Jump to content

Photo

NHL discussion


  • Please log in to reply

#241

Posted June 14, 2019 - 11:01 AM

EXXEO

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 664 posts
  • 7 thanks
    GM Since: September 2015
361
Rep - Outstanding
Yup, next season is the Red Win....hmm....yeah I’m not even going to finish that sentence. But, hey, Yzerman’s back!

#242

Posted June 14, 2019 - 12:04 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             

I'm going to go on a limb with potentially dark horse teams and say the Stars or Coyotes from the West vs the Panthers or Flyers from the East next year.

 

That said an alternate from each conference to watch for. West: Chicago. 2 years ago when everybody was still picking them to win the cup I was picking them to finish well out of the playoffs due to a lack of depth. They more than made the playoffs that year but their lack of depth got exposed to the tune of being swept in embarrassing fashion by the Preds. Last year when most were picking them as a bubble team I was picking them bottom of the standings. I may have jumped the gun a bit two years ago but I got it right this year. That said I think there are a number of young players now ready to start filling in a number of holes in the lineup. There are still issues with the roster however the C depth is fairly decent and the winger group isn't too bad either. The question marks for me is at D and behind Crawford in net. Keith rebounded from a disastrous first few months of the season but it is clear that he is now long in the tooth. Seabrook is even longer in the tooth and has had a more dramatic fall. The only player to step up thus far and fill in adequately is Gustafsson and I am not yet sold that he will be able to repeat last season.

 

East: Rangers. I think I am a year ahead on this but they have 3 big name young players joining the team this upcoming season and that isn't even touching on who they pick at #2. The talent they are stockpiling is starting to get a bit ridiculous to not think that something will happen soon. The question for me is the potential log jam in net. It makes sense to give Shesterkin a year in the AHL to adjust but what if it takes nowhere near that long? The other thing is Shattenkirk has yet to have a good healthy season. The problem here is that there are a number of young defenders looking like they are ready for the NHL leaving one spot for the 3 veteran D on the Rangers. I see Staal being the one that is least likely to get moved. As a result, if two of the three do get moved it would likely be Shattenkirk and Smith. It isn't that Staal is the worst of the three. It is that NHL teams would be unlikely to convince the Rangers to eat 2+million in salary to trade him.



#243

Posted June 14, 2019 - 01:24 PM

Kyle44

    Head Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: March 2019
16
Rep - Helpful

if two of the three do get moved it would likely be Shattenkirk and Smith. It isn't that Staal is the worst of the three. It is that NHL teams would be unlikely to convince the Rangers to eat 2+million in salary to trade him.

 

 

Either Smith or Shatty will likely be bought out.  Saying that Staal isn't the worst of the three is a toss up.  All 3 of them are below average dmen who need to be exiled to the AHL.  I watched almost every Rangers game this year.  Staal is basically a 6th skater on the ice for the other teams, Smith is exiled to forward because he is so bad, and Shattenkirk is getting benched in the 3rd and at times healthy scratched, yet he gets paid like a top dman.  Tbh, they each showed flashes of their old selves this season, but they are nowhere near even playing like playoff team caliber 7th defensemen.  

 

That said, with all of the talent in the system, hopefully, a quicker turn around is in order.



#244

Posted June 14, 2019 - 10:30 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             

I would argue that you are devaluing Stall and Shattenkirk too much. Staal is a lot like Girardi. A rather solid defensive player and valuable front of the net player. Rangers fans were saying the same about Girardi yet when he left and went to the Lightning suddenly what he brought was more noticeable as it was now missing. Taking Staal away too leaves no defender on that roster that is adept at winning front of the net battles. It goes unnoticed by many but one weakness that other teams were exploiting this past season against the Rangers was front of the net presence that other teams could establish as only Staal was capable of winning those fights with any regularity. Staal's weaknesses as a player are his lack of mobility and his play offensively leaves much to be desired. That said he isn't near the turnover machine that you elude to. The issues with Staal and Girardi isn't that they are, or were, playing poorly. Girardi went to Tampa and was seen as a valuable part of their D group yet his play wasn't any different than when he was in New York. The issue is how big their contracts are, or were for Girardi. They were being overpaid for what they were and by a not insignificant amount. Most other players of their archetype were getting around 3-4 million tops around the league yet the Rangers were paying them closer to 5 million.

 

Shattenkirk is a victim of the teams greatest deficiencies. He is a pure puck-moving defenseman. Were there stretches where he wasn't playing well? Yes, of course. However, there are a few things that you have to understand with Shattenkirk. First, he is, and will always, be a defensive liability. He is no different than the Gostisbehere or Erik Karlsson in that regard. Second, he gets his points off of his passing. Which means that the team in front of him has to be good at scoring. This, however, is unlike Ghost or Karlsson in that they can also get goals on their own as well via their really good shots. Thus Shattenkirk isn't putting up the numbers but it isn't his fault alone as he has relied on his teammate's ability to score to get points in the past. Third, in general, he actually is playing fairly well however he doesn't have the team around him that can really help him play to his best. In St. Louis he had a veteran team around him that could cover for his deficiencies through their own solid D play and could also score on their own which maximized what he could do. In Washington, the scorers were there and the team around him could cover for his deficiencies to a degree however he didn't have the time to get familiar with the system and that was the focal point to his issues when he was there. However, in New York, he joined a team that was, frankly, at the point of needing to undergo a rebuild. That means a younger team that is going to make mistakes which means that the team can't cover for his defensive deficiencies. To boot the team struggles to score. Ultimately the issue is that what the team is currently just doesn't work well with what Shattenkirk both needs and brings to the table.

 

Smith, on the other hand, should have been nothing more than a rental grab. I get that he played well after being traded for but what he could bring to the team was not worth anywhere near the 4 million plus that he got in extension. Nobody in their right mind would offer a 3rd pair Dman 4 million plus.



#245

Posted June 15, 2019 - 11:37 AM

Kyle44

    Head Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: March 2019
16
Rep - Helpful

I agree with what you say about Staal and shatty to an extent.  Staal's leadership and ability to win battles are great.  The problem is in the last minute when rangers are protecting a lead and hemmed in their zone.  I look at his contract as being similar to the one Colorado bought out for brooks orpik.  He is too expensive and struggles to clear the puck in big game moments.  On a reduced salary, he'd be a great option.  We could downgrade on Staal for sure as I agree, many are quick to judge him, but when a team is already struggling defensively, he and Shattenkirk don't help the cause.  With Shattenkirk, I also witnessed him struggling to hold the line on numerous occasions as well as fanning on easy passes and shots, creating scoring chances for the opposition.  I won't fault the player for an occasional whiff, but he does it far too often.  It appears as though his puck handling ability is in decline as it always looks like he's playing through a sprained wrist.  I may be a little over critical on them, but to me they are delaying the rebuild.

 

That said, Keandre Miller looks like he'll have a studly future in NY!!!



#246

Posted June 15, 2019 - 12:01 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             

I agree with what you say about Staal and shatty to an extent.  Staal's leadership and ability to win battles are great.  The problem is in the last minute when rangers are protecting a lead and hemmed in their zone.  I look at his contract as being similar to the one Colorado bought out for brooks orpik.  He is too expensive and struggles to clear the puck in big game moments.  On a reduced salary, he'd be a great option.  We could downgrade on Staal for sure as I agree, many are quick to judge him, but when a team is already struggling defensively, he and Shattenkirk don't help the cause.  With Shattenkirk, I also witnessed him struggling to hold the line on numerous occasions as well as fanning on easy passes and shots, creating scoring chances for the opposition.  I won't fault the player for an occasional whiff, but he does it far too often.  It appears as though his puck handling ability is in decline as it always looks like he's playing through a sprained wrist.  I may be a little over critical on them, but to me they are delaying the rebuild.

 

That said, Keandre Miller looks like he'll have a studly future in NY!!!

 

Orpik is a great comparison to be using for Staal. That said he helps defensively he just doesn't do a good job of clearing the puck out of the zone. A helps but can hurt kind of deal.

 

There is a reason that Shattenkirk was more of a half wall to point position on the powerplay in St. Louis. He hasn't ever been particularly good at holding pucks in either.

 

Also, they might be more helping in that they helped get the Rangers the 2nd overall pick. It just depends upon which way you look at it.



#247

Posted June 15, 2019 - 01:51 PM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • 7 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
555
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

I was reading a recent article on a popular website yesterday that graded every player's playoff performance with extra emphasis on the Finals.  There were 3 players that were given an A+ that I think are worth discussing.

 

1st) Tuukka Rask. 

 

I remember when Rask got his first real chance in Boston was the 2010 season when Thomas went down.  He looked solid and very promising.  He carried the Bs all the way to the Quarterfinals where they blew a 3-0 lead to Philly.  I didn't blame Rask for this collapse.  Fast forward to 2013.  Bruins are back in the Finals, 2 years removed from Thomas winning them a Cup and Rask is playing lights out.  Then the Blackhawks pretty much light him up every other game and steal game 6 by scoring 2 goals with just over a minute to play.  This is where my opinion of him changed.  I haven't liked him since then.  It just seems that "big" game after big game, he cannot elevate his game or steal games.  I'm aware my opinion might be unfair as I often compare him to Tim Thomas who was just unreal during that Cup run, but it is just what I have seen since 2010 through current day.  Fast forward to Game 7 of this year's Finals.  As good as Rask played through the playoffs, I just had a feeling there would be a collapse.  I literally predicted exactly what happened in Game 7.  Bs dominate the first period and the Blues get very few chances and Rask won't make the big saves.  Surely enough, that's what happened.  I cannot blame Rask for those goals - BUT- they were VERY stoppable.  Keep your stick on the ice and you stop the 1st deflection and the biggest chance of the night was the 2nd goal.  Sure, it was mostly on Marchand for deciding to go off for a line change with 10 seconds left, but Rask could have kept Boston in the game by making a huge save at the end of the first, but he just can't.  He's been given every opportunity to be the hero in Boston and he fails time and time again.  He's a GREAT goalie who cannot elevate his play in big games (see Thomas, Quick, Murray, Binnington, etc.).  In the end, Binnington stole 2 or even 3 games in this series and Rask stole none.  You can have your own opinion about Rask, but be warned - I will argue my point, which I have been with many people since 2013, until we are both blue in the face. 

 

2nd)  Torey Krug

 

Krug exploded on the scene in the 2013 playoffs by scoring 4 goals against the Rangers in his NHL playoff debut.  The 5'9" blueliner is an underdog.  Undersized and sometimes out-muscled, but always seems to make the smart "think ahead" play.  He's masterful at creating scoring chances and drives the Bs power play.  Many of my friends do not like him for considering him a defensive liability, but I've been telling everyone the entire playoffs that he has been the most consistent and best player for the Bruins (he led the team in points in the Finals btw and overall points if you take away empty net points for that matter).  If the Bruins forwards could actually finish, he would have had at least 10 more assists.  He was extremely physical all playoffs and didn't shy away from anyone.  As a vertically challenged person myself at 5'10", he is someone I love to see succeed.  Anyways, I just felt like letting everyone know that he is my 2nd favorite Bruin all time, that I've seen live.  1 being Bergeron and 3 being Bourque.  I'll round out the top 5 with Chara and Thomas.  Sure the great #4 Bobby Orr was best, but hey, I'm not THAT old.

 

3rd Ryan O'Reilly

 

Now it's time to give credit where credit is due.  Holy sh!t was this guy a beast all playoffs long.  He is the reason St. Louis took home the Cup (well, and Binnington, but mostly O'Reilly).  He deserved that Conn Smythe.  Just dominated at both ends of the ice.  He also played with a broken effing rib that he suffered in the 2nd round vs. Dallas.  There is nothing not to like about this guy.  If Krug and Rask (debatable) get an A+, O'Reilly deserves an A++.  I remember a story 2-3 seasons ago when Crosby speared him in the marbles, O'Reilly was asked about it after the game and basically said "eh, it's hockey, it happens".  Man, I wish this guy was a Bruin.  I am currently looking for the GPHM version of O'Reilly. 


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 


#248

Posted June 15, 2019 - 05:51 PM

Kyle44

    Head Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: March 2019
16
Rep - Helpful

I am currently looking for the GPHM version of O'Reilly. 

 

Man wouldn't that be the best haha

 

After games, I like scrolling through comments from the fans of the team that lost.  I always see Bruins fans sh!tting on Rask.  He went through that rough patch before his leave of absence.  Afterwards, he yet again proved his ability to dominate basically up to game 7 (few rough patches in between but not major).  Krug is honestly a beast.  His trainwreck hit Robert Thomas was amazing to watch, this coming from someone who hates the Bruins.  



#249

Posted June 15, 2019 - 07:29 PM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • 7 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
555
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

Man wouldn't that be the best haha

 

After games, I like scrolling through comments from the fans of the team that lost.  I always see Bruins fans sh!tting on Rask.  He went through that rough patch before his leave of absence.  Afterwards, he yet again proved his ability to dominate basically up to game 7 (few rough patches in between but not major).  Krug is honestly a beast.  His trainwreck hit Robert Thomas was amazing to watch, this coming from someone who hates the Bruins.  

 

Haha.  Yeah, most Boston fans can be really passionate.  It can be annoying at times.  I'm too old to get all bent outta shape or blow my lid on social media :) (I must have got it all out when we lost to Chicago).

 

I don't "hate" Rask, nor do I wish for his failure.  He's a really good goalie and I'd love to see him win a Cup.  I just think he's overrated, that's all.  I trust him to get Boston to the playoffs - and to provide solid play when the Bruins play well... but I don't trust him to steal games in big moments.  It's been proven over and over again.  He was given 3 chances to steal a game in the Finals (games 2, 4 & 5) when Boston played below average.  Then in game 7 the Bs outshot STL 12-2 and had all the momentum and he lets in the next 2.  I saw it coming and it's frustrating.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 


#250

Posted June 15, 2019 - 08:18 PM

Kyle44

    Head Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: March 2019
16
Rep - Helpful

Ya fair enough.  The Rangers have a very critical fan base too.  I feel like Rask is better suited in a tandem type role.  If he had a goalie that was similar in skill splitting games with him, he would probably perform better.  Kinda like a Schnieder and Luongo tandem in Vancouver at the time or a Smith / Rittich tandem.  That way it would reduce some pressure off of him.



#251

Posted June 16, 2019 - 05:36 AM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             
I don't "hate" Rask, nor do I wish for his failure.  He's a really good goalie and I'd love to see him win a Cup.  I just think he's overrated, that's all.  I trust him to get Boston to the playoffs - and to provide solid play when the Bruins play well... but I don't trust him to steal games in big moments.  It's been proven over and over again.  He was given 3 chances to steal a game in the Finals (games 2, 4 & 5) when Boston played below average.  Then in game 7 the Bs outshot STL 12-2 and had all the momentum and he lets in the next 2.  I saw it coming and it's frustrating.

 

 

Ya fair enough.  The Rangers have a very critical fan base too.  I feel like Rask is better suited in a tandem type role.  If he had a goalie that was similar in skill splitting games with him, he would probably perform better.  Kinda like a Schnieder and Luongo tandem in Vancouver at the time or a Smith / Rittich tandem.  That way it would reduce some pressure off of him.

 

In that case, every goalie is. Including Price. Rask's issue with so many games wasn't pressure but fatigue. That holds true for Lundqvist, Price, Luongo or any other goalie you start 60+ games.

 

In regards to stealing games Pens fans felt the same about Flower for a while even though it wasn't ever true and it is the same with Rask. Rask is capable of it but because of unrealistic views some have the opposite view of reality. Because of shot placement, where the shot was from and the direction of movement from both the skater and goalie Pietrangelo's shot was nearly unsavable for every NHL goalie. As for the first goal, it was going low blocker before being deflected to the 5 hole. Going low blocker means that any goalie would have been moving their blocker, thus their stick as well, in an attempt to make a save on the initial shot. Again another goal that was pretty much unsaveable for every NHL goalie unless they didn't ever see the initial shot and thus didn't move to save it. A save on either of those shots would have been frankly miraculous. The loss in game 7 wasn't because Rask couldn't steal the game because he let in some goals. It is because the Boston skaters made bad decisions in what they were doing that lead to extremely high-quality chances against that were going to be nearly impossible saves for Rask to make and then the Boston skaters were flat the rest of the game. The same is true for game 6 from 2013 against Chicago. Neither of those 2 goals against Chicago was saveable either. The first was a point-blank cross-crease pass that no goalie was ever going to save while the other was a deflected shot that then hit the post and just sat there to be poked in before anyone from Boston could do anything. Several years ago Stephen Valiquette created a system of analyzing shots against and grading them. Shots given an A grade are extremely difficult to save for any goalie. Each of those 4 shots that you criticize Raks for letting in is grade A.

 

When on his game Rask genuinely is one of the best goalies in the world. He was at his best during these playoffs and fully deserves that A given to him. Most of the goals against him this postseason were goals due to breakdowns in front of him that left him very little chance to make a save. Also do you not remember the 2014-2017 seasons when Boston's D core was below NHL average in quality and Rask had to stand on his head nearly every night just to keep the Bruins within sight of the playoffs and actually making it that last year? Edit: or even prior in these very playoffs. Had Rask not stolen game 4 against Toronto the Bs would have been out in 5 in the first round. Then game 5 against Columbus that the Bruins arguably should have lost but Rask kept the Bs close so they could come back and take a 3-2 series lead. Then the entire difference in the series against Carolina was goaltending. Two of those games the Hurricanes actually outplayed the Bruins but the goaltending for Carolina wasn't anywhere near Rask level.



#252

Posted June 16, 2019 - 07:44 AM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • 7 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
555
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

I dunno.  Sounds like excuses for Rask. 

 

I'd like to see the data behind the shot grades as I really don't think goals 1 and 2 from game 7 were unstoppable (goals 3 and 4 maybe).  I thought they were difficult saves, but very stoppable.  Binnington also made at least 5 difficult, but stoppable saves.

 

My next argument would be - if certain saves are "unstoppable" and their play highly depends on the players in front of them, why pay a goalie 7M per year when you could use that cap space to build up your team/skaters.  If guys like Binnington and Murray can outplay Rask and Rinne.  Seems like that is the direction the NHL is heading.  An average goalie with a solid team around them.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 


#253

Posted June 16, 2019 - 08:34 AM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             

Murray himself is at the level of Rask. He is just injury prone which will also lead to inconsistency issues and a quicker decline in his career. Binnington is thought of as just below Rask in level potentially at his best. Meaning while not world class is still great. That said as for your argument against just look at the Carolina/Boston series and then try to pass that off as a good idea. Alternately look at the SCF teams since forever and count the number of times a team with a less than great goalie even made the SCF. Since the 04 lockout it has only been one team. The 09-10 Flyers and they struggled to overcome their goalie issues all season and got beat in the SCF due to it despite having the deeper talented team.

 

That said both goals against Rask were extremely difficult saves at best. The first was actually unstoppable outright.

 

 

The initial shot is low blocker and Rask reacts to make the save as he should. However, O'Reilly deflects the shot to the 5 hole and with Rask reacting to the initial shot the 5 hole is open. This is a typical intentional shot for a deflection play in the NHL. Shoot low blocker and tip for 5 hole for this exact reason. It is an easy goal if the person deflecting is good at deflecting because the initial shot is intentionally getting the goalie to move their stick out of covering the 5 hole. The only defense is the defender tying up the stick which isn't done on this play. There is nothing Rask, or any other goalie ever could have done to make this save.

 

The second goal could be argued as saveable but a save would have been rather amazing, to be frank.

 

 

Pietrangelo is allowed to take the puck into the low slot forcing Rask to move laterally and then shoots, from the backhand, for the upper corner blocker side. Rask not only stays upright in his movement across, which is rather difficult, but he also keeps his blocker elevated when most goalies drop their blocker in such instances. Also, Rask manages to stay in good position while moving across. Something that is also rather difficult to do. The key thing, however, is that moving the play laterally changes the angle to a favorable one for the shooter when they shoot to the side that they are going. There is nothing that a goalie can do to make up for this outside of reacting to the shot when it happens. However, Pietrangelo's shot is, in goalie circle terms, the perfect shot and realistically cannot be saved. It is too far for Rask to reach in time with the shot so close to him. This goal is entirely on Marchand. First, he skated slowly to the bench to change in the first place which allowed him to get caught. Second, when he was caught he then abanded his man to change anyway leaving them wide open. Either hustle to the bench to get off or stay in the play once caught to deny the play and see where it goes from there.

 

Neither goal can Rask be realistically or fairly blamed for as he realistically didn't ever have a chance to save them.



#254

Posted June 16, 2019 - 01:07 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             

An add on to the last part in regards to paying top goalies. The same goes for top skaters too. It is about getting the best and most consistent players that you can. While Sam Gagner and Conner McDavid are both fully capable of putting up a lot of points a night which is more likely to do it on a more regular basis? Same goes for goalies. While someone like McElhinney might be able to outduel Rask once every ten games it is once every ten games. A majority of times with NHL teams in front of them Rask is winning that matchup. That is why you pay Rask the money. Also, no the NHL isn't going in that direction at all. Outside of the Hurricanes, Avs and Sharks every team that made the playoffs had a great goalie. Yes, even the Islanders and Flames.

 

Lehner doesn't get the credit he deserves for what he did in Buffalo. Ok, it was one great season followed by a bit of a dud but remember that he was dealing with very serious personal distractions and a really bad team in front of him and still managed to pull out a somewhat respectable season. He then goes to a much better defensive team while getting his life under control and we got to see what he is capable of. Next year I am honestly expecting around 2.30GAA and .925% from him as he has the talent to do it and maintain that for most of his career. He was seen as the next Lundqvist when he was coming into the league. He has the talent.

 

Ok, I grant that Mike Smith is very likely over the hill at this point of his career so it might be a bit unfair to call him great now but what he did in the playoffs makes me more than willing to still tag him as great for the time being. That is very tentative though and I am more than willing to quickly rescind that if he doesn't have another good season. I will be honest though. I am not expecting it. Neither are other analysts which is why they don't call him great anymore which is more than fair. However, for the majority of 6 seasons, he was backstopping what was arguably the worst team in the NHL every year and ending most seasons with around 2.65 and 915. Above the NHL average. Allowing the team to flirt with the playoffs almost every year. When he did drag that team to the playoffs he turned in a world-class 2.21 930 effort. Which is why I am still rather upset at how the Coyotes got knocked out right after a horrible non-call. Proof that NHL refs have been badly missing calls in the playoffs for years.

 

The only teams out of the playoffs with great goalies is Montreal and Anaheim. I am willing to give asterisks to Chicago, Florida, NJ, and LA though. All teams with goalies that were either great or world class but have been hampered by injuries or age just catching up to them. I'm not willing to give Schneider, Quick or Luongo the status that they once had as great/world class goalies because I do think those days are now behind them however I want to see if Crawford can still provide the goaltending he once was capable of. Lundqvist used to be great too but age has caught up to him. That said the Rangers may have brought in the next Russian great that is looking to have the potential to be world class. I'm not going to hype him into generational like I have heard a few others say however Shesterkin might create some fun issues for the Rangers. Hart and Demko are the other young goalies looking like they might become great goalies soon.

 

Basically, unless you have a great goalie you aren't likely to make the playoffs and if you do without having one you typically don't go far in the playoffs.

 

Also, I am willing to bet that Carolina resigns Mrazek to 4+ mil a year. I don't know if they resign McElhinny too but I wouldn't resign Mrazek and if I did it would be to trade him. I would resign Mc and see what Nedeljkovic can do or look for something better than Mrazek in FA or via trade.



#255

Posted June 16, 2019 - 06:04 PM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • 7 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
555
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

I guess I just don't feel like those shots were "unstoppable".  Every shot can be saved - some more difficult than others.  And if I'm rating the difficulty on a scale from 1-10, both goals were an 8 (we can agree to disagree on this).  I think the saves that Binnington made in game 7 were far more difficult than the ones Rask let in.

 

Sure, Marchand is 100% to blame for goal #2.  That doesn't mean Rask shouldn't bail him out.  (Side story: my kids accidentally let our dog out of the yard last week and right before she ran across the road I was able to grab her leash and save her from a car going about 30. It wouldn't have been my fault she got hit, but I was great in a clutch moment. If that was Rask's dog, it would be a pancake right now).  

 

The Bs didn't generate many chances in the 2nd and 3rd.  But they dominated the 1st only to go into intermission down 2-0, by giving up only 4 shots.  That's a momentum killer.

 

I believe in the big/clutch/timely save.  Whatever people want to call it.  Rask doesn't have it.  He shows flashes of greatness, but in the end is always a few saves short.  I'm not basing this on just these 3 examples (Philly, Chi, STL).  It's just what I've seen over the past 10 years of watching him.  I could probably break down 95% of the goals he's let in to prove they weren't his fault, but in the end, you sometimes have to make saves your not supposed to... if you want to win a Cup. 


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 


#256

Posted June 16, 2019 - 09:43 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             

Everyone believes in the timely save thing and Rask does have it. If he didn't the Bruins wouldn't have made it past the 1st round this offseason. We also do disagree and that is ok. I don't know how intimate your knowledge about the goalie position is but I know that you also view things from a B's fans perspective. Thus you are going to have a natural bias on things in certain ways. Some right and some wrong. There isn't anything wrong with that either.

 

I don't think any save Binnigton was asked to make was nearly as hard as those two shots on Rask. Binnington was asked to come up with some very difficult saves but none of them were bordering on impossible. Using your scale Binnington only faced a handful 9s at worst whereas Rask faced 3 10s to go with a handful of 9s at least. He even saved one of the 10s. St. Louis created better quality chances than the Bruins throughout the entirety of the game and the Bruins only created 4 to St. Louis' 2 after the 1st with the 2 by St. Louis being the best chances created all game.

 

All that said that dog story is not applicable at all.

 

Edit: After thinking about this post I realized that the wording of it can make it look like I am trying to discredit you. That was never my intent as I was only trying to point out what I thought were the origins of why we disagreed.  If you took this post to be aggressive or negative in a manner like that than I do apologize as it was not my intent whatsoever. This entire discussion between us was over a difference of opinion. An opinion that frankly neither of us can be proven right on.



#257

Posted June 17, 2019 - 08:20 AM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • 7 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
555
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

 

All that said that dog story is not applicable at all.

 

Edit: After thinking about this post I realized that the wording of it can make it look like I am trying to discredit you. That was never my intent as I was only trying to point out what I thought were the origins of why we disagreed.  If you took this post to be aggressive or negative in a manner like that than I do apologize as it was not my intent whatsoever. This entire discussion between us was over a difference of opinion. An opinion that frankly neither of us can be proven right on.

 

I didn't take it that way at all.  You made some valid points - and it's cool to have people around to chat hockey whether the opinions differ or not.

 

I nearly spit my coffee out to your response to the dog story!  LOL.  I threw that in there for some comic relief. 

 

I probably am bias in my opinion of Rask.  But I remember going through the same emotions with Tim Thomas when BOS fell short a few times in the playoffs, but I never felt like he wasn't clutch or couldn't make the big save.  I always defended him.  I dunno - it's just a different feeling I get with Tuukka.  ...and Thomas playing out of his mind in 2011 doesn't help it either.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 


#258

Posted June 17, 2019 - 02:08 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • 24 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
380
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile


             

I didn't take it that way at all.  You made some valid points - and it's cool to have people around to chat hockey whether the opinions differ or not.

 

I nearly spit my coffee out to your response to the dog story!  LOL.  I threw that in there for some comic relief. 

 

I probably am bias in my opinion of Rask.  But I remember going through the same emotions with Tim Thomas when BOS fell short a few times in the playoffs, but I never felt like he wasn't clutch or couldn't make the big save.  I always defended him.  I dunno - it's just a different feeling I get with Tuukka.  ...and Thomas playing out of his mind in 2011 doesn't help it either.

 

I got the comic part of the dog story but it just isn't applicable. Not because dog dying but performance in sports, specifically goalie skills here, doesn't translate into out of sports things like that pretty much at all. Maybe in catching china that fell off of a table.

 

I like Thomas more than Rask too but I am more than willing to concede that while Thomas was a great goalie Rask is considered world class for a reason.



#259

Posted June 17, 2019 - 02:18 PM

Kyle44

    Head Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: March 2019
16
Rep - Helpful

I honestly laughed hard at Paul's dog example.  It is not applicable but funny af imo



#260

Posted June 17, 2019 - 02:29 PM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • 7 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
555
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

How can you guys say the dog story isn't applicable?  LOL

It was the perfect combination of anticipation, athleticism and reaction (or in GPHM terms, Reflexes 99, Athletic 99, Positioning 99, Spirit 99, Endurance 99, Leash Control 99) - and in a clutch/timely scenario where a lot is on the line - while bailing out someone else's mistake.  It's the perfect comparison for the "Marchand lack of awareness" goal from Game 7.  Think of the dog as the puck, the road as the goal, my kids as Marchand, the speeding car as Pietrangelo and me as Rask (but I actually made the save, so Tim Thomas or Jordan Binnington).  :D


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users