The Hockey PDOcast - Let's Play Goalie Matchmaker!

Episode Date: June 20, 2023

Kevin Woodley joins Dimitri on the show. The guys play goalie matchmaking, deciphering which goalies would be the best/worst fits on other teams. They discuss potential goalie changes for the upcoming off-season in the NHL. If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

since 2015. It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filippovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEDEOCast. My name is Dimitri Filippovich and joining me here in studio, my good buddy, Kevin Woodley. Kevin, what's going on, man? Yeah, much, a little bit of a... A little frantic, helter, shelter, getting started. As they say, but we got it in the building, we're all right. We're here. And it's always good. Whenever we're hanging out in here, spend 50 minutes together, it's always a good time. Hopefully today will be the same. Here's our plan. we're going to play the role of goalie matchmaker.

We're going to try to pair up goalies with teams. I think it feels like over the past couple off seasons, you and I have been doing this for a few years now. It feels like there's been sort of this like goalie carousel, revolving door, goalie switching teams. Over the past couple off seasons, it feels like we're headed for another summer in that fashion. So I thought we could have some fun kind of try to identify goalies with fits

because often with skaters, we think of it that way, right? We identify our skater skill set, there's strengths, weaknesses, and then you try to match them up with a system and a team that makes sense stylistically, right? You never really go, oh, well, this guy who attacks off the rush, we're going to put him with this extremely sort of low-end dump-and-chase team, and they're going to thrive. But for whatever reason with goalies, we do do that, right? We like, you just look at say percentage and we say,

all right, well, take this goalie, put him on this team. They're going to be the same way. And that's, you and I have talked many times on the show. that's often not the case, right? There are certain stylistic strengths and weaknesses that we need to match up with specific defenses in front of them. A lot of mistakes made at this time of here, just assuming that he's a good goalie. He'll be good on our team. Yes. Yeah, I mean, it's a lot of transposing save percentage, right? You go like, oh, well, he was a 9-15 safe percentage goalie here. We're going to put him on this team. He's going to do that again. And then when they don't,

we're disappointed. We're like, oh, well, the goalie position's very volatile. What do you expect? And in reality, maybe we should have done more scouting. Do you think it's a matter of us just not having the right information in terms of like data or like descriptive tools because other than I guess just watching all of the tendencies and like the technical component of it the way you do a lot of us aren't equipped that way so we just kind of go with the path of least resistance which is the same percentage and you know goals able above expected that we have available to us yeah I mean to a certain degree like there's good goalies and then there's good teams and bad defensive teams and part of that

you know like they're sort of a basic level of data but I think for the most part there are too many teams that aren't looking deeply enough and not sort of cross-referencing what this goalie is best at

or maybe more to the point where his weaknesses are like there are there's there's very few perfect goaltenders right like the whole position is a give and take if I take more like there's a sliding scale if I take more ice and play more aggressively, I'm more susceptible to back doors. If I play deeper and in my crease,

I'm more exposed on open looks from the middle of the ice and the high slot. And where those are very simplistic examples, but I don't even, I don't know how much teams even look that much into it. And we have data that can match specific scoring chances. So if a goalie is like, say, an elite level goal tender and he's good at nine out of ten things

and there's one thing that's a relative weakness where he say just around expected or slightly below expected. But you happen to be the team that gives up the most of those in the NHL. Expecting that goalie to continue to have the success he's had elsewhere where he hasn't faced those types of chances

like you're going to see a regression. So you can plug and play to a certain extent. There's no perfect answer here. There's no perfect formula because the teams change. The personnel changes around them. But certainly we can, based on coaches change, systems change.

But certainly if you have consistency in those elements, at least from a coaching and systems perspective in terms of what you expect to give up in front of your goal tender, you should be able to make at least more educated guesses or more educated decisions when you're picking a guy who fits behind it. the problem, I think part of the problem is like, you know, and I'm biased, right?

Like, so I have access to ClearSight Analytics and I'm going to use those numbers if I can get the Wi-Fi going here to fuel much of this discussion. During the break, we're going to get you on it. And then when we come back in the second half, we're just going to be spouting off stat after stat. And so it amazes me that there are a lot of teams that don't have this data. It really does because I see decisions being made in goal by those teams that, I mean, I've called them at the time, like that summer, like, this isn't going to be a good fit. And a year later, they're stuck with a guy who's got another three or four years left on a contract,

making $4 to $5 million a year, wondering what they're going to do and why it didn't work. Okay, well, without naming names, let's talk about that process a little bit, because I think people would be curious to know more about that in terms of what, like, let's say the offseason, right, you have your scouting meetings, whatever you're making your decisions in terms of targets, what you want to identify, let's say, and many teams in this summer in particular have a lot of openings, right? they have only one goalie signed to an NHL contract. Pretty much a third of the league starters has changed, like a third of the league has changed starters last summer.

