HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Calgary Flames
Notices

McLennan: what do the #'s tell us?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-07-2003, 05:54 AM
  #1
Badger Bob
Registered User
 
Badger Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in my happy place
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,286
vCash: 500
McLennan: what do the #'s tell us?

Admittedly, this is old data, but we can more accurately evaluate Jamie McLennan's performance with figures. The November 11 edition of The Hockey News "Goalie Zone" lists the a ranking of the two key statistics, though 6 games, as:

GAA - 1.61
SP - .914

On the surface, these numbers might seem impressive. Considering he's had a mostly undistinguished career as a backup, it's probably more than expected of him. However, breaking it down a little bit, a different story emerges, especially if Turek stays sidelined for an extended period of time).

The 1.61 GAA is among the tops in the league. Certainly, kudos are in order, but is it really because of stellar goaltending? The Daryl Sutter defensive system has resulted in a limited number of shots. The defense has executed it well, which has led to fewer scoring opportunities.

Now look at SP. His .914 was exactly at the league average, at that time. Andrew Raycroft (Boston) had also played 6 games over the same period. Raycroft's GAA was a comparable 1.65, and he had a .944 SP. Not only did Raycroft face more shots than McLennan 161-105, but he stopped a higher percent of the shots that he faced. This is a fair comparison, as the Bruins signed Felix Potvin to be their starting goaltender. (The B's are also a lower payroll franchise.)

Assuming things remain as they are, warning lights will go off. Unless Jarome Iginla & Craig Conroy begin to consistently contribute offensively, a GAA of in the range of 1.61 is not safe, especially from a goaltender with an average SP. McLennan could appear to play better with more ice time, but he's more likely to let in more goals if he begins to face more shots. If he's playing over his head right now, there is cause for concern.

On the positive side, McLennan has benefitted from the full time presense of the new goaltending coach. However, he's going to have to dig deeper if he's the de facto #1 in the coming months. Incidentally, THN did not include McLennan among its Top 10 goalies.

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 07:42 AM
  #2
FLAMESFAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,410
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freakin' Saprykin
You're making way too big of a deal out of this, backups have carried teams before. When he starts being the cause of losing games then you can worry.
No, maybe he hasn't lost any games outright, but he hasn't won any games outright either. I just hope he can hold the fort, and the team stays at 500 until Turek gets back.
BTW - have we ever had a goalie finish with a save% over .910?

It doesn't matter who's in net, if you don't score goals you're not going to get points. The real problem with this team is goal scoring.

FLAMESFAN is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 08:47 AM
  #3
kruezer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLAMESFAN
No, maybe he hasn't lost any games outright, but he hasn't won any games outright either. I just hope he can hold the fort, and the team stays at 500 until Turek gets back.
BTW - have we ever had a goalie finish with a save% over .910?

It doesn't matter who's in net, if you don't score goals you're not going to get points. The real problem with this team is goal scoring.
I agree goals are more of a concern IMO. But I really don't expect the backup to steal games for us, I just want him to hold the fort until the starter (who he has played better than in the short beginning of this season) can get back. I can't complain, but if things do start to fall apart in the GAA of the team, he will be the fall guy, whether he deserves it or not.

kruezer is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 09:03 AM
  #4
Badger Bob
Registered User
 
Badger Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in my happy place
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freakin' Saprykin
You're making way too big of a deal out of this, backups have carried teams before. When he starts being the cause of losing games then you can worry.
Take the Raycroft comparison a little further. Suppose that McLennan's SP was .03 higher and equal to Raycroft's at .944. That would be almost a 1/3 of a goal/game, which would be enough to steal victories. The figures clearly illustrate that McLennan has only done only an average job. He can't be faulted for causing the Flames to lose any games yet, but he hasn't stolen any victories either (as FLAMESFAN noted). That trend will probably continue, as he is not the type of goaltender to instill confidence. That might also be part of the reason why the offense hasn't opened up in front of him.

Badger Bob is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 09:33 AM
  #5
Flames Draft Watcher
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freakin' Saprykin
He hasn't really been put in a position to steal a game because the Flames have never been badly outplayed with him in net. That and he's only played 7 freakin games!
I'm not sure I follow. He certainly has been in a position to steal games. We lost against Colorado, St. Louis and Detriot with him in the net. Therefore he failed to steal any of those games.

Flames Draft Watcher is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 09:39 AM
  #6
Flames Draft Watcher
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,553
vCash: 500
I think there's plenty of guys out there who would be an upgrade on Jamie. But personally I'd start Sabourin tonight, he gives me a lot more confidence with his size and butterfly style.

I don't really have much confidence in Jamie to be anything more than a backup and right now we're asking him to be a starter.

Flames Draft Watcher is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 12:12 PM
  #7
elphy101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: City of Champions
Posts: 1,568
vCash: 500
Wow, I never thought I'd read this. You guys are complaining because Mclennan has a GAA of 1.61 and .914 save%. That is dominant. What's their to be upset about especially considering he's your backup. You've had Turek for several years, how can Mclennan putting up those kind of numbers be bad? I just don't understand.

elphy101 is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 12:55 PM
  #8
Sec of Partying Down
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Moscow, Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 3,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphy101
Wow, I never thought I'd read this. You guys are complaining because Mclennan has a GAA of 1.61 and .914 save%. That is dominant. What's their to be upset about especially considering he's your backup. You've had Turek for several years, how can Mclennan putting up those kind of numbers be bad? I just don't understand.
McLennan numbers are inflated a goalie of starter quality or at least 1st tier backup quality would have better numbers than him.

Sec of Partying Down is offline  
Old
11-07-2003, 01:30 PM
  #9
Badger Bob
Registered User
 
Badger Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in my happy place
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphy101
Wow, I never thought I'd read this. You guys are complaining because Mclennan has a GAA of 1.61 and .914 save%. That is dominant. What's their to be upset about especially considering he's your backup. You've had Turek for several years, how can Mclennan putting up those kind of numbers be bad? I just don't understand.
That's really reading in between the lines, and finding something that's not there, when you call a reasoned observation "complaining." With the team hovering around .500, in last place, McLennan's performance isn't exactly "dominant." The 1.61 GAA is because of the fewer number of shots faced, and .914 is at the league average. Hardly dominant.

Badger Bob is offline  
Closed Thread

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 08:03 AM.

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.