Tribute Jack Campbell Discussion Part 2

[Gary Nylund]

Got it so you make something up and deflect it back as me being unable to read. Carry on, knew it was a mistake to reply.

All I did was copy paste from my original post and I bolded and used a bigger font to highlight the part you seem to have missed. The fact that you consider this to be "making something up" only confirms your reading comprehension issues.

My original post was only two sentences, not sure how you whiffed so badly but if you don't understand what you're reading, then it may indeed be a mistake to reply. And you claiming that I'm the one who's "unable to read" is pretty hilarious, maybe go get some sleep or something.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Blame for last year's loss STARTS at your cap hit.

Jack was 2% at fault, and let's say he didn't perform to expectations, and his fault% rose to 3%.
Marner + Matthews - started at 27%. I'd say they ended up at 33%.

Essentially the M&M no-show was 11x more costly than Campbell's play.

 

[saffronleaf]

Very good bounce back game.

Last 40 minutes of that game he went toe to toe with Vasi and he prevailed.

Huge save on a point blank Kucherov chance that led to the Matthews GWG.

First period was very concerning though. But whatever, hopefully that's an aberration.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Bring back Jack.

 

[mapleleafs34]

SOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUPPPPPPPPPP

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

This save was massive. Fourth line hemmed in after an icing, could’ve been the GWG for Tampa. Jack stood tall.

 

[Le Cobra]

the 5 on 3 PK might be the turning point of this series. Jack stole the game

 

[MC41]

Rough start from him but after the second goal we had a brick wall between the pipes.

 

[Gary Nylund]

First period was very concerning though. But whatever, hopefully that's an aberration.

Rough start from him but after the second goal we had a brick wall between the pipes.

IMO you guys are crazy. The first goal, looked to me like he didn't even see it. I mean if you really want to be harsh you could say he should have seen it but it's not realistic to expect the goalie to ALWAYS be able to position himself in a way that he sees the shot coming. The second goal somehow went through a number of bodies so there was simply no way to track that and it was perfectly placed, Jack had zero chance to stop that one.

Don't expect the goalie to be perfect and stop every shot. Jack was near perfect last night, I give him a 9 out of 10 which makes him once again our best player in that game.

 

[WillyC]

That’s some serious gourmet Red Lobster Clam Chowder we saw in net last night.

 

[saltming]

IMO you guys are crazy. The first goal, looked to me like he didn't even see it. I mean if you really want to be harsh you could say he should have seen it but it's not realistic to expect the goalie to ALWAYS be able to position himself in a way that he sees the shot coming. The second goal somehow went through a number of bodies so there was simply no way to track that and it was perfectly placed, Jack had zero chance to stop that one.

Don't expect the goalie to be perfect and stop every shot. Jack was near perfect last night, I give him a 9 out of 10 which makes him once again our best player in that game.

I'll play the middle road.
1st goal was bad. He was way out of position and there was virtually no traffic infront of him. He was in the middle of his net when stammer had the puck moving to Campbell's right. It should have been a routine positional save.
2nd goal was more difficult. Lots of traffic, but this is what I find is his weak point, tracking through traffic. He needs to get lower to the ice and track the puck through the players legs at times. Because he lost the puck he wasn't in a position where he had a better chance of the puck hitting him.
Other than that he did play well, got lucky a few times and made some good toe stops.
Overall I'm happy he pulled it together. Give some kudos to Spezza there too.
We won and he had to be good for that, but I still think the first 2 goals were bad. I also think he recouped well.
As for a goalie ALWAYS being in position, of course it's not possible, but we should expect him to be in position on routine plays and to fight through screens if we are to consider him an elite or top level goalie.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I'll play the middle road.
1st goal was bad. He was way out of position and there was virtually no traffic infront of him. He was in the middle of his net when stammer had the puck moving to Campbell's right. It should have been a routine positional save.
2nd goal was more difficult. Lots of traffic, but this is what I find is his weak point, tracking through traffic. He needs to get lower to the ice and track the puck through the players legs at times. Because he lost the puck he wasn't in a position where he had a better chance of the puck hitting him.
Other than that he did play well, got lucky a few times and made some good toe stops.
Overall I'm happy he pulled it together. Give some kudos to Spezza there too.
We won and he had to be good for that, but I still think the first 2 goals were bad. I also think he recouped well.
As for a goalie ALWAYS being in position, of course it's not possible, but we should expect him to be in position on routine plays and to fight through screens if we are to consider him an elite or top level goalie.

OK it might be fair to say that tracking the puck is his weak point, and for that reason you could blame him for that first goal. The second one though went through so many bodies, it's not possible for anyone to track that one, I also think he was positioned just fine on that one and no way can I blame him for that goal. So blame him for one goal but the whole team played like crap in that first period, maybe we should be blaming some other guys instead of focusing on the one mistake by our goalie with the minimalistic cap hit? I mean sure put some blame on him for that goal put there was TONS of blame to go around in that 1st period so I don't think it's fair to single him out either because he made plenty of saves to bail out mistakes others made and keep it close.

There's no reason to consider him (or expect him) to be like you say, an "elite or top level goalie", especially not at that cap hit. The best we can hope for is that he plays well enough to keep us in games and give us a chance to win most nights and so far, he's definitely done that. Hell he's even outplayed Vasi so far, can't ask for much more than that IMO.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Jack was a key player in the win last night.

OK it might be fair to say that tracking the puck is his weak point,

He's better than Reimer and Andersen.

 

[zeke]

That late save on Kucherov was so good because Jack just stayed on his feet. Other goalies we have had would have already been flopping and left the top of the net wide open.

There was another late game bad angle shot/deflection from the corner that I'm 100% sure would have eluded a previous leafs goalie or two.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Jack was a key player in the win last night.


He's better than Reimer and Andersen.

See now I'm trying to figure out if that's a genuine compliment, or a backhanded one.

 

[saltming]

OK it might be fair to say that tracking the puck is his weak point, and for that reason you could blame him for that first goal. The second one though went through so many bodies, it's not possible for anyone to track that one, I also think he was positioned just fine on that one and no way can I blame him for that goal. So blame him for one goal but the whole team played like crap in that first period, maybe we should be blaming some other guys instead of focusing on the one mistake by our goalie with the minimalistic cap hit? I mean sure put some blame on him for that goal put there was TONS of blame to go around in that 1st period so I don't think it's fair to single him out either because he made plenty of saves to bail out mistakes others made and keep it close.

There's no reason to consider him (or expect him) to be like you say, an "elite or top level goalie", especially not at that cap hit. The best we can hope for is that he plays well enough to keep us in games and give us a chance to win most nights and so far, he's definitely done that. Hell he's even outplayed Vasi so far, can't ask for much more than that IMO.

I agree with your points and I'm willing to accept my bias on the read of the 2nd goal.
As for the elite comment, not saying you were saying it, but there were posts about signing him long term and paying him to 10 money.
That said, he's not young, but if he can figure out how to get low like vasi or quick to track the puck through all those bodies, that would be awesome for us

Jack was a key player in the win last night.


He's better than Reimer and Andersen.

Reimer yes, Andersen no

 

[barilko05]

I agree with your points and I'm willing to accept my bias on the read of the 2nd goal.
As for the elite comment, not saying you were saying it, but there were posts about signing him long term and paying him to 10 money.
That said, he's not young, but if he can figure out how to get low like vasi or quick to track the puck through all those bodies, that would be awesome for us


Reimer yes, Andersen no

At this point, I'll take the goalie who gives up a weak one early in the game and then stones 'em the rest of the way to Five Hole Freddie and his penchant for losing important games by letting in backbreakers in the 3rd.

 

[Folignos Helmet]

Basically everyone that posted in the first half of the game thread mentioning Jack needs a slap in the face.
The expectations for a Leaf goalie are beyond unrealistic. It’s bananas.

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

Neither goalie has been good (Vasi/Campbell). Failing grade for both overall. A few fun saves from Campbell when we needed them doesn't change the fact he'd have let in even more if Tampa's impact players showed up this series.

We need 16 wins not 4. If the next opponents skill players show up, Campbell's current play will sink us fast. Every goalie playing in the playoffs, even Penguins 4th stringer are capable of making big saves throughout the game where the circumstances around the save increase the weight of it. We need actual 60 minute consistency if we want the complete 16 wins.

 

[Aashir]

That late save on Kucherov was so good because Jack just stayed on his feet. Other goalies we have had would have already been flopping and left the top of the net wide open.

There was another late game bad angle shot/deflection from the corner that I'm 100% sure would have eluded a previous leafs goalie or two.

He read kucherov like a book

Taking the top of the net for a sensational save

He knew kucherov was never putting that along the ice

Neither goalie has been good (Vasi/Campbell). Failing grade for both overall. A few fun saves from Campbell when we needed them doesn't change the fact he'd have let in even more if Tampa's impact players showed up this series.

We need 16 wins not 4. If the next opponents skill players show up, Campbell's current play will sink us fast. Every goalie playing in the playoffs, even Penguins 4th stringer are capable of making big saves throughout the game where the circumstances around the save increase the weight of it. We need actual 60 minute consistency if we want the complete 16 wins.

Well I expect our skill players to also show up

And if Matthews, Marner, nylander, Tavares and Rielly show up like they did yesterday….even this Jack will be more then enough

 

[Gary Nylund]

I agree with your points and I'm willing to accept my bias on the read of the 2nd goal.
As for the elite comment, not saying you were saying it, but there were posts about signing him long term and paying him to 10 money.
That said, he's not young, but if he can figure out how to get low like vasi or quick to track the puck through all those bodies, that would be awesome for us


Reimer yes, Andersen no

What is "to 10 money", 10 million a year?

That's obviously nuts but I did want him extended. I said last summer that extending Jack would be my #1 priority in the summer, I was plenty pissed that Dubas didn't get it done, there was much discussion about this and most people seemed to think that the reason it didn't get done was that Jack was being greedy and I still don't see any basis for that whatsoever (though possible of course). Then Jack had that crazy slump and I thought hmm, maybe it's good we didn't extend him and now he's looking great again. I wish I knew the reason for the slump - was he playing hurt?

In any case, as of today I still wish he was extended as I'm not sure there are any better goalies available in free agency. But as far as term and dollars go, I'm not really sure how far I'd be willing to go there but whatever, time to worry about all that later as the focus now is obviously on putting the boots to TB tomorrow night.

Basically everyone that posted in the first half of the game thread mentioning Jack needs a slap in the face.
The expectations for a Leaf goalie are beyond unrealistic. It’s bananas.

Yet another reminder that I'm doing the right thing by almost never looking at the GDT's. But then again, sometimes it seems like even the "normal" threads are full of unrealistic expectations for goalies and I agree it's bananas. I could go on at length on this subject but I'm in too good a mood today so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[saltming]

At this point, I'll take the goalie who gives up a weak one early in the game and then stones 'em the rest of the way to Five Hole Freddie and his penchant for losing important games by letting in backbreakers in the 3rd.

Revisionist memory.
Last year game 7 OT shot from the point, series over. That was not Andersen.
Bad goals happen to every goalie but when talking about goalie mechanics, it's cut and dry. They have it or don't. They can develop and improve, just like any skill, so I sit here and hope.
Even with that look at kallgren, he tracks better than Campbell Imo but is not a better goalie by a stretch. Goalie position has so many intangebles.
My preference is Andersen, always has been and he put up a stellar year with the canes, very similar to his first few years here where he single handedly won us games time after time early in.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Revisionist memory.
Last year game 7 OT shot from the point, series over. That was not Andersen.
Bad goals happen to every goalie but when talking about goalie mechanics, it's cut and dry. They have it or don't. They can develop and improve, just like any skill, so I sit here and hope.
Even with that look at kallgren, he tracks better than Campbell Imo but is not a better goalie by a stretch. Goalie position has so many intangebles.
My preference is Andersen, always has been and he put up a stellar year with the canes, very similar to his first few years here where he single handedly won us games time after time early in.

Anyone posting anything about our goalies should repeat this to themselves a few dozen times before posting.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Overall, Jack outplayed Vasi (again).

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

He read kucherov like a book

Taking the top of the net for a sensational save

He knew kucherov was never putting that along the ice


Well I expect our skill players to also show up

And if Matthews, Marner, nylander, Tavares and Rielly show up like they did yesterday….even this Jack will be more then enough

Still playing with fire. Out of 15 period Tampa has been flat for 10. That's only 33% of the time they've been scary Tampa and even during that times, I feel their core has still been flat. gaa and save % is way too high for what I have seen from Tampa so far, that is the big concern. The big saves suddenly lose value if that g.a.a increases even 0.5 more. Which is possibility since his gaa is already over 3 against a team who is choking at playoff level hockey.

I'm not fond of the idea our core has to light lamp every game to succeed (they have potential to do it but doesn't feel safe requiring it). Not even Tampa core can do that for the entire playoff in their cup winning days. There will come a time this playoffs where we need 60 minute/ game to game consistency from Campbell, not <90% save percentage Campbell who makes exciting save in the 3rd periods.

*light lamp I mean score 3+ a game among the 4 of them. I do expect at least one of them to score every single game.