Hockey's Future Top 50 Prospects Fall 2005: 1-10

[Liquidrage*]

These are not excuses.
You make fantasy ideas about where your team would be with your goalie.
It's exactly the same with Fleury.
You say Providence's defense was worst than WB, and yet they had less goals against.
What argument do you have that would enable you to say that?
None.

Fantasy is great, I know.

This is the second time you've pulled this one. First with Houston, now with Providence.

What could cause their GA to be less. Hmmm... Let me thing.

HOW ABOUT BETTER PLAY FROM THEIR GOALIE??????????


Toivonen saw a LOT more shots then Feury. And yet he allowed less. By a good margin. That's what happens when your goalie puts up a great Save %. Amazingly, the better you are at stoping the puck, the less goals you give up. Shocking, I know.

 

[Mothra]

Ovechkin is faster and stronger (and older), but he does not exemplify the same vision and strength in the corners i see with crosby.

Im curious....just how many Crosby and Ovechkin games have you seen to make such a detailed opinion?

 

[Evilo]

These are not excuses.
You make fantasy ideas about where your team would be with your goalie.
It's exactly the same with Fleury.
You say Providence's defense was worst than WB, and yet they had less goals against.
What argument do you have that would enable you to say that?
None.

Fantasy is great, I know.

 

[Evilo]

This is the second time you've pulled this one. First with Houston, now with Providence.

What could cause their GA to be less. Hmmm... Let me thing.

HOW ABOUT BETTER PLAY FROM THEIR GOALIE??????????


Toivonen saw a LOT more shots then Feury. And yet he allowed less. By a good margin. That's what happens when your goalie puts up a great Save %. Amazingly, the better you are at stoping the puck, the less goals you give up. Shocking, I know.

Yep incredible you still don't understand the quality of the shots faced influences the save percentage.
Shocking.

Sabourin+Lehtonen ALL THE WAY BABY!!!

 

[Evilo]

And don't give me any of this stupid "fool" garbage.
Lehtonen's Save % was better by a good margin. His win% was much better.
And it was last year as well.

Saying "Sabourin=Lehtonen" is foolish. The stats don't back you up at all on that one. What are you going to do, tell me a .929 == .921? You going to try and bring up last year's *ECHL* stats for Sabourin? Whatever.

And yet Sabourin had a better GAA!!!
Sabourin>Lehtonen!!

Wow!

So you're saying you agree with me that he was average? You going to put the #7 overall prospect as what, slightly above average the last two years? That makes sense.

All hail MAF. The most average performing, lackluster uber-prospect of all time.

So you're either average or you kick ass...?

Hmmm no wonder...

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Im curious....just how many Crosby and Ovechkin games have you seen to make such a detailed opinion?

I have seen Sid play about 25 times, and i have seen Ovechkin play 10 or 12 times.
Thats not that detailed of an opinion, all i said was that Ovechkin is stronger and faster and that Crosby sees the ice better. I may live in NC now, but I go to alot of CHL games cause my dad is a huge fan. We can fly for free anywhere we want, so we'll take weekends. Its not an overseas deal, just in North America.

Why do you ask, do we have a difference of opinion?

 

[Liquidrage*]

Yep incredible you still don't understand the quality of the shots faced influences the save percentage.
Shocking.

Sabourin+Lehtonen ALL THE WAY BABY!!!

No I do. But unless you have a detailed study to show in quality of shots, I'm not going to take your word for it. I doubt you saw many Houston or Proivdence games this year. Hell, I doubt you saw many Baby Pens games this year. And even if you saw every game this year, the manner you're arguing wouldn't trust you with anything but a detailed analysis. It's always excuse after excuse from you.

So at this point, all I consider you having is a bias and a willingness to say anything to defend that bias.

You have no problem breaking out the "how do you explain the Pens allowing more goals" stat. Twice no less. Though sadly you must not have realized that it completely backfires on you since the less goals were simply a result of the goaltenders stopping the puck more often on a percentage basis.

Apparently, you're willing to try and use stats to back up your opinion. But you instantly criticize anyone for doing the same. The reality is that the stats don't paint Fluery in a very good light at all. So please, break out your very detailed analysis, finally get me some supporting evidence for your earlier claims, or just drop it already.

 

[Vic Rattlehead*]

These are not excuses.
You make fantasy ideas about where your team would be with your goalie.
It's exactly the same with Fleury.
You say Providence's defense was worst than WB, and yet they had less goals against.
What argument do you have that would enable you to say that?
None.

Fantasy is great, I know.

That was because of Toivonen. Did you even bother to read what I wrote? His defence was worse, but Toivonen saved them on so many occasions. The team would have been lucky to have won 15 games without Toivonen because the defence was that bad. Toivonen faced a lot of shot every night.

 

[Evilo]

No I do. But unless you have a detailed study to show in quality of shots, I'm not going to take your word for it. I doubt you saw many Houston or Proivdence games this year. Hell, I doubt you saw many Baby Pens games this year. And even if you saw every game this year, the manner you're arguing wouldn't trust you with anything but a detailed analysis. It's always excuse after excuse from you.

And how many did YOU see?
I read every game report from the WB games. That gives me more arguments that your stats.

You have no problem breaking out the "how do you explain the Pens allowing more goals" stat. Twice no less. Though sadly you must not have realized that it completely backfires on you since the less goals were simply a result of the goaltenders stopping the puck more often on a percentage basis.

QUALITY OF SHOTS.
Wow, look it up un the dictionnary.
You can't compare goalies with stats. Plain and simple.

Apparently, you're willing to try and use stats to back up your opinion. But you instantly criticize anyone for doing the same. The reality is that the stats don't paint Fluery in a very good light at all. So please, break out your very detailed analysis, finally get me some supporting evidence for your earlier claims, or just drop it already.

Where have I used stats?
I'm mocking your use of stats by showing you Sabourin's stats are comparable to Lehtonen's.
The only stat I've brought up is goals against.

 

[Liquidrage*]

And yet Sabourin had a better GAA!!!
Sabourin>Lehtonen!!

Wow!

Yeah, playing behind a defense that gave up less shots. He's also much older. And yes, if you would bother to read I've included age in this whole thing all along. Using similarly aged goalies, and timeframe comparable to Fluery. Yet regardless, anyone that would say Sabourin was better then Lehtonen last year is a moron. He ha one better stat, GAA. Not wins. Not save %. And before this year, he last stints in the AHL weren't good. Where as Lehtonen was great the last two years.

So you're either average or you kick ass...?

Hmmm no wonder...

You can be somewhere in between. But you better be kick ass to be the #7 overall prospect. Something you just can't seem to fathom. Inbetween you only have a few levels. What, good? Very good? He was neither.

Let me ask you, for how long have you been a Fleury apologist?

 

[Evilo]

That was because of Toivonen. Did you even bother to read what I wrote? His defence was worse, but Toivonen saved them on so many occasions. The team would have been lucky to have won 15 games without Toivonen because the defence was that bad. Toivonen faced a lot of shot every night.

I bothered. You say Providence had a worst D, and yet you can't provide me with one argument to say so.
The only argument that would enable someone to say a team is better defensively than another may be goals against. Yet you refuse to take it into account.
Fine. Then what makes you think Providence's D was worse than WB's?
The team would have been lucky, blah, blah, blah...
Same could be said with Fleury.

 

[Kaizer]

Yep.
Now give me the rookie goalies who had 18 stood on their heads in the National Hockey League behind the worst defense in the league, facing 40 shots a night.

Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick...

Jim Carey won Vezina in his first season as a starter and he was 21 and 1/2 or something. No big names after Gonchar and Witt

It's Jan Caloun and he came to Finland where he ruled the league for several years, currently playing in Russia I think.

Yes. Just checked, but in my source he was listed as Joe

 

[Evilo]

Jim Carey won Vezina in his first season as a starter and he was 21 and 1/2 or something. No big names after Gonchar and Witt

Yep. he wasn't 18, the Caps D did have names BTW, and I'd say winning a Vezina ain't too shabby.
Or maybe you mean winning a Vezina is busting?
BTW, he won the Vezina with a 906 SV%.
He must have been baaaaaad...

 

[Evilo]

Yet regardless, anyone that would say Sabourin was better then Lehtonen last year is a moron. He ha one better stat, GAA. Not wins. Not save %.

Oh....
Still stats are very comparable.
Very strange now that anyone that would think that comparable stats mean everything is a moron...
Very interesting.

BTW, I was among the first to say Lehtonen was a better prospect than Fleury when everyone was raving about MAF.
Then he put up his show in the NHL's first month, and I wasn't so sure.

Still while you and others were bandwagonning left and right, I'd stood firm, either in negative or positive periods.

 

[DBL]

These are not excuses.
You make fantasy ideas about where your team would be with your goalie.
It's exactly the same with Fleury.
You say Providence's defense was worst than WB, and yet they had less goals against.
What argument do you have that would enable you to say that?
None.

Fantasy is great, I know.

Maybe Fluery was the reason for more goals against and Toivonen was the reason for less goals against. Is that a fantasy too?

Fluery is a top 10 pick based on draft position and pure potential and Toivonen has the same type of potential, but has actually been showing signs of improvement since being drafted.

Fluery is quick and flashy but it overrates other parts of his game. He seemly has no mental game and that should be of some concern, but for some reason it's not taken into consideration. He's a raw talent that's got much work to do.

 

[Evilo]

Maybe Fluery was the reason for more goals against and Toivonen was the reason for less goals against. Is that a fantasy too?

Fluery is a top 10 pick based on draft position and pure potential and Toivonen has the same type of potential, but has actually been showing signs of improvement since being drafted.

Fluery is quick and flashy but it overrates other parts of his game. He seemly has no mental game and that should be of some concern, but for some reason it's not taken into consideration. He's a raw talent that's got much work to do.

Yep it's fantasy too, because we'll never know.

I never denied Fleury had some things to work on (mainly his mental game as you pointed).
But he deserves his top 10 spot no doubt.

 

[Vic Rattlehead*]

I bothered. You say Providence had a worst D, and yet you can't provide me with one argument to say so.
The only argument that would enable someone to say a team is better defensively than another may be goals against. Yet you refuse to take it into account.
Fine. Then what makes you think Providence's D was worse than WB's?
The team would have been lucky, blah, blah, blah...
Same could be said with Fleury.

Okay, let's compare:

Whitney > Jurcina - Whitney is one of the top defensive prospects in the game.
Lupaschuk > Dallman - Lupaschuk is much better offensively than Dallman.

After that, Bruins just had much worse in Thompson, Leach, Filipowicz, Dyment, and Scoville. The only time our defence got better was when we signed Alberts after he finished college, and Alberts became our best defenceman.

WB had Scuderi, Kellher, Nasreddine, Rossiter, and Koci. As a group, they played better than Thompson, Leach, Filipowicz, Dyment and Scoville.

For this year, Providence will have a great defence, with Stuart, Alberts, Jurcina, Dallman, Jonsson, and Sigalet being the main defenceman. One or two will probably play with Boston. This is the type of defence that if Toivonen played behind last season, his stats would have been god like.

 

[Evilo]

Okay, let's compare:

Whitney > Jurcina - Whitney is one of the top defensive prospects in the game.
Lupaschuk > Dallman - Lupaschuk is much better offensively than Dallman.

After that, Bruins just had much worse in Thompson, Leach, Filipowicz, Dyment, and Scoville. The only time our defence got better was when we signed Alberts after he finished college, and Alberts became our best defenceman.

WB had Scuderi, Kellher, Nasreddine, Rossiter, and Koci. As a group, they played better than Thompson, Leach, Filipowicz, Dyment and Scoville.

For this year, Providence will have a great defence, with Stuart, Alberts, Jurcina, Dallman, Jonsson, and Sigalet being the main defenceman. One or two will probably play with Boston. This is the type of defence that if Toivonen played behind last season, his stats would have been god like.

Nah, you can't only compare individuals and you know it.
Hasek had supreme numbers because his team (not made of HOFers) knew which shots he wanted to face.

 

[Evilo]

You asked ... about



and I provided. I give you guy who won Vezina as rookie (he had 28 games before actually, but played 1st season as a starter ) and then turned into bust, but you're trying to judge and consider only one month after what MAF was tired/sucked/ was outplayed or something.

No. Carey didn't win the Vezina in his first season, he didn't play in the NHL at 18, he didn't have the worst D in front of him, etc...

And really playing three years as the top goalie in the game isn't busting IMO.

 

[Kaizer]

Yep. he wasn't 18, the Caps D did have names BTW, and I'd say winning a Vezina ain't too shabby.
Or maybe you mean winning a Vezina is busting?
BTW, he won the Vezina with a 906 SV%.
He must have been baaaaaad...

