Do overzealous goalie pulls annoy anyone else?

[Tak7]

How many miracle comebacks with the goalie out have we seen this season, alone?

We saw the Rangers in the outdoor game. The Leafs pulled off a few. The Canucks just did it to the Preds.

You always take that opportunity - losing by 4 goals vs losing by 3 goals is largely irrelevant at the end of the day

 

[ijuka]

So it's this thing:

Losing 3-2 and 4-2 is the same.

Losing 3-2 and being tied 3-3 is very different.


It's actually sort of like in gambling. Let's say you have terrible chances of winning, like 30%, and your goal was to quadruple your money.

Mathematically, the best way to do this is to bet all in twice in a row. It's only a 9% chance to work. But if you bet conservative amounts instead, it has a 0% chance to work.

The worse your odds, the greater the risks you need to take. If you play it safe, you will just lose, slowly. If you take massive risks, you will also lose a lot of the time. But you at least have a chance to win. There is no such chance if you don't take those risks.



Interestingly enough, coaches often use conservative strategies when they're at a disadvantage, even though it's the precise opposite of what they should be doing. Conservative strategies are for when you're winning big. Taking risks is for when you're losing big.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

All goalie pulls annoy me, even the zealous ones.

It's really not that effective. It's especially annoying when a team is getting looks and has the momentum going, and they put the opponent up by two, ending the game with 2:15 left.

They don't.

There was one year, I think it was 13-14, where pulling your goalie was a cheat code. It seems like it was just a collective random shooting bender, as it has never reached those levels of effectiveness again. The whole "pulling earlier is better" thing never actually held up.

The one time NHL coaches listened to analytics and it was stupid.

Ooo is that really true? Interested to read about that or see the stats. I’ve always felt like the early goalie pull is dumb as hell and just bails the other team out most of the time. Also NYR don’t even have more than 6 players I want on the ice in that situation so any other empty net shifts are probably not even worth the gamble

 

[KeydGV21]

All goalie pulls annoy me, even the zealous ones.

It's really not that effective. It's especially annoying when a team is getting looks and has the momentum going, and they put the opponent up by two, ending the game with 2:15 left.

They don't.

There was one year, I think it was 13-14, where pulling your goalie was a cheat code. It seems like it was just a collective random shooting bender, as it has never reached those levels of effectiveness again. The whole "pulling earlier is better" thing never actually held up.

The one time NHL coaches listened to analytics and it was stupid.

Do you have any stats to back that up?

Extra Attacker: When and How Should We Pull Our Goalie?

This would seem to indicate that coaches are still waiting to long to pull the goalie.

 

[Tofveve]

I agree with the OP. In fact I think I too made a thread about it while ago.

It used to be if you were down by 2 goals you'd pull a goalie with 2 to maybe 2.5 min left. If you were down by one goal 1.5 min left to 2 max. Now you've got coaches pulling the goalie 3 and 4 min early. It's ridiculous. A team can come back quite reasonably from even 3 goals with 3 min left. Pulling the goalie so early just gives the other team free target practice and it undermines your own team's confidence 5 on 5 IMO.

I think playoff elimination may be the only caveat if you're down by 4 plus goals with under 4 min.

 

[tucker3434]

I wouldn’t do it all the time, but an elimination game is an elimination game. Losing by 20 is the same as losing by 1. Throw the kitchen sink at it.

 

[Peltz]

The worst is when they do it already on the powerplay. You already have a 20% chance of scoring if you have a decent powerplay. A cloggy ass no room on the ice 6v4 isn't worth having your net empty.

30 seconds left, sure. It's supposed to be a desperation move. Doing it with 2+ minutes left is horseshit.

I highly disagree with this. Having 2 guys clogging up the crease is so much better than one.

 

[McVechkin]

I think it depends on the team.. if the team is a heavy possession controlling team, i can be on board with it.. for teams that can’t drive possession and mostly score off the rush.. I don’t like it.

 

[Siludin]

A team out of the playoffs should play an entire game 6v5, just to mess with their opponent down the stretch, maybe deny a goalie an illustrious Jennings.
Again probably something Patrick Roy would do.

 

[blankall]

Depends on the circumstances. If it's an elimination game and the faceoff is in the other zone, sure strategically pull the goalie. I do agree that teams are playing too loose with goalie pulling though. That being said, I'm hoping they have done statistical work to back up their calls and its not just a coach being clever.

 

[RooBicks]

Stats soundly back up pulling early and often. There's no question at this point, it significantly increases your chance of scoring the equalizer. This isn't controversial from a tactical standpoint, teams can't clog things up nearly as effectively when you have an extra skater on the ice, so you do it. As for when you're down 2 or 3: if you can increase your chance of tying from 0% to 3% or 5%, why wouldn't you do it? Repeat that several times a season and you're up to a significant percentage chance of stealing a point or two each year, which can make the difference. Teams should have been doing it for decades, but old mindsets die hard, even in the face of overwhelming evidence (hint, hint).

 

[SnowblindNYR]

The worst is when they do it already on the powerplay. You already have a 20% chance of scoring if you have a decent powerplay. A cloggy ass no room on the ice 6v4 isn't worth having your net empty.

30 seconds left, sure. It's supposed to be a desperation move. Doing it with 2+ minutes left is horseshit.

This game begs to differ.

 

[Machinehead]

View attachment 864244

This game begs to differ.

How many times this year did our empty net get scored on almost immediately?

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

No. In fact I want 2 teams to agree to play a game 6 on 6 with no goalies

 

[SnowblindNYR]

How many times this year did our empty net get scored on almost immediately?

It's weird and I don't have stats to prove this but I feel like we got scored on more quickly when we were down like 3 than 1. The team gave up at that point. Felt like Lavi was trying to make the loss look as bad as possible.

 

[Machinehead]

It's weird and I don't have stats to prove this but I feel like we got scored on more quickly when we were down like 3 than 1. The team gave up at that point. Felt like Lavi was trying to make the loss look as bad as possible.

I should say, to be fair, that I care less down multiple goals. You're probably gonna lose anyway.

I can't count how many times I felt we were coming on down one and blew up the last two minutes because we just let the other team score.

 

[acor]

With one goal game, I'd wait till final two minutes- there's a good chance you score without pulling the goalie, and playing "6vs5", it's still more likely your opponent will increase the lead (and therefore will seal the deal for good), than that you tie.

More than one goal- f*** it, pull it early, what's the worst thing could happen?

 

[Goose]

I'm happy when they're more aggressive trying to tie it up,

 

[powerbomb]

I’m not sure I understand why you care that the score appears more or less lopsided when the result is the same. Why does it matter if someone who wasn’t watching the game and glances at the scoreboard thinks it was a big blowout instead of a slightly smaller blowout? Your team lost in either scenario so what difference does the imagined thoughts of some stranger make? In what world would it be “better” for the coach to pack it in, suck it up, and lose by a lesser margin instead of giving his team a man advantage to try manufacturing a last minute comeback? It may be an effort that ends in vain, but that’s definitely better than the vanity of whether it looked like a close game to those who weren’t watching anyway.

 

[93LEAFS]

No, before they fixed the odds I used to make some nice side cash off betting next goals with 5 minutes left on the team that was up by 2 goals. Patrick Roy was a godsend for gamblers who figured this out.

 

[ponder719]

If you aren't doing everything in your power, as a coach, to try and win the game, why should you still have a job?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

There literally was a thread on this a while back and this happened the next night.

 

[KeydGV21]

There literally was a thread on this a while back and this happened the next night.

But you don’t understand…they *could* have lost by 4 and the game wouldn’t have looked as close

 

[Grifter3511]

But you don’t understand…they *could* have lost by 4 and the game wouldn’t have looked as close

And they'd be living with the embarrassment for the rest of their lives. It would probably wind up on their tombstones.

 

[KeydGV21]

I think it depends on the team.. if the team is a heavy possession controlling team, i can be on board with it.. for teams that can’t drive possession and mostly score off the rush.. I don’t like it.

A team who generally needs to score on the rush should be the team doing this even more.

Down multiple goals, late in the 3rd, odds are very much against the opposing team being aggressive enough to allow odd man rushes against