HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Jonathan Quick scouting report - created for San Jose prior to game 1

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-27-2011, 12:57 AM
  #26
GaryLivingston
Registered User
 
GaryLivingston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
=/

They aren't the same. You can say he's good at puck handling if you account for his rebound control and ability to never give up on a play and track pucks and get on top of them. Sure.

But, that doesn't mean he is good at MOVING the puck. That's passing and that's clearing. That's when the puck is MOVING.

GaryLivingston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 01:07 AM
  #27
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLivingston View Post
=/

They aren't the same. You can say he's good at puck handling if you account for his rebound control and ability to never give up on a play and track pucks and get on top of them. Sure.

But, that doesn't mean he is good at MOVING the puck. That's passing and that's clearing. That's when the puck is MOVING.
Again, for goaltending, it's the SAME THING.

When you are scouting a goaltending, and you want to mention puck handling, you take into account how he stops it behind the net and gets in position, how quickly he can move back and forth, how he reacts to it, how he sets up for his D, how he communicates with him, how he shifts the pressure from the forechecker away from his D so they don't get hammered...

It's much more than how often he makes a stretch pass...

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 01:36 AM
  #28
HTK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 174
vCash: 500
This was the scouts response to the "puck moving" comment.

"His puck-moving efficiency rate was average compared to the other NHL
starters. His footwork and athleticism makes him very active moving behind
his net and returning to the crease. You might be confused with
decision-making, which is a different story. He is more skill
than situational awareness. The more he plays, the less he will make
risky plays moving the puck. But his skating ability and active hands make
him an effective puck-moving goaltender. It's pretty straightforward."

HTK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 01:44 AM
  #29
SMoneyMonkey
Registered User
 
SMoneyMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LA/MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,506
vCash: 500
So, had we played Bernier they wouldn't have known what to do and we would have won in four. This is what I've decided to take away from this

SMoneyMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 01:45 AM
  #30
King'sPawn
Enjoy the chaos
 
King'sPawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLivingston View Post
And, that report is flawed in a huge way to say Quick is effective at moving the puck. That's his greatest weakness and a glaring one. Moving the puck is more than being able to stick handle. To me it includes the decisions you make while stick handling...who you pass to, how decisive you are in passing it, how accurate you are at making those passes, and if you aren't passing it how smart are you at clearing the puck while stick handling it.
How many goals did the Sharks score from Quick mishandling the puck?

And how many goals did the Sharks score from Quick having to move, not getting himself square, and the Sharks shooting up high?

Quick's stickhandling and decisions with the puck were horrid, and they upgraded to questionable then average. They are far from his greatest weakness.

Quote:
I am confused how any scouting report would go into predictions for who they are scouting. How does that help the team reading the report?

Why would the Sharks care if Quick is on his way to being an elite goaltender? Just stick to right now. The future is meaningless to them.
Did you read the article?

The report itself* said nothing about Quick on his way to being an elite goaltender. The article surrounding the report talked about Quick's future and his analysis.

*The report submitted to the San Jose Sharks is the PDF file, with the subcategories Style Breakdown, Raw Emotions, etc.

King'sPawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 01:55 AM
  #31
Scrivezina
AMart Jazz Hands!!!
 
Scrivezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: RSM, CA
Posts: 2,304
vCash: 500
Would love to see a view on our defense and offensive lines from their perspective.

Scrivezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 03:12 AM
  #32
GaryLivingston
Registered User
 
GaryLivingston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
I only read what was quoted. So, the article confused me.

And, Quick is better at everything else as a goaltender than moving the puck. How is that not his biggest weakness?

Also, he had a couple miscues in the series. They didn't result in a goal. Thankfully. But, you really want to say just because a weakness doesn't result in a goal every time it means it isn't a weakness?

I'm a huge fan of Quick. Don't confuse me stating the obvious as being a critic and calling for change or saying he's not a true #1 or anything else.

He still is young and has potential to be better. And, improving his puck moving abilities (MOVING) is a key area of focus he should have in the off season. Because, everything else is on a different level for him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by King'sPawn View Post
How many goals did the Sharks score from Quick mishandling the puck?

And how many goals did the Sharks score from Quick having to move, not getting himself square, and the Sharks shooting up high?

Quick's stickhandling and decisions with the puck were horrid, and they upgraded to questionable then average. They are far from his greatest weakness.



Did you read the article?

The report itself* said nothing about Quick on his way to being an elite goaltender. The article surrounding the report talked about Quick's future and his analysis.

*The report submitted to the San Jose Sharks is the PDF file, with the subcategories Style Breakdown, Raw Emotions, etc.

GaryLivingston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 03:15 AM
  #33
GaryLivingston
Registered User
 
GaryLivingston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
Again, for goaltending, it's the SAME THING.

When you are scouting a goaltending, and you want to mention puck handling, you take into account how he stops it behind the net and gets in position, how quickly he can move back and forth, how he reacts to it, how he sets up for his D, how he communicates with him, how he shifts the pressure from the forechecker away from his D so they don't get hammered...

It's much more than how often he makes a stretch pass...

As I said, I'm looking at all the areas where he is actually MOVING the puck. And, his decision making too. I don't care what that scouting report says or looks at it. I'm speaking MOVING the puck. He is not good at it and it is his biggest weakness as a goaltender.

GaryLivingston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 07:04 AM
  #34
King'sPawn
Enjoy the chaos
 
King'sPawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLivingston View Post
I only read what was quoted. So, the article confused me.

And, Quick is better at everything else as a goaltender than moving the puck. How is that not his biggest weakness?

Also, he had a couple miscues in the series. They didn't result in a goal. Thankfully. But, you really want to say just because a weakness doesn't result in a goal every time it means it isn't a weakness?
You said biggest weakness, and I contested that his puck handling isn't his biggest weakness. While his puck handling may be average at best, it wasn't exploited as badly as his inability to square up to the shooter. If you get scored on SEVERAL times the exact same way, and they were arguably stoppable goals, I'd say that's a pretty blatant weakness.

King'sPawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 09:44 AM
  #35
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 9,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLivingston View Post
As I said, I'm looking at all the areas where he is actually MOVING the puck. And, his decision making too. I don't care what that scouting report says or looks at it. I'm speaking MOVING the puck. He is not good at it and it is his biggest weakness as a goaltender.
I have been critical of Quick at times, and I think his biggest weaknesses are:

1. not using a poke check more
2. not reading the possible moves by a shooter and reacting accordingly
3. flopping down too soon AND STAYING DOWN
4. playing the angles better (staying too far back in his crease)
5. playing the puck - ANYWHERE.


All that said, he's still the BEST goalie this teams has had in a long, long time - and that's not just by process of elimination. His reaction time and athlitic abilities are great, and I think that if he played in the east more media folks would take notice of him (no biggy on that though).

I can see him being the #1 here for a long time. Play Bernier next season for 20 - 30 games, see what's got and trade him. I've seen enough of Quick's good-to-great play to be satisfied with him for many years - move Bernier for offense.

Hopefully, some team's goalie will have a melt down in the playoffs (Howard, 7uongo, other?) and Bernier's trade value will rise dramatically.

Butch 19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 11:47 AM
  #36
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,878
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... 100% agree with this, though. This happened all series long.



... 100% agree with this whole passage, too.





.
JT, you are one of my favorite posters here. You tell it like you feel it without fear of hurting popular opinion. Most of the time I agree with you, and in some ways I can get on board with what you are saying in this thread. With that said, in this thread you are showing an agenda. You are completely throwing out the reports bottom line. The bottom line that paints Quick in a wonderfull light. On the other hand you are cherry picking the negatives and saying those are the only correct opinion. Really though, every scouting service is going to come up with negatives. They are paid to find the edge. Every goalie will have those problems or worse. Have you watched Luongo's career? He's got worse habbits than Quick.

no name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 01:22 PM
  #37
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,987
vCash: 500
Bottom line, Quick is a very good goaltender.

We all want Bernier to succeed as well and make this a tough decision. Time is on our side. This decision does not have to be rushed at all.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 04:37 PM
  #38
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Thereís no reason why he canít win 40 games next season and earn recognition as a possible Vezina Trophy finalist."
Jonathan Bernier would be a reason why. Not that I agree with that, but it's a valid reason.

RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 05:09 PM
  #39
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murica
Country: United States
Posts: 19,687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonSwanson View Post
Jonathan Bernier would be a reason why. Not that I agree with that, but it's a valid reason.
The Kings better know what they're doing if they play that card.

Rabid Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2011, 06:57 PM
  #40
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
You are completely throwing out the reports bottom line. The bottom line that paints Quick in a wonderfull light. On the other hand you are cherry picking the negatives and saying those are the only correct opinion. Really though, every scouting service is going to come up with negatives. They are paid to find the edge. Every goalie will have those problems or worse. Have you watched Luongo's career? He's got worse habbits than Quick.
... I don't see how the report can come up with mostly very valid criticism and praise for Quick's game and his habits, and then come up with something completely off the wall like saying he's an "efficient puck handler" when he's clearly not and to draw up an otherwise very accurate assessment of a middle of the road goalie and come to the incredible conclusion that "there's no reason why he can't be a Vezina finalist" when I can think of two very big reasons right off the bat - and that's 1) he's a middle of the road goaltender and 2) he'll have to leapfrog too many people in front of him who have better reputations, both in the regular season and in the playoffs, than he does.

It's just incongruous to the rest of the scouting report. It's like saying "well there's no reason Niemi or Pavelec or Crawford or Halak can't be Vezina finalists too" because literally all four of them had better numbers than Quick this season, and they're not even sniffing the upper-tier elite like Thomas, Price, Rinne, Hiller, Lundqvist, and yes Luongo. Only three can be finalists. Not thirteen, not fifteen, not seventeen. And realistically that's where Quick is. Thirteen to seventeen, depending on how much weight you want to give the shootout.

I'm not going to join in on the chorus of "Quick is the best goalie since X time in Kings' history" - because number one, he certainly has a ways to go to catch Kelly Hrudey (Hrudey has three top-10 finishes in save percentage as a King and Quick has zero, for starters), and number two, if you say he's the best goalie since Hrudey left the Kings, that's basically saying he's the valedictorian of summer school since he doesn't have too many good goalies in that time frame to compete with. Quick is the perfect recipe for overrated - he's a flashy goalie that relies more on reflex and emotion than on technique, he plays for a good to great defensive team, and he's with a team that hasn't had a good lasting goalie in a decade and a half. I would say that I can't blame people for overrating him, except that we live in an age where so much info about goalies is right there in black and white, and the people who overrate him simply ignore it and post something lazy like "hurr wins" when those are influenced by team play and artificially inflated because of the shootout. It's just lazy, over-generalizing, and biased. Check out the examples in this very thread. "Bottom line, he's very good". Well, hey, there's some real objective proof there. I choose not to buy into this B.S., sorry.

I've praised Quick on here every time he's played well, and I've criticized him when he hasn't. I choose not to kid myself on where he is in relation to his peers in the league. He played well overall in the series, and it was a big improvement from last year, but it wasn't without some mighty struggles. I still think that Bernier has the better chance to be an elite goalie, and it would serve him better to be traded to another team than to go through another season of starting 20-25 games under Terry Murray. The Kings have a choice - do they want to develop a career backup, do they want to receive as much value as they can for dealing Bernier away, or do they want to really take a look at what they have here and give Bernier that chance to develop into a starter for this team into the future?

Look at the two scenarios. If the Kings honestly believe that Quick is a Vezina nominee waiting to happen, then they HAVE their number one, right? No need for the competition, then. Get what they can for Bernier and get someone who's a career backup and is comfortable with that role OR use it to get the next wave (Jones) to get his feet wet. But - If they DON'T honestly believe that Quick is that good, then why do they have their future goalie rotting away in 70% of the team's games? Stage a true competition, split their games, pick the winner, and get what they can for the other guy.


Last edited by JT Dutch*: 04-27-2011 at 07:03 PM.
JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.