Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Matt Murray (G) - 4 years, $6.25M AAV

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been one of his harshest critics but strong game tonight. Id love to be made to look like an idiot for questioning his abilities. Keep it up Matt!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoardsofCanada
Who would have thought a NHL goalie could do the job with a NHL defense in front of him?

Crazy concept I admit

Some people really have no idea how goaltending works. As long as we don't give 3+ automatic goals against per game, our goalies will have a chance to have normal "stats"

Also coaching staff seemed to have made some adjustments too, started seeing that vs the Oilers (2nd game only lol). We give up less time and space on the points for starters.

robsenz said:
Bishop move was so dumb at the time, he was good here. And we had goaltending depth for the first time ever
Click to expand...

Lehner was the goalie of the future, Bishop had to be traded before losing him to UFA. Anderson was our best goalie ever (outside of Hasek for 1 season) and the Sens weren't going to go Lehner-Bishop.

Unproven goalies at the NHL level don't have that much trade value too. Proof : the Sens got Bishop for a 2nd round pick in the first place, even though he was seen as the best goalie outside of the NHL and had dominated the AHL. Conacher+4th didn't work out but it wasn't a bad return at all in the NHL market context. There's only 2 spots for NHL goalies and our duo was going to be Andy-Lehner for a while until Robin took over. It was unpredictable that he would mental problems delaying his development. We had to trade him and a 1st round pick was a good return. Wish we never had to do it, big Lehner fan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smeddy
Xspyrit said:
Lehner was the goalie of the future, Bishop had to be traded before losing him to UFA. Anderson was our best goalie ever (outside of Hasek for 1 season) and the Sens weren't going to go Lehner-Bishop.

Unproven goalies at the NHL level don't have that much trade value too. Proof : the Sens got Bishop for a 2nd round pick in the first place, even though he was seen as the best goalie outside of the NHL and had dominated the AHL. Conacher+4th didn't work out but it wasn't a bad return at all in the NHL market context. There's only 2 spots for NHL goalies and our duo was going to be Andy-Lehner for a while until Robin took over. It was unpredictable that he would mental problems delaying his development. We had to trade him and a 1st round pick was a good return. Wish we never had to do it, big Lehner fan.
Click to expand...

At the time is was evident that Bishop was the better pro, Lehner was the goalie of the future, but i recall watching practises and he was the oddball who appeared to be taking drills a bit more lighter than the other two, which I didn't like at the time. Then Lehner got absolutely lit up here before moving on. Glad he figured it out later in his career, just sucked seeing Ottawa left with a solid but aging goalie after having 3 capable tenders at one point.
 
Xspyrit said:
Who would have thought a NHL goalie could do the job with a NHL defense in front of him?

Crazy concept I admit

Some people really have no idea how goaltending works. As long as we don't give 3+ automatic goals against per game, our goalies will have a chance to have normal "stats"

Also coaching staff seemed to have made some adjustments too, started seeing that vs the Oilers (2nd game only lol). We give up less time and space on the points for starters.



Lehner was the goalie of the future, Bishop had to be traded before losing him to UFA. Anderson was our best goalie ever (outside of Hasek for 1 season) and the Sens weren't going to go Lehner-Bishop.

Unproven goalies at the NHL level don't have that much trade value too. Proof : the Sens got Bishop for a 2nd round pick in the first place, even though he was seen as the best goalie outside of the NHL and had dominated the AHL. Conacher+4th didn't work out but it wasn't a bad return at all in the NHL market context. There's only 2 spots for NHL goalies and our duo was going to be Andy-Lehner for a while until Robin took over. It was unpredictable that he would mental problems delaying his development. We had to trade him and a 1st round pick was a good return. Wish we never had to do it, big Lehner fan.
Click to expand...

If Murray lets in a couple of soft goals tonight, the score would have been 5-3 Montreal instead of 3-2 Ottawa. The defense tonight was a huge improvement, but so was the goaltending.

You can have an all star defense infront of you and still let in back breaking goals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cudi
BoardsofCanada said:
Enjoying your high horse?
Click to expand...

