The Great Flames Goalie Debate Thread

[jonkaupp]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Fun fact: this is actually untrue.

Not only has the goaltending not been consistently poor or average, it’s actually been closer to the opposite.

Games where the SV% of the starter was:
Above .918 = 18
“Average” .917-.906 = 2
Below .905 = 12

.918+ represents the averages of the top 10 goaltenders in the league, while average represents goaltenders 11-20, and below represents 20 on.

So, the Flames have received above average goaltending more than below average. So it’s factually incorrect to say the Flames have received average to poor goaltending consistently.

The more you know!

This is so insanely disingenuous and just total crap, period. We are discussing how bad Smith is, one of the if not the worst starting goalie in the league. To lump in Rittich’s stats with him just shows how out of touch you Smith defenders are. Get a clue.

This team is ready to win a cup. Get rid of Smith pronto. I am flabbergasted by the amount of support such a terrible player has here.

[jonkaupp]

As for the posters saying to wait til the offseason, You can’t. This team is ready. If there isn’t yet a trade to be made then you ride Rittich and find out if he is the guy. If he is then that is fantastic. If he isn’t then you need to overpay for someone. They cannot go back to Smith.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SixtySix

No, it's not.

It would be factually incorrect to say that the Flames combined save percentage of their goalies is poor to average relative to the league. But this is not a conversation that begins and ends with statistics, especially when we're lumping 2 opposite ends of the spectrum together.

Fair enough on that comment not including Rittich, but the comment that it’s “consistent poor to average” is still wrong. I his last 10 games, Smith has actually had above average numbers (<.917) more than below (<.905) - 5 games above average, 4 below, and 1 in the middle. Over the season, he sits at 8 games above, 11 below, and 1 average. Still not consistently poor/average, but closer to an even split.

So yeah, it is factually incorrect no matter which goalie you’re talking about.

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

This is so insanely disingenuous and just total crap, period. We are discussing how bad Smith is, one of the if not the worst starting goalie in the league. To lump in Rittich’s stats with him just shows how out of touch you Smith defenders are. Get a clue.

See the numbers above. And I’m certainly not a Smith defender, I’d be happy to see him go for any one of the options out there. I’m just offering up some perspective, so feel free to relax.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by jonkaupp

As for the posters saying to wait til the offseason, You can’t. This team is ready. If there isn’t yet a trade to be made then you ride Rittich and find out if he is the guy. If he is then that is fantastic. If he isn’t then you need to overpay for someone. They cannot go back to Smith.

“Aaaaaaaannd your mother! Aaaannnd your mother!!!”

[SixtySix]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Fair enough on that comment not including Rittich, but the comment that it’s “consistent poor to average” is still wrong. I his last 10 games, Smith has actually had above average numbers (<.917) more than below (<.905) - 5 games above average, 4 below, and 1 in the middle. Over the season, he sits at 8 games above, 11 below, and 1 average. Still not consistently poor/average, but closer to an even split.

So yeah, it is factually incorrect no matter which goalie you’re talking about.

You can keep trotting out stats but I don't really get what point you are trying to make with them. I assume you're not using them to argue Smith's actually been good this year, considering you said yourself that you're not a defender of him and would be happy to see him go. So is it semantics? Is "consistent" the wrong word, should I have said frequent? I was never discussing stats as it's not how I primarily choose to analyze things, especially on a game-by-game basis, and the fact that he posts what could be considered an elite save% here and there is not going to sway my opinion of him. The bottom line is it's clear that over a large sample size dating back to his return from injury last year he's looked and performed horribly. I believe he's done and not a goalie suited for a top team in the NHL trying to win a cup. I'm glad I have faith in our GM to think a little bit deeper about the issue than you seem to be.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SixtySix

You can keep trotting out stats but I don't really get what point you are trying to make with them ... I was never discussing stats as it's not how I primarily choose to analyze things .... I'm glad I have faith in our GM to think a little bit deeper about the issue than you seem to be.

They just stats. They don’t really have a point, it’s just perspective. Maybe if there has to be a point, it’s that looking at the numbers “a little bit deeper” gives you a little bit more perspective.

I know you were just trying to be catty, but I have faith in our GM to look at things deeper than some stats too. But hey, I bet he at least uses them in his analysis and doesn’t get angry about them being on the table... unlike SOME people

[Freeway]

If you think this team is still building, you make due with what you have and regroup in the summer. If you think this team can win right now, you burn the boats.

[SixtySix]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

They just stats. They don’t really have a point, it’s just perspective. Maybe if there has to be a point, it’s that looking at the numbers “a little bit deeper” gives you a little bit more perspective.

