Sometime before 2005: Ilya Bryzgalov trade proves Flyers still have pre-salary cap mentality
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 9:30 AM EDT
in Philadelphia Flyers Commentary
Email
Print
Ilya Bryzgalov could very well be a member of the Philadelphia Flyers next season. He could be our starting goaltender. Yes, a 2011 Vezina Trophy nominee could be the goaltender of your favorite hockey team ... and in 2011, nonetheless.
For each and every one of us, this is supposed to be the news for which we've been waiting over a two decades. For some of us, we've been waiting our entire lives for this news. The Flyers could have a true, legitimate No. 1 goaltender next year. He's also only 30 years old, so he could be ours for a very long time.
And God damn, that's f*cking exciting. It makes me giddy with delight. It likely makes you feel the same.
Just picture it. Ilya Bryzgalov wearing Flyers orange, putting up these kinds of numbers.
Damn, that's sexy. But unfortunately, this reaction is purely visceral. It's made using the raw emotion we so often dump into our sports teams, not the brain that we would prefer to leave at the office at the end of the day.
I would love a new car. Not that I don't appreciate the car I have now, but you know, it's a 2003, it's got some miles on it and a brand new one would be really nice. Leather seats, a sun roof, better gas mileage, maybe one of those awesome built-in GPS systems in the dash. Unfortunately, I'm on a budget like everybody else who doesn't work on Wall Street and I can't afford a brand new car right now.
I mean, I guess I could afford a new car if I really wanted one, but it'd mean a few less trips to the bar with my buddies every month, less eating out, curbing some vacation time in the summer and just general cutbacks across the board when it comes to my everyday lifestyle. To put it simply, it wouldn't be worth it.
Sure, I'd have this great new ride and it'd probably be the envy of all my friends, but when you factor in everything I'd have to get rid of in order to afford it, I'd be losing the overall battle. Hell, I'd be eating Ramen every night for dinner. (Seriously, my poor blood pressure.)
That's how we should be approaching the Flyers goaltending situation this summer.
You know, it'd be great to drop a bunch of coin on a goaltender like Ilya Bryzgalov. We have him for a bit of a test drive over the next 22 days, and we're just getting to know him. The idea is really nice, and we're going to see if we can make it work in the budget.
But we know deep down inside that when we crunch the numbers, we can't afford it.
Well, let's clarify: we could afford it, but it'd mean a decrease in goal production, a tapered defensive unit and the inability to break in the engine on the very new car (yet admittedly, an experimental model) we already have in the garage. You know, less of all that stuff that made our hockey team so good last season.
To put it simply, it wouldn't be worth it.
As Flyers fans, this is bizarre for us. We're in the sixth offseason of the salary cap age, and even despite the many years of being fixed to a budget, we've still been able to buy all the new toys we want.
Peter Forsberg (two years, $11.5 million)
Derian Hatcher (four years, $14 million)
Mike Rathje (five years, $17.5 million)
Kimmo Timonen (six years, $6.3 million per)
Scott Hartnell (six years, $4.2 million per)
Danny Briere (eight years, $6.5 million)
Chris Pronger (seven years, $35 million)
We always get what we want. We have one of the best, most dedicated owners in professional sports, and he's willing to do anything to get what we want and what we need. Right now, we need a goaltender. We want a goaltender. And by God, he's going to get us a goaltender -- no matter what.
What was that quote from Ed Snider in the Inquirer a few weeks back?
"If we trade or go for a goalie, we'll make it work," he said. "We can make anything work, even with the cap."
But at some point, it just doesn't work. At some point, we run out of tricks up the sleeve, and we have to analyze the situation with our wallet out on the table and our bright orange jersey in the closet.
The NHL says Snider can spend $59.4 million on his hockey team (or potentially as much as $63.5 million next season). That's a hard cap, and despite it, we've found ways to get around it quite a lot in recent years.
But hey, you know what? At some point, the rules actually apply to us, too. We can't just make anything work anymore.
694 comments
|
Add comment
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Excellent
In all seriousness, the following steps should be taken:
- Combine this article with statistical analysis from Geoff and Eric, showing why last year’s team was so successful, and why a move like this is completely unnecessary.
- Add in a discussion of what this move could mean, given the hard salary cap. Certain players won’t be here anymore, and it will likely have effect X on the team (again, more statistical analysis here)
- Throw in Jen’s analysis of how Homer has painted himself into a corner re: contract limits.
- Add in some snappy, attention-getting language from Ben. I will assist if needed.
- Put in anything else I’m forgetting – maybe reminders of how our lack of attention to the cap hurt us in 2006-07 and 2008-09?
- Take out a full-page ad in the Inquirer and Daily News showing all of this stuff put together.
- Send copies to Paul Holmgren and Ed Snider.
Honestly, I’m glad that the Flyers are generally good – and definitely proactive – about getting WHAT they need. Their approach is generally, “We need Player Type X, and we’re going to get him.” (This is better than the Eagles, who seem to take the approach of, “Player Y (and sometimes Player Z) is/are so good that he/they masks/mask all of our other problems! Super Bowl here we come!”)
However, they always spend too damn much. And even if they don’t per se, it seems as if there’s always a sticking point somehow (i.e., Pronger’s contract extension becoming an “over 35” contract).
They need to wake the hell up.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Are you in marketing??
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions
I used to be in legal marketing. Did that for about four years.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
I subconsciously knew that.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, we were in the business of telling corporations that our lawyers were brilliant and here’s why you should hire them.
I myself did not do this; I was the administrator of the SQL-based CRM database that the attorneys and their secretaries used.
Still though, I learned a lot.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
by mikefive on Jun 8, 2011 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Marketing is a very important business. /giggles
What kind of plane is it? Oh, it's a big pretty white plane with red stripes, curtains in the windows and wheels and it looks like a big ol' Tylenol.
And to think that even before the lockout, they couldn’t figure out how to buy a championship.
Contributor at The Brotherly Game, SBN's Philadelphia Union blog
In all fairness, you can’t really buy a championship in hockey. Remember the Rangers of the early aughties? They had all of those star players, and they did jack shit every year. Too many egos.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Let’s be reasonable, here. It wasn’t so much the too many egos as it was management gave big contracts to mediocre talent. Besides, I don’t think Bobby Holik knows how to speak, even less exhibit an ego.
Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Co-Manager at Behind the Net
by Bettman's Nightmare on Jun 8, 2011 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions
People refer to the 2000s as the aughties, I thought. I was being serious.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
People do.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I live under a rock and hadn’t heard it. But I thoroughly approve.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
NO worries – apparently I live ‘round the corner at ’under stone’.
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 8, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Bryzgalov was great in the regular season
But he absolutely, positively sucked out loud in the playoffs. 0-4, 4.36 GAA and .879 SV%. I don’t have his 2010 playoff stats to refer to in front of me, so forgive me. Do the Flyers really need another solid regular season goaltender that wilts in the playoffs?
Vezina finalist or not, I would still hardly be sold that he is a step towards a ring.
That was our argument earlier this summer. Come playoff time, you have no clue what you’re getting out of most goalies. Brian Boucher had better numbers than Ryan Miller in Round 1. Bob had a very good regular season, sucked in the playoffs. Same with Bryzgalov.
In general, goaltending is overvalued.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Really the Flyers were beaten by the better team in Boston. Even if we had Thomas and they had someone else say Bouch we still lose the series, maybe not in 4 but 5 or 6 games.
I cannot wear my Pelle Eklund jersey anymore because of hockeybuzz and its creator Eklund.....
Karate' Jerry..... Karate'
Semper Fi...
Oh yeah, the entire team got obliterated by Boston.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That’s kinda the point…
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Bob
If my memory serves me correctly Bob lost the 1st game to Buffalo 1-0. In fairness, Bob had ONE bad period in the Buffalo series and was exiled to the press box for Michael “I give up BS Goals” Leighton.
by flyersphan17 on Jun 9, 2011 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Put our defense (at full health & strength) in front of him as opposed to Phoenix’s and I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts his stats would be a helluva lot better.
How much better?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree with Darth there. Sub 2.25 GAA if he’s a Flyer.
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
GAA is a team metric. I’m curious about Sv%.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
I think save percentages are much more related to the goalie and that GAA is more of a team metric. That said, it would be difficult to predict Sv% because one can argue better defense/team=less shots but the other side of the fence would be correct as well in saying winning more= more shots.
To be honest—- I don’t care about the Sv% as much as the GAA. I just want the Wins. If he gives up 1 goal in 1 shot and we win 3-1, I’ll take it.
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
it would be difficult to predict Sv% because one can argue better defense/team=less shots but the other side of the fence would be correct as well in saying winning more= more shots.
Exactly. But we know that the best goalie in the world, getting the best luck in a season, behind one of the best defenses in the world will still not stop 95% of shots. We know the worst goalie in the world, behind one of the worst defenses in the world, getting the worst luck in a season, will still stop roughly 91% of shots.
That’s a really small difference from best to worst. So I want to see how someone will be “a helluva lot better” than stopping 92.5%. At best, you can “expect” an additional 1% of shots to be stopped. At best.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
We know the worst goalie in the world, behind one of the worst defenses in the world, getting the worst luck in a season, will still stop roughly 91% of shots.
Maybe if you amend it to “worst goalie in the NHL” I could buy it. I still think there are lots of NHL goalies that won’t give you 91% over a significant sample. Those guys usually just don’t get the opportunity to do that.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good point. This is true.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Either. Both. Whatever.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
nah, just up late talking to a lot of people.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
haha, what?
:)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Man I remember when Mike Rathje and his contract was coming off the books and we would rejoice in getting rid of that contract mistake… I guess the Flyers will never learn….
I cannot wear my Pelle Eklund jersey anymore because of hockeybuzz and its creator Eklund.....
Karate' Jerry..... Karate'
Semper Fi...
This is a good analogy, especially considering what Bryzgalov’s car actually looks like.
I’m pretty sure the total amount I’ve paid for all the cars I’ve ever owned is still less than the cost of a new Aston Martin DB9.
Sarauj, Latvija!
Well, considering his wife and his ride, at least the man has taste. Slightly gaudy taste, but better than Richie in that damn trucker hat.
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 8, 2011 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
The best part of that link is that even BizNasty understands the analogy.
by Eric T. on Jun 8, 2011 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Goaltending is only overvalued around here because everything has to be boiled down to stats.
To say Boucher was better than Miller in Round 1 is crazy.
Would Buffalo have gotten to game 7 without Miller stealing Game 1 in Philly? Or how about evening up the series instead of going down 3-1? What would have happened had the Flyers gone back to Boston with a tied series instead of Thomas stealing one of the better games they had played the entire post season?
The Flyers haven’t had goaltending to change the momentum in a playoff series for over 20 years.
Now whether Bryz will be worth the price tag and whoever skater we lose is another question entirely.
No it shows that having good or even serviceable goal tending with better team defense and scoring won that series. Boucher had better numbers but again the Sabers had two shutouts and still lost, if the Flyers had just one that series is over in less than 7 games. I mean the Flyers lost game 1 by a score or 1-0 so how can you say its a goal tending issue, even if you use game 2 yet the Flyers scored 5 goals.
I cannot wear my Pelle Eklund jersey anymore because of hockeybuzz and its creator Eklund.....
Karate' Jerry..... Karate'
Semper Fi...
You can say it’s a goaltending issue when Ryan Miller stands on his head and keeps shot after shot from going in. Miller was the only reason that series went 7 games.
And yet you can say the Sabres lost because of Miller too. See how easy it is to blame/credit a goalie?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
And yet you can say the Sabres lost because of Miller too.
I disagree there—- you can say that Boosh outplayed him… but not that they lost because of him.
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Ryan Miller was boom or bust. He pitched a shutout in two games, and in the other five, he allowed 3 or more goals in each. In three games, he allowed a combined 14 goals.
The Sabres lost 3 games because Ryan Miller was terrible, and won 2 because he was terrific. He was also below-average in his other two.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
he allowed 3 or more goals in each.
I just think he should be replaced with they. We went over how we really did dominate that series. I don’t remember goals specifically, but I don’t recall tons of weak goals. I think we scored those goals opposed to him letting them in—-if you catch my drift.
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Then why doesn’t this argument carry over to the Flyers?
Everyone is giving Miller the “well, his defense let him down” but not the Flyers? It’s hypocritical.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not everyone :-) I’d be fine with Bob/Emery (or any of the guys you mentioned yesterday)
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I was going to exclude you, but… you were arguing with me :)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
Nah, back in the early Shelley days we argued. These are more healthy debates where we are really on the same side, but we are playing around with different POV’s.
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Especially because the defense was suspect for the Flyers in that series… especially right at the beginning of all the games when the Flyers just coughed up odd-man rushes every shift.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Shhh! That goes against the narrative that Flyers goalies suck.
Stop speaking rationally, objectively, and honestly.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions
And Miller outplayed Boucher considering how much worse the Sabres offense was especially after you knocked half of it out of the series.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Duh, facts.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Nope, it was all Boucher's fault
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not trying to say that.
You just don’t apply the same standards to Miller as you do to Boucher. The Sabres defense was worse than the Flyers, by far, and their offense was worse than the Flyers, also by far.
If the Flyers defense affects the results for Boucher, doesn’t the sabres defense affect Miller?
Doesn’t Miller make up for the Sabres poor defense, while the Flyers defense makes up for Boucher’s lack of ability?
Doesn’t that show that the Good defense + average goalie outplayed the average defense + good goalie?
Either Boucher was good enough against Buffalo, or Miller wasn’t good enough. Phrasing doesn’t matter.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
There isn’t one formula for winning in the NHL.
I think we can both agree that a great goalie alone can’t win a cup. The mix of how-good-the-defense-has-to-be to how-good-the-goalie has to be becomes the debatable part.
I think Buffalo’s defense wasn’t good enough to win a series, yet Miller played well enough to force it to seven.
We’re also comparing apples to oranges when it comes to their offenses. Buffalo is simply outclassed by the skill of the Flyers’ forwards. Doesn’t that factor into how well Miller performed? Is it not harder on a goaltender to play against skilled offensive forwards?
There isn’t one formula for winning in the NHL.
I think we can both agree that a great goalie alone can’t win a cup. The mix of how-good-the-defense-has-to-be to how-good-the-goalie has to be becomes the debatable part.
Absolutely agreed.
I think Buffalo’s defense wasn’t good enough to win a series, yet Miller played well enough to force it to seven.
And I don’t think this is the case at all. Buffalo’s defense was good enough to win a series in front of Miller, just like Philly’s defense was good enough to win a series in front of Boucher. Miller gave up 3 or more goals five times. He gave up 4 or more goals three times. That’s not good enough to win a series.
Buffalo is simply outclassed by the skill of the Flyers’ forwards.
But the Flyers forwards played like crap. It’s easy to say, on paper, the Flyers forwards are better. But they played like crap. Doesn’t that factor into how crappy Miller performed?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, let’s back up and talk about our power play in that series. Or the repeated attempts to carry the puck in down the center of the ice through the clump of Buffalo defenders waiting to greet us at the blue line. Just as the first two examples that come to mind. Our forwards really weren’t playing too hot.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Hey, you were just copying the Caps.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions
The only winning formula in the NHL is to assemble a group of players that outperforms four other similiar groups of players in the spring.
In other words, find a mostly (but not completely) fair coin that flips heads four times in a row.
But if you do that, you’re golden!
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
I think maybe it’s just a team sport. Goalie is part of a team. So is D corps and F corps. The better team should win and usually does. It’s easy to over think things and make them way too complicated.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I agree.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
What the hell dude? You make an argument that good around here and you didn’t need to use any stats to do it? That’s messed up.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
And soft goals are entirely subjective. Not only is your soft goal different from my soft goal, it’s almost certainly different from what Kimmo Timonen thinks is a soft goal.
Further, the number of “soft goals” you remember is disproportionate to the number of “huge saves” as a result of the emotion you attach to the memory.
In other words: “soft goals” are given up by everybody, and arguing that one goalie gives up too many of them is a statement that can neither be confirmed or denied.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Not true. If scoring chances can be tracked, so can soft goals. If we want to go rough and dirty, you can start with any goal that comes off a non-scoring chance. I don’t see how that’s any less accurate than many of the measures we already use. To refine it, exclude deflections, own goals, and anything that happens to find a corner. While I agree soft goals are on some level subjective, so are scoring chances. Yet, we have no issue tracking scoring chances (to say nothing of dismissing shot quality).
I’d love to see people start tracking the soft goals against their team. At the very least it’s a start, and I’m actually contemplating doing it for the Caps next year. It will just eat into my commenting time, but I guess I can swing it.
I do think huge saves are more difficult, and I attach less weight to them in any event. So many of them involve a ridiculous amount of luck. Sure, the goalie “battled” but how many huge saves attend a flubbed shot? I also don’t think momentum from a huge save equals momentum lost from a soft goal. You could try to do it, but I’d stick with soft goals for now.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well if you decide to define soft goals and track it, then:
arguing that one goalie gives up too many of them is a statement that can neither be confirmed or denied.
isn’t true, is it? If they are tracked and defined, that is objective. As we stand though, it’s entirely subjective. People go off memory and emotion while arguing an undefined statement has value.
If there was someone counting soft goals, more power to em. Until then, don’t be bringin’ that shit in my face, son!
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair enough, and I agree that trusting memory is just not an accurate or valuable way to do things. I’ve said several times that the two things I care about most with a goalie are the number of softs goals and the number of huge saves. ESSV% is easier to use, but I don’t put as much faith in it; certainly not over just a season or less.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
If somebody did what In Lou We Trust did – tracking where every goal went in the net – for every team, I’d be fascinated. Until then, saying “He gave up soft goals” is basically saying “I remember this one time, and this other time.”
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Even if you are, are you sure that someone else agrees it was soft? I’m not here for all your game recaps, but knowing how we are, there’s rabid debate over plenty of goals.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Yeah, but everyone falls into their personal biases. Boucher sucks, those were all soft goals. Bobrovsky had no chance, that goal is JVR’s fault.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I agree. But I trust myself when I watch 80 Caps games a season and that I know which goalies are letting in more soft goals. It’s no way to have a constructive debate, though.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
haha, exactly. You won’t convince anyone of that.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions
John Fischer at In Lou We Trust did a fantastic series last season on soft goals allowed by Brodeur. It’s something I’d like to do with Bob/Boosh, but I won’t have time until August.
Mourning Gagne forever.
I’m thinking it’s a nice July project for me.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, I still have to find time to finish the defensive breakdowns series Eric started…. sigh.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions
And at least twice Miller gave up 3 goal leads and lost, right? I’m of the mind that if you pay a goalie like Ryan Miller gets paid, a 3 goal lead has to be a win, no excuses. Of course, that’s also why I’m of the mind that you just don’t pay a goalie like Ryan Miller or Henrik Lundqvist.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Miller had two shutouts. In the other 5 games, he allowed 3 or more goals. If you want to focus on two shutouts and ignore the 20 goals allowed in 290 minutes (4.14 GAA), by all means. But Boucher was better than Miller in Round 1. To argue otherwise is letting emotion cloud reality.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions
This. IMO, despite how much I love goalies, a goalie can steal a game or two, but not a series, and definitely not the entire way to the Cup.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Goalies can definitely steal series. That’s not really disputable if you’ve paid attention at all. I agree that it’s extremely rare for a goalie to steal a Cup, but series happen all the time.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
How about to say that that it becomes less likely, since it requires stealing four games instead of just one or two? I’m having trouble thinking of examples when a team does absolute jack shit, but they win four games and the series anyway solely because of their goalie. I’d think the rest of the team would have to do something at some point to make those four wins happen. I guess I don’t pay attention.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Pens and Caps had series stolen by Halak last year. Roloson outright stole a series from DET the year EDM went to the Cup. You remember ANA’s run to the SCF in ‘03? Any memory of what Giguere did to their opponents? You ever hear of this “Dominick Hasek” guy? Roy? Dryden? Brodeur? Those guys made HoF careers on carrying underwhelming teams past superior opponents (though Brodeur usually had an underrated and unappreciated team, he undoubtedly got the NJD team past teams it shouldn’t have, especially in ‘94 when they almost knocked off the Rags in the ECF). What about when FLA went to the SCF, Beezer didn’t steal a series? History is littered with them. In an absolute sense, yes, the team in front has to score a goal or two here or there. But in the vernacular usage it’s pretty well established that goalies do, in fact, steal series in the playoffs with amazing regularity.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
My list is:
Hasek every time he dragged Buffalo into the playoffs (except possibly 1994 and even then he had a .950 S%)
Kiprusoff in 2004 though my memory is vague on this one.
Roloson in 2006 for the entire playoff.
Halak last year anytime his team was facing elimination.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Kipper is a good one as well. Forgot about that. Maybe you guys remember the FLA/PHI series better than me (or maybe you’ve scrubbed it from your memory) but I remember thinking there was no way FLA got past PHI if Beezer wasn’t out of control. I felt that way through all 3 FLA series victories, really.
And you could also say the Caps don’t make the SCF if Kolzig isn’t out of control for the EC portion of the playoffs. Caps have also had unceremonious goalies get hot and eliminate us, but those aren’t big names and at this point you may as well just chalking it up to the Caps sucking balls when spring hits.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
In an absolute sense, yes, the team in front has to score a goal or two here or there. But in the vernacular usage it’s pretty well established that goalies do, in fact, steal series in the playoffs with amazing regularity.
Okay, that’s where we’re missing each other then. Now I’m on board. I was thinking more like Thomas’ performance in Game 2 with the 52 saves. You don’t do that four times in a row.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Halak did it 3 in a row. I’m sure goalies have gotten hot enough to do it 4 in a row. I’d bet some have done it more than 4 but didn’t get all the Ws because of lack of support.
I do agree with you that it’s not the norm and that it’s incredibly unlikely to result in a Cup parade if you need a goalie to do that for you.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I do agree with you that it’s not the norm and that it’s incredibly unlikely to result in a Cup parade if you need a goalie to do that for you.
And that’s the point I’m trying to make. I don’t want to completely hang our playoff hopes on signing Bryzgalov and f up the rest of the team on the way. I just did a very poor job conveying that. ;-)
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
what are people’s thoughts on the rumor of Carter to Columbus for Voracek the 8th overall and a third rounder?
Where are these rumors?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Argh! Enough with the fucking Sea Isle jokes! What does that have to do with anything?! Carter is one of the best, if not the best, forwards on this team! As long as he works out, practices and is ready to play like he does when it’s time to hit the ice (and it sure seems like he does), I don’t give a rats ass what he does in his free time! Is he supposed to quietly sit at home reading books and helping little old ladies cross the street in between games?
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Plus, Sea Isle is fun.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions
I am not a huge Carter fan but the Sea Isle stuff is so played out… But as many have said before if it costs Hartnell then I’ll drive him to the air port….
I cannot wear my Pelle Eklund jersey anymore because of hockeybuzz and its creator Eklund.....
Karate' Jerry..... Karate'
Semper Fi...
Last year I considered Carter to be very much a “round peg, square hole” situation. I liked him, thought he was great, but didn’t see how he fit the needs and roster openings of the team. This year he showed me that he fits the system just fine. He was simply outstanding. I just can’t throw that away over jokes about “Sea Isle”, “lazy”, and “misses the net.” Sure, he misses the net a lot, but he hits it plenty, too.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
The Columbus Dispatch has stated that there are rumors revolving the 8th overall pick and Carter, with CLB adding more. Cant find the link, but there are a decent amount of sources saying it
Gus Supporter.
All I’ve heard is Columbus willing to listen to offers for the #8 pick, and The Cannon mentioning Carter. I saw nothing about Voracek and a third.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions
saw it in HFboards…just something to throw out there, seems to be just voracek and the 8th though
by my pal mal 16 on Jun 8, 2011 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh. So it’s just some guy’s idea?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
I hear we’re getting Kovalchuk for Powe, straight up.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I hope you also heard the cap is going to be $73M next year.
by Eric T. on Jun 8, 2011 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I heard Snider found a loop hole where the Flyers don’t have to actually operate under a hard cap.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
If Comcast can get away with not distributing CSN to satellite dish subscribers, Comcast can get away with ignoring the NHL’s salary cap.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
I thought that was over with, the FCC is forcing them to lower the carrying cost. That’s how they got around it, they made other cable companies pay absurd amounts of money to get the channels and the FCC said “you gotta stop”.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Yeah, that was like a year ago and it hasn’t happened… so I’ll believe it when I see it.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I just remember hearing about it since I don’t have cable I was trying to find bars that had the channel, no one ever did. Yeah if it ever happens I’ll be surprised too.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Yeah, it sucks. The bar I typically go to doesn’t get CSN because of it, but they do have $2 Molson drafts during all Flyers games. Uh, alright.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
FCC may have said that, but...
Comcast hasn’t stopped. On CenterIce via DirecTV, I almost never have a Flyers feed, and if I do, it’s not in HD.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions
They said they had to stop. They failed to specify when. Oops. Business as usual.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
so like the salary cap…… it’s $63m the league says not to go over, but we do anyways and don’t care. I mean can the league tell Snider no to anything? He’s their TV boss now too.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Speaking of that. Who is to say Snider doesn’t know exactly how much the cap is going to go up as a result of the TV deal and knows he can fit Bryz in?
by KornontheKobb on Jun 8, 2011 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Well they appealed the decision, didn’t that? I think that appeal might still be pending, hence why the cease and desist order hasn’t been enforced against us (or Cablevision or Cox, for that matter)
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jun 8, 2011 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions
If Comcast can get away with not distributing CSN to satellite dish subscribers, Comcast can get away with ignoring the NHL’s salary cap.
—>Comcast signs Ilya Bryzgalov to a 5 year contract to become a producer. Money not disclosed (later revealed as $5 million per year).
—>Bryz signs an amateur tryout contract with the Flyers. Plays the season under this deal
(—>???
—> Profit!)
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Step 4: Gary Bettman comes in to confiscate all of Flyers draft picks for cap circumvention: discovers Flyers have no draft picks and gives up.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
by Ubiquitous on Jun 8, 2011 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's not enough.
Phil kessel brought in two first rounders and a second. Carter is a better player than kessel
-bob
by Rrainone on Jun 8, 2011 12:56 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Goaltending and defense go hand-in-hand. While Boosh and Bob are not totally at fault for the outcome of this season they most certainly have a role in it. This is an excellent blog but the amount of arguments based on statistics has gotten ridiculous. You can run all the stats you want but let’s face facts – stats only tell part of the story. Ryan Miller is the only reason that series went 7 games. And Tim Thomas is the reason why Boston won Game 2. Goaltending more often than not is the X-Factor in wins and losses. Goaltending takes the pressure off of the defense by not forcing it to play flawlessly to avoid giving up bad goals – several Flyers said this after the playoffs ended. You can point to GAA and Save Percentage all you want but the bottom line stats are W and L. I fully agree that this is a team sport and you win or lose together but a chain is only as strong as its weakest link and goaltending has been our weakest link since Steve Yzerman scored on Hextall from Broad & Oregon.
Goaltending and defense go hand-in-hand.
Absolutely. Nobody disputes this. It’s why a great defense can succeed in front of Brian Boucher.
The rest of your comment essentially comes down to: Goaltending isn’t about stopping pucks, it’s about winning. But goalies can’t score goals, and you need to score goals to win.
Dismissing simply mathematics – like save percentages – as ridiculous is, well, ridiculous. It’s not advanced stats. It’s math. A goalie who stops 92.6% of all shots is just not that much better than one who stops 91.7%. That’s not ridiculous, it’s common sense.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Boucher is an adequate backup but he will not backstop us to a Stanley Cup. The playoffs are a whole different beast. Any team that needs goaltending to steal an entire series is bound to lose but let’s take a look at Boston. They have a great squad with a goalie who got them a win on a night when the rest of the team was off its game, that being Game 2. If we win Game 2 who knows what happens? Do we win the series? Probably not. But I truly believe if we win Game 2 we don’t start Game 3 nowhere near as flat as we did. And in the Buffalo series, two 1-0 shutout losses in my opinion proves that while our goaltending was good, theirs was just enough better to steal those games. And to win in the playoffs, every team needs a goalie that can do that for you, especially when your offense is not playing up to snuff and you’re getting peppered shot after shot. Boucher just can’t do that. He’s a good goalie in that you can rely on him for 20-25 games a year to give you a decent chance so you don’t burn out your starter (like Brodeur) but that’s all.
You’re ignoring the fact that Buffalo’s goaltending was just crappy enough to give the Flyers 3 games back after stealing 2.
But you’re essentially saying you want a goalie to make up for when your great team shits the bed. So do I. But we live in a cap world. How do you pay for it? If the Flyers could just sign Ilya Bryzgalov and Dan Hamhuis and Brad Richards, I’d be all for it. But the 1% difference in Bryzgalov and Bobrovsky is not worth losing one of the elite two-way players in the NHL.
That’s all.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Trading Claude Giroux and James van Riemsdyk for Derek Boogard is worth it if the Flyers win the Cup.
That doesn’t mean it’s a good trade.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
If we win the cup by trading Carter to the Bruins for David freakin Ortiz—-its an amazing trade.
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
true, but what GM would ever make that trade? that’s just silly keep it in reality. however winning the next 5 cups isn’t reality either.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
It’s my response to: If trading Jeff Carter wins a Cup, it was worth it.
Well no shit, Sherlock. That doesn’t mean it was smart, or even that it increased the odds of winning a Cup. If playing Johan Backlund in goal won a Cup, it’d be worth it. The argument doesn’t mean anything.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
I argue with Hooks Orpik all the time about this. Pens won a Cup with Staal, so it must be the right pick. My response is that they could have won more Cups with Toews and that no reasonable person would take Staal over Toews. But the Pens won a Cup with Staal, so how can you criticize it? Because he wasn’t the best available player. But the Pens needed Staal. But Toews could have done that, and more. But Staal played D and we won. And on and on and on.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Exactly. I can’t imagine what’s worse:
a) If trading Carter means a Cup, it’s worth it.
or
b) Jordan Staal was a better pick than Jonathan Toews because the Pens won a Cup with Staal.
I’d slam my head against a table in both cases.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Right. And at the end of the debate it ends like this “well, I guess we’re both glad the Pens didn’t take Toews, then.”
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
haha and we all agree!
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
didn’t towes win a cup though? doesn’t that make that argument moot?
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Not really, both teams worked out. Pens needed a defensive specialist so maybe Toews wasn’t the guy. Now, Toews winning Olympic MVP while playing the shut down role in the world’s only best-on-best tournament while not being on the ice for a goal against… that makes the argument moot.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
sorry I kinda missed the argument and was skimming and that was my first response.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
You can do the wrong thing and have the right result, just as you can do the right thing and have the wrong result. Rarely is it every as easy as do this, and this will happen.
"You can commit no mistake and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." - Jean-Luc Picard
Maybe Boston looked great defensively against Philadelphia, but their defense has been pretty bad in the other three series, I think. At least, until you get to the blue paint.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Good points Darth.
The Flyers have to play on eggshells because you really don’t know what you’re getting with our rag tag platoon of goaltending. I certainly believe that problem was alluded to by nearly everyone in the org, some more blunt than others.
And as far as the whole argument with save percentage… isn’t a goalie playing in front of a better defense getting a lot more “easy” shots from worse angles? Numbers can be deceiving, that why you can’t put all your trust in them.
For the record I’m still on the fence about Bryz. I like Bob, but I don’t know if he is the answer now. In the cap world, he may make more sense than Bryzgalov… but we’ll see who we have to lose to get him.
If you got this proposed Columbus package for Carter, I think that would make the acquisition an easier pill for us to swallow… at least it would help restock our incredibly bare cupboards.
Then who scores goals for us next year? Can Bryz do that too?
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Breezy is gonna stop so many shots we won't need to score!!
by hebrew hammer on Jun 8, 2011 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
And as far as the whole argument with save percentage… isn’t a goalie playing in front of a better defense getting a lot more "easy" shots from worse angles?
Prove it. Gabe put up $100 to anybody who can prove shot quality exists.
Numbers can be deceiving, that why you can’t put all your trust in them.
Show that shot quality exists, your argument is based in reality, and then we’ll agree that numbers can be deceiving.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
So every shot is created equal? You guys are so obsessed with statistics and numbers you should just forego watching and take the game off the ice and to an excel spread sheet.
So whats the point of a good defense then? One that limits shot numbers exclusively?
I guess Eric T gets the $100 because the chart below claims there is some way to track shot quality.
I still don’t think you can put numbers on everything and those charts do very little for me. Point blank shots don’t necessarily mean they are higher quality chances, and it looks like those numbers are based on shot distance (sorry, at work so can’t really bear down and analyze shit.)
Even if the chart is right, it proves our defense sucks so why not lose salary from one of the overpaid blueliners or our “top” two way center to sign Bryz? Don’t see how it would hurt matters if that was the situation, because we certainly don’t have good enough defense to win with an average goalie, if that chart is accurate.