Yeah, and it will again, I think. Depending on, you know, does Freddie Anderson and Auntie Ron to go back to Carolina, like there are still questions, but we can see up to a third of the league change again. Right. So in terms of the process, is it a matter of if you're like a GM, you're just deferring to your goalie coach in terms of a goalie they particularly like to work with or they give you a list or you kind of run it by them before you make that decision. Because on the skater side, right, there's so many checks and balances you've got to go along the way.

Obviously, every hit or miss gets directly attributed to the GM in charge. That's kind of part of the gig. But for the most part, it's never as unilateral as a GM just saying, oh, I like this player. So I'm going to go out and sign them or I'm going to trade for them, right? You have pro scouts, you have your assistant GMs. You're running it through many different voices and opinions. In this case, though, a lot of these people are not really equipped. with like the background to evaluate goalies in that fashion, right?

So really you only have the one guy in your organization, unless you're like a team like the Florida Panthers and you have the full department, of course, to actually kind of bounce these opinions off. So it kind of comes down, I guess, just the goalie coach and who they want to work with or from your understanding, how does that work? It doesn't.

It depends on the organization. I know organizations that have made mistakes in goal on a personnel side and seeing the goalie coach question within that marketplace in the media because the goalies continue to fail. And behind the scenes, knowing full well at first, because I know the guy well enough to know that that decision in free agency doesn't fit

what I believe his preferences to be. And then in some cases I'm able to later confirm that. So there are definitely cases where the goalie coach isn't as much a part of the decision. They're just kind of giving it and be like, all right, work with it. Yeah, here's a good goalie. Make them better. Make them fit. Right.

You know, like a lot of times, and again, this is shifting, this is changing, but a lot of times we expect the goaltender to adjust to the team. Yes. Right? Like, okay, we've got a team that defends this way. You make your adjustments. And to a certain extent, you can. Like, these are the best, whatever, 64 goalies in the world in theory.

So they should be able to, you know, if you are a team that gives up a lot of laterals and you are a goalie that likes to play outside the edge of your crease off rushes. Yeah, you can make an adjustment. You can play deeper. You can shorten that path to the backside so that you can get across. But again, is that are you now playing the game that got you the contract that, you know, like, so are you asking the goalie to play the way he's most comfortable? Or are you bringing in a guy giving him a contract and then saying, okay, we liked you,

we acquired you based on everything you've done to hear, but we're going to need you to change it all now. And you can to an extent, but assuming they can all make all those changes and still give you what they were before, that they're still going to be comfortable. And I've got to be careful with some of the examples, but there are lots of them.

You know, a team that gave up draft capital to acquire a goaltender, signed to an extension and a two-year extension. reasonable money. So it was a safe bet because it wasn't overly expensive. But then basically said,

here's how we play, here's how we need you to play, without recognizing that they were essentially asking him to play to his biggest weakness as a goaltender. And watching that fail and being like, yeah, of course it's going to fail. Like it was destined to fail.

Why the hell is everyone else surprised? But usually it's the goalie that gets blamed. Sometimes it's the goalie coach. quite often, neither one of those guys have been put in an optimal position. Well, yeah, I think obviously save percentage matters, but for me almost, I'm coming around to the idea of like how you get there is just as important, right? And that's when we talk about sort of fit and style. And safe percentage isn't enough.

Of course. I'll give you like the Jack Campbell example, right? Like that wasn't just like that wasn't about bad fit, although I would argue given the way some of the pressures played out in Toronto and how openly things played out. terms of his interaction with the media and how much he beat himself up over failures, giving him his first number one NHL, you're the guy job in a Canadian market with Stanley Cup expectations. Even from a mindset perspective might not have been the way to go.

But it wasn't necessarily anything, if you dug into Campbell's numbers that it was like, oh, like the Oilers give up too much of this and he's bad. Like you could just look at adjusted, like the raw numbers were, what do you have coming out of Toronto? Like a 919? which was like flirting with top 10 no even in the top 10 for two years yeah the adjusted numbers the adjusted say percentage by clear sight was in the 30s both years that's still not bad you're

the top half of the league but are you a five times five are you a five times are you a 25 sheets guy number one yeah again like it wouldn't have taken it was two clicks on this website to tell you that's probably not a good decision yeah And I don't think enough of these teams have access to that type of data. Okay. Well, let's get into some of that. Let's start with the obvious name on top of the list, right? Connor Hallibuck.

I've done this one enough because he's an easy example. Yes. That I don't need the Wi-Fi for this one. Okay, so we'll do this one. We'll go to break after, and then I'm going to get you all set up. So, Connor Hallibuck, just turned 30 years old, has one year left at 6.16 million. I'll get the cap. Last year, he had a 9-20 save percentage.

Sport Logic had him at plus 17 goal sale, well expected, which was behind only Soros O'Mark and Philip Gustavson, according to their metric. Now, he led the league in starts. And by any time interval over essentially the past seven years, which is when he became an NHL regular, no goalie has played more than him. He's a workhorse. And one of the key abilities of goaltenders is availability, and he checks that box. Well, here's the thing.

Since 2016-17, that first season, he's played 78% of all Winnipeg Jets games in that time, which comes out to an average of about 64 games. per season. Obviously that is great, right? It's becoming a rarity at the position, right? We talk more and more about how teams are going more towards splits and work shares. He's one where he hasn't needed that necessarily. Now, as he's getting into his 30s, you could make an argument that that might work against him

in terms of how much wear and tear he's put on himself. If all the time is undefeated, wear and tear matters, but I will say, like, having been able to witness it in the off seasons, like Connor Hellebuck's rise to elite status sort of begins with working with a trainer that we know up in Colonna changing some of the body mechanics that he uses on the ice and the way he approaches taking care of that to me I mean again Father Time's undefeated but it mitigates that risk to an extent just knowing what this guy does

and in particular how he does it in the focus he has in how he trains to move like a goaltender I think there's anything could happen but I think there's some durability there that, you know, might, you know, there's less risk there than maybe some other guys you're not, you know, that I'm not as familiar with. Well, I think any team, especially ones who are looking for a starter or are looking to improve, would be interested in him and view him as an upgrade, right?

I think he's universally considered to be a top five goalie, certainly, maybe even top three, depending on your opinion of him and others. So there's no doubt about he's a fantastic goalie. And as you said, like in terms of strengths and weaknesses, there's a lot of strengths and very few weaknesses. Now, for me, this is what I wanted to get into with you because we laid the groundwork for this a couple times ago when I had you on.

I think it's been months ago now. Who knows? Time is flying. But we had a conversation about whether a team like the Sabres would be a good for him or the Kings. And we were talking about sort of like these specific strengths and weaknesses of his. And in particular, what he's really good at and what Winnipeg over the years,

even when they've had issues as a team. has done a really good job of insulating him in that specific area, versus if you went to a team like Buffalo, what he'd be suddenly exposed to. And I think it's obviously, it's a sliding scale. No one's saying that he's going to go from being a Vesna candidate to out of the league. But it's a matter of like playing to,

as you illustrated it perfectly, playing to your strengths versus like not exposing the specific weaknesses. Yeah, because if you're the Buffalo Sabres and you're going to give up assets to acquire him and then, you know, I'm assuming you're doing so with the idea of extent. him, although Devin Levi being a part of your mix might mitigate how long you want to commit to a Connor Hellebock. At the end of the day, you know, he's not free beyond a paycheck. It costs you assets. And so the point would be,

you're absolutely right. He's still going to be Connor Hellebock. He's still going to be one of the top goaltenders in the league. But if you ask him to play a style that plays away from his strengths, then I don't think you're going to get what you were expecting, what you were. we're looking for. And again, everything's relative. Like, he's top tier. Some of his numbers are off the charts, good, especially in straight lines. Like, there's no goalie better in straight lines. Point blank, slot area, chances. And this is where a lot of the other proprietary metrics that don't include cross-ice

passes rank him higher than ClearSight does. Like, for example, this year, he's still, again, top 10 easily, goal stayed above expected. But they have him six, whereas I think you said Sport Logic had him. Four, thank you. Four. So they've got him six. Like, and for the record,

UCSaros should be a best. No trophy finalist, there is no doubt about it. Um, but this is what happens. Well, let's get into those strengths and weaknesses then. Is it, is it a matter of his ability on those lateral plays?

Is it like a technique thing? Is it like a foot speed thