GDT: wardo vs new york rangers

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
What I am saying is that shot location alone is a poor way to determine how dangerous a shot is, which that data seems to be saying.

I realize what you are saying and that's what I am meaning to respond to. With a large enough sample size, shot location probably is a pretty decent way. For instance, if a team plays Nashville and Boston and faces 10 low danger shots, but 3 of them are from Chara and Weber, then yes, it's skewed and not a good metric. But as sample size increases and goaltenders are now seeing 200, 300, 400, 500+ low danger shots, it's very likely that they are seeing a similar quality of shots over that sample size and it becomes a meaningful metric to measure how dangerous a shot is.

I'm also attempting to kill the last hour and a half of work. If this conversation goes on for 10 more minutes, I'll have succeeded.

:laugh: At this rate, you'll kill tomorrow off also.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
He's playing small, is continuing to struggle with fighting through traffic, and has regressed a bit from last year in terms of overcomitting. His 13-14 season, he made those highlight reel saves because he pulled himself out of position constantly. Last season, he was a lot more controlled. This season, he isn't as bad as 13-14, but is worse than 14-15.

I think you may have inadvertently partially answered your own question Rod. I think the difficulty in this is that there’s a very small margin of error for goal tenders in the NHL because the shooters are just that damn good, so the difference between good, average and bad is pretty small. Other than obvious flubs/weak goals or fantastic robbing saves (which everyone can agree on), it can be, at times very difficult to judge a goal simply by watching the play, because much of it is what he does leading up to the shot. There's so much that goes into it that, even on replay it can be difficult to discern as a lot of it isn't visible. (thus much of the disagreement on this board about which ones he should have and shouldn't have stopped).

How well did he read and anticipate the play in advance? Did he come out a bit too far? Did he commit a fraction to early? Did he go down too early? Was his glove 6" lower than it should have been? Is his base positioning sound? Is his recovery a fraction of a second late? Is he confident and seeing the puck well or battling it? Did his stick blade have a bit too much tilt to it? Did he work hard enough to see around a screen? Is his concentration and focus up to snuff, etc.. etc... It's these little things (many of which are in a guys head) that many times are the difference between a save and a goal in the NHL. There isn't much margin for error and sometimes, none of us can tell for sure on each shot, thus the reliance on stats so much (which aren't a be all, end all but do try to normalize things out over time) and why there can be so much disagreement.

When Ward was at his best during that couple year stretch, he seemed to always make it look very easy, always looked calm (people joked he was almost too calm) and made the majority of saves he should have as well as his share ones an "average" goalie wouldn't. He was hung out to dry frequently and bailed the team out. He was borderline elite then and this was at a time when NHL scoring was higher than it is now. His mechanics and positioning were solid, he anticipated well, he was very efficient, and other than "glove side high" and not being a great puck handler, he rarely fought it and stole more than a few games. He faced a lot of shots with some terrible defenses in front of him and he still was outstanding and his numbers reflected that.

Personally, I don't see that guy any more, at least not on a consistent basis. To me, he doesn't look nearly as efficient or confident, even when he makes the save. Like you said, he's playing small, is continuing to struggle with fighting through traffic, and has regressed a bit from last year in terms of overcomitting. Those types of things can be the difference between stopping a goal and letting it in.

He's by no means the sole problem with this team though. PP is LAST in the league with only 2 goals from someone not named Faulk. PK sucks. Goal scoring, in general is down. Skinner, Staal(s), Lindholm, aren't cashing in, etc.. It's a team effort for sure and other than getting an Elite goalie, the end results probably aren't that much different.
 

Navin R Slavin

Fifth line center
Jan 1, 2011
16,220
63,700
Durrm NC
How well did he read and anticipate the play in advance? Did he come out a bit too far? Did he commit a fraction to early? Did he go down too early? Was his glove 6" lower than it should have been? Is his base positioning sound? Is his recovery a fraction of a second late? Is he confident and seeing the puck well or battling it? Did his stick blade have a bit too much tilt to it? Did he work hard enough to see around a screen? Is his concentration and focus up to snuff, etc.. etc... It's these little things (many of which are in a guys head) that many times are the difference between a save and a goal in the NHL. There isn't much margin for error and sometimes, none of us can tell for sure on each shot, thus the reliance on stats so much (which aren't a be all, end all but do try to normalize things out over time) and why there can be so much disagreement.

These are all "why" conversations. Why is Cam performing poorly? It could be a million reasons. We are privy to relatively few of them, and we can speculate all we like. Personally, I think it's a combination of factors:

* Annie left town and he's taking it hard;
* He's not breathing through his eyelids;
* He loaned his garter belt to Khudobin who then left for Anaheim with it.

I just want to make sure we're all on the same page on the "what" conversation, and it seems like we are. More or less.

To sum up: Cam Ward is not a very good goaltender right now.
 

NotOpie

"Puck don't lie"
Jun 12, 2006
9,287
17,879
North Carolina
I think you may have inadvertently partially answered your own question Rod. I think the difficulty in this is that there’s a very small margin of error for goal tenders in the NHL because the shooters are just that damn good*(excluding shooters from the Carolina Hurricanes), so the difference between good, average and bad is pretty small.

Had to fix that for ya....
 

Ole Gil

Registered User
May 9, 2009
5,703
8,898
Here are some weird even strength Wardo Stats:

Score - Sv%
UP2+ .886 (96)
UP1 .902 (138)
Tied .950 (340)
Down1 .893 (134)
Down2+ .882 (130)
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
These are all "why" conversations. Why is Cam performing poorly? It could be a million reasons. We are privy to relatively few of them, and we can speculate all we like. Personally, I think it's a combination of factors:

* Annie left town and he's taking it hard;
* He's not breathing through his eyelids;
* He loaned his garter belt to Khudobin who then left for Anaheim with it.

I just want to make sure we're all on the same page on the "what" conversation, and it seems like we are. More or less.

To sum up: Cam Ward is not a very good goaltender right now.

Excellent Nuke LaLoosh reference!

Yep, those things I listed are indeed are the potential "why" reasons and I'm on the same page re: the what.
 

The Stranger

Registered User
May 4, 2014
1,233
2,077
No, he hasn't.

This is ridiculous, and I'm tired of it. So now I'm going to spend way too much time pounding this into people's heads with Fancystats.

This year, Cam Ward is objectively a below-average NHL goaltender.

Haha...it's funny how emotional and touchy this topic is...multiple posts crapping on Ward...one post suggesting Ward is decent and people get all worked up.

This is ridiculous! I'm tired of it!

mad-as-hell.jpg


As far as the sv% as a function of shot location data...it's been covered some in this thread and in others...it's somewhat informative but far from conclusive as it doesn't contain significant variables such as puck movement prior to shot, shot velocity, shot location, was the goalie screened, and was the puck tipped.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
Haha...it's funny how emotional and touchy this topic is...multiple posts crapping on Ward...one post suggesting Ward is decent and people get all worked up.

This is ridiculous! I'm tired of it!

As far as the sv% as a function of shot location data...it's been covered some in this thread and in others...it's somewhat informative but far from conclusive as it doesn't contain significant variables such as puck movement prior to shot, shot velocity, shot location, was the goalie screened, and was the puck tipped.

Your tired of it and then you go on to comment further about it after you say your are tired about it? :dunno: :laugh:

Seriously though, there's nothing wrong with the dialogue. There's a lot of good discussion going on, even if the data doesn't support your conclusions.
 

Blueline Bomber

AI Generated Minnesota Wild
Sponsor
Oct 31, 2007
39,278
41,352
Hey! No more discussion until I get bored at work again. You guys and gals are going to ruin my plan!
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
Hey! No more discussion until I get bored at work again. You guys and gals are going to ruin my plan!

don't worry BLB. You and I can argue about something else meaningless while you are at work so you can kill time. :laugh: Just come up with a topic and I'll take the opposing view.
 

The Stranger

Registered User
May 4, 2014
1,233
2,077
Therefore, Cam Ward is objectively a below-average NHL goaltender in 2015-2016. QED.

When folks are saying he's not good but not as bad as some here claim, what do you mean by that. I think he's been a bottom 5 starting goalie in the league to this point. Do you disagree, and if so, why?

In my opinion, this ^ is quite true. It's ok to state that Ward has been "below average" and still acknowledge that a replacement level goaltender would be just as "bad."

So, Ward isn't replacement level bad...but let's say for *****s and giggles that he's below average (a very reasoned/reasonable opinion)...let's even say he's bottom 5 for starters...my point/perspective is that if the team could magically trade up from Ward to say, whoever you think is the 15th best goalie in the league, it's not gonna move the needle for this team.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
So, Ward isn't replacement level bad...but let's say for *****s and giggles that he's below average (a very reasoned/reasonable opinion)...let's even say he's bottom 5 for starters...my point/perspective is that if the team could magically trade up from Ward to say, whoever you think is the 15th best goalie in the league, it's not gonna move the needle for this team.

Yeah, I agree with that. A 15th ranked goalie might give them a few more wins, but by the end of the season, they still (IMO) aren't making the playoffs with bad depth, bad PK, bad PP and bad goal scoring. It would take an elite goalie to significantly move the needle.
 

NotOpie

"Puck don't lie"
Jun 12, 2006
9,287
17,879
North Carolina
Yeah, I agree with that. A 15th ranked goalie might give them a few more wins, but by the end of the season, they still (IMO) aren't making the playoffs with bad depth, bad PK, bad PP and bad goal scoring. It would take an elite goalie to significantly move the needle.

#badbadbadallbad
 

Stickpucker

Playmaka
Jan 18, 2014
15,394
37,183
Going from the 60somerhing ranked goaler to league average would make the pk look a lot better.

A good winger would go a long way to helping the PP. I would consider moving Murphy or Fleury for one of Edm good wingers.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
Going from the 60somerhing ranked goaler to league average would make the pk look a lot better.

A good winger would go a long way to helping the PP. I would consider moving Murphy or Fleury for one of Edm good wingers.

Maybe, I'm just not sure that makes a lot of sense from EDM's standpoint though. Edmonton needs better defenders, not more offensive defenders so I'd guess they wouldn't have much, if any interest in Murphy (especially with Shultz on the team.).

Fleury I could see them having an interest in, but I doubt they would give up Hall, RNH, Draisatl, or probably even Yakapov for him (without a significant add) and Fleury is unproven yet. I think if the Oilers are going to part with one of their young forwards, it will be for a more proven defenseman at this point rather than another prospect.
 

caniac247

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
5,211
259
Raleigh
I admit, I was one who would stick up for Ward. I didn't think he could be as bad as people were saying, I mean he just couldn't. But the light has turned on and I see it. He really is a bad goalie. I used to make excuses and say it's the team in front of him, blah blah blah, but shockingly our defense, outside of Hainsey, has been really good IMO. Ward just lets in too many goals at the worse time. He's not that goalie that can make a save at a desperate time. The bad goals he does let in happen at the worst times, (see 3rd rangers goal). Maybe, just maybe, he is the reason for our failures all these years.

I don't know what is in the system as far as goalies go that can be back-up, but I've come to the realization that he has to go.

Good to see Lack get the start tonight. No matter how he plays, I would like for Peters to stick with him this weekend as well. Its time to let Lack get a few games in a row and see what he's got.
 

NotOpie

"Puck don't lie"
Jun 12, 2006
9,287
17,879
North Carolina
Going from the 60somerhing ranked goaler to league average would make the pk look a lot better.

A good winger would go a long way to helping the PP. I would consider moving Murphy or Fleury for one of Edm good wingers.

Of all of the young blueliners in the system (or on the team), Haydn Fleury might be the one I'd be least inclined to move....notice I said might. He's big, fast, has a rocket of a wrister, and is PHYSICAL. None of the other defensive prospects have that combo.
 

Stickpucker

Playmaka
Jan 18, 2014
15,394
37,183
We've seen a lot of teams go very deep even win the SC with 4 good D and whatever on the third pair.

With Faulk Hanifin Pesce and Slavin I'm inclined to consider moving Fleury and Murphy for forward help.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,388
98,060
We've seen a lot of teams go very deep even win the SC with 4 good D and whatever on the third pair.

With Faulk Hanifin Pesce and Slavin I'm inclined to consider moving Fleury and Murphy for forward help.

I personally think that's counting some chickens before they are hatched. Even though he's looked better than I expected, I'm not sure we can count on Slavin being a "good" top 4 D (maybe not even Pesce). Yes, I know that Fleury is yet to be proven also, but he has a bigger toolbox. I'm with Opie. Obviously, it would depend on what forward is being returned, but I'd hold on to Fleury. I think it's more likely our long term D is Hanifin-Faulk, Fleury-Pesce.

I'd be very surprised if RF trades Fleury also.

I'd honestly hold on to all of them and see what comes our way during the trade deadline (a la the Mckeown pickup last year) and the draft before moving them.
 

Zezima

Registered User
Jul 28, 2012
1,200
508
Charlotte, NC
Speaking of McKeown, he currently has 18 assists, 5 goals (23 points) in 26 games this year for kingston. Given his history of chemistry with Fleury on team canada I'm certainly not looking to move either of those guys. I am not inclined on moving any of our d...at least until we see more definitive progression. Yes, pesce looks a lot like the real deal right now, but he's also played less than 30 nhl games. Slavin was impressive during his short stint up but you need at least a seasons worth of quality play before you can start slotting these guys in as locks in the lineup.

I'm echoing Anton here a bit but we can't trade away the first real sign of prospect depth we've had since....ever? Give the offense time, that's next on GMRF's priority list.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad