Combined Goalie Discussion thread

[Mess]

I think he used 3 years because he wanted to show the effect Keefe’s systems had on the goalies.

Exactly correct

There is this perception that Dubas with his choice of coach Keefe and his goalie choices make the Leafs better, but the team results suggest the opposite is true.

The Leafs use to be a Top 5 team in overall Save % during their record setting 105 point season. Sporting a 4th best .917 overall.

Then Dubas was hired and now Leafs receive below average Team SV%. Finishing 19th, 15th and last year 22nd.

So why are results so poor, is it coach Keefe, the system, or the GM constantly downgrading the goalie position ?

Now we are trying Murray at .906 sv% and Samsonov at .896 SV% as the plan to improve the Leafs team save %. With team results showing declining results.

 

[Mess]

What's this 86.5 point bet? Fill me in, does Mess figure the Leafs are going to finish the season with around 86 points?

He is just misquoting a former post of mine where I for fun experiment simply replaced Murray and Samsonov official stats from last season with Jack Campbell and Mrazek to see what the cause and effect of that would have been (past tense) , had they been Leafs goalies instead.

It has nothing to do with the upcoming season predictions it was simply MATH using last years goalie records win-loss and games played stats and swapping in the new guys in place of the old guys.

Goalie comparison Last year Goalie group vs this year new Goalie group based on 2021-22 stats based on actual win-loss record by goalies.

Former goalies
--------------------------------------------------------------
Campbell + Mrazek + Kallgren + Woll + Hutchenson = 82 games 54 wins 21 losses 7 OTL = 115 points [New Franchise Record]

including [Campbell .. 49 games 31 - 9 - 6 record (= 68 points) & Mrazek 20 games 12 - 6 - 0 record (= 24 points) ]

vs

New Goalies
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ilya Samsonov ...... 44 games .. 23-12-5 record = 51 points
Erik Kallgren ...........14 games .... 8-4-1 record = 17 points
Matt Murray .......... 20 games .....5-12-2 record = 12 points
Joseph Woll ............. 4 games .....3-1-0 record = 6 points

Total ................. 82 games .. 39 wins 29 losses 8 OTL = 86 points.

Total : Last year's goalies .. 82 games & 115 points - New goalies ... 82 games & 86 points = - 29 points (- 15 less wins).

The downgrade from Campbell & Mrazek to Murray & Samsonov would have resulted in -29 point reduction and non playoff team and just slightly above a .500 hockey team based on 2021-22 results.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Again, all this does is set a low bar for Murray and Samsonov as if we've found a solution already, but in the end we still need them to give us something approaching Campbell's October .918 SV%, and April .915 SV% goaltending, if not November .959 SV%. And like I said, we can only have the answer when we actually see them in action.

Nobody said we have a guaranteed solution. In fact, I'm the one who said we'll have to wait and see. But the discussion was about Campbell's results last season, which we already did see, and fact is, he was slightly below average overall. The bar to surpass the overall goaltending we got last season is pretty low. And what we need more than a 0.959 November is a goalie that avoids the 0.880 January, the 0.894 February, the 0.845 March, and the 0.897 playoffs. Especially behind top end defensive play that flatters a goalie's SV%.

If we go by the idea that Dubas can't find goalie solutions because of what happened in the market, what kind of vote of confidence is that for management?

Our management isn't in charge of who other teams make available. The only goalie traded at the deadline was having a worse season and ended up have a worse playoffs, and there were reasons to have belief in Campbell.

So, why was our GM betting our season on a critical position with a $1.65 million goalie when he could have made a longer term fix at the 2020-21 offseason?

Campbell making 1.65m is irrelevant. There wasn't a "longer term fix" available in the 2020-2021 offseason either, and Campbell was coming off a good season himself.

 

[Bomber0104]

Would it make you happier if every single poster here was as negative about everything leafs here? Tho I'm sure some posters here are fake leaf fans (trolls) that just like to get their jollies off people here who only have criticism and doom mentality.

Also, even the biggest homers here are just as dissapointed as you about the first round exits... They just don't feel the need to play the "end of the world card" which gets tired to read over and over again.

New season, new hope. Let's cheer our boys on.
Go leafs go

Don't worry what I think.

Worry about the results we see with the team each passing year.

Mounting losses and wasted seasons...

 

[Bomber0104]

Nobody said we have a guaranteed solution. In fact, I'm the one who said we'll have to wait and see. But the discussion was about Campbell's results last season, which we already did see, and fact is, he was slightly below average overall. The bar to surpass the overall goaltending we got last season is pretty low. And what we need more than a 0.959 November is a goalie that avoids the 0.880 January, the 0.894 February, the 0.845 March, and the 0.897 playoffs. Especially behind top end defensive play that flatters a goalie's SV%.

Our management isn't in charge of who other teams make available. The only goalie traded at the deadline was having a worse season and ended up have a worse playoffs, and there were reasons to have belief in Campbell.

Campbell making 1.65m is irrelevant. There wasn't a "longer term fix" available in the 2020-2021 offseason either, and Campbell was coming off a good season himself.

And who paired up that supposed failed goalie Campbell with an absolute disgrace of a signing in Mrazek and wasted another season away for the Leafs last year?

Dubas!

Squabbling over abstract nonsense stats doesn't change the fact Dubas sucks at goalie evaluation and completely wasted yet another year of contention for this team.

How many more early 1st round defeats will it take for people to understand the guy just flat-out sucks at GM'ing?

Oh wait, let's try the last place teams' worst goalie and think that's the solution!

He's got at least a couple people here fooled.

 

[Bomber0104]

He is just misquoting a former post of mine where I for fun experiment simply replaced Murray and Samsonov official stats from last season with Jack Campbell and Mrazek to see what the cause and effect of that would have been, had they been Leafs goales instead.

It has nothing to do with the upcoming season predictions it was simply MATH using last years goalie records win loss and games played and swapping in the new guys in place of the old guys.

I thought we lost all of those old Brian Burke and Nonis fans constantly tugging at your cape @Mess??

 

[Bomber0104]

He believed in Campbell. That didnt work out and he ended up with below average starting goaltending for $1.65M. Its right to question Dubas and his handling of the goaltending last year. Its also fair to question the ones hes brought in this summer IMO.

I'll add that i understand the belief in Campbell this past summer (2021) even if it was a gamble they lost. It felt like they re-evaluated throughout the year but didnt pay the cost to upgrade at the deadline when they saw their division load up.

All fans really require are results at the end of the day.

Dubas failed to get quality goaltending and it cost the Leafs yet another first round exit.

Your belief system and your belief in what you think are Dubas' beliefs matter exactly zero net against results.

The Leafs keep losing, and all these amount to are a very sorry sack of excuses!

 

[cookie]

It really is annoying to see Mrazek's signing be judged without taking into account the multiple groin injuries he faced during the year (Oct 14, re-aggravate Oct 30, out six weeks Mar 30) and the bout with covid. Similarly, I believe Campbell's numbers were impacted by his own set of injuries. The common denominator in both instances are things beyond the control of the coach or the GM. As such, one can't critique the goaltending depth when the first, second, and third option see significant time in the IR.

Yes there were options available in UFA and through trades but with Mrazek having negative trade value and eating up significant cap space, the cost of acquisition for a legitimate option that could backstop the Leafs, or at least Campbell, to the cup was exorbitant/non-existent:
Fleury's cap hit was $7M,
Khudobin had even worse stats than Mrazek,
CBJ was being idiotic with their ask for Korpisalo, and
Varlamov had a 16-team NTC

Both Hutchinson and Hutton proved they weren't NHL material

It would have been nice to see an answer internally, like Woll making his mark or Kallgren coming out of nowhere... but it would have also been nice to see other younger goalies in the organization make marked improvements and win jobs as opposed to retire due to... injuries.

 

[deprw]

All fans really require are results at the end of the day.

Dubas failed to get quality goaltending and it cost the Leafs yet another first round exit.

Your belief system and your belief in what you think are Dubas' beliefs matter exactly zero net against results.

The Leafs keep losing, and all these amount to are a very sorry sack of excuses!

In the end all that matters is winning, but I'd say in most cases succesful eras and franchises are built on some sort of stability. That we haven't never had here. I still believe Shanahan and Dubas more than their predecessors or changing guard at this exact moment. They haven't put all their eggs on one basket, which has been strategy here as long as I have been a fan. In some sense this goalie situation mirrors that and with all the fairness to all parties. There haven't been any known solutions available to fix our goaltending.