So every shot is created equal?
No. Nobody has ever said this. Stop projecting misunderstanding and hatred of advanced stats onto what we say.
it looks like those numbers are based on shot distance
Exactly. Shot distance, as a proxy for quality. But as you admit, distance isn’t proof of shot quality. It’s simply the best there is right now.
it proves our defense sucks
It does? That’s an interesting analysis. I would disagree. But it’s funny that you see that chart and say the defense sucks, not the goaltending was good enough. What would it take for you to admit that the Flyers goaltending was good enough this year?
You ignore save percentages and you ignore shot distance data. What would it take for you to say “You know, maybe goaltending was the issue last year. Maybe it was health”?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions
First of all, you’re putting words in my mouth. I don’t think goaltending was our main problem this year. I do think it was a contributing factor. I do think it’s safe to say that it was unreliable.
Doesn’t that chart “track” shot quality? Of course that’s indicative of defense. I’m also not going to argue that the defense just wasn’t good enough either… but a lot of people blame it on Pronger being gone.
If that’s the case then sign Bryz and lose a depth defender for more cap room. What’s the point of having both Carle and Mez if their play isn’t good enough to carry the team without Pronger?
Having less defensemen helps them play better without Pronger?
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
They went to the SCF without Mez. The point of acquiring Mez was to rest Pronger and allow them to win in situations without him. Did that work out?
They probably shouldn’t have awarded him the Barry Ashbee Trophy then. Oops.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
And I’m not saying that to claim that Mez is infallible. I mean, as I’ve said several times around here, that pinning a total team failure on one guy is silly. “We added this guy so we’d play better without Pronger, and we lost even earlier without Pronger, so I guess it’s all the new guy’s fault!”
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
When did I put words in your mouth? I don’t see anywhere that I did.
What’s the point of having both Carle and Mez if their play isn’t good enough to carry the team without Pronger?
Why is it on one of those two to carry the team? Who’s to say their play wasn’t good enough? If you point to the playoffs, I can point to 18 players who didn’t play well enough to carry the team without Pronger. Why single those two out?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Because Mez’s job was to fill Pronger’s “role” if he was unavailable or needed the rest? Because Carle’s play was questionable without Pronger’s stabilizing force?
It’s why I point to them. And because of their 8 million combined cap hit.
And this is in a 7 game sample? Where Meszaros required surgery?
So Carle had to play with an injured parter, and because he had a bad 11 games playing next to a guy who required surgery, either he or the injured guy needs to be traded because they aren’t good enough? What about just how good they were for the previous 82 games? You don’t think that’s an over-reaction based purely on emotion?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe it is.
But how many Canucks and Bruins will be getting surgery next season? How many did the Flyers get last year?
Injuries are a factor, but it’s hard to say how big a factor it is in their play isn’t it?
Also, you pick and choose when the sample size is too small or too large. Why reference Boucher’s series against the Sabres if it is too small a sample size? Isn’t his career work that of a backup goaltender and not the solid starter that good defense needs to win?
I’m not trying to antagonize, don’t take it that way. I’m just wondering.
Injuries are a factor, but it’s hard to say how big a factor it is in their play isn’t it?
Absolutely. But when you have Carle and Meszaros, who played fantastic together in the regular season, then they play like crap over an 11 game sample, where one of them was injured, how can you draw the conclusion that they aren’t good enough to carry the team without Pronger, despite being able to when healthy and two weeks prior?
Also, you pick and choose when the sample size is too small or too large. Why reference Boucher’s series against the Sabres if it is too small a sample size? Isn’t his career work that of a backup goaltender and not the solid starter that good defense needs to win?
Comparing a small sample size to a small sample size is one thing. Boucher outplayed Miller in a 7 game series. Is that because of a small sample size? Almost certainly, but it happened.
Comparing Carle and Meszaros’ 11 game sample and saying they aren’t good enough, so they must be traded is taking 11 games and comparing to the rest of their careers. That’s the difference.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
There wasn’t a particularly large sample size from the regular season either. It was an interesting look, but I wasn’t going to crown them as amazing just yet, though I’d be willing to say very good.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
by DLJr on Jun 8, 2011 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is true.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Just want to keep you honest. But this whole thing has become confusing. I was going to clarify a couple of your statements, but I got lost within them and gave up.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
“I’ve lost track of my whole point” — Geoff Detweiler
by Eric T. on Jun 8, 2011 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
And I want people to keep me honest. If I say things that aren’t true, call me out. I have plenty to learn.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn’t say they must be traded. People were arguing about cap space and they certainly take a large chunk of it… If you bring in Bryz and lose one of them, I certainly think it could be a net gain.
Especially since a lot of the blame has been on the defense and not our goaltending. So why stick with the status-quo if it didn’t work?
Whether they were injured or not, this team couldn’t replicate what it did last year without Pronger. Since, as an organization we have put all our eggs into Chris’ basket now, why not keep it up? (Note: this is not my sentiment, but I feel like the organization has chosen to make their stand now… even if it could set the team back decades if they don’t win the cup in the next year or two.)
It all depends on who they move. I don’t think weakening a defense corps that is only getting older to get a better goalie is an improvement. I don’t think trading a two-way elite talent in the NHL is an improvement.
But if you traded Hartnell? If you traded Versteeg? I agree. Carle and Carter are crucial pieces, in my opinion.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I think our biggest problem is going to be that we have nobody in the organization close to replacing Pronger or Timonen. Does Carle have that potential?
We’re going to be in for a rude awakening when one, or both, is gone.
Let’s hope we are too busy celebrating a cup to worry about the bleak future after the Pronger era…
And that’s my entire point. I don’t know if Carle is good enough for that, but I know he’s good enough to be a top-4 right now. I know that he’s better than Erik Gustafsson and Kevin Marshall right now.
If the Flyers win a Cup next year, let Versteeg and Carle walk for all I care. Play Testwuide and Read and Gustafsson and Marshall. Whatever. But if you don’t win, you’re going to want to keep Carle for the very reason you mentioned.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Further, it would be like looking at Miller’s sample against PHI and concluding that he’s not good enough to win a playoff series or carry a team. (When he also, instructively, had injury problems.) Over that series, Miller wasn’t as good as he can be or needed to be. Long term? I’d take him over almost any goalie in the league, ignoring contracts.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Yup.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
You guys are so obsessed with statistics and numbers you should just forego watching and take the game off the ice and to an excel spread sheet.
And there it is, he’s tuned us out. We could argue for the rest of the month, not using a single number, and he’d reject it all because we’re “stat nerds” and have never watched a game in our lives. I’m not a stat nerd. Before I joined BSH, I didn’t understand this stuff at all. I’m interested in learning more about it because it’s a new way of looking at the game, and it shows me things I’ve never seen or understood before. But since I’m new to it, I still watch the games with my eyes. And even my eyes tell me your argument is full of shit. No numbers required.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
well you can’t really predict a human sport. too many variables. I see what he’s getting at. I could care less about corsi whatevers and all the other “advanced stats” since it doesn’t interest me at all. I prefer to just watch and enjoy. However, whenever I see players playing like crap or just not being worthwhile, it usually does coincide with those advanced stats.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
by Val_d'Or on Jun 8, 2011 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You can absolutely predict a human sport. You can’t predict with 100% certainty, but have you ever looked at PECOTA? It does a damn good job of it. Further, I was able to predict Hartnell and Leino’s production this year almost exactly accurate.
It doesn’t matter if you aren’t interested in Corsi. Nobody is offended. But if you aren’t interested, you also can’t dismiss it as garbage, then make up stuff that you think people do with it. And that’s what he’s doing.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t use the stats to predict. I use them to help explain and understand what I see. A lot of times there is correlation, as you say. It’s interesting to me to see what underlying things the stats can reveal sometimes. But I don’t use them to predict. Sports are unpredictable, and that’s what makes them worth watching.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
You guys are so obsessed with statistics and numbers you should just forego watching and take the game off the ice and to an excel spread sheet.
This is getting entertaining. I’m imagining TacoPal’s reaction at TGP if “field” replaced “ice” in that quote.
This is my Cerberus .sig, while the regular one is on the DL.
Hypocrite douche (not you guys).
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Money line:
Even though Minnesota seemingly followed a strategy of conceding shots (but limiting the quality of each chance), they’ve consistently outshot their opponents when Koivu is on the ice.
I wonder what that means…
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
He used to think shot quality existed. Now he’s at the point that he believes in shot distance and time since last shot. I’ll buy that.
His comment at the time of the Koivu signing doesn’t really reflect that. But it’s not really the point. He’s 100% seen the evidence that there is some sort of shot quality effect. He no doubt understands the logic that implicitly it has to matter. Instead of even defending his position he argues that shot quality has no effect and you’re basically an idiot if you disagree. And then on the other hand he has at least two posts where he himself articulates shot quality! I’m also sure he’s seen Vollman’s piece on it. I’m also sure he saw the fanpost on his own site that discussed the existence of shot quality. Instead he mischaracterizes a position, puts a cute little bet out there, and then acts like a pompous ass about the whole situation.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Instead of even defending his position he argues that shot quality has no effect and you’re basically an idiot if you disagree.
That’s not how I understand his point (there’s little to no year-to-year correlation proving a sustainable skill), but he is often caustic and you aren’t off on what he thinks of his detractors.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe if he took the time to calmly and clearly explain what changed his mind after his various admissions of shot quality we’d have understood. But his interactions with the COL and Caps fan bases have pretty much soured me on him. He does interesting work, but he thinks it (and himself) is much more impressive and important than it is.
Things like CBJ would be a successful franchise in any other division. Maybe they’d be better, I can buy that. But then again, they probably wouldn’t be. Look at their draft history, they don’t bring in talent. They’ve never been a very good team. I thought the analysis he did was pretty superficial and then he backs it up with a grandiose conclusion that one of the team’s carpets would actually be a success story but for a bit of geographic misfortune! Bullshit.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
that team may be the only team worse than the flyers at drafting. although the flyers have had some luck of late. Only Rick Nash is a success story over there. Brule so far has been a huge bust and isn’t on the team anymore, Zheredev at this point a bust, not on the team anymore, I’m sure we could go on and on regarding the BJ’s drafting history
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
I happen to agree that Columbus had the talent necessary to at least make the playoffs consistently.
However, I don’t think they failed to make the playoffs consistently was because of their divisional alignment. I blame MacLean and Hitchcock for that.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Really, they had the talent? when and whom? aside from 2 goalies who had one good year each, that team is full of AHL’ers and always has been. Off the top of your head name me some players not named Nash that they have drafted and kept?
Not fighting with you I’d just like to know how you feel they’ve had the talent when they’ve only had Rick Nash who’s worth a damn.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Also I just found something odd——
2006 3rd rd 85th overall pick for Columbus (from PHL) Tom Sestito
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
That has happened a lot in the Flyers history…. Just look at the current roster. Our 1st round pick in 96 goes to the Sharks in trade, gets transferred to the Jets/Coyotes and becomes Danny Briere. 3rd round pick in ’05 goes to Edmonton and they take Danny Syvret
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jun 8, 2011 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions
It has to be players they drafted and kept? I don’t see why, but on a team that has:
Nash – Vermette – Huselius
Umberger – Brassard – Voracek
Calvert – Pahlsson – Filatov
as a top-9? Yeah, the D is brutal, but they had complimentary pieces (Hejda, Commodore, Klesla) that were a decent 3-4-5.
They had holes, don’t get me wrong. The biggest holes are on D. But that top-9 is impressive.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess that’s where we are different, aside from Nash and Pahlsson there’s not much to write home about.
It doesn’t have to be players they’ve drafted and kept, I only brought that up to illustrate that the players they draft have for the most part been duds and that reflects on their team as a whole, in how they put the pieces together. If you have that many busts, you’re apt to put a less than stellar team on the ice which is exactly what they have done over the years.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Oh, their draft picks are largely terrible. But I think that top-9 has too many defensive centers (Umberger, Vermette, Pahlsson) and not enough offensive centers. Not saying they’re as well built as Nashville, but I think they’re consistently a 7-10 team in the West.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, 7-10 is mostly mediocre, but it’s an improvement. I just see a team that needed an award winning hot streak from their goalie to even get swept out of the first round of the playoffs. How many successful teams aren’t bringing in core players regularly?
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
How many successful teams aren’t bringing in core players regularly?
Very, very few.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions
And when was the last time CBJ supplemented their drafted core with a significant (i.e. core) UFA signing?
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
RJ Umberger?? Mathieu Garon??
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Those guys are significant? Umberger is a nice complimentary player, but I wouldn’t want him to be a core guy for my team (and he wasn’t for yours). Garon, that’s gotta be a joke.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
The double question mark was my sarcasm indicator.
Sorry.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Ah, I also have those. I refuse to use emoticons so I definitely use punctuation to tip off sarcasm. My bad.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
No problem. The @ code has gotten popular around here lately.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think Vermette is a 1C on a contender. Huselius is a borderline 1W. Umberger is ideally on the 3rd line and Filatov hasn’t lived up to his hype yet. Brassard and Voracek need to stay healthy and produce for 82 before I’m sold on them. There’s potential there, but I don’t think it’s impressive by any stretch. 50 point guys on the second line won’t even win the east.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I don’t disagree, but here’s how I see what I listed above:
2 LW – 2C – 1RW
3 LW – 2C – 2RW
3 LW – 3C – 3RW
They lack top-flight players, but they have nine top-9 forwards.
50 point guys on the second line won’t even win the east.
The Capitals only had three 50-point guys this year, and they won the East. That’s … wait… worse than 50-point guys on the second line winning the East.
:)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s fair enough, those guys do all belong in the top 9. But whereas you have lots of 2s and 3s when you look at CBJ, you see lots of 1s and 2s when you look at teams that win playoff series. It’s my belief that there is so much talent out there that a team can’t help but have some. It’s a matter of having more than one or two impact players if you really want to compete.
Buuuuurned. Caps definitely had a downturn in offense, but their D was also much better, as was their G. Hard to survive with the holes CBJ has when their “strength” consists of 2nd and 3rd line guys.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Absolutely agree. And I don’t think they’ve been good enough to win a playoff series – a solid top-9 can’t overcome a piss-poor defense – but I’ve always thought they had a foundation around which to build. But they’ve failed Brassard, Voracek, Zherdev, and Filatov.
Yeah, just wanted to give a dig at you for that.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Right, but how many teams don’t have a foundation? I guess people should have nailed down what “successful” meant before attacking Gabe, but in a league where the majority of the teams are “above .500” (thanks, half-wins), my definition of “successful” seems to be quite a bit higher than his.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Yeah, I agree.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe someone could get them into the playoffs, but I don’t think that it was a very good team. It’s easy to blame the GM for the talent and the coach for the execution. I’m not really sure how to separate it all, though.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
It’s easy to blame the GM for the talent and the coach for the execution. I’m not really sure how to separate it all, though.
I blame the GM for talent acquisition, and the coach for talent management. Filatov, Zherdev, and Mason in particular, were failed by their coaches.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Interesting. What were the failures? How and what kind of a different approach would have changed the way those guys turned out?
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Filatov wouldn’t play for Hitchcock because Hitch was still instituting the trap. Zherdev had similar problems. Mason’s goalie coach was a part-time guy, who worked from home. In Canada.
I just don’t think Hitchcock is the coach for an organization that drafts flashy forwards. Could part of that be on the GM? Yeah, because they’re expecting the coach to completely change players, which isn’t likely to happen. Or on the coach to completely change, which isn’t going to happen.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I hate Hitch, so I almost completely agree. I do have questions about a guy that can’t or won’t play a style of hockey they don’t like. That’s not generally the recipe for a successful player, unless they have ungodly talent. Are Filatov and Zherdev at that level? I don’t think Zherdev is, jury is still out on Filatov.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I generally agree, but when you build your team around those types of players, then tell them to play a trap… I’m going to side with the players. Columbus knew what they were getting when they drafted them. If you don’t want that, don’t draft em.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Definitely agree there. It’s why I thought it was lame for MIN to fire Richards. They brought him in to play an up-temp, aggressive offense. Who did they have to do that? Koivu and Burns? They both played well for him! Either stick with him and wait to get Granlund and some more skill guys, or don’t even bother with him.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
And I get that what he measures doesn’t have much correlation. I don’t know what his response is to the fact that coaches change and adjust to what other teams do well. I don’t know what his response is to the fact that he may not be measuring shot quality in an accurate enough way to really pick up the salient data. I know he’s been confronted with these. He just hasn’t shown any interest in explaining his side. It’s much more fun to be condescending.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
This is all completely true.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions
isn’t a goalie playing in front of a better defense getting a lot more "easy" shots from worse angles? Numbers can be deceiving, that why you can’t put all your trust in them.
Actually, we have numbers for that too. You can calculate league-wide how often players score from any given location and type of shot (snap/slap/etc). Then you can use that to calculate whether a team gave up more dangerous shots on average than another team.
Know what you find? The Flyers goalies faced shots that were more dangerous than the league average, and more dangerous than the shots Phoenix’s goalies faced.
Define Dangerous
Not sniping, just curious. Is “danger” a measurement of league-wide, what percentage of shots from point X ended up in the net?
Tangentially, isn’t “danger” similar to “quality” if we think of a “quality shot” as being dangerous or having a high chance of scoring relative to other shots?
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
The way this table was generated:
For every shot, look at its location on the ice and its type (snap/slap/wrist/etc). Look at what percent of shots league-wide of that type went in from that location. Sum over all of the shots and you get the total expected goals that an average goalie would have allowed on those shots. Divide by the number of shots and you get the expected save percentage that the average goalie would have.
Divide the league-wide average save percentage by that number and you have a shot quality factor for how much more dangerous (likely to go in) the average shot that team allowed was than the average shots league-wide.
Shot quality, as Geoff is using it, is distinct from shot location. Shot quality is about whether teams or players systematically score more often from that given location than you would expect from an average team or player who is shooting from that same spot.
Thanks
I’m gonna have to chew on that “systematically” business a while… but at least now I understand what ‘dangerous’ is in this context.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Also...
The link to the table didn’t work for me, so I had to ask. If the answer was in the table, I apologize for making you explain it again.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Although until the metric takes into account whose stick the puck is coming off of I’ll be skeptical. A Stamkos shot from the same spot as a Dominick Moore shot is not equal quality.
The problem, IMO, with quality is that it’s almost impossible to model. I hate when people say it doesn’t matter, because logically it has to matter, and in micro analysis it absolutely does matter. The issue is whether teams can control that over the long run, but that even isn’t clear cut. How does coaching play out? How does line matching impact it? How do adjustments and systems impact it? Etc. It’s a really complex issue that has a lot of nuance that is usually ignored in the debate, by both sides. I think Vollman wrote a pretty solid piece addressing shot quality and basically concluded that it exists, but except for teams at the extreme it’s not a huge factor and is generally less of a factor than shot quantity.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
A Stamkos shot from the same spot as a Dominick Moore shot is not equal quality.
This is the question. If anyone can prove that, it’d be a very interesting result. But no one has found a basis for that being true yet.
I might be wrong, but was Vollman differentiating between shot quality and shot distance (he might have termed this differently, saying "shots from dangerous areas)? Some players are good at finding the danger areas and getting a lot of shots from, and that is what makes them a dangerous scorer. That doesn’t mean a shot by Dan Carcillo is worse than a shot from Danny Briere in that area, but that Carcillo isn’t talented enough to get to those areas often as Danny.
I think you’ve probably seen these arguments already, but I don’t see an acknowledgement of them in your argument for shot quality. We are defining shot quality in a very restricted way; it’s not by team (or team defense), or by distance but whether you’re better off having certain players rather than others shooting from identical spots on the ice.
No, I think absolutely Stamkos is better at finding open shots and a better shooter than Dominick Moore. With the exception of possible shootout artists, I’ll give the third line players any shot on the ice over their analogous first line player. I know there’s no proof, and you can disagree, but I would 100% rather have Carcillo shoot from anywhere than have Briere shoot from there. I’d probably even spot Carcillo “20% quality” however you define it. Briere at the top of the circles open look, I’ll give Carcillo right about the faceoff dot.
You define “quality,” in both competition and shot, in a way that does not jibe with the normal usage of “quality.” Thus, people get to say “shot quality is BS” and condescend to those that disagree. If it’s not quality, find another name. Or be completely forthright and honest that it’s a seriously lacking definition of real world shot quality.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I’d be for finding another word for it, but not because quality is a misnomer. “Can quality of a shot from a certain spot be controlled?” I think stat geeks have just decided to be stubborn about the semantics.
As far the the forthright and honest background for these things, I’m all for it. It doesn’t always help. People wont’ always to the prerequisite reading. It’s a tough issue, and usually people are too dismissive in their explanations of the value of certain statistics.
For Stamkos, how are you defining “better shooter,” then?
The little heel drag he does before he releases his shot, measured in millimeters / millisecond. IF he does it at a higher velocity than Dominic Moore, it’s a higher quality shot.
by hebrew hammer on Jun 8, 2011 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree that some people will choose not to inform themselves. Welcome to the problems with democracy.
I think Stamkos’ shot is more accurate, with a quicker release, with more power behind it with less wind up. All of these things contribute to shot quality. So does the ability of the shooter to change the angle at the last split-second, and the ability of the shooter to hide the angle the puck comes off the stick. Some people are just better at these things.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
But doesn’t that show in his 15.9% shooting percentage?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
No, that’s confounded with where he shoots from.
It would show in shooting a higher percentage than you would expect a league-average player to shoot from those ice positions.
Ah. I’m an idiot.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s a step in the right direction if you factor it into the analysis, but the list of Sh% leaders does include a lot of guys that make their living in the crease. You do have to consider more than Sh%.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
a) If we knew in advance which goalie was going to steal a bunch of games in the playoffs, we’d pay handsomely for him. But we don’t — remember, the guy we’re trading for had a horrid playoffs himself.
b) Ryan Miller isn’t the only reason that series went 7 games. This play, where no Flyer skater was within 15 feet of a Sabre, is the only reason you’re giving credit to Miller for a 1-0 win in game one instead of cheering Bob for a scoreless regulation and seeing what happens in OT. And one period later, Bob was pulled, benched, demoted, and losing his job for the next five years. This play, where half the team isn’t even in the picture as Boucher is completely hung out to dry, is the only reason you’re giving credit to Miller for a 1-0 win in game four instead of agreeing that Boucher outplayed him. W and L as the only way to evaluate goalies means ignoring the fact that most of what happens is out of their control.
And one period later, Bob was pulled, benched, demoted, and losing his job for the next five years.
Fuck.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
That five year time line was the first thing I thought of when I learned the news. That still leaves us with a relatively young Bob in five years though, to take over.
Very true, but if what Jen said about him not being waiver exempt is true, we’re fucked. That’s five years of Bob sitting on his ass, not playing hockey. Might as well trade him.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions
He’s not. CapGeek did the math for me.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
So, we’re fucked and might as well trade Bob then, right?
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Why? Let him start 20-30 games a year behind Bryz (in the situation where that signing actually happens) for two years, then re-evaluate. He’s young, he needs more adapting to the NA game and the US in general which he can get not being a full-time starter.
I’d be fine with that, but Holmgren’s quote makes me think otherwise.
I’ve said numerous times, that I really like Sergei and that he’s got a really bright future as a Flyer, so we don’t want to lose track of that. Having said that, if we can sign Ilya, he’s a guy that is used to the workload. So there’s a little bit of give and take there. He played 70 in Phoenix… maybe he can play 65 here with I assume easier travel than they have in Phoenix, maybe he can play more than 70.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Homer's Advocate
I’ve said numerous times, that I really like Sergei and that he’s got a really bright future as a Flyer, so we don’t want to lose track of that.
I take it as meaning they want Ilya to be the starter and Bob can be the backup to focus on learning the game, improving his technique, and being a true ace by the time Bryzgalov is gone.
Having said that, if we can sign Ilya, he’s a guy that is used to the workload. So there’s a little bit of give and take there.
Ilya can play a lot of games, which Bob has not proven he can do yet. You want someone who can start a lot of games if need be, and Bob won’t have to worry about carrying the team like he did in October and November. But a fresher Bob will be a better Bob, no doubt.
The only thing that makes me uncomfortable is the 65-70 games thing.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
I read Homer’s statement as just the requisite slathering of a free agent. He has to tell the “journalist” something to fill his column inches. Someone tell me when was the last time a Flyer goalie started 65 games or more in a season?
Someone tell me when was the last time a Flyer goalie started 65 games or more in a season?
Probably last time we actually had a legit goalie.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
66 games in 86-87, the most games in one season for his career. That may be the last time that I can recall.
Someone tell me when was the last time a Flyer goalie started 65 games or more in a season?
That would require:
1) That our goalies never get injured.
2) That our goalies never have a bad outing that gets them pulled and demoted until the new starter has a bad outing of his own.
So I’d say Hextall.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
You might as well just wallow in despair for the next 30 years (or until Katchis completes her mission.)
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
If you were someone who advocated for putting him in the AHL, then yes.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, I don’t want him in the AHL, but if Holmgren says Bryzgalov would start 65-70 games for the Flyers, I don’t want Bob sitting on the bench for all but 12-17 of them.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m fine w/ Bob allotted 30 or so games per year for the next two years as that gives him a little more time to acclimate to the rigors of the NHL. Assuming Bryz stays healthy. Besides, as a back up for two years means his next contract will be cheaper. I don’t advocate trading him, at least not now.
My stance on the goaltending aside, I will also point the finger at the defense. Solid defense is just as important – that’s why Brodeur and the Devils haven’t done shit since Stevens & Niedermayer left. It was also just as responsible for our loss to the Blackhawks. Look at the 3 games in Chicago that we lost. Joel Quenneville was a genius for playing up to our weaknesses on D – the 3rd pairing of Krajicek & Bartulis. He took advantage of last change and we got burned for it almost every time those 2 were on Chicago ice. That said, Chicago also scored when Timonen-Coburn & Pronger-Carle were on the ice as well. Leighton – and Boucher – both shit the bed at an alarming rate that series. Eager’s GWG in Game 2 proved that. Had our 3rd pairing and the goaltending been just a little better, no one here (myself included) would be bitching about a now 36-year Cup drought.
You cannot make arguments against stats on this site plain and simple. 100% someone will argue with you, thats a stat see what I did there. However I absolutely agree with you. I have serious issues with any predictive analysis that tries to “prove” how many goals, hits, TD’s or whatever a team will give up based on stats from the year before. If sports were simply about stats then they would not even have to play the games. Under the stats prove everything hypothesis used so frequently here you would just have to look at the teams stats the year before add and subtract their off season moves, and then run your spreadsheets and you will know who the champs for that particular sport will be the next year. However in the real world it doesn’t work that way, you actually have to play the games you can’t say well goalie X will only give up Y amount of goals next year because last year he saved Z %. NO ONE can predict future performance with the absolute certainty that some people claim here.
All the stat wonks here say the same thing you only need serviceable goaltending, which they say we had based on their numbers, with good O and good D and you will win. However the Mack Truck sized hole they ignore in their hypothesis is that if Boucher provided that this post season why am I not making plans to go to game 4 tonight at the WFC? Their snarky retort, which is usually backed up with some silly number the NHL doesnt even track, is well so and so didnt score in his offensive zone starts etc etc etc. So the obvious solution is we should keep the same players who did not perform in the playoffs and sign a much cheaper goalie so we can afford said non-perfomer.
Furthermore the definition of insanity is performering the same task over and over and expecting a different outcome…the masthead even says searching for goaltending since 87! Then the team goes out and tries to get a real number 1 goalie and all the stat nerds say no he isnt worth it, my corsi number says it was all Versteeg or Carter or whoever so we shouldnt get a new goale we should sign a cheap goalie so we can afford the same skaters that didnt get it done last year.
I have a novel idea lets try something new like a great goalie with decent supporting cast and see what that gets us. Maybe a Stanley Cup, maybe not I do not know but I do know they will have to actually play the games to find out, you simply can’t run a spreadsheet and declare a champ.
by Highaltitude784 on Jun 8, 2011 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m not a stat wonk. I run the site. I started the site. I failed Algebra 1 in 9th grade.
But at some point, facts are facts and can’t be argued with. It’s like a poltical debate: if we can’t even agree on the facts, how can we have a legit debate on something?
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I have serious issues with any predictive analysis that tries to "prove" how many goals, hits, TD’s or whatever a team will give up based on stats from the year before.
That’s not what anybody did. In fact, all I did was show that a goalie who stops the percent of shots evidenced by Ilya Bryzgalov’s talent level would only have been 4 goals better last year. If the framing was incorrect, I apologize, but I don’t see how you can disagree with analysis based on Bryzgalov’s talent and applying the percentage of shots he stops to the number of shots the Flyers faced.
Under the stats prove everything hypothesis used so frequently here
Please don’t insult us. This is never what anybody has said.
The rest of your comment is just bashing the good work everyone here does because you don’t understand it. That’s not an indictment of us, that’s an indictment of you.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ironically, the article he’s commenting on doesn’t have an ounce of statistical backup in it. Unless the salary cap is a stat…?
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Does it have numbers in it? Then yes.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Wait, I actually used stats above. To gin up excitement about Bryzgalov. Hm.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
You pointed out facts, like Brygalov had 7 SO’s last season. Geoff would have said that he has a CorsiCom of 6.859 and his luck factor was a solid 84.
Yes thats /s
Samesis
by JpH89 on Jun 8, 2011 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
THAT is where I always have issues. The common useage of ‘stats’ is actually not. It is simply data (or facts) as used. Once you make a relating correlation – as is sometimes done, no doubt, but less frequently – then and only then is it statistical analysis. Facts are great, and immutable. Statistics, however, are somewhat arguable by definition (even in the case of 100% correlation, due to secondary factors).
And that’s the last I’ll say about it. I have my assignment from the stat-heads already, so now I gotta go learn what Corsi really means (I always thought it was a short-legged dog …)
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 8, 2011 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
And before anyone gets upset – Eric, Geoff, etc – YES you guys have done correlative studies that DO count as statistics. But pure data (ESS%, for example) is NOT stats, per se. It is simply data. As data, it is irrefutable. Once you take said data, and use other data, and try to make a relationship defined between those two sets of data – you have done statistics. And at that point, you may NOT say it is infallible. Merely that there is a likelihood of the correlation.
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 8, 2011 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
And lastly … I see that this argument has been continued below, but I’m already behind, so I’m done. Red Army – it’s all you.
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 8, 2011 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
You put it better than I did.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I think this is very well put.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I wasnt insulting or bashing anybody, if you took it that way I am sorry.
by Highaltitude784 on Jun 8, 2011 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
How many times did you say “stat nerds”?
I don’t think the problem is reception, so I don’t accept your half-assed apology.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
NO ONE can predict future performance with the absolute certainty that some people claim here.
I don’t think any one claims that here. Please don’t misrepresent some of the great work done here with extremes. It belittles the work and makes you look foolhardy.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
by DLJr on Jun 8, 2011 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
All the stat wonks here say the same thing you only need serviceable goaltending, which they say we had based on their numbers, with good O and good D and you will win. However the Mack Truck sized hole they ignore in their hypothesis is that if Boucher provided that this post season why am I not making plans to go to game 4 tonight at the WFC?
This comment suggests that our team played good O and D against Boston. This makes me laugh. I’m not trying to exempt our goaltending from fault or anything, but the loss to Boston was a complete team failure.
That said, trying a different approach with a legit starting goalie isn’t a terrible idea. I’m just afraid of what we have to give up to do it.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
I agree the loss to Boston was a “team” failure so I dont understand the fear of getting rid of guys that failed. If player Y didn’t help you win why is getting rid of him so bad?
by Highaltitude784 on Jun 8, 2011 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Because you’re replacing him with player Z who is demonstrably worse.
It’s not like people are saying “boy, I wish we could move Carle to give Gustafsson a chance because I’m really excited about him”.
Demonstrably worse then not winning a stanley cup? Must be those numbers things I don’t understand again. I get it now keep player X who did not help you win so maybe he can help you win next year because his stats say he should help more then player Y. Got it.
by Highaltitude784 on Jun 8, 2011 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
So now you’re arguing that: Any player who hasn’t won a Cup is equally helpful as any player who hasn’t won a Stanley Cup? And you shouldn’t keep Claude Giroux because his stats say he should help more than Matt Clackson?
If you want to speak in sarcasm and generalities, so be it. But you aren’t helping your cause at all.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m puzzled.
I thought my claim that Gustafsson was demonstrably worse than Carle would be pretty easily agreed on. I’d make the same claim for, say, Hartnell and Wellwood, or Nodl and Holmstrom. Are you disagreeing?
It sure does sound like you’re suggesting that every team that doesn’t win the cup should try getting rid of all of their players because they know those players didn’t win. I can’t imagine that’s what you mean, but it’s how it sounds.
Sometimes very good teams don’t win the cup. It happens. It doesn’t mean the team needs to be blown up.
by Eric T. on Jun 8, 2011 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Like, the 2010-11 Boston Bruins.
/gocanucks
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
You’re saying this like it’s completely unreasonable, and not how player evaluation actually works both within the league and among fans.
Yeah, I get annoyed at people who say “trade Green” or “trade Semin”. For what??? There’s almost no realistic trade that makes the team better in the short run, and possibly not in the long run, either.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Well if the team as a whole failed, let’s ditch them all and start over!
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Don’t hold your breath – in order to sign Bryz, that’s where we’re heading.
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 9, 2011 12:45 AM EDT up reply actions
That said, trying a different approach with a legit starting goalie isn’t a terrible idea. I’m just afraid of what we have to give up to do it.
And that’s the whole point. The “stats wonks” here don’t mind the move, they mind the move given what it could mean as far as the necessary subtraction to fit under the cap goes. I think there are moves that people would be happy with, and moves that they wouldn’t.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
by DLJr on Jun 8, 2011 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Which is what us “stat nerds” have been saying all along. Hartnell for Bryz in a heartbeat. Carter for Bryz? No way.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
But you’re a stat nerd. It doesn’t matter what you’ve been saying all along, you used stats at some point to do it, so therefore it’s wrong and stupid.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
by hintzy64 on Jun 8, 2011 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
And you smell bad, too.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
by hintzy64 on Jun 8, 2011 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
:(
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
You forgot to tell him to put on pants!!! :)
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 8, 2011 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Like I said, I’d love a new car. I want it to talk to me, like Don’s car. But at what price?
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Bernadette? You miss her huh? She hasn’t been the same since you charge 12 devices simultaneously on the drive up to Glens Falls.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
I do. We had a special bond. I sucked all kinds of electric juice out of her.
/lol
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
You cannot make arguments against stats on this site plain and simple.
Listen, stats are objective and fact. Indisputable. Your interpretation of them, however, is not. That’s where all this begins.
It’s pretty hard to argue against Geoff and his numbers, but a good start is to read up on all the articles linked to. If you understand the drawbacks and limitations of each study, well, use that as a starting point.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Listen, stats are objective and fact. Indisputable.
This is where you piss people off. The math may be indisputable, you can’t question the average of a series of numbers (assuming it’s done correctly). But you start with Corsi, a fact. Just counting occurrences. Then you take the leap and call it “Quality of Competition” and you still want to call it a fact. It’s not just interpretation of what it means, IMO, it goes to the heart of whether the stat is “fact” or not. Interpretation would be “well player X has .05 higher QComp and .03 higher QTeam than player Y, so I still conclude he’s better because of the positive delta.” Think about how Dirk discussed the QComp/Team stats with Lidstrom and Weber. That’s interpretation. I don’t think interpretation includes whether or not QComp is what it says it is, and I’m certain that most of the high ranking stats mafia doesn’t use it that way. They built assumptions into QComp stats and then try to pass them off as “fact” because they are mathematically ascertained.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I don’t think interpretation includes whether or not QComp is what it says it is,
Alright. I do, for the record, since to me Corsi is just shot differential, nothing more, and good Corsi I suppose we generally interpret as “good competition,” for example. I don’t think competition metrics are facts, but whoever argues against them better have pretty good reasons why the aren’t accurate.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Hint to everyone: Line combinations are a good argument in these cases.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
As are matching, systems, coaching strategies. And ultimately, if you think QComp is accurate in terms of adjudging the quality of a player, then you should admit that the way to determine who the best player in the NHL is would be to just rank them in terms of Corsi, or Corsi Rel, whichever you prefer. That would have made Peter Regin the second “best quality” player in the NHL last year!
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I don’t think anybody is saying one metric is the definitive proof of how to rank players. If they do, I don’t want them to be lumped in with us “statistical analysts”.
Show me a guy who can outshoot his difficult opposition while starting in a difficult position AND score, and I’ll tell you who the best players are. Combine metrics to get a more well rounded look.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
People say it. Reputable people say it. I completely agree with you but reputable people rely on single stats to make broad claims that aren’t really supported by the data. It happens pretty regularly. The entire debate that spawned Gabe’s $100 bet is an example. Staal carrying the Pens in the playoffs is another.
Obviously you need to look at the stats, and use what you see, and use a dose of common sense if you really want to get an accurate picture of a guy.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Reputable people say you can rank the best played based on a single category? Who are these people, and how are they still deemed “reputable”?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
The entire Michal Neuvirth is “a legitimately below average goaltender” debate, which I think you saw, started from Neuvirth being like .002 or .003 below the average for ESSV% with about half a season over.
There’s also a quote from Gabe around that “Corsi Rel is probably the single best stat to evaluate an individual player.” That’s not saying it’s the be all, one stat to rule them, but I do think it overstates the importance of the stat and really misleads.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Suppose we look at his Relative Corsi, which takes a player’s shooting plus/minus — the number of shots his team takes while he’s on the ice minus the number of shots it allows — and compares it to what happens when he’s off the ice. Really, everything a player does should be related to shot creation or prevention. Relative Corsi accounts for the quality of a player’s teammates (and, implicitly, that of his opposition) — Gabriel Desjardins has called it “the best single statistic we have to evaluate a player’s performance.”
So he voted for Corsi Rel, before he voted against it.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Heh. This doesn’t even fall in the “the facts have changed so my position has changed” category, since there are no facts here, just opinion and interpretation.
The Neuvirth debate was very odd, yes
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think interpretation includes whether or not QComp is what it says it is, and I’m certain that most of the high ranking stats mafia doesn’t use it that way.
I don’t know whether you picked that one at random, but it’s interesting that we’ve had two lengthy (and largely non-mathematical) debates this week about how we interpret and use the various competition metrics.
QComp is one of the ones that I dispute the most. It’s not really random. I’ve gotten into it with RAL a few times regarding the veracity of Quality stats.
Aside from Quality stats, there aren’t a lot that have those built in leaps and assumptions. It’s more about how much weight you ascribe to ESS% when discussing goalies, for example.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I was wondering if there was some history there. I’ll have to search for it.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
What, us and Qcomp? Maybe it was more Knee High but I know I’ve gotten into my Quality metric complaints on several occasions over at Japers’ Rink.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
I’ve definitely seen that enough to know that I’m better off not addressing the topic.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions
I can think of others.
We say Leino was sheltered because he had a 62.3% OZ%. If we instead said Leino started 316/1647 (19%) of his shifts with an offensive zone faceoff, 191/1647 (12%) of his shifts with a defensive zone faceoff, and 1140/1647 (69%) of his shifts in other situations, it might be clear that we’re making an assumption about how important the extra two offensive zone faceoffs per game are and/or how much they reflect what types of on-the-fly situations he might have been sent out for.
Actually, cataloguing assumptions might make for an interesting post.
Interesting post for sure. I also had briefly gotten into a zone start debate with Knee High (not sure if you have ran into him) about zone starts but he said that since neutral zone starts have no impact on Corsi, they’re agnostic I think was his term, it doesn’t matter if we cut them. I never pushed back that much but when you see the vast majority of FO coming in the neutral zone (or on the fly) then maybe I should question them more.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Yeah, it’s actually not that there are a ton of neutral zone faceoffs; it’s that half the shifts start on the fly. The assumption we’re making is that either the on-the-fly shifts don’t matter, or that they go in the same direction as the faceoff shifts.
I think that’s probably a fine assumption, and I use OZ% all the time. But it’s an assumption. I can imagine that a player who is great at faceoffs but not great on defense might be used for defensive zone faceoffs but not for on-the-fly shifts where the other team has control of the puck.
I’d actually imagine that the majority of on the fly shifts start with puck being broken out of the other end. It’s not exactly an O zone FO, but it’s an advantageous territorial start. Though at the same time, it frequently means you are starting at a possession disadvantage and you may be facing a controlled break out up the ice. That can be a greater or lesser disadvantage, depending on who you are playing against. I’d love to know how this stuff all factors in but I don’t think we’re close to that.
I agree that for now it’s a decent assumption, I’d just like to see more discussion of the limitations and context of a lot of the stats that are thrown around. I agree with your example, I also thinks it means a guy that can play solid D but isn’t a great FO guy (I’m thinking of Marcus Johansson on the Caps) might get sent out a lot of times on the fly against certain lines, but those examples both depend on how rigorously a coach matches.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Just read a excerpt from Lebrun today...
Stating that Bryzgalov’s contract demands were “off the charts”. Apparently, he wants to be one of the highest paid players in the league, not just goaltenders.
And a team with almost 9 million dollars in cap space said no. Wonderful.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Then we’ll just trade him to Pittsburgh for another third rounder
by OrangeNblacK on Jun 8, 2011 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, to be fair, the Coyotes are not the average team when it comes to finances.
But yeah.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions
I wish they’d wait and see what Vancouver wants for Schneider. Probably prospects, which we could land from Toronto/Edmonton/Islanders while cutting cap by getting rid of some (not all) of the players previously discussed (Carle, Coburn, Hartnell, Carter, etc.). Maybe it’s just me, but I’d be much more excited about them landing Schneider. A team being forced to trade a young goalie with that much talent never happens… I think he’s proven over the past 2 years that he’s the real deal (much moreso than Bob) Plus he’ll only cost $800K next year….Double PLUS…HE’S AMERICAN! USA USA USA! Thoughts?
Schneider is young and needs to develop(like Bobs), Last year was his only REAL amount of significant playing time. If we truly NEED a goalie(which we don’t), then it would have to be a proven vet.
Samesis
I’d say Schneider has completed most of his development. He’s 25, and had plenty of seasoning as a #1 in the AHL before his rookie year.
That’s not to say he’s necessarily the answer for a Cup-run team. But if I were Phoenix, for example, I’d take him as a starter immediately.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
Closing Eyes, Hoping for Best, Waiting for Homer to dance.
"Call me dumb, call me stupid, whatever. I block shots."
@boknows71
Briggy is one of my favorite players outside the Flyers. And despite his few “stereotypical” Russian flaws(takes nights off, hates the media), he is one of the top 5 goalies in the NHL. And I still think goalies are over-rated, and I don’t the idea of us loosing Carter for him(especially if its a cap move and we can’t get anything for Carter, like Gagne last year). But still, this IS the best goalie we have had in a while, since I was born even. And no matter what, thats still exciting.
Samesis
If, and that’s a big if, we end up trading Carter there’s no way we don’t get a good return for him. Big difference in an injury-prone veteran two-way forward and a perennial 40 goal threat in his prime.
Still, the return will be lower then what we would have gotten before we were greatly over the cap.
Samesis
Maybe. But I believe the only way he goes is if we’re getting what is a legitimate return for him. If we really need to dump salary for less than ideal trades there are other ways to do it (Versteeg, one of Carle/Coburn, SHELLEY)
I Wish we could trade Carle and Hartnell and get a 1st and a 3rd for them. Then we shed almost $8 mill, lose two guys that are replaceable, and get a 1st out of it.
Samesis
Yeah.. we can wish for a lot of things. I just hope that Homer is seriously looking into moving Harts and that he’s consider waiving his NTC. Getting rid of Hartnell’s contract would enable us to get better, he is replaceable. Being forced to get rid of Carle/Coburn and Versteeg and Leino or something along those lines leaves it very questionable that we’ll be a better team.
Keeping Carle past this season isn’t going to be possible we have to come to that realization. JVR, Coburn and Carle are all up next year. One won’t be back.
Why not?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions
JVR can potentially get a 2million dollar raise signing at or around what Giroux is getting. Meaning Coburn and Carle would have to get some kind oft paycut to fit them. I don’t see UFA’s don’t usually taking paycuts at the ages of 26-28 when the entire league can offer them equal or more valued contracts.
Almost everyone coming off their last RFA contract gets a raise. Usually a substantial one.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
But Versteeg’s contract is up, the cap will increase some more, Timonen may retire…
You have no idea what will happen, nor what has to happen.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Sure you have no idea what will happen but either way you going to lose one key roster player to make it all workout. Losing one guy to the cap each year is pretty much the norm. You can’t keep everyone.
So why do I have to accept one of Matt Carle, Braydon Coburn, or JVR won’t be back?
That’s what I took issue with. It could easily be Versteeg, Hartnell, Briere, Carter, etc.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions
When two guys hit UFA at the same position bringing both back on a cap strapped team is the most likely scenario. Also the forward depth is going to take the hit this year with Z and Leino walking I don’t think can spare the room up front losing another 1-2 guys again next year. It would be the D’s turn.
When you’d be left with two 37 year old D, one of whom expires the next season, it doesn’ tmake much sense to:
10: Get meszaros
11: Let Carle walk
12: Replace Timonen
Why keep doing the dance? Either you prepared for Pronger and Timonen’s decline, or you’re swinging like a pendulum without a plan.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I am hoping one of the young guys Marshall, Bourdon, Gus, ….. can become the next Carle/Coburn/Mez on better contracts when that happens. it is time for them to step up. Or we can get some stop gap good value D-man with the cap space freed up by moving both Hartnell and Carle. I haven’t or won’t bother looking at names just yet. But those are some options get a 26-28 guy who is up now at half the price.
All I’m saying is that I do not have to accept one of JVR, Coburn, and Carle will be gone, so we might as well trade Carle now.
Which was your contention
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Scott Hartnell. Yes.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed I just like the extra room provide by also moving Carle. Have you looked at the CAP GEEK. you can really do a lot with that money. Could find a UFA Carle type player at 2 million? Maybe
And I think Carle is a bargain at $3.4 million. He was your highest scoring Dman at 5-on-5 while getting second-line competition in second-pairing situations. And people say that’s not good enough.
Why do we want to trade good players?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, one trades good players because you can’t get a decent return on a bad one, Zhitnik trade notwithstanding.
You don’t go around saying, “Damn, I want to get rid of my best guys! Any takers?” but you have to give to get. So you look at salary, remaining term, and potential return.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Absolutely. And how does that come up with a top-4 defensemen on a team with two 36 year old Dmen?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Without researching names, perhaps there is a d-man on some team that plays top-4 now, or is ready to play top-4, and makes a bit less than Carle, say 2.5? Even if he’s not quite as good, the idea is to find the definition of “good enough.”
I mean, it’s all hypothetical, but Carle’s salary and the fact that he’s a good d-man make him trade-able.
Not saying he MUST go, but he might be a good option to shop.
We could just disagree with each other, too :-)
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. I’m not saying he’s untouchable or that he’s on a bargain contract. Nor am I saying there are better players for less money.
He’s definitely more trade-able than Hartnell, but anybody that has more trade value is inherently a better player to have on your roster. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t have trade value.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
It is a tough choice but sometimes those choices have to be made for the better of the team. Not everyone is going to be on the roster for their entire career. Some trades are classified as win win. Like trading Recchi for LeClair and Desajardin. Recchi was a hell of a player and still is.
haha, yeah?
And sometimes you trade a good player for a really bad player. Like trading for Dan Carcillo. Scottie Upshall was a hell of a player and still is.
I don’t understand your point.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Absolutely. And you can trade good players and get worse as a team by trading them.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Tom Poti is at like 2.8. You guys can have him.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Jeff Schultz is a hair more than that.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
But I’d like to keep Schultz.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
Don’t blame you at all for that. That’s why we want him more :-)
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions
For Carle? Send ’em both!
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Technically you are correct.
That’s the very best kind of correct.
by Eric T. on Jun 8, 2011 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m still on the fence about this. I don’t know if it is a good idea or not. I mean seriously it hasn’t worked not having a legit #1 goalie so may as well try this route.
Who knows in the long run if it will work out. Guess we’re about to find out.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Haven’t we had guys who were supposed to be legit #1 goalies though? Vanbiesbrouck? Cechmanek? Biron? Now that I think about it more, I feel like I remember Biron being heralded as the veteran goalie who was going to come in and lead us to the Cup. Am I imagining that? (It’s entirely possible, I just bring it up to see what you guys remember.)
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Beezer certainly was a proven #1 but I guess by the time he got here he was too far removed from top form.
Cechmanek was kind of an unknown, and as much as he had moments of playing well he didn’t quite have that top class #1 feeling.
Biron was a backup, a good backup, but not a proven #1. He came here to try to prove he was a #1.. and he was okay.
They were all.. okay.
Cechmanek was legit. Beezer was one of the best during his generation of goalies (maybe not so much when he got here). And Biron was better here than most will give him credit for.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
Biron was decent, he just made bad decisions with the puck.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
The one thing I hated about Biron was how he never could hug the post. Like, his pads had magnets in them that would retract to always be at least 3 inches from the pipe.
Samesis
Why didn’t you reverse the polarity of them?
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
I didn’t think Biron was as bad as the rap he got. But I have a feeling he was a stop gap while they waited for a young guy to emerge. Biron was and never will be a legit starter. Hell he couldn’t even be the starter in fucking long island!
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
It also isn’t 2007. Biron was most certainly a #1 in the 07/08 season, or at least put up #1 type numbers.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
He only started 59 if it makes you feel better. But that’s kind of my point. He had a very average 08/09…and also people will remember what they want to…for instance that Cech was crazy as opposed to the elite numbers he put up while he was here.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
Which is my point. We’re talking about it being over 20 years since we had a legit #1 goalie instead of a tandem, and when I dug through the cobwebs I found three guys who were supposed to be just that before the fanbase tore them to pieces. We’re very very very rough on goalies here.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
I’m hoping Bryz’ asking price is driven down by the fact that most of the teams with a cup challenging roster that need a goalie are all pretty close to the cap anyways.
If I wanted to play elsewhere I’d make my demands to my current team absurd as well.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
moving forward
I don’t need to continue to discuss the need versus perceived need of goaltending we been through this all before and I am opposed to this move and in the camp goaltending overrated and wouldn’t have made a difference this year. I hate beating the dead horse or for that matter any horse, horse beating is not cool dead or alive. So moving forward…..
What is done is done so where do we go from here assuming we are going to sign Brzy as Homer has stated he intends to do.Thinking outside or just off to the side of the box I feel the best option is move BOTH Hartnell and Carle all the details can be found here on my breakdown fanpost. Here is the link.
http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2011/6/8/2213288/making-room-from-brzy-the-breakdown
I think some people will be quite surprised by the potential outcome.
Bryz was over worked in Phoenix. Similar to what Bob ran into towards the end of the year. I also think being over worked could have attributed to Ray Emerys injury but thats a different subject.
Bryz has played close to 70 games for 3 years in a row now and 55 in his first season with Phoenix. That’s and absolute work horse. But given that we have Bob to ease the workload we should be able to have Bryz nice and ready for the playoffs.
I think if you put our defense at full strength in front of Bryz instead of Phoenix’s its not even comparable. Everyone points at Bryz’s playoff stats and says he was garbage. Well in my opinion the yotes were just far out classed, again. Bryz didn’t play well by any means, no, but I’m pretty sure he knew the team in front of him couldn’t beat the wings.
SIGN UP THE HORSE!
Devils Advocate
The upside to this move is that BOB as much as I like him is still a huge question mark. I am not sure if the Flyers have time to wait for him to come into his own. We wasted years in the past hoping guys like Boosh, Esche, and Nitty would develop into the solid starter we have been without. We don’t have that kind of time with Pronger and Kimmo aging. We are primed now. What if BOB pulled a Steve Mason and we were left with Leighton as the starter next season and doesn’t catch lightning in a bottle we are fucked another year down the drain. I think BOB can be the guy but all the other moves we have made getting Pronger getting Versteeg puts us in a win now mode. The future is bleak (no picks no prospects) and that is a big gamble risking the entire season on BOB a goalie of BRZY’s calibur doesn’t hit the open market very often. Carpe Diem Seize the Day.
No one wasted time waiting for those goalies, they were given one or two seasons to develop into a starting goalie. It takes longer than that for most goalies. Look at how well bob did his first year, that’s a great sign so long as the flyers don’t do the typical, here’s a great goalie let’s ruin him and then trade him. They’ve done it with goalies, defense, and offense. The flyer just don’t believe in developing talent. Maybe they finally figured it out though and there is a plan to develop bob
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
I am not saying trade BOB and I just say by time BOB is ready to solidify the position it would be too late for the rest of this lineup mainly the two biggest pieces on the blueline Pronger and Kimmo. And BOB is still an if he doesn’t develop then what. We let him go like we did with Nitty and sign another career backup like Biron to take over full time and hope for the best.
Everyone points atBryz’sBoucher’s playoff stats and says he was garbage. Well in my opinion theyotesFlyers were just far out classed, again.BryzBoucher didn’t play well by any means, no, but I’m pretty sure he knew the team in front of him couldn’t beat thewingsBruins.
It’s equally true this way.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is true. But I take issue with people saying Bryz gets a pass because his team played like crap, but Boucher sucks because his team played like crap.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Im not trying to give him a “free pass”? What are you talking about? 2 years ago they went to game 7 with Detroit, and he was the main reason why. Just like this year, he was the only reason why they were in the playoffs again. I guess I’m more so looking at the team in front of the goalie. If anything Bryz gave the Coyotes a free pass into the playoffs so they could actually see what their building looks like at capacity for a change.
I’ll agree we pretty much played like shit against the bruins. Game 1 was brutal, yes, but game 2 I still believe we deserved to win. Thomas made what like 50+ saves or something? That was simply retarded, and losing that 2nd home game was pretty much the end of it, and I think everyone knew it.
I don’t think that was directed at you. There are a number of others around here today who point to Phoenix’s defense as why Bryz had bad playoff numbers, but then want to crucify Boucher for the loss to Boston. You didn’t say that, Geoff is just using your quote to demonstrate how ridiculous their claim is because it fits so nicely.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
This is also true.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
If one game ends the Flyers season, and the goaltending wasn’t even bad in that game – as you’ve admitted – why change the goaltending?
That’s all I’m saying. You are arguing that Tim Thomas beat the Flyers in Game 2. Fine. I can agree with that. But that statement doesn’t suggest moving $5 mil in salary from your skaters to get a goalie who you hope can steal one second round game. If the Flyers lost because Tim Thomas stood on his head, why not just get healthy, add some depth, and try again? One game doesn’t suggest completely reworking your team – as Bryzgalov may require.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I see where your going. My argument I guess is that Timmy stole game 2 after the flyers gave them everything they had. Then in next game they scored 2 goals in the first minute right? Thats when everyone went FUCK, we couldnt get the win after peppering timmy with 50 shots now were down 2 in the first minute, fuck? Confidence is a huge thing in every game. You can say the flyers play hard in front of a shitty goalie too, and I agree they will play with desperation, but to say its not more important to have a guy you are confident in back there is wrong in my opinion.
And that’s fine. It’s opinion.
But saying you need to go from spending $2.6 million on goaltending to spending upwards of $7.8 mil on goaltending because the Flyers couldn’t beat Tim Thomas in Game 2 is a huge over-reaction.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
When we started talking about Ilya Bryzgalov. Unless you have a way to instill confidence in a team without spending $5 million on a starter.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
why change the goaltending?
Solidfy the goaltending because it is still a huge question mark if we can get that same play out of BOB or better play next year. That is the only logical reason for any of this. No time to wait and hope.
The goaltending is still a huge question mark with Bryzgalov. That’s what goaltending is. The best goaltender in the world can go from Vezina wInner to backup in one year. Or Vezina winner to “run-of-the-mill goaltender” in a year.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree but the question mark is a lot smaller with Brzy versus BOB. Can Brzy be classified as one of those Miller, Lundquist, Broduer types that you can pretty much count on year to year? I don’t know and you still have BOB in case of emergency.
It all depends on what it takes to sign him. An improvement in one area is a decrease in another.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Not necessarily.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Seriously… Any team with Carter, Richards, Giroux, JVR, Briere, Versteeg, Pronger, Kimmo, Coburn, Mez is going to be very competitive. Two elite D pairings and two elite forward lines makes for a very good team. I will to put those top two lines and top two pairings against any team in the league and it would be really hard to find more than a handful that are better.
36 year old D man
36 year old D man coming off back surgery
Center possibly traded in order to afford a goalie
32 year old C who can’t play D
Yeah, you’re looking at it rather optimistically.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Putting them up against the SCF teams top 6 forwards top 4 D-Men I don’t see a huge disparity there and Erhoff and Ryder don’t have contracts next season.
Sedin Sedin Kesler, Burrows, Samulesson, Mason
Hamhuis, Edler, Ballard, Erhoff
BOS
Lucic, Krejic, Horton, Savard, Bergeron, Ryder
Chara, Boychuk, Seidenberg, Ference
Is Chara coming off back surgery? Is Boychuk talking about how he needs more time to recover, mentally and physically? Did you trade Bergeron to get a goalie?
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Is that a huge disparity and my above top 6 has Hartnell Carle and gone. And Horton has a concusssion Savard has concussion issues so does Bergeron and Ryder will be walking UFA.
And my above list has Hartnell and Carle gone to fit the goalie. And do you really think Timmonen is on the decline I thought he had one of his best years this year defensively.
Even if I conceded that – because I don’t care to argue over the Flyers v. Bruins, which, by the way, was heavily Boston this year – you are still ignoring the Flyers complete lack of depth beyond that top-6 you propose.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
But the question mark of having a legitimate proven #1 starter is no longer. He’s proven to be this, on weaker team too. Not in the playoffs no, but everyone knows anything can happen in the playoffs. I mean we got to the Cup last year with Boucher and Leighton but that doesn’t mean it cant be improved. Pekka Rinne was the best goalie in my opinion this year but they ran into the juggernaut that is the canucks.
I’ve never said it can’t be improved. But goaltending by it’s nature is never proven.
The last two Vezina Trophy winners got benched the following years. Saying Bryzgalov solves the problem is incorrect.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Only Thomas did, Brodeur and Miller both missed time due to injury.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Miller was “injured”. Right. ;)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Injured with crippling fear that his team would lose every game he wasn’t in
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Isn’t it only a ‘fear’ if it is unjustified? :)
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 9, 2011 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Never claimed the problem to be solved. But I think to say this won’t improve the problem everyone has been complaining about for how many years? Is, well, wrong.
The last 2 Vezina winners were benched the following years? Really Ryan Miller was benched this year? He played in 66 games? And wasn’t Tim Thomas hurt last year? I’d say he came back to form, no? You’re reaching pretty far with this one….
But the question mark of having a legitimate proven #1 starter is no longer.
If it’s no longer a question mark, then the problem is solved, isn’t it?
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
No the problem is not solved. He still has to come in and prove himself in Philly. Im not trying to say that he doesn’t? My point is that the finger can’t be pointed at not having a solidified #1 goalie like it has been the past how many years? I think the motto on the front page is something about looking for goaltending since 1975 right?
If he still has to come in and prove himself, then the question mark still remains. The question mark that you just said is no longer. So getting Bryz removes the question mark, but doesn’t solve the problem because we don’t know how he’ll be and he has to prove himself. You seem to be contradicting yourself a lot here.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
No you’re just dancing around the subject. You asked why he is a proven goalie. And I told you. My point is that it won’t be as easy for people to point their fingers at a goalie problem, because we have 1. Just because he still has to prove himself on a new team in the other conference doesn’t make that untrue.
No, I’m pointing out a contradiction in your arguments. You claimed that there would no longer be a question mark in goal. But then you said that the goaltending problem wasn’t solved and he has to prove himself here. And you say that people won’t be able to point their fingers at there being a goalie problem because we’ll have a #1 goalie. But that suggests again that the problem is solved.
Contradictions aside, I’d argue that if he fails, people will absolutely point their finger at their being a goaltender problem, whether he’s proclaimed a #1 starter or not. See my point elsewhere about Vanbiesbrouck, Cechmanek and Biron.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Oh, and asking (elsewhere, mind you) why he is proven wasn’t trying to argue with you. I’m trying to understand where the people who herald him as the goalie we’ve been waiting for are coming from. I intended that to be completely separate from this question mark/problem solved argument.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
But I think to say this won’t improve the problem everyone has been complaining about for how many years? Is, well, wrong.
Then we’re clearly talking about two different problems. You’re focused only on the goaltending, I’m focused on the team. Bryzgalov is obviously a better goalie than anybody the Flyers have had in years. I’ve never denied this. But the cost at which he comes is likely not an improvement.
Ryan Miller sat in favor of Jonas Enroth, but they said it was because of injury. Not surprisingly, he had just blown up at the media, the media had just called him ‘run-of-the-mill’, and he played within the week.
Tim Thomas was coming off surgery, but he was healthy by the time the playoffs rolled around. Instead, he was a backup goalie with below-average numbers.
I don’t think it’s a reach to say the best goalies in the world have fluctuations. They go up and down. It might not be as drastic as Thomas’ 94.0% to 91.5%, but they go up and down.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Ryan Miller sat in favor of Jonas Enroth, but they said it was because of injury. Not surprisingly, he had just blown up at the media, the media had just called him ‘run-of-the-mill’, and he played within the week.
During the incident you speak of, he sat for one game against the Canadiens after playing 25 consecutive games. (and most recently losing a game to the Islanders 7-6 in which he was pretty bad, and more important worse than AL MONTOYA)
I’m talking about the week and a half he missed in november (it was known he had suffered some sort of injury in training camp, but everyone claimed it was no big deal until then). Before “injury”: 3-7 After “injury”: 7-3
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
I thought he sat for three games after that? Buffalo was up in arms about him sucking.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Nope just one.
That, and we try really hard to forget everything that happened in October.
Lindy Ruff’s “Play Hasek Miller until he collapses” strategy, though quite effective, can be very frustrating.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Proven using what exactly? Stats? Cup wins? Playoff series wins? Bryz is a good goalie, I’ll agree with that, but what makes him “proven” and worth dismantling the team to get him?
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
Look at the last 4 years. 60+ games played every year which shows he can handle a full workload and hasn’t been prone to injury. Only one of those years was he over 2.50 gaa but was still under 3 which playing for Phoenix is pretty solid in my eyes. And then a save % that never went under .920 except for one year but still above .900. To me this proves enough after coming from Anaheim as a back up and stepping into a role like that.
He also still holds the record for longest playoff shutout streak… Yet isn’t “clutch” in the playoffs according to everyone that watched the Red Wings stomp on them this year.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Boucher holds the longest shutout streak in regular season history, but still isn’t considered someone who can steal a game when he’s at his best by anyone who watches the Flyers.
still isn’t considered someone who can steal a game when he’s at his best by anyone who watches the Flyers.
Which is amusing, considering we watched Boosh outright steal a game last March.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jun 8, 2011 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Stats nerd! Predicting the future!
;)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay, so proven because of consistent good numbers over the past few years, where Bob only has one season and anything can happen next year. I can dig that. (One could argue that anything could happen with Bryzgalov next year, too, so I guess he’ll just have to prove himself here to eliminate that question mark…zing! /kidding) I guess my hang up is on people jumping from stating “proven” via his good numbers to saying he’s what we need to win the Cup, but then trashing his playoff performance (or, alternately, saying it was all the defense’s fault) and denouncing any statistical analysis all at the same time. There’s too much contradiction going on around here today and it’s tying my brain in knots.
Once more, he’s a good goalie, I’d love to have him. I’m afraid of what we have to give up in scoring in order to do it. Good goaltending will have a tough time winning Stanley Cups if there is nobody in front of him to score goals. And I know that’s not what you’re saying, but it’s the argument I feel I have to keep making with others.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
I’ll agree with most of that. Except the “again” part of being outclassed (thinking back to last years historic comeback) and then the last sentence too. I think the more accurate ending to that would be – The flyers didn’t play well by any means, no, but I’m pretty sure they knew the goalie(s) behind them couldn’t stop the bruins.
But the Flyers have been outclassed many times in the past, even with last year. And the Flyers played like absolute shit against the Bruins. They held a lead in that series for 14 minutes. Saying they did that because the goalies were bad is ignoring that they were equally bad.
I just don’t see how you can say Bryzgalov gets a pass because the Coyotes played like shit, but Boucher doesn’t despite the Flyers playing like shit.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
I think this is where you’re going to find it hard to parlay with certain people. There are things that stats can’t quantify, like confidence. I’ve been reading all the articles here, I understand how the stats show that our goaltending wasn’t nearly as bad as most people make it out to be, and realistically it was more of a strength in the playoffs than any other part of our team. We don’t know what kind of mental and moral effect having someone like Bryz instead of Boosh/Bob would have on the rest of the players. Statistically we can see that it shouldn’t make much of a difference. But..
I agree with this. I’ve never said stats quantify everything. But the argument that confidence is all the team needs, or that the team would have played better in front of a better goalie is countered by showing how well the team played in front of Michael Leighton last year.
Sometimes the team plays well in front of a bad goalie because they are more mentally prepared to do whatever it takes. Sometimes the team plays like crap in front of a bad goalie because they are scared of making a mistake. Citing one and saying it’s definitive proof is just as irresponsible as claiming that stats predict the future. Except nobody has ever argued stats predict the future.
All I ask for is that both sides are presented. If you think the Flyers would be better with a better goalie, fine. I agree. But saying confidence is the solution is disingenuous and ignorant of all the other factors. Having a better defenseman could make the forwards play better just as easily as a better goalie can make the defensemen play better.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Bryz was over worked in Phoenix. Similar to what Bob ran into towards the end of the year. I also think being over worked could have attributed to Ray Emerys injury but thats a different subject.
I agree with all of this.
Unfortunately, the reasons I don’t want to sign him have little to do with his playoff performance (except the general “never know what you’ll get in small sample sizes” argument).
This is what I did (also on Chris's fanpost)
CAPGEEK.COM CAP CALCULATOR
FORWARDS
James Van Riemsdyk ($1.654m) / Mike Richards ($5.750m) / Daniel Carcillo ($1.075m)
Joel Ward ($2.000m) / Claude Giroux ($3.750m) / Jeff Carter ($5.272m)
Kris Versteeg ($3.083m) / Daniel Briere ($6.500m) / Andreas Nodl ($1.000m)
Tom Sestito ($0.600m) / Blair Betts ($0.700m) / Darroll Powe ($1.000m)
Eric Wellwood ($0.580m)
DEFENSEMEN
Erik Gustafsson ($0.900m) / Chris Pronger ($4.921m)
Braydon Coburn ($3.200m) / Kimmo Timonen ($6.333m)
Andrej Meszaros ($4.000m) / Oskars Bartulis ($0.600m)
Danny Syvret ($0.600m)
GOALTENDERS
Ilya Bryzgalov ($5.250m) / Sergei Bobrovsky ($1.750m)
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled without the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $62,000,000; CAP PAYROLL: $60,520,488; BONUSES: $1,700,000
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $1,479,512
Samesis
I would be quite happy with Joel Ward. And Sestito over Shelley, and Hartnell being gone. I still think 5.25 is VERY optimistic for Bryzgalov, I’d expect to see a figure closer to 6.25. But still, its doable. Pronger or Timonen getting hurt makes our defense not so great, but we’d have a better goalie to makeup for it, right..
I don’t mind that line up at all. Banking on Timmonen and Pronger being healthy all year leaves very little margin for error.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yikes
Leino, Hartnell and Carle gone, eh? That would likely be what it would take. Possibly Versteeg instead of Hartnell, if KV is more trade-able. Is Matt Walker any better than DSOD or Bartulis, when healthy?
Defense is very vulnerable to injury (as stated by others). And the Richie and Briere lines scare me, and not in a good way. Nodl/Versteeg on Briere’s line? And Carbomb hangs around on Richie’s line.
Sigh. Breezy is looking very not worth to my jaded eyes.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Just scrap Joel Ward for 2 million and build the roster yourself you can even scrap Carcillo at 1.000 and have almost 5 million in cap space to do stuff. I certainly would bring in both a D-Man and forward if I traded both Carle and Hartnell.
I wish Ward would only command $2mil. That would be lovely.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
I’m aware of what he makes, I’m aware he is now a UFA, and I’m not basing his pay raise on the playoffs. The dude plays crazy hard minutes, and is still a pretty good point producer and moves the play forward. I don’t think he only signs for $2mil, I don’t necessarily want the Flyers to pay him more money either. If he’s only looking for $2mil though, put me at the front of the line.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
Take it easy...
I can not like the lines as much as what we have now, and still appreciate your effort. That’s why I was saying Breezy is looking more costly; meaning beyond just the $$. It’s the loss of depth on O and on D.
I like the Ward idea very much, didn’t know he was UFA. That’d be an excellent signing and make Carbomb expendable, IMO.
If Breezy’s joining the team, he needs a long (6 year minimum), front-loaded contract to the tune of $4 million cap hit or less.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
When does the cap for next year get announced, anyways? I assume before July 1, and presumably the Flyers wouldn’t sign Bryzgalov without knowing the hike.
Can’t argue with that.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
:)
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Will Emma Watson give me a blow job for $2 and a Natty Lite
Samesis
by JpH89 on Jun 8, 2011 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Your saying Hartnell and Carle aren’t worth a 1st round pick but instead $2 and a natty lite? But the 2nd overall pick, likely Larsson or Hopkins, is worth a blow job from Emma Watson. Interesting logic….
by kckrebs on Jun 8, 2011 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Carter, Carle, and Hartnell may get you the #2 overall and a decent prospect. Carle and Hartnell are a late 1st at best.
Samesis
I think on their own, Carle should net a 1st (not top-10) and Hartnell, ehh, a second maybe considering salary, or a prospect projected to the NHL but not as a dynamic offensive player.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Could Homer be thinking of a Kovy-type deal, say $25-30 million over 10 years, front loaded w/ a NTC (not a NMC)? He plays 5 years and either retires, gets bought out, waived, or whatever to end his run here?
I’m sure it’s on his mind.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - Covering the Philadelphia Flyers. Got goaltending? Searching since 1987.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 8, 2011 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Unfortunately I’m ignorant to what this would do to the cap. I understand it would equate to roughly $2.5-3 million per year, but what would happen to the cap should he retire after 5 years? Are we still taking that cap hit for the remaining 5? Am I correct that if he’s bought out we eat a reduced cap hit for a period of time, depending on his contract? Any insight would be appreciated.
by PowerOfBauer on Jun 8, 2011 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
There are several considerations that come into play w/ this, some of which I’m not qualified to adequately address (but I’m willing to bet that Jen can), especially where “retirement” is concerned in any given contract. But essentially we pay the vast majority of his contract during the first 5 years as I think that will be the extent to which he lasts around here, if that. If he decides against retirement, we can buy him out (not optimal, but would reduce his annual cap hit) or waive and reassign him to the AHL, at which point he reports, has permission not to report, or waives his NTC and requests a trade. Whatever the case, to waive and reassign him removes the cap hit entirely. A trade at this point may be attractive to other teams seeking an experienced backup with the 2.5-3M cap hit but only having to pay, say, 575K/ year for his services. He signs said contract while still under the age of 35, so I’m not quite sure what a retirement does to my way of thinking here; over-35 contracts would still count against the cap. But yes, the cap hit for us would be significantly lower, so those who like to play around w/ Capgeek try it with $3 million for Bryz and see what you come up with. But, for the love of everything holy, please stop putting Rinaldo in the lineup!
Hmmmm
$28-32 mil over 8 years, front -loaded? League might look askance at 10 yrs for a 30-yr-old…
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
League said 15 years for a 28 year old was OK. Besides, Homer would just defend himself by saying, “His name is Ilya, so it’s allowed.”
LOL
good one. Breezy almost certainly wants a payday, so I can see a front-loaded offer being tendered and maybe accepted. If it were me, I’d want the cap hit at $4 million or less.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Heres something i just wrote on facebook which puts why paying a goalie a lot of $$$ is a bad idea:
Our D is pretty bad actually. Pronger and Kimmo can’t play 82 games and then the playoffs anymore, Coburn and Mez are very good, Carle sucks, and we have a bunch of unproven rookies. So really we have Mez and Coburn are our best guys. So lets put it like this. We limit Pronger and Kimmo to 60 games this year and trade Carle. Your asking a for LOT of work from guys like Gustufsson, Marshall, Bartulis, and Syvret. Plus, adding a huge goalie contract would limit the number of forwards we have. Also add to the fact that Briggy has been the most overworked goalie the past 3 years. So he would be limited to only 55 games if we want him to be ready for the playoffs. So in reality, we are kinda looking at a 5th or 6th seed spot, and banking on no injuries and Briggy to be the best goalie in the playoffs for us to win the cup if we sign
Samesis
He hates Carle and doesn’t care what anybody says or shows him.
Nobody will change his mind and I’ve given up trying.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
He sucks at D. His only really good season he’s had since eaving SJ was last year with Pronger. And just like you said about how Leino is sheltered by having briere and hartnell as linemates, Carle is just as sheltered by having Pronger with him.
Samesis
And this just isn’t true. I can show you all I need to – Carle’s WOWY with Pronger, Carle’s superior GAON/60, his Corsi RelQoC, his CorsiRel, his OZ%, his blocked shots – and it won’t change your mind.
He’s not sheltered, he did better without Pronger this year than with him, he faces top competition rather than bottom, he starts in the defensive zone more without Pronger, he blocks a ton of shots, and the Flyers outshoot the opposition when he’s on the ice.
And you’ll keep saying he sucks at D, regardless of all that. So let’s just clarify that you hate Carle and won’t listen to evidence which shows he’s actually really good. Then move on.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
I am of the totally biased opinion that the worst two defensemen on the team (Danny Syvret didn’t play enough to be considered) were SOD and Coburn, but i guess i’m just crazy.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
I would even disagree with you. SOD and Carle were terrible in the playoffs. There’s no denying that. It’s when people extrapolate those 11 games and make sweeping generalizations about their talent level, which flies in the face of their previous 170 games.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
when people extrapolate those 11 games and make sweeping generalizations about their talent level
I’ve never seen this happen. By which I mean it hasn’t happened since I started typing this response, so it must not have happened anytime before that either.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
I would even disagree
O rly? ;)
Sorry, this struck me as funny.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 8, 2011 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
gallof tweeted
That the Flyers are shopping around Carter
"I bet Calgary wishes they had a backup goalie as their GM" - Pauly C
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
Dun dun dunnnnnnnn………
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Though I’d hardly call this confirmation that we’re shopping Carter..
“GM meetings are today, so likely Holmgren talking to teams about what they’d offer for a list of players… top of list has to be Carter”
GMs are absolutely gonna ask about Carter, why the hell wouldn’t they now that Homer wants to try to sign Breezy. “Shopping” is a different matter and I really hope that’s not Homer saying “Hey everyone, what’ll you give me for Jeff Carter?”
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions
In Fairness
That’s a different tweet then the first two I saw from him, considering that Gallof tweets about a thousand times a day:
BDGallof BDGallof
So don’t think h suddenly lands here. BUT, not many with the room and ability to absorb his 11 yr deal. #isles can
6 hours ago
BDGallof
BDGallof BDGallof
#isles talking to Flyers about Carter. This said, Flyers are also talking to all 30 teams.
"I bet Calgary wishes they had a backup goalie as their GM" - Pauly C
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
From J.P. over at Japers' Rink:
I’m sure you guys have seen this somewhere (probably crunched them yourselves) but here’s what he got:
So over the past three seasons, ES SV%:
Bryzgalov: .92587
His backups: .92589
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
by Rob Parker on Jun 8, 2011 1:40 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
To be fair i like his backups (mostly LaBarbera with a chunk of Tellqvist and a sprinkle of Al Montoya and a few other guys.)
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Though i’m suspicious of this because, for example, Vokoun is also outperformed by his backups.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Right, and you have to consider who the back ups are getting games against. But at the very least, it should make you pause and think.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
What it shows is that goaltenders are evil and only exist to ruin statistics.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
Goalies are definitely evil, I don’t think that was ever in doubt.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
:)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
So does everyone really think this is a bad move? I think this is the best thing to happen to the Flyers in my lifetime if we can sign him. If we only have to give up Carle or Versteeg to make this work then i don’t see the problem, someone want to give us a salary cap breakdown of what the team/salary cap situation would look like if we drop Versteeg or Carle and pick up Bryz? Also, all the graphs and charts in the world can say that he’s not much of an improvement but things are a lot different on a new team, in a new system, with a new defense, etc. He could end up having Vezina numbers again if our defense stays healthy and Pronger doesn’t miss half a season again. The Flyers are a better team than the Coyotes, i’m confident that Bryzgalov would be great for us, and if his workload is lessened a bit from 70 games to about 50-55 maybe he’d have more left in the tank for the playoffs and would play better. I wouldn’t blame everything on him for the Coyotes playoff woes. Anyway, i’m really happy/excited about the possibility of signing Bryz and i think a lot of you guys are being a bit too negative about it.
Danny Fist-Pump Strikes Again!!!
by MeszarosKillsPeople on Jun 8, 2011 2:20 PM EDT reply actions
If they somehow sign him for less than 5 million dollars, I’m pretty sure all the writers will write “BEST DAY EVER” posts.
The main worry is that it will cost the Flyers Carter, which would be… an issue.
On the Mike Weber bandwagon!
Sabres took the scenic route, but they still MADE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS!!!1
I’d hate to give up Carter because unless Giroux and JVR both put up 70-75 points this year i don’t see anyone making up for Carter’s numbers, but i’d give up Versteeg or Carle and/or Leino for one of the best goalies in the league.
Also, i think it’s funny that people are using the arguement that you can’t judge Carle by his terrible playoff performance but everyone crucifies Bryz for having bad playoffs. Pretty hypocritical. Plus, who’s to say that Bryz wouldn’t be great for us in the playoffs? The Coyotes were hardly impressive in the playoffs in front of Bryz..
Danny Fist-Pump Strikes Again!!!
by MeszarosKillsPeople on Jun 8, 2011 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Also, i think it’s funny that people are using the arguement that you can’t judge Carle by his terrible playoff performance but everyone crucifies Bryz for having bad playoffs.
They aren’t the same people.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
But still, there has been a lot of hypocrisy around here this morning.
Lightning strikes once, Hextall strikes twice!
by hintzy64 on Jun 8, 2011 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think there has been a lot of arguing. And in those discussions people want to look at specific things, so their countering poster will go to that small sample size argument to say, okay you say A, but then you ignore B. then you get caught up in, well you selectively choose small sample sizes…which really isn’t true, they are just trying to tailor their argument to fit their counter posters line of thinking.
Then someone comes in at the end and calls everyone a hypocrite…which for the most part, is a general rule of thumb for humanity anyways.
Point is, there’s been a lot of arguing, and a lot of people interpreting comments in a manner they weren’t intended. Shit happens, and shit has been confusing today.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
But it is the same logic.
Danny Fist-Pump Strikes Again!!!
by MeszarosKillsPeople on Jun 8, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I know, but if the person saying Carle can’t be judged by his bad playoffs isn’t the one crucifying Bryz, then they aren’t a hypocrite.
Hence my point. You are just assuming the people saying A are also the people saying B, and then calling them hypocrites. I think you are jumping the gun a bit there.
Teaching Travis how to Dougie since 2011.
Geoff has Boosh, Mike's got Powe, Nodl is all mine!
Most people are opposed due to the assumption of which shoe is dropping. I don’t think anybody here would dare say Ilya Bryzgalov is not a good goalie, or that he doesn’t make the Flyers better.
Speaking for myself, and I feel like a large contingent of commenters here, it’s not an opposition to acquiring Bryzgalov’s rights. It’s an opposition to possible courses of action in order to sign Bryzgalov.
If all it took was throwing money at him – as Travis wrote in the story – everybody would be ecstatic. If all it took was finding $1.5 million, everyone would be ecstatic. Instead, it’s about finding removing one, possibly two, very large pieces of the team. If the Flyers move Hartnell to pay for Bryz, I’ll be ecstatic. If they move Carter to pay for Bryz, I’ll be pissed. If they move Carle to pay for Bryz, I’ll be pissed.
It’s like chess. I’m not pissed that I just captured your rook, I’m pissed I exposed my queen to do it.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions
I think I’m in the small contingent of “I hate this move no matter what else happens.” We’ve given away the 3rd. Someone has to be moved to sign him. Even if that’s Hartnell, I’d rather that money be used elsewhere.
Giving a 3rd for rights is fine if it’s a player I wanted signed. I don’t want a goalie for any more than the 4.5-5 range, with almost no exceptions*.
*I would pay Hasek 5.1 for one year if I knew the roster had to be blown up next summer anyway.
from the argument of it’s not worth it to trade Carter to fit Bryz, I completely agree that paying him 4.5-5 is absurd. For a position that is as fleeting as a closing pitcher in baseball, it makes no sense to tie up that much money on one position.
On the other side I sure wish I got paid 5 million to let pucks hit me.
http://restorations.bandcamp.com/
Sorry if this has been mentioned already but I didn’t read all the comments since the first 20 comments I read were about the tired topic of Miller vs Boosh in round 1.
I’m really not sure how I feel about this move so I’m gonna let it play out. Hopefully it is Hartnell or Versteeg that goes and not Carter but regardless I feel a little bad for Homer. When your boss basically publicly announces that you must have a “#1 goalie” it kinda leaves Homer with no choice but to go out and do this. Main thing I am pissed about is everyone in the league knows we will be moving salary so trade value for whoever they trade is going to be a jar full of used condoms.
We have useful pieces that aren’t overpriced, though. (sorry gags i love ya but your contract was a beast) So I think in this case you’re going to see more of a return than a straight salary dump. At least I hope.
They can absolutely structure a cap hit under $4 million. Let’s just say, as done upthread, there’s a long-term, front-loaded offer:
Year 1: $6mil
Year 2: $5mil
Year 3: $4.5mil
Year 4: $4mil
Year 5: $3.5mil
Year 6: $2.5mil
Year 7: $1.5mil
Year 8: $1 mil
$28 million/8 years = 3.5 million. For the first two years, he’s paid like a top 5 goalie. If he counters, we can raise a few more of those numbers, to about $31.5 million and still be under $4million cap hit.
I’m officially less pissed off than I was last night. But I’m still leery of our upcoming lack of depth.
except from the reports out of Phoenix I’ve seen he wants to be paid like a top PLAYER not just top goalie
"It's not just linebackers. This is Penn State linebackers, man. We're a certain type. We've gotta be aggressive, relentless, focused. Don't talk. Don't talk at all. We don't showboat or anything. We just play hard and get the job done." -Khairi Fortt
I think this is actually what he wants
Year 1 $10M
Year 2 $10M
Year 3 $10M
Year 4 $10M
Year 5 $500K
Year 6 $500K
Year 7 $500K
Year 8 $500K
Cap hit: $5.5
Gary B. would come calling, of course.
This is my Cerberus .sig, while the regular one is on the DL.
Um, $5.25, but of course, that was not my point.
This is my Cerberus .sig, while the regular one is on the DL.
He's greedy, for sure...
But I had my Total Optimism Hat on. I think a cap hit of under $4 million is a bit of a dream, but it’s not completely out of the question, either. Breezy might WANT 10 for four years straight, but he ain’t getting it.
Make it 7, 6, 6 for years 1-3; then 4.5, 3.5, 2.5, 1.5 and 1. $32 million and precisely 4.0 cap hit. Do-able. Unless he won’t sign it :-). Then counter with 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 — $34 million over 8 = 4.25 cap hit. Still not too bad. We can trade him after his salary goes down below 4, maybe.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Signing Bryzgalov for 6 – 8 years is ridiculous. Bob should be the heir apparent in 2 years for sure. Vokoun would sign in Philly for 2 years.
If Bob leaves I will be pissed.
I must admit though, being from Winnipeg and one of the lucky ones who got season tickets, it would be interesting to wear a Bryzgalov Flyer jersey to the Flyer game after the comments he made about moving here!
He was talking about comments made in regards to WInnipeg, not Philly
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I never said signing Breezy long term is good for Bob. Quite the opposite. I wanted Bob to take over as well. But without a long-term, front-loaded deal, not sure how Breezy fits, and it looks bad for Bob. God bless him.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions
That violates the CBA
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Did you miss this?
Gary B. would come calling, of course.
This is my Cerberus .sig, while the regular one is on the DL.
I did.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Definitely…. but even before it got to the “suspected circumvention” part, it’d get vetoed because 500K is less than the league minimum.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jun 8, 2011 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions
@EricCooney only if the Flyers don’t believe Bob will be ready soon. Bryzgalov doesn’t like sharing playing time.
—Dmitry Chesnokov’s Twitter
Certainly seems like Bob is the odd man out. Fortunately we have lots of goaltending prospects in the system to replace him.
Bob has trade value
I haven’t polled any GMs, but I’m sure he has value. High pick, at least. We need those.
I don’t want to trade Bob, at all. If Breezy signs, and I was coach, I’d say he gets 55 starts, tops. Bob needs work and I don’t want to waste him on the bench. Lavy can sit players with non-team attitudes, he’s shown that. But will he sit Mr. All-world, $7 million goaltender for a bad attitude?
Maybe Boosh is re-upped (per Seravalli) for about $950K to be backup.
by Georgia_Flyer on Jun 8, 2011 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow. I’ve said I want Boosh to be backup-for-the-rest-of-his-NHL-life (notice I changed this Geoff. :-) But certainly not at the expense of Bob.
Unfortunately, this sounds like Homer-logic to me.
That awful Hartnell-and-Bob for someone trade I mentioned may indeed be coming. In fact, maybe it’s something like Carter-Hartnell-and-Bob to Columbus for various pieces. They certainly have the cap room.
This is my Cerberus .sig, while the regular one is on the DL.
I’m not excited at all. I’d rather go with Bob, and shore up the defense.
Eagles next starting QB: "East-West Shrine Game Legend" Mike Kafka
Flyers: Sigh
Phillies:Gah enough with the injuries!.
Good lord man – after last off-season, the only way you get more ‘shoring up’ is by calling the Army Corps of Engineers off the New Orleans works. You DO realize that the Flyers have arguably one of the deepest defenses in the league? Mesz coudl be a second-paring guy on almost any team – and we have him on our THIRD. Not to mention decent AHL prospects … well, at least one.
That said, I would have preferred sticking with Bob. Maybe we still will, and all this is just a ruse to drive up the free-agent price of Bryz like Hamhuis last season. AT least Homer ditched a contract from the roster in Clackson. But the real hole in the lineup is – as it was last year – at WING.
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 9, 2011 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m calling start calling these last two months: “Meh” and “Doom”
do you poop on parties professionally, or do you just do it as a hobby?
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Jun 8, 2011 4:20 PM EDT reply actions
gong to start calling*
do you poop on parties professionally, or do you just do it as a hobby?
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Jun 8, 2011 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions
One more try?
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 9, 2011 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions
This kind of makes me wonder: what did people ever see in Hartnell that warranted extreme amounts of cash and additives that would make moving his contract rough?
do you poop on parties professionally, or do you just do it as a hobby?
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Jun 8, 2011 4:23 PM EDT reply actions
I wonder if his agent would negotiate a contract or two for me? Hmmm…
by 92-74-99-96 on Jun 8, 2011 5:29 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, I agree, but I’m still trying to figure out how he ended up being a 6th overall pick. That one doesn’t make sense to me either.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Jun 8, 2011 9:05 PM EDT up reply actions
“For what it’s worth, amid all the Jeff Carter trade rumors, I am told PHI is not trying to move him and not planning to move him.”
“Never say never in this business but I suspect other bodies – Versteeg, Carle etc – will fly out the door before Carter.”
-Bob McKenzie
Makes me feel a bit better about this potential signing/Flyers roster.
Moving Versteeg, by himself, doesn’t get you enough cap space to pay Breezy a $5.5 million cap hit and field 22 players, unless you replace Leino, Zherdev, Shelley, Carcillo and Nodl or Powe with AHLers.
by hebrew hammer on Jun 8, 2011 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I never wanted a nice car. I wanted to spend my entire life driving Honda Civics and using the rest of my living expenses on housing (defense) and food/toys (forwards). Civics are a known quantity. I don’t expect to get too much out of them, but they are reliable, modestly priced, and get the job done.
Don’t get me wrong, if someone forced me to get housing and personal expenses in order to get a car, I could at least be excited about driving a nice car. I just don’t think, given the choice, I would live that way.
Also, if I were spending the money anyway, I might make sure it’s the best car on the market.
I like Aston Martins. Especially the DB9. (Although the Sport is fucking wicked.)
I own a poor mans’ sports car – a Jetta. And as a toy, a few motorcycles.
The analogy? One of the supposed second-tier goalies at a less-obnoxious but still more than a daily driver-type, and supplement that with a few flashy wingers, that cost less but actually deliver more ‘win’ per dollar.
(YES Stat-heads, I’ll do the damn analysis. Not tonight.)
Maybe it should read "reformedpenguinsfan" since I have retired my Lemeiux jersey ... and purchased an Orange and Black Pronger jersey.
by MaximumTalbot on Jun 9, 2011 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Bryzgalov: the only free agent I know whose situation warrants him to be treated like a restricted free agent, where the Flyers must provide compensation on top of the compensation already provided to Phoenix.
do you poop on parties professionally, or do you just do it as a hobby?
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Jun 8, 2011 5:35 PM EDT reply actions
Signing a free agent shouldnt mean that you lose value in your assets, but it seems the Flyers love doing this
do you poop on parties professionally, or do you just do it as a hobby?
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Jun 8, 2011 5:48 PM EDT reply actions
Not a lot of wiggle room, but it could work
FORWARDS
Scott Hartnell ($4.200m) / Daniel Briere ($6.500m) / Jeff Carter ($5.272m)
James Van Riemsdyk ($1.654m) / Claude Giroux ($3.750m) / Kris Versteeg ($3.083m)
Chris Higgins ($1.490m) / Mike Richards ($5.750m) / Andreas Nodl ($0.900m)
Darroll Powe ($0.800m) / Blair Betts ($0.700m) / Zac Rinaldo ($0.544m)
DEFENSEMEN
Kimmo Timonen ($6.333m) / Chris Pronger ($4.921m)
Andrej Meszaros ($4.000m) / Braydon Coburn ($3.200m)
Erik Gustafsson ($0.900m) / Oskars Bartulis ($0.600m)
GOALTENDERS
Sergei Bobrovsky ($1.750m) / Ilya Bryzgalov ($5.050m)
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(these totals are compiled without the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $61,400,000; CAP PAYROLL: $61,399,432; BONUSES: $1,700,000
CAP SPACE (20-man roster): $568
Obviously were back to the ‘only 4 good defensemen’ issue and we would have literally no cap space, but nothings gonna be perfect.
You also have no healthy scratches. Teams usually field a 22-man or 23-man roster.
If someone gets hurt, you have nobody to plug in and no money to sign someone else. Even if the NHLPA let you get away with this, you’d have some problems.
Also, the 1.490M salary to just barely squeeze it in is cute.
You get rid of Hartnell or Versteeg and bring in another lesser paid forward an NHL competent D-Man and you don’t have all the AHLers as starters but as reserve players and the roster looks a lot better overall.
All of this brings me back to the soft goal theory. If you look at the two series, our goaltenders opened four games with at least one soft goal. Forcing our forwards to amp-up the back-check. Neglecting the forcheck, giving up the blueline, and playing outside their game.
I am still of the belief that multiple injuries caused our demise more than anything against Boston. However we have tried for countless years with middle of the road goal-tending to win the cup. I say let’s try something different and bring in a top ten goalie.
Soft goal theory…
Someone really needs to define what this is and track it. Because I don’t buy it for a second.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t mind “goals that don’t come from scoring chances,” but Todd will have to be stricter on scoring chances, I’d think.
Yeah, Todd would have to be a lot stricter. And then the grey area of “Was the goalie screened or not?” is more important than just counting a scoring chance, it’s swinging the results of a soft goal study wildly.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I know I haven’t included goals before that have come from “soft” chances. The Vanek behind-the-net-off-Boosh goal, and Coburn’s goal in game 7 come to mind. It’s hard to get your head around the concept that not all goals come from scoring chances (as we define them anyway).
Whether the goalie was screened or not is definitely the hardest to justify.
I’d also like to add, that while I may have seemed to generous in the Buffalo series, I was watching the game replays in minutae with pause and rewind, where the DBTB perspective was watching it live with people over. Our numbers got closer as the series went on, though.
Mourning Gagne forever.
Would you say there are non-“soft” goals that also aren’t scoring chances? Or is that really rare?
The screen, I imagine, is already your most difficult part. I didn’t know DBTB was doing it live with people over… that’s two extremes of recording (entertaining v. rewind and taking notes). Good for you.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I think there are non-soft goals that aren’t scoring chances. I won’t weigh in on frequency because we both know that it’s just a guess. But any goal that gets thrown on net from a crazy spot but hits a D in the foot, or seeing eye pucks through screens, can be non-soft and non-scoring chance.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
That’s true, but you don’t tend to see that on non-scoring chances. But that’s what my eyes tell me, and they clearly suck, so…
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah well, you think Boucher is better than ECHL caliber, so obviously you’re pretty dumb and/or blind. Try watching a game.
They do seem like rare goals, I’m getting real curious as to how the numbers break down now. I’d bet most goals are off scoring chances and aren’t the kind you can blame a goalie for. I think I’m going to track Caps goals next year, I’ll just make sure I work out my definitions first.
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
.
This is where it gets tricky in my head. If a shot from the point goes top stick, but there were players in front, was the goalie screened? If so, that’s a scoring chance, but you can’t tell because you don’t exactly get to see what the goalie saw.
"/>
Out of interest, this is a feature on Gamecentre where you can see the areas on the ice where goals are scored from. Vancouver is on the left, Boston on the right for 2010-2011. If PP and SH goals are taken out, the frequency in the slot increases to 60%, and that’s not even the boundary limit to what we define a chance as.
Mourning Gagne forever.
This is truly fascinating. Most people would say, in that simplified graph, that the “soft goal” area takes up five of the six areas. Now, they’d adjust for screens, so just pretend to adjust for that that they only qualify four of six as soft…
You’re looking at between 20 and 30% of all goals being “soft”? Maybe that proves the “non-scoring chance” thing wrong. Or maybe it means a lot of those point goals are scoring chances. Who knows.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Well the top two corners on the graph are where Stamkos, Ovechkin (in the past, sigh), and some other elite scorers have made their hay on the PP. I’d bet the vast majority of those are pucks thrown from the goal line, but there is still some serious quality available in the lower face off circles.
Point shots are tough. I have a hard time dealing with them. Lots of them don’t seem like scoring chances until after the fact when you saw the puck snipe in off the post or cross bar. You don’t normally expect goals from there, but when a shot comes in off the pipe do you really expect the goalie to make the save? Enough so to call it soft?
A kitten on fire, a baby in a blender, both sound as sweet as a playoff surrender.
haha, this is my difficulty.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 9, 2011 8:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Do we think this is impacted much by offensive and defensive strategies? Or do we think this should even out over large sample sizes?
There is this information for the past two seasons, but even then it’s not a huge sample size; especially given the variance in goal scoring.
At the moment it’s just interesting to see, I guess.
Mourning Gagne forever.
Yeah, I guess I was just generally wondering how it stacks up against shooting totals from those areas.
I recall reading a BtN article that mentioned x & y locations on a rink for shots. If those exist then a heat map showing shot frequency by location could be produced for each team and you could add those areas to it.
Maybe even Eric’s scripts have pulled that info from NHL.com
Mourning Gagne forever.
NHL.com doesn’t have the x-y locations, just the distances.
I believe the x-y data comes from gamecenter, but I don’t have it and don’t know how to get it. If you can, I’ll do all kinds of good stuff with it.
Something about going to the HTML of the gamecenter page and looking at the play tracker stream.
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 9, 2011 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I didn’t think you were being generous so much as, for the sake of this definition, you’d have to change your policies.
And still, it might not be worth defining it that way. We have video of all goals, and can judge them easily even if we don’t watch the game. Maybe even an exchange program with another team’s blog to remove bias? We do them, they do us.
I can certainly start counting soft goals as I do chances for next season and record them seperately.
But it won’t matter if Bryz signs as there will never be another soft goal scored against the Flyers.
Mourning Gagne forever.
soft goal…shot from endline, short-side bad angle, roll up your leg off the goalies shoulder in to the net… look at the playoff games,, 4 games started with soft ass goals.
I watched playoff games. There were some soft goals, sure. But start with a definition of soft goals and then compare the number of soft goals to scoring chances.
Oh, and how many of those games did that cause the Flyers’ “Neglecting the forcheck, giving up the blueline, and playing outside their game.”? Because the Flyers came back to win most of those.
Basically: For every time games started with soft goals, games started with terrible defensive breakdowns. Until there’s objective recording of soft goals, I’ll continue to not agree with those who cite them. Too much emotion, too much reliance on memory.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 8, 2011 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions
(What he’s saying is just give us the examples)
Red Line Station and @RedArmyLine, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
To help with basic Timeonice functions.
If I reference a lot of stats, just assume I haven't seen anything to contradict or invalidate them.
by red army line on Jun 9, 2011 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Broad Street Hockey
Related FanShots on Broad Street Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
- Friday’s Three Stars: Devils head to Final; Brodeur, Kovalchuk the difference in Game 6
- Devils eliminate Rangers in Game 6, ending fear of the past, setting course for the future
- Adam Henrique sends New Jersey Devils to Stanley Cup Final with OT goal vs. Rangers (VIDEO)
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Former Oilers Stoll, Greene grateful for 2nd chance when well-rested LA Kings face New Jersey
- Shinnimin named CHL's Player of the Year
- Capitals send left-wing Bourque to Bruins for centre Hamill
- Rangers look to get past hurt of loss to Devils
- Top-seeded Rangers have reasons for optimism after disappointing loss to Devils in East finals
