Mike Smith Is So Bad

Bleedred

Travis Green BLOWS! Bring back Nasreddine!
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
128,942
55,952
So I reviewed the goals against him. The regulation goals only. I watched the end of it and the shootout and he was pretty poor on one of the goals in that, but I don't review those or count them.

He had no chance at all on goal 1. Absolutely no chance at all.

If you wanna nitpick, you can say a poor rebound on goal 2 that led to that goal, but I didn't nail him on that one.

Goal 3 was a goal that I didn't like. I did not like this one on him. It's a point shot, a simple wrister, there was a partial screen, but he did a poor job tracking it. He clearly has time to react to this when looking at the cam from behind the net. He clearly looks like he sees this shot once it gets past the guys screening, but it just beats him. I think he should have had that one. I'm sure he's stopped that shot before, I'm sure a couple of shots like that were stopped today around the league.
 

Stickpucker

Playmaka
Jan 18, 2014
15,097
36,186
At least Peters pulled him after 6 in the Pens game. Iirc he left Darling in for all 10 when you could tell he was done after 3 or 4.

The Pens game looked more like the team gave up. At the end there were 3 Flames on the puck who weakly gave the puck to a Pen for an easy goal. I think Gio was even in the pile.
 

airbus220

Registered User
Feb 19, 2012
3,872
56
Mrazek hasn't been good in Carolina (he sucked before Carolina for the last two years in both Philly and Detroit too)

Last season Mrazek was much better in DET than in PHI and this season Mrazek is good in CAR.

What happened with Smith this season is the same what happend with Mrazek in PHI last season and this has nothing to with the goalies. For CGY it has to do with goalie coach Sigalet.
 

Maukkis

EZ4ENCE
Mar 16, 2016
10,538
7,218
Give me a break! One or two extra high danger chances a game doesn't make an all star goalie turn into glass, he's cooked.
High danger chance = shot from a location from which there is a 9+% chance of a goal being scored, according to a definition I remember by heart

Allow two more of those per game over a large period of time, and you'll stand at giving up 0.18 more goals a game.

Now, 0.18 × 82 = ~14.7 goals per a 82-game season. Still insignificant?
 

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
High danger chance = shot from a location from which there is a 9+% chance of a goal being scored, according to a definition I remember by heart

Allow two more of those per game over a large period of time, and you'll stand at giving up 0.18 more goals a game.

Now, 0.18 × 82 = ~14.7 goals per a 82-game season. Still insignificant?

So a goalie would go from a 916SV% to an 869SV% as a result? No, I don't think so. This reasoning would make sense if Smith's numbers where marginally down, he looks like a tire-fire in net this year.
 

Maukkis

EZ4ENCE
Mar 16, 2016
10,538
7,218
So a goalie would go from a 916SV% to an 869SV% as a result? No, I don't think so. This reasoning would make sense if Smith's numbers where marginally down, he looks like a tire-fire in net this year.
And also, are you aware that judging a goalie based on a sample size of what, under 10 games, is downright absurd? Go by career SV% before resorting to 10 games any day of the week.

One bad game can ruin any goalie's numbers at this point of the year with ease. Think the Flames just went through a rough one.
 

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,765
15,509
Calgary
And also, are you aware that judging a goalie based on a sample size of what, under 10 games, is downright absurd? Go by career SV% before resorting to 10 games any day of the week.

One bad game can ruin any goalie's numbers at this point of the year with ease. Think the Flames just went through a rough one.

He's been bad for closer to 20 games. His last 10 starts had him at an 880SV% (post injury), and he's been awful this year two. When you double the sample size, it looks a lot worse for him.
 

nabob

Big Daddy Kane
Aug 3, 2005
34,312
20,708
HF boards
And Oilers fans declared themselves cup champs before last season started.. some people say dumb things.

On topic, Smith was never the solution.

No Oilers fans said that at all.

The solution is to stop thinking that Calgary has even a league average defense group. Doesn’t help that their young forward are not good two way players either.
 

Maukkis

EZ4ENCE
Mar 16, 2016
10,538
7,218
He's been bad for closer to 20 games. His last 10 starts had him at an 880SV% (post injury), and he's been awful this year two. When you double the sample size, it looks a lot worse for him.
Make that sample size 100 starts, and then we can talk.

Through 8 games, Smith's xSV% is 90.3, and his SV% is 86.9 (Corsica). There is no doubt he is underperforming, but Calgary has also been a way below-average defensive team.

If you replace that .714 against Pittsburgh with his career average of .912, his SV% would shoot up to almost .890. Not exactly a fair 'if', as it is cherry-picking, but is he going to be blown up once every eight games? Don't think so.
 

Hogan86

Registered User
Jun 21, 2016
1,563
679
With the exception of one season and one playoffs with the Yotes, Smith's career numbers are very pedestrian. He just isnt very good. I think Calgary should waive him.
 
Jan 29, 2009
4,646
1,895
Edmonton/Calgary
No Oilers fans said that at all.

The solution is to stop thinking that Calgary has even a league average defense group. Doesn’t help that their young forward are not good two way players either.

Seems like you blanked that off season out as most on hf would disagree. Not every team can win the lottery over and over and still be mediocre, so to talk about Calgary being average is kind of asinine when Edmonton is right there with us.
 

nabob

Big Daddy Kane
Aug 3, 2005
34,312
20,708
HF boards
Seems like you blanked that off season out as most on hf would disagree. Not every team can win the lottery over and over and still be mediocre, so to talk about Calgary being average is kind of asinine when Edmonton is right there with us.
It sure why you’re being so sensitive. Maybe because Calgary’s defense has been getting exposed as being grossly overrated for years now and they don’t have much else to be proud of on a port club.
 
Jan 29, 2009
4,646
1,895
Edmonton/Calgary
It sure why you’re being so sensitive. Maybe because Calgary’s defense has been getting exposed as being grossly overrated for years now and they don’t have much else to be proud of on a port club.

It's just as overrated as Edmonton going into last season, which was grossly overrated and exposed as being a one season wonder of over achievers:)
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->