Post-Game Talk: Postseason thread

ThePhoenixx

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
9,285
5,751
Eh, I'd say the true downfall was the Smyth trade and the subsequent shipping out of that 06 core in the offseason. We were in a playoff race in 07.

From the Stanley Cup finals to missing the playoffs.

Really?

Trade away a Hart trophy Dman and you don't even get a top4 back.

No biggie you say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeGrier99

Drivesaitl

Time to Drive
Oct 8, 2017
45,296
54,827
Duck hunting
Statistically he has been decent to good since the defense has been healthy. He is 10-4-4 since Sekera returned with a .912 sv% and a 2.83 gaa. His problem has been consistency. When he is bad he is very bad.

With all due respect this is some sample effects. The period just coincides with Sekera's return, but not necessarily due to his return. Sekera, like anybody back from long injury took a bit to find his game.

In anycase broader sample differentiates from the bolded stats. In both February, and March, Koskis's splits are 2.97GAA both months. His save % being .904, and .908 respectively. The Sekera sample just allows a time frame where the stats were slightly better, but without it being a sample that would substantiate anything. At best its associative.

Harpoon and Stoneman were correct, and your reply seems to suggest that Sekera has made a difference, and with numbers improving being indicative of that difference. But as any person familiar with statistics knows your illustration would be as associative connection, not a causative one. But your reply was to posts that clearly suggested that the defence the Oilers had on the ice was not the only problem. That Koski himself is part of the problem, and you seem to agree. So why bring up the Sekera associated stats?
 

Drivesaitl

Time to Drive
Oct 8, 2017
45,296
54,827
Duck hunting
Again, I have tried to support Koskinen and find the 'frying pan' type posts to be both ridiculous and immature. The fact is however that he lets in a lot of bad goals, as you seem to acknowledge with the bold statement. He lets in bad angle goals that simply have nothing to do with the defense in front of him, and everything to do with his positioning in the crease. The notion that he would be 'consistently great' once Klefbom returned was/is indefensible. Being .912 is not great in this or any league. Its acceptable. I stand by my conclusion, based on his own posts, that the poster in question over rates both Koskinen and Klefbom. Neither of them is anything that special. As you point out it has been Sekera, not Klefbom, who has stabilized the d-corps.

Theres not enough evidence or sample to suggest this either. The Sekera return has also cooncided with a relatively weak portion of the schedule, or against teams that historically have trouble with us. When we've played good teams that typically have our number during this end stretch they have blown the Oilers, and Koskinen out of the water. That said I feel that Sekera has played well, and that Benning in turn has looked better since Sekera has been back. When Sekera is at his best he seems to add some stability to the D. He has a calm in possessing and controlling the puck and not panicking that our other D do not seem to possess.
 

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
27,205
21,402
Statistically he has been decent to good since the defense has been healthy. He is 10-4-4 since Sekera returned with a .912 sv% and a 2.83 gaa. His problem has been consistency. When he is bad he is very bad.

And that for me has been the biggest issue with his play. He'll make a 10 bell save in one moment and then let in a stinker to deflate everyone the next minute. At 31 years of age, I would have thought the consistency issues would be overcome and at least lessened.
As Draisaitl mentioned, I don't know if it's just something that sticks out for me or not, but the amount of posts and bars that are hit behind in seem alarmingly higher than normal. Not sure if that will even out in the future or not.
The other thing that I can't quite get is how small he seems in net when facing shooters. For a big man, you'd think most of the holes would be covered up.

But the biggest thing, as has been mentioned many times on here, is the timing and term of that contract. Giving a long term deal to a relative unknown after a short little splurge is so "Oiler-like", it reeks. I seriously doubt that multiple suitors would have been beating down his agents door if they had waited another couple months to get a better read on him. A guy his age with limited NHL ecxperience is taking a huge gamble. And we've had far too many of those blow up in our face to keep making the same mistakes.

Is he terrible? No. Is he great? No. I think he's settled in as a middle of the road to average starter at best and possible decent backup, maybe in the Anders Nilsson mold.

Lastly, I sincerely hope I'm wrong and he turns everything around this summer and comes back a different goalie. Would love to eat crow on this, but I'm not seeing anything right now or the last few months to convince me otherwise.
 

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
25,444
19,579
Waterloo Ontario
And that for me has been the biggest issue with his play. He'll make a 10 bell save in one moment and then let in a stinker to deflate everyone the next minute. At 31 years of age, I would have thought the consistency issues would be overcome and at least lessened.
As Draisaitl mentioned, I don't know if it's just something that sticks out for me or not, but the amount of posts and bars that are hit behind in seem alarmingly higher than normal. Not sure if that will even out in the future or not.
The other thing that I can't quite get is how small he seems in net when facing shooters. For a big man, you'd think most of the holes would be covered up.

But the biggest thing, as has been mentioned many times on here, is the timing and term of that contract. Giving a long term deal to a relative unknown after a short little splurge is so "Oiler-like", it reeks. I seriously doubt that multiple suitors would have been beating down his agents door if they had waited another couple months to get a better read on him. A guy his age with limited NHL ecxperience is taking a huge gamble. And we've had far too many of those blow up in our face to keep making the same mistakes.

