Ya for as strongly as i am arguing that the break downs were the real culprit last night. Its not something im overly concerned about. Id say its near impossible to give up that many odd mans game in game out.
GDT: New Jersey Devils vs. Washington Capitals - 7:30pm
- Thread starter Cheddabombs
- Start date
- Status
- Jan 24, 2007
- 7,302
- 7,720
Not sure why the Defense and Schmid both being bad last night is not possible. I have some faith Marino will figure his game out cause he did last year, and if not Nemec can hopefully get called up to take some minutes. Even Luke on the right side seems to work and maybe he can play higher up if necessary.
Schmid we have no answer internally for 2nd/3rd goalie right now. Erik Kallgren is probably worse, a trade and Schmid going back to the AHL would probably have to happen.
Schmid we have no answer internally for 2nd/3rd goalie right now. Erik Kallgren is probably worse, a trade and Schmid going back to the AHL would probably have to happen.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
The response to him shitting his pants and getting pulled after period 1 was to score 4 consecutive goals.
TrufleShufle
Registered User
- Aug 31, 2012
- 7,782
- 12,142
Dude, we've had this discussion, this is the internet and more importantly HF boards. Pick a side and ignore everything else. Those are the rules, get with it.
this is kind of the point though right. We have a young goalie who is looking shakey. What are our options?
Play better d in front of him and hope he settles down.
Or
Make a trade for who knows what.
And them proceed to give up that lead via two more breakdowns.
guitarguyvic
Registered User
- Mar 31, 2010
- 8,745
- 6,929
Both are in fact possible and that's what happened. The difference is that some people think it's reasonable to expect the (maybe) average goalie who has like 50 games of NHL experience to bail out the top skaters in front of him who's response to said goalie looking shaky is to shit their pants in their own end.
Yeah and then they shit their pants again to start the third period, with a different average goalie in net.
How can we expect more from those guys than the goalie who's barely played in the NHL and hasn't even proven anything yet? Very reasonable.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
Breakdowns occur. That’s why giving up a goal every time there’s a remotely dangerous chance kneecaps a team’s chances of winning. You have to make some saves.
Devils731
Registered User
- Jun 23, 2008
- 12,336
- 16,448
How many breakdowns is acceptable? I would argue last game the number of breakdowns, especially to the capitals, is unacceptable.
Just saying “you have to make some saves” really does seem like handwaving away the volume of breakdowns last night.
There could have been some saves and there also could have been half as many breakdowns.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
I thought the number of failed clears was egregious last game. I’m not sure how many of those actually ended up as dangerous chances on frame though.
- May 8, 2010
- 20,249
- 35,142
We had almost twice the number of scoring chances and high danger chances that the Caps had.
People will discredit the numbers but while the D needs to be cleaned up and you want to limit the chances on your goalie, the Caps goalie who was playing in his first NHL game made some big saves while facing more scoring chances and high danger chances, including 3 breakaways.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
Is it? Scoring is also part of hockey and we put up 4. Definitely should’ve been enough to get it to OT at a minimum with the number of chances Washington had.
guitarguyvic
Registered User
- Mar 31, 2010
- 8,745
- 6,929
I call bullshit on this. I was at the game, lower bowl, watched every second of it. The only time we were getting more scoring chances was in the second period, and quite unsurprisingly their no name goaltender was not able to come up with enough big saves.
There is no way in hell we got twice as many scoring chances than the caps in periods one and three.
This is just wild stuff. How could any hardcore hockey fan who didn’t just start watching the sport like yesterday, question if what we saw yesterday was bad hockey?
It was bad hockey. Against an inferior opponent no less. How can this be up for debate, because some xG stat says otherwise? That’s just ridiculous.
NJDevs26
Once upon a time...
- Mar 21, 2007
- 67,395
- 31,701
Seriously, people are twisting themselves into pretzels here. Just make a save...how about just not allow a million two on ones in the same game? More than one thing can be true at the same time, the goaltending can be bad and the D can be bad in the same game. Kind of explains a loss to a lottery team, no? How about giving a professional effort for more than twenty minutes last night? They looked like the '80's Oilers in the second period and the other two periods they got a combined eight shots on net.
NJDevs26
Once upon a time...
- Mar 21, 2007
- 67,395
- 31,701
People need to stop with this...all the scoring chances they had literally came in one period of play when they were giving Game 7 in a playoff series desperation effort after they embarassed themselves in the first period against a bad team, then ran out of steam in the third period as a result or got their momentum sapped by the early goal.
And I don't take any metric seriously that says scoring chances were 2-1 last night, unless we had like fourteen scoring chances (at least thirteen in the second period) which...maybe and they only had seven which I doubt since basically every goal was a legit scoring chance, whatever you think of the quality of the goal allowed. And Vitek stopped several scoring chances in the second period as well.
Multiple bad goals to really no good saves is not good enough. Vitek wasn’t great but wasn’t awful. The D was not good enough but Schmid was flat out awful.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
Cue the screeching.
We played poor by our standards and still win the game more often than not with a modicum of goaltending.
Devils731
Registered User
- Jun 23, 2008
- 12,336
- 16,448
This is akin to saying nobody can disagree with this metric because it’s perfect, or at least so strong that watching the entire game still leads to no possibility of argument.
Not that the coach is a perfect metric but the coach that has criticized the goalies in prior games instead eviscerated the skaters for poor defense in his post game.
NJDevs26
Once upon a time...
- Mar 21, 2007
- 67,395
- 31,701
It’s lazy analysis, just slap down someone else’s chart or stat and it’s gospel
guitarguyvic
Registered User
- Mar 31, 2010
- 8,745
- 6,929
Posting this is becoming borderline parody. Please stop. I was in person noticing in real f***ing time how shitty they were playing.
“If we got a modicum of goaltending”….when the entire group of skaters (who are all better and more proven at their respective positions than the goalie) are out there playing absolute shit hockey in their own end, focusing your ire on Akira “I haven’t proven jack shit yet” Shmid is really goddamn absurd.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
I’m actually not particularly interested in talking about this anymore lol. We had way more scoring chances than the other team, by the numbers and by my eyes. The goalies stunk, by the numbers and by my eyes.
I missed where someone posted that and presented it as definitive analysis? You’re free to watch the game again and track it yourself. I doubt you’ll be left with the conclusion that Washington outplayed us.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
Yeah, that isn’t what occurred. The hell were you watching if you think Jack, Toffoli, Meier, or Luke played “absolute shit hockey”?
The game was made almost impossible to win because we didn’t get any saves. We can play like that most nights and still battle for the playoffs. We get goaltending like that, and we’re in the basement.
- Status
