Our goaltending

[bottlecap]

It's a good thing that we've been scoring 4.5 goals a game because our goalies are letting in 3-4 especially lately. We need our GAA to be around 2-2.5 to really be a top team. Do you give Dennis a shot? Biron seems to be suseptible to at least one softie a game and frankly Miller hasn't impressed too much either. :doh: :doh:

[BetweenThePipes00]

check out the game discussion thread from the Ottawa game, we pretty much beat this to death.

[PASabreFan]

I agree, for the most part. Someone had to say it. We're all living in this LaLa land right now where none of our problems seem to be a concern. I don't agree that Miller hasn't been impressive. His numbers are good, but not great, but he has come up huge at the right times. He's the right goalie for this team -- as long as this team continues to score bunches of goals. But, yeah, you just can't allow four goals a game. While you can point to the play of their teammates, you have to look at the goalies and say the puck stops there. Or doesn't, as the case may be. Our defensive zone play is just unacceptable and is fairly shocking for a Lindy Ruff team.

[BetweenThePipes00]

I don't see how any of this is solved by playing a kid who has played five games as a pro, none in the NHL. "It can't get any worse" is not a reason. Yeah, it CAN get worse. Nashville and Minnesota combined for 12 goals last night and they are supposedly defensive teams. It's a wide-open league and the Sabres play a high-risk game ... is this a good place to throw a kid into the fire?

Don't panic, guys.

[hopeleslyobvious]

He's right, our goaltending is suspect. It has nothing to do with our top defensive pair being out...It's purely coincidence that we started giving up 4 per game right around the time that Tallinder got hurt. ;)

 

EDIT: Just some more thoughts on this. First of all while GAA is a useful stat, I am always going to look at SV% first. If a goalie is facing 40 shots a night, he can have a GAA of 3.00 and yet still have a SV% of .925. That's good enough for 5th in the league. (Just look at Hasek, he's number 1 in GAA and number 15 in SV%). Also, Miller's SV% right now is .001 worse than his final one for last year. If I remember correctly, his numbers are much better than they were at this time last year. Plus he hasn't had a hot streak like he did last year. Also, if I remember correctly, people were questioning our goaltending in March and early April last year, and it worked out ok. Finally, with the style the team plays, the goalie's numbers are always going to be slightly skewed. The team plays a high risk style. Teams are going to get more good chances due to those risks.

[matter2003]

He's right, our goaltending is suspect. It has nothing to do with our top defensive pair being out...It's purely coincidence that we started giving up 4 per game right around the time that Tallinder got hurt. ;)

 

EDIT: Just some more thoughts on this. First of all while GAA is a useful stat, I am always going to look at SV% first. If a goalie is facing 40 shots a night, he can have a GAA of 3.00 and yet still have a SV% of .925. That's good enough for 5th in the league. (Just look at Hasek, he's number 1 in GAA and number 15 in SV%). Also, Miller's SV% right now is .001 worse than his final one for last year. If I remember correctly, his numbers are much better than they were at this time last year. Plus he hasn't had a hot streak like he did last year. Also, if I remember correctly, people were questioning our goaltending in March and early April last year, and it worked out ok. Finally, with the style the team plays, the goalie's numbers are always going to be slightly skewed. The team plays a high risk style. Teams are going to get more good chances due to those risks.

 

 

Part of the reason we allow more goals than other teams is because we play a more high risk game than they do. We are probably the most aggresive team in the league as far as pinching at the blueline, and we gamble that the rewards outweigh the risks, which are usually true. We also ask for our goaltender to bail us out of quite a few jams, and allow teams to get some good scoring chances. That being said, we have the largest goal differential in the league(goals for-goals against), and part of the reason why they are so good is because they look to set up odd man rushes from deep in their own end. We also own the highest shooting percentage in the league of any team, which shows just how many quality chances are being set up. I would not worry too much about our goaltending. It is a byproduct of the type of game we play. To make a comparison I would say look at the great Oiler teams back in the mid 80's...their goaltenders never had "great" numbers(Fuhr, Moog, etc), but they won 5 Stanley Cups, and were asked to bail them out quite a bit. They played a high risk/reward game and took their chances that their team could just overpower the other team. It usually worked, and if they needed to dial it down a notch and play more defensive hockey, they were certainly capable of it, they just chose to play wide open offensively most of the time, as it was their style. The point is that it isn't "a good thing we score so many goals", the point is that we intentionally play this way and basically say to other teams "We are gonna get lots of good scoring chances, and in return for that, we will allow you to get better chances than what you normally would get, but we are confident at the end of the day, we will outscore you."

