EHM The Blue Line

Ok so I was speaking about -10 goalies being once every few years. Carry on lads.

I've never given a -10 to a goalie and I probably never will.
Looking at the goalies aged 26 or younger there is only Tuukka Rask that could possibly warrant that status.

Subban, Campbell and Fucale barely warrants a -9 IMO
Gibson, Allen, Lehner yes

Those are the only -9 on CJs list

Campbell I changed to -8.

I want to weigh in on this expanding on what batdad said:

Goalies are hard, because if you look at a goalie like Chris Osgood he was successful but never was really all-star caliber. And there's a reason for that:

Osgood was a *fit*.

Osgood played for both STL and NYI and never fared very well. A lot of people say that's because DET was *so* good, but it then ignores the fact that a good goalie like Manny Legace and a great goalie like Curtis Joseph also never could win in DET. I watched a replay of a playoff game recently where DET has Joseph in net and man, was he honestly really good... but things never entirely fell in place for him and he needed ot be more active and see more shots. His really good games were when he saw a lot of shots.

Osgood's game, style, demeanor, etc... just *fit* better. Guys like Jospeh and to an extent Hasek honestly *needed* to see more shots. Hasek had struggles in DET sometimes when he didn't see as many shots. Osgood, on the other hand, thrived when he wasn't seeing as much rubber and then had to bail them out in short bursts.

Now the problem is... I'm not sure how you handle that in EHM. The game is more based on attributes than some other intangibles. And that makes for wonky-seeming ratings for goalies.

Another example outside of the NHL. For a couple years in the mid-2000's Michigan State had an athletic goalie by the name of Dominic Vicari. He was *incredibly* flashy, and he could take a game over by himself and carry the team. But MSU never went very far with him.

Then in 2006-07 a little goalie by the name of Jeff Lerg came along and surprisingly stole the starting job from him and suddenly MSU won a national title as an at-large. Lerg wasn't nearly or flashy as athletic as Vicari but he had one thing he did way better -- he controlled rebounds way, way better, and just managed the pace of them game better. He was *exactly* what MSU needed as it turned out, even though in sheer talent Vicari was probably the better goalie. On another team, Lerg probably isn't as big an impact. But with the solid "d" and talented forwards MSU had, they needed control more than anything else.

So in an EHM world would Vicari have noticeably better attributes than Lerg? Probably. Because I'm not sure how you account for "fit". And in EHM Vicari would probably perform better than Lerg.

And that's the challenge I've found with goalies. You can't just give them certain PA ranges and have things make sense necessarily. It works better for skaters. But PA and CA don't reflect everything. More than the skaters, a goalie has to "fit" the system, and the team's specific need outside of just raw talent. And... how do you account for that fit in goalie development and prospects?

Yeah the fit thing is huge, and I was hoping someone would catch the Osgood part that I posted. Funny I was thinking it might be you Primis.

Now....the -10 goalie is few and far between, and I totally agree with Manimal that the only one under 26 would be Rask as a possibility and I am not even sure about him.

And to be honest I question Lehner as a -9, but I have not seen him a ton. The other two I have seen and would say yes.

The Subban group is at best a -8.

batdad wrote:Yeah the fit thing is huge, and I was hoping someone would catch the Osgood part that I posted. Funny I was thinking it might be you Primis.

Now....the -10 goalie is few and far between, and I totally agree with Manimal that the only one under 26 would be Rask as a possibility and I am not even sure about him.

And to be honest I question Lehner as a -9, but I have not seen him a ton. The other two I have seen and would say yes.

The Subban group is at best a -8.

Lehner is easily a -9, he's gonna be a stud.

LOL

I really don't understand whats funny about that

He's from Sweden, you're from Sweden. You keep cheering for him when you talk to batdad. I find that funny.

philou21 wrote:He's from Sweden, you're from Sweden. You keep cheering for him when you talk to batdad. I find that funny.

Aight, fair enough. But it's not like its a revolutionary opinion to think that Lehner is going to be a top-10 goalie in the NHL in the future =P

Yeah I no that. I just like that you push your opinion to batdad. DO IT MORE.

philou21 wrote:Yeah I no that. I just like that you push your opinion to batdad. DO IT MORE.

Yes, DO IT MOOR!!

Lehner is going to be really good. He has had a few bad games this January but he is young.

He is technically excellent, incredibly athletic and a very strong competitor. The knock against him is that he is a hothead which is true but Roy was a hothead and a pretty good goalie! (Note, I am not saying that Lehner is the next Roy, just that he deserves a -9)

Speaking of young goalies, how do you rate Andrei Vasilevski, Juuso Saros and Oscar Dansk? Both Vasilevski and Saros has shown more than Fucale and Subban, both in the JWC and also in their clubs being regulars at such young age playing with seniors. Looking through the stats (I know it doesn't tell you everything) one could also argue that Dansk is at the same level as Fucale and maybe even Subban.

ElPayaso wrote:Speaking of young goalies, how do you rate Andrei Vasilevski, Juuso Saros and Oscar Dansk? Both Vasilevski and Saros has shown more than Fucale and Subban, both in the JWC and also in their clubs being regulars at such young age playing with seniors. Looking through the stats (I know it doesn't tell you everything) one could also argue that Dansk is at the same level as Fucale and maybe even Subban.

I'm only working on NHL contracted players. So I think Manimal will look at those. But Vasilevski is probably the #1 goalie prospect atm. I would definitely rate him a -9 if not -10. Dansk and Saros (-8,-9 or -15?)

ElPayaso wrote:Speaking of young goalies, how do you rate Andrei Vasilevski, Juuso Saros and Oscar Dansk? Both Vasilevski and Saros has shown more than Fucale and Subban, both in the JWC and also in their clubs being regulars at such young age playing with seniors. Looking through the stats (I know it doesn't tell you everything) one could also argue that Dansk is at the same level as Fucale and maybe even Subban.

Why do people keep spelling Juuse's name wrong...

On a more serious note Saros (and Ville Husso) are going to be turned -14 for the next update. -15 was discussed but considered as too much for such young players.

Likely because we are not Finnish. And also because sometimes people do not pay attention. Finnish names are perhaps (even harder than Russian) to get right, for English speaking people (at least in hockey) because their spellings in English do not follow the English patters.

Hence.....(here you go tasku) NIIIITTTTTTYYMMMAAKIIKIIIEEEE.!!!!

ForNever wrote:

ElPayaso wrote:Speaking of young goalies, how do you rate Andrei Vasilevski, Juuso Saros and Oscar Dansk? Both Vasilevski and Saros has shown more than Fucale and Subban, both in the JWC and also in their clubs being regulars at such young age playing with seniors. Looking through the stats (I know it doesn't tell you everything) one could also argue that Dansk is at the same level as Fucale and maybe even Subban.

Why do people keep spelling Juuse's name wrong...

On a more serious note Saros (and Ville Husso) are going to be turned -14 for the next update. -15 was discussed but considered as too much for such young players.

Now that I think of it, -8 could be warranted for Saros. Dansk would get a -8 too and Vasilevski -9

Sounds good. I will also ask you to take a look at Bernhard Starkbaum of Brynäs IF. He's the #1 goalie of Brynäs (better than Johan Holmqvist), one of the best goalies in SHL and also a part of the Austria Olympic Team. In the game...he's not nearly good enough.

And Once again...who does he compare to. Saying he is better than one guy is not enough. Especially when that guy is a guy who could be given a 100 or less CA.

batdad wrote:And Once again...who does he compare to. Saying he is better than one guy is not enough. Especially when that guy is a guy who could be given a 100 or less CA.

Sorry, but It's pretty hard to compare them in the editor. Johan Holmqvist has a CA/PA of 120/130 and Bernhard Starkbaum has a CA/PA of 65/-4 (!?). I would rate change it to about 110/130 for Holmqvist and 120/125 for Starkbaum, that would make him comparable to Daniel Larsson, Markus Svensson and David Rautio in terms of ability. All of his netminder-attributes needs to be upped to 12-14, he's a butterfly-goalie and his absolute strength is his read of the game which i guess would be translated into anticipation and positioning.

Manimal wrote:

ForNever wrote:

ElPayaso wrote:Speaking of young goalies, how do you rate Andrei Vasilevski, Juuso Saros and Oscar Dansk? Both Vasilevski and Saros has shown more than Fucale and Subban, both in the JWC and also in their clubs being regulars at such young age playing with seniors. Looking through the stats (I know it doesn't tell you everything) one could also argue that Dansk is at the same level as Fucale and maybe even Subban.

Why do people keep spelling Juuse's name wrong...

On a more serious note Saros (and Ville Husso) are going to be turned -14 for the next update. -15 was discussed but considered as too much for such young players.

Now that I think of it, -8 could be warranted for Saros. Dansk would get a -8 too and Vasilevski -9

Will do. I'd say that Husso is harder to predict because of his even more unexpected development this season, so I'd keep his PA -14.

Now that I looked at Vasilevski's CA (in the 6.1 rosters) he really needs a boost, 75 is too low when he is a solid starter in the KHL. Otherwise Husso and Saros will be better than him in the next version and I think Vasilevski should be considered the best European goalie prospect under the age of 20 atm.

batdad wrote:Likely because we are not Finnish. And also because sometimes people do not pay attention. Finnish names are perhaps (even harder than Russian) to get right, for English speaking people (at least in hockey) because their spellings in English do not follow the English patters.

Hence.....(here you go tasku) NIIIITTTTTTYYMMMAAKIIKIIIEEEE.!!!!

I actually thought you were spelling Saros' name incorrectly on purpose for some reason during the WJC-20. Your luck is that Niittymäki had to retire because he now has two metal legs to put it bluntly. :l

Also the CA of 65 is too low for an SHL starter, even you can admit that batdad.

No. Because what if everyone else sucks too ?

batdad wrote:No. Because what if everyone else sucks too ?

Then I'd say SHL is waaaay overappreciated.

I think Bernier, Bobrovsky, Bishop, Harding, Scrivens, and Niemi need boosts. In terms of who needs a decline, Brodeur, Thomas, Lindback, and Ramo need decreases. Bernier, Bobrovsky, Bishop, and Harding have been playing well and better than some of the goalies rated above them. Niemi and Bishop have been stellar this season.

Brodeur and Thomas haven't been horrible, but they're not top 10 NHL goalies. Ramo has been inconsistent with Calgary and I wouldn't rank him over Bernier or Crawford as examples.