Toronto's Goaltending Dilemma (Who starts in the playoffs?)

Who starts in the playoffs?


  • Total voters
    308

Joey Hoser

Registered User
Jan 8, 2008
14,232
4,143
Guelph
I could really do without the distraction of a goalie controversy entering the playoffs....

The idea that there is a controversy is kinda of ridiculous.

Campbell has played great.

Andersen has been bad for over 2 years and hasn't played in 6-8 weeks.

There's only a controversy for people so stubborn that they cling to a mostly false narrative from 3-4 years ago, that says Andersen is great and carries this team.
 

Bluelines

Python FTW!
Nov 17, 2013
12,349
4,559
The idea that there is a controversy is kinda of ridiculous.

Campbell has played great.

Andersen has been bad for over 2 years and hasn't played in 6-8 weeks.

There's only a controversy for people so stubborn that they cling to a mostly false narrative from 3-4 years ago, that says Andersen is great and carries this team.

He has not been bad for 2 years, why do people keep going with this lazy narrative?

He was amazing in last years playoffs, he was playing hurt this year. Last season he was middle of the road not great, not bad. For goalies who played 20 or more games (57 goalies) , he was 32nd in sv% and he was 34th and tied for 5th with Quality Starts. He was up and down, inconsistent would be a good description of his previous season.

Please stop trying to make him something he is not, I think we can all agree the results we expected were not met but to package him as bad, is mischaracterizing his performance.

With that said this is a what have you done for me lately league, Campbells results and his stats say he is your starter for the first game of the playoffs. I don't think you can go with a guy that has been sitting for over a month. Then we go from there. If Campbell chokes in the first game, give Andy mop up duty and let him play the rest of game one and then based on his performance you make a decision for game 2.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
He has not been bad for 2 years, why do people keep going with this lazy narrative?

He was amazing in last years playoffs, he was playing hurt this year. Last season he was middle of the road not great, not bad. For goalies who played 20 or more games (57 goalies) , he was 32nd in sv% and he was 34th and tied for 5th with Quality Starts. He was up and down, inconsistent would be a good description of his previous season.

Please stop trying to make him something he is not, I think we can all agree the results we expected were not met but to package him as bad, is mischaracterizing his performance.

With that said this is a what have you done for me lately league, Campbells results and his stats say he is your starter for the first game of the playoffs. I don't think you can go with a guy that has been sitting for over a month. Then we go from there. If Campbell chokes in the first game, give Andy mop up duty and let him play the rest of game one and then based on his performance you make a decision for game 2.

He was bad in the playoffs. 5 stinkers in 5 games.
 

hoglund

Registered User
Dec 8, 2013
5,757
1,256
Canada
Andersen has been great for 3 years, it was the last half of last season and the first bit of this year that he was bad and he was playing Injured. I'd give him a chance and if he has 1 bad game put in Campbell.
 

Bluelines

Python FTW!
Nov 17, 2013
12,349
4,559
He was bad in the playoffs. 5 stinkers in 5 games.


For goalies that played 5 or more games, he was top 2 in GAA and sv%, he was not bad. You can gaslight all you want, facts are facts. It just makes you look manipulative.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
For goalies that played 5 or more games, he was top 2 in GAA and sv%, he was not bad. You can gaslight all you want, facts are facts. It just makes you look manipulative.


Last 5yrs opposing goalies in playoffs series vs CBJ:

Fleury '17: 5gms .933
Holtby '18: 5gms .932
Vasilevskiy '19: 4gms .856
Rask '19: 6gms .948
Andersen '20: 5gms .936
Vasilevskiy '20: 5gms .930

That's just the way CBJ rolls.
 
Last edited:

socko

Registered User
Nov 26, 2013
7,433
5,211
Martinez, GA
Last 5yrs opposing goalies vs CBJ:

Fleury '17: 5gms .933
Holtby '18: 5gms .932
Vasilevskiy '19: 4gms .856
Rask '19: 6gms .948
Andersen '20: 5gms .936
Vasilevskiy '20: 5gms .930

That's just the way CBJ rolls.
Small sample size. Data is not reliable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cipher

Wafflewhipper

Registered User
Jan 18, 2014
14,114
5,694
There is no dilemma. Campbell starts and Andersen is a Healthy backup. That’s the way it’s going to go no matter if networks are trying to find some talking points. There is the though by many that you don’t take a starters job because of injury. This is different circumstances every time.

