Jimmy Howard out 1 week+ with groin injury, Coreau called up

[Echolalia 2,961]

22 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

StWell as for the starter thing, he obv isn't anymore. Wasn't even given much of a shot before Blash jumped the gun and started turning to Howard. Sometimes your starter has a rough beginning to the season, especially in his second season in the league. Doesn't mean you turn to the backup that quickly, and you def don't hand him the reigns full time. s***ty move. Give him a good chance first. Like i've said before, it is what it is. Next season they'll let Mrazek play and learn from his mistakes maybe instead of simply benching him because Howard is there because Howard won't be there. And the difference in experience is a factor. Howard should have been off this team awhile back. No excuses for the huge 2-3 year slump he went through bein being a vet goalie in the league. He was horrible and everyone would have traded him for a set of moldy '70's goalie equipment. Amazing how a lot of those same people love him again after 11 starts, 9 he didn't make a mess out of.

And I guess my personal numbers thing came across wrong. Mrazek lost 7 games, Howard lost 5. Not a big difference. Sure Mrazek has allowed more goals, but wins are wins. Howard has allowed less goals, but wins are wins. Personal numbers are for statistics and awards. Wins get you towards the main goal, which is the Cup.

And yes, a GAA over 3.00 sucks, but he's not 0-11. That's my point. And on Saturday, Mrazek lost by a goal and got a point from the team that blew out Howard earlier in the season. Things easily go the other way.

So I dunno, guess i'll keep "blindly defending" Mrazek for having bad numbers 12 starts into his second season while most others "blindly defend " Howard because not sucking in 9 games this season apparently makes up for the horror show that half his 7-8 year career has been while both have 5 wins each.

Lol this is the most ridiculous logic for evaluating a goalie.  It's like choosing to walk blindly through a minefied again because despite losing your arms and hearing and suffering the secondary infections you somehow made it through the field alive the first time.

Thankfully the organization would rather not walk the team blindly through a minefield over and over again cuz they scraped by a few times.

[chaps80 1,591]

3 hours ago, Echolalia said:

Lol this is the most ridiculous logic for evaluating a goalie.  It's like choosing to walk blindly through a minefied again because despite losing your arms and hearing and suffering the secondary infections you somehow made it through the field alive the first time.

Thankfully the organization would rather not walk the team blindly through a minefield over and over again cuz they scraped by a few times.

It's a different way of looking at things yes, but ridiculous, no. Anyways, it is what it is. Mrazek was 4-4-1 when he lost the starting job. He lost his starting job 9 games into the season with a pretty much even record on a horrible defensive team. Does that make sense? Sound like the move was a bit rushed? Who cares how Howard was playing. It shouldn't even have factored in, because he was officially the BACKUP. Everyone overlooks that fact it seems. Mrazek earned that starting job according to coaching and management, but has it given to his backup 9 games in when Blash panicks. That's awesome coaching right there huh? Way to have a bit of faith in the guy you chose. Oh well, whoever will play will play, but i'll be glad when all the flip flopping of starting goalies is over next season.

[kickazz 5,459]

9 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

It's a different way of looking at things yes, but ridiculous, no. Anyways, it is what it is. Mrazek was 4-4-1 when he lost the starting job. He lost his starting job 9 games into the season with a pretty much even record on a horrible defensive team. Does that make sense? Sound like the move was a bit rushed? Who cares how Howard was playing. It shouldn't even have factored in, because he was officially the BACKUP. Everyone overlooks that fact it seems. Mrazek earned that starting job according to coaching and management, but has it given to his backup 9 games in when Blash panicks. That's awesome coaching right there huh? Way to have a bit of faith in the guy you chose. Oh well, whoever will play will play, but i'll be glad when all the flip flopping of starting goalies is over next season.

Why do you keep bringing up Howard in a discussion about Mrazek's individual performance? You keep going on and on and on and on and on and on and on

and on

and on

and on

and on about Howard. We get it, you hate Howard and feel it necessary to point his past performance out to try to make Mrazek look better. You can keep trying but it won't change the fact that Mrazek has sucked this season. Just accept it and hope for the best. That's what the rest of us are doing. We're rooting for Mrazek but we're not going to sugar coat his performance and make excuses and try to change principles about how personal numbers all of a sudden don't mean anything in hockey. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

If both their stars ither than W-L were tgesame you'd have a point. If you're counting on your team scoring 3.5 a game just to get you to .500, that's not close to sustainable.

[kickazz 5,459]

4 hours ago, chaps80 said:

And I guess my personal numbers thing came across wrong. Mrazek lost 7 games, Howard lost 5. Not a big difference. Sure Mrazek has allowed more goals, but wins are wins. 

We'll be sure to keep that quote in mind next time you point out how Howard allowed a late goal in the 3rd period but ends up winning a game. Remember, a win is a win, so no need to keep pointing out when Jimmy lets that 3rd period goal in... Unless you're just changing our beliefs to make Mrazek look less bad. Which I'm 99% sure you're trying to  do. Because no person in the league at the professional level would EVER disregard personal numbers. You might be the first person on this forum that's gone to this extent to cover up for a goalie. 

BTW you still haven't explained why Hasek won the Vezina and was regarded the best goalie in the league that year with a crappy win/loss but amazing personal numbers. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by kickazz

[Echolalia 2,961]

 

10 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

It's a different way of looking at things yes, but ridiculous, no. Anyways, it is what it is. Mrazek was 4-4-1 when he lost the starting job. He lost his starting job 9 games into the season with a pretty much even record on a horrible defensive team. Does that make sense? Sound like the move was a bit rushed? Who cares how Howard was playing. It shouldn't even have factored in, because he was officially the BACKUP. Everyone overlooks that fact it seems. Mrazek earned that starting job according to coaching and management, but has it given to his backup 9 games in when Blash panicks. That's awesome coaching right there huh? Way to have a bit of faith in the guy you chose. Oh well, whoever will play will play, but i'll be glad when all the flip flopping of starting goalies is over next season.

It makes perfect sense if you're about giving your team the best chance to win and make the playoffs, and that's exactly what Blashill is getting paid to do.  Mrazek would have Blashill's faith in net if he played better.  He hasn't.  Thus he deserves nobody's faith.

Edited November 30, 2016 by Echolalia

[chaps80 1,591]

3 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Why do you keep bringing up Howard in a discussion about Mrazek's individual performance? You keep going on and on and on and on and on and on and on

and on

and on

and on

and on about Howard. We get it, you hate Howard and feel it necessary to point him out to try to make Mrazek look better. You can keep trying but it won't change the fact that Mrazek has sucked this season. Just accept it and hope for the best. That's what the rest of us non-haters are doing. We're rooting for Mrazek but we're not going to sugar coat his performance. 

I don't hate Howard. Not trying to use him to make Mrazek look better. I've already said Howard has been the better of the two. Maybe I just like to see players get their fair shots, which Mrazek was not given. If your not gonna stick with your starter, then don't have one. You want a battle for the job, then have one. Simple as that. I'd feel the other way if it was Howard who lost the job. Yes i've brought up Howard's past fault's in talking about Mrazek's play and comparing the two, but that's warranted. 

[chaps80 1,591]

17 minutes ago, kickazz said:

We'll be sure to keep that quote in mind next time you point out how Howard allowed a late goal in the 3rd period but ends up winning a game. Remember, a win is a win, so no need to keep pointing out when Jimmy lets that 3rd period goal in... Unless you're just changing our beliefs to make Mrazek look less bad. Which I'm 99% sure you're trying to  do. Because no person in the league at the professional level would EVER disregard personal numbers. You might be the first person on this forum that's gone to this extent to cover up for a goalie. 

BTW you still haven't explained why Hasek won the Vezina and was regarded the best goalie in the league that year with a crappy win/loss but amazing personal numbers. 

Hasek won the Vezina with great personal numbers because that's how the award is won. It's very simple.why even ask a question like that? Did I ever say Mrazek's numbers are Vezina worthy? At one point last season they were, but def not right now. Lol

I'm not "covering up" for anyone. To me, getting the win is more important than stellar numbers. It is a team sport after all. Just like I don't care if any players win scoring titles. Big deal. I didn't ask your opinion anyways. Your happy Howard has great numbers but is a. 500 goalie, cool man.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

I don't hate Howard. Not trying to use him to make Mrazek look better. I've already said Howard has been the better of the two. Maybe I just like to see players get their fair shots, which Mrazek was not given. If your not gonna stick with your starter, then don't have one. You want a battle for the job, then have one. Simple as that. I'd feel the other way if it was Howard who lost the job. Yes i've brought up Howard's past fault's in talking about Mrazek's play and comparing the two, but that's warranted. 

How long is he supposed to be garbage and get bailed out by scoring surges before they go with the better player.

[chaps80 1,591]

7 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

How long is he supposed to be garbage and get bailed out by scoring surges before they go with the better player.

Funny how the most goals he's allowed in any of his wins is 3. Huge bail out.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

27 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

I don't hate Howard. Not trying to use him to make Mrazek look better. I've already said Howard has been the better of the two. Maybe I just like to see players get their fair shots, which Mrazek was not given. If your not gonna stick with your starter, then don't have one. You want a battle for the job, then have one. Simple as that. I'd feel the other way if it was Howard who lost the job. Yes i've brought up Howard's past fault's in talking about Mrazek's play and comparing the two, but that's warranted. 

I think that you might just be stuck on the idea of a starter being a finite static distinction. It's not like being labeled #1 means that you're entitled to play all but a handful of games. If you're playing bad you'll be given a break.

I also disagree with those saying that Mrazek has sucked this year. I think he was good at the beginning and stole a game or 2. Then he had 4 or 5 rough games so go with very capable other goalie who's playing well. All is good. Roll with the punches and adapt.

[chaps80 1,591]

3 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

I think that you might just be stuck on the idea of a starter being a finite static distinction. It's not like being labeled #1 means that you're entitled to play all but a handful of games. If you're playing bad you'll be given a break.

I also disagree with those saying that Mrazek has sucked this year. I think he was good at the beginning and stole a game or 2. Then he had 4 or 5 rough games so go with very capable other goalie who's playing well. All is good. Roll with the punches and adapt.

Finally a level headed response. I didn't expect Mrazek to play every game..no starter does. Brodeur used to play all but ten of the Devils' games, but that was Brodeur. Anyways, Mrazek has played two games more than Howard counting tonight. That's a tandem to me. not a starter getting a break.

Can def agree he hasn't sucked. His numbers don't tell the whole story that's for sure. He was great till end of October, had three bad starts with a good job in relief of Howard against MTL in between. Past two he's looked great.

[kickazz 5,459]

28 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

I think that you might just be stuck on the idea of a starter being a finite static distinction. It's not like being labeled #1 means that you're entitled to play all but a handful of games. If you're playing bad you'll be given a break.

I also disagree with those saying that Mrazek has sucked this year. I think he was good at the beginning and stole a game or 2. Then he had 4 or 5 rough games so go with very capable other goalie who's playing well. All is good. Roll with the punches and adapt.

I DISAGREE WITH UR FACE

51 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

Hasek won the Vezina with great personal numbers because that's how the award is won. It's very simple.why even ask a question like that? Did I ever say Mrazek's numbers are Vezina worthy? At one point last season they were, but def not right now. Lol

I'm not "covering up" for anyone. To me, getting the win is more important than stellar numbers. It is a team sport after all. Just like I don't care if any players win scoring titles. Big deal. I didn't ask your opinion anyways. Your happy Howard has great numbers but is a. 500 goalie, cool man.

No I'm happy that Howard was giving us a better chance of winning. And I'm happy that at the very least, Blashill is open to playing the hot hand rather than being a stubborn idiot and playing one goalie who obviously was in a slump. For some reason even with Howard being the better goalie at the time, you're pointing out his past and going off into tangents to compare him to Mrazek. It's not really warranted in this situation. 

As far as the first paragraph about wins/losses. That logic doesn't make sense. A goalie having good personal numbers isn't just about winning the Vezina, that actually defines the goalie as being THAT good.

For instance lets say we have goalie  A who won 10 games but in 8 of those games lets say he allowed 5 goals in each game and in 2 of them he allows only 1 goal per game. And let's say you have goalie B who won 8 games and in all 8 games he only allowed 1 to 2 goals per game. Which goalie would you rather have? The one that has the ability to stop most of the shots he faces? or the goalie who consistently allows 5 goals and keeps getting bailed out by his offense? What if in goalie A's case the offense is no longer able to bail him out? Will goalie A still be able to keep winning games with his s***ty GAA? Probably not. So yeah personal numbers make a huge difference whether it's winning of Vezina or winning a game. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by kickazz

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

2 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

Finally a level headed response. I didn't expect Mrazek to play every game..no starter does. Brodeur used to play all but ten of the Devils' games, but that was Brodeur. Anyways, Mrazek has played two games more than Howard counting tonight. That's a tandem to me. not a starter getting a break.

Can def agree he hasn't sucked. His numbers don't tell the whole story that's for sure. He was great till end of October, had three bad starts with a good job in relief of Howard against MTL in between. Past two he's looked great.

Howard's better than most backups/1b goalies so I think it would logical that he would play more than other backups. Also, Mrazek's still struggling with consistency so it's no surprise we use Howard to help out through those rough stretches. I think Mrazek will still play a fair amount more than Howard, but with a solid second option I think it's great that we won't have to force him into the workhorse role so early.

[chaps80 1,591]

8 minutes ago, kickazz said:

I DISAGREE WITH UR FACE

No I'm happy that Howard was giving us a better chance of winning. And I'm happy that at the very least, Blashill is open to playing the hot hand rather than being a stubborn idiot and playing one goalie who obviously was in a slump. 

He won 3 of 7.

[kickazz 5,459]

2 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

He won 3 of 7.

Chance does not equal games won. Chance means chance regardless of the final result. Read the rest of my post I added more to it. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by kickazz

[chaps80 1,591]

3 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

Howard's better than most backups/1b goalies so I think it would logical that he would play more than other backups. Also, Mrazek's still struggling with consistency so it's no surprise we use Howard to help out through those rough stretches. I think Mrazek will still play a fair amount more than Howard, but with a solid second option I think it's great that we won't have to force him into the workhorse role so early.

Good points. He also does need to learn how to play himself out of slumps though. Just think Blash is too quick to turn to Howard at this point, and for too long. Had he not been injured, he probly would have started tonight even though Mrazek played great on Saturday. He'll figure things out though I guess.

7 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Chance does not equal games won. Chance means chance regardless of the final result. Read the rest of my post I added more to it. 

Yeah, gotcha.

[kickazz 5,459]

43 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

I think that you might just be stuck on the idea of a starter being a finite static distinction. It's not like being labeled #1 means that you're entitled to play all but a handful of games. If you're playing bad you'll be given a break.

I also disagree with those saying that Mrazek has sucked this year. I think he was good at the beginning and stole a game or 2. Then he had 4 or 5 rough games so go with very capable other goalie who's playing well. All is good. Roll with the punches and adapt.

Mrazek hasn't sucked the entire year, I was exaggerating. But he's had a disappointing season overall thus far and it's still early. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by kickazz

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

37 minutes ago, kickazz said:

I DISAGREE WITH UR FACE

Haha! I guess I should have just named you. Mrazek's definitely had some struggles, but - again - thought he was solid to really good in a fair number of games. Even if you just look at his SV% game by game, it aligns pretty much with what I think  see the good stretch he had in the first collection of games. I think you could roughly say the first 6 (that first game with 5 goal against, I thought he was good despite the score - team was in defensive shambles those first 2 games). Then the rough stretch...

http://www.espn.com/nhl/player/gamelog/_/id/5619/petr-mrazek

But, yeah, I agree that on the whole he's been a bit disappointing so far. In 4 games in a row (that he started), he let in 4 goals - that's pretty bad - and I think going with Howie in Top Jimmy form was the right move. Mrazek's playing well tonight and last game, though, so hopefully it was just a blip.

Edited November 30, 2016 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[kickazz 5,459]

Yeah he was fine in his initial games and I recall even praising him. But then as the season went on I think I was one of the first commenting of his inconsistency because he was letting in too many goals per game for a stretch. 

[chaps80 1,591]

He did have a four game losing stretch where he allowed 4 goals in each game and was 0-3-1. I don't see where he's ever been "bailed out" in any of his wins though. Allowing 3 goals twice while facing 33 and 37 shots?

[marcaractac 3,963]

Here is the thing I do not like about how Blash handles the goalies:

Howard had that game where he got blown out. He sat out one game and was right back to starting after that.

Mrazek has a bad game, and Howard gets many consecutive starts. I'm not against giving Mrazek a game off when he has had a couple not so great outings. But I do not agree with sitting him for 3-4 straight games when he does. 

 

This also is not exclusive to goaltending with this team. The youth get very little leeway, and it is frustrating. Veterans can make mistakes all game long, and they will be back the next game. Injuries have now forced Blashill's hand, and now the youth have no choice but to learn from their mistakes and to keep playing. To the surprise of probably nobody, they are getting better as a result. 

[kickazz 5,459]

For goalies, that's not true. On the opposite actually, when Mrazek was going thru his slump in February, Blashill kept being persistent and kept starting him with Howard taking a few games here and there. They ended up slitting a lot of the games in Feb/March. But no, Mrazek didn't all of a sudden sit 4 games in a row, he was given plenty of opportunities. This season has been an exception because Howard starting playing like a Vezina goaltender and had insane stats.

And remember that when Howard started sucking last winter, Mrazek took the starting position and held it for a good two months before he lost it again. I'll criticize Blash when it's deserved but when it comes to giving Mrazek opportunities, his track record has been just fine, given the circumstances that this team is trying to do whatever it can do win.

If we were a top seeded it would be a mo brainer, you keep starting your future goalie regardless of how long his slump has been. But when your roster is mediocre al around, you're scrambling to get the right combination for success.

Blashill kept Larkin on the roster since day one and Mantha is still here too. When the young guys play extraordinarily good, it seems Blash likes to keep them up. The one guy he pissed me off about was AA. Not sure what Blash has against him

Edited November 30, 2016 by kickazz

[marcaractac 3,963]

I'm citing examples from this season. You're citing examples from last. How the goalie situation was handled last season is irrelevant now. It hasn't been handled all that great this season. It hasn't been as terrible as chaps make it out to be, and I certainly don't think it's anywhere as good as you are making it out to be, but rather somewhere in the middle. 

In the end, this franchise has shown time and time again that they will cling to the vets until they are absolutely forced to do otherwise. It would really be nice to see them realize that youth is simply taking over the league. 

Edited November 30, 2016 by marcaractac

[e_prime 1,936]

I still think both of these goalies would look a hell of a lot better if the team in front of them played with some consistency and then we really would have a problem with who should be starting.

Granted, injuries all around have made this a bit difficult, but the whole, "Mrazek won a game! He's clearly our number one."   "Mrazek let in four. Pull him out!"  "Jimmeh dah man!  All-Star Material"  "Howard with another third period breakdown."  All of this is irrational knee-jerk analysis when the team in front of BOTH OF THEM continues to play poorly.