- May 1, 2011
- 135,853
- 66,891
Yes, but that’s kind of similar to Vitek’s statline and I wonder why Vitek gets the rope?
Again, Vitek is on pace for 56 starts/62 games with similar numbers to the goalie that’s on pace for 26 starts.
GDT: Rangers @ Devils - 7 P.M. - MSGSN
- Thread starter Bleedred
- Start date
-
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
Again, Vitek is on pace for 56 starts/62 games with similar numbers to the goalie that’s on pace for 26 starts.
- May 1, 2011
- 135,853
- 66,891
They were prepared to let him sit on that St. Louis game, until Vitek came out and blew it against the Caps and sunk them.
It was going to be 11 days between Schmid’s St. Louis game and his next start, and that’s if they were even gonna give him that start. They did after the way that Caps game went.
And Schmid gets bombed by Winnipeg (like everyone does for us when we play there) and he’s back to the bench the next game. Vitek would have had to have choked against Pittsburgh to not have started this one.
one last thing before i passout.
Fans of other teams are drinking ya'll tears reading our GDT losses. Keep some compsure. don't feed the trolls.
Fans of other teams are drinking ya'll tears reading our GDT losses. Keep some compsure. don't feed the trolls.
ZachaFlockaFlame
Registered User
- Aug 24, 2020
- 16,789
- 22,734
My response: Didn't win the Cup? Don't care like their drama queen goalie would say
Meh you’re not wrong but the fans of the “other teams” had the ultimate experience of that last April. So it is what it is.
- May 1, 2011
- 135,853
- 66,891
I’m fairly confident Vanecek is too far gone here. It doesn’t mean he can’t have some good games, but he definitely can’t be the guy.
I think after last playoffs it seems he can’t come back from that here. I think he can with another team. Especially since there’s teams out there that make ECHL Logan Thompson a literal NHL all star and make an okay Vanecek level goalie like Adin Hill a cup winner.
His career could go on just fine, but I think he’s peaked here for sure.
Again, I don’t think he was ever supposed to be the guy. He was merely an insurance policy on Blackwood. I think the hope was Blackwood would return to pre-covid levels and he never did.
- May 1, 2011
- 135,853
- 66,891
My response is “You didn’t beat Schmid, and Vanecek is now a freebie bingo spot on the card for you, so it doesn’t count. 
ZachaFlockaFlame
Registered User
- Aug 24, 2020
- 16,789
- 22,734
No he was 100% brought in to be a starter. He did his job last year and arguably what he was traded for. 21-22 Devils didn't have one goalie that was above .909 which was Vanecek's career average coming into last year. It's just that this team is ready to contend that a .909 goaltender is nowhere near good enough. But they're also in the weird spot where they're incorporating young dmen on the roster and the absurd uptempo system Lindy plays prone to high danger chances. It's like having a shitty ass car from your 20's when you were single and then realizing that same car isn't getting the job when you have a family.
Because he's won more games? At the end of the day when you're struggling to win the coach is probably going to lean on the guy who wins, even if its sometimes despite the goalie.
Vitek got a run of starts when they were winning, and he won his last start, so he was going to get another one tonight. If Schmid looked better in his starts this year I'd get being pissed but at this point it's basically pick your poison between the two of them.
- May 1, 2011
- 135,853
- 66,891
I don’t think he was brought in to be the starter. I’m 100% convinced the hope was Blackwood was going to both get back to where he was and stay healthy while he was doing it.
I think Vitek was brought in to be the guy that could be a starter if that did not happen with Blackwood and it didn’t.
Best case I think he was brought in to be a 1b goalie with Blackwood. I’m not saying he was brought in to play only 30 games a year, but I do believe the hope was that Blackwood could rebound and Vanecek was nice insurance behind him and a decent option if Blackwood blew up again.
Not to mention he was an upgrade on the linkes of Gillies, Daws, Hammond, Wedgewood and the very green and amateurish Schmid. But I don’t believe he was brought here to be the starter, unless it was out of necessity, which it ended up being that way.
Hischier and Hughes
“I love to hockey”
- Jan 28, 2018
- 9,408
- 4,360
i think the argument was Schmid stone-cold Steve Austin's the Rangers and so.. why not go back to that?
clearly he hasnt been as good this year but its the idea that some players show up versus some teams (mentally)
- May 1, 2011
- 135,853
- 66,891
Last year I remember Lindy publicly stating the rationale for starting goalies against certain opponents had to do with their previous play against a particular team. Actually a lot of teams do that, so it’s nothing shocking.
But Schmid has ridiculous numbers the Rangers, though as hard as it is to believe he has played exactly 0 games or a second of regular season ice time against the Rangers.
glenwo2
JESPER BRATWURST
Last edited:
Hmmm...I seem to recall people on this board laughing about this type of logic before, but now because if fits the "Vitek is shit and should be jettisoned into the sun" narrative it's fine?
And by no means do I think Vitek has been good, I just get annoyed by people acting like starting Schmid was the obvious move when he hasn't been much better. As if these people haven't watched hockey for years and see coaches "go with the hot hand" after a goalie wins all the f***ing time.
Vitek needs to be better. Schmid needs to be better. Our defense could maybe not let Jimmy f***ing Vesey skate right through them to get a rebound the goalie gave up late in a tied game against a rival.
- May 8, 2010
- 22,745
- 40,488
Vitek could absorb a basic rebound for once and we don't even have to worry about the defense on that play.
Not saying you are saying that, but I'm tired of the idea that teams has to play 100% perfect hockey in front of goalies in order for them to be blamed.
Goalies are the last line of defense, hockey is a game of mistakes, you can diminish the mistakes but there'll always be some. That's what goalies are there for.
Make the basic save in a tie game with 2 minutes left. The team played well enough to win and he let the team down on that play.
Last edited:
- May 1, 2011
- 135,853
- 66,891
It feels like we have to play damn near perfect for Vitek to only allow 2 goals, let alone one goal or god forbid a shutout.
It’s been much the same with Schmid, but I give him more of a pass just because he hasn’t played much. If he has these types of numbers after the amount of games Vitek has played so far then I think I’d be more reluctant to keep getting more looks at him.
I have more confidence in Schmid right now, but maybe that’s because he hasn’t been given enough games to be as bad as Vitek has been in his number of games played.
And Akira also hasn’t been terrible going back to February like Vitek.
Granted, Akira had only played about half the games or less than half the number of games Vitek has played since then.
NJDevs26
Once upon a time...
- Mar 21, 2007
- 68,936
- 34,875
This game was annoying cause it feeds into the narrative that it's ONLY about the goalies when there have clearly been other problems this year, but today they really did play an even game under adverse conditions (only ten forwards for two whole periods and nine for a good chunk of the second) that got sunk by bad goaltending. Doubly annoying that they couldn't take advantage of a rusty Igor.
- May 8, 2010
- 22,745
- 40,488
Your first point is true and I feel the same way. I'd even say 3 goals. Tonight is a good example. Tonight was probably one of our best games all year imo against a hot team, while icing 10 forwards almost all game and having 2 top 6 guys out. We needed Vitek at his best and that goal at the end just..... blegh.
Killing Joke
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2017
- 2,883
- 2,868
- May 8, 2010
- 22,745
- 40,488
Unfortunately it'll most likely not be this season. The 2 goalies that could've potentially moved the needle that seemed available aren't anymore (Helluybuck signed a deal and Trotz has mentioned he isn't moving Saros and that they've begun negotiations).
Anyways, those 2 guys have been pretty bad to start the year. Especially Saros, so yeah.
Goaltending in today's NHL is so f***ed lol. A complete crapshoot except for like 3-4 guys.
I don't disagree. It's a bad combination right now of some mistakes being made defensively and not getting saves. And it's not even all the time, it just seems like they have these breakdowns and questionable goals at the worst possible time.
It being the Rangers and their penchant for having a horseshoe stuck up their asses makes it even more frustrating. We put up 3 on Shesterkin and then blow it late. It'd be easier to take it they'd just gotten dominated the whole time. But its also a positive sign that they played well for most of the game. There's really nothing they can do but keep playing that way and maybe tighten some things up a bit and hope either Schmid can take the reins or that Vitek stops shitting himself.
It feels goaltending is an issue league wide this year. Even normally god like goalies like Shesterkin and Sorokin seem mortal this year.
Better Call Sal
Salnalysis
I hate losing to the Rangers as much as anyone, but as always, there is a fine line between being disappointed with a loss and overreaction.
This was a game that we were in virtually the entire way with a very good opponent. This was with 11 forwards and 7 defensemen, and then down to 10 forwards for the majority of the game after losing Nosek. We were ahead for most of the 3rd period, and had our chances to go up by two. We even had our chances to go up again after Panarin tied it.
It's a tough pill to swallow, I get it, but the response from Jack and Bratt tells you all you need to know. The players know this isn't good enough, and they have to get to that level. We're not in a hole when it comes to the playoff chase, it's far too early to make those claims. Have faith in the players we invested in, because they're good enough to put us in positions for success. We have to hope that we can get fully healthy, and that the goaltending settles down.
As for the Ranger fans in the Rock, it is what it is and it will likely never change. Tickets here I imagine are still way more affordable than they are at MSG, and there is too much of a Ranger fan presence in our neck of the woods to make a difference. I haven't been to a Ranger-Devil regular season game in a decade, and it's tough to regret that. It tends to bring out the worst in both sides of the fanbase.
This was a game that we were in virtually the entire way with a very good opponent. This was with 11 forwards and 7 defensemen, and then down to 10 forwards for the majority of the game after losing Nosek. We were ahead for most of the 3rd period, and had our chances to go up by two. We even had our chances to go up again after Panarin tied it.
It's a tough pill to swallow, I get it, but the response from Jack and Bratt tells you all you need to know. The players know this isn't good enough, and they have to get to that level. We're not in a hole when it comes to the playoff chase, it's far too early to make those claims. Have faith in the players we invested in, because they're good enough to put us in positions for success. We have to hope that we can get fully healthy, and that the goaltending settles down.
As for the Ranger fans in the Rock, it is what it is and it will likely never change. Tickets here I imagine are still way more affordable than they are at MSG, and there is too much of a Ranger fan presence in our neck of the woods to make a difference. I haven't been to a Ranger-Devil regular season game in a decade, and it's tough to regret that. It tends to bring out the worst in both sides of the fanbase.
- Status