Andersen hasn’t got a game in and there is no cap space to do it even. Completely makes all the sense to go with Campbell.
 

Bluelines

Python FTW!
Nov 17, 2013
12,349
4,559
Last 5yrs opposing goalies vs CBJ:

Fleury '17: 5gms .933
Holtby '18: 5gms .932
Vasilevskiy '19: 4gms .856
Rask '19: 6gms .948
Andersen '20: 5gms .936
Vasilevskiy '20: 5gms .930

That's just the way CBJ rolls.


So what you are illustrating is this, when Andersen was given the opportunity he played as well or better than four recent Stanley Cup winning goalies, two former Veznia winning goalies and one former Jennings Trophy winner? If your point is Andersen raised his game in last years play-in round, well bravo @zeke, I will admit you made that point very succinctly.
 

Bluelines

Python FTW!
Nov 17, 2013
12,349
4,559
You just keep doing it, citing the stats and ignoring the cheap untimely goals. You're completely tone deaf.

Shame on me for using facts to disprove lazy narratives.... How many goals does one cheap untimely goal count for on the score sheet?
 

Wafflewhipper

Registered User
Jan 18, 2014
14,114
5,694
So what you are illustrating is this, when Andersen was given the opportunity he played as well or better than four recent Stanley Cup winning goalies, two former Veznia winning goalies and one former Jennings Trophy winner? If your point is Andersen raised his game in last years play-in round, well bravo @zeke, I will admit you made that point very succinctly.
Haha the Sizzle of the burn lol
 

WilliamInLondon

Registered User
Mar 24, 2016
336
143
I think Andersen is supremely underrated - the guy has one of the highest save percentages for chances in-close/high-danger. He was injured this season and the defence sucked until this season.

Having said that, there's no way that it's not Campbell. The guy is 14-2-1 in his past 17 games lol. No way they're going to start Andersen with 7 games left in the season.

The other thing is, even if they were fully healthy, I'd still take Campbell. Even if both goaltenders were 8 out of 10s, Campbell has a significantly lower standard deviation in his performance - he's like a 7.5-8.5 out of 10. Andersen will give you a range of 6.0-10.0 based on his body of work. He'll steal games for you in ways that Campbell probably can't - but he'll also surrender timely goals that will bury the team (although, this is mostly RS and 3 playoff seasons ago). It just feels like too much unnecessary risk given the offensive firepower of the Leafs. It's that firepower that will determine success of this team, and so you go with the more reliable hand in Campbell.

If both played on the Habs, I'd actually go with Andersen and hope that he can get hot and steal a few rounds. Go big or go home. But I don't think this applies to the 2021-2022 Leafs.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
So what you are illustrating is this, when Andersen was given the opportunity he played as well or better than four recent Stanley Cup winning goalies, two former Veznia winning goalies and one former Jennings Trophy winner? If your point is Andersen raised his game in last years play-in round, well bravo @zeke, I will admit you made that point very succinctly.

What those numbers clearly illustrate is that every goalie does that against the blue jackets.
 

Bluelines

Python FTW!
Nov 17, 2013
12,349
4,559
What those numbers clearly illustrate is that every goalie does that against the blue jackets.

Those were not every goalie, they were the best of the best over the last 4 years. Thanks for proving my point better than I did though :)

If at the very worse, every goalie as you say "everyone" plays that way vs the Jackets, well then at the very worse he was the same as every other goalie, meaning you couldn't expect any more from him that what he did.

Any way you slice it, Andy was not the guy you can point your crooked finger at to blame.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
Those were not every goalie, they were the best of the best over the last 4 years. Thanks for proving my point better than I did though :)

If at the very worse, every goalie as you say "everyone" plays that way vs the Jackets, well then at the very worse he was the same as every other goalie, meaning you couldn't expect any more from him that what he did.