Is he terrible? No. Is he great? No. I think he's settled in as a middle of the road to average starter at best and possible decent backup, maybe in the Anders Nilsson mold.

Lastly, I sincerely hope I'm wrong and he turns everything around this summer and comes back a different goalie. Would love to eat crow on this, but I'm not seeing anything right now or the last few months to convince me otherwise.

I don't disagree. This contract is worrying. The problem I have is that goalies in the NHl are often enigmas. Great at one moment and horrid at another. Frankly we have no idea right now which end of the scale Koskinen will tend towards. But if its not to the positive side this contract will be an anchor.
 

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
25,444
19,579
Waterloo Ontario
With all due respect this is some sample effects. The period just coincides with Sekera's return, but not necessarily due to his return. Sekera, like anybody back from long injury took a bit to find his game.

In anycase broader sample differentiates from the bolded stats. In both February, and March, Koskis's splits are 2.97GAA both months. His save % being .904, and .908 respectively. The Sekera sample just allows a time frame where the stats were slightly better, but without it being a sample that would substantiate anything. At best its associative.

Harpoon and Stoneman were correct, and your reply seems to suggest that Sekera has made a difference, and with numbers improving being indicative of that difference. But as any person familiar with statistics knows your illustration would be as associative connection, not a causative one. But your reply was to posts that clearly suggested that the defence the Oilers had on the ice was not the only problem. That Koski himself is part of the problem, and you seem to agree. So why bring up the Sekera associated stats?
The question being discussed was how Koskinen would perform had the defense been healthy. That means Sekera is playing. All I did was state his actual numbers under the scenario being discussed. I made no claim that this proved anything. You are the one seemingly reading between the lines for some sort of deep hidden meaning.
 

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
25,444
19,579
Waterloo Ontario
Again, I have tried to support Koskinen and find the 'frying pan' type posts to be both ridiculous and immature. The fact is however that he lets in a lot of bad goals, as you seem to acknowledge with the bold statement. He lets in bad angle goals that simply have nothing to do with the defense in front of him, and everything to do with his positioning in the crease. The notion that he would be 'consistently great' once Klefbom returned was/is indefensible. Being .912 is not great in this or any league. Its acceptable. I stand by my conclusion, based on his own posts, that the poster in question over rates both Koskinen and Klefbom. Neither of them is anything that special. As you point out it has been Sekera, not Klefbom, who has stabilized the d-corps.

I actually don't see much difference in our position here. As I said in my post he has been decent to good for most of the time the defence has been healthy but when he has been bad he has been very bad as we see again last night. Frankly I would hope for more out of the guy the team bet the farm on. This is a worrisome contract.
 

Drivesaitl

Time to Drive
Oct 8, 2017
45,296
54,827
Duck hunting
The question being discussed was how Koskinen would perform had the defense been healthy. That means Sekera is playing. All I did was state his actual numbers under the scenario being discussed. I made no claim that this proved anything. You are the one seemingly reading between the lines for some sort of deep hidden meaning.

Look how many times "seems" was a statement modifier in my post that you replied to. I wasn't making any declarative statements about what you posted. Perhaps you are seemingly reading between the lines for some sort of hidden meaning. ;)

jk around. Thanks for the clarification.
 

alphahelix

Registered User
Feb 15, 2007
7,015
2,795
Any player over 30, I sign for 3 years max. No NMC or NTC at all.

Maybe every GM feels this way but also desperately wants to improve their team, so they add a 4th year to get a competitive edge on a key UFA. But then, somebody adds a 5th year... maybe free market economics arent always the most efficient way to allocate resources, and some players begin to get overpaid while others have their contracts buried to make room or head to the KHL, and then everyone gets to experience lower quality hockey. Oh well.
 

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
27,205
21,402
The problem with the contract as well, is that it now limits your options for getting really quality backup help, and maybe even gives management the mindset that they really don't need to look very hard anyhow, given the confidence contract they just issued. And if he continues to stumble, we are in for a world of hurt.
 

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
27,205
21,402
I don't disagree. This contract is worrying. The problem I have is that goalies in the NHl are often enigmas. Great at one moment and horrid at another. Frankly we have no idea right now which end of the scale Koskinen will tend towards. But if its not to the positive side this contract will be an anchor.


And that is EXACTLY why you don't give out a long term contract back when they did with a much smaller sample than we even have today. On a cap stressed team with so many other holes,to fill and other bad contracts you need to get rid of. What a mess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luckylarry

RegDunlop

Registered User
Nov 5, 2016
3,291
3,189
Edmonton
I have a simply take on who I now call
'Likko Lostagain'.

I was happy, satisfied, and confident when he started to play in front of Talbot. Full confidence and trust in him. And when a goalie can shine, the D follow suit.

Let's just say I have no confidence whatsoever in him. His inconsistency has me questioning who he is. Unfortunately I feel you all may be right about another ridiculous, hindering contract. Hope not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackDogg

Harvey Birdman

…Need some law books, with pictures this time…
Oct 21, 2008
9,145
2,234
Penguins Legal Office
Iae8x6I.gif
:laugh:
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->