Mike Smith's... woes? He blows? Eating crows? Who knows! (Also David Rittich exists!)

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

That's the difficult part. Do you use the full season, Rittich's NHL career, Rittich's North American career or something else.



We've been over the sample picking so no point in rehasing.

If you really want to split Rittich's season into spots where that was definite changes in his stats its like this:

October - All world sensation

6 games, 4 starts - 939 save percentage

November 1 - Feb 3 - Average Starting Goalie

25 games, 24 starts - 913 save percentage

February 7 - March 12 - Bad goalie
*this starts with the game he was pulled against SJ

9 games, 9 starts - 876 save percentage


You can split hairs in the 1st and 3rd segments because they are smaller samples - in October he really just had 2 amazing games (1 goal on 45 shots vs NYR and 1 goal on 29 shots vs Buffalo. In Feb/March - you can pick out the 2,3 games that kill his stats (Tampa, Toronto, NJ)

You can believe whatever you want out of those numbers. I believe in using the full sample

Aren't you pretty much saying the same thing then? You break that into time slots and it's a decline.

On the season I still think he's the better goalie because the stats support that (so does the eye test).

But when one guy is sliding (you laid that out), and the other guy has stabilized somewhat ... recency is the best way to chart things going forward isn't it?

But I agree if you're handing out the award for best Flames goalie this season you look at the whole season.

[Erick Estrada]

This thread feels like a car forum argument over what's the better car; the AMC Gremlin or Ford Pinto.

[VladtheImpaler]

We can sign both of these guys for next year at $1.5M (total) and really go big game hunting in UFA.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Aren't you pretty much saying the same thing then? You break that into time slots and it's a decline.

On the season I still think he's the better goalie because the stats support that (so does the eye test).

But when one guy is sliding (you laid that out), and the other guy has stabilized somewhat ... recency is the best way to chart things going forward isn't it?

But I agree if you're handing out the award for best Flames goalie this season you look at the whole season.

The bolded is the part I disgree with. I know it isn't true in baseball, I haven't seen anything similar research wise in hockey so I'm assuming it will be similar to baseball.

[Toonage]

nm, think I misunderstood a prior comment

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

The bolded is the part I disgree with. I know it isn't true in baseball, I haven't seen anything similar research wise in hockey so I'm assuming it will be similar to baseball.

I'm not sure things like

a) using the whole season or
b) using recent games

can ever be proven as true or false can they?

But suite yourself. When the good stretch is almost six months ago I take that into account.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm not sure things like

a) using the whole season or
b) using recent games

can ever be proven as true or false can they?

But suite yourself. When the good stretch is almost six months ago I take that into account.

You can determine which stat line is more predictive of future performance after the fact. I linked an article from Fangraphs about baseball earlier than 2nd half stats are much less correlated to future performance than full season stats.

[Bingo]

And that's interesting.

But this isn't first half / second half noise.

This is top five goalie in October, and nowhere near that since.

Plus I wonder if this is actually correlated or just a statistical history as the situations don't seem very predictive to me.

[TheIronMaiden]

Up to this point in the season Peters has managed the goal tending situation well. I am confident that when he makes a choice it is the right one. At this point I don't think he has full confidence in either player and he will likely have to manage the playoffs on a game by game basis the same way he has managed this tandem all year.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Up to this point in the season Peters has managed the goal tending situation well. I am confident that when he makes a choice it is the right one. At this point I don't think he has full confidence in either player and he will likely have to manage the playoffs on a game by game basis the same way he has managed this tandem all year.

I think that once the playoffs start they have to give the ball to one guy and let him run with it. If he falters, the other guy gets his chance and then either succeeds or fails. That has essentially been the history of playoff goaltending for the last couple decades; I think it repeats itself in April.

At this point, I am not especially confident in either of the Flames goalies, and think that the margin separating them is small enough that it won't particularly matter who is in goal in Game #1. I find myself feeling a little more confident with Rittich in goal now, but not much more than when Smith plays.

I think the Flames can and will win their first round matchup with either goalie. But one of them needs to make a strong statement for the team to move beyond Round #2.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think that once the playoffs start they have to give the ball to one guy and let him run with it. If he falters, the other guy gets his chance and then either succeeds or fails. That has essentially been the history of playoff goaltending for the last couple decades; I think it repeats itself in April.

