GDT: Wind @ Snow 10/21 | 10pm

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Not clever. Then we would've scored as many shots as we took. I can play this game too.

except you have forgotten how bad our offense is that explains the lack of goals

and if the game you are referring to is nhl goaltending you cannot because cam ward is the only one

 

[Unsustainable]

Through 5 games:

Somewhere between C/D.

One A game doesn't do anything for 3 Ds and a C game.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

i give him a c.

as the only goalie in the league, he must be average.

 

[Swag Surf Aho]

except you have forgotten how bad our offense is that explains the lack of goals

and if the game you are referring to is nhl goaltending you cannot because cam ward is the only one

Holograms are transparent, no?

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Holograms are transparent, no?

yes but you can still SEE them thats why it looks like they have goalies when really they do not.

 

[Joe McGrath]

Through 5 games:

Somewhere between C/D.

One A game doesn't do anything for 3 Ds and a C game.

3 D's? Did you watch the Washington and/or Nashville game, or just look at the boxscore?

 

[RodTheBawd]

3 D's? Did you watch the Washington and/or Nashville game, or just look at the boxscore?

You don't need to watch those games given the sufficient sample size.

 

[Joe McGrath]

It really chaps my ass that I have to defend Ward's performance on here thus far because I'd rather see Lack playing. But for so many to just bury their heads in the sand and downplay that he's been average at worst thus far is just baffling.

 

[VAcaniac]

Agreed. Wardo's fault we lost in Washington too. He was terrible.

 

[Unsustainable]

3 D's? Did you watch the Washington and/or Nashville game, or just look at the boxscore?

Nothing in those games really gave me the impression that Ward is above average, maybe a C- in the Nashville game. Nashville is not a scoring juggernaut though. The Washington game Lack should have started.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

It really chaps my ass that I have to defend Ward's performance on here thus far because I'd rather see Lack playing. But for so many to just bury their heads in the sand and downplay that he's been average at worst thus far is just baffling.

You get used to it. Some have their minds made up about Ward and even when a loss isn't on him at all (The WSH game, for example), they'll still pin it on their current scapegoat.

Given how few games have been played, I don't think it's reasonable to jump to any conclusions about anyone's performance this year. Usually I like to give skaters 10-15 games before I can feel pretty confident if they're playing well or poorly, and with goaltenders, probably closer to 15-20, simply because the goaltending position has so many variables that are (mostly) out of the goaltenders' control.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

You get used to it. Some have their minds made up about Ward and even when a loss isn't on him at all (The WSH game, for example), they'll still pin it on their current scapegoat.

Sounds like a lot of angst aimed at Eric Staal over the years.

In fairness though, there are others who regularly defend Ward and pin goals on "defensive breakdowns", even when Ward played it poorly for a given goal. I know, you'll say it's to try to counteract all the other stuff being said, but it's more than that. There is built in bias on both sides of the discussion and the truth, more often than not, lies somewhere in between.

For instance, the goals Lack gave up in the 3rd against Florida. In both cases, a Florida player was left wide opened, uncovered, right in front of the net to poke a loose puck home and in one case it was a 2 on 1. Did Lack play those two well? No, he didn't, but a good play by the Canes player would have prevented 1, if not both of those goals. Yet the people who are in the "Ward" camp are more than willing to call out those goals and put them on Lack, yet firmly blame the skaters in the situations where Ward doesn't play it well after a breakdown.

I don't have a horse in this race as I don't like (or hate) either of these guys, but I see both sides of it on here.

EDIT: and I do recognize that if Ward had made the same plays on those goals against FLA, there are some that would have crucified him for it.

 

[The Stranger]

Given how few games have been played, I don't think it's reasonable to jump to any conclusions about anyone's performance this year. Usually I like to give skaters 10-15 games before I can feel pretty confident if they're playing well or poorly, and with goaltenders, probably closer to 15-20, simply because the goaltending position has so many variables that are (mostly) out of the goaltenders' control.

Making an assessment of a player's performance in a game is a fine thing to do...you just shouldn't look at a small sample size like 5 games and make a conclusive evaluation of a player.

 

[Joe McGrath]

Nothing in those games really gave me the impression that Ward is above average, maybe a C- in the Nashville game. Nashville is not a scoring juggernaut though. The Washington game Lack should have started.

So because you think Lack should have started the Washington game, Ward didn't play at least average? That's some impressive logic right there. And a C- in a game that he only gave up 2 goals and had little to no chance to stop either of them?

What did you think of Lack's performance, an F?

