Injury Report: Petr Mrazek (Groin Again) [Update Nov 7: Out 4 weeks]

[Dekes For Days]

Very true.

You can keep saying it all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that it's not true. Pretty much every goalie stat is more representative of a goalie's play than win-loss record, and there are a lot of valuable statistics that do a good job isolating individual play, including ones that consider the shooter. This is just another notch in the long line of statistics you arbitrarily refuse to accept.

 

[Bomber0104]

Keep dodging and ignoring.

This is just another notch for you in a span of 10 minutes.

You can keep saying it all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that it's not true. Pretty much every goalie stat is more representative of a goalie's play than win-loss record, and there are a lot of valuable statistics that do a good job isolating individual play, including ones that consider the shooter. This is just another notch in the long line of statistics you arbitrarily refuse to accept.

Not a single goalie stat can isolate a goalie's impact.

If you can't or don't measure and quantify shooter talent/shot selection then you cannot conversely attempt to quantify the talent of the goalie.

It's simple logic, and irrefutable.

 

[Dekes For Days]

It's simple logic, and irrefutable.

What's irrefutable is that win-loss is a bad way of evaluating a goaltender, and there are many far, far superior ways that do a good job isolating the individual. There are many valuable goalie statistics out there, including ones that consider the shooter and quality of chances against. You are, quite simply, incorrect.

 

[kb]

What's irrefutable is that win-loss is a bad way of evaluating a goaltender, and there are many far, far superior ways that do a good job isolating the individual. There are many valuable goalie statistics out there, including ones that consider the shooter and quality of chances against. You are, quite simply, incorrect.

Anyone who believes that win-loss is a goalie stat needs to eat more paste.

 

[Bomber0104]

I never said win-loss is a good way of evaluating/isolating goalie talent.

What I did say was the below and all you've said in response is "that's not true" as if that means anything.

Try not to use straw-man arguments and also avoid running away from positions you simply cannot defend, in future debates.

It would help you immensely.

What's irrefutable is that win-loss is a bad way of evaluating a goaltender, and there are many far, far superior ways that do a good job isolating the individual. There are many valuable goalie statistics out there, including ones that consider the shooter and quality of chances against. You are, quite simply, incorrect.

Not a single goalie stat can isolate a goalie's impact.

If you can't or don't measure and quantify shooter talent/shot selection then you cannot conversely attempt to quantify the talent of the goalie.

It's simple logic, and irrefutable.

There are no measures of shooter quality, available in the public-sphere, that are in any way statistically reliable.

There are also no measures of quality of chances, available in the public-sphere that are in any way statistically reliable.

This is why these garbage public-sphere stats are routinely dismissed by those who work in real-world NHL stats wings.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I never said win-loss is a good way of evaluating/isolating goalie talent.

You rudely responded to my statement that win-loss was a bad method of goalie evaluation, and have dismissed all other goalie statistics that do a far, far, far better job of evaluating a goaltender's individual play, based on your repeated incorrect claims about those statistics. There are many valuable goalie statistics out there, that do a good job isolating their individual play, including ones that consider the shooter and quality of chances against. Toronto will survive Hutchinson playing a few games due to Mrazek's injury.

 

[Bomber0104]

Go ahead, and prove the below wrong.

Any day now...

Ignoring and avoiding defending your ludicrous positions about debunked and dismissed internet stats isn't helping you in any way.

There aren't "many valuable" stats at all.

Otherwise you would have shown them and proved the below wrong.

But you can't...

You rudely responded to my statement that win-loss was a bad method of goalie evaluation, and have dismissed all other goalie statistics that do a far, far, far better job of evaluating a goaltender's individual play, based on your repeated incorrect claims about those statistics. There are many valuable goalie statistics out there, that do a good job isolating their individual play, including ones that consider the shooter and quality of chances against. Toronto will survive Hutchinson playing a few games due to Mrazek's injury.

Not a single goalie stat can isolate a goalie's impact.

If you can't or don't measure and quantify shooter talent/shot selection then you cannot conversely attempt to quantify the talent of the goalie.

It's simple logic, and irrefutable.

Any day now...

 

[Isaac Nootin]

This thread is a complete disaster.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Go ahead, and prove this wrong.

Prove what wrong? You haven't proven anything in the first place. Your entire argument centers around your personal belief that goalies can't be individually evaluated without evaluating shooting talent and shot quality, which aside from being wrong, blatantly ignores that goalie statistics exist that do include shooting talent and shot quality. And your response to that is to just arbitrarily dismiss those measures of shooter and shot quality, based on nothing.

The simple fact is, there are many valuable goalie statistics out there, that do a good job isolating their individual play, including ones that consider the shooter and quality of chances against. Whatever limitations you wish to wildly exaggerate, it doesn't change the fact that every single one is better than win-loss record. Toronto will survive Hutchinson playing a few games due to Mrazek's injury.

I'm not even sure what you're attempting to argue anymore. If you're suggesting that there is no way to evaluate a goaltender's individual play, you have no basis with which to conclude that Hutchinson is a bad 3rd string goalie.

 

[Bomber0104]

You're not sure what I'm attempting to argue anymore?

I've posted the below several times and you haven't directly replied to it, once.

Not once.

Not a single thing that can refute my post or that validates any of the grandiose lies you continue to write.

Just more word-salad and avoiding.

Try to address the below and explain how goalie performance is isolated, without accounting for shooter-talent.

You won't though, because you can't.

Prove what wrong? You haven't proven anything in the first place. Your entire argument centers around your personal belief that goalies can't be individually evaluated without evaluating shooting talent and shot quality, which aside from being wrong, blatantly ignores that goalie statistics exist that do include shooting talent and shot quality. And your response to that is to just arbitrarily dismiss those measures of shooter and shot quality, based on nothing.

The simple fact is, there are many valuable goalie statistics out there, that do a good job isolating their individual play, including ones that consider the shooter and quality of chances against. Whatever limitations you wish to wildly exaggerate, it doesn't change the fact that every single one is better than win-loss record. Toronto will survive Hutchinson playing a few games due to Mrazek's injury.

I'm not even sure what you're attempting to argue anymore. If you're suggesting that there is no way to evaluate a goaltender's individual play, you have no basis with which to conclude that Hutchinson is a bad 3rd string goalie.

Not a single goalie stat can isolate a goalie's impact.

If you can't or don't measure and quantify shooter talent/shot selection then you cannot conversely attempt to quantify the talent of the goalie.

It's simple logic, and irrefutable.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I've posted the below several times and you haven't directly replied to it, once.

I've directly replied to you and that statement every single time, and shown why your claims are incorrect. You have refused to even address the things I have written; instead endlessly repeating the same incorrect statements, which can be easily seen by the fact that you continue to write:

explain how goalie performance is isolated, without accounting for shooter-talent.

when I've repeatedly informed you that statistics exist that quite literally account for shooting talent and shot quality. But to answer your question, accumulated shooting talent does not differentiate enough to impact results by as much as people think over significant samples. You can still get results that do a good job isolating a goaltenders play without that; certainly far, far, far better than win-loss record.

 

[Racer88]

Mrazek out again……..great job Dubas…….how many millions for a goalie who is routinely injured

 

[Stephen]

Kevin Woodley actually made the case that Petr Mrazek's play style is very compatible to the type of shots the Leafs give up and would be a good fit on the Leafs. I don't know what goes into the sausage in terms of proprietary goalie analytics, but I did like that insight going into this season and was curious to see that unfold. I generally like Mrazek as a goalie and thought maybe with both goalies having injury issues in the past Mrazek might have the inside track on keeping the job being locked in medium term.

I think with Jack Campbell's continuing emergence as a really good looking starter running into UFA status, the cap pressure probably puts Dubas and co. on the hot seat in making a snap judgement by seasons end on whether they have to bail on Mrazek as soon as they can. Mrazek can still play a big role this season, so who knows what will happen. But he's been a band aid so far, but I don't think there's a possibility they can carry $7-8 million in goalie salary and have both guys come back.

 

[Metroid]

This thread is a complete disaster.

It needs to go on LTIR

 

[hamzarocks]

Mrazek was always going to be a backup/1B

It was clear Jack is the guy for the year. Mrazek hopefully gets healthy and gives us 25 or so games at a respectable level.

We'll move him in the summer. Don't have to hold him when he's going to be overpaid to the leafs due to us having a top 10 or so starter.

Mrazek will be a good tandem option for teams like the Kings (if they can LTIR/move Quick), Sabres, Preds, Blackhawks (with Fleury 99.9% likely to retire/leave), Capitals (a very good candidate for him, with how awful their goaltenders are), Avs (Kuemper is a UFA I believe next year), Pens (if they see Jarry sucks again if they make the playoffs), Sens (if they buyout Matt Murray).

At least half a dozen teams could/would be likely to inquire on Mrazek so long as he puts up decent (.910 or so) SV%, and has a decent record in his starts. We won't get a lot in return but getting 3.8M in cap space would be the biggest asset along with a 4th or 5th for the draft.

 

[Racer88]

Clown post like usual.

Sorry Marner fan boy but It was an accurate post. It seems everyone except you and Dubas knew that Mrazek was injured often.
Answer me why would Dubas spend 3.8 million on a goalie with an injury history like him.
He barely made the final buzzer in his first game

 

[Tak7]

It definitely seemed like he returned early - had 1 full practice before his start against Detroit.

Now it's 4 weeks.

This is a big concern.

 

[JEI]

Hopefully he comes back healthy because I think he will be important down the stretch. Hopefully Campbell can manage the load until he returns.

 

[RobBrown4PM]

At this point is it possible to remove his groin so this doesn't repeat?

 

[Brown Dog]

2.38 GAA and .914% in 92 games (3 seasons, 2 of them being 40 NHL games) with the Hurricanes... seems like a good fit to me.

Find me a goaltender that signed for 1 season recently that was actually good or better than Mrazek.

Yeah, I'm not saying they could've had Mrazek with a one-year offer (obviously very likely he would've gone elsewhere), but I'd be ok with that. The priority last off-season should have been getting Campbell extended and getting some cost-certainty there. But, again, I say this as someone who believed Campbell was good enough to be a good starter/1A.

Seemed to me to be a permanent fall back if Campbell failed and/or they couldn't sign him long term. I thought there might be cheaper backup options, but only a couple with the same "#1 status" when he is on. The problem is, this backup has been injury prone his entire career. It was an odd decision, for three years only due to the Leafs Cap issues, time will tell if it works out.

Let's face it, the Cap is going to be a problem for too many teams, especially in the goalie position. The league should just adopt a Luxury Tax system, even if the punishment is severe. Let the wealthy teams help fund some of the smaller market teams in such a manner and provide some wiggle room to franchises. Even the small market Blues are begging for relief right now and Bettman shot them down.

But what if Campbell doesn't fail? What does the Mrazek signing mean if Campbell proves he's capable of carrying the load? In that scenario (which is playing out), the Mrazek deal is a significant problem.

 

[Warden of the North]

teams aren't taking on this contract without a sweetner (draft picks) which we don't have cause they've been traded away

Johnny Boychuk just got moved for futures

 

[The Podium]

Very true.

There is zero.

Not a single goalie stat that can isolate a goalie's impact.

If you can't or don't measure and quantify shooter talent/shot selection then you cannot conversely attempt to quantify the talent of the goalie.

It's simple logic, and irrefutable.

And why these stats are outright dismissed by professionals that actually work in the NHL.

Forgive me completely dunking on you but I'm totally against willful spread of misinformation.

Does HDSC Sv% not take the shooter into account?

Does the fact that most goalies tend to hold a stable Sv% over their career even after switching teams not suggest there is some individual element to it?

I get what you are saying, and I’m sure there are stats that account for the shooters a bit more, but to dismiss goaltending stats as purely team based seems a bit naive.

 

[crump]

As a kid I used to scratch my head when I looked at the NYI goalies Chico Resch and Billy Smith. Statistics said Resch was the better goalie in regular season, even some years in straight up wins, yet it wasn’t until they stuck with Smith in the Playoffs that they started winning series and Cups.

Grant Fuhr was not a top stat goalie, yet very few could have kept the Oilers in games like he did, “the last save is your best save” in a 6-5 game.

Different eras I know, but stats don’t always tell the whole story.

 

[Racer88]

With Mrazek as backup it looks like the Leafs will have to ride Campbell into the ground………..sound familiar

 

[hotpaws]

Johnny Boychuk just got moved for futures

yes he did and he'll also be on the IR for the remainder of his contract which ends this season so i have no idea why you believe this is a comparable for Mrazek especially since Buff only traded for him to reach the cap floor

it's still early in the season so if he can come back , stay healthy and play well there might be a team that's interested in him but if continues to be on and off the shelf no one's touching him without us paying to get rid of him