The point of that was saying that Varly has stretches that are far below what should be expected of any goalie in any system. I still maintain that the Avs' system inflates save percentage a bit since there are so many shots, but either way that can't be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. On Hank... his team relies on the goalie in a similar matter. I don't expect Varly to be as good, but he shouldn't be significantly worse either. The stats bear out that Varly has more down months (by any system) than most goalies do. It doesn't mean he is worst, just that he is inconsistent.
I think it is fair at this point. Varly has given up a lot of goals that are of the 'he should have had it variety' of late and throughout the past couple seasons. He had some in 13-14, but when he was in net, you pretty much expected him save the ones he could get.
It is entirely possible the workload is too much, but Varly tends to do a lot better when facing a lot of shots... his record while facing a 35-40+ shots has to be one of the best in the NHL. He tends to lose some focus when not facing as many.
A platoon might be the worst possible choice. It is what Vancouver did and it backfired. It is what St Louis has done for years and isn't working. Teams need a 55-60 game starter that you can count on in the playoffs to contend. Not a platoon. It just causes too many questions and both goalies never fully get comfortable.
Varly plays at his best when he gets a lot of shots within a game, but that's not the same as the heavy workload I'm referring to. The heavy workload having an affect on him is the cumulative one of all those games facing large shot totals. That's what I think we have to take into account when judging his down periods.
Would having a competent defense eliminate that cumulative workload, and perhaps eliminate those down periods that may be caused by pushing him past what any goaltender is capable of physically and mentally to stay consistent?
By that same token, Picks hasn't been put to anywhere near the same test. There's no reason whatsoever to think, except by sure guess work, that he'll fare better without the same inconsistencies.
I don't like the idea of a platoon either. In fact I hate it when teams do it, because of the unsettling environment it always causes. The point of doing such is a last resort kind of method. You don't want to fully give up on your starter, but you can't just ditch him either on faith that Pickard will be better based off a few games in a less than backup tested environment.
He hasn't even been tested in a true backup role over enough games. There have been far too many goalies have success over a small sample of games, only to prove incapable over a larger sample.
This brief period of going with the hot hand aside, the job should be Varly's until he loses it. He's proven far far more than Pickard has in the NHL. He really hasn't been all that bad recently either. He hasn't even let in the kind of soft goals we've seen from other poor goalies, including goalies of the Avs past. He just hasn't made the big saves. There's a difference, and we've seen him countless times make those same big saves in the past, so we know he's capable.
He deserves to be judged with a better than dog**** defense playing in front of him. If they're considering Picks for the long run, and I think there's a lot of reasons that could make sense, than they need to bite the bullet and go with a platoon next year to see if he can win the job. Not just give it to him on faith based on 30-40 games. That's a recipe for disaster.