Any way you slice it, Andy was not the guy you can point your crooked finger at to blame.

Who's blaming him?

Somebody claimed he was "phenomenal".

He wasn't phenomenal.
 

Bluelines

Python FTW!
Nov 17, 2013
12,349
4,559
Who's blaming him?

Somebody claimed he was "phenomenal".

He wasn't phenomenal.


If we are going to use baseline stats to claimed he sucked, can we not use baseline stats to say he played phenomenal ... you said it yourself Andy is on par with Veznia winners....
 

moon111

Registered User
Oct 18, 2014
2,890
1,283
I think the pressure of being a goalie for the Leafs is so huge it's not funny. Think a proper back-up or tandem is paramount for success.

If the Leafs execute their X's and O's game plan perfectly, the nod might go to Andersen.
If you're going to make a mistake, I'd rather have Campbell in a bail-out situation.

Might just be my perception, but feels a huge difference is Andersen will blame the team for failure and Campbell will blame himself.
I would want to play harder for Campbell and think the team does as well. And really, someone with a .925 save percentage has me
way more inspired than someone with a .897, even with all the excuses in the world.
 

kb

Registered User
Aug 28, 2009
15,202
21,507
Andersen was the third best goalie in the CBJ/Leafs series both by the stats and the eye test, while facing the easiest shots.

Not going to win many series that way. The truth is, he gave up a lot of backbreaking goals.
 

Menzinger

Kessel4LadyByng
Apr 24, 2014
40,975
32,364
St. Paul, MN
He has not been bad for 2 years, why do people keep going with this lazy narrative?

He was amazing in last years playoffs, he was playing hurt this year. Last season he was middle of the road not great, not bad. For goalies who played 20 or more games (57 goalies) , he was 32nd in sv% and he was 34th and tied for 5th with Quality Starts. He was up and down, inconsistent would be a good description of his previous season.

Please stop trying to make him something he is not, I think we can all agree the results we expected were not met but to package him as bad, is mischaracterizing his performance.

With that said this is a what have you done for me lately league, Campbells results and his stats say he is your starter for the first game of the playoffs. I don't think you can go with a guy that has been sitting for over a month. Then we go from there. If Campbell chokes in the first game, give Andy mop up duty and let him play the rest of game one and then based on his performance you make a decision for game 2.

I think this is an exaggeration. Yes it's fair to say his macro stats that series were fine - and they were. But a review of.the highlights of the losses show an awful lot of low chance shots hitting the back of the net.
 
  • Like
Reactions: napoleon in rags

Wafflewhipper

Registered User
Jan 18, 2014
14,114
5,694
Who's blaming him?

Somebody claimed he was "phenomenal".

He wasn't phenomenal.
That was me and he was phenomenal and thanks for posting the numbers and proving he was as good as the very best. That was me and i am still saying you are wrong in your obsession of slagging a injured goalie.
 

Wafflewhipper

Registered User
Jan 18, 2014
14,114
5,694
I think this is an exaggeration. Yes it's fair to say his macro stats that series were fine - and they were. But a review of.the highlights of the losses show an awful lot of low chance shots hitting the back of the net.
You can put up highlights of any goaltender getting scored on and it will look bad. Getting bookended shutout offense in games 1 and 5 might be saying something. Then didnt score for 57 minutes of another game. No pressure Freddy we got this. It’s a wrong narrative and ridiculous really ridiculous. He can’t stop them all and score too.
 

Menzinger

Kessel4LadyByng
Apr 24, 2014
40,975
32,364
St. Paul, MN
You can put up highlights of any goaltender getting scored on and it will look bad

Sure over a huge sample size. But we're taking about a small 5 game size in this case though. A starting goalie can't be letting in weak shots during must win games if the team wants to go deep.

My problem with Andersen has never really been a physical one - (until the last couple seasons his stats are always good), but mentally he always seem a unable to shut things down during must win situations.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->