GDT: Star Wars Homage Night. Columbus Blue Jackets at New Jeresy Devils. 7pm MSG+

[Emperoreddy]

Mental mistakes are going to happen. Not much you can do but try and play through it, and send messages with benchings or demotions if it gets out of hand.

The priority right now needs to be getting special teams back on track. We can’t be firing blanks this often on the PP. especially when we are getting shafted on calls as it is.

 

[guitarguyvic]

Here's a stat for you. Our team save percentage is .913 and the league average save percentage is .911, so we're barely getting better than average goaltending on the season. Why do you think that is? I'll give you a hint, it ain't because of Cory. I really don't wanna hear it if Kinkaid plays his usual crap game that he's played since late October. I really don't wanna read ''Well, Andy Greene was staring off in space'' or ''Zajac was checking out Lauren Cohan in the crowd when that goal was scored!'' or ''Jimmy Hayes was floating around on the ice, as per usual'' because while I'm sure that all of these things probably will be happening tomorrow night, at least the odds are favorable for them happening, the odds are also very much in favor of Kinkaid allowing at least one bad goal. There's usually an excuse for him, like some phantom screen, or a ''GREAT SHOT'' or skilled player making a skilled play.

If he can't do better than Cory did tonight, or god forbid better than he's done the last two months, we'd be stupid to not start playing Cory more. Because Cory tonight is what you get the last 5 consecutive starts from Kinkaid, while Cory has played how many games in the last month? And this is probably the first time he's had a game like this since Winnipeg, about 4 weeks ago?

Honestly I don’t want to hear anymore about save percentages. Zero context to that stat.

 

[Bleedred]

Honestly I don’t want to hear anymore about save percentages. Zero context to that stat.

How else should we judge them then? Are you gonna argue with me that Kinkaid hasn't been bad? He lets in a softy a game! Schneider hasn't averaged a softy per game, I know that much. Saying this stat has no context is like the Sharks fan who tried to rationalize that Jannik Hansen is really not playing poorly, despite having just one point in 17 games this season. He did get point number 2 last night though!

Kinkaid looks like twilight era Marty, who was probably averaging close to a softy per game by 13-14.

I happen to believe that over a larger sample size, the goalie's with the lower save percentages, let in more stoppable goals. Just turn on a Rangers game. Why is Lundqvist's save percentage declining the past few seasons? Do you think that's on accident? If you watch him, there's a lot of more shitty goals going in on him than past seasons. Turn on a Carolina game, Darling lets in putrid goals left and right, and he's got a save percentage that's barely above 90% to show for it.

If save percentage means nothing, maybe we should have played Marty more than Cory in 13-14 and maybe we should have brought him back in 14-15, so he didn't have to retire with another team!

Okay, if you don't wanna use save percentage as a argument, then maybe I'll pretend that Cory didn't play badly last year when he had a .908 save percentage. Maybe he was just unlucky? You've already used his play the last two years against him, so what made you use last year's play against him? The low save percentage? Or the bad goals? The bad goals are backed up by the low save percentage....

Even the good goalies allow bad goals sometimes. I can give you LOADS of examples of it from prime Marty. Did he really only allow a weak goal twice a season in his prime? Or Roy? Or Hasek?

 

[Its a Trap]

It is odd, but most likely just a quirk that will eventually correct itself as time goes on.

I hope so. But that was a pretty real thing back then until the Streak in 2011. Team rarely played a good game in front of a big home crowd unless it was a Rag game. Pissed me off to no end.

 

[Kurt Cobain]

The sooner people realize that this team has some glaring flaws, the easier it will be to reset your expectations.

There will be periods of brilliance and periods of incompetence. The rebuild is one year ahead of schedule with the emergence of bratt and butcher

Yeah I'm trying my hardest not to get too excited about this team when things are going well or too low when things just get straight up depressing like tonight. This is a young team with serious defensive problems. Not just on the back end but even the majority of our forwards should never be confused for two way players, especially on the wing. When we were a dominant defensive team for all those years we always had great two way forwards up and down the lineup that could help out the defense. We put out some pretty pathetic defense pairings post 2005 lockout and we're still elite defensively for a reason. This is something that's going to take time before players develop that two way ability.

