Speculation: Mrazek trade to FLA?

[DetroitRed]

Trade them both.

 

[Redder Winger]

To tell you "more" about something, wouldn't I have had to tell you a first time? Interesting, because I don't recall saying anything even close to that, but if you want to make things up to make a point, go ahead. No more or less reliable then the cherry picked small sample sizes you normally use to make a point.

I'm going on this year's stats.

If that sample size doesn't work for you, too bad.

Howard just lost his 3rd straight game. Maybe sticking with Howie is a sign that we're trying to tank.

 

[BinCookin]

Lol Red. "howard just lost 3 in a row" "he must suck"

I mean the red wings winning and losing has very little to do with their goalie at this point.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

We have what we have.
Howard lost another one tonight.

We must be in tank mode right?
That brings Howie's numbers down below Mrazek's I think.

Since Nov. 19 - even worse.
28.5 percent win rate.
40.5 percent point rate.

Tell me more about putting Mrazek in net is a sign that the Red Wings are in tank mode.

You're using win rate and point rate (is that even a thing?) to evaluate a goaltender's performance??

 

[TatarTangle]

You're using win rate and point rate (is that even a thing?) to evaluate a goaltender's performance??

Mrazek is 1 for 1 since his last start, hard to argue against a 100% win rate

 

[kliq]

I'm going on this year's stats.

If that sample size doesn't work for you, too bad.

Howard just lost his 3rd straight game. Maybe sticking with Howie is a sign that we're trying to tank.

Not sure why you keep arguing with me about Howard, I don't think I mentioned him even once in the conversation with you other then repeatedly telling you that I am not arguing about Howard. But keep going with your false narrative.

A strong of an argument as "too bad" is, the reality is that you are attempting to compare goalies based on how many points does the TEAM get per game when they start, and one of the goalies has only played 13 games. I'm not arguing the result you are coming up with as it may or may not be true, but the stats you are using to get there, are incredibly flawed and a joke.

Its clear what you do, you come up with a narrative, then you look for stats that will attempt to prove your point.

Nobody is buying it.

 

[kliq]

You're using win rate and point rate (is that even a thing?) to evaluate a goaltender's performance??

Nope, not a thing lol.

Mrazek is 1 for 1 since his last start, hard to argue against a 100% win rate

lol, exactly. But hey, sample size means nothing. Its not statistics 101 or anything.

 

[Redder Winger]

You're using win rate and point rate (is that even a thing?) to evaluate a goaltender's performance??

Only to evaluate his ability to win games and get points.

 

[kliq]

Only to evaluate his ability to win games and get points.

But a team winning games is not solely dependent on the performance of the goaltender. Using this logic, if a team wins 7-6 the goalie did better then if a team loses 1-0 in a shootout. It's a meaningless stat.

 

[Redder Winger]

Not sure why you keep arguing with me about Howard, I don't think I mentioned him even once in the conversation with you other then repeatedly telling you that I am not arguing about Howard. But keep going with your false narrative.

A strong of an argument as "too bad" is, the reality is that you are attempting to compare goalies based on how many points does the TEAM get per game when they start, and one of the goalies has only played 13 games. I'm not arguing the result you are coming up with as it may or may not be true, but the stats you are using to get there, are incredibly flawed and a joke.

Its clear what you do, you come up with a narrative, then you look for stats that will attempt to prove your point.

Nobody is buying it.

Whether you or anyone else "buys it" doesn't matter.

The point was made that if Mrazek was given starts, it was a sign the team was tanking.

Given that the team, this year, wins and produces point at the same level, regardless of the goalie, it's not a very good point.

You can all ignore the facts all day long.

But going with Mrazek isn't tanking.

 

[kliq]

Whether you or anyone else "buys it" doesn't matter.

The point was made that if Mrazek was given starts, it was a sign the team was tanking.

Given that the team, this year, wins and produces point at the same level, regardless of the goalie, it's not a very good point.

You can all ignore the facts all day long.

But going with Mrazek isn't tanking.

Where did I say going with Mrazek was tanking? Please find that quote. What facts am I ignoring? I think you are arguing with so many people that you forget who said what.

Again, what I am disputing is your flawed stats to get to your conclusion, I'm not disputing the actual conclusion. There is a difference.

 

[Redder Winger]

Where did I say going with Mrazek was tanking? Please find that quote. What facts am I ignoring? I think you are arguing with so many people that you forget who said what.

Again, what I am disputing is your flawed stats to get to your conclusion, I'm not disputing the actual conclusion. There is a difference.

Why don't you pay attention to the arguments you're jumping into.
That's where this started
The comment that going with Mrazek is tanking.
I provided stats that show the Wings are no worse in goal, so it's silly to say the Red Wings would only use Mrazek if they are tanking.

