Good goalie or system argument?

[LAKings88]

I get a little tired of some other fans talking about Kings goalies only being good because of the system. In my mind it is always a symbiotic relationship between team defense and goaltending. That being said, Cloutier is no Quick. I guess the argument comes up more with Scrivens. Has there been a recent goalie in the modern Era who can carry a team all on their own? I think the sign of a good goalie is to be able to make those big saves and not let in the soft ones consistently.

What do you think? What is the standard for a good goalie? Is there a goalie out there who doesn't have the "system" argument?

Click to read more...

 

[cyclones22]

If it was just the Kings system, why don't other teams that suck at defense and have bad goaltenders just implement it and solve their problems? The Kings "system" is a winning system, right? Just copy it and become Cup contenders. Easy peasy. Problem is, you need the correct personnel to do it and that includes goaltenders, defensemen and forwards who don't suck.

 

[KingKopitar11*]

65% defense.

 

[etherialone]

JB has faced 35 or more shots in over half of his starts. He has faced 40 or more shots during a few starts too.

He (JB) is still doing a great job in TO. So I agree with the idea that we have a symbiotic relationship between our developmental system and its ability to obtain and/or train goalies to become good to exceptional positional players that benefit somewhat from our team being capable of playing hockey in every zone including the d zone.

When JQ first came up we were far from the monsters of the ice that we are today but he still was exceptional and had very good numbers to boot.

Let the others cry for their sad teams, we had to do so forever and now we are on the other side. Let em cry and moan and whine about everything we do.

And let them lose too.

 

[gonnaneedsomewine]

Mostly system

 

[goosh]

Just gonna say I think it's more the Kings' system than goaltending. Need both, but system more important.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

It's symbiotic, but a system certainly helps. Bernier gets peppered in TO but he doesn't suck there. Quick showed up here when we were just getting started and was the best thing to happen in decades. Besides, if it were just the system, wouldn't Quick have sucked vs. the Blues and Sharks when we were under siege (puckhandling nonwithstanding )? You can't really say we limited the quality chances in those series...

That being said, I don't think you can separate the two, and Quick thrives here because he can be super-aggressive. He might not work well elsewhere, but if you need a goalie to consistently pick up their own rebounds and tap-ins, you're doing it wrong. Ours have been doing that when they have to, but it's not some badge of honor for a franchise that your goalie is better because he constantly has to clean up your messes.

I know some of the 'experts' have been talking about that in the last couple of days in reference to Jones and Scrivens, but it's not like these guys were two total unknowns to us. They have a history of success and being good goaltenders in their own right. Throw in a superb goalie coach and a cup-winning defensive system with elite personnel and what do you think is going to happen?

In an HF context, people pick which argument suits them best at the time.

 

[kingsholygrail]

It's always a combination. It's never one or the other.

 

[NHLFanSince2020]

One need look no further than beyond a month into the season to help determine...something?

The Kings did not have their stuff together in October, still getting their feet wet with the ever-popular, easy-peasy system that any team can adapt to and successfully implement overnight.

October 15th, Kings at Tampa Bay
Scrivens' save percentage, 75.0%.

The Kings tighten up their system, Regehr adapts, Scrivens adapts, etc. AND...

November 19th, Tampa Bay at Kings.
Scrivens' save percentage, 90.5%

3000th post!

 

[Nefarious]

A system doesn't do this.



That being said, you need both to win a SC. When the system breaks down, which will happen on occasion, you need an elite goaltender to bail you out.

 

[Rusty Batch]

My theory is that at the nhl level all of these goaltenders are so good that it doesn't really matter who's in net. Ur team defense is the most important thing in keeping pucks out of the net.

The system is a part of the reason. But probably the most important part is having 2 - way players throughout ur lineup. We are lucky that are best offensive players are also some of our best defensive players. That is incredibly rare and basically means everyone is defensively reaponsible, no holes.

 

[HolyShot*]

Its both. Teams w good systems will produce good goaltending stats, st louis, detroit, chi, van, etc.

 

[kingsholygrail]

The difference in the goalies at this level is which ones can make the big saves when they matter. There are plenty of goalies that can make the standard saves regularly. When we had Cloutier he was bad largely because he was the single biggest momentum killer in any game. He would make a lot of standard saves for the Kings but on any break away or 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 or 3 on 2, etc where the team needed him to save their ass, he would fail every time. That's why he sucked, really.

 

[tigermask48]

To look echo what many above have said it's both. But it's also identifying a goalie that can be successful in the teams system. The kings have a system where they collapse into one he slot to clear rebounds, so all a goalie needs to do is make the first save and not cough up a bad rebound and the d will take care of it. Look at a system like in Philly and you need to have a goalie get pucks into the corner for breakouts, and rebounds in the slot are the goalies job to avoid. It's a much more tasking system there and thus fewer goalies can succeed there.

 

[HYORI 1963]

Both.

Basically, our system will instill confidence in most goalies that play here.

 

[apadilla]

who was the last goaltender to struggle with the Kings? Labarbara? And he was before Sutter,

 

[tigermask48]

who was the last goaltender to struggle with the Kings? Labarbara? And he was before Sutter,

Ersberg and LaBarbera the first year Murray was in LA? The guy that brought stability that year? Jonathan Quick. Point, counterpoint. Ersberg was never the same and Murray played Quick almost to death the following year.

But on the other side of the coin it's hard to say ANY Kings goalie has struggled or would have since the options are Bernier and Quick... This year is the first season since Murray's first that there hasn't been an elite level prospect or goalie between the pipes for every game. It's impossible to say for sure if LaBarbera, Ersberg, or whoever wouldn't have some success with this team and system in front of them.