 

Remember, it's like if you are stranded in the ocean with your friend and you are being chased by a shark...You don't need to outswim the shark----you only need to outswim your friend...

 

We don't "need to get a better GAA or save percentage" or anything else---all they "need" to do is score 1 more goal than the other team. I am sure when they "need" to do something about their defensive play they will address it...

[Bmwolf21]

matter hits the nail on the head with the reference to the Oilers and Fuhr, Moog, Ranford, etc. - this team's hi-risk, hi-reward style is the biggest reason we give up 4 goals/game. The team will be fine, so long as the keepers make the saves they are supposed to (i.e., limiting the softies.) If you look at the games that Ryan has played in this year (since Marty has given up some soft goals on in the last 5-6 games) you'll notice there have been more than a few times this year where the team gave up one or two defensive goals in a game - where someone didn't get back, covered the wrong guy, or someone was left staring at an empty cage.

 

I don't have a problem with giving up four goals a game as long as we are able to score 5, but that won't last all season. The team needs to work on tightening up a little in their own end, to cut that fourth "bad goal" off the nightly scoresheet without jeopardizing their attack strategy.

[X. Benedict]

matter hits the nail on the head with the reference to the Oilers and Fuhr, Moog, Ranford, etc. - this team's hi-risk, hi-reward style is the biggest reason we give up 4 goals/game. The team will be fine, so long as the keepers make the saves they are supposed to (i.e., limiting the softies.) If you look at the games that Ryan has played in this year (since Marty has given up some soft goals on in the last 5-6 games) you'll notice there have been more than a few times this year where the team gave up one or two defensive goals in a game - where someone didn't get back, covered the wrong guy, or someone was left staring at an empty cage.

 

I don't have a problem with giving up four goals a game as long as we are able to score 5, but that won't last all season. The team needs to work on tightening up a little in their own end, to cut that fourth "bad goal" off the nightly scoresheet without jeopardizing their attack strategy.

 

I agree. Of course we could always play the left-wing lock after the first goal.

If the current style is driving you guys crazy, recall when Bowman in the 80's would get

a lead and play in the shell - most times it would win - but it was absolutely agonizing to

watch.

 

Ruff knows this team is going to give up great scoring chances - and they do - the trick in this

system is creating a 2-1 ratio of scoring chances. I still think that it is possible for a goaltender to

give up 4 goals and play great. I think some of you guys really got programmed by the hockey of the previous 10 years.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Not to mention they are actually allowing 3.05 per game ... this month has not been what they would like defensively, but again ... no Lydman, no Tallinder, no Miller, no Max to maybe help keep the puck in the other end a bit more ... the sky is not falling here.

[Bmwolf21]

Not saying they should left-wing lock, trap or anything - just that the games where we usually give up 4 or more, it's more due to defensive breakdowns rather than "bad" goaltending, which was the original idea of the thread. There have been more than a few times where a defender chased someone behind the net, a center failed to pick his man in the slot, etc., and if the team can cut those down, we'll be even tougher to beat.

 

If we can limit defensive zone mistakes, and our keepers make the saves they are supposed to, then we'll be fine.

[PASabreFan]

BM, there's a bit of a contradiction in what you're saying. You want to play a high-risk, high-reward game where the goaltender bails you out. But when the goaltender doesn't, you blame "defensive breakdowns." Aren't the breakdowns the "risk" part of the game that the goaltender has to cover up for?

 

X... are blind back passes and dead giveaways in your own zone part of that "style"? I guess mistakes are inevitable, but the Sabres are approaching the point where the ends don't justify the means. Or it means and ends? I always get that mixed up.

 

I would feel better if I thought playoff hockey would be like this. But we all know it's a different game in April and May. I think a SLIGHT correction is needed. The Sabres can still be ultra-aggressive -- there are just moments in games where you don't have to make that risky pass. Lindy has said at much, by the way.

[X. Benedict]

 

X... are blind back passes and dead giveaways in your own zone part of that "style"? I guess mistakes are inevitable, but the Sabres are approaching the point where the ends don't justify the means. Or it means and ends? I always get that mixed up.

 

I agree, those are just mistakes. But there are times when the defense is going to pinch,

or Campbell or Kalinen are going to join the rush. There are times when I do want them to

simplify things.

 

 

I would feel better if I thought playoff hockey would be like this. But we all know it's a different game in April and May. I think a SLIGHT correction is needed. The Sabres can still be ultra-aggressive -- there are just moments in games where you don't have to make that risky pass. Lindy has said at much, by the way.

 

This raises a decent point. I think that they gave up about 3 shots a period against Ottawa when

they tried to make the extra pass or they got a little cute. It looks unselfish, but it is not always the smart play.

[Bmwolf21]

BM, there's a bit of a contradiction in what you're saying. You want to play a high-risk, high-reward game where the goaltender bails you out. But when the goaltender doesn't, you blame "defensive breakdowns." Aren't the breakdowns the "risk" part of the game that the goaltender has to cover up for?

No, because we're not talking about the same thing. When we talk about the hi-risk/reward style, I tend to think of "D" pinching and giving up an odd-man rush, or a bad outlet pass that results in the opposition having numbers down low, or something similar. When those happen, the Sabres have enough speed to compensate and get back in the play, negating the usual 3-on-2 or 2-on-1 advatage.

 

The breakdowns I am talking about are where a forward is generally in the right position - the center is back in the slot, for instance - and fails to pick someone up, two defenseman chase someone into the corner/behind the net, we let a rebound sit loose in front of the net w/out clearing it away, the goalies misplays the dump-in, or skaters losing battles along the boards. Those aren't tied into the Sabres attack mentality, but are rather just mental or physical mistakes, which can be (and should be) corrected.

 

I am not advocating asking Ryan or Marty to stand on their head and steal games for us - just make the saves you're supposed to, and keep the bad goals to a minimum, and let the forwards & D do their thing.

[nfreeman]

My bottom line on all this is that we've lost our 3 best defensive players to injury (or 3 of the top 4, depending on one's view of Lydman). It's natural for some falloff in defensive play, esp. on the PK, to result.

 

Lindy made an interesting point on this: Tallinder and Lydman are the top penalty-killers on defense, and generally don't play on the PP. With those 2 out, Campbell and Spacek are now the top 2 penalty-killers. Those shifts, which are very draining both physically and mentally, have hurt their effectiveness on the PP in addition to loosening up the PK.

[wjag]

My bottom line on all this is that we've lost our 3 best defensive players to injury (or 3 of the top 4, depending on one's view of Lydman). It's natural for some falloff in defensive play, esp. on the PK, to result.

 

Lindy made an interesting point on this: Tallinder and Lydman are the top penalty-killers on defense, and generally don't play on the PP. With those 2 out, Campbell and Spacek are now the top 2 penalty-killers. Those shifts, which are very draining both physically and mentally, have hurt their effectiveness on the PP in addition to loosening up the PK.

I think this matches my sentiment as well. The part we fail to recognize is that the roles are switching as well. We need guys to play more and while we admire them for doing it, they are getting pretty tired out there. They wouldn't be normally pressed and pressing as much as they are. Throw in that CARD and PETERS are nailed to the bench late in the game and it begins to matter.

[Sabretooth73]

both goalies are great, cant be awesome every night.... long season, they will be just fine

[nfreeman]

both goalies are great, cant be awesome every night.... long season, they will be just fine

 

while I admire your team spirit, I'm reminded of the classic line from "Strange Brew" when one of the McKenzie brothers was ordering breakfast: "back bacon and toast, hold the toast."

 

In other words -- both of our goalies are great, except for one of them.

[bottlecap]

I've always felt that Marty doesn't have his head on straight, he's kinda shaky

on the whole. There's so many examples over the years...the white helmet,

the stolen pads, the lazy way he plays the puck...He might be rusty

languishing in a backup role but I have seen enough to think I know what

Marty can bring as a starter. And I don't think it's a steadying influence.

 

Even Briere mentioned a night in the QMHL where Marty couldn't

"stop a beach ball." That didn't sound like a vote of confidence. He was a #1 pick and

now he has lost his starting job to a #5 pick. That makes him kinda like a

Tom Brady/Drew Bledsoe thing. Except Brady doesn't seem to be injury prone...

 

I also think that there are other factors involved here of the increased GAA. The schedule

has been brutal. 7 days off then 10 games in 12 nights, or something like that. When

you have that kind of schedule our small guys start giving into injuries and fatigue

and they start making tentative or lazy defensive plays.

 

What I'm saying is I think Darcy needs one more masterstroke here.

We need a big dog to carry the little dogs for awhile. I think we should trade

Biron + for a monster defenseman like a Boewmeester.

[BetweenThePipes00]

I've always felt that Marty doesn't have his head on straight, he's kinda shaky

on the whole. There's so many examples over the years...the white helmet,

the stolen pads, the lazy way he plays the puck...He might be rusty

languishing in a backup role but I have seen enough to think I know what

Marty can bring as a starter. And I don't think it's a steadying influence.

 

Even Briere mentioned a night in the QMHL where Marty couldn't

"stop a beach ball." That didn't sound like a vote of confidence. He was a #1 pick and

now he has lost his starting job to a #5 pick. That makes him kinda like a

Tom Brady/Drew Bledsoe thing. Except Brady doesn't seem to be injury prone...

 

I also think that there are other factors involved here of the increased GAA. The schedule

has been brutal. 7 days off then 10 games in 12 nights, or something like that. When

you have that kind of schedule our small guys start giving into injuries and fatigue

and they start making tentative or lazy defensive plays.

 

What I'm saying is I think Darcy needs one more masterstroke here.

We need a big dog to carry the little dogs for awhile. I think we should trade

Biron + for a monster defenseman like a Boewmeester.

 

:blink:

 

First of all, if Biron is so bad, why would Florida give us Bouwmeester for him? What is the "+" in that deal, Campbell and Vanek?

 

I don't know where you read that Briere said that, but his last year in junior Marty's GAA was 2.48, and that is a high-scoring league. Pretty decent. his last year in Rochester his GAA was 2.07 and his SV PCT was .930 in 52 games. I guess they played with bigger beachballs.

 

All that said, there's no doubt he is average at best as an NHL starter ... so again, why would Florida give up their franchise player to get him?

[wjag]

I thought Marty played well enough to win the other night IMO. BUT he played the puck twice outside the trapezoid and didn't get called on it either time. That was bad judgment and he was lucky the refs missed or ignored it.

[hopeleslyobvious]

I've always felt that Marty doesn't have his head on straight, he's kinda shaky

on the whole. There's so many examples over the years...the white helmet,

the stolen pads, the lazy way he plays the puck...He might be rusty

languishing in a backup role but I have seen enough to think I know what

Marty can bring as a starter. And I don't think it's a steadying influence.

 

Even Briere mentioned a night in the QMHL where Marty couldn't

"stop a beach ball." That didn't sound like a vote of confidence. He was a #1 pick and

now he has lost his starting job to a #5 pick. That makes him kinda like a

Tom Brady/Drew Bledsoe thing. Except Brady doesn't seem to be injury prone...

 

I also think that there are other factors involved here of the increased GAA. The schedule

has been brutal. 7 days off then 10 games in 12 nights, or something like that. When

you have that kind of schedule our small guys start giving into injuries and fatigue

and they start making tentative or lazy defensive plays.

 

What I'm saying is I think Darcy needs one more masterstroke here.

We need a big dog to carry the little dogs for awhile. I think we should trade

Biron + for a monster defenseman like a Boewmeester.

 

 

So a broken thumb on a freak play last year and a muscle strain makes a guy injury prone? Every athlete is going to have muscle strains. Anyone who exercises regularly will strain a muscle every now and then. That's life.

 

I fail to understand how smaller guys get more fatigued when the schedule gets busy. Smaller guys are usually better conditioned.

[DR HOLLIDAY]

It's a good thing that we've been scoring 4.5 goals a game because our goalies are letting in 3-4 especially lately. We need our GAA to be around 2-2.5 to really be a top team. Do you give Dennis a shot? Biron seems to be suseptible to at least one softie a game and frankly Miller hasn't impressed too much either. :doh: :doh:

 

Miller has played very good for us, to say that he hasn't been impressive is just plain untrue.......... B-)