At this point, I am not especially confident in either of the Flames goalies, and think that the margin separating them is small enough that it won't particularly matter who is in goal in Game #1. I find myself feeling a little more confident with Rittich in goal now, but not much more than when Smith plays.

I think the Flames can and will win their first round matchup with either goalie. But one of them needs to make a strong statement for the team to move beyond Round #2.

A hot goalie is more or less the key formula for any championship calibre team. I'm not sure how a team can force that into existence, but they do have some leeway. In the last 4 playoffs the champion team has split some of the games between two goalies. That being said, there is usually a clear number one. I am not a fan of arguing what the coach should do, but I think that in terms of game management, the time to ease Rittich in is over. Its green lights to give him the remainder of the season after this next back to back. I'd like to see what he can do.

[Hot_Flatus]

Up to December 31st:
Rittch: 20 GS - 13-4-0-3, .920 SV%, GAA 2.39
Smith: 20 GS - 11-8-0-1, .888 SV%, GAA 3.00

Since January 1st:
Rittch: 17 GS - 11-3-0-2, .895 SV%, GAA 3.07
Smith: 13 GS - 8-5-0-1, .905 SV%, GAA 2.77

For me the telling stat is and always has been the EV SV% of the two goalies this year:

Rittich: Up to Dec 31st - .935
Since Jan 1st - .902

Smith: Up to Dec 31st - .898,
Since Jan 1st - .914

Despite Smith have a notable upper hand in EV SV% since the calendar flipped, Smith is outside the top 45 for the season when you take out the spot starters and backups.....Rittch is still in the top 20 and definitely starting to look more and more like the guy we saw earlier this season.

If you continue to dive deeper into 2019, it becomes apparent that the three blow up games against SJ, TB and Toronto are outliers that have really caused his numbers to fall off so drastically. Smith, on the other hand has his own outliers in the form of numerous starts against inept offensive teams skewing things the other way. Take it for what it is, but I know who I'd tap to start in a must win game.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Bingo

And that's interesting.

But this isn't first half / second half noise.

This is top five goalie in October, and nowhere near that since.

Plus I wonder if this is actually correlated or just a statistical history as the situations don't seem very predictive to me.

I look at the October stats as on outlier as well. I don't think anyone can reasonably expect that type of performance.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

A hot goalie is more or less the key formula for any championship calibre team. I'm not sure how a team can force that into existence, but they do have some leeway. In the last 4 playoffs the champion team has split some of the games between two goalies. That being said, there is usually a clear number one. I am not a fan of arguing what the coach should do, but I think that in terms of game management, the time to ease Rittich in is over. Its green lights to give him the remainder of the season after this next back to back. I'd like to see what he can do.

Not really. The last few champions have played their goalies just as I stated:

· Last year Grubauer started Games #1 and #2, lost them both, was pulled in Game #3, which Holtby won and then went the distance.
· In 2017 Fleury won two rounds after Murray was injured at the end of the season, and then three games in Round #3. Murray and then went on to win the series and eventually the Stanley Cup.
· In 2016 Jeff Zatkov started Games #1 and #2, was replaced by Murray for Game #3, who started all of the rest of the games.

As near as I can recall the last playoff team that rotated their starters was the 2003 Minnesota Wild. Since then teams have followed the same pattern: pick a guy to play at the start of the playoffs, and run with him. If he falters, switch him out for the other guy and survive or falter. For whatever reason teams don't rotate goalies in the playoffs.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Not really. The last few champions have played their goalies just as I stated:

· Last year Grubauer started Games #1 and #2, lost them both, was pulled in Game #3, which Holtby won and then went the distance.
· In 2017 Fleury won two rounds after Murray was injured at the end of the season, and then three games in Round #3. Murray and then went on to win the series and eventually the Stanley Cup.
· In 2016 Jeff Zatkov started Games #1 and #2, was replaced by Murray for Game #3, who started all of the rest of the games.

As near as I can recall the last playoff team that rotated their starters was the 2003 Minnesota Wild. Since then teams have followed the same pattern: pick a guy to play at the start of the playoffs, and run with him. If he falters, switch him out for the other guy and survive or falter. For whatever reason teams don't rotate goalies in the playoffs.

So what you are saying is that Washington and Pittsburgh proved it was prudent to have 2 viable goalie options in case one collapses.

In a series where you only need to lose 4 of 7 to be out, being able to have a good 1B to turn to is gold. Your examples indicate just how important it is.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Not really. The last few champions have played their goalies just as I stated:

· Last year Grubauer started Games #1 and #2, lost them both, was pulled in Game #3, which Holtby won and then went the distance.
· In 2017 Fleury won two rounds after Murray was injured at the end of the season, and then three games in Round #3. Murray and then went on to win the series and eventually the Stanley Cup.
· In 2016 Jeff Zatkov started Games #1 and #2, was replaced by Murray for Game #3, who started all of the rest of the games.

As near as I can recall the last playoff team that rotated their starters was the 2003 Minnesota Wild. Since then teams have followed the same pattern: pick a guy to play at the start of the playoffs, and run with him. If he falters, switch him out for the other guy and survive or falter. For whatever reason teams don't rotate goalies in the playoffs.

I don't think that we are in disagreement here. In the last 4 playoffs the champion team has split some of the games between two goalies. That being said, there is usually a clear number one. I think that goal tending at this rate will be the pitfall of this team. Because after some first round adjustments winners ride a goalie to the finish line.

That is why I suggest riding Rittich for the remainder of the season after next game. Getting one goalie hot is the Flames chance at success. I don't know what the best way to do that is, but managing Rittich's schedule is over.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

So what you are saying is that Washington and Pittsburgh proved it was prudent to have 2 viable goalie options in case one collapses.

In a series where you only need to lose 4 of 7 to be out, being able to a good 1B to turn to is gold. Your examples indicate just how important it is.

More or less. My point was that teams don't rotate their goalies in the playoffs, and I believe coaches would always prefer to start just one goalie throughout the playoffs. The events in which two have started games have been out of necessity, and not by design.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I don't think that we are in disagreement here. In the last 4 playoffs the champion team has split some of the games between two goalies. That being said, there is usually a clear number one. I think that goal tending at this rate will be the pitfall of this team. Because after some first round adjustments winners ride a goalie to the finish line.

That is why I suggest riding Rittich for the remainder of the season after next game. Getting one goalie hot is the Flames chance at success. I don't know what the best way to do that is, but managing Rittich's schedule is over.

Ideally, yes, and I think the coaches are likely planning for Rittich to get most of the starts heading into the playoffs. But he needs to play well in those games. I think he has been good for the last couple weeks, but not so good that he has established himself as the guy who starts Game #1. I expect there is also a backup plan in place for Smith to start Game #1 in the event that Rittich does not rise to the occasion.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Still can't believe all this came out of a game story where I called Rittich average. He gave up six goals.

Just my opinion, but don't you find victories that you have to declare yourself a little more hollow?

Depends how seriously you take things here, I guess. Being technically correct, well, that’s the best kind of correct, isn’t it? Just kidding around, man. I thought that was obvious.

I do notice, though, that you still are using save percentages across what I consider to be small sample sizes, and do not appear to have acknowledged the principles the article I linked on save percentage.

No opinion on the comment about 6 goals on 600 shots making a delta of .010, or essentially what could be the difference between good and bad.

Just using straight up sv% to evaluate goalies still. I find it somewhat amusing. I agree there isn’t much better simple data available. And I find the results as the starting point of the discussion, not the end.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Depends how seriously you take things here, I guess. Being technically correct, well, that’s the best kind of correct, isn’t it? Just kidding around, man. I thought that was obvious.

I do notice, though, that you still are using save percentages across what I consider to be small sample sizes, and do not appear to have acknowledged the principles the article I linked on save percentage.

No opinion on the comment about 6 goals on 600 shots making a delta of .010, or essentially what could be the difference between good and bad.

Just using straight up sv% to evaluate goalies still. I find it somewhat amusing. I agree there isn’t much better simple data available. And I find the results as the starting point of the discussion, not the end.

Metrics show both goaltenders have faced similar degree of difficulty in terms of shots, so save percentage as a total may not be fair from team to team (that was a good article, and I remember it from a few years back)

But when comparing two goaltenders from the same team it's still a pretty decent way of boiling things down.