What if they allowed 2 weak shots and lost 2-1?
Of course you can say the goalie is at fault when he allows bad goals, regardless of the score.
I don't know so many always blames the offence and puts zero accountability on the goaltending and defence. If offence is all that matters, we should be spending league min. on all goaltenders and defencemen.
Point I am trying to make is that Lesfs need more offense, like more than ONE goal to give themselves the chance to win.
Let’s say Woll had two shutouts and the score was 2-0 and 3-0. Three of those goals were empty net. Its still doesn’t change the fact that the team needs to score more goals when there is an opposing goalie in net.
We would feel better winning 5 or 6 straight games with points over Panthers, 1st in divisions and challenging for 1st in Conf…. But at the same time, the teams need to score more goals when playing against a goalie.
Don’t understand why it’s either this or that for some here. It is the goalie for letting in weak goals….but our beloved betas chokers are all great, they just hit the posts, or got goalied… or the goalie and defense sucked their momentum….
Put it this way, if a goalie allowed 2 goals or less regardless of how weak those goals were, he did his job. Just like a pitcher in baseball, if he only allowed 3 runs in 6-7innings, he did his job, regardless of how those runs were scored and when they were scored.
At the same time, if the Leafs scored 3goals in a game, the offence did their job in terms of goals scoring. As this is a 3 goals league.
Ofcourse there will be times that goalie will bail the team out and vice versa. But it doesn’t change facts. Such as if the team allowed 5 goals, that’s on the goalie and the D, even if they win that game. Since the D and goalie didn’t do their job. On the other hand, if the team only scored ONE goal in the game, even if they end up winning the game, the boys need to score more goals bc their D and goalie can’t bail them out all the time.