JJFIVEOH

Not sure what's worse, the fact that so many people get upset by the fact somebody said a particular player is doing well, or the fact so many people want so badly to prove a certain player is doing poorly. Only in BFLO can so much effort be wasted on a GDT in trying to prove how much one of their players sucks. Sad.

Do you have something relevant to add besides your typical snark? What fancy stats, the ones where Rask and Johnson were almost identical two years ago, or the ones where they are almost identical this year?

I'll admit defeat as soon as you can put together something conclusive enough to do so without ignoring the counterpoints.

Really?

Must be coincidence then that Johnson is in the top half and Ullmark is 3rd last.

I got it out of these stats which are damn near identical, are they not? Rask: ASV% = 93.82 SV% = 94.24 QS = 39 QS% = .672 GS = 58 Johnson: ASV% = 93.94 SV% = 93.42 QS = 15 QS% = .652 GS = 23 They do apply, as does the goal support that clearly shows the team plays much more conservatively with Ullmark in net.

You compared Rask to Johnson and Rask was better. How much better? Almost insignificant. Johnson was in the top 5 in the league in save percentage that year if I'm not mistaken, and he played enough games to qualify for that comparison. Show me a stat that compares quality starts to team record, 17th (which is probably much higher since October) on a last place team is damn good. If you want to convince me, compare apples to apples.

Doesn't really say much about stats when you're comparing two goaltenders having similar seasons to a Vezina caliber goaltender. It's either a flaw in logic or a flaw in the legitimacy of the stats. The team plays a part in the stats of a goaltender, if you hold those stats in high regard 17th is pretty good considering the first month and also considering he plays on one of the work teams in the league. And when you consider the dysfunction that was the first month, still being able to hold on to an almost 500 record. So they're very similar to a Vezina quality starter. Huh, imagine that.

For one goal support and record means quite a bit. Why would you want a goaltender in net in which the team plays more conservatively and scores less because they may not be as comfortable in net? I mention this because it was a key point thrown at me when I compared Miller to Enroll but for some reason now it doesn't apply. Second, can you perform those same statistical comparisons over the last three months when Johnson had time to come off his injury, a new coach, a new system and 10 new players in the lineup? If you want to compare Rask, compare those same stats to Rask three years ago when he started almost 30 games playing behind the same team as him. I guess I just base it off of the sparky comments you usually include with the discussion. Like the last discussion and others we've had when you used to post often. O It feels even better when you can cherry pick to match the narrative.

If I'm wrong, I apologize. But it happens a lot.

Sorry, SEVEN of the first nine (the games in October) were under .910. Does that negate the point that the majority Nevermind Tom, you win. I made a seemingly innocent comment that maybe Chad is starting just because he's been playing well and right on cue you challenge me. And then proceed to get upset when I defend myself. Maybe you like the discussion, maybe you just don't like me. Either way I've got better things to do.

That's why I included only the last three months because Johnson was coming back from an injury as well and had barely played any in months. He didn't have the benefit of a conditioning stint. 8 of those 13 happened in the first month. The goal support thing is a pretty important stat, along with the overall record. Don't ignore those.

6 out of 13, not 13 out of 13. So no, 6 out of 13 is pretty similar to 7 out of 17.

Out of goaltenders with 1000+ minutes played, Johnson is 17th in goal support, Ullmark was 39th............. out of 41 goaltenders. http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201516&sit=all&pos=goalies&minutes=1000&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=F60&sortdir=DESC

That's exactly what I was getting at when I mentioned that maybe Johnson is starting simply because he's been playing well. I agree, it's irrelevant if the team can't score goals. Although they do score more when Chad's in net (by a significant amount compared to Ullmark/Lehner) which was an argument the Miller fans always used, they scored more for Miller because they trusted him more. Maybe, at this point, they trust Johnson more and are more comfortable opening up the offense when he's in net.

That's how averages work. Luongo's been under .910 seven of his last seventeen games........... and he's an all-star. What makes a starter, how the previous team used him? Lehner and Johnson have both played two full seasons. One was a backup because he played behind Rask, the other was a starter because the original starter got hurt. I like Lehner just as much as Johnson, if not more. I just don't think that "oh he's a career backup" mentality flies with me. If you're playing well, you start.

You don't take recent success into account when determining whether or not a player is worthy of starting? He's got a .936 save percentage since 11/1. It's safe to say that's pretty up there among other goaltenders.

Another round this weekend, you might hear about that one haha. After record warmth in Nov and Dec, a cool January is a pleasant change.

I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me any more.

And the fact Johnson has been one of the best goalies in the league over the past 3 months.

You think you guys have it bad, it dropped into the low 40's for consecutive days down here!

Interesting........

I agree with many points you guys are making. I know this is a Bills thread, but my post was about football in general since the Bills are done and playoffs are in full swing. Sorry for the confusion. And in regards to Cam's rookie stats, yes they were great but he was not a winning QB and there was a lot of criticism around his decision making early on. It took him a while to mature and also knowing when to run. With a losing record after 4 seasons, most teams would have given up on a QB regardless of stats. I'm giving Carolina credit for letting him mature.

Who was making a defense for EJ?

QB's are not given the chance to show they are capable of carrying a team for years like they used to. This is a 'win now' league. It is undeniable.