Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Anton Forsberg

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
He hasn't been that bad this season. The reality is that there is a shortage of NHL goalies and with many of the rule changes resulting in higher scoring, an 889 save percentage is mostly fine for a backup. He is probably still a top 45 goalie in the league, which says more about goaltending than it does about him.
Click to expand...

His sv% is really bolstered by the two shutouts, which in a small sample can really skew things (though tbf, as can a really bad outing).

The thing is, from a backup, you need consistency, someone that will just give you an honest chance, it's not about someone that will steal games, it's about someone that won't lose them on his own. Idk if Forsberg has given us that this year.

I guess what it boils down to is he's got a top 32 cap hit among goalies to play a game this year, I think we'd be better off paying someone close to league min, because we aren't getting value for his contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Relapsing and ChurchOfAlfie
Micklebot said:
His sv% is really bolstered by the two shutouts, which in a small sample can really skew things (though tbf, as can a really bad outing).

The thing is, from a backup, you need consistency, someone that will just give you an honest chance, it's not about someone that will steal games, it's about someone that won't lose them on his own. Idk if Forsberg has given us that this year.

I guess what it boils down to is he's got a top 32 cap hit among goalies to play a game this year, I think we'd be better off paying someone close to league min, because we aren't getting value for his contract.
Click to expand...
You use Natural Stat trick right? Are there any other sites you would recommend?
 
When the margins for success are as thin as they are, a capable backup is the difference between making the playoffs and missing it.


I was pretty convinced going into the season that Forsberg was going to cost us a playoff spot, and although the team is disappointing in other ways, he is certainly a big contributor to that.

Yet another gross misjudgment of talent by the previous regime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigRig4 and Relapsing
Loach said:
You use Natural Stat trick right? Are there any other sites you would recommend?
Click to expand...
Depends what you are looking for.

Natural statrick is good for your typcial advanced stats.
Moneypuck has some niche stats like goals saved above expected, DZ giveaways as well as an alternative model for xG
NHL.com has a robust filter system that can be handy.
Puckiq has some unique QOC stats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loach
Senscore said:
Yet another gross misjudgment of talent by the previous regime.
Click to expand...
To be fair to the previous regime, Forsberg was half decent before the double knee injury, not sure if that caused long term issues, or if he was just a poor bet,


Oouf, I just looked at his Hockeyreference page, his Quality start % is .273.... that's miserable.
 
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
He hasn't been that bad this season. The reality is that there is a shortage of NHL goalies and with many of the rule changes resulting in higher scoring, an 889 save percentage is mostly fine for a backup. He is probably still a top 45 goalie in the league, which says more about goaltending than it does about him.
Click to expand...
Ullmark is 37th, Forsberg 51st in SV% (min 5 games).

Goaltending is depressing for this team as usual.
 
we really should have had yesterdays game, 9 saves on 12 shots is just bad

we should just run ullmark until christmas, especially since he has started to play better
 
Loach said:
You use Natural Stat trick right? Are there any other sites you would recommend?
Click to expand...
I like NST ... more one stop shopping. They have filters and can toggle between counts and rates (/60) ; linemates; defensive pairs etc
Moneypuck for goalies
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loach
Wallet Inspector said:
Caused Dorion to carelessly trade away Gustavsson on the basis that we would have had a 1A/1B scenario with Forsberg and Talbot.
Click to expand...

What a nightmare. Made me look at some takes I had 2 years ago

- it's a dead contract because we don't need him (Forsberg/Gustavsson) and is very injury prone anyway. (2022, I was talking about Matt Murray)

- but now without Gustavsson, all our eggs are in the Sogaard basket I find (2022)

- Goalies are only a reflection of the team and systems in front of them. I have seen enough about Gustavsson's ability that I think he could be a good goalie in this league (Oct 2022)

- I didn't want the Sens to spend a 10th OA pick on a goalie since we had Gus and Sogaard already but damn I regret these words... If I only knew who we'd draft... and that we'd trade Gustavsson... (Dec 2022)

- But why not go with Forsberg and Gustavsson? Why trade the 24 y/o goalie making $825,000 in salary this season for a veteran making $3,000,000? They really thought Talbot was going to be better on this team with this coaching staff? (Jan 2023)

So much Dorion PTSD lol

By trading Gustavsson, we absolutely needed Sogaard to work out (not trending well). Since then, Forsberg knees got blown and Sogaard is still not NHL ready so we had to trade a 1st round pick and Kastelic to get a starter plus give him a 8.25 AAV. And not only that, the original cost was a 7th OA pick and a 2nd (let's say we recovered the 3rd round pick value already)

Micklebot said:
To be fair to the previous regime, Forsberg was half decent before the double knee injury, not sure if that caused long term issues, or if he was just a poor bet,


Oouf, I just looked at his Hockeyreference page, his Quality start % is .273.... that's miserable.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, he just isn't the same goalie anymore. It looked like he might be back early on but as mentioned, can't go anywhere with a 0.273 QS%. When he was really good in 2021-22, he had .659 QS%. Even this year, Ullmark has a 0.563 QS%

That said, having a guy like Hamonic doesn't help, I'm sure like each one of his teammates, his stats are affected big time by it.
 
darude said:
Ullmark is 37th, Forsberg 51st in SV% (min 5 games).

Goaltending is depressing for this team as usual.
Click to expand...

Knock on wood, but Ullmark has been very good since after the Philadelphia collapse, and out of his last 6 starts, he has been elite for 5 of the 6.

As far as Forsberg goes, I think people have unrealistic expectations of what to expect from a backup goalie. I would have been fine with waiving him at training camp after a soft pre-season because there were multiple options on waivers. As far as now goes, his play has picked up a bit and there aren't a lot of goalies to go around.

He is overpaid for his role, but he fits his role. We have no one in the system with Sogaard failing to grab the brass ring, so if he will stay here on a 1 year contract we may not have a better option. Goalies are becoming increasingly hard to get, even Marcus Hogberg is back in the league because of it.
 
frightenedinmatenum2 said:
Knock on wood, but Ullmark has been very good since after the Philadelphia collapse, and out of his last 6 starts, he has been elite for 5 of the 6.

As far as Forsberg goes, I think people have unrealistic expectations of what to expect from a backup goalie. I would have been fine with waiving him at training camp after a soft pre-season because there were multiple options on waivers. As far as now goes, his play has picked up a bit and there aren't a lot of goalies to go around.

He is overpaid for his role, but he fits his role. We have no one in the system with Sogaard failing to grab the brass ring, so if he will stay here on a 1 year contract we may not have a better option. Goalies are becoming increasingly hard to get, even Marcus Hogberg is back in the league because of it.
Click to expand...
Forsberg has a Quality start % of .273 this year. That's 67th out of the 74 goalies to start a game this year.

League average is .565, Idk if it's unreasonable to expect somewhere around 50%. 54 goalies have a 50% or higher QS%, 60 are about 40%.

Idk, a bit below average is fine for a backup goalie, but he isn't that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChurchOfAlfie, darude and BonHoonLayneCornell
Micklebot said:
Forsberg has a Quality start % of .273 this year. That's 67th out of the 74 goalies to start a game this year.

League average is .565, Idk if it's unreasonable to expect somewhere around 50%. 54 goalies have a 50% or higher QS%, 60 are about 40%.

Idk, a bit below average is fine for a backup goalie, but he isn't that.
Click to expand...
My unofficial metric is "Did our backup give us a chance to win the game?"

I'd argue yes against the Islanders, fwiw. I just think the teams that win have either a tandem or a backup who can sometimes steal a game. Generally though, those teams aren't depending on their goalie; they play better in front of them.
 
darude said:
My unofficial metric is "Did our backup give us a chance to win the game?"

I'd argue yes against the Islanders, fwiw. I just think the teams that win have either a tandem or a backup who can sometimes steal a game. Generally though, those teams aren't depending on their goalie; they play better in front of them.
Click to expand...
That's essentially what quality starts are, only instead of a subject gut feeling, it's a threshold based on league average sv%.

The nyi game was an odd one, none of the goals were bad goals per say, but goalie need to save some quality chances.

I don't blame the lose on him, but he also didn't have the best game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darude
darude said:
My unofficial metric is "Did our backup give us a chance to win the game?"

I'd argue yes against the Islanders, fwiw. I just think the teams that win have either a tandem or a backup who can sometimes steal a game. Generally though, those teams aren't depending on their goalie; they play better in front of them.
Click to expand...
No chance.

Unless you allow twelve 2-on-0 for the dozen shots against, how can you say he gave us a chance to win, giving up 3 goals?!

The 1st one was a brutal rebound, just sitting there to be put back in, the 2nd could have been stopped by his stick before it was deflected and the last had him deep in his net.

The team played amazing in front of him and should have been able to win 2-1.

He may end up being fine, but he wasted his teams effort last night, and not for the 1st time this year.

We can't expect Ullmark to win every start from here on out, and in any case, we need to win games in which the team plays well enough to win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChurchOfAlfie
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom