Niemi.....

[Cmon_WTF]

Im gonna have to go with this... After looking at the numbers and gameplay of those 2 from Oct-end Dec, I just dont see where Com's argument is coming from. I think there was only 3x Nitty gave up more then 3 goals and some of them were OT games so I dont know if they were shootout credited 1 goal or what...

IMO which isnt going to change, you compare the games where they were both healthy and its a no brainer who was better. You compare there play in the playoffs (which isnt exactly even minutes) but even then, its still a no brainer who has played better. Without that game 4 effort by Nitty, this series prob goes to LA.

We can be happy we won this series, but 3 outa 4 wins coming in OT, to the worst team in the playoffs, who dont have their leading scorer? Its pathetic, and people still blame the D for the bad goalie play. And most of the D turnovers that flushing nemo lets in arent even odd mans, breakawys or scoring chances. they are just normal shots.

On another note Corey Crawford is a badass, I wish we had his game 7 play in net for the next round. And Luongos OT save... Fuck man, that play by the Hawks was incredible, I was droppin F-bombs that could destroy Hiroshima when he stpped that... Uggg here comes detroit...

You should try running their numbers then. Through to Niitty's injury he was at a 2.57 GAA and .917 SV%. Niemi was at 2.69 GAA and .912 SV%. Niemi had 6 games giving up more than 3 goals, Niitty 5 during that time. The biggest difference between the two, Niemi's numbers kept getting better and better the more starts he got while Niitty's were getting consistantly worse.

 

[filosofy29]

You should try running their numbers then. Through to Niitty's injury he was at a 2.57 GAA and .917 SV%. Niemi was at 2.69 GAA and .912 SV%. Niemi had 6 games giving up more than 3 goals, Niitty 5 during that time. The biggest difference between the two, Niemi's numbers kept getting better and better the more starts he got while Niitty's were getting consistantly worse.

Cmon, look at the games they started though instead of the raw data numbers. Again, I don't think this is an apples to apples comparison. When Niemi struggled, he'd still rattle off 2-3 consecutive starts after that. When Niitty struggled, he'd sit for 2 or 3 games before getting another start. You can't get in a good operating rhythm (which is huge for a lot of goalies not only for rhythm, but confidence as well). I never played goalie at a high enough level to really speak from experience (meaning when I played Goalie.....I WAS the Goalie, there was no tandem). That said, the more games I played, the better I felt. If I played one game and then was pulled for the next 3, I definitely would not feel as comfortable/confident when I did go in next game. If it were a clear goalie tandem experiment where they played alternating games, I'd agree with you on an apples to apples comparison.

I think you're looking at raw data. I'm talking about equal opportunity to succeed. I didn't feel any more comfortable with Niemi than Niitty in nets until Niemi stepped up big time once Niitty got injured. If you're saying the "favoritism" stemmed from the coaching staff and DWil thinking/knowing that Niemi was just the better goalie. Fair enough, I'm not in practice and I'm not the goalie coach. That said, with the numbers the way they were (like your numbers indicate above), there clearly was no distinction as to who the better goalie was (with a slight favor towards Niitty if you're just going by numbers). So when you look at consecutive starts and then after that analyze the stats, I think that definitely demonstrates favoritism. Sure Niemi's numbers got better.....but that's because he was getting consecutive starts imho. BUT, as I said, I'm ok with how everything worked out. Niemi was a lot better than I originally thought and he is a TON more durable. That said, if you said I had ONE game to win everything, I think I'd feel just as confident in Niitty as I would with Niemi.

Likewall is talking about something entirely different I think.....he just HATES Niemi (it's not so much that he is a strong advocate for Niitty), lol.

Once again though, I don't think we're going to change each others minds so an agree to disagree is probably the route to take. Go Sharks and go Niemi as far as I'm concerned. Because if the Sharks need to turn to Niitty again, it probably means we're getting smoked, lol.

 

[Likewall32]

Likewall is talking about something entirely different I think.....he just HATES Niemi (it's not so much that he is a strong advocate for Niitty), lol.

Once again though, I don't think we're going to change each others minds so an agree to disagree is probably the route to take. Go Sharks and go Niemi as far as I'm concerned. Because if the Sharks need to turn to Niitty again, it probably means we're getting smoked, lol.

I do hate the guy, but my reasons for hating him are along the same lines as yours (just a lot stronger hatred haha). I just dont like the favoritsim that he has gotten when it wasnt earned before the nitty injury. I wasnt a fan of him last year when everyone hoping on the hype train while the Hawks bowled through everyone. Of course he was better then Huet and I wanted him starting games over him, but his talenet was WAY overrated. I didnt like him from day 1 of this signin cause that slapped Greiss in the face and pushed him out of the backup role that he should have had. He's always gonna be the guy I bag on on the team, but I will give him credit when he deserves it (like during the streak).

BTW Com, since you were quick to post the stats that made your arguement look better, post the ones I originally asked for. Niemis playoffs stats minus the Sharks series... so the Nash, Vanc, Philly, LA stats... Playing 1 good outa 5 series doesnt strike me as a game stealing playoff goalie I have a lot of confidence in. And not to take anything away of his awesome series vs SJ ast year, but lets be honest with sharks playoff history, there scoring drops a ton and they love making avg goalie look like HOFers (Craig Anderson?)

 

[Cmon_WTF]

I do hate the guy, but my reasons for hating him are along the same lines as yours (just a lot stronger hatred haha). I just dont like the favoritsim that he has gotten when it wasnt earned before the nitty injury. I wasnt a fan of him last year when everyone hoping on the hype train while the Hawks bowled through everyone. Of course he was better then Huet and I wanted him starting games over him, but his talenet was WAY overrated. I didnt like him from day 1 of this signin cause that slapped Greiss in the face and pushed him out of the backup role that he should have had. He's always gonna be the guy I bag on on the team, but I will give him credit when he deserves it (like during the streak).

BTW Com, since you were quick to post the stats that made your arguement look better, post the ones I originally asked for. Niemis playoffs stats minus the Sharks series... so the Nash, Vanc, Philly, LA stats... Playing 1 good outa 5 series doesnt strike me as a game stealing playoff goalie I have a lot of confidence in. And not to take anything away of his awesome series vs SJ ast year, but lets be honest with sharks playoff history, there scoring drops a ton and they love making avg goalie look like HOFers (Craig Anderson?)

Give me a little bit of time. I've got a couple of meetings before I can compile the research.

 

[Cmon_WTF]

Here's your numbers for Niemi not including the San Jose series: 2.76 GAA and .906 SV%.

 

[Likewall32]

Here's your numbers for Niemi not including the San Jose series: 2.76 GAA and .906 SV%.

How is that possible, the numbers I got from NHL.com for last years playoffs were 3.00Rd1, 3.00Rd2, 3.60Rd4.... And figuring the LA series those numbers would only inflate...

One of us has wrong data here haha

 

[Cmon_WTF]

How is that possible, the numbers I got from NHL.com for last years playoffs were 3.00Rd1, 3.00Rd2, 3.60Rd4.... And figuring the LA series those numbers would only inflate...

One of us has wrong data here haha

I didn't include the LA series. I must have misread your previous post and wasn't aware you wanted me to include it. Those are the combined numbers for the Nashville, Vancouver, and Philly series from last years PO's. I still have all the data and could break it down game by game so you can see for yourself if you like.

 

[Likewall32]

I just relooked at it and heres what I got:

Vs Philly: GA-21, SA-178, GP-6.13, GAA-3.42, S%-.882
Vs Vanc: GA-17, SA-167, GP-5.62, GAA-3.02, S%-.898
Vs Nash: GA-13, SA-164, GP-6.02, GAA-2.15, S%-.920
Vs San: GA-19, SA-139, GP-4.73 GAA-4.01, S%-.863

Totals: GA-70, SA- 648, GP-22.50, GAA-3.11, S%.891

Eaither Im bad at math or your numbers of 2.76GA/.906S% are WAYYYYYY off Cmon

 

[Likewall32]

even if your subtract the LA series, your numbers are still off... only including Nash,Philly & Vanc I got 2.87GAA & .899S%


But again maybe Im bad at math or your not including total mintues played divided by 60 mins

 

[Likewall32]

Antti Niemi, Sharks - 2009-2010 Game Log - NHL.com - Players

 

[Cmon_WTF]

With several OT games you need to go (GA/min)*60 for GAA.

EDIT:

even if your subtract the LA series, your numbers are still off... only including Nash,Philly & Vanc I got 2.87GAA & .899S%

These numbers are close. I entered data for the one game he was pulled incorrectly. After making the adjustment I come to 2.85 GAA and .900 SV%. Not great but not bad either. Though I'm not really sure of the reason for excluding the San Jose series, or LA series on my part as well, as they are all part of this playing experience.

I guess the bottom line is he's shown the ability to get the job done. He was one of the top goalies in the league from the begining of January to the end of the season. Goalies go on hot streaks sure but even you have admit that a four month run is more than just a hot streak.

 

[Likewall32]

Your numbers include EN goals against the team, that shouldn't be credited agiant Niemi, if you're going by the link you're posting. Also with several OT games you need to go (GA/min)*60 for GAA.

I dont believ empty net goals are included and evidence of this game:
Apr 16 '10 NSH @ CHI L 2GA 24 22 .917 00 59:07 2 0 0 2EN

If that was the case then it would say 4GA, not 2GA, unless for some reason chicago pulled him while he was pitching a shutout which makes no sence. The empty net goals arent figured into what I added...

Also I know how to do GAA formula for GAA & S% as Ive been keeping track of my own stats for 15years and also used to do detailed stats for the leagues I play in...

The numbers are correct Cmon, Ive gone over them multiple times.
My way of doing it comes out the same as your equasion:

Mines: Nashville series: 59.55+63.19+60+60+59.55+59.02= 361.36mins
361.36/60 = 6.02 GP
13GA/6.02= 2.15GAA
Yours: Nashville series: (13/361.36)*60=2.15

Same shit, your numbers your using just arent correct...

 

[Likewall32]

Confirmed by clicking on the actual date, my numbers do NOT include empty net goals lik you suggested. I think for your numbers your subtracting EN's that were already subtracted thus making your numbers look better then the ones Im posting

 

[Likewall32]

I chose to omit the SJ series to show that playing 1 good out of 5 total playoff series doesnt not make him the series stealing goalie people think he may be. His numbers without that series are not good at all 3.11/.891... SJ has the ablitiy to make avg goalies look like brick walls in the playoffs. That one series alone is what has made Dwil & Todd go buck wild over the guy, chooseing to focus on th fact SJ couldnt score on him vs looking at the big picture that he was nt anything special in the other 4 series.

To me, it gives you a better feeling of the overall ability of the goaltender. I do it to myself & my own stats to see what my "true" (as I call it) averages are. When I add up my tournament stats I exclude one tournament where I had a GAA below 1.00 & an absurd high s%. Why? cause we had a pro playing on our team and breezed through the tourny. Although the games count, including those when Im messing aroun with my averages doesnt give me an idea of what my "true" numbers are for tournments...
Again, this ist the same as a NHL playoff series, but im using it as an example of 1 stellar series of numbers can greatly inflate stats to something they really arent... (just my opinion)

 

[Cmon_WTF]

Cmon, look at the games they started though instead of the raw data numbers. Again, I don't think this is an apples to apples comparison. When Niemi struggled, he'd still rattle off 2-3 consecutive starts after that. When Niitty struggled, he'd sit for 2 or 3 games before getting another start. You can't get in a good operating rhythm (which is huge for a lot of goalies not only for rhythm, but confidence as well). I never played goalie at a high enough level to really speak from experience (meaning when I played Goalie.....I WAS the Goalie, there was no tandem). That said, the more games I played, the better I felt. If I played one game and then was pulled for the next 3, I definitely would not feel as comfortable/confident when I did go in next game. If it were a clear goalie tandem experiment where they played alternating games, I'd agree with you on an apples to apples comparison.

I don't know Filo, I just don't see it. The only time I see where Niemi was given a string of consecutive starts after a poor outing was Dec 9th aginst Buffalo. The only time I see where Niitty should probably have kept playing and wasn't allowed to was a string from Dec 16th - 21st. Nitty did a 3-in-5, Niemi made the typical relief appearance then got a 2nd start before Niitty was put back in. Everything else I see is the typical relief by one goalie on the 2nd of a back-to-back or playing the 4th game after the other goalie had played three games in five nights.

 

[Cmon_WTF]

I chose to omit the SJ series to show that playing 1 good out of 5 total playoff series doesnt not make him the series stealing goalie people think he may be. His numbers without that series are not good at all 3.11/.891... SJ has the ablitiy to make avg goalies look like brick walls in the playoffs. That one series alone is what has made Dwil & Todd go buck wild over the guy, chooseing to focus on th fact SJ couldnt score on him vs looking at the big picture that he was nt anything special in the other 4 series.

To me, it gives you a better feeling of the overall ability of the goaltender. I do it to myself & my own stats to see what my "true" (as I call it) averages are. When I add up my tournament stats I exclude one tournament where I had a GAA below 1.00 & an absurd high s%. Why? cause we had a pro playing on our team and breezed through the tourny. Although the games count, including those when Im messing aroun with my averages doesnt give me an idea of what my "true" numbers are for tournments...
Again, this ist the same as a NHL playoff series, but im using it as an example of 1 stellar series of numbers can greatly inflate stats to something they really arent... (just my opinion)

Check the edited post. I entered numbers for the game in which he was pulled incorrectly.

Now, if you are going to leave out his best series statistic wise you should also exclude his worst as it too should be considered an anomaly and would inconsistantly inflate his numbers.

 

[Likewall32]

Check the edited post. I entered numbers for the game in which he was pulled incorrectly.

Now, if you are going to leave out his best series statistic wise you should also exclude his worst as it too should be considered an anomaly and would inconsistantly inflate his numbers.

His worst isnt an anomaly as he was bad in the Philly & Vanc series too.
Even so, ommited, 2.87/.899 are not impressive...
Id perfer those numbers to be closer to 2.30 & .910... Thats along the lines of Nabokov's numbers, whom I said was good in the playoff, which posters responded that those werent good numbers. So if 2.30/.910 isnt good to people, why is (ommitting the SJ & LA series) 2.87/.899 respectable numbers? Lets include all his series: 2.87/.902... Still not where they should be at. Cup ring = Product of All-star team.

Whats ironic about this that I just noticied is that Niemi actually has the same career numbers and my all time fav (who I didnt like for his skill mind you)): ARTURS IRBE, and look at the teams Irbe was workin with even in that conf finals season haha

 

[Cmon_WTF]

His worst isnt an anomaly as he was bad in the Philly & Vanc series too.
Even so, ommited, 2.87/.899 are not impressive...
Id perfer those numbers to be closer to 2.30 & .910... Thats along the lines of Nabokov's numbers, whom I said was good in the playoff, which posters responded that those werent good numbers. So if 2.30/.910 isnt good to people, why is (ommitting the SJ & LA series) 2.87/.899 respectable numbers? Lets include all his series: 2.87/.902... Still not where they should be at. Cup ring = Product of All-star team.

Whats ironic about this that I just noticied is that Niemi actually has the same career numbers and my all time fav (who I didnt like for his skill mind you)): ARTURS IRBE, and look at the teams Irbe was workin with even in that conf finals season haha

That's why you look at an average though. It takes into account anomaly's on both sides of the equation and provides data for a full spectrum of a players work. A great series like the one against the Sharks last year is just as indicitive of his ability as his series this year against LA. If you remove one aspect of the equasion but leave the other you have an imbalance of information and inacurate data.

 

[Cmon_WTF]

By the logic you are using to guage Niemi I could make the same argument that the only series that should be excluded and isn't indicitive of his ability is this years series against LA. He's had two great series (Nashville and San Jose), two mediocre (Vancouver and Philly), and one bad (LA). That would indicate that the LA series is the only one that falls outside the norm and should be excluded from the averages instead of the San Jose series.

 

[Likewall32]

That's why you look at an average though. It takes into account anomaly's on both sides of the equation and provides data for a full spectrum of a players work. A great series like the one against the Sharks last year is just as indicitive of his ability as his series this year against LA. If you remove one aspect of the equasion but leave the other you have an imbalance of information and inacurate data.

I feel as if your are just not reading what I type out here as on the last post I did elmininate both the best & worst and the numbers still werent good. I feel as your explaining things but are reading what I stated before hand as your as stating the exact same thing I had just posted. Just like you posted the numbers, I said they were wrong, instead of reading my post with correct numbers, you posted that I didnt do this or that or added this and didnt carry the 1 etc when in fact mine were correct & yours included the errors. When you finally realised that, you state elminate the worst series to, which I in fact did and still - average not great numbers. then you post this statment which again says exactly what I had just done.

Cmon, its ok to be wrong sometimes haha and no matter which way you twist & turn it or whatever side you look from the constant remains the same. Niemi is just not as good as fans, dwil & todd make him out to be and there is a double standard for his mishaps vs other goalies.
Another example of this is what I again just posted. His total career numbers, his average career numbers in comparison to Nabakovs, whos numbers when I originally posted in whatever topic it was were deemed as Nabby was not good in the playoffs nor were his numbers. The important questions keep getting ignored. If Nabbys numbers were not good, how is it justified, lets say by the fans on this board that Niemi is a better goaltender then anything Nabby could/would have done for the team when Niemis numbers are a lot worse then Nabbys?

When he starts stealing series and gets us further then Nabby has, then Ill come back to this forum and pull up the thread saying "Holy shit, he made me eat my words & look like a jackass - That a boy Nemo!!"

But I dont see if happening. He's just not consistant enough...