You asked ... about

Now give me the rookie goalies who had 18 stood on their heads in the National Hockey League behind the worst defense in the league, facing 40 shots a night

and I provided. I give you guy who won Vezina as rookie (he had 28 games before actually, but played 1st season as a starter ) and then turned into bust, but you're trying to judge and consider only one month after what MAF was tired/sucked/ was outplayed or something.

 

[Evilo]

I haven't seen Toivonen play, and I haven't read many reports on him, so I'll trust you.
What I have seen on the other hand is the play of several prospects behind Fleury.
And I would not trade Fleury for any of them.
As for the "only" reason, I guess Fleury having played and dominate for a stretch at the NHL level is a reason to think highly of him.
Until we see what Toivonen can do at the NHL level, it's hard to say one is clearly better than the other.

I'm not disputing the fact other goalie prospects are good.
I dispute the fact Fleury gets a bad rep based on numbers from people who have no idea of how he's played. I also dispute the fact that these were the exact same people that were hyping him like crazy, which really shouldn't have been the case.

 

[DBL]

Yep it's fantasy too, because we'll never know.

I never denied Fleury had some things to work on (mainly his mental game as you pointed).
But he deserves his top 10 spot no doubt.

Would you agree with me and say the only reason there's a small gap between Fluery and Toivonen is draft position? If no whats your arguement?

 

[Gags1288]

I don't understand why you say goals against is the only way to judge the quality of a team defense. That's also factors in the quality of the goalie. Without ever seeing Fleury or Toivonen play a single game this season (fact) you know that Toivonen faced more shots per game (fact) and gave up fewer goals (fact). You know that Toivonen had a better GAA (fact) and didn't get beat out for the #1 starter role in the playoffs (fact). Don't you think it says a lot about a goalie if he can't perform in the playoffs. The last three times he's been in a pressure spot, he's been down right bad (2 AHL Playoffs, 1 WJC final). There isn't a single number of Fleury's you can present that would lead anyone to believe he has been even decent in the AHL. And yet you still haven't answered the initial quesiton, which was what has MAF done in the past 2 seasons to warrant his ranking. I know that #10 prospect Jeff Carter, for instance, has been all WJC twice, set the goal record for any Canadian player in the tournament (with Eric Lindros, in one fewer years), and dominated the AHL playoffs (including the great MAF). So why does Fleury deserve to be above him?

 

[Evilo]

I don't understand why you say goals against is the only way to judge the quality of a team defense.

Because it's probably the best way.
A good goalie will get lit up on a bad team, and an average goalie will have good numbers on a great team.
There's nothing more important than the team defense.

That's also factors in the quality of the goalie. Without ever seeing Fleury or Toivonen play a single game this season (fact) you know that Toivonen faced more shots per game (fact) and gave up fewer goals (fact). You know that Toivonen had a better GAA (fact) and didn't get beat out for the #1 starter role in the playoffs (fact).

Yep, and I know stats are relative.

Don't you think it says a lot about a goalie if he can't perform in the playoffs. The last three times he's been in a pressure spot, he's been down right bad (2 AHL Playoffs, 1 WJC final).

Absolutely. I think Fleury will have to work.
That said, I'd like to say WB performed in a "normal" way in the playoffs with Fleury. Fleury wasn't bad, he was not great. The team was bad. Everytime, Chiodo came in and made miracles.

There isn't a single number of Fleury's you can present that would lead anyone to believe he has been even decent in the AHL.

Nope. I don't believe in numbers. I believe in first hand impressions. Fleury made some good impressions this year, as well as some average ones.

And yet you still haven't answered the initial quesiton, which was what has MAF done in the past 2 seasons to warrant his ranking.

Huge potential. Has shown he can dominate at the NHL level. Has been up and down at the AHL level, including some sky rocket high.

I know that #10 prospect Jeff Carter, for instance, has been all WJC twice, set the goal record for any Canadian player in the tournament (with Eric Lindros, in one fewer years), and dominated the AHL playoffs (including the great MAF). So why does Fleury deserve to be above him?

Higher potential. Carter is not a potential franchise player (at least it's not a big chance), while Fleury has most of the tools to be a franchise goalie one day (if he works on his mental game).

 

[Evilo]

and Fleury also has the better chance to be a complete non-factor in the NHL.

Possible.
But would you take a franchise goalie or a very good supporting forward?

Some people need to consider that goalie need more time than forwards. Carter may have made more impact this year, but the fact remains nobody would trade Fleury for him right now.