Devils team discussion (news, notes and speculation) - 2023-24 season part III

[devilsblood]

That might be true...but it's hard to argue the guy is getting "goal support"

Early in games? Maybe not. I think Triumph was going to look into some of those numbers.

But overall, given his numbers vs his W-L record? Easy money to bet he gets a lot of support.

We're talking about predicting what they'll do moving forward, not what they're current stats are. Do you actually think that Kahkonen is a better goalie than Saros, Shesterkin and Vasilevskiy because he currently has a better save percentage this season?

Vanecek with the Devils: .903 SV%, -3.7 GSAA over 84 games.
Kahkonen with the Sharks: .895 SV% -23 GSAA over 74 games.

Over a larger sample size Vanecek has been a clearly better goaltender than Kahkonen in a similar time frame. People are just getting caught in the moment with Vanecek's poor play, there's zero reason to think Kahkonen is an improvement unless you choose to believe in short sample size noise vs a larger sample size.

You're missing some very basic elements in this conversation.

Acquiring Shesterkin or Vasilevsky are not options.

Saros might be, but will cost a ton.

Vitek has been one of the worst goalies in the league this year. Do we think that will turn around? I dunno but I think Fitz was hoping it would have happened already and that plays into why he hadn't made a move.

 

[JimEIV]

Early in games? Maybe not. I think Triumph was going to look into some of those numbers.

But overall, given his numbers vs his W-L record? Easy money to bet he gets a lot of support.

Hard to see how he gets support when we are 23 of 32 teams in time with a lead. We have started slow almost every game this season...Catching up is a regular occurrence.

https://morehockeystats.com/teams/leadingtrailing

 

[devilsblood]

Hard to see how he gets support when we are 23 of 32 teams in time with a lead.

https://morehockeystats.com/teams/leadingtrailing

Again, if he's one of the worst goalies in the league, he's letting in lots of goals which skews that stat.

I can look it up if you really want, but I'm pretty sure he get's plenty of support. How else would he have a good record with his GAA?

He's been okay over a 26 game sample size this season, but he was one of the worst goalies in the league over a 37 game sample size last season. I just don't get the logic of paying assets for a player that doesn't solidify the position and doesn't move the needle. Would you really feel more confident in this team if they had Kahkonen in net vs Vanecek or Daws?

It would be relatively little assets for a player who, this season, has been much better then Vitek, so thus would be a needle move.

Not to mention Vitek is currently out, which is a whole other thing.

 

[JimEIV]

Again, if he's one of the worst goalies in the lead, he's letting in lots of goals which skews that stat.

I can look it up if you really want, but I'm pretty sure he get's plenty of support. How else would he have a good record with his GAA?


It would be relatively little assets for a player who, this season, has been much better then Vitek, so thus would be a needle move.

Not to mention Vitek is currently out, which is a whole other thing.

We play catch up.... winning from behind isn't goal support. I think the disconnect here is what is "goal support"

Goal support is playing with a lead to me? We don't do that regularly.

 

[Monsieur Verdoux]

It's odd thing to defend Vanecek. He has been awful this season. It's a miracle that we have won so many games in spite of him.

 

[Lou Bloom]

Early in games? Maybe not. I think Triumph was going to look into some of those numbers.

But overall, given his numbers vs his W-L record? Easy money to bet he gets a lot of support.


You're missing some very basic elements in this conversation.

Acquiring Shesterkin or Vasilevsky are not options.

Saros might be, but will cost a ton.

Vitek has been one of the worst goalies in the league this year. Do we think that will turn around? I dunno but I think Fitz was hoping it would have happened already and that plays into why he hadn't made a move.

No, you just completely misunderstood what I said. I brought up Vasilevskiy, Saros and Shesterkin to show the point that just looking at this year's numbers and ignoring all other context will bring you to some very silly conclusions.

Ignoring a 84 and 74 game sample size in favor of a 29 and 26 game sample size is illogical. Why would you assume that these shorter sample size numbers this year are more likely to be the predictor to future performance moving forward than the larger sample size that I showed you?

 

[devilsblood]

Minimum 600 minutes, so 10 games.

Vitek is 11th, out of 67 goalies, in Goals for rate.

Plenty of goal support.

No, you just completely misunderstood what I said. I brought up Vasilevskiy, Saros and Shesterkin to show the point that just looking at this year's numbers and ignoring all other context will bring you to some very silly conclusions.

Ignoring a 84 and 74 game sample size in favor of a 29 and 26 game sample size is illogical. Why would you assume that these shorter sample size numbers this year are more likely to be the predictor to future performance moving forward than the larger sample size that I showed you?

Because we are talking about acquiring Kahk, to improve this years goal tending, and make a run at the playoffs this year.

Vitek's numbers from last year are irrelevant. This year he has been terrible, if he was putting up last years numbers we wouldn't be having this conversation.

So no, I didn't misunderstand what you said. I'm pointing out you are bringing irrelevant points to the discussion.

 

[JimEIV]

Minimum 600 minutes, so 10 games.

Vitek is 11th, out of 67 goalies, in Goals for rate.

Plenty of goal support.


Because we are talking about acquiring Kahk, to improve this years goal tending, and make a run at the playoffs this year.

Vitek's numbers from last year are irrelevant. This year he has been terrible, if he was putting up last years numbers we wouldn't be having this conversation.

So no, I didn't misunderstand what you said. I'm pointing out you are bringing irrelevant points to the discussion.

Goal rate isn't goal support.

 

[devilsblood]

Goal rate isn't goal support.

I'm going to need clarification here.

 

[JimEIV]

I'm going to need clarification here.

Rate is just the amount of goals scored while he's in net.

Goal support, as I understand it, is getting a cushion and playing with a lead.

 

[Better Call Sal]

We play catch up.... winning from behind isn't goal support. I think the disconnect here is what is "goal support"

Goal support is playing with a lead to me? We don't do that regularly.

Wouldn't Vitek be considered a reason we're always playing catch up?

I feel this can be a really circular argument. If Vitek is one of the worst statistical starting goalies in the league but has a winning record, I find it tough to believe that he is not receiving enough goal support from the team in front of him if we're managing to win games with his poor overall statistics.

 

[Devs3cups]

Rate is just the amount of goals scored while he's in net.

Goal support, as I understand it, is getting a cushion and playing with a lead.

Hopefully we get a definitive answer, I’d like to know! The way I understood it, goal support is simply the number of goals a team scores when 1 particular goalie is in net.

If the team scores a lot of goals when Vitek is in net, he gets goal support. That’s how I understood it and how it’s being discussed anyways.

 

[devilsblood]

Rate is just the amount of goals scored while he's in net.

Goal support, as I understand it, is getting a cushion and playing with a lead.

So Devils coming back from early deficits to help lead a bad goalie to a good record is not support?

Seems like a very narrow interpretation.

Hopefully we get a definitive answer, I’d like to know! The way I understood it, goal support is simply the number of goals a team scores when 1 particular goalie is in net.

If the team scores a lot of goals when Vitek is in net, he gets goal support.

We've gone purely semantic's here.

 

[Devs3cups]

So Devils coming back from early deficits to help lead a bad goalie to a good record is not support?

Seems like a very narrow interpretation.


We've gone purely semantic's here.

I mean, is my definition correct here or I’m way off track lol? To me, goal support is strictly a team’s GF in front of a particular goalie.

 

[JimEIV]

Hopefully we get a definitive answer, I’d like to know! The way I understood it, goal support is simply the number of goals a team scores when 1 particular goalie is in net.

Well then "support" is a poor descriptor if it's simply number of goals scored.

Because we have seen shit meaningless goals scored in the 2nd half of the 3rd period well after the game has been lost

 

[devilsblood]

Wouldn't Vitek be considered a reason we're always playing catch up?

I feel this can be a really circular argument. If Vitek is one of the worst statistical starting goalies in the league but has a winning record, I find it tough to believe that he is not receiving enough goal support from the team in front of him if we're managing to win games with his poor overall statistics.

Knowing how often we've allowed a goal in the first 5 or 10 minutes of a game, relative to the league, would help in this discussion.

I mean, is my definition correct here or I’m way off track lol? To me, goal support is strictly a team’s GF in front of a particular goalie.

Nah, I'm on your side, but do other people see it differently? Maybe (but some people may act like they see it differently to support their argument, not that I suggest that is what is happening here

 

[JimEIV]

So Devils coming back from early deficits to help lead a bad goalie to a good record is not support?

Seems like a very narrow interpretation.


We've gone purely semantic's here.

I don't think it's purely semantics...aside from this conversation, timing of goals as it relates to the score is critical.

Leads mean something and the leading and trailing after 2 periods have pretty dramatic and definitive results.

So the raw number of goals is pretty irrelevant in my opinion when talking about "support"

 

[devilsblood]

Well then "support" is a poor descriptor if it's simply number of goals scored.

Because we have seen shit meaningless goals scored in the 2nd half of the 3rd period well after the game has been lost

Again, doesn't make sense given Vitek's record. The Dev's scoring goals has helped a goalie with terrible numbers to a good record.

 

[kiwidevil]

Mary is back in full force.

 

[My3Sons]

Well then "support" is a poor descriptor if it's simply number of goals scored.

Because we have seen shit meaningless goals scored in the 2nd half of the 3rd period well after the game has been lost

Isn’t what you are talking about called score effects? The other team is up by three so that last goal or two don’t matter as much.

 

[JimEIV]

Again, doesn't make sense given Vitek's record. The Dev's scoring goals has helped a goalie with terrible numbers to a good record.

I think it's a shallow analysis.

If we are playing run and gun -wide open hockey - exchanging quality chances with the other team and frequently win 5-4 or 3-4

Is that a team lifting a bad goaltender or a style leading to high risk, high scoring games aside from the goaltender?

If Vitek is bad and still winning that clearly means there was someone who gave up more and was worse on the other side. He's the worst but wins makes little sense.

Regardless of what you want to call it, it's certainly not "support"

 

[Lou Bloom]

Because we are talking about acquiring Kahk, to improve this years goal tending, and make a run at the playoffs this year.

And what makes more sense to try and determine how a player will perform moving forward? Their career sample size or a 26 game sample size?

Vitek's numbers from last year are irrelevant. This year he has been terrible, if he was putting up last years numbers we wouldn't be having this conversation.

So are Shesterkin, Saros and Vasilevskiy below average goalies since we only care about this year's numbers? It's ridiculous to assume this season's numbers are more predictive of future performance than their career numbers.

So no, I didn't misunderstand what you said. I'm pointing out you are bringing irrelevant points to the discussion.

You clearly still don't understand my point if you think past seasons are irrelevant in determining who will be a better goalie moving forward this season.

 

[devilsblood]

I think it's a shallow analysis.

If we are playing run and gun -wide open hockey - exchanging quality chances with the other team and frequently win 5-4 or 3-4

Is that a team lifting a bad goaltender or a style leading to high risk, high scoring games aside from the goaltender?

If Vitek is bad and still winning that clearly means there was someone who gave up more and was worse on the other side. He's the worst but wins makes little sense.

It's not shallow. It's simple logic.

Acting like we score "meaningless" goals is silly. We need almost every goal we score with Vitek out there.

 

[NJDevs26]

Jack has looked off mentally ever since the first injury. I’m starting to wonder if he’s worried about how easily he gets injured or injuring himself further.

I don't know if that's the timeline I'd be looking at, he had five goals and eight assists in his first eight games after that injury. After the Hughes bowl seems to be where Jack downshifted.

Last 20 games since the Vancouver tilt: 7 G, 10 A and -8...which isn't even that bad on paper except three of the goals came in one game against Columbus, and right after that came his hideous night against the Ducks, then after that he cost us the winning goal in the Philly game. At least he's been on a slight upswing with five points in the last four games but the Kings game was hideous despite the assist.

 

[devilsblood]

And what makes more sense to try and determine how a player will perform moving forward? Their career sample size or a 26 game sample size?

So are Shesterkin, Saros and Vasilevskiy below average goalies since we only care about this year's numbers? It's ridiculous to assume this season's numbers are more predictive of future performance than their career numbers.

You clearly still don't understand my point if you think past seasons are irrelevant in determining who will be a better goalie moving forward this season.

In the discussion of Vitek vs Kahk, if by "moving fwd" we mean this season? I'll go with this seasons numbers.