Stans goalie choices after last years cup win

[Variable]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="226939" data-time="1398210520">
<div>


But, you still need great goaltending to win a Cup 80% of the time. In the last 10 years, only two Stanley Cup winning goaltenders have had under a .920 save percentage. Six of those goaltenders had above a .930 save percentage... all of them were Conn Smythe winners or candidates.</p>


 </p>


Why are you ignoring that?</p>


 </p>


Do you really believe the team in front of Crawford is the greatest team to ever lace up a pair of skates that any average goaltender can win a Cup with them? Who cares about the team in front of him. If you sign an average goalie for $3-4M you're banking on pure luck that he will somehow play above average in the most pressure filled situation in hockey. Forget about the talent, or the team in front of a goaltender... guys are paid the money because their head is right and they can perform at the highest level in pressure, not because of talent.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


The thing people can't seem to understand, or they ignore,  is that "average" isn't uniform from team to team. So many variables (pun unintended) go into what kind of team is in front of a goalie, the style of game they play,etc. Things that change everything.  What would you consider more "mentally straining" playing on a team where you know the team in front of you will, on a regular basis, limit the quality chances against or a team that leans on you because they can't?  People like to argue the "expectations" side of it on winning teams but then completely ignore the actual superhuman physical demands side of it on a team that can't control the pace of the game.  That's the reason why Luongo in Florida, near the start of his career, continually got beat out by Brodeur for the Vezina, when it shouldn't have even been close.</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="226943" data-time="1398211487">
<div>


The thing people can't seem to understand, or they ignore,  is that "average" isn't uniform from team to team. So many variables (pun unintended) go into what kind of team is in front of a goalie, the style of game they play,etc. Things that change everything.  What would you consider more "mentally straining" playing on a team where you know the team in front of you will, on a regular basis, limit the quality chances against or a team that leans on you because they can't?  People like to argue the "expectations" side of it on winning teams but then completely ignore the actual superhuman physical demands side of it on a team that can't control the pace of the game. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


Exactly. And a single goalie can change an entire teams system and how that team plays in front of said goalie. It's a give and take relationship and works both ways. Goalies just don't (better yet..they SHOULDN'T) just be depended on to sit in the crease and only stop pucks. A good goalie can do so much more than that like Craw does with how he plays the puck. Changes an entire system and takes a lot pressure off of the blueliners coming back and allows them to transition easier to offense. It's a fact.</p>

 

[Ton]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="226943" data-time="1398211487">
<div>


The thing people can't seem to understand, is that "average" isn't uniform from team to team. So many variables (pun unintended) go into what kind of team is in front of a goalie, the style of game they play,etc. Things that change everything.  What would you consider more "mentally straining" playing on a team where you know the team in front of you will, on a regular basis, limit the quality chances against or a team that leans on you because they can't?  People like to argue the "expectations" side of it on winning teams but then completely ignore the actual superhuman phyical demands side of it on a team that can't control the pace of the game. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


Blah blah blah. Is this team the best team in history or what?</p>


 </p>


In a salary cap era, you have to be freaking joking me. Forget talking about parity between goaltenders, what about the minuscule parity from talent on team to team. How is a team like the Blues leading the series against such a superior stacked club like the Hawks?</p>


 </p>


I suppose, logically, you are correct. If a team is super stacked in front of a goaltender, and I mean far and away superior compared to any other team, then yes. Perhaps you can get away with adequate goaltending, such as the 2010 Hawks. But, your logic fails, because that's not the case. You can't do that consistently in a salary cap era. You can't buy a team anymore.</p>


 </p>


Again, 8 of 10 Stanley Cup winning goaltenders in the last 10 years have a .920 or above save percentage. Six of them above .930 (a couple above .940)... these are not average goaltenders behind stacked teams.</p>

 

[Variable]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226944" data-time="1398211848">
<div>


Exactly. And a single goalie can change an entire teams system and how that team plays in front of said goalie. It's a give and take relationship and works both ways. Goalies just don't (better yet..they SHOULDN'T) just be depended on to sit in the crease and only stop pucks. A good goalie can do so much more than that like Craw does with how he plays the puck. Changes an entire system and takes a lot pressure off of the blueliners coming back and allows them to transition easier to offense. It's a fact.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Playing the puck may be one of the most overrated skills of a goalie, because for all the potential good it may do, one **** up erases everything. One negative outcome on playing the puck does a lot more damage than helping the puck to a d-man or forward. And it damn near did a few times in the last game. Especially when in this case, you usually have a few of the better (maybe the best in Keith) puckhandling/skating d-men coming back for the puck already.</p>

 

[the canadian dream]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="226952" data-time="1398213539">
<div>


Playing the puck may be one of the most overrated skills of a goalie, because for all the potential good it may do, one **** up erases everything. One negative outcome on playing the puck does a lot more damage than helping the puck to a d-man or forward. And it damn near did a few times in the last game. Especially when in this case, you usually have a few of the better (maybe the best in Keith) puckhandling/skating d-men coming back for the puck already.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


HAHAHAHAHAHA</p>


 </p>


riiiiiight</p>


 </p>


nice try</p>


 </p>


if anything its under-rated because about 10% of goalies actually know how to do it well. Like saying a hard slap shot is over-rated. LMFAO</p>


 </p>


talk to the goalies on this board about how difficult puck handling is and how well it pays off when its done properly and with limited mistakes. Talk to the blueliners also who fucking love a good puck handling goalie.</p>

 

[Variable]

Never said it wasn't difficult. Never said it wasn't something that a lot of goalies can do well. Read what I said.</p>

 

[Pez68]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="226946" data-time="1398211923">


Again, 8 of 10 Stanley Cup winning goaltenders in the last 10 years have a .920 or above save percentage. Six of them above .930 (a couple above .940)... these are not average goaltenders behind stacked teams.</p>
</blockquote>


 </p>


No, they are goalies that got hot at the right time, had career years....and played behind great teams.</p>


 </p>


This is a great article:</p>


 </p>


http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2013/09/06/the-value-of-a-stanley-cup-winning-goalie/</p>

 

[Rex]

that feel when shit goalies just get red hot and win a cup. </p>

 

[the canadian dream]

hahahaha goalies hot at the right time. what an over-used cliche and that article is full of flaws and missing variables.</p>


 </p>


this only apply to goalies? doesn't apply to skaters just goalies when they have success in the playoffs? Bickell didn't get hot last year? Sharp doesn't get hot? Seabs doesn't get hot? etc etc etc</p>


 </p>


Goalies can't earn a fucking ounce of respect with any fan base. The easy goat when they have off nights and the fluke or got hot excuse when they succeed. What a bunch of bullshit.</p>


 </p>


and god knows a goalie has never made a team in front of them look better than they actually are in single games, in series and in seasons? Again this shit works both ways. </p>


 </p>


Only players on the ice for full 60 minutes in games. Endure crazy ass strain on their bodies..crazy ass pressure they put on themselves and which is put on them and the only respect they get when they play well is "they got hot at the right time". Sighhh</p>

 

[Rex]

Crawfords career playoff stats </p>


 </p>


22W  17L  2.05GAA  .925SV%  3SO</p>


 </p>


fucking fluke, just always "getting hot" this time of year</p>

 

[Pez68]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226999" data-time="1398224196">


hahahaha goalies hot at the right time. what an over-used cliche and that article is full of flaws and missing variables.


this only apply to goalies? doesn't apply to skaters just goalies when they have success in the playoffs? Bickell didn't get hot last year? Sharp doesn't get hot? Seabs doesn't get hot? etc etc etc


Goalies can't earn a fucking ounce of respect with any fan base. The easy goat when they have off nights and the fluke or got hot excuse when they succeed. What a bunch of bullshit.


and god knows a goalie has never made a team in front of them look better than they actually are in single games, in series and in seasons? Again this shit works both ways.</p></blockquote>


They are just like any other player. The difference is, when a goalie is in a slump, your playoffs are usually over pretty quickly. If a player is in a slump, you have 17 other guys to pick up the slack.


It's not a bunch of bullshit at all really. The point is quite simple. Most goalies that have won a cup, won't duplicate that success again...Which is why rewarding a goalie with a huge contract because they won a cup is silly.


I'm not saying at all that I don't want Crawford on the Hawks. He's awesome and his parade speech was epic. I'm just worried his contract will cost the Hawks down the line, and I have a big problem giving out huge contracts to goalies because they won a cup.

 

[Variable]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Canadian Dreamalchuk" data-cid="226999" data-time="1398224196">
<div>


 </p>


and god knows a goalie has never made a team in front of them look better than they actually are in single games, in series and in seasons? Again this shit works both ways. </p>


 </p>


Only players on the ice for full 60 minutes in games. Endure crazy ass strain on their bodies..crazy ass pressure they put on themselves and which is put on them and the only respect they get when they play well is "they got hot at the right time". Sighhh</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


In single games? No argument there whatsoever. Just about any starting NHL goalie can do that on any given night in the NHL. In a playoff series? Agreed, happens all the time, sometimes only to regress in the very next series. Through an entire season, through multiple seasons? Extremely rare. Only the very best that have ever played have done that. </p>


 </p>


And I will definitely agree that  goalies get more of the blame than they deserve when things go wrong, no argument there either because so much is out of their control. But when things go right?  When things go right, forget about the fans  there's no way the majority of them think it's a "fluke" (which I wouldn't call it a "fluke"), it convinces otherwise smart hockey organizations  like Detroit and Boston  to start paying stupid money to keep you around, no matter the cost in terms of players that have to be let go or  where  the salary cap is at.</p>


 </p>


There's a very small minority of people who watch hockey that actually delve into stats and metrics, that will talk about the stupidity behind giving out long term, big money contracts to a position most heavily dependent on the rest of the team. Don't try to pass it off like it's this league wide thing, this stigma hockey fans have against goalies, because it's nowhere close to being that. Most people are clamoring for that contract to happen if they think that goalie made "the big save at the big time" a lot during the past season. And then they say good bye to players like Seguin.</p>

 

[roshinaya]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="226952" data-time="1398213539">
<div>


Playing the puck may be one of the most overrated skills of a goalie, because for all the potential good it may do, one **** up erases everything. One negative outcome on playing the puck does a lot more damage than helping the puck to a d-man or forward. And it damn near did a few times in the last game. Especially when in this case, you usually have a few of the better (maybe the best in Keith) puckhandling/skating d-men coming back for the puck already.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Playing the puck was so overrated that they changed the rules and painted a stupid trapezoid behind the net.</p>

 

[Ton]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Pez68" data-cid="227004" data-time="1398225263">
<div>


They are just like any other player. The difference is, when a goalie is in a slump, your playoffs are usually over pretty quickly. If a player is in a slump, you have 17 other guys to pick up the slack.


It's not a bunch of bullshit at all really. The point is quite simple. Most goalies that have won a cup, won't duplicate that success again...Which is why rewarding a goalie with a huge contract because they won a cup is silly.


I'm not saying at all that I don't want Crawford on the Hawks. He's awesome and his parade speech was epic. I'm just worried his contract will cost the Hawks down the line, and I have a big problem giving out huge contracts to goalies because they won a cup.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


So because Crawford already won a Cup, they should have dropped him instead of signing him, and tried another (cheaper) goaltender? (Yeah I'm putting words in your mouth!)</p>


 </p>


Talk about shooting fish in a barrel.</p>


 </p>


I think the extra $2-3M is worth the chemistry alone. We aren't losing a key piece with $2-3M. Just Versteeg, maybe. Corey is part of the core, losing him would be losing a core player. I think ya'll are overrating how "overpaid" Corey is.</p>


 </p>


Tampa just got swept with a $2M goaltender. PHI is losing their series with a $1.65M goaltender. MIN, do they have a goaltender?</p>


 </p>


Only team winning without a top dollar goalie is Anaheim. Colorado doesn't count -- Varlamov has his contract extension kicking in next season ($5.9M), just like Crawford ($6M).</p>

 

[Ton]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rex" data-cid="227003" data-time="1398224757">
<div>


Crawfords career playoff stats </p>


 </p>


22W  17L  2.05GAA  .925SV%  3SO</p>


 </p>


fucking fluke, just always "getting hot" this time of year</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Ya but, any unproven goaltender with something to prove can do that behind this amazing historical top notch unbeatable team.</p>

 

[Rex]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="227028" data-time="1398257872">
<div>


Ya but, any unproven goaltender with something to prove can do that behind this amazing historical top notch unbeatable team.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


 </p>


sign Cedrick Desjardins to be starter. He has A LOT to prove!</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rex" data-cid="227054" data-time="1398268017">
<div>


sign Cedrick Desjardins to be starter. He has A LOT to prove!</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


 </p>


Keep it down Newfie!!!!</p>

 

[puckjim]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Pez68" data-cid="227004" data-time="1398225263">
<div>


They are just like any other player. The difference is, when a goalie is in a slump, your playoffs are usually over pretty quickly. If a player is in a slump, you have 17 other guys to pick up the slack.


It's not a bunch of bullshit at all really. The point is quite simple. Most goalies that have won a cup, won't duplicate that success again...Which is why rewarding a goalie with a huge contract because they won a cup is silly.


I'm not saying at all that I don't want Crawford on the Hawks. He's awesome and his parade speech was epic. I'm just worried his contract will cost the Hawks down the line, and I have a big problem giving out huge contracts to goalies because they won a cup.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>


That premise only works if the goalie actually won the 'Cup.  By himself. </p>


 </p>


Niemi was less than sparkling in the Finals in 2010.  He didn't "win the 'Cup".  He had 17 other guys to pick up the slack.</p>

 

[Forklift]

I keep hearing doomsayers talking about how Corey Crawford making $6MM/per for the next 6 years will damage the Hawks.</p>


 </p>


As of now, he's carrying the 6th-largest cap hit of any NHL goalie for next season. This is in part because Vancouver is eating part of Luongo's hit, and because Ryan Miller hasn't signed for next season yet.</p>


 </p>


By the 4th year of this deal, Bishop, Bobrovsky, Schneider and Niemi could surpass his hit as well. Depending on what else happens, we're looking at a very real possibility that he won't even be in the top 10 goalies in terms of cap hit.</p>


 </p>


Which means either a) The Hawks can keep a proven veteran goalie for a relatively low price, or b) His contract will be very easy to move.</p>


 </p>


As for the Hawks' current options in net, there will not be anybody available who is a better option than Crawford in terms of skill and price.</p>


 </p>


There's really nothing to see here.</p>

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="puckjim" data-cid="227056" data-time="1398269840">

That premise only works if the goalie actually won the 'Cup.  By himself. 

 

Niemi was less than sparkling in the Finals in 2010.  He didn't "win the 'Cup".  He had 17 other guys to pick up the slack.</p></blockquote>


But he got hot against the sharks!!!