Just how good is Matt Murray in the playoffs?

[Sidney the Kidney]

It is hilarious. The guy gave up five today and still gets the win. There is no pressure on him at all because of Pittsburgh’s offense. He doesn’t have to win games by himself. Goal support does matter in wins and losses. Quick on the other hand, gives up a single goal and is the losing goalie.

Total playoff wins:
Quick - 46
Murray - 26

Number of wins in playoff career when giving up 4 goals or more:
Quick - 2
Murray - 1 (today)

Number of wins in playoff career when giving up 3 goals:
Quick - 8
Murray - 4

Seems to me that Quick's relied on getting goal support more than Murray has, with 8 of his 46 wins coming when he gave up 3 goals or more (17.3% of the time) compared to Murray's 4 out of 26 (15.4%) when he gave up 3 or more.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Total playoff wins:
Quick - 46
Murray - 26

Number of wins in playoff career when giving up 4 goals or more:
Quick - 2
Murray - 1 (today)

Number of wins in playoff career when giving up 3 goals:
Quick - 8
Murray - 4

Seems to me that Quick's relied on getting goal support more than Murray has, with 8 of his 46 wins coming when he gave up 3 goals or more (17.3% of the time) compared to Murray's 4 out of 26 (15.4%) when he gave up 3 or more.

would you rank a 4-3 double ot game as easier or harder to win than a 5-0, 6-0 or 7-0 blowout?

Dishonest stat picking. Although quick did benefit from his team's offense in 2014. 2012, different story.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

would you rank a 4-3 double ot game as easier or harder to win than a 5-0, 6-0 or 7-0 blowout?

Dishonest stat picking. Although quick did benefit from his team's offense in 2014. 2012, different story.

How is it stat picking? All I did was literally post the number of games each won when they surrendered 3 or more goals against and needed their team to score 4 or more in order to win.

You're the one focusing on the blowout games and pretending like that was the norm (lets ignore all those close Caps/Pens games or the San Jose series where the Pens couldn't beat Jones very often).

And the funny thing is you even add "although Quick did benefit from his team's offense in 2014.

So we're judging Murray on the few blowout games as though that's the case for ALL his wins, while dismissing the games where Quick had a strong offensive team.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

would you rank a 4-3 double ot game as easier or harder to win than a 5-0, 6-0 or 7-0 blowout?

Dishonest stat picking. Although quick did benefit from his team's offense in 2014. 2012, different story.

Stat picking..as in you just picking Murrays last ten games? Hes played alot more..winning a cup the year before as well.
In some low scoring games. Didnt fit your narrative tho.

Of course he had some bad games sprinkled in. But we dont win it all without the help of him period.

Pens have a great team...and a solid goalie.

Yes we arent the florida panthers letting up 60 shots a game with vokoun saving most of them. Who gives a shit? Id rather my team win cups.

Surround Quick with some more talent..maybe he will get another. On another team.

 

[Frank Drebin]

How is it stat picking? All I did was literally post the number of games each won when they surrendered 3 or more goals against and needed their team to score 4 or more in order to win.

You're the one focusing on the blowout games and pretending like that was the norm (lets ignore all those close Caps/Pens games or the San Jose series where the Pens couldn't beat Jones very often).

And the funny thing is you even add "although Quick did benefit from his team's offense in 2014.

So we're judging Murray on the few blowout games as though that's the case for ALL his wins, while dismissing the games where Quick had a strong offensive team.

How many 1 goal games has each goalie won?

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

How many 1 goal games has each goalie won?

How about you actually do the research since you dismiss anything I offer and seem to insist that Murray's always getting wins in blowouts?

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

How about you actually do the research since you dismiss anything I offer and seem to insist that Murray's always getting wins in blowouts?

He'd end up missing the ones that were scored with an EN at the end.

 

[Talon70]

Total playoff wins:
Quick - 46
Murray - 26

Number of wins in playoff career when giving up 4 goals or more:
Quick - 2
Murray - 1 (today)

Number of wins in playoff career when giving up 3 goals:
Quick - 8
Murray - 4

Seems to me that Quick's relied on getting goal support more than Murray has, with 8 of his 46 wins coming when he gave up 3 goals or more (17.3% of the time) compared to Murray's 4 out of 26 (15.4%) when he gave up 3 or more.

You forgot a measure of comparison
Quick 1 Conn Smythe
Murray none

The Penguins’ last two Conn Smythe trophies should tell you where the strength of this Penguins team is (as if we didn’t already know). The Penguins could put Scott Darling in net as still be as successful.

 

[vanarchy]

All of his playoff wins have been kind of hilarious. Just laugh

 

[Frank Drebin]

He'd end up missing the ones that were scored with an EN at the end.

I think i posted all of his playoff wins in the past 2 seasons?

Edit: missed the 3-2 win vs the sens. 55 gf in 11 wins. Money.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

I think i posted all of his playoff wins in the past 2 seasons?

Edit: missed the 3-2 win vs the sens. 55 gf in 11 wins. Money.

Only 11 wins last two seasons? So only 4 wins in 2016 when we had 1 win from someone other than him? Money.

Keep searching. Youll get there someday.

I already gave you a hint , you should be able to work the math. I hope.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

How many 1 goal games has each goalie won?

Since you're probably going to be too lazy to do it.

1-goal wins:
Quick - 21 (out of 46) for 45.6% of the time
Murray - 10 (out of 26) for 38.5% of the time

2-goal wins:
Quick - 32 (out of 46) for 69.6% of the time
Murray - 16 (out of 26) for 61.5% of the time

When you consider that LA is generally a more defensive club, the fact their percentages are close should tell you you're underrating Murray considering Quick is considered one of, if not the, most clutch goalies recently.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

Since you're probably going to be too lazy to do it.

1-goal wins:
Quick - 21 (out of 46) for 45.6% of the time
Murray - 10 (out of 26) for 38.5% of the time

2-goal wins:
Quick - 32 (out of 46) for 69.6% of the time
Murray - 16 (out of 26) for 61.5% of the time

When you consider that LA is generally a more defensive club, the fact their percentages are close should tell you you're underrating Murray considering Quick is considered one of, if not the, most clutch goalies recently.

He also thinks Murray only had 11 wins the last two years instead of 22. So, yeah you were better off providing the info.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Since you're probably going to be too lazy to do it.

1-goal wins:
Quick - 21 (out of 46) for 45.6% of the time
Murray - 10 (out of 26) for 38.5% of the time

2-goal wins:
Quick - 32 (out of 46) for 69.6% of the time
Murray - 16 (out of 26) for 61.5% of the time

When you consider that LA is generally a more defensive club, the fact their percentages are close should tell you you're underrating Murray considering Quick is considered one of, if not the, most clutch goalies recently.

I honestly think Murray is a legit top ten starter in the league. But he's nothing special when compared to other elite goalies. He's just fortunate to play behind the pens.

 

[Frank Drebin]

He also thinks Murray only had 11 wins the last two years instead of 22. So, yeah you were better off providing the info.

What do you consider a year?

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I honestly think Murray is a legit top ten starter in the league. But he's nothing special when compared to other elite goalies. He's just fortunate to play behind the pens.

And Quick is fortunate to play behind a stingy Kings' defense. And Rask is fortunate to play behind a stingy Bruins defense. And Crawford is fortunate to play behind a dominant Chicago team. And Ken Dryden was fortunate to play behind a 5-in a row Cup winning dynasty.

Why is their success not dismissed because of the teams they played on? Everyone else who sees success like that in the playoffs is considered "elite" or "money". But Murray is replaceable with friggin' Scott Darling and a beneficiary of a good offense (no, you didn't say this last part, but it's been brought up in this thread) because he plays on a good team, while those guys aren't punished for the same thing?

I'm not saying Murray's the greatest ever. I'm not saying he's the best goalie in hockey. But for folks in this thread to act like the ONLY reason he's having playoff success is because his team scores 10 goals every time he starts (hyperbole before anyone nitpicks this point) is asinine.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

What do you consider a year?

You said Murray has 11 playoff wins the last two years. These hurdles are getting taller...

And honestly I wouldnt even care..always cracks me up tho when the most condescending posts( "hilarious...money") are the ones that are completely wrong.

 

[Frank Drebin]

You said Murray has 11 playoff wins the last two years. These hurdles are getting taller...

yes. this year and last year. 2016 would be 2 years ago, or 3 cumulative years. (2018,2017,2016)

 

[Frank Drebin]

And Quick is fortunate to play behind a stingy Kings' defense. And Rask is fortunate to play behind a stingy Bruins defense. And Crawford is fortunate to play behind a dominant Chicago team. And Ken Dryden was fortunate to play behind a 5-in a row Cup winning dynasty.

Why is their success not dismissed because of the teams they played on? Everyone else who sees success like that in the playoffs is considered "elite" or "money". But Murray is replaceable with friggin' Scott Darling and a beneficiary of a good offense (no, you didn't say this last part, but it's been brought up in this thread) because he plays on a good team, while those guys aren't punished for the same thing?

I'm not saying Murray's the greatest ever. I'm not saying he's the best goalie in hockey. But for folks in this thread to act like the ONLY reason he's having playoff success is because his team scores 10 goals every time he starts (hyperbole before anyone nitpicks this point) is asinine.

Well frankly no one is saying how great rask or quick is,but Murray is getting attention because of wins and shutouts.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

yes. this year and last year. 2016 would be 2 years ago. (2018,2017,2016)

His playoff career was being mentioned this whole time...I even brought up what he did in 2016 saying you picked stats to support your argument. That there were alot more close wins..where he bailed this team out. You chose last 10 games..then went to 11..as in how many playoff games he won.

So Im assuming you didnt know he was the goalie in 2016? That matters as well. And even more impressive since he was 21 with very little experience.

 

[Tom Hanks]

yes. this year and last year. 2016 would be 2 years ago, or 3 cumulative years. (2018,2017,2016)

Last two years from today is April 22nd 2016 and he’s had 23 wins since then.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Well frankly no one is saying how great rask or quick is,but Murray is getting attention because of wins and shutouts.

Murray's getting attention because (so far -- obviously at some point this will end) he's never lost a playoff series. And he's putting up historically good GAA and save percentage totals in the process.

That's why it's noteworthy.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Last two years from today is April 22nd 2016 and he’s had 23 wins since then.

I shouldn't have to clarify on a hockey forum that a year implies a season.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

I shouldn't have to clarify on a hockey forum that a year implies a season.

"Dishonest stat picking"?

Ill stop now..this guy's all over the place.

 

[valet]

i'd trade a conditional 3rd for like 5 of murray's best playoff performances, but only if they were important games and my team went on to win the cup, kind of like a space jam thing i guess