I know you were just trying to be catty, but I have faith in our GM to look at things deeper than some stats too. But hey, I bet he at least uses them in his analysis and doesn’t get angry about them being on the table... unlike SOME people

I mean stats are fine, I have no problem with using them in the right context to strengthen a point. But in this case, I just don't think they discredit what I said at all, which is precisely what I have been trying to debate with you. I definitely did not mean to be catty, I apologize if I came off that way.

[PepsiFree]

Other interesting stats about Mike Smith:
- 2nd highest rushes against per 60 (meaning he faces the 2nd most rushes in the league)
- 10th shortest average goal distance
- 10th most High Danger Shots Against
- 13th WORST in High Danger SV% (notables worse: Vasilevsky, Murray, Fleury, Saros)
- Surprising players that have been about as bad as Smith: Murray, Jones, Saros, Allen, Crawford
- SV% before “the Pittsburgh” = .885, after? .902 (ranks 29th since that game above only Price out of the top 30, Rittich is 19th)

[DeluxeMoustache]

Here is some perspective.

Hypothesis: Single game save percentage is insignificant.

What we know is that about 91 percent of all shots on net are saved. Some variability is expected based on team style of play (trap teams that also protect the middle in their own zone should allow fewer and less dangerous opportunities than fire wagon hockey teams). There is also the effect of the opposition, and contrast of styles, which varies game to game.


We know that the odds of a save on unopposed breakaways (supported to an extent by shootout stats) is much lower than that 91 percent.

If save percentage alone was a good metric to evaluate goalies , then
- how do you account for shot quality? The opposition each game, and their style of play as contrasted to the team they play will vary from night to night
- how many breakaways and odd man rushes did the goalie face?
- how do you account for manpower situations?
Sometimes the Flames are on the right side of the penalty ledger and some nights they can’t buy a call
- given, say, short handed time, how do you factor in the strength of the opponents’ power play and the effectiveness of the goalie’s team’s Penalty kill

There are so many more points to be made, but for illustrative purposes that should suffice.

Look. Kipper put up over .930 under Sutter and under .910 under Keenan. That’s s team effect. Manny Fernandez and Dwayne Roloson both out up numbers above .930 with the Wild.

Was he all of a sudden a crap goalie? Come on

Also, consider this. If save percentage is meaningful as an indicator of the quality of a goaltender, then presumably it should be repeatable or predictive for a goaltender.

Guess what? People have looked at the data. Trying to use a goalie’s save percentage history as a predictor of the next year’s save percentage. Guess how successful they were? Not at all. And that is with full seasons’ worth of data which should wipe out some noise of lower sample sizes.

People have created definitions of quality starts based on single game sv%. Guess what? Not repeatable, not predictive.

This kind of statistic is for practical purposes only of use if it can be translated in to something predictive. And many folks have focused on this and failed to succeed.

Can we please throw this single game save % #### out the window?

[Calgary4LIfe]

I thought Smith has been playing very well lately. I thought he has dramatically improved since the beginning of the season. On that basis, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and take a 'wait and see' approach at the moment. If he did tweak something, that can explain how suddenly he went from being rock-solid to start the game into shaky. Rather not spend assets when you don't have to.



Either this team is going to spend a LOT on a goalie, or they are not going to get much of an upgrade anyway. Who are people really targeting out there? Smith has unquestionably been rock solid since he got back on track, right up until the tweak/injury.



I don't see an upgrade in net being available without having a significant cost associated with it, and probably with a significant cap hit as well. Flames are first in the division. If any team in the west can afford to be a bit patient, it is the Flames right now.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I thought Smith has been playing very well lately. I thought he has dramatically improved since the beginning of the season. On that basis, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and take a 'wait and see' approach at the moment. If he did tweak something, that can explain how suddenly he went from being rock-solid to start the game into shaky. Rather not spend assets when you don't have to.



Either this team is going to spend a LOT on a goalie, or they are not going to get much of an upgrade anyway. Who are people really targeting out there? Smith has unquestionably been rock solid since he got back on track, right up until the tweak/injury.



I don't see an upgrade in net being available without having a significant cost associated with it, and probably with a significant cap hit as well. Flames are first in the division. If any team in the west can afford to be a bit patient, it is the Flames right now.

A few games is a few games. Great that Smith stopped the puck, and sometimes it hit him.

The reason NHL players make multiple millions is consistency, not because they colour inside the lines half the time, or a few times in a row.

Remember when Rene Bourque had a great start one year and people were looking at Iggy’s slow start and wondering if Bourque was going to take over top line RW duties? Yeah. How did that work out?

As for ‘wait and see’, Smith is a veteran. He is fully baked. He is highly paid. Babies are for coddling. Even if he throws the odd temper tantrum, he’s not a baby. Consistency is expected.

