If the Hawks have an average goaltender, then maybe they should put him on the roster and play him. Because Crawford and Emery hold up the bottom of the goaltender statistic charts.
I know people like to make excuses for them...it's the defense, deflected shots, blah, blah, blah. All goalies face tough shots. All goalies face deflected shots all night long.
After watching guys like Lundqvist, Quick, Smith and Brodeur doing their stuff these playoffs, you see how these goals that 'aren't Crawford's fault' can be stopped and usually are stopped.
Oh my ****ing god!! Are you actually saying Crawford and Emery both had bad seasons? OH MY GODDD!!! I guess that means we should trade them. I guess every team should trade sophmores coming off rough second seasons..
Statisically, Crawford's had a very good season last year and a poor season this year. He's averaged a GAA of 2.51 and SV% of 0.910 over his NHL career. He is an average goaltender, sometimes above it as it showed through most of last year and sometimes below, as he showed at times this year.
And saying "it was the defense" isn't an excuse. It's a legitimate reason why, as you point out, both goaltenders - despite putting up very good/great numers last year - both had bad seasons statisicaly.. seasons that are or would match the worst (or close to it) statisical seasons of their NHL careers. The Hawks are awful in their own zone. They're complete trash. I can not put enough emphasis on how bad they are in their own zone. They're disorganized, their wingers are almost never in position to support the Dmen and each centre seemingly had a different way of defending throughout the season. They don't cover the slot and they don't even attempt to clear opposing players from the crease and/or tie-up players standing right infront of Crawford/Emery... especially on the PK. They're awful.
Were the goaltenders bad for stretches throughout the year? Sure they were. I don't think either Crawford or Emery would say they played anywhere near as good as they could have.. but the play infront of them was awful and it was awful from start to finish.
It's funny how the goaltenders you mentioned all play on defense-first teams.. with NYR, PHX and LA being arguabley the three most diciplined and well-coached defensive teams in the league.
Oh my ****ing god!! Are you actually saying Crawford and Emery both had bad seasons? OH MY GODDD!!! I guess that means we should trade them. I guess every team should trade sophmores coming off rough second seasons..
Statisically, Crawford's had a very good season last year and a poor season this year. He's averaged a GAA of 2.51 and SV% of 0.910 over his NHL career. He is an average goaltender, sometimes above it as it showed through most of last year and sometimes below, as he showed at times this year.
And saying "it was the defense" isn't an excuse. It's a legitimate reason why, as you point out, both goaltenders - despite putting up very good/great numers last year - both had bad seasons statisicaly.. seasons that are or would match the worst (or close to it) statisical seasons of their NHL careers. The Hawks are awful in their own zone. They're complete trash. I can not put enough emphasis on how bad they are in their own zone. They're disorganized, their wingers are almost never in position to support the Dmen and each centre seemingly had a different way of defending throughout the season. They don't cover the slot and they don't even attempt to clear opposing players from the crease and/or tie-up players standing right infront of Crawford/Emery... especially on the PK. They're awful.
Were the goaltenders bad for stretches throughout the year? Sure they were. I don't think either Crawford or Emery would say they played anywhere near as good as they could have.. but the play infront of them was awful and it was awful from start to finish.
It's funny how the goaltenders you mentioned all play on defense-first teams.. with NYR, PHX and LA being arguabley the three most diciplined and well-coached defensive teams in the league.
Also St Louis.
Just look at bryz for proof of how important good defense is. Regarded as one of the best netminders in the league when he was playing for the ****dogs, now regarded as a horrible signing and overpayment with the flyers.
Oh my ****ing god!! Are you actually saying Crawford and Emery both had bad seasons? OH MY GODDD!!! I guess that means we should trade them. I guess every team should trade sophmores coming off rough second seasons..
Statisically, Crawford's had a very good season last year and a poor season this year. He's averaged a GAA of 2.51 and SV% of 0.910 over his NHL career. He is an average goaltender, sometimes above it as it showed through most of last year and sometimes below, as he showed at times this year.
And saying "it was the defense" isn't an excuse. It's a legitimate reason why, as you point out, both goaltenders - despite putting up very good/great numers last year - both had bad seasons statisicaly.. seasons that are or would match the worst (or close to it) statisical seasons of their NHL careers. The Hawks are awful in their own zone. They're complete trash. I can not put enough emphasis on how bad they are in their own zone. They're disorganized, their wingers are almost never in position to support the Dmen and each centre seemingly had a different way of defending throughout the season. They don't cover the slot and they don't even attempt to clear opposing players from the crease and/or tie-up players standing right infront of Crawford/Emery... especially on the PK. They're awful.
Were the goaltenders bad for stretches throughout the year? Sure they were. I don't think either Crawford or Emery would say they played anywhere near as good as they could have.. but the play infront of them was awful and it was awful from start to finish.
It's funny how the goaltenders you mentioned all play on defense-first teams.. with NYR, PHX and LA being arguabley the three most diciplined and well-coached defensive teams in the league.
Sarava is right though, too many back breaking goals let in by both goalies. You're right too, there needs to be some improvement in the setups defensively, it is unorganized, passive and ineffective. And it's also quite obvious some personel changes need to be made on D and up front.
The coach is staying so I don't see any major changes schematically. I hope he at least changes the PK to allow players to put more pressure on the opposition and create turnovers like they did so well in 09-10.
The goaltenders seem to be staying. Hopefully Crawford plays like he did in 10-11 when he was still dealing with bad schemes and underperformance but somehow managed to prevail, a well known fact that is often forgotten. Emery, no hope for him, he plays as hard as any goalie in the league and still sucks, just doesn't have it at all. I think it was topher that summed it up the best and I quote "****ing horrible resign"
The defense, and possibly bringing in a good defensive forward, at least a good PKing 4th line C, we'll have to wait and see what Bowman does. The absolute worst thing he can do, and I think we can all agree on this, is bring back the charmin soft turnover machine, Oduya. That would signal sheer insanity on Bowman's part given the problems the team had on defense last year.
Just look at bryz for proof of how important good defense is. Regarded as one of the best netminders in the league when he was playing for the ****dogs, now regarded as a horrible signing and overpayment with the flyers.
CC & Emery were worse than average. They gave up more than enough goals that were their faults and nobody others fault. Soft goals left and right. Only Mason gives up more than we did
CC & Emery were worse than average. They gave up more than enough goals that were their faults and nobody others fault. Soft goals left and right. Only Mason gives up more than we did
Define "soft"? I define it as a shot that was stoppable. A shot that should not have gone in. Did Emery and Crawford have a few of those this year? Yep.. But more troubling than the amount of "soft" goals was the amount of grade-A chances and open looks constantly surrendered by the Hawks. Chances that happened on a game-by-game basis.. And I get teams give up chances and teams make mistakes and that's when a goaltender has to bail their team out.. that's 100% true.. but with the Hawks, Crawford would make a big save on a 2-on-1 that was caused by a bad pinch.. 5 minutes later there'd be another 2-on-1 or a breakaway off another bad pinch and Crawford wouldn't/couldn't make the save.
Simply put, if the Hawks don't tighten up in their own zone and address their decision making in the offensive zone (as far as pinching/risky passes to the blueline go), it really won't matter much who's in net for Chicago.
Would they be a better team with Lundqvist or Quick in net? Yes.. but a goaltender can only do so much if a team is unwilling or unable to play better defensively.
Soft for me also is defined by a lack of common place NHL quality skills, such as side to side movement, where Emery actually makes Crawford look good and both are weak in that regard. I mean, how many goals was Emery way off to the opposite side and the other team just tapped it in to a wide open net? Also, a straight on shot from the top of the circle, unless it's bar down, should usually be stopped too. That's just what NHL goalies do, that's what got them there. If they see it from semi-decent distance, they should be able to snag it.
Soft for me also is defined by a lack of common place NHL quality skills, such as side to side movement, where Emery actually makes Crawford look good and both are weak in that regard. I mean, how many goals was Emery way off to the opposite side and the other team just tapped it in to a wide open net? Also, a straight on shot from the top of the circle, unless it's bar down, should usually be stopped too. That's just what NHL goalies do, that's what got them there. If they see it from semi-decent distance, they should be able to snag it.
Which goes back to a stoppable puck. Crawford's lateral movement isn't as bad as Emery's.. I'm assuming that was hyperbole.. which is surprising coming from a guy that's ragged on Emery since the moment he was given a try-out.
I agree that pucks from the top of the circles should be stopped.. I wouldn't define a grade-A chance as a shot from the top of the circles.. and by "open look", I was referring to the time and space opposing players had from the point or slot to take shots and tee up bombs.. which, taking into account we're talking about the Hawks, likely were taken with a player standing completely unharrassed infront of Crawford or Emery..
I think you just misinterpreted my statement. It was, in fact, another dig on Emery. They both suck side to side but I've never seen anything like Razor trying to move side to side, maybe me when I played ball hockey goalie in the street, that's about it.
