Antti Raanta Appreciation Thread

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="217419" data-time="1387406796">
<div>


I think you meant save percentage with that, and I believe that number will come back up, don't think it can get worse. But still, it goes back to my point where one really good season doesn't make an elite goalie and it doesn't mean you should pay him like an elite goalie. His shorthanded save percentage in the playoffs was an insane .943. You can't ever expect that to be sustainable or a repeat of something like that to happen, just in the same way his current short handed save percentage isn't going to stay that abysmally low.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


I agree, but there was something off about Crawfords game this year up until his injury. I expect a big bounce back now that Raanta has shown he can make the big stops. </p>


 </p>


Also in regards to young goalies cooling off. Yes that happens a lot in the NHL, but those goalies aren't playing behind the Blackhawks, the prime example would be Antti Niemi. So I am now going to ask myself a question and answer it; do I think the Hawks could win a Cup with Raanta in net? Yes I do. </p>

 

[R K]

Didn't seem to happen with Niemi and I compare Raanta as very similar to Niemi.</p>

 

[Ton]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="217422" data-time="1387407169">


I agree, but there was something off about Crawfords game this year up until his injury. I expect a big bounce back now that Raanta has shown he can make the big stops. 

 

Also in regards to young goalies cooling off. Yes that happens a lot in the NHL, but those goalies aren't playing behind the Blackhawks, the prime example would be Antti Niemi. So I am now going to ask myself a question and answer it; do I think the Hawks could win a Cup with Raanta in net? Yes I do.</p>
</blockquote>



Could they? Sure they can, but with little experience I wouldn't necessarily want to rely on that. But, I'm just adding to that point, not putting words in your mouth or anything. If it came down to Crawford being unable to go, I wouldn't cringe with Raanta. So far he's been solid, I like him. Who knows though, 10 games from now everyone's opinions can change once again.</p>

 

[Ton]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="R K" data-cid="217425" data-time="1387409180">
<div>


Didn't seem to happen with Niemi and I compare Raanta as very similar to Niemi.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


I don't think any other goaltender will ever have as wide of a butterfly as Niemi. His knees/hips must be double jointed or something, it's insane how much he can get his legs out there when he's on his knees.</p>

 

[jakobeast]

I am pro Antii</p>

 

[BlackHawkPaul]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="217437" data-time="1387436719">
<div>


Could they? Sure they can, but with little experience I wouldn't necessarily want to rely on that. But, I'm just adding to that point, not putting words in your mouth or anything. If it came down to Crawford being unable to go, I wouldn't cringe with Raanta. So far he's been solid, I like him. Who knows though, 10 games from now everyone's opinions can change once again.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Exactly.

I'm waiting for a better sample size, but the PK needs to get better in front of any goaltender the Hawks throw out there.

The Kings game was a tremendous display of D, and the 4 minute PK looked great.  The Kings sat back and watched the Hawks pass from zone to zone sans a skater.  </p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="BlackhawkPaul" data-cid="217445" data-time="1387466577">
<div>


Exactly.

I'm waiting for a better sample size, but the PK needs to get better in front of any goaltender the Hawks throw out there.

The Kings game was a tremendous display of D, and the 4 minute PK looked great.  The Kings sat back and watched the Hawks pass from zone to zone sans a skater.  </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


No moar weighting 4 me ne moar, Raanta 4 lyphe</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="217422" data-time="1387407169">
<div>


I agree, but there was something off about Crawfords game this year up until his injury. I expect a big bounce back now that Raanta has shown he can make the big stops. </p>


 </p>


Also in regards to young goalies cooling off. Yes that happens a lot in the NHL, but those goalies aren't playing behind the Blackhawks, the prime example would be Antti Niemi. So I am now going to ask myself a question and answer it; do I think the Hawks could win a Cup with Raanta in net? Yes I do. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


In regards to Dr. Craw this year, He IMHO looked very good up until he was being Kiprusoff'ed when Khabi crapped the bed and before Raanta proved a viable backup. Before that his game was masked by some key players not quite up to speed.  Meanwhile, there's only been 1 game where the D completely shat the bed in front of Raanta.</p>


 </p>


I think Crawford maybe came down a bit this year all things considered, but I'll reserve judgement until he's playing behind a full competant D.</p>


 </p>


Any way you slice it about Raanta, the kid looks really good so far but I'll reserve judgement until other teams have the book on him and he learns to adapt.  right now he's got a small sample size of games and not enough league-wide exposure.</p>


 </p>


I agree though--If the 'hawks D is on like they have been as of late Raanta, Crawford, hell, a lot of goalies could win a cup behind our squad. </p>


 </p>


Thus, the question should be "how often can the D be on?"</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="LordKOTL" data-cid="217454" data-time="1387473005">
<div>


In regards to Dr. Craw this year, He IMHO looked very good up until he was being Kiprusoff'ed when Khabi crapped the bed and before Raanta proved a viable backup. Before that his game was masked by some key players not quite up to speed.  Meanwhile, there's only been 1 game where the D completely shat the bed in front of Raanta.</p>


 </p>


I think Crawford maybe came down a bit this year all things considered, but I'll reserve judgement until he's playing behind a full competant D.</p>


 </p>


Any way you slice it about Raanta, the kid looks really good so far but I'll reserve judgement until other teams have the book on him and he learns to adapt.  right now he's got a small sample size of games and not enough league-wide exposure.</p>


 </p>


I agree though--If the 'hawks D is on like they have been as of late Raanta, Crawford, hell, a lot of goalies could win a cup behind our squad. </p>


 </p>


Thus, the question should be "how often can the D be on?"</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Pretty often when push comes to shove I am hoping.</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="217458" data-time="1387476486">
<div>


Pretty often when push comes to shove I am hoping.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


You and I both.  So far it's been trending up with extreme prejudice with only a few hiccups.  Can't really complain about that. </p>

 

[EspoForever]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jakobeast" data-cid="217441" data-time="1387457394">
<div>


I am pro Antii</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Is "pro Antti" kind of like a new way of saying "plus/minus?" If you were anti-Antti, would that be a double negative? Grin.</p>


 </p>


Seriously, I love having multiple goalies we can win with. I recall just last season Crawford fell into a couple slumps when Emery needed to give him a break to get it going again.</p>

 

[MassHavoc]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="EspoForever" data-cid="217514" data-time="1387547536">
<div>


Is "pro Antti" kind of like a new way of saying "plus/minus?" If you were anti-Antti, would that be a double negative? Grin.</p>


 </p>


Seriously, I love having multiple goalies we can win with. I recall just last season Crawford fell into a couple slumps when Emery needed to give him a break to get it going again.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Multiple more than you mean... the team in front is so good what goalie can't they win with... well except khabi it seems. But even then Khabi still didn't have a regulation loss. Last year Crow and Razor were both flawless. The year before Crow was pretty good and they made Turco look like he could still play. The year before that we know what happen with Niemi and Huet... who still had a 26-14-4 record with a 2.5 GAA. It's really hard to find bad goaltending for the Hawks going back quite some time now. Sure you have guys that had bad games and such but I bet overall the Wins is obviously tops but I bet the GAA and S% is right up there too. Probably trace it back to Keith and Seabs. hah.</p>

 

[Variable]

GAA maybe but I don't know about save percentage. Huet was below .900 his last season, wasn't much better the season before that, also below average. Niemi was league average. Turco was horrible as well, sub .900 save percentage Crawford that season was a bit above league average. The first year of Crawford/Emery they were both below league average. We know Khabi was horrible this season, but back in 08'-09' he was slightly above average. Which is really all the Hawks need.</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="217537" data-time="1387564443">
<div>


GAA maybe but I don't know about save percentage. Huet was below .900 his last season, wasn't much better the season before that, also below average. Niemi was league average. Turco was horrible as well, sub .900 save percentage Crawford that season was a bit above league average. The first year of Crawford/Emery they were both below league average. We know Khabi was horrible this season, but back in 08'-09' he was slightly above average. Which is really all the Hawks need.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Save percentage doesn't really reflect quality of shot allowed onto the netminder.  Plus, a lot of fans think low number of shots on goal means the d is doing their job.</p>


 </p>


Not quite.  Part of the 'hawks in-zone game is making an outlet pass to spring the rush.  When the rush is sprung we usually have a good amount of time keeping the puck in the offensive zone, and limiting shots on goal against by proxy.  That coupled with the usual defensive formation with Hammer, Oduya and the like blocking shots usually leads to a low shots against. </p>


 </p>


When the breakout passing is on, all's right in the world like in 2013 and 2010.  When it's off, it's usually turned over for an odd-man rush and a good qualitty chance for the opposition.  That coupled with the flyby-poke-check, *not* clearing the crease allowing multiple goalmouth whacks, and ill-advised backhand clears (usually by a LHD playing their off-side) leading to turnovers in general means the shots against our netminders do face are usually high-quality shots.</p>


 </p>


Comparing 2010 and 2013, all of our defenders were playing top of their games, and in general were *on*.  2011 and 2012 our D was off--the numbers in general prove that.</p>


 </p>


Earlier this year (based on their numbers), Crawford was pulling out wins in spite of a late start by Keith and Seabs (both of whom in all fairness have come back with a vengence), and having to be Kiprusoff'ed because of Khabi's poor play and no trust at the time in Raanta.  Luckily for us Raanta came in right when the D started to really elevate their game.  The one game the D failed to show up with Raanta in net (against Toronto), both he and Simpson got shelled massively.</p>


 </p>


If 2010 and 2013 prove anything, the whole team has to be pulling on the rope in the same direction.  As such, when Crawford is back I'm sure his numbers will increase as long as the D keeps playing as well as they have been since the road trip.  There will be lapses by everyone but as long as they play solidly come playoff time we should be good.</p>


 </p>


Just no more Kiprusoff'ing of Crawford.  Raanta has proven he can backstop the team adequately, if not admitrably.</p>

 

[Variable]

That's a different discussion altogether, of which I don't entirely agree with.  I was just responding to the idea that the team's save percentage would be up among tops in the league.</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

No worries, I tend to that Mass's stance that wins are paramount to everything--be it 1-0 or 6-5.  I just don't think really any stat in the league can be taken as truly telling the tale in its entirety without considering something else.  Thus, would we have the best Sv% in the league?  Who knows? Maybe not because if we limit the shots on goal because of good D, puck possession, or both even a single goal will swing the numbers more than another team that aloows a lot of shots on goal.</p>

 

[MassHavoc]

At the end of the day I could give a shit about having the best save % or GAA as long as they have the best win %, which was my main point.</p>

 

[Variable]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="LordKOTL" data-cid="217545" data-time="1387570239">
<div>


No worries, I tend to that Mass's stance that wins are paramount to everything--be it 1-0 or 6-5.  I just don't think really any stat in the league can be taken as truly telling the tale in its entirety without considering something else.  Thus, would we have the best Sv% in the league?  Who knows? Maybe not because if we limit the shots on goal because of good D, puck possession, or both even a single goal will swing the numbers more than another team that aloows a lot of shots on goal.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


You would think shot quality would have a big difference, but overall, it really doesn't. I thought the same too until I started looking up the numbers. It really does come down to shot differential being more important.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

SHUT OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111</p>