This title is so cheesey bad that it actually makes me hope that he does putrid the rest of the way out of spite.
What's wrong with his name? whatever you hope for seems to have the opposite effect
kopitar 2 points last 6 games played
What's wrong with his name? whatever you hope for seems to have the opposite effect
kopitar 2 points last 6 games played
This guy is elite, best goalie in the NHL already. Generational goalie, if you project out his skill-set with his production. He should be the next Price. 6'4 and the NHL's most athletic goalie. He's an athletic freak with polish and great career production through all the different levels. Why are forwards and defensemen considered generational but goalies aren't?
Penguin and Duck fans were mad when I was pointing out that he has ability their goalies just don't have, he's showing it now. I fully expect him to win the Vezina this year, and win a number of more Vezina's in upcoming years.
it's good to see the past arguments against Quick being used against Vasilevskiy
except this is with .933 and not .915
The horrific grammar of the thread title is finally wearing me out.
Well, this might be going a bit too far. Murray and Gibson are awesome, but I agree he has a little bit more of talent than them.
There were several people in that thread that said he isn't a front runner because he's on a good team, and would rather give it to known goalies like Crawford or Bob.Isn’t there another thread about this?
And who doesn’t think he’s a front runner?
I read somewhere Quick only faced 35+ Shots 16 times between 2014 and 2017.Quick's SV% is a result of being on such a strong defensive team. If you notice, the Kings THIS YEAR aren't as good of a shot suppressing team this year as they were under Sutter. It's not a surprise that you see a rise in his SV%.
Every goalie has a lower cumulative SV% when they face fewer than 30 shots, than when they face 30 or more shots. And that is even the case after EXCLUDING games where the goalie gets pulled due to injury or poor play. I have yet to find a single goalie where he has a higher cumulative SV% in his lower shot volume games.
I read somewhere Quick only faced 35+ Shots 16 times between 2014 and 2017.
People still do not get it how little quality chances the Kings have been giving up the last years. Top 3 every season since 2010 in shots against per game. His extremely low GAA is a result of that but it also affects his SV%.
I just do not get it why people keep refering to his SV% as being low. There is more to the picture. Brodeur had + .920% only three times in his career. Kings and those Devils teams played very similar.
I think Crawford deserves some praise. Never thought I would say this.