Conflict in the Crease

[wings_fanatic 677]

41 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

No way they send down Mrazek. Just ride Howard when he returns while Mraz rides the pine. let Coreau go down, then trade Mraz at the deadline or the draft and bring Coreau back up if the wings really wanna go with coreau now.

Howard has a mntc and is the better goalie. Very unlikely he gets traded

They are not going to keep howard over mrazek. Howard is having a good season for the 1st time in 3 years. Howard will be the one who gets moved.

[Echolalia 2,961]

10 minutes ago, wings_fanatic said:

They are not going to keep howard over mrazek. Howard is having a good season for the 1st time in 3 years. Howard will be the one who gets moved.

You say this like Mrazek has a proven track record of being a reliable starter.  

[wings_fanatic 677]

40 minutes ago, Echolalia said:

You say this like Mrazek has a proven track record of being a reliable starter.  

Howard is old and proven to be unreliable on a rather consistent basis. Mrazek has been inconsistent but he is young. When he is on his game he is far better than howard. I am quite sure management would rather keep mrazek and see how he develops rather than keep howard.

[Echolalia 2,961]

1 minute ago, wings_fanatic said:

Howard is old and proven to be unreliable on a rather consistent basis. Mrazek has been inconsistent but he is young. When he is on his game he is far better than howard. I am quite sure management would rather keep mrazek and see how he develops rather than keep howard.

The problem is Mrazek is rarely on his game, which is a trend that has only gotten worse in the past couple years.  There's no guarantee that he ever puts its all together and plays as the elite goalie everyone labeled his as on a consistent basis, and thus far in his NHL career he hasn't shown us anything that would imply he's capable of that.  I mean look at where he's at right now.  He came into this season and was handed the number 1 position, and now he finds himself battling with Coreau of all people for a backup role.  This is how bad he's been.  So if you want to ignore what Howard's done this year and throw that all out the window, and instead trade him away based on what he did last year or the year before, fine, but you better trade for an established number 1 goaltender to fill his spot, because like it or not, Howard is the only number 1 goalie we have right now.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

2 hours ago, Echolalia said:

The problem is Mrazek is rarely on his game, which is a trend that has only gotten worse in the past couple years.  There's no guarantee that he ever puts its all together and plays as the elite goalie everyone labeled his as on a consistent basis, and thus far in his NHL career he hasn't shown us anything that would imply he's capable of that. 

He's only been on the full time roster this year and last year. Edit: plus half the year before - i forgot - so about 2 full years.

I think keeping the 32 year old goalie and getting rid of the promising 24 year old would be a horrific decision for our future. Sure, Howard's playing better now and could be better next year or 2, but we're not winning in these years. And we have no one else in the system projected to be a starter.

I'm kind of amazed the extent to which people have turned on Mrazek. He's lost 11 games this year - I'm not sure how many people would consider bad games for him, but to me it's less than that number.

Some may call this unfair, but I found it interesting: Even with Mrazek's current horrible stats (which make up a larger portion of his career) he and Howard have almost identical career stats:

Mrazek: GAA: 2.44, SV%: .916

Howard: GAA: 2.43, SV%: .915

That suggests that overall, Mrazek's been on par with Howards play over the years. I'll go with the goalie that showed to have the higher ceiling and in the developing years. Or if we have both for the next couple years, I'm good with that too and we'll have insurance rather than betting on one horse.

Edited December 30, 2016 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[Echolalia 2,961]

12 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

He's only been on the full time roster this year and last year.

I think keeping the 32 year old goalie and getting rid of the promising 24 year old would be a horrific decision for our future. Sure, Howard's playing better now and could be better next year or 2, but we're not winning in these years. And we have no one else in the system projected to be a starter.

I'm kind of amazed the extent to which people have turned on Mrazek. He's lost 11 games this year - I'm not sure how many people would consider bad games for him, but to me it's less than that number.

Some may call this unfair, but I found it interesting: Even with Mrazek's current horrible stats (which make up a larger portion of his career) he and Howard have almost identical career stats:

Mrazek: GAA: 2.44, SV%: .916

Howard: GAA: 2.43, SV%: .915

That suggests that overall, Mrazek's been on par with Howards play over the years. I'll go with the goalie that showed to have the higher ceiling and in the developing years. Or if we have both for the next couple years, I'm good with that too and we'll have insurance rather than betting on one horse.

I'm personally not suggesting trading away Mrazek, and I haven't turned on him.  But I do think its asinine to hand him the reins or dive headfirst into a future committed to him as the number one goalie considering how unreliable he is.  If he turns into an elite goalie, then awesome.  But that's not a guarantee, and he's done absolutely nothing in his career to suggest that hes even heading in that direction.  For some reason everyone on this forum is so high on this kid based on a couple games from world juniors, or a playoff series a couple years back the Wings ended up losing, or the occasional incredibly athletic save he makes once every 5 or 6 games, and then declares that he is destined for greatness.  I mean the  tunnel vision is to a degree I didn't think was even possible.  He has been absolutely abysmal this year (to address your point, I think he has played much worse than the 11 losses he has on his record).  Mrazek is 44th in the league in save percentage, 42nd in goals against.  Those aren't even decent numbers for a backup.  And people still look for any excuse possible for him, or think he should still be the number 1 goalie, or declare the Wings future in his hands.  I mean this guy could sleep with everyone's gf/wive and they'd still fight to the end in his honor.  Its baffling. 

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

1 hour ago, Echolalia said:

I'm personally not suggesting trading away Mrazek, and I haven't turned on him.  But I do think its asinine to hand him the reins or dive headfirst into a future committed to him as the number one goalie considering how unreliable he is.  If he turns into an elite goalie, then awesome.  But that's not a guarantee, and he's done absolutely nothing in his career to suggest that hes even heading in that direction.  For some reason everyone on this forum is so high on this kid based on a couple games from world juniors, or a playoff series a couple years back the Wings ended up losing, or the occasional incredibly athletic save he makes once every 5 or 6 games, and then declares that he is destined for greatness.  I mean the  tunnel vision is to a degree I didn't think was even possible.  He has been absolutely abysmal this year (to address your point, I think he has played much worse than the 11 losses he has on his record).  Mrazek is 44th in the league in save percentage, 42nd in goals against.  Those aren't even decent numbers for a backup.  And people still look for any excuse possible for him, or think he should still be the number 1 goalie, or declare the Wings future in his hands.  I mean this guy could sleep with everyone's gf/wive and they'd still fight to the end in his honor.  Its baffling. 

I should have specified that only the first line of my post was responding to your post. It was more at others earlier that suggested trading him or just getting rid of him.

And I don't think you're response is aimed at my post either since it's not close to what I said. He's lost the #1 spot rightfully for the time being. I don't even think he should have been declare #1 so early on in his career when he struggled for that long last year and Jimmy is still a very good goalie. 

I'm saying he's a young goalie who I do feel will get there. Jimmy's getting older and we're a team building for the future - why would you get rid of the only goalie in your system that will reasonably be expected to be a starter in 5 years? (Luongo's 37 so maybe Howie could do it, but that would be the end of career and I think it'd be a stretch).

Finally, there's many other reasons people are high on him that you didn't mention. A big one is the Calder cup that he won in his rookie year in the AHL. And his stellar play in the AHL in general.

Edited December 30, 2016 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[DickieDunn 2,571]

The real issue is Holland gave him a fat contract based on a small sample size. He needed a bridge deal not what he got.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[Buppy 1,720]

13 minutes ago, Echolalia said:

I'm personally not suggesting trading away Mrazek, and I haven't turned on him.  But I do think its asinine to hand him the reins or dive headfirst into a future committed to him as the number one goalie considering how unreliable he is.  If he turns into an elite goalie, then awesome.  But that's not a guarantee, and he's done absolutely nothing in his career to suggest that hes even heading in that direction.  For some reason everyone on this forum is so high on this kid based on a couple games from world juniors, or a playoff series a couple years back the Wings ended up losing, or the occasional incredibly athletic save he makes once every 5 or 6 games, and then declares that he is destined for greatness.  I mean the  tunnel vision is to a degree I didn't think was even possible.  He has been absolutely abysmal this year (to address your point, I think he has played much worse than the 11 losses he has on his record).  Mrazek is 44th in the league in save percentage, 42nd in goals against.  Those aren't even decent numbers for a backup.  And people still look for any excuse possible for him, or think he should still be the number 1 goalie, or declare the Wings future in his hands.  I mean this guy could sleep with everyone's gf/wive and they'd still fight to the end in his honor.  Its baffling. 

Oh come on. If it's asinine to hand the reins to Mrazek, how is it any less so to keep Howard, who has shown the exact same unreliability over the course of 7 years? If anything, you should think keeping both is the absolute worst thing we could do. Getting rid of one would at least create the opportunity for someone more reliable, plus ease our cap situation. And if we're getting rid of one, Howard makes the most sense. 

There is no future commitment. Mrazek may or may not be the long-term answer, but it should be pretty obvious by now that Howard for sure is not. What baffles me is that people can mock the hype for Mrazek while simultaneously jerking themselves raw over a 17 game stretch from Howard. 

[kliq 3,755]

33 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

The real issue is Holland gave him a fat contract based on a small sample size. He needed a bridge deal not what he got.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

He signed a 2 year deal for 8mil. That is a bridge deal. Is it the amount you have an issue with? Or am I misunderstanding, and you are talking about Howard?

Edited December 30, 2016 by kliq

[Echolalia 2,961]

16 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Oh come on. If it's asinine to hand the reins to Mrazek, how is it any less so to keep Howard, who has shown the exact same unreliability over the course of 7 years? If anything, you should think keeping both is the absolute worst thing we could do. Getting rid of one would at least create the opportunity for someone more reliable, plus ease our cap situation. And if we're getting rid of one, Howard makes the most sense. 

There is no future commitment. Mrazek may or may not be the long-term answer, but it should be pretty obvious by now that Howard for sure is not. What baffles me is that people can mock the hype for Mrazek while simultaneously jerking themselves raw over a 17 game stretch from Howard. 

Like I already mentioned, if you want to trade away Howard, I have no problem with that.  That's not what I'm arguing.  But if you're gung-ho about getting rid of Howard, you best trade for an established number 1 NHL calibre goalie because Mrazek has demonstrated he is currently too unreliable for the role, and Coreau has 2 games total NHL experience.  I'm not arguing from the stance that Howard is necessarily the answer to the Wings problems going into subsequent seasons.  I'm arguing that Mrazek isn't necessarily that answer either, which is something that for reasons beyond me just doesn't sit well with LGW.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 hours ago, wings_fanatic said:

They are not going to keep howard over mrazek. Howard is having a good season for the 1st time in 3 years. Howard will be the one who gets moved.

Mrazek has played how many years of good games again? Perhaps you should look up what an mntc is as well.

[Buppy 1,720]

15 minutes ago, Echolalia said:

Like I already mentioned, if you want to trade away Howard, I have no problem with that.  That's not what I'm arguing.  But if you're gung-ho about getting rid of Howard, you best trade for an established number 1 NHL calibre goalie because Mrazek has demonstrated he is currently too unreliable for the role, and Coreau has 2 games total NHL experience.  I'm not arguing from the stance that Howard is necessarily the answer to the Wings problems going into subsequent seasons.  I'm arguing that Mrazek isn't necessarily that answer either, which is something that for reasons beyond me just doesn't sit well with LGW.

I don't think anyone has an issue with the idea that Mrazek might not become anything special. Some here have suggested giving up on Mrazek (though I kind of think #9 is just trolling with all that), and I'd think quite a few would take issue with that, but not with reasonable skepticism.

Beyond that though, if you acknowledge that both goalies have reliability questions, what difference does it make if we get rid of one? If we don't have a long-term solution now with both, how it worse if we also don't have a long-term solution with just Mrazek?

We'd need a solid backup, and that's it. Hopefully, Coreau can show at least that much while Howard is out, and we won't need to even worry about that. Then we can start worrying about whether we need to upgrade.

 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, Buppy said:

Oh come on. If it's asinine to hand the reins to Mrazek, how is it any less so to keep Howard, who has shown the exact same unreliability over the course of 7 years? If anything, you should think keeping both is the absolute worst thing we could do. Getting rid of one would at least create the opportunity for someone more reliable, plus ease our cap situation. And if we're getting rid of one, Howard makes the most sense. 

There is no future commitment. Mrazek may or may not be the long-term answer, but it should be pretty obvious by now that Howard for sure is not. What baffles me is that people can mock the hype for Mrazek while simultaneously jerking themselves raw over a 17 game stretch from Howard. 

Howard has had his ups and downs sure, but nothing like mrazeks track record. Howard is an established starter in this league. An elite starter? No. An average starter? Yes.

Mraz has how many decent games in this league lol? Kid fell apart in the playoffs and never picked up the pieces apparently.

I still need someone to explain to me how were going to trade our best goalie who also has an ntc as well.

[Echolalia 2,961]

45 minutes ago, Buppy said:

I don't think anyone has an issue with the idea that Mrazek might not become anything special. Some here have suggested giving up on Mrazek (though I kind of think #9 is just trolling with all that), and I'd think quite a few would take issue with that, but not with reasonable skepticism.

Beyond that though, if you acknowledge that both goalies have reliability questions, what difference does it make if we get rid of one? If we don't have a long-term solution now with both, how it worse if we also don't have a long-term solution with just Mrazek?

We'd need a solid backup, and that's it. Hopefully, Coreau can show at least that much while Howard is out, and we won't need to even worry about that. Then we can start worrying about whether we need to upgrade.

 

Right now the difference would be about 1.15 GAA and .038 save percentage, or top 5 goalie stats vs 40-45th league wide.

[Buppy 1,720]

21 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Howard has had his ups and downs sure, but nothing like mrazeks track record. Howard is an established starter in this league. An elite starter? No. An average starter? Yes.

Mraz has how many decent games in this league lol? Kid fell apart in the playoffs and never picked up the pieces apparently.

I still need someone to explain to me how were going to trade our best goalie who also has an ntc as well.

You should probably look at Howard again. And also Mrazek. And also note that the world existed prior to the start of this season.

Mrazek has 58 quality starts, in 101 career starts. A slightly better percentage than Howards 205 of 373. 53 of 93 in the last 3 years for Mrazek, 52 of 98 for Howard. Ignoring this year, 46 of 75 for Mrazek and 42 of 83 for Howard.

Howard has been the better goalie this year. Mrazek was better the last two. And players with NTCs get traded pretty frequently.

7 minutes ago, Echolalia said:

Right now the difference would be about 1.15 GAA and .038 save percentage, or top 5 goalie stats vs 40-45th league wide.

Well durn, that might just stop us from winning the cup.

But at least it's fun to see you confirm that your attachment to Howard is based on 17 games, after you were so incredulous that people could think something positive about Mrazek after just 80-ish.

[Echolalia 2,961]

38 minutes ago, Buppy said:

You should probably look at Howard again. And also Mrazek. And also note that the world existed prior to the start of this season.

Mrazek has 58 quality starts, in 101 career starts. A slightly better percentage than Howards 205 of 373. 53 of 93 in the last 3 years for Mrazek, 52 of 98 for Howard. Ignoring this year, 46 of 75 for Mrazek and 42 of 83 for Howard.

Howard has been the better goalie this year. Mrazek was better the last two. And players with NTCs get traded pretty frequently.

Well durn, that might just stop us from winning the cup.

But at least it's fun to see you confirm that your attachment to Howard is based on 17 games, after you were so incredulous that people could think something positive about Mrazek after just 80-ish.

If people are allowed to cream their pants over Mrazek and declare him the future of the Wings based on a random sample from the past (and ignore the most recent, and thus most relevant data), whats wrong with me cherry picking data from Howard's past as well?  2013 was a great year for Howard.  In fact it was better than any year Mrazek has had since he's established himself in the NHL.  2012 was great too.  2011 wasn't as good, certainly not as bad as Mrazek this year, but 2010 was excellent for Howard as well.  In fact during that span Howard was top 10 in the league for save percentage every season other than 2011, and 2013 he was was 11th (Mrazek has yet to crack the top 10 in any season, mind you), and Howard is back in that range again this year.  So while Howard struggled the past few years, he also has demonstrated in his career on multiple occasions that he can be relied upon to be a solid NHL goalie throughout the course of an entire season.  Looking at the combination of what Howard has demonstrated over his career as well as what he's doing right now, and then looking at what Mrazek has done, its not even a fair comparison.  One is an NHL starter and has been throughout the majority of his career, and is playing some of the best hockey of his life right now.  The other got his feet wet then started drowning.  

Edited December 30, 2016 by Echolalia

[roboturner 562]

1 hour ago, Echolalia said:

If people are allowed to cream their pants over Mrazek and declare him the future of the Wings based on a random sample from the past (and ignore the most recent, and thus most relevant data), whats wrong with me cherry picking data from Howard's past as well? 

Everything.

Trust me, I was a 'Straight-A' student in high school and college if you don't count the classes I didn't get 'A's' in (I'm gonna use that at my next job interview)

Edited December 30, 2016 by roboturner

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, Buppy said:

You should probably look at Howard again. And also Mrazek. And also note that the world existed prior to the start of this season.

Mrazek has 58 quality starts, in 101 career starts. A slightly better percentage than Howards 205 of 373. 53 of 93 in the last 3 years for Mrazek, 52 of 98 for Howard. Ignoring this year, 46 of 75 for Mrazek and 42 of 83 for Howard.

Howard has been the better goalie this year. Mrazek was better the last two. And players with NTCs get traded pretty frequently.

Well durn, that might just stop us from winning the cup.

But at least it's fun to see you confirm that your attachment to Howard is based on 17 games, after you were so incredulous that people could think something positive about Mrazek after just 80-ish.

And youre defining a "quality start" how exactly?

Yeah man, NTC players get traded everyday. How many got traded last year bups? How about the year before that?

[Echolalia 2,961]

7 hours ago, roboturner said:

Everything.

Trust me, I was a 'Straight-A' student in high school and college if you don't count the classes I didn't get 'A's' in (I'm gonna use that at my next job interview)

So are you suggesting that we ignore past data with regard to Mrazek and Howard?  Or just Howard?

[AtlantaHotWings 987]

8 hours ago, roboturner said:

Everything.

Trust me, I was a 'Straight-A' student in high school and college if you don't count the classes I didn't get 'A's' in (I'm gonna use that at my next job interview)

and I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night and decided that our new number one is

Coreau as he has a .908 SV% and sits between our two "stud" goalies with a 2.94 GAA. Judgement is on his current sample size and "gut" feeling. He is big like every other goalie so we would be trending in net like all the other teams.

I started this as a more tongue and cheek but what if Coreau starts blowing it up as in doing well right now? Does it give us hope for the future? Do we have more flexibility come the deadline?

Guess I better stay again at the Holiday Inn tonight to ponder these questions. 

[Buppy 1,720]

14 hours ago, Echolalia said:

If people are allowed to cream their pants over Mrazek and declare him the future of the Wings based on a random sample from the past (and ignore the most recent, and thus most relevant data), whats wrong with me cherry picking data from Howard's past as well?  2013 was a great year for Howard.  In fact it was better than any year Mrazek has had since he's established himself in the NHL.  2012 was great too.  2011 wasn't as good, certainly not as bad as Mrazek this year, but 2010 was excellent for Howard as well.  In fact during that span Howard was top 10 in the league for save percentage every season other than 2011, and 2013 he was was 11th (Mrazek has yet to crack the top 10 in any season, mind you), and Howard is back in that range again this year.  So while Howard struggled the past few years, he also has demonstrated in his career on multiple occasions that he can be relied upon to be a solid NHL goalie throughout the course of an entire season.  Looking at the combination of what Howard has demonstrated over his career as well as what he's doing right now, and then looking at what Mrazek has done, its not even a fair comparison.  One is an NHL starter and has been throughout the majority of his career, and is playing some of the best hockey of his life right now.  The other got his feet wet then started drowning.  

The only "random sampling" going on here is from you.

Looking at the entirety of the careers for both players, the stats are nearly identical. In the most recent years (which as you say is more relevant, plus also removes possible bias from the team in front of them) the stats tip in Mrazek's favor. This year it's tipped to Howard.

But also looking at this year, both are far from their career numbers. Given the small sample size, we should conclude that what we've seen this year is an anomaly, and should not be expected to continue. Most likely going forward both will trend back toward their norm.

Again, it has nothing to do with Mrazek being the future or a potential star. That doesn't matter. Over the course of 7 seasons Howard has shown he is just an average starter. He's not going to be more than that. Mrazek has shown the same thing. So why do we need both?

If your answer is because of this year, you are doing the exact thing you've been mocking others for doing.

12 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

And youre defining a "quality start" how exactly?

Yeah man, NTC players get traded everyday. How many got traded last year bups? How about the year before that?

It's a stat from hockey-reference.com. A start with a sv% > the league average for that season, or at least .885 if facing 20 or fewer shots.

For players with NTCs, I stopped counting when I got to 20-ish. That was going back to the summer before last season. 

[Echolalia 2,961]

4 minutes ago, Buppy said:

The only "random sampling" going on here is from you.

Looking at the entirety of the careers for both players, the stats are nearly identical. In the most recent years (which as you say is more relevant, plus also removes possible bias from the team in front of them) the stats tip in Mrazek's favor. This year it's tipped to Howard.

But also looking at this year, both are far from their career numbers. Given the small sample size, we should conclude that what we've seen this year is an anomaly, and should not be expected to continue. Most likely going forward both will trend back toward their norm.

Again, it has nothing to do with Mrazek being the future or a potential star. That doesn't matter. Over the course of 7 seasons Howard has shown he is just an average starter. He's not going to be more than that. Mrazek has shown the same thing. So why do we need both?

If your answer is because of this year, you are doing the exact thing you've been mocking others for doing.

It's a stat from hockey-reference.com. A start with a sv% > the league average for that season, or at least .885 if facing 20 or fewer shots.

For players with NTCs, I stopped counting when I got to 20-ish. That was going back to the summer before last season. 

Except we don't know that what Mrazek did for the first half of his career is his norm.  You label him as an average starter based on two halfs of a season playing well and two halfs of a season playing terribly, which is incredibly misleading.  As you alluded to, the sample size with Mrazek is tiny, and half his career has been one extreme and the most recent half has been the other extreme. The confidence that you can say Mrazek's actual game is one vs the other is very low, thus like I've beat to death 100 times already Mrazek is an unproven commodity who's played like a fringe backup for almost the past year now, and giving him the net without having someone proven ready to clean his potential mess is idiotic.  And let's be clear about the recent stats tipping in Mrazek'a favor.  Unless you're cherry picking the second half of the 2014-2015 season and the first half of 2015-2016 season, the recent stats have been brutal for Mrazek.

[roboturner 562]

8 hours ago, Echolalia said:

So are you suggesting that we ignore past data with regard to Mrazek and Howard?  Or just Howard?

Neither. That was my point.

[Echolalia 2,961]

3 minutes ago, roboturner said:

Neither. That was my point.

That was also my point when I made my original comment