lilidk
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2008
- 9,914
- 3,625
More importantly is that Yzerman/Feds and Datsyuk/Z had Lidstrom
what about Russo? , he leads GR difference and he has +25 raiting
More importantly is that Yzerman/Feds and Datsyuk/Z had Lidstrom
Jimmy Howard was great at Maine, Mrazek was merely good in the OHL.
Mrazek was of course considerably better in Grand Rapids in a much smaller sample.
I think Mrazek is better than Howard and I applauded Howard's demotion but I also have seen some shakiness from Mrazek that makes me wonder if he's really going to be the kind of steady high-end performer you need for a goalie to be a true building block.
7 goals makes him elite? come on
So this is more of a thing where you're not familiar with how even great goalies get lit up, and not a thing about Mrazek, since you didn't know how good he was at the OHL level.
But he's shown good enough to feel comfortable dumping 5m Howard.
it just Yserman had Fedorov , And Datsyuk have Zetterberg, Larkin needs 1-2 punch at the center . We have dissent wingers in the pipe , probably difference , but not at Center .
With 2 assists last night he climbed to top 60. This is as I said while playing very little PP, almost no PP time.7 goals makes him elite? come on
assists are a WAY more important stat for Defensemen and he only has 8 of them
but I guess being tied for 22nd among Defensemen in goals makes up for being tied for 102nd in assists
and i'm sure his 13.7% shooting percentage as a Defenseman is going to continue indefinitely without massive drops right? I mean that's not a ridiculous number at all and is well in line with his career average of 5.4% that includes this year
The game has changed and we see some Dmen producing a lot, while forwards produce less.Do you have to be more than generically offensively productive to be an elite dman?
I'm not making the argument he is elite, by the way, I'm just wondering if there's an offensive benchmark a dman has to hit before he's even considered.
Good point. Howard used to carry the wings on his back back in the day too. Now he can't win a game to save his life.Eh even with those rankings you can really only say that he was one of the better goalies in one junior league. That's fine. Never said he wasn't good. But Howard was still seen as a better player before the draft. He had the better stats in college, that's all I'm saying and obviously our team's brain trust agreed since they spent a 2nd round pick on him rather than a 5th round flyer.
It has nothing to do with getting lit up, which indeed can happen to all of them, it's soundness. Mrazek doesn't look 100% sound out there. That's a risky gambit because if you aren't Hasek that sort of approach will typically lead to inconsistent outcomes.
I don't have a huge issue with Mrazek and am OK with him as starter but if there's one mistake that this forum repeatedly makes (and probably every team forum) it's that we tend to overrate our own young players early on. He hasn't shown enough to be seen as a franchise goalie.
I thought the whole board agreed at the beginning of the season they would fight for #1. Mrazek won it. For good? I do not know.Yeah though there's probably another factor here which is what Howard has shown. It's a combination of both factors which has led to Mrazek winning the starting job. At the end of the day you go with your best option.
Eh even with those rankings you can really only say that he was one of the better goalies in one junior league. That's fine. Never said he wasn't good.
But Howard was still seen as a better player before the draft.
He had the better stats in college, that's all I'm saying
It has nothing to do with getting lit up, which indeed can happen to all of them, it's soundness. Mrazek doesn't look 100% sound out there. That's a risky gambit because if you aren't Hasek that sort of approach will typically lead to inconsistent outcomes.
He hasn't shown enough to be seen as a franchise goalie.
The game has changed and we see some Dmen producing a lot, while forwards produce less.
Many fans don't see it yet.
Good point. Howard used to carry the wings on his back back in the day too.
I thought the whole board agreed at the beginning of the season they would fight for #1. Mrazek won it. For good? I do not know.
I don't know what style the Wild play but I feel pretty confident that he would put up more points in Detroit. Too bad because he was a perfect fit for this team.For example, is Ryan Suter elite? He's never had more than 46 points in a season and he plays 25+ minutes a night, on all three
For his first two full years in juniors 4 of his 6 major categories ranked inside the top 5 in the whole league.
"Merely good."
... which is entirely meaningless. What you are seen as has nothing to do with what you are. It doesn't matter if a player is drafted top 10, last 10, or entirely undrafted... draft position is not a leading indicator of what a player is. Each years draft is replete with dozens and dozens of cases where guys selected earlier are worse, and sometimes insanely worse, than players selected later.
I think you're confusing style with solidity. Mrazek's not a 6'4 behemoth who can just sit there and soak up shots. His style is solid in that it's been the same throughout his career to date.
As has his performance on the ice.
So, how many years does he have to be in the top 5 goalies in the leagues he is in before you'll allow yourself to think he's a top 5 goalie in the league he's in?
For example, is Ryan Suter elite? He's never had more than 46 points in a season and he plays 25+ minutes a night, on all three units.
And for that to be considered a 'proven' fact, I'd like a bigger sample size than one season sharing starting duties and 2/3 of a season as a starter. Plenty of goalies have had Vezina type years without living up to the franchise goalie tag thereafter.
Clearly you operate with another definition of 'good' than me so that's fair enough.
Of course and I never said Howard is better than Mrazek, I said that Howard at the time of the draft was rated more highly than Mrazek at the same stage by the same organization.
And those behemoths sitting there effortlessly adjusting their position by inches to basically stop everything are the franchise goalies of this era.
The question isn't if he is a top 5 goalie this year. In order to be a franchise goalie we need to know he will be an elite goalie for at least the next decade.
And for that to be considered a 'proven' fact, I'd like a bigger sample size than one season sharing starting duties and 2/3 of a season as a starter. Plenty of goalies have had Vezina type years without living up to the franchise goalie tag thereafter.
4 season average is a good starting point. That proves something about a goaltender.
Just like we did with Howard. 4 season sample size, he looked good and was signed for a long extension.
Everything was made right.
And at next season, he blows his groin at first time and has never been same as 2009 to 2013.
Everything was built perfectly and you still won't have any guarantee.
How many franchise goalies can you name me who are taller than 6'3"? I'm thinking maybe 1, Rinne. If you want to go to 2 just to say Bishop, that would be funny, but I think that's what it would take to get to two.
Do you have to be more than generically offensively productive to be an elite dman?
I'm not making the argument he is elite, by the way, I'm just wondering if there's an offensive benchmark a dman has to hit before he's even considered.
I think you have to be at least over .5 ppg. Ideally while also being great defensively. If you're not great defensively, then you have to be a top point producer.
Also, I consider Ryan Suter elite.
Yeah. My definition of good tends to start fading into 'great' when a player is in the top 5 of his league most of the time.
But, sure, if you want to call anything outside the top 2 or 3 goalies in a league 'merely good'... hey, who's gonna stop ya?.