Grading the 2010 Flyers: Michael Leighton

Yeah. That last goal is still hard to stomach, but what Leighton provided was so far and above what I expected him to provide in December I almost don’t believe it happened. A.

How about this is the thread where no one qualifies their language in praising Michael Leighton?

Simply put, he gave us ten times what could have been asked from anyone in his position. Phenomenal work, Leights.

Meh. Just Meh. A system goaltender made to look better than he is by his defense. On a breakaway or a Two on One….horribly inept and out of position. Rebound control?

Sorry, not onboard the Leighton train.

C+.

I like Leighton, I think he did a good job in the regular season and playoffs. My view is that he’s a backup goaltender on a cup contending team. The 5 hole issues and that last dagger which I can’t wash out of my mouth are why. Isn’t rule 1 or 1a of goaltending that you always play the shooter and leave the guy driving the net to your D? If he continues to improve with Reese, maybe he is the guy. Right now, we have two really good backup goaltenders.

I’m sure Ryan Miller would like to have that one back.

In situations like these, yes weak goals are heart breaking and Leighton coughed one up. Crushing, brutal, and you know that there’s not one person on earth who probably feels worse about it than Leighton. But somehow people seemed to have missed the simple fact that Chicago OUTSHOT THE FLYERS 41-24!!!!!

In general, I appreciate this article. I wouldn’t give Leighton an A after everything is said and done — he had his lapses, and I think there are areas he could improve, but overall, it’s great that the blog acknowledged what many of the bandwagoners who only saw the guy in the playoffs didn’t know, which is that Leighton saved the Flyers season. The only reason we were on the bandwagon was his performance, out of nowhere, when the team was at its most dismal and lost. Boucher had actually played fairly well, but the team just wasn’t playing in front of him. To those who want to say that Leighton was carried by team defense, well sorry but that’s a crock. The guy had a stretch where he was outstanding in spite of a floundering team that was routinely coughing up pucks and giving up scoring opportunities.

There just isn’t a situation one could imagine being more pressure filled than the one Leighton was put in when Boosh went down to injury in the Boston series.

I also think that pulling Leighton in game 5 was a major mistake. Funny, but Chicago didn’t pull their starting goalie after the same number of goals. Instead of letting Leighton attempt to get his confidence back, he was yanked as in game 1, and in neither case did that help. Do you think that maybe that might have put a little more pressure on him?

Sadly, people don’t seem to be able to look past a handful of softies when the guy was fresh off his injury and thrown into the firestorm, but I think he certainly demonstrated he has the ability to be an NHL goalie.

I agree that mostly when Leights looked good, it was due to superior effort from his defense. However, when he looked his worst (in the finals), the defense was horrible.

I think that the same would be true with any goaltender that Philly had put in. The point is, for whatever reason, the defense played better when Leights was in goal. Why? I don’t know.

However, if goalie X means losing games and not making the playoffs, and Leights in goal means winning games and making it to the finals, that sounds like an A to me.

When I first saw this poll, and the grade, I pretty much agreed with the A grade. But the more I thought about it, the more I had to disagree. Ultimately, I gave Leights a C. Here’s why.

First off, did Leighton exceed all expectations of him? Absolutely. He played mostly great against Boston and Montreal, and to come back and go into an elimination game on his first game back from injury, well, that’s impressive. But, much like the QB in football, or hell, even the president of our country, goalies often get too much credit or too much blame for the way things play out.

As Gizmoitus mentioned earlier, Boucher played pretty damn well himself, even when the Flyers were losing a ton of games. The fact of the matter is the team in front of him was playing terrible hockey. They started playing better and better as the season went on, obviously, and while I won’t go as far as to say the team defense carried Leighton through the playoffs, it sure as hell didn’t hurt him. And if anyone thinks the minutes Pronger was playing was just due to the third line being as bad as it was/is, I think Leights is actually a part of that as well. I just don’t think Lavvy had the confidence in Leighton, and if you think of his five-hole, it’s easy to understand why that might have been the case.

Especially when you look at the Finals, because Leighton generally outplayed Niemi (who I personally think is a pretty bad goalie, but that’s neither here nor there). The difference is Niemi managed to steal a game or two (game 2 for sure), whereas Leighton just couldn’t do the same. It wasn’t for lacking talent—that I could excuse. Leighton made some great saves in the series, but he also had some huge blunders that may have cost us the Cup. The second goal of game 2, the mullet’s OT goal in game 6, et cetera. As many great and timely saves as he made, as many shutouts as he had against Montreal, it’ll be the blunders that stick with me. And for that, he gets a C. He was/is an average (not terrible, not great) goalie around a very much above average team, and a C reflects that.

if that doesn’t get you an A I don’t know what does. It’s a shame he gave up such a weak goal but that’s life. Hopefully he bounces back, puts his trust in what Reese taught him and finds a team to give him a chance. I didn’t like it when Lavi pulled him vs Toronto or Game 5— yeah it shakes up the team but it sends the wrong message to the goalie IMO.