 

[jstaal]

yessssssssssssssss

For most of you, instead of admitting you're wrong about Cam Ward, you all get even more tangled in your web of lies. There is nothing comical about it.[/QUOTE Bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Sounds like a lot of angst aimed at Eric Staal over the years.

And I've openly admitted my bias against Eric during the time. It's something I think I've gotten a lot better about, at least, IMO.

In fairness though, there are others who regularly defend Ward and pin goals on "defensive breakdowns", even when Ward played it poorly for a given goal. I know, you'll say it's to try to counteract all the other stuff being said, but it's more than that. There is built in bias on both sides of the discussion and the truth, more often than not, lies somewhere in between.

For instance, the goals Lack gave up in the 3rd against Florida. In both cases, a Florida player was left wide opened, uncovered, right in front of the net to poke a loose puck home and in one case it was a 2 on 1. Did Lack play those two well? No, he didn't, but a good play by the Canes player would have prevented 1, if not both of those goals. Yet the people who are in the "Ward" camp are more than willing to call out those goals and put them on Lack, yet firmly blame the skaters in the situations where Ward doesn't play it well after a breakdown.

I don't have a horse in this race as I don't like (or hate) either of these guys, but I see both sides of it on here.

EDIT: and I do recognize that if Ward had made the same plays on those goals against FLA, there are some that would have crucified him for it.

This is just my opinion, but if the goal is the result of an obvious defensive breakdown or turnover, the defense (or individual) who caused the breakdown/turnover should receive the blame, regardless of who's in net or how the goaltender may have played the shot.

Breakaways, for example. You'd like to see goaltenders stop those, obviously. But if they wind up deked out of their jock or simply get beat by a shot (*coughGlovehighcough*), I struggle to blame the goalie more than I blame the defense that allowed the breakaway to happen in the first place.

My bias for goaltenders (whether its Ward, Lack, Khudobin, Price, Miller, etc) has me putting very few goals squarely on their shoulders. They'd have to completely **** up a shot for that to happen.

 

[Unsustainable]

So because you think Lack should have started the Washington game, Ward didn't play at least average? That's some impressive logic right there. And a C- in a game that he only gave up 2 goals and had little to no chance to stop either of them?

What did you think of Lack's performance, an F?

D for Lack, 2 goals against Lack was clearly on the Defense. 1 was a softy.

A being elite level, I think only Price is playing at the level.

B Level? Quick, Guy we shall not named that didn't sign here, Lund, and a few others.

C Level: Ward probably falls in the end of this group.

D: small sample size right now

F: too early to tell also.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

This is just my opinion, but if the goal is the result of an obvious defensive breakdown or turnover, the defense (or individual) who caused the breakdown/turnover should receive the blame, regardless of who's in net or how the goaltender may have played the shot.

That's way too simplistic of a view. Hockey is a very fast paced, dynamic game and to expect perfection of any one player is unrealistic. To expect that a team with better players isn't going to get better scoring chances, drive more turnovers from the other team, get more odd man rushes, etc..over the course of 60 minutes, is again, unrealistic. Alex Ovechkin is going to get really good shots against most defensemen in the league. The same goes for a goalie. It's unrealistic to expect them to stop every shot, even when fans think they should. In that light, you HAVE to expect that sometimes a goalie is going to make-up for a bad play by the skaters, and conversely, that sometimes the skaters are going to make up for a bad play by the goalie (ie...clear a juicy rebound out of the crease, save a goal, etc...).

So to say that the goalie can never be blamed when there is some sort of breakdown, is way too simplistic and I don't agree with. There are cases where both a goalie can play it poorly and the skaters can. Take the 3rd goal given up by Lack. The defense gave up a 2 on 1, so a breakdown. Then on the shot, Lack stopped it, but didn't play it well and the puck was loose, but then the Canes skater left the FLA player free in front to tap it into the net.

There's a classic case where there were two obvious defensive breakdowns (2 on 1 and then later not covering the guy in the crease) and a poor play by the goalie. You can't hold the goalie harmless on that one just because there was a defensive breakdown.

 

[RodTheBawd]

D for Lack, 2 goals against Lack was clearly on the Defense. 1 was a softy.

A being elite level, I think only Price is playing at the level.

B Level? Quick, Guy we shall not named that didn't sign here, Lund, and a few others.

C Level: Ward probably falls in the end of this group.

D: small sample size right now

F: too early to tell also.

Using the "I haven't watched a game, but I'll look at the numbers" MO around here, Quick is 2-3 with a .898 sv% and 2.59GAA. I take it you've watched all 5 of those games and came to the conclusion he's playing better than the numbers show?

 

[tarheelhockey]

That's way too simplistic of a view. Hockey is a very fast paced, dynamic game and to expect perfection of any one player is unrealistic. To expect that a team with better players isn't going to get better scoring chances, drive more turnovers from the other team, get more odd man rushes, etc..over the course of 60 minutes, is again, unrealistic. Alex Ovechkin is going to get really good shots against most defensemen in the league. The same goes for a goalie. It's unrealistic to expect them to stop every shot, even when fans think they should. In that light, you HAVE to expect that sometimes a goalie is going to make-up for a bad play by the skaters, and conversely, that sometimes the skaters are going to make up for a bad play by the goalie (ie...clear a juicy rebound out of the crease, save a goal, etc...).

And in the NHL the margins are just so small. A goalie who only stops the well-defended shots won't last long. A goalie who can stop "high danger" shots but lets in softies won't last long either. Teams need a goalie who stops all the ones he's supposed to AND negates most of the 4 or 5 breakdowns he faces in a given night. It's got to be both of you wont win games.

Last night Ward gave us both. But that hasn't been the norm for him. Not ever, really, outside of a year or two at his peak.

 

[The Stranger]

Let's say there are 4 shot categories:

1) Routine save - expected save 97% of the time
2) Difficult save - expected save 67% of the time
3) Ten Bell save - expected save 10% of the time
4) No Chance - expected save 0% of the time

A goalie starts the game at zero...if he make a routine save he gets 0.03 credit, if he gives up a goal on a routine shot, he gets -0.97...and so on...

2 and above is elite/game stealing performance - A
1 to 2 is good - B
-1 to 1 is average - C
-1 to -2 is subpar - D
-2 and below is replacement level - F

Suggested alterations are welcomed.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'd be quite interested to see a goalie ranked that way.

Edit: What jumps to mind is that screened shots are neither routine nor difficult... I feel like they get stopped around 80% of the time. How do they fit here?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I think there would have to be some work/research to set the percentages though. 97%, 60%, 10%, 0% are arbitrarily set and can vastly change the outcome. Also, is there any shot that is truly "no chance"? Unless a teammate falls on the goalie and he is unable to move, I can't see how any other shot can be 0% chance. It may be a low % to save it, but not 0%.

 

[A Star is Burns]

I think Ward has been in the C to C- range so far. I don't think he was particularly good in either Detroit game, was solid after the early rough start in Nashville (by everyone on the team), was pretty darn good for most of the Washington game, and was pretty great last night (I don't think it was the most taxing shutout ever last night, or the biggest steal ever, but you can't argue with his play last night).

I don't think it's outside the realm of reality for him to have a decent season similar to last season when/if the team in front of him gets its act together on a regular basis. But I still don't trust him to be any more than decent/average/mediocre long term at this point, so I still wouldn't mind moving on from him at the deadline if possible. I also won't be crushed if he's re-signed as long as it's somewhat similar to Lack, maybe with a little more of a longtime soldier premium. That would at least be a potentially solid duo without breaking the bank on the position.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

That's way too simplistic of a view. Hockey is a very fast paced, dynamic game and to expect perfection of any one player is unrealistic. To expect that a team with better players isn't going to get better scoring chances, drive more turnovers from the other team, get more odd man rushes, etc..over the course of 60 minutes, is again, unrealistic. Alex Ovechkin is going to get really good shots against most defensemen in the league. The same goes for a goalie. It's unrealistic to expect them to stop every shot, even when fans think they should. In that light, you HAVE to expect that sometimes a goalie is going to make-up for a bad play by the skaters, and conversely, that sometimes the skaters are going to make up for a bad play by the goalie (ie...clear a juicy rebound out of the crease, save a goal, etc...).

So to say that the goalie can never be blamed when there is some sort of breakdown, is way too simplistic and I don't agree with. There are cases where both a goalie can play it poorly and the skaters can. Take the 3rd goal given up by Lack. The defense gave up a 2 on 1, so a breakdown. Then on the shot, Lack stopped it, but didn't play it well and the puck was loose, but then the Canes skater left the FLA player free in front to tap it into the net.

There's a classic case where there were two obvious defensive breakdowns (2 on 1 and then later not covering the guy in the crease) and a poor play by the goalie. You can't hold the goalie harmless on that one just because there was a defensive breakdown.

My memory's not the greatest, and I'm at work currently so I can't look up the highlight. Did Lack simply give up a rebound on a 2-on-1 shot or did he attempt to cover it and simply miss?

If it's the former, I'd put the blame on the defense. If it's the latter, then it falls into that "The goaltender ****ed up the shot" category and I'd blame both, leaning more blame toward the goaltender.