Nobody said we have a guaranteed solution. In fact, I'm the one who said we'll have to wait and see.

There haven't been guaranteed solution available since Dubas started here. We could have continued with Andersen and we would have picked him part here and would hate him and Dubas to our guts, if he would have pulled that stunt he did with Hurricanes. Traded for Binnington or Gibson, then would have argued here that they were trending down and slumping. Like we have done with Murray all summer.

I understand all the scrutiny towards Dubas handling on goaltending and this years goalies, but talking about with some sort of certainty that there was our would be guaranteed solution available is as stupid as talking about "goalies are voodoo". If he would have revamped the goaltending department, that wouldn't have solved the problem, since we didn't have good enough prospect, that could have handled this situation.

Goalies are voodoo enough, that teams tend to keep their promising starters and prospects inside their system, which we have failed in for not having enough talent. Then there are these openings like Andersen with Ducks, Georgiev with Rangers, Husso with Blues or Samsonov with Capitals. Two goalies fighting for the sole position and you lose the other one.

Then we debate here, if we have picked the winning solution. I'd say pretty much everyone here would have picked Samsonov over Husso last summer. Like you said now we'll have to wait and see. Potential wise we have more than we did have with Mrazek, Campbell, Andersen or their predecessors. Potential with tons of question marks, but all other potential solutions would have had reasons to pick them apart.

We'll see in few months, but I'd like to throw a ball to all Dubas haters, that give me a goalie, that would have fixed our team and we would have known it. Also that goalie would have been available. Traded, signed or reliable rumors of being available.

 

[Mess]

It really is annoying to see Mrazek's signing be judged without taking into account the multiple groin injuries he faced during the year (Oct 14, re-aggravate Oct 30, out six weeks Mar 30) and the bout with covid. Similarly, I believe Campbell's numbers were impacted by his own set of injuries. The common denominator in both instances are things beyond the control of the coach or the GM. As such, one can't critique the goaltending depth when the first, second, and third option see significant time in the IR.

That is the thing Mrazek only 20 games last year.. But he only played 14 games the prior season with Carolina due to injuries when the GM gave him his 3 year X $3.8 mil deal.

Taking on a injury prone risk goalie you know of in advance through your own due diligence is on the GM making the decision. You can't hide behind injuries when you knew the background injury first first.

Now enter Matt Murray .. He only played in 20 games last year the same # as injury prone Mrazek dressed for the Leafs.

Murray also has a long injury history well documented dating back years, but included 38 games missed last year alone, with multiple serious brain injury concussions.

So hopefully after next season, the reasoning here isn't the same its not the GM's fault for Murray's injuries and time on IR, because not only are the Leafs taking on Murray's struggling play on the ice as a major gamble, but also facing an equally high injury risk situation. We know that going in, however this isn't hindsight analysis, should the pattern continue.

We're hoping Murray's health holds up , not looking for more how could anyone see this coming retrospective analysis to avoid blaming the GM for taking this gamble.

 

[ToneDog]

That is the thing Mrazek only 20 games last year.. But he only played 14 games the prior season with Carolina due to injuries when the GM gave him his 3 year X $3.8 mil deal.

Taking on a injury prone risk goalie you know of in advance through your own due diligence is on the GM making the decision. You can't hide behind injuries when you knew the background injury first first.

Now enter Matt Murray .. He only played in 20 games last year the same # as injury prone Mrazek dressed for the Leafs.

Murray also has a long injury history well documented dating back years, but included 38 games missed last year alone, with multiple serious brain injury concussions.

View attachment 583583

So hopefully after next season, the reasoning here isn't the same its not the GM's fault for Murray's injuries and time on IR, because not only are the Leafs taking on Murray's struggling play on the ice as a major gamble, but also facing an equally high injury risk situation. We know that going in, however this isn't hindsight analysis, should the pattern continue.

We're hoping Murray's health holds up , not looking for more how could anyone see this coming retrospective analysis to avoid blaming the GM for taking this gamble.

Difference is that the genius brought in Mrazek as the backup. Murray is coming in as the starter.

At the end of the day, if Murray gets us over the hump, it is a win. As long as it costs Dubas his job if Murray flops, it is win-win for Leaf fans. God help us if Murray flops and Dubas is promoted.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I think he used 3 years because he wanted to show the effect Keefe’s systems had on the goalies.

To show Keefe's effect he'd need to show the numbers before&after. That's leaving aside for the moment how valid an approach that would be to begin with.

 

[Mess]

To show Keefe's effect he'd need to show the numbers before&after. That's leaving aside for the moment how valid an approach that would be to begin with.

See post #151 this thread for before and after analysis.

Combined Goalie Discussion thread

I think he used 3 years because he wanted to show the effect Keefe’s systems had on the goalies. Exactly correct There is this perception that Dubas with his choice of coach Keefe and his goalie choices make the Leafs better, but the team results suggest the opposite is true. The Leafs use...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[hockeywiz542]

 

[Stephen]

He believed in Campbell. That didnt work out and he ended up with below average starting goaltending for $1.65M. Its right to question Dubas and his handling of the goaltending last year. Its also fair to question the ones hes brought in this summer IMO.

I'll add that i understand the belief in Campbell this past summer (2021) even if it was a gamble they lost. It felt like they re-evaluated throughout the year but didnt pay the cost to upgrade at the deadline when they saw their division load up.

See, I agree with you in the understanding the bet on Campbell and think Campbell gave us more or less adequate goaltending in aggregate. Just don't think one can kick Campbell down without firewalling the GM from such a big gamble.

Murray and Samsonov are also big rolls of the dice, but we just have to wait and see what they can do before commenting.

 

[Mess]

So, why was our GM betting our season on a critical position with a $1.65 million goalie when he could have made a longer term fix at the 2020-21 offseason?

The more Campbell is kicked in the butt, the bigger the questions involving why the Leafs trusted him in the first place.

The very same posters praising the GM last year for his 1A/1B tandem choice of Campbell and Mrazek predicting Leafs have a strong well above average goaltending team now. seem to have done a complete 180 after seeing the Leafs finishing with the 22nd ranked Team Save% and below league average. Wonder if they realize the more they rip Campbell and Murray the more blowback that is on the decision maker Dubas.

Those that suggested last year that with foresight Campbell, that had never played more than 38 games in a season, and Mrazek was injury prone after only playing 14 games, would not give the Leafs high-end goaltending, but rather suspected below average and Leafs would suffer as a result. Luckily Matthews saved them with his 60 goal season to help outscore the goalie mistakes and low sv%.

Leafs this year are taking on even more risk in net with the previous goalies replacements, and coming in with injury history and known poor play that shows both newcomers sv% below league average to start.

I find that with the GM previous track record of goaltending with all his options Sparks, Hutchinson, Campbell,. Rittich, Mrazek essentially going south, that there is SO much confidence in the new goalies considering their stats and injury history going in.

 

[andora]

I was curious about somethimg after reading these last few back and forths. Interesting

Last two seasons 5 on 5 leafs ranked:

HDCA/60 - 8th overall
HDSA/60 - 6th overall

MDCA/60 - 14th
MDSA/60 - 14th

LDCA/60 - 7th
LDSA/60 - 10th

So it would suggest medium danger is where we give up the most. Last 2 years goalies that have played 2000 or more minutes 5on5 - 49 goalies total

Murray - 2046.5 minutes
HDSV% - 32nd
MDSV% - 49th
LDSV% - 9th

Samsonov - 2774.5 minutes
HDSV% - 48th
MDSV% - 12th
LDSV% - 44th

Campbell - 3343 minutes
HDSV% - 43rd
MDSV% - 5th
LDSV% - 12th

 

[Gary Nylund]

See post #151 this thread for before and after analysis.

Combined Goalie Discussion thread

I think he used 3 years because he wanted to show the effect Keefe’s systems had on the goalies. Exactly correct There is this perception that Dubas with his choice of coach Keefe and his goalie choices make the Leafs better, but the team results suggest the opposite is true. The Leafs use...

forums.hfboards.com

There's a lot more to it then "Keefe's system", different goalies being the most obvious one.

 

[Gallagbi]

See, I agree with you in the understanding the bet on Campbell and think Campbell gave us more or less adequate goaltending in aggregate. Just don't think one can kick Campbell down without firewalling the GM from such a big gamble.

Murray and Samsonov are also big rolls of the dice, but we just have to wait and see what they can do before commenting.

Building up or tearing down the GM isnt a motivation in my player evaluations.

The sum of those evaluations (and their value/circumstances) will impact my view on the GM, but who made the decision isnt the driver on how effective the player is.

This seems to be your hang-up

 

[Stephen]

The very same posters praising the GM last year for his 1A/1B tandem choice of Campbell and Mrazek predicting Leafs have a strong well above average goaltending team now. seem to have done a complete 180 after seeing the Leafs finishing with the 22nd ranked Team Save% and below league average. Wonder if they realize the more they rip Campbell and Murray the more blowback that is on the decision maker Dubas.

Those that suggested last year that with foresight Campbell, that had never played more than 38 games in a season, and Mrazek was injury prone after only playing 14 games, would not give the Leafs high-end goaltending, but rather suspected below average and Leafs would suffer as a result. Luckily Matthews saved them with his 60 goal season to help outscore the goalie mistakes and low sv%.

Leafs this year are taking on even more risk in net with the previous goalies replacements, and coming in with injury history and known poor play that shows both newcomers sv% below league average to start.

I find that with the GM previous track record of goaltending with all his options Sparks, Hutchinson, Campbell,. Rittich, Mrazek essentially going south, that there is SO much confidence in the new goalies considering their stats and injury history going in.

Goaltending wouldn't be my first choice for these annual Moneyball bets. Generally I'd save the reclamations and betting on bottom six and mid to bottom pair defensemen or maybe an accessory forward on a top six role. But I guess with Murray and Samsonov we'll just have to see if we luck into a solution.

 

[Gallagbi]

He is just misquoting a former post of mine where I for fun experiment simply replaced Murray and Samsonov official stats from last season with Jack Campbell and Mrazek to see what the cause and effect of that would have been (past tense) , had they been Leafs goalies instead.

It has nothing to do with the upcoming season predictions it was simply MATH using last years goalie records win-loss and games played stats and swapping in the new guys in place of the old guys.

Probably best to distance yourself from it. We cant have another "Leafs are a bubble playoff team" scenario

 

[Stephen]

Building up or tearing down the GM isnt a motivation in my player evaluations.

The sum of those evaluations (and their value/circumstances) will impact my view on the GM, but who made the decision isnt the driver on how effective the player is.

This seems to be your hang-up

How can negative evaluations of players at critical positions - that lead to undesired results - be firewalled from the people who make those decisions?

Put it another way. When JFJ screwed up the Raycroft trade, did the follow up Toskala deal give you the warm and fuzzies? We won't know about Murray and Samsonov until we see them on the ice.

 

[Gallagbi]

How can negative evaluations of players at critical positions - that lead to undesired results - be firewalled from the people who make those decisions?

If you want my analysis of Dubas, ask for it. If you want my analysis of Campbell, read it.

My thoughts on Dubas overall job doesnt drive the narrative for Campbell. My viewings of the player, numbers and results do

 

[Its not your fault]

I'm going to take a wild guess here and say you took the last 3 years because if you took the last 1/2/4/5 years, the numbers for Murray/Samsonov would look better and thus wouldn't suit your agenda. Am I wrong?

They also must have played for the same team. To be even more accurate.

How can negative evaluations of players at critical positions - that lead to undesired results - be firewalled from the people who make those decisions?

Put it another way. When JFJ screwed up the Raycroft trade, did the follow up Toskala deal give you the warm and fuzzies? We won't know about Murray and Samsonov until we see them on the ice.

Didn't he still break the most wins in a season?

 

[Stephen]

If you want my analysis of Dubas, ask for it. If you want my analysis of Campbell, read it.

My thoughts on Dubas overall job doeant drive the narrative for Campbell

How could Jack Campbell's track record not be tied overall to Kyle Dubas' track record as a GM? By design, circumstances, lack of other options, etc. Kyle Dubas has entrusted 40% of his playoff runs at a critical position to Jack Campbell which all have had undesired results. Personally, I thought Campbell was actually okay and Dubas came out ahead on the gamble. But you can't kick down an outgoing Leaf without it looking bad on the management team that put him in that critical position.