Good thing you quote me as you were among the most vocals about heavily trashing Murray the last few weeks. I tried to explain why a big portion of the problem wasn't on him at all. I also noted that it would be the same story with Hogberg and that's also exactly what happened. You didn't acknowledged it or anything and continued to trash him at every occasion. Is it because my takes are not valid? That part is up to you but you shouldn't be absolved of criticism as well if you were so hard on Murray. It's really simple.

I don't know if what we saw tonight will hold up but we absolutely have to be more fair in our criticism. As long as the Sens provide him or any other goalie a NHL defense, they will have a chance to do their job. What we saw from game #4 to game #9-10 was not NHL level defense coverage/structure. Almost every goalie would have looked bad and their stats would have been awful.

Edit : the highlighted here has been explained by several coaches, ex-players, etc, at least here in Quebec and the Sens are just the 2nd covered team.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SensontheRush
Murray made the stops he should have ....But the defense helped him,he really needs to work on his rebound tracking...As there were a few moments from him...That said he needs to build off this and continue to climb out of the terrible place he was in
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nac Mac Feegle and cudi
robsenz said:
At the time is was evident that Bishop was the better pro, Lehner was the goalie of the future, but i recall watching practises and he was the oddball who appeared to be taking drills a bit more lighter than the other two, which I didn't like at the time. Then Lehner got absolutely lit up here before moving on. Glad he figured it out later in his career, just sucked seeing Ottawa left with a solid but aging goalie after having 3 capable tenders at one point.
Click to expand...

Lehner was much younger though and had displayed high potential. Personally I wanted him as the goalie of the future, he was my choice and pretty much all the fanbase as well. Knowing what would happen with him and his issues, in hindsight it would have been better to keep Bishop but it's not like it was predictable. It was not based on ability and potential. Sometimes things are totally out of your control. It's not as drastic but like when the Canucks draft Luc Bourdon or the Rangers draft Cherepanov, sometimes the outcome is just unpredictable.

TheDebater said:
If Murray lets in a couple of soft goals tonight, the score would have been 5-3 Montreal instead of 3-2 Ottawa. The defense tonight was a huge improvement, but so was the goaltending.

You can have an all star defense infront of you and still let in back breaking goals.
Click to expand...

I never said goalies couldn't be better and Murray played above average tonight, you need those games from your goalies, particularly for a rebuilding team that wants to improve. But the problem was the massive trash job we were doing even though if Murray/Hogberg weren't the main problem. Defensive coverage was just not NHL level. Inserting Brannstrom and Zub, plus coaching adjustments really helped in that regard. Crossing fingers that it will hold.

It was easy to see too and even statiscally. Did both goalies drop 0.050% in save percentage from last year because they are suddenly trash?
 
Xspyrit said:
Good thing you quote me as you were among the most vocals about heavily trashing Murray the last few weeks. I tried to explain why a big portion of the problem wasn't on Murray at all. I also noted that it would be the same story with Hogberg and that's also exactly what happened. You didn't acknowledged it or anything and continued to trash him at every occasion. Is it because my takes are not valid? That part is up to you but you shouldn't be absolved of criticism as well if you were so hard on Murray. It's really simple.

I don't know if what we saw tonight will hold up but we absolutely have to be more fair in our criticism. As long as the Sens provide him or any other goalie a NHL defense, they will have a chance to do their job. What we saw from game #4 to game #9-10 was not NHL level defense coverage/structure.
Click to expand...

You are not giving some of us enough credit.

Some of us have been watching hockey for 'x' number of years, and we can tell the difference between a goalie that is letting in a bunch of goals because the team infront of him is trash, and a goalie who is letting in a bunch of goals that an ECHL goalie can save.

You can be a good goalie who lets in a lot of goals because the defense infront of you is weak, and the fans will understand because we know the difference between unstoppable goals and unstoppable goals.

Did you think Hogberg standing 2 feet too far to the left when Draisaitl scored the other day was a defense problem or a bad positioning problem? That was a weak goal and should have been stopped.

Nobody is blaming Murray for any goals tonight, and he would not have been blamed even if we had lost, because we know the difference between a good goal and a bad goal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nac Mac Feegle and SensontheRush
I've seen goalies play well in front of bad teams and I've seen goalies play badly in front of bad teams.

Over the course of our losing streak, Murray was playing badly on at least one or more goals per game. He was at least -part- of the problem.

Tonight he was much better. Hopefully we will see more of the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RickyLafleur, Nac Mac Feegle, Micklebot and 3 others
TheDebater said:
You are not giving some of us enough credit.

Some of us have been watching hockey for 'x' number of years, and we can tell the difference between a goalie that is letting in a bunch of goals because the team infront of him is trash, and a goalie who is letting in a bunch of goals that an ECHL goalie can save.

You can be a good goalie who lets in a lot of goals because the defense infront of you is weak, and the fans will understand because we know the difference between unstoppable goals and unstoppable goals.

Did you think Hogberg standing 2 feet too far to the left when Draisaitl scored the other day was a defense problem or a bad positioning problem? That was a weak goal and should have been stopped.

Nobody is blaming Murray for any goals tonight, and he would not have been blamed even if we had lost, because we know the difference between a good goal and a bad goal.
Click to expand...

It's not about being right or wrong, or give credit or not. My goal is to make people realize that AT LEAST more benefit of the doubt should have been given to Murray (and Hogberg), so that criticism will be more fair in the future. I don't even know how long it will last, can't say for certain that things have been "fixed" but the whole structure/coverage improvement + Brannstrom/Zub play so far has helped a lot.

That being said, what you say might not apply to everybody. I have seen some people trash some goals that the goalie can't do anything about, double deflections and whatnot. Even tonight on the 1st goal, someone trashed Murray even though the puck deflected on Danault's back then right on Gallagher's tape. The goalie couldn't see it, it's the D-man job to help the goalie track the puck when he loses sight of it (which happens a lot during a game, I know crazy, a small rubber puck disappears into a field of 220 lbs bodies)

Hogberg goal #3 last game, absolutely I ridiculed it myself, it was actually the worst goal a Sens goalie has given up this year (but not as bad as Hellebuyck the other night. Yes Vezina goalies give up bad goals too). There's a few goals I criticized Murray on as well. But in REALITY, there was not nearly as many "bad goals" as you seem to think. Call them and I'll gladly analyze them with you.

I have mentionned it once. My first year in College, I joined a deck league, never played organized hockey as a goalie before and won the best goalie of the year. I had a ~ 0.960 SV% and 1.28 GAA (IIRC because 20 years ago lol). We were crazy good. I think our record was 21-1-2 and we won championship of course. There was 2 guys who played in the Q on that team, and another who was very good friends with an ex NHLer (so they grew up playing together). Then 2 seasons later when they were gone and team was very different, can't remember but I had way under 0.900 SV%. Was it because I was suddenly crap? Well, maybe not and still got a few asks from teams looking for a goalie in other leagues, and eventually started playing on the ice. I know the comparison is not perfect as nothing compares to the NHL but the level of defense the Sens displayed in that stretch of games was also not NHL level.

NyQuil said:
I've seen goalies play well in front of bad teams and I've seen goalies play badly in front of bad teams.

Over the course of our losing streak, Murray was playing badly on at least one or more goals per game. He was at least -part- of the problem.

Tonight he was much better. Hopefully we will see more of the same.
Click to expand...

Yes a part but not even that huge of a part, it's NOT a coincidence both goalies saw their SV% drop by 0.050-0.060 from last year at the same time...

And it's not even that the Sens were a bad "team", they were doing a lot of good things in 2 zones, they even had more quality chances or possession than the opposition for games/periods, BUT the play in their own zone was NOT NHL level. I don't even remember seeing anything like that. Might have to go to expansion teams. Look at the tapes, the amount of time and space we were giving up on a consistent basis was ridiculous. We GIFT WRAPPED a lot of goals as a result. Goalies would have needed to stand on their heads to have a 0.900 SV%

It has looked much better since last game against the Oilers. Hopefully it continues because it was unwatchable. It's not even about winning/losing, it's about giving up games on a silver platter.
 
Last edited:
Murray had a solid game, but let’s not pin all the blame on the defense for his struggles this season. We give up chances, and he also has let in a lot of soft goals. And I’m far from a Murray hater, I have never trashed his contract or his play, and have a lot of hope he can be our goaltender moving forward.
 
Rhaegar Targaryen said:
Murray had a solid game, but let’s not pin all the blame on the defense for his struggles this season. We give up chances, and he also has let in a lot of soft goals. And I’m far from a Murray hater, I have never trashed his contract or his play, and have a lot of hope he can be our goaltender moving forward.
Click to expand...

That's the thing though, that wasn't really THE problem. It's not about the quantity of scoring chances against but the NATURE of those chances.

We also gave up a lot of scoring chances last night, naturalstattrick says Habs had 39 scoring chances and 16 were high danger. It was in fact comfortably ABOVE our average per game this season (31.16 SCA/60 & 11.78 HDCA/60)

The difference is last night we had NHL defensive structure/coverage which gave a chance to Murray to do his job. He played well but he had a LOT MORE support than he had the last 2 weeks. I don't know how much it is related to the change in personnel (Zub, Brannstrom instead of Coburn, Brown) and the coaching staff making adjustments but it was night and day with that 6 games stretch (2 vs Jets, 3 vs Canucks, 1 vs Oilers)

I talked about AUTOMATIC GOALS AGAINST, what I mean is goals we simply gift wrapped to the opposition. It's a game of mistakes, so mistakes will happen but the amount we made and the time and space we were given up in our zone was atrocious. Do I need to post videos to explain? I don't know what SN/TSN are doing but TVA/RDS showed several replays with deep analysis by ex players/coaches and it was blatantly obvious that the Sens were "lost" in their own zone. So many goals could have been easily avoided with just regular NHL zone coverage.

Do you normally see NHL teams GIFT WRAPPING several goals per game? No, usually opponents have to work hard and make great plays to score goals. Many goals are a direct result of mistakes but what we were doing was another level of bad.
 
I was not, and still am not expecting Stanley cup winning level goaltending from Murray. Simply expecting consistent, keep-your-team-in-games level goaltending from him and the trade/contract extension will be a huge win for us.

So far so good, let us see if he keeps it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JackieDaytona
Keep it up Matty.

Got time now to work on the game and confidence. Very nice couple of games there.
 
Played really well the last 2 games, mainly due to a more NHL "team defense" level in front of him, which was heavily SUBPAR for the first 6 games of the road trip

Kinda makes me wondering... wasn't DJ Smith just simply outcoached? On top of bad personnel decisions?

That being said the 2nd Habs goal was more of the same. I can certify that giving up a goal on a 3rd rebound is extremely frustrating, particularly when you already made 2 good/great saves. That's the pure definition of being left out to dry

RedWhiteBlackGold said:
Props to Murray for putting in 2 good games. Hope he continues to do so.

I'll call him trash when he plays like it, but don't mind giving credit when its due.
Click to expand...

But do people call us trash when we have a bad day at work? I have received some criticism before but never got the harsh words

Wouldn't "weak goal", "really bad/poor game", "didn't deserve his salary at all" or stuff like that be enough? Do we have to use offensive words? What more does it bring?

I have seen some people starting to turn on Tkachuk and Chabot as well, offensive words are starting to emerge... kinda leaves a bad taste. I mean, not that it's acceptable for any player but it's even more discouraging when we're talking like that about our best players.
 
Didn't like the Ennis goal but he still had a great game and kept us in it when we shouldn't have. Despite the bad calls we fought in front of him so another game where we were competitive. Let's hope we have a slightly better sense of urgency tommorow considering Hoggy will probably be in net.
#GoSensGo
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy, Wallet Inspector and Senscore
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom