Ray Emery fan club

[TheChicagoFan]

you do know that wins and losses and GAA are meaningless right? you cant be serious with using that as an arguement?

.898 SV% tells the story of Ray Emery.

Besides seeing nice pics of him in Lambos did you know that he has been in the league since 2002 and from highest to lowest his games played are:

58(06-07) 39 (05-06) 31 (08-08) ............see where im going with this?

.898 isn't bad considering he gave up a lot of goals early in the season because of the defense. Just look at how he's playing now. He is making great saves and nobody is calling for him to be the fulltime starter. Rest for Corey is nice. And it gives Crawford a reason to fight for his job and play well.

What the hell is up your ass?

 

[derosabomb]

.898 isn't bad considering he gave up a lot of goals early in the season because of the defense. Just look at how he's playing now. He is making great saves and nobody is calling for him to be the fulltime starter. Rest for Corey is nice. And it gives Crawford a reason to fight for his job and play well.

What the hell is up your ass?

joe cawks

 

[icehogfan08]

.898 isn't bad considering he gave up a lot of goals early in the season because of the defense. Just look at how he's playing now. He is making great saves and nobody is calling for him to be the fulltime starter. Rest for Corey is nice. And it gives Crawford a reason to fight for his job and play well.

What the hell is up your ass?

He'll be fine. He is just going through his DMS monthly mode.

 

[southern_cross_116]

Emery's Save %?

StL: .920
Pho: 1.000 (and managed to get tagged with the loss)
NYI: .939
SJ: .946

.898 is a red herring, but I suspect you knew that one.

 

[Gunzaan]

Don't mind Dewey, he is blind.

 

[TheChicagoFan]

No fun on CCS.

 

[DewsSox79]

so I take it we are on the Ray Emery bandwagon?

I take it we just take the bad games out and than evaluate?

It Ray fucking Emery, but hey, goalie wins are a substantial stat when evaluating a goalie.

 

[DewsSox79]

joe cawks

always a delight reading your posts.

 

[Capt. Serious]

joe cawks

When you add something to a topic, let me know.

 

[tbo41fan]

so I take it we are on the Ray Emery bandwagon?

I take it we just take the bad games out and than evaluate?

It Ray fucking Emery, but hey, goalie wins are a substantial stat when evaluating a goalie.

Wins are a substantial stat in the standings because Wins get you points

always a delight reading your posts.

Yours too

When you add something to a topic, let me know.

I thought you had him on ignore.....

 

[DewsSox79]

Wins are a substantial stat in the standings because Wins get you points

Yours too


I thought you had him on ignore.....

team wins are much different than goalie wins. The team gets the win, not just the goalie. .898 SV% tells the full story on the goalie on wheter he is good or not. GAA and Wins mean zero. So goalie X gets a win in a 6-4 game with 20 shots on goal, how logical is it to evaluate on W's and L's

 

[tbo41fan]

team wins are much different than goalie wins. The team gets the win, not just the goalie. .898 SV% tells the full story on the goalie on wheter he is good or not. GAA and Wins mean zero. So goalie X gets a win in a 6-4 game with 20 shots on goal, how logical is it to evaluate on W's and L's

Because at the end of the day, the goalie gets the win..

I'd rather have a goalie with a .896 save% and a 10-3-2 record than a goalie with a .945 save% and a 3-4-1 record


im not saying that save % is not important, im saying that right now, Emery is getting us wins

 

[HawkWriter]

team wins are much different than goalie wins. The team gets the win, not just the goalie. .898 SV% tells the full story on the goalie on wheter he is good or not. GAA and Wins mean zero. So goalie X gets a win in a 6-4 game with 20 shots on goal, how logical is it to evaluate on W's and L's

It doesn't tell the full story though.

He had a terrible game in Edmonton, the whole team did. I don't think anyone is letting that slide.

However, he has been pretty damn solid in all his other games.

While it isn't fair to take that 1 game out, it hurts his save percentage so badly, that it doesn't tell the full story. Especially when he hasn't started a ton of games to overcome that Edmonton game.

 

[tbo41fan]

It doesn't tell the full story though.

He had a terrible game in Edmonton, the whole team did. I don't think anyone is letting that slide.

However, he has been pretty damn solid in all his other games.

While it isn't fair to take that 1 game out, it hurts his save percentage so badly, that it doesn't tell the full story. Especially when he hasn't started a ton of games to overcome that Edmonton game.

true that...its like a batters batting average early in the season.

it's always really bloated or deflated due to lack of quantity shots/at-bats faced

 

[DewsSox79]

Because at the end of the day, the goalie gets the win..

I'd rather have a goalie with a .896 save% and a 10-3-2 record than a goalie with a .945 save% and a 3-4-1 record

im not saying that save % is not important, im saying that right now, Emery is getting us wins

bold: that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

 

[southern_cross_116]

so I take it we are on the Ray Emery bandwagon?

I take it we just take the bad games out and than evaluate?

It's Ray... Emery, but hey, goalie wins are a substantial stat when evaluating a goalie.

That's fair- ok, well in my way of thinking is that playing consecutive games -in this case in 4, is significant enough where it identifies a streak that a player is on.

And I am stating this in that some athletes can be streak athletes (take Andre Dawson for example - Hossa can be another one), when certain guys get hot -they get white hot -and if a guy is in net for wins, and is performing (stastically there is nothing in this last stretch indicating that he is doing much noticeably wrong) - therefore the decision many coaches make is to go with the hot player.

Otoh, I also didn't mention wins, but sort of like a QB in football, for better or worse, the goalie gets the credit (same thing with pitchers). They are there... call it a tie breaker.

 

[tbo41fan]

bold: that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

so you value individual stats over actual wins and points in the standings?

 

[icehogfan08]

team wins are much different than goalie wins. The team gets the win, not just the goalie. .898 SV% tells the full story on the goalie on wheter he is good or not. GAA and Wins mean zero. So goalie X gets a win in a 6-4 game with 20 shots on goal, how logical is it to evaluate on W's and L's

I understand what you are saying.

 

[derosabomb]

When you add something to a topic, let me know.

:lmao:

 

[southern_cross_116]

Oddly enough, the dumbest thing I ever heard was some guy getting up me and telling me that topographic maps don't use colour coding for elevation changes - apparently they use "elevation lines" (note complainant not using the actual term "contour lines".)

Everything is relative isn't it?

___


Mind you too - back to goalies ... I was on the Alain Chevrier and Bob Sauve bandwagons too... basically whoever is in net when the team is getting results (ok I was not on the Murray Bannerman one - which was probably why I was on the other 2's - as they weren't Murray Bannerman... as I have said a million times on boards - I was at a game against Quebec when Michel Goulet (then at the top of his game on the Nords) scored on Bannerman with an unscreened shot from the flipping red line. . .

So goalies are sort of a -well, I dunno ... ok, my playing experience has reinforced the cliched opinion that they all have to have a screw loose to play that position. But then again, I mostly played wing.