This is actually a great way to think about goaltending. The Leafs are a top xGA team, so they just need a goalie that stops xGA at an average/above average level, and they are a top defensive team, which Mrazek has been over the last few years. Don't need a Hellebucyk/Vasy and really don't need an Andersen that gets you below water.
This is actually a great way to think about goaltending. The Leafs are a top xGA team, so they just need a goalie that stops xGA at an average/above average level, and they are a top defensive team, which Mrazek has been over the last few years. Don't need a Hellebucyk/Vasy and really don't need an Andersen that gets you below water.
And as lof points out if jack is still a 915+ guy they may be shopping for a new goalie again next year! So in a way two average goalies is ok and keeps them affordable at least?either way he seems a very safe bet to beat Fred's .895.
question is now can campbell keep up the .915++ to give us a top goalie duo or if he falls back to average and we just have two average goalies.
So, is Mrazek going to have a chance to come out of camp as the #1 from the get go?
Is the #1 spot Jack's to lose?
last 3yrs, dfsv%, (min 20gms):
1. Driedger 35gms, +1.08
2. Nedeljovic 28gms, +1.00
3. Bishop 90gms, +0.76
4. Lehner 101gms, +0.71
5. Mrazek 92gms, +0.53
6. Shesterkin 47gms, +0.52
7. Petersen 54gms, +0.49
8. Hellebuyck 166gms, +0.39
9. Brossoit 54gms, +0.37
10. Sorokin 22gms, +0.35
11. Kuemper 111gms, +0.34
12. Campbell 79gms, +0.33
13. Binnington 124gms, +0.33
14. Saros 107gms, +0.29
15. Crawford 79gms, +0.26
Not sure how i really feel about that.Think they'll go with a true tandem. I'd expect a 40/40 split unless one guy sucks.
MEs boy
Not sure how i really feel about that.
For me, i'd like to see the top spot given to Mrazek. I think Jack is best suited for the #2 position.
But that's just me..i know a lot of people see jack as a true #1 but not me.
Mrazek will be our #1 goalie before January 1.
This is not a bad thing.We're not going to have a #1. Will be a true tandem.