Duncan Keith - Norris Trophy Lock?

[puckjim]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Pez68" data-cid="225413" data-time="1397198364">
<div>


"Cup winning" goalie is such a fucking cop out. How many elites goalies have never won a cup? List is endless. How many shit goalies have won a cup behind a stacked team? Again, the list is endless.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Yep, but there are plenty of goalies that helped their teams win a 'Cup, including the last three winners.</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="puckjim" data-cid="225415" data-time="1397220264">
<div>


Yep, but there are plenty of goalies that helped their teams win a 'Cup, including the last three winners.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Crawford is solid, but he is playing behind an unbelievable squad. There are phases where he doesn't see a quality shot for almost 8-10 minutes, some can argue that hurts a goaltender, but in all he is really sheltered back there. </p>


 </p>


You throw him on Buffalo and I do not see him being under 3.00 GAA or above .900 SV%</p>

 

[Shantz My Pants]

I'm in the group that thinks Crawford isn't "elite". He had a helluva season last year, but the team in front of him was one of the best in the NHL in say 10-15 years.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

Not being a homer, but there is no way Keith doesn't win this over Karlsson. He's a much better player in his own zone.


Only guy I think can compete this season is Pietrangelo. Though point production wise, he's not close.

 

[Forklift]

I don't see the point in arguing too much about whether Crawford is an elite goaltender or not. He's a better-than-average one on a winning team. And the 2012 mess was the only time he hasn't been nails in the postseason - he almost stole the series in 2011 from Vancouver singlehandedly.</p>


 </p>


So if you have issue with a goalie who is hanging around in the top half in GAA and save percentage, and steps it up in the playoffs, you might want to find an old Islanders fan and ask how they feel about Billy Smith.</p>

 

[Variable]

The point is the Hawks don't need to spend that amount of cap space on that position when they have the team they do. And of which several key players are due for raises in the next few years. All of whom are much harder to replace than Crawford.

 

[LordKOTL]

To me Crawford is middle percentile among starters--anywhere on the NHL leaderboards for goalie stats he'll be right around the middle--somewhere in slots #10-20.</p>


 </p>


Someone on the internet did a stat comparison:  Of the top-4 scoring teams in the NHL (Anaheim, us, Boston, and Colorado), among their starting netminders, all of their GAA averages for games they won was around 1.65, while for losses only Crawford is 2.95 on the GAA for losses--the others considerably above 3.00 GAA.</p>


 </p>


In other words, Rask, Hiller, and Varlamov might steal you a game more often than Crawford, but they might also melt completly melt down and give it away. Crawford, on the other hand, will let in 2 goals on average regardless of a softie or the D shitting the bed, and whether we win or lose.  As such, it puts the onus on our offense to produce.</p>


 </p>


Last 2 games are a prime example:  Against St Louis--Crawford should have had that 2nd goal, but the O already had us out on top.  Against Montreal our O struggled and didn't6 show up at all until Moring scored, and the rest didn't show up until about 55 minutes in--yet there was no über-meltdown--Crawford kept it to 2 and only 2 goals.</p>


 </p>


Conversely, Raanta has allowed about 3+ per game regardless of whether it's a softie on him or the D shitting the bed. So the argument that "this team can win with anyone in net", much like a hippie, simply won't wash.</p>

 

[puckjim]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="225435" data-time="1397228038">
<div>


The point is the Hawks don't need to spend that amount of cap space on that position when they have the team they do. And of which several key players are due for raises in the next few years. All of whom are much harder to replace than Crawford.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


I can think of exactly zero free agent goalies that would be able to put up the stats Crawford did for a lower price.</p>


 </p>


Even Detroit, who was always the model for not overpaying for goaltending, poneyed up $5.5 million for Jimmy Howard.</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="puckjim" data-cid="225445" data-time="1397231565">
<div>


I can think of exactly zero free agent goalies that would be able to put up the stats Crawford did for a lower price.</p>


 </p>


Even Detroit, who was always the model for not overpaying for goaltending, poneyed up $5.5 million for Jimmy Howard.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Well he is not a free agent, he is on the bench. I firmly believe this team could win a Cup with Raanta in net. </p>

 

[puckjim]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="225448" data-time="1397232363">
<div>


Well he is not a free agent, he is on the bench. I firmly believe this team could win a Cup with Raanta in net. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


I know you do, but what evidence do you have that supports that?</p>


 </p>


His stats playing in from of the exact same team are significantly worse than Crawford's.</p>


 </p>


He is not your grandfather's Antti.</p>

 

[winos5]

Raanta is no Niemi.</p>


 </p>


Yet.   Needs more time to develop.</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="225448" data-time="1397232363">
<div>


Well he is not a free agent, he is on the bench. I firmly believe this team could win a Cup with Raanta in net. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


I agree with PJ on this.  Last handful of Raanta outing he's given up 3+.  Crawford's last handful of games has been on average.</p>


 </p>


The only way this team wins the grail *now* with Raanta in the net is if our boys can manage 4 goals or more per game in a playoff atmosphere.  I don't see that happening.</p>


 </p>


Raanta may ba a starter in the future, but I don't think his time is now.  Give it 2 years and see where he is, once he's worked any sophomore slump out and other teams have the book on him.</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="puckjim" data-cid="225449" data-time="1397232810">
<div>


I know you do, but what evidence do you have that supports that?</p>


 </p>


His stats playing in from of the exact same team are significantly worse than Crawford's.</p>


 </p>


He is not your grandfather's Antti.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


I mean his sample size is very small, and in the time when he played consistently he was just as good as Crawford. He didn't play for months and has gotten a handful of sporadic starts...you will see bad numbers with that.</p>

 

[LordKOTL]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="225459" data-time="1397240845">
<div>


I mean his sample size is very small, and in the time when he played consistently he was just as good as Crawford. He didn't play for months and has gotten a handful of sporadic starts...you will see bad numbers with that.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


I'm not saying you speficially hold this view, but if the team in front of Crawford was so good and solid that anyone could win, then Raanta should not be letting in significantly more than Crawford--regardless of how many starts.</p>


 </p>


I think the Ottawa game and the Montreal game prove it.  Both games the defense was piss-poor (at least by 'hawks standards).  Raanta got lit up.  Crawford flat-out stole the game.</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="LordKOTL" data-cid="225457" data-time="1397239860">
<div>


I agree with PJ on this.  Last handful of Raanta outing he's given up 3+.  Crawford's last handful of games has been on average.</p>


 </p>


The only way this team wins the grail *now* with Raanta in the net is if our boys can manage 4 goals or more per game in a playoff atmosphere.  I don't see that happening.</p>


 </p>


Raanta may ba a starter in the future, but I don't think his time is now.  Give it 2 years and see where he is, once he's worked any sophomore slump out and other teams have the book on him.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


I mean come on, the last handful of games Raanta has been a fish out of water with the amount they've been playing him. From January 28th to March 13th he didn't step on the ice, that says it all to me. </p>

 

[puckjim]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="225462" data-time="1397241384">
<div>


I mean come on, the last handful of games Raanta has been a fish out of water with the amount they've been playing him. From January 28th to March 13th he didn't step on the ice, that says it all to me. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


But that doesn't prove that he would be as good as Crawford if he had played more.</p>


 </p>


The only reason that Niemi ever got a look is because he played better than Huet when given a chance.</p>


 </p>


Raanta cannot say this and will never get a chance as long as Crawford is performing at the above-average pace that he is doing now.</p>

 

[Forklift]

Raanta is not as good a goaltender as Corey Crawford is. He lacks the size, mobility, and assertiveness when people are in his crease.</p>


 </p>


Not to mention, a brick wall is better at controlling rebounds.</p>


 </p>


When he covered for Crawford, he had the "new goalie" advantage, where there was no book on him. There's a book on him now - Shoot low, send bodies to the net.</p>


 </p>


All these things - except size - are fixable. And he's not Darren Pang in the size department. It would have neem nice for him to spend a whole year in Rockford to learn how to play in North America, but Ol' Vodka Tits had other ideas.</p>


 </p>


He'll never be a starting goalie in the NHL. But hopefully next year Q can work them into a 3 for Crawford, 1 for Raanta rotation. That would work, keep both guys pretty sharp, and put them in the best position to win every night.</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Forklift" data-cid="225465" data-time="1397242157">
<div>


Raanta is not as good a goaltender as Corey Crawford is. He lacks the size, mobility, and assertiveness when people are in his crease.</p>


 </p>


Not to mention, a brick wall is better at controlling rebounds.</p>


 </p>


When he covered for Crawford, he had the "new goalie" advantage, where there was no book on him. There's a book on him now - Shoot low, send bodies to the net.</p>


 </p>


All these things - except size - are fixable. And he's not Darren Pang in the size department. It would have neem nice for him to spend a whole year in Rockford to learn how to play in North America, but Ol' Vodka Tits had other ideas.</p>


 </p>


He'll never be a starting goalie in the NHL. But hopefully next year Q can work them into a 3 for Crawford, 1 for Raanta rotation. That would work, keep both guys pretty sharp, and put them in the best position to win every night.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


You just made a gourmet meal of crow to eat. I see it different in many ways, I wish he would have been in Rockford as well, but to say that he will never start in this league is somewhat ludicrous.</p>

 

[PatrickSharpRules]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="puckjim" data-cid="225464" data-time="1397241721">
<div>


But that doesn't prove that he would be as good as Crawford if he had played more.</p>


 </p>


The only reason that Niemi ever got a look is because he played better than Huet when given a chance.</p>


 </p>


Raanta cannot say this and will never get a chance as long as Crawford is performing at the above-average pace that he is doing now.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Hey I am not saying anything as fact, but the price is right and the chance of him being as good as Crawford behind this team is very probable in my opinion. </p>

 

[Forklift]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="225467" data-time="1397242409">
<div>


You just made a gourmet meal of crow to eat. I see it different in many ways, I wish he would have been in Rockford as well, but to say that he will never start in this league is somewhat ludicrous.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


OK, so maybe he'll be a starter somewhere. But not here, and not for any type of contender.</p>