 

[kliq]

Why don't you pay attention to the arguments you're jumping into.
That's where this started
The comment that going with Mrazek is tanking.
I provided stats that show the Wings are no worse in goal, so it's silly to say the Red Wings would only use Mrazek if they are tanking.

I am paying full attention to the argument I am jumping into. Another false narrative by you.

I get the argument you are trying to make, but again I was never disputing any conclusions that you came to. Regardless of what you are saying, your stats are flawed and you do it all the time. You take small select sample sizes and manipulate them to make a point, that is MY point.

I argue your stats, and then you counter me with an argument about Mrazek or Howard. I dont think you get what I am arguing.

 

[Redder Winger]

I am paying full attention to the argument I am jumping into. Another false narrative by you.

I get the argument you are trying to make, but again I was never disputing any conclusions that you came to. Regardless of what you are saying, your stats are flawed and you do it all the time. You take small select sample sizes and manipulate them to make a point, that is MY point.

I argue your stats, and then you counter me with an argument about Mrazek or Howard. I dont think you get what I am arguing.

Bullshit.

If someone says the Red Wings will only use Mrazek if they are tanking, they are suggesting that Mrazek will lose more games, win less games, or tally fewer points than Howard.

There's nothing cherry picking about these numbers.

So far, Mrazek wins or gets points at virtually the exact same level as Howard.

Despite the higher GAA and despite the lower save percentage.

Those are straight, cold facts.

If you want cherry picking, I can cherry pick.

Outside of Howard's hot 3-0 start his numbers are pedestrian... 11-15-6, .908 sv pct, 2.85 GAA

Since Nov. 19: 3.11 GAA and a .900 sv pct to go along with a 6-10-5 record.

These numbers, awful as they are still better than Mrazek's numbers -- though not nearly as much as some pretend.

Except in one area.
Wins and points.
Since Nov. 19, Howard is winning 28 percent of his starts.
His point percentage has fallen to 81 percent.

Since that 3-0 start his winning percentage is 34.3 percent. His point percentage is 87.5 percent.

If Howard continues to start 78 percent of his games, and continues to pick up wins and points at the pace shown since Nov. 19, he'd play 29 games and win just 8 of them and pick up 23 or 24 points.

Based on what we've seen of Mrazek - which is very little, there's not much reason to believe he couldn't at least match that.

 

[kliq]

Bull****.

If someone says the Red Wings will only use Mrazek if they are tanking, they are suggesting that Mrazek will lose more games, win less games, or tally fewer points than Howard.

There's nothing cherry picking about these numbers.

So far, Mrazek wins or gets points at virtually the exact same level as Howard.

Despite the higher GAA and despite the lower save percentage.

Those are straight, cold facts.

If you want cherry picking, I can cherry pick.

Outside of Howard's hot 3-0 start his numbers are pedestrian... 11-15-6, .908 sv pct, 2.85 GAA

Since Nov. 19: 3.11 GAA and a .900 sv pct to go along with a 6-10-5 record.

These numbers, awful as they are still better than Mrazek's numbers -- though not nearly as much as some pretend.

Except in one area.
Wins and points.
Since Nov. 19, Howard is winning 28 percent of his starts.
His point percentage has fallen to 81 percent.

Since that 3-0 start his winning percentage is 34.3 percent. His point percentage is 87.5 percent.

If Howard continues to start 78 percent of his games, and continues to pick up wins and points at the pace shown since Nov. 19, he'd play 29 games and win just 8 of them and pick up 23 or 24 points.

Based on what we've seen of Mrazek - which is very little, there's not much reason to believe he couldn't at least match that.

If that first line is the title of your post, then I think we are finally on the same page. You really cant admit when you are wrong, can you?

The 13 games played by Mrazek this season is way too small of a sample size to determine anything, I'm not sure if you have ever taken an advanced stats course before, but this is like basic stuff and a joke to even argue. You want to make an accurate comparison of Howard or Mrazek, compare their actual stats over their last 50 games each or look at the last 2 years, that will paint a more accurate picture. I dont know what that will tell you because i havent looked, but I do know its more accurate then these cherry picked time frames you are using.

How many points the team gets per game when they play is pointless and a joke of a stat especially when one guy has played in 37 games, and the other 13.
I get that the point you are trying to make is that the Wings will likely lose just as many games with Howard or Mrazek, but the problem is with Mrazek's small sample size of games. If Mrazek plays 37 games like Howard and doesn't lower his GAA/Save % statistically speaking law of averages will play out and they will loose more with him playing. Could he improve if he played more games? Yes, but its too hard to tell because he has barely played so we dont have accurate stats. Hence these stats are flawed. You can say "it doesnt matter" or "too bad" all you want, but you have a flawed argument.

Lets stick to real stats please and end this stupid argument.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Only to evaluate his ability to win games and get points.

Unfortunately they don't measure either of those things.

I'm not even particularly a Howard supporter. I think he's been mostly solid but unspectacular. And I'm in favor of them starting Mrazek.

But the straws you're grasping at here with things like win percentage and "points percentage" only reveal the lack of actual data to support your argument.

 

[Goalie guy]

Well if the new Nuck GM had not giving Howard so much money, and he was not made of glass we could move him. but that is not gonna happen. I like Petr and think he has been in his own head, but think he will be fine. It just wont be here.

 

[BinCookin]

Redderwinger... why do you keep using Nov 19th??

I bet Howard had some really nice games mid november?
Kliq's point is spot on, you have been playing hard and lose with numbers for a while.

Just post the SV% of each goalie for each seperate game for the entire season... lets see how that looks in a tabular format.

P.S. I already know their season stats:

Howard 2.74GAA; 9.13SV% ("OK" NHL numbers, not really exciting)
Mrazek 3.43GAA; 8.94SV% (Shitty Backup numbers)

(this is the largest sample size possible from this year... however I realize Mrazek has only played 13 games this year)

In the last 30 Days:

Howard 2.35GAA; 930SV% (9 starts)
Mrazek 2.50GAA; 902SV% (1 SO, 1 Loss (only 2 GP))

 

[BinCookin]

I should be clear my point is not to say Mrazek is bad... as his sample size is small.

My point is Howard has been "acceptable" and his play is not the reason we are losing games.
Infact we should be demanding to trade him, he is ruining our tank.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Red wings try to win hockey games. Howard has been bad the past couple while mrazek has been good

There’s no good reason to play Howard at this moment It could change and mrazek could suck. But you can’t say he will unless he gets some playing time

Even if they are not trying to win and are tanking you could make the case for mrazek to start.

 

[pylon17]

Bull****.

If someone says the Red Wings will only use Mrazek if they are tanking, they are suggesting that Mrazek will lose more games, win less games, or tally fewer points than Howard.

There's nothing cherry picking about these numbers.

So far, Mrazek wins or gets points at virtually the exact same level as Howard.

Despite the higher GAA and despite the lower save percentage.

Those are straight, cold facts.

If you want cherry picking, I can cherry pick.

Outside of Howard's hot 3-0 start his numbers are pedestrian... 11-15-6, .908 sv pct, 2.85 GAA

Since Nov. 19: 3.11 GAA and a .900 sv pct to go along with a 6-10-5 record.

These numbers, awful as they are still better than Mrazek's numbers -- though not nearly as much as some pretend.

Except in one area.
Wins and points.
Since Nov. 19, Howard is winning 28 percent of his starts.
His point percentage has fallen to 81 percent.

Since that 3-0 start his winning percentage is 34.3 percent. His point percentage is 87.5 percent.

If Howard continues to start 78 percent of his games, and continues to pick up wins and points at the pace shown since Nov. 19, he'd play 29 games and win just 8 of them and pick up 23 or 24 points.

Based on what we've seen of Mrazek - which is very little, there's not much reason to believe he couldn't at least match that.

Are you factoring in quality of competition? Which teams have the goalies started against? Playoff teams? Points %? Good teams? Bad teams?

 

[TheOtherOne]

I think we are all talking circles around the real point.

We are arguing that Howard is bad, and Mrazek is bad, and one is a little more bad or less bad than the other. And i feel like we all basically agree on this. So the conclusion we SHOULD be drawing is:

WHO CARES WHO PLAYS? It doesn't made the slightest f***ing difference!

 

[Henkka]

Hmm...

Next season options.

Keep Jimmy 5.3M caphit
Keep Mrazek (4.1M qualified)
-------------------------
Total: 9.4M for goaltending for 1 year. Then Howard question and Mrazek question.

Buyout Jimmy, 1st season buyout caphit 2.4M (second season 1.4M)
Keep Mrazek, offer 3-year 3M extension
Promote Coreau, 700k 2-year extension
----------------------------------
Total: 6.1M (5.1M 2nd year) goalie-tandem for 2 years.

Trade Jimmy, retent 50% of salary, 2.65M caphit stays
Keep Mrazek, offer 3-year 3M extension
Promote Coreau, 700k 2-year extension
-----------------------------------
Total: 6.35M goalie-tandem for 2 years (2nd year only 3.7M). + extra draft pick.

Keep Jimmy for 5.3M
Trade Mrazek for pick
Promote Coreau, 700k 2-year extension
-------------------------
Total: 6M goalie-tandem for 1 year. + extra draft pick. Trade also Howard at the deadline? Or extend cheaper?

Would be interesting to have a poll of these options...

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

I would trade Howard now and just qualify Mrazek for one year.

Would add a UFA veteran goalie for around 1.5

Coreau who cares.

 

[Redder Winger]

Suddenly, Jimmy and Mrazek have almost the same stats.
Jimmy - .911, 2.82, won 38.9 percent of his starts. 47.2 percent of points
Petr - .910 2.86, won 46 percent of his starts, 53.8 percent of points.