Tough loss, but a win tomorrow night against the rangers and I'll consider this a decent week for us since we already beat Columbus. I would have expected to lose both of these games against the jackets before the season started.

Also don't think it's necessary to blame individual players and talk about their immediate retirements being a necessity. Let's stop and think things out instead of posting completely fueled on emotion only. Just a thought. I don't expect it to be taken seriously.

 

[Its a Trap]

That turnover by Greene that lead to the first goal is just absolutely infuriating.

 

[guitarguyvic]

How else should we judge them then? Are you gonna argue with me that Kinkaid hasn't been bad? He lets in a softy a game! Schneider hasn't averaged a softy per game, I know that much.

Kinkaid looks like twilight era Marty, who was probably averaging close to a softy per game by 13-14.

I happen to believe that over a larger sample size, the goalie's with the lower save percentages, let in more stoppable goals. Just turn on a Rangers game. Why is Lundqvist's save percentage declining the past few seasons? Do you think that's on accident? If you watch him, there's a lot of more ****ty goals going in on him than past seasons. Turn on a Carolina game, Darling lets in putrid goals left and right, and he's got a save percentage that's barely above 90% to show for it.

If save percentage means nothing, maybe we should have played Marty more than Cory in 13-14 and maybe we should have brought him back in 14-15, so he didn't have to retire with another team!

Okay, if you don't wanna use save percentage as a argument, then maybe I'll pretend that Cory didn't play badly last year when he had a .908 save percentage. Maybe he was just unlucky? You've already used his play the last two years against him, so what made you use last year's play against him? The low save percentage? Or the bad goals? The bad goals are backed up by the low save percentage....

Even the good goalies allow bad goals sometimes. I can give you LOADS of examples of it from prime Marty. Did he really only allow a weak goal twice a season in his prime? Or Roy? Or Hasek?

Good lord, I didn’t say any of this. My only point is that trotting out Cory’s save percentage numbers is not going to do anything to convince me that Cory is a better than average goalie.

The eye test is a pretty flawed method of judging skater performance during games, but I think not as much for the goaltending position. There’s also more intangibles there that are difficult to measure. Cory could make 30 saves in a row and then he lets that one wrister in from the wing off the rush and it’s just so goddamn deflating. How do you measure that through save percentage? You can’t.

 

[Bleedred]

Also don't think it's necessary to blame individual players and talk about their immediate retirements being a necessity. Let's stop and think things out instead of posting completely fueled on emotion only. Just a thought. I don't expect it to be taken seriously.

The players being trashed in this thread (aside from Cory I think, though I'm fine with saying he wasn't good tonight) have been all year long, or at least as long as they've been playing. Stafford hasn't been bad all year long, but has Michael Rydered himself in the last month.

I don't think anyone should retire, but most of the 30+ year old's on this team are a problem right now. We're also scratching a 20 year old to accommodate these slugs. This is the worst 11 games I've seen from Zajac in his career. Does it mean he's done? No, too early to say. He deserves it this year though and if you think he doesn't, then you have to blame the coaching staff, for using him like he's played like the 45 point/defensive stalwart that he's otherwise been, which has been far from the case this year. You gotta blame the coaches for leaning on him so heavily on the power play.

Andy Greene has been pretty awful. I think he's been as bad as Lovejoy was last year in this role, it's certainly close. I don't think he needs to retire, but the load needs to be lightened at this point. His decline started a bit earlier than Zajac's, but I thought he was decent last year. If you don't wanna blame him, blame the coaches.

 

[Its a Trap]

Also don't think it's necessary to blame individual players and talk about their immediate retirements being a necessity. Let's stop and think things out instead of posting completely fueled on emotion only. Just a thought. I don't expect it to be taken seriously.

My evidence is the cliff his level of play has fallen off over the last season+. The atrocious game witnessed live is just the cherry on top of the pie honestly.

 

[Emperoreddy]

My evidence is the cliff his level of play has fallen off over the last season+. The atrocious game witnessed live is just the cherry on top of the pie honestly.

That isn’t evidence though. You would need to present some stats and data to prove he should retire.

 

[Its a Trap]

That isn’t evidence though. You would need to present some stats and data to prove he should retire.

Well I wasn't defending the he should retire part, just the he sucks part. I only say I hope he retires because he sucks at 5 million a year

 

[Bleedred]

Good lord, I didn’t say any of this. My only point is that trotting out Cory’s save percentage numbers is not going to do anything to convince me that Cory is a better than average goalie.

The eye test is a pretty flawed method of judging skater performance during games, but I think not as much for the goaltending position. There’s also more intangibles there that are difficult to measure. Cory could make 30 saves in a row and then he lets that one wrister in from the wing off the rush and it’s just so goddamn deflating. How do you measure that through save percentage? You can’t.

Then I don't know if you watch other goalies around the league. Cory let in an abnormally low number of softies in the 15-16 season. I mean, less than 20% of the goals he allowed that year were goals that I felt he had a chance on. I was surprised he didn't have a .930+ save percentage that year, that's how good he played on the eyes. I know you've singled out the last two years, which I agree with a little bit. The softy count has went up a bit over the last two years or since the start of the 16-17 season.

But even Marty was knocked back in his prime for being prone to allowing the inexplicably soft goal sometimes. I remember when he pretty much was the reason we were up 3 games to 1 against Ottawa in 2003, then they win games 5 and 6 and Marty allows a stoppable goal (it looked exactly like Staal's series winner in 2009) and Bill Clement, who was usually very pro-Brodeur, wanted to talk about how bad that goal was. And even after Marty stood on his head and stole that game and series, he referenced that goal after the game ended by saying ''Brodeur didn't have the best game, he allowed a bad goal, you're not supposed to win when you're goalie allows bad goals''. Speaking of Staal Marty got torn to shreds for that Carolina series, despite the only bad goals he allowed of the series being that Ruutu goal early in game 7 and the Staal game winner. And Marty hasn’t really started to significantly decline until a year later.

People often use the amount of soft goals he allowed to undermine his career.

 

[Bleedred]

If Zacha can't get in after this game.... And I was SHOCKED that he couldn't get in after whatever you call that excuse of a performance in Arizona. I didn't expect him in for this game after Tuesday's game in Columbus.

It would serve us well to put in some younger and fresh legs, while taking out some slowing, aging, player.

 

[Emperoreddy]

I would be surprised if he isn’t in tomorrow, but he has to play like a man possessed. It is about time we saw some real fire from him.

 

[Bleedred]

Well I wasn't defending the he should retire part, just the he sucks part. I only say I hope he retires because he sucks at 5 million a year

I'm not worried about his salary, as much as I'm worried about them feeling compelled to play him like he's still this #1-2 defenseman, which he's definitely not.

I wish they liked Severson more but

In before ''Severson sucks at defense, is a liability and we'll allow more goals if we use him more''.

 

[Emperoreddy]

I'm not worried about his salary, as much as I'm worried about them feeling compelled to play him like he's still this #1-2 defenseman, which he's definitely not.

I wish they liked Severson more but

In before ''Severson sucks at defense, is a liability and we'll allow more goals if we use him more''.

Severson doesn’t factor into that though because Greene plays on the left. We don’t have another LD that can ease Greene down.

Maybe Mueller when he gets back.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

If Hynes can’t find someone to bench for Zacha tomorrow after that garbage, he’s a f***ing idiot.

 

[guitarguyvic]

Then I don't know if you watch other goalies around the league. Cory let in an abnormally low number of softies in the 15-16 season. I mean, less than 20% of the goals he allowed that year were goals that I felt he had a chance on. I was surprised he didn't have a .930+ save percentage that year, that's how good he played on the eyes. I know you've singled out the last two years, which I agree with a little bit. The softy count has went up a bit over the last two years or since the start of the 16-17 season.

But even Marty was knocked back in his prime for being prone to allowing the inexplicably soft goal sometimes. I remember when he pretty much was the reason we were up 3 games to 1 against Ottawa in 2003, then they win games 5 and 6 and Marty allows a stoppable goal (it looked exactly like Staal's series winner in 2009) and Bill Clement, who was usually very pro-Brodeur, wanted to talk about how bad that goal was. And even after Marty stood on his head and stole that game and series, he referenced that goal after the game ended by saying ''Brodeur didn't have the best game, he allowed a bad goal, you're not supposed to win when you're goalie allows bad goals''. Speaking of Staal Marty got torn to shreds for that Carolina series, despite the only bad goals he allowed of the series being that Ruutu goal early in game 7 and the Staal game winner. And Marty hasn’t really started to significantly decline until a year later.

People often use the amount of soft goals he allowed to undermine his career.

\
You talk about tallying up "soft goals" as if it's not something that is highly subjective. This is quite the flawed premise you are working with here.

 

[Bleedred]

\
You talk about tallying up "soft goals" as if it's not something that is highly subjective. This is quite the flawed premise you are working with here.

Aren’t you rallying them up though? Because if you’re not, then how else is Cory nothing more than average? What else are you basing it on? Save percentage is already out for you.

 

[guitarguyvic]

Aren’t you rallying them up though? Because if you’re not, then how else is Cory nothing more than average? What else are you basing it on? Save percentage is already out for you.

I'm not tallying them up, have you ever seen me comment that Cory gives up too many softies? Analyzing every goal scored against from a technical standpoint and trying to determine which ones were soft and then presenting whatever quantity you subjectively came up with - as if it's some objective truth - that's just not a convincing form of performance evaluation to me.

Rather than parsing each goal allowed, I'd rather look at the big picture. The in-game situation and how the goalie performed generally speaking. Did he give up a morale-killing goal at a terrible time? Did he cough up rebounds or lack puck control leading to more quality chances than one would otherwise expect? Did he do an effective job of covering up for his teammates mistakes? etc.

 

[Emperoreddy]

\
You talk about tallying up "soft goals" as if it's not something that is highly subjective. This is quite the flawed premise you are working with here.

What is your objective measuring stick if that is out and you don’t count save percentage?

 

[guitarguyvic]

What is your objective measuring stick if that is out and you don’t count save percentage?

1) I never said I completely discount save percentage. I'm just tired of seeing that one particular stat repeated ad nauseum as a rationalization for claiming Cory is a top goaltender.
2) You can combine save % with other stats like GAA and wins and losses. But IMO those are largely ineffective (for example, I wish there was a stat tracking rebounds in some way).

I outlined in the post prior to yours some admittedly subjective methods of assessing goaltender performance. I good mix of all these things is probably the best we can do for now, until someone comes up with credible advance stats for goalies lol. Picking apart and quantifying "soft goals" is probably the least precise and most subjective method of evaluating a goalie I've ever encountered.

 

[Bleedred]

1) I never said I completely discount save percentage. I'm just tired of seeing that one particular stat repeated ad nauseum as a rationalization for claiming Cory is a top goaltender.
2) You can combine save % with other stats like GAA and wins and losses. But IMO those are largely ineffective (for example, I wish there was a stat tracking rebounds in some way).

I outlined in the post prior to yours some admittedly subjective methods of assessing goaltender performance. I good mix of all these things is probably the best we can do for now, until someone comes up with credible advance stats for goalies lol. Picking apart and quantifying "soft goals" is probably the least precise and most subjective method of evaluating a goalie I've ever encountered.

But as I’ve said, I find there’s a correlation between a goaltender who allows a lot of bad goals and has a poor save percentage. Toskala and his softies were a meme, and he let in a lot of them, and had a pretty lousy career save percentage. Cory’s poor season last year, seemed to coincide with a rise in stoppable goals, especially in comparison to his season before, when he allowed them at a much smaller frequency and had a much higher save percentage.

I will say there are some goalies who somehow massively fail the eye test, yet seem to have an average or above average save percentage. Scott Clemmensen is a big example of that for me. He was above average here that year that Marty was injured, he was average for his first several years in Florida, yet for all the lousy goals he allowed, you’d think he would be posting Darren Pang numbers.

James Reimer is an active example for me. He has his lousy years, but he also has solid years, and manages to not look so solid when having them. Even the years where he looks good on paper, I feel like every 2 or 3 goals he allows are something he could have stopped.

 

[guitarguyvic]

It would be equally silly to evaluate a forward's goal-scoring performance by looking for and adding up every missed scoring chance that you subjectively believe he should have capitalized on. Not sure why doing the equivalent with a goalie would be considered a good strategy.

 

[Bcap88]

What a f***ing joke the refs have been all year as well. Hall tripped on a breakaway....no call