Come on Dale. The only goalposts I have had in this discussion has been all of their careers. I suggested using last year only as a response to your trying to break their careers down into chunks. (I don't accuse you of moving goalposts here, but you do seem to be trying to view the data in any way that will favour Comrie) If we are going to look at chunks of their careers then their most recent chunks make sense. If you don't like that one I have no problem reverting to ALL of their respective careers.
I can see where you're coming from, but that's not accurate.
I've been consistently saying/prefacing that Comrie sucked in Buffalo. I'm not hiding this. I did isolate how he did in games where he faced 30 or more shots, and it was a fruitless exercise, and I said so after the fact.
More accurately though, my intention was looking for reasons as to
why he sucked in Buffalo. Just surmising that he's a bad goalie, is too easy. I'm looking through the lense of
why he wasn't as bad as we might think, rather than the lense of here's why he was actually good in Buffalo. And more importantly, I'm trying to understand why the Jets went with him over KK. My originally chiming into this thread, was to say (and outline) that I think it's the right decision. It's an unpopular opinion, fine, but I like what they're doing.
Now, if I'm a GM with another team, I'm likely not interested in Comrie. There are other goalies out there that I would rather go with. But 31 other teams don't have Hellebuyck either. Comrie had success in his last stop with the Jets, and it's not that long ago. I think you should go with the right fit. Flaherty got to see KK up close, and might have recognized that he's not exactly the right guy as a backup to Hellebuyck. Probably a better starting goalie than Comrie, but they're not looking for a starter.
Maybe KK sees himself as a guy who needs to play 30 games a year. Maybe KK thought that Hellebuyck's work load will decrease this year, and perhaps Hellebuyck isn't comfortable having a guy backing him up, who wants to play more than 20 games a year. I also think that Hellebuyck likes things like his daily ritual and continuity, and wants everything set up a specific way. Maybe Comrie is a better caddy than KK, and that's precisely what he's looking for. A goalie who embraces being just a backup, is there to give him honest advice (intermissions), and is easy to get along with.
Also, I would think that Flaherty recognizes the problems that Comrie had in Buffalo, and knows how to fix them. Perhaps KK has a lot of bad habits developed, since he left Minnesota, that are harder to fix. I'm purely speculating of course. Maybe he's not the greatest communicator.
All of this still boils down to Chevy, Flaherty (input), Hellebuyck (input) making a decision that's best for them and the team. If KK wowed them in camp, maybe he's still here.
If we are going to look at chunks of their careers then their most recent chunks make sense. If you don't like that one I have no problem reverting to ALL of their respective careers.
I used the last 3 years, mostly because most of the analytical-types - which I think you're one of and I don't mean that as an insult - like to use 3-year blocks as opposed to 4, or 5, or career. So, that's why I've been using 3. Does Comrie's only good year slip into that 3? Yes. But, the same can be said with KK 3 years ago, that being his last good year.
You want to be emphasizing KK's work prior to 2021-22, fine, then he clearly wins that race. Comrie's work before then is for the birds.
I'm also pretty sure that when talking about Ehlers last season, in various threads, you talked about how 37 games isn't that much of a sample size; or only using a sample size of 5 games in a best of 7 series (which I agree with). But then you're talking about KK's time in NJ, it's all of 6 games. And neither goalie has that long of a track record.
I know I disagree with you quite a bit, but I generally appreciate your style of debate.
