Post-Game Talk: Panthers score two goals but lose 2-1 to NYI in a fluke filled game of the year

Status
Not open for further replies.

vendetta

#CatsAreComing
Mar 22, 2011
14,725
4,772
Edmonton
Oh yeah, the D looked great on those two goals against. Barzal had ten years to make a move RIGHT ON TOP OF THR CREASE. And the second one couldnt be replicated by a circus act. "Yeah, let's try to re-direct the puck as many times as we can and see if our goalie can still save it".
Guess people aren’t used to goaltending that isn’t unreal like we’ve had our existence. Oh well when it eventually becomes good again I guess people will notice. Till then we have worst d in the league even tho no stat or metric shows that. Anyway this is pointless. Neither side will agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am not exposed

Dread Clawz

LAWSonic Boom
Nov 25, 2006
27,301
8,649
Pennsylvania
Guess people aren’t used to goaltending that isn’t unreal like we’ve had our existence. Oh well when it eventually becomes good again I guess people will notice. Till then we have worst d in the league even tho no stat or metric shows that. Anyway this is pointless. Neither side will agree.

Uh, ok then.
 

ucanthanzalthetruth

#CatsAreCooked
Jul 13, 2013
27,059
28,829
Bob is not that bad. Everybody needs to calm down. He has done a decent job. Sure he has had some goals which he should have saved... But vs NYI he saved 2 breakaways by himself

Reimer.... Says it all
Oh I think Bob has been very good, but for a team that will probably come down to a coin flip for playoffs, leaving behind 3 points from the last 2 games is frusturating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boothinator

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,089
8,983
Yeah, the statistical claims are soooooo convincing.

Greiss with his .942, if only he was playing for the Panthers, would have stolen a few games for them and Bobrovsky, if he was playing for Islanders would have given them several more defeats because of his .880. And that Holtby’s gotta be having a hell of a season saving games left and right for the Caps (oops: the stats say he’s a sucky .895). And that Lehner in Chicago’s surely having Blackhawks deep in playoff position with his .935 (oops: he’s 3-3-0 and his team 5-7-3).

Hello people! Stats need exacting context. People are looking at just a couple of things and passing HUGE judgments on Bob’s play. Yes, he could play better. But his GAA won’t become all THAT much better until Yandle and Brown and Stillman and Hoffman and Trocheck and a couple of others learn to take defending responsibilities seriously enough to give Bob a better chance of “looking good statistically”, which seems to be the way he’s judged here.
 

vendetta

#CatsAreComing
Mar 22, 2011
14,725
4,772
Edmonton
Yeah, the statistical claims are soooooo convincing.

Greiss with his .942, if only he was playing for the Panthers, would have stolen a few games for them and Bobrovsky, if he was playing for Islanders would have given them several more defeats because of his .880. And that Holtby’s gotta be having a hell of a season saving games left and right for the Caps (oops: the stats say he’s a sucky .895). And that Lehner in Chicago’s surely having Blackhawks deep in playoff position with his .935 (oops: he’s 3-3-0 and his team 5-7-3).

Hello people! Stats need exacting context. People are looking at just a couple of things and passing HUGE judgments on Bob’s play. Yes, he could play better. But his GAA won’t become all THAT much better until Yandle and Brown and Stillman and Hoffman and Trocheck and a couple of others learn to take defending responsibilities seriously enough to give Bob a better chance of “looking good statistically”, which seems to be the way he’s judged here.
This argument would have merit if we were getting caved in on scoring chances. But we just aren’t
 

Bag Of Beans

"Some may never live, but the crazy never die."
Sponsor
Dec 14, 2002
16,027
8,270
Blue Jay Way..
Another tough one because I thought we played good enough to win, but obviously we didn't.

After thinking for a few hours about that goal, I would have called it no goal as well. It was played with the high stick, then it hit the Islanders defenseman, then it hit the Islanders goalie and in the net. Islanders didn't have possession of the puck, it just hit them. On a delayed penalty the whistle wouldn't be blown if it just hit the opposition player, therefore no goal.

But we did, what, hit four thick post tonight? Plus again, their goalie played unreal. Bob played really good as well, made about four really good saves.

I have the utmost faith that they will bring it tomorrow and be ready to play off the Hop. :fight::hit::hockey:
 

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,089
8,983
This argument would have merit if we were getting caved in on scoring chances. But we just aren’t
Just like last season, when supposedly everything was Lu’s and Reimer’s fault, the scoring chance stats don’t depict with anywhere near sufficient ACCURACY the chances given.

High danger needs to have more subdivision into two or three levels. One can only begin to draw some TRUTHFUL conclusions after one has accurate data.

Anyone who’s watched the Panthers this season with an impartial view knows that Bob hasn’t been .880 level bad, given what that stat historically implies. He simply hasn’t been bad - he’s been pretty decent, and is getting better.

Certain players on the team have to get Q’s system down better. Then we’ll see Bob’s save % go up dramatically.

It’s a game where little things make a big difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PantherboyHTR

Dread Clawz

LAWSonic Boom
Nov 25, 2006
27,301
8,649
Pennsylvania
Just like last season, when supposedly everything was Lu’s and Reimer’s fault, the scoring chance stats don’t depict with anywhere near sufficient ACCURACY the chances given.

High danger needs to have more subdivision into two or three levels. One can only begin to draw some TRUTHFUL conclusions after one has accurate data.

Anyone who’s watched the Panthers this season with an impartial view knows that Bob hasn’t been .880 level bad, given what that stat historically implies. He simply hasn’t been bad - he’s been pretty decent, and is getting better.

Certain players on the team have to get Q’s system down better. Then we’ll see Bob’s save % go up dramatically.

It’s a game where little things make a big difference.

Agreed, the scoring chance stats don't even paint half the picture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PantherboyHTR

vendetta

#CatsAreComing
Mar 22, 2011
14,725
4,772
Edmonton
Just like last season, when supposedly everything was Lu’s and Reimer’s fault, the scoring chance stats don’t depict with anywhere near sufficient ACCURACY the chances given.

High danger needs to have more subdivision into two or three levels. One can only begin to draw some TRUTHFUL conclusions after one has accurate data.

Anyone who’s watched the Panthers this season with an impartial view knows that Bob hasn’t been .880 level bad, given what that stat historically implies. He simply hasn’t been bad - he’s been pretty decent, and is getting better.

Certain players on the team have to get Q’s system down better. Then we’ll see Bob’s save % go up dramatically.

It’s a game where little things make a big difference.
The goals that are going in aren’t from high quality chances for the most part. Bobs done really good in that department. They are the low quality chances that have to stop. Shots thru traffic and deflections. Bad bounces etc. They can’t all end up in our net this consistently
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am not exposed

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,089
8,983
The goals that are going in aren’t from high quality chances for the most part. Bobs done really good in that department. They are the low quality chances that have to stop. Shots thru traffic and deflections. Bad bounces etc. They can’t all end up in our net this consistently
I disagree.
 

GrumpyKelly

Registered User
May 15, 2011
14,195
5,494
Bottom of a bottle
Was watching some playoff games under Q. I think we need someone like Bickell or Shaw from 2015. An asshole or a bulldozer that can intimidate people. A trade deadline acquisition ofc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KW

vendetta

#CatsAreComing
Mar 22, 2011
14,725
4,772
Edmonton
What counts as a scoring chance is totally subjective and unequal in probability to score. It shouldn't be used as a stat against goalies.
I am aware of that. And I’m not using that as a stat. In fact bobs low danger save percentage (meaning shots taken from outside high scoring areas and with minimal puck movement ) is near bottom of league.
 

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,089
8,983
Was watching some playoff games under Q. I think we need someone like Bickell or Shaw from 2015. An ******* or a bulldozer that can intimidate people. A trade deadline acquisition ofc.
Maybe Boyle can come back in form...
 

vendetta

#CatsAreComing
Mar 22, 2011
14,725
4,772
Edmonton
Only goalie worse than bob in goals saved above average is jones. A stat which takes into account quality and quantity and how many goals should be going in from these chances compared to how many goals are going in. Schneider who is considered one of the worst goalies is ahead of bob in 3rd last.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am not exposed

GrumpyKelly

Registered User
May 15, 2011
14,195
5,494
Bottom of a bottle
I am aware of that. And I’m not using that as a stat. In fact bobs low danger save percentage (meaning shots taken from outside high scoring areas and with minimal puck movement ) is near bottom of league.

if the high danger sv% sucks as a stat, I wouldn't use the low% sv stat either. Not that I've been looking at those but that's my presumption
 

vendetta

#CatsAreComing
Mar 22, 2011
14,725
4,772
Edmonton
if the high danger sv% sucks as a stat, I wouldn't use the low% sv stat either. Not that I've been looking at those but that's my presumption
Why do these stats suck? High danger and low danger over enough data points paint at least. A mediocre picture of quality of shots. Bob is better in high danger like I suggested and like the eye test says making some good highlight reel saves. He is aweful in low danger chances meaning he is giving too many goals that shouldn’t be going in. 2nd last in goals saved above average which combines everything and is the most accurate stat they have for goaltenders in most peoples opinions
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am not exposed

sinDer

Registered User
Nov 22, 2006
3,508
2,328
Drummondville, QC
The goals that are going in aren’t from high quality chances for the most part. Bobs done really good in that department. They are the low quality chances that have to stop. Shots thru traffic and deflections. Bad bounces etc. They can’t all end up in our net this consistently

You're right.

And I think that's why many people around here believe that Bob has been great. Because he makes stops on breakaways and 2 vs 1 and only let "unstoppable" shots go in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am not exposed

GrumpyKelly

Registered User
May 15, 2011
14,195
5,494
Bottom of a bottle
Why do these stats suck? High danger and low danger over enough data points paint at least. A mediocre picture of quality of shots. Bob is better in high danger like I suggested and like the eye test says making some good highlight reel saves. He is aweful in low danger chances meaning he is giving too many goals that shouldn’t be going in. 2nd last in goals saved above average which combines everything and is the most accurate stat they have for goaltenders in most peoples opinions

It doesn't makes sense that Bob is saving high danger shots and doesn't make low danger ones, does it? He's a Vezina winner. Why would he suck at low danger shots. These stats are arbitrary especially at this point. Let's see how the stats look at the end of the season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PantherboyHTR

vendetta

#CatsAreComing
Mar 22, 2011
14,725
4,772
Edmonton
It doesn't makes sense that Bob is saving high danger shots and doesn't make low danger ones, does it? He's a Vezina winner. Why would he suck at low danger shots. These stats are arbitrary especially at this point. Let's see how the stats look at the end of the season.
How does it not make sense? He makes some nice highlight reels a game. Then let’s in garbage from the outside consistently. Something I’ve been complaining about all year. Funny now that I look at the stats it backs up what I see
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am not exposed

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,089
8,983
How does it not make sense? He makes some nice highlight reels a game. Then let’s in garbage from the outside consistently. Something I’ve been complaining about all year. Funny now that I look at the stats it backs up what I see
My argument is that the way stats are recorded for goalies (and other things too) isn’t accurate enough to pass judgment like you (and many others) do. It’s just not scientific, it’s a feel good thing that becomes impressive because people now have “averages” and “standard deviations” and “confidence intervals” to deal with.

But the statistical measures that sound good to people are only as good as the raw data going in. And what my common sense and eye test tells me is that Bob hasn’t been as bad as the numbers imply. I deal with enough statistics to state that with some confidence.

You can make any claims you want - I’m not impressed by your (or your links) analysis. What’s next, you’re gonna call this “settled science” because enough people say so?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->