* and kudos to him for learning after playing really awfully many times to stop throwing his teammates under the bus

Edit: Let’s say a goalie’s agent assures Treliving that his client will be ‘rock solid’ for a 6 game stretch out of the first 30 games. And his contract is millions per year. Do you jump on it, or what?

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

A few games is a few games. Great that Smith stopped the puck, and sometimes it hit him.

The reason NHL players make multiple millions is consistency, not because they colour inside the lines half the time, or a few times in a row.

Remember when Rene Bourque had a great start one year and people were looking at Iggy’s slow start and wondering if Bourque was going to take over top line RW duties? Yeah. How did that work out?

As for ‘wait and see’, Smith is a veteran. He is fully baked. He is highly paid. Babies are for coddling. Even if he throws the odd temper tantrum, he’s not a baby. Consistency is expected.

* and kudos to him for learning after playing really awfully many times to stop throwing his teammates under the bus

Consistency is of course key, but it isn't like we don't see this from just about every goalie in the league. Heck, just this season there were people mocking Price as he was going through a rough patch.



Conversely with your example of Bourque, people were saying that it may be time that Iginla pass the torch to him. Iginla still ended up having quite a lot in the tank and it was just another 'slow start'.



Kipper was exceptionally good for a long time. Problem is that most goalies in the NHL just aren't as good as he was. Can Smith's last game's poor showing be blamed on the injury? I think so. Can his slow start be pinned to having a more difficult time adjusting to the equipment changes? I think that too. Both are plausible at least. I am just saying that in light of the options - all of which will probably be very expensive in terms of both assets and cap hit - and the fact that Smith has looked like 'Smith' again in the last set of games, that perhaps patience is the better road to take for now.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Consistency is of course key, but it isn't like we don't see this from just about every goalie in the league. Heck, just this season there were people mocking Price as he was going through a rough patch.



Conversely with your example of Bourque, people were saying that it may be time that Iginla pass the torch to him. Iginla still ended up having quite a lot in the tank and it was just another 'slow start'.



Kipper was exceptionally good for a long time. Problem is that most goalies in the NHL just aren't as good as he was. Can Smith's last game's poor showing be blamed on the injury? I think so. Can his slow start be pinned to having a more difficult time adjusting to the equipment changes? I think that too. Both are plausible at least. I am just saying that in light of the options - all of which will probably be very expensive in terms of both assets and cap hit - and the fact that Smith has looked like 'Smith' again in the last set of games, that perhaps patience is the better road to take for now.

And at the same time, Smith has put together a hot streak of 5-6 games out of his last, what, 30?

That’s a sigh of relief that he is playing above his new normal, not a return to normal.


Edit : equipment changes this year were only upper body armour. Not pads or gloves. So not the excuse for many of his bad goals against.

Plus, that change affected all goalies. His decrease in performance is much different than most goalies. How is below average ability to adjust to equipment changes really not his fault? Come on, now. Please.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

This kind of statistic is for practical purposes only of use if it can be translated in to something predictive. And many folks have focused on this and failed to succeed.

Can we please throw this single game save % #### out the window?

I don’t disagree with your hypothesis.

Most stats in the NHL cannot be translated into something predictive. They’re historical records, not crystal balls. In a game as full of random events as hockey, that’s about all you can expect from most stats.

You can break down games in a multitude of different ways. None of them tell the full story alone, none of them are predictive, none of them do more than provide perspective or some level of historical information.

If you want to throw non-predictive stats that don’t tell the full story out the window, then you might as well stop paying attention to goals and assists too. And faceoffs. And so on and so forth.

Use stats for what they are, a piece of the story that’s already happened. Or don’t care about any of them, I guess.

[GioforPM]

Single game save% is obviously misleading. So might be a whole season save% where there was a change, or even a marked improvement in play over a more recent stretch. In other words, really crappy play early on (reflected in a terrible save %) can obscure more recent good results. The question is whether the new results are more representative of the expected play in the future, or whether they are the outlier and the earlier play is the "true" standard.

[Erick Estrada]

I fail to see anything great about this debate.

[redforever]

Judging from his lack of positioning, his poor lateral movement, and his desperate flip-flop style, I would say that his early play is closer to his standard.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I fail to see anything great about this debate.

Wasn’t the greatness agreeing with the thread, in order to keep this out of other threads?

Just like the Sam Bennett and James Neal threads keep the PGTs really streamlined?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by redforever

Judging from his lack of positioning, his poor lateral movement, and his desperate flip-flop style, I would say that his early play is closer to his standard.

Most people see what they want to see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk