Mrazek "Maturing, could bounce back like Howard"

[chaps80 1,591]

Hahaha this has started up again? Not even through October yet!!

Last I checked, both weren’t doing so well, although Jimmys GAA improved from 2.80 to 2.58 after last game. The one thing that stands out though is Mrazek’s starts we’re Dallas, Vegas, and Washington. And inheriting a 3-1 deficit coming into Toronto and taking the loss. Three offensively talented teams out of four. Howard gets Minnesota, Arizona, Tampa, Toronto ( pulled on 3 goals on 4 shots), Vancouver, Buffalo. So two out of six that are offensively talented, and one of those he didn’t last a period. 

Take it for what you will.

[chaps80 1,591]

12 hours ago, kliq said:

You're really taking liberties with your definitions huh. Howard is not "mediocre" because he is injury prone, he is "injury prone" because he is injury prone. You can't just change the meaning of words so something fits your narrative. 

With your logic, back when Crosby was dealing with his concussion issues, he could be labeled as "mediocre".

I think by mediocre he means he can’t be counted on by this team to get them through a full season without being injured. You can be the best in the world, but if your hurt, your of no value. Plus his playoff record stinks. He’s never going to be good enough to win a Cup with any team in the NHL. Right now he’s a stop gap measure until or if Petr gets his shot together, or another young goalie outplays him.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

21 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

I think by mediocre he means he can’t be counted on by this team to get them through a full season without being injured. You can be the best in the world, but if your hurt, your of no value. Plus his playoff record stinks. He’s never going to be good enough to win a Cup with any team in the NHL. Right now he’s a stop gap measure until or if Petr gets his shot together, or another young goalie outplays him.

That would make his impact on the success of the team mediocre. Not him. No it's not the same thing.  

[chaps80 1,591]

5 hours ago, Son of a Wing said:

That would make his impact on the success of the team mediocre. Not him. No it's not the same thing.  

Rick DiPietro, not a mediocre goalie ability wise. Did pretty well when healthy on a horrible team, but all people remember him for is being made of glass and never doing anything significant, therefore mediocrity is associated with him, and he’s been forgotten. Not comparing the two, just saying you don’t have to suck to be forgettable when your often injured and haven’t come close to winning anything. 

[kickazz 5,459]

1 hour ago, chaps80 said:

Rick DiPietro, not a mediocre goalie ability wise. Did pretty well when healthy on a horrible team, but all people remember him for is being made of glass and never doing anything significant, therefore mediocrity is associated with him, and he’s been forgotten. Not comparing the two, just saying you don’t have to suck to be forgettable when your often injured and haven’t come close to winning anything. 

Are you kidding me? Dipietro was trash even when he was healthy. 

You must think Hasek was mediocre too then. They guy had a groin pulled every 3rd day. You're just coming up with this BS argument to put Howard down as per usual. And this is exactly why people call Mrazek out. 

I can't believe you're actually making the argument that player x is "mediocre" because he happened to get injured the last 2 years of his 9 year NHL career. 

edit - saw that Dickie was the one who implied mediocre = cuz not healthy. So post is directed to him. 

Edited October 26, 2017 by kickazz

[kliq 3,763]

7 hours ago, chaps80 said:

I think by mediocre he means he can’t be counted on by this team to get them through a full season without being injured. You can be the best in the world, but if your hurt, your of no value. Plus his playoff record stinks. He’s never going to be good enough to win a Cup with any team in the NHL. Right now he’s a stop gap measure until or if Petr gets his shot together, or another young goalie outplays him.

The definition of mediocre is: "of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate:"

Calling Howard mediocre (I know it wasn't you), is just incorrect. Mediocre would be a player like Glendening. Was Bobby Orr mediocre because he retired young? Of course not because injuries and mediocrity are two completely different things. 

The Cup thing is also hyperbole, put Howard on Pittsburgh or Chicago and definitely has a shot to do it. Howard has a career GAA of 2.43 and a career Save % of 91.6% which are better numbers then those who have won cups, its a team game.

Two off the top of my head, Cam Ward won a cup and has a career GAA of 2.77/S% 90.9. Antti Niemi won a cup and has a career GAA of 2.53 and S% of 91.2, both worse then Howard.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

So was Eric Lindros mediocre too?

Edited October 26, 2017 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[kliq 3,763]

1 hour ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

So was Eric Lindros mediocre too?

Not to mention those "mediocre" hall of famers Peter Forsberg and Paul Kariya.

Edited October 26, 2017 by kliq

[kickazz 5,459]

Peter Forseberg was the definition of mediocre in the 00s

[wings_fanatic 677]

13 hours ago, kliq said:

The definition of mediocre is: "of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate:"

Calling Howard mediocre (I know it wasn't you), is just incorrect. Mediocre would be a player like Glendening. Was Bobby Orr mediocre because he retired young? Of course not because injuries and mediocrity are two completely different things. 

The Cup thing is also hyperbole, put Howard on Pittsburgh or Chicago and definitely has a shot to do it. Howard has a career GAA of 2.43 and a career Save % of 91.6% which are better numbers then those who have won cups, its a team game.

Two off the top of my head, Cam Ward won a cup and has a career GAA of 2.77/S% 90.9. Antti Niemi won a cup and has a career GAA of 2.53 and S% of 91.2, both worse then Howard.

Howard also chokes most games in the playoffs. He had 2 good playoffs series thats it.

[krsmith17 7,191]

 

[chaps80 1,591]

15 hours ago, kickazz said:

Are you kidding me? Dipietro was trash even when he was healthy. 

You must think Hasek was mediocre too then. They guy had a groin pulled every 3rd day. You're just coming up with this BS argument to put Howard down as per usual. And this is exactly why people call Mrazek out. 

I can't believe you're actually making the argument that player x is "mediocre" because he happened to get injured the last 2 years of his 9 year NHL career. 

edit - saw that Dickie was the one who implied mediocre = cuz not healthy. So post is directed to him. 

DiPietro’s stats are actually pretty good in seasons where he played 50+ games on horrible NYI teams in the pre- cap and just post-cap era. 

Howard has been injured in more than two seasons. Been out at least once a season starting in 2013-14. In 2014 alone he was injured four times. 

Hasek has six Vezinas, two Harts, two Cups, and an Olympic gold, among other things. His achievements vastly outweigh his injury history, although he may have cost Ottawa a Cup in 2006 after being injured in the Olympics. 

I used to be as much of a Howard fan as some of you are. I just grew tired of the injuries and inconsistent play over the years. He’s rebounded very well the past season and this one, (despite missing a lot of last season), which i’m happy about. But him getting injured suddenly or his play dropping off suddenly is always in the back of my mind. Not that it matters much though, this team isn’t doing anything anyways.

Edited October 26, 2017 by chaps80

[chaps80 1,591]

14 hours ago, kliq said:

The definition of mediocre is: "of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate:"

Calling Howard mediocre (I know it wasn't you), is just incorrect. Mediocre would be a player like Glendening. Was Bobby Orr mediocre because he retired young? Of course not because injuries and mediocrity are two completely different things. 

The Cup thing is also hyperbole, put Howard on Pittsburgh or Chicago and definitely has a shot to do it. Howard has a career GAA of 2.43 and a career Save % of 91.6% which are better numbers then those who have won cups, its a team game.

Two off the top of my head, Cam Ward won a cup and has a career GAA of 2.77/S% 90.9. Antti Niemi won a cup and has a career GAA of 2.53 and S% of 91.2, both worse then Howard.

Ward won that Cup as a rookie, and Niemi as well on a stacked team. They’ve both trended downhill since. Neither will ever win a Cup again. When Howard was younger on the good Wings teams of the early 2010’s, he had a shot. I just can’t see him ever doing it now, not as a starter anyways.

edit- Niemi is the backup in Pittsburgh now, so maybe he’ll ride the pine to a Cup. I hope not.

Edited October 26, 2017 by chaps80

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

30 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

Ward won that Cup as a rookie, and Niemi as well on a stacked team. They’ve both trended downhill since. Neither will ever win a Cup again. When Howard was younger on the good Wings teams of the early 2010’s, he had a shot. I just can’t see him ever doing it now, not as a starter anyways.

edit- Niemi is the backup in Pittsburgh now, so maybe he’ll ride the pine to a Cup. I hope not.

Florida

 

[kickazz 5,459]

45 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

1. DiPietro’s stats are actually pretty good in seasons where he played 50+ games on horrible NYI teams in the pre- cap and just post-cap era. 

2. Howard has been injured in more than two seasons. Been out at least once a season starting in 2013-14. In 2014 alone he was injured four times. 

3. Hasek has six Vezinas, two Harts, two Cups, and an Olympic gold, among other things. His achievements vastly outweigh his injury history, although he may have cost Ottawa a Cup in 2006 after being injured in the Olympics. 

4. I used to be as much of a Howard fan as some of you are. I just grew tired of the injuries and inconsistent play over the years. He’s rebounded very well the past season and this one, (despite missing a lot of last season), which i’m happy about. But him getting injured suddenly or his play dropping off suddenly is always in the back of my mind. Not that it matters much though, this team isn’t doing anything anyways.

1. No they're trash, he mostly hovered around 3.00 GAA or high 2.8. His save % was barely 90% for a 1st pick he was terrible. Compare that to Hasek to actually played on a bad Buffalo team and won multiple awards. And when the team was actually decent with Tavares, Dipetro was still s***. Averages 3.44 GAA. WTF is that? I can't believe you're defending Dipietro over Howard lol.

2. Don't care if he was injured for a few games here and there, he still played 50-60 games and in the shortened season played 42 out of the 48 games. The only seasons he missed significant time was the last two seasons. You're complaining about him missing a few games over the course of the other seasons? Really?  

3. Thank you for proving my point. Excuses are made for other goalies you like but when it comes to Howard he's mediocre because he gets injured. Cool. 

4. I'm not a Howard "fan" I just don't like stupidity. And I don't like irrational "love" towards Mrazek when he's clearly as bad if not worse than Howard is. 

Edited October 26, 2017 by kickazz

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

1 hour ago, kickazz said:

1. No they're trash, he mostly hovered around 3.00 GAA or high 2.8. His save % was barely 90% for a 1st pick he was terrible. Compare that to Hasek to actually played on a bad Buffalo team and won multiple awards. And when the team was actually decent with Tavares, Dipetro was still s***. Averages 3.44 GAA. WTF is that? I can't believe you're defending Dipietro over Howard lol.

2. Don't care if he was injured for a few games here and there, he still played 50-60 games and in the shortened season played 42 out of the 48 games. The only seasons he missed significant time was the last two seasons. You're complaining about him missing a few games over the course of the other seasons? Really?  

3. Thank you for proving my point. Excuses are made for other goalies you like but when it comes to Howard he's mediocre because he gets injured. Cool. 

4. I'm not a Howard "fan" I just don't like stupidity. And I don't like irrational "love" towards Mrazek when he's clearly as bad if not worse than Howard is. 

I think it speaks volumes to the blind hatred and revisionist history many seem to have regarding certain players.

[kliq 3,763]

2 hours ago, chaps80 said:

Ward won that Cup as a rookie, and Niemi as well on a stacked team. They’ve both trended downhill since. Neither will ever win a Cup again. When Howard was younger on the good Wings teams of the early 2010’s, he had a shot. I just can’t see him ever doing it now, not as a starter anyways.

edit- Niemi is the backup in Pittsburgh now, so maybe he’ll ride the pine to a Cup. I hope not.

Howard had a shot when he was younger because the Wings were better. I am not saying the Wings will win the cup, what I am saying is that Howard on the right team (ie. a Pittsburgh or Chicago) could win a cup.

Also Niemi is on Florida not Pittsburgh.

Edited October 26, 2017 by kliq

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

In some ways, Howard is the new Osgood. He's not elite, but no matter what kind of numbers he has, or what he accomplishes, he'll always be "just not good enough". At least Osgood had a good blueline corp and defensively responsible forwards in front of him. I think he gets more respect because of it. Howard doesn't, and put him in to backstop those Osgood teams and he would be just as successful. When Howard's numbers do decline its because he's coming back from injuries not because he's "streaky" or disinterested or a prima donna (all of which Mrazek is IMO). Howard is one of those goalies that you can win a cup with as long as you have a good team in front of him. He is not going to stand on his head and steal games for you. But at the same time, he's not going to lose you games either. Just like Osgood used to be.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

23 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

In some ways, Howard is the new Osgood. He's not elite, but no matter what kind of numbers he has, or what he accomplishes, he'll always be "just not good enough". At least Osgood had a good blueline corp and defensively responsible forwards in front of him. I think he gets more respect because of it. Howard doesn't, and put him in to backstop those Osgood teams and he would be just as successful. When Howard's numbers do decline its because he's coming back from injuries not because he's "streaky" or disinterested or a prima donna (all of which Mrazek is IMO). Howard is one of those goalies that you can win a cup with as long as you have a good team in front of him. He is not going to stand on his head and steal games for you. But at the same time, he's not going to lose you games either. Just like Osgood used to be.

Howard is Osgood. Mrazek is poop-Hasek. Finkle is Einhorn. Been saying it for a while, and I agree with your description. My love for Ozzie lives on through his only begotten son; Howard. 

[Buppy 1,720]

5 hours ago, kickazz said:

1. No they're trash, he mostly hovered around 3.00 GAA or high 2.8. His save % was barely 90% for a 1st pick he was terrible. Compare that to Hasek to actually played on a bad Buffalo team and won multiple awards. And when the team was actually decent with Tavares, Dipetro was still s***. Averages 3.44 GAA. WTF is that? I can't believe you're defending Dipietro over Howard lol.

2. Don't care if he was injured for a few games here and there, he still played 50-60 games and in the shortened season played 42 out of the 48 games. The only seasons he missed significant time was the last two seasons. You're complaining about him missing a few games over the course of the other seasons? Really?  

1. That isn't really true. Looking at his 4 healthy seasons from 03-04 to 07-08, he had a .908 sv% and 2.71 gaa. Average numbers for the time. 03-04 was a hair above average, 05-06 was a hair below (season after the lockout scoring was up and save% down league-wide), 06-07 was very good and earned him some Vezina consideration, then 07-08 was fairly bad.

Howard had a great rookie year, then a below average year, two exceptional years, three more below average years, then rebounded with a great (albeit short) year last year.

Much more comparable than you seem to think. But when people think of DiPietro, all they can think of is that he was a 1st overall pick, signed a ludicrous contract, and his career was decimated by injuries. Chaps kind of has a point. Perception has a way of distorting reality.

2. Case in point: It is actually only last year that Howard missed much time due to injury. He was not injured in 15-16, he just lost the starters job. He had more minor injuries in the two years prior to that, but like you say he played over 50 games those years. Yet despite not missing really that much time, the perception of being so injury prone has grown. Probably because the big injury was so recent, and not too far removed from the more minor injuries.

Similarly, because his most recent play has also been very good, people are forgetting the previous three seasons, just as those seasons made other people forget about his play prior to that. Long story short, of course Howard isn't mediocre because he's had injuries. He's been mediocre because he's been bad more or less as often as he's been good.

Hopefully that's changed, and last year was a developmental step forward rather than just a temporary upswing. If so we can trade him for a decent pick or something, Mrazek will become the old guy everyone hates, and we can start arguing Coreau vs Machovsky vs Van Pottelberghe vs Larsson vs Petruzzelli.

[kickazz 5,459]

12 minutes ago, Buppy said:

1. That isn't really true. Looking at his 4 healthy seasons from 03-04 to 07-08, he had a .908 sv% and 2.71 gaa. Average numbers for the time. 03-04 was a hair above average, 05-06 was a hair below (season after the lockout scoring was up and save% down league-wide), 06-07 was very good and earned him some Vezina consideration, then 07-08 was fairly bad.

Howard had a great rookie year, then a below average year, two exceptional years, three more below average years, then rebounded with a great (albeit short) year last year.

Much more comparable than you seem to think. But when people think of DiPietro, all they can think of is that he was a 1st overall pick, signed a ludicrous contract, and his career was decimated by injuries. Chaps kind of has a point. Perception has a way of distorting reality.

2. Case in point: It is actually only last year that Howard missed much time due to injury. He was not injured in 15-16, he just lost the starters job. He had more minor injuries in the two years prior to that, but like you say he played over 50 games those years. Yet despite not missing really that much time, the perception of being so injury prone has grown. Probably because the big injury was so recent, and not too far removed from the more minor injuries.

Similarly, because his most recent play has also been very good, people are forgetting the previous three seasons, just as those seasons made other people forget about his play prior to that. Long story short, of course Howard isn't mediocre because he's had injuries. He's been mediocre because he's been bad more or less as often as he's been good.

Hopefully that's changed, and last year was a developmental step forward rather than just a temporary upswing. If so we can trade him for a decent pick or something, Mrazek will become the old guy everyone hates, and we can start arguing Coreau vs Machovsky vs Van Pottelberghe vs Larsson vs Petruzzelli.

That's exactly what we're arguing. Calling someone mediocre because they have injuries is stupid. If Howard = Average it's because of his abilities as a goaltender not because he's get injuredInsert other media

As far as Dipietro average isn't "pretty good" as Chaps says it. For a 1st round pick and contract he significantly under-performed. s*** for his standards and contract. 

Edited October 26, 2017 by kickazz

[chaps80 1,591]

3 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Howard is Osgood. Mrazek is poop-Hasek. Finkle is Einhorn. Been saying it for a while, and I agree with your description. My love for Ozzie lives on through his only begotten son; Howard. 

I guess he could be the new Osgood, besides the three Cup rings. And stepping up in the playoffs to win two of those Cups as starter, and nearly a third after a pretty bad regular season. Probably would have won the Smythe had the Wings won the Cup.

 

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Florida

 

He started the season in Pittsburgh. Didn’t know he was moved. Shows how under the radar he is now.

[chaps80 1,591]

7 hours ago, Son of a Wing said:

I think it speaks volumes to the blind hatred and revisionist history many seem to have regarding certain players.

I’m not defending DiPietro over Howard. I was only using DiPietro as an example of a goalie who had respectable numbers in his day despite crappy teams and injuries, and is now pretty much forgotten. 

[Buppy 1,720]

2 hours ago, kickazz said:

That's exactly what we're arguing. Calling someone mediocre because they have injuries is stupid. If Howard = Average it's because of his abilities as a goaltender not because he's get injuredInsert other media

As far as Dipietro average isn't "pretty good" as Chaps says it. For a 1st round pick and contract he significantly under-performed. s*** for his standards and contract. 

Yeah, that's why I said that part. 

Point was you were doing basically the same thing. Letting factors other than play influence your opinion of his play. "Pretty good" may be a bit of an overstatement, but it's much closer than "trash", at least for the seasons Chaps was referring to. Still doing it too, by framing his performance in the context of his draft position and contract.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

As was said before, hockey is a team sport. You can't argue that Osgood is superior to Howard because he won 2 cups (not counting Vernon's) and Howard hasn't won any. The teams playing in front of them are at 2 totally different skill levels. As I said before, you put Howard in goal in 98 or 08 and they still win those cups. You put Ozzie in goal from 2009 on and he has 0 cups.

Osgood has also scored more goals than Howard, so I guess that makes him better too. Lest we forget that it was Howard who took the starting job from Ozzie in 2009. And Howard was a Calder finalist his rookie year (which he should have won, but too many voters held his age against him). Osgood was never a serious candidate, he finished 5th.

Neither has ever won a Vezina either, although in 96 Ozzie finished 2nd (although so have guys like Turek and Cechmanek, so take the Vezina as you wish).

Anyway, my point is not to trash Ozzie, loved the guy, never got all the props he deserved. There is nothing wrong with believing that Osgood was/is better than Howard, too each his own. But to argue that he is inferior to Osgood based on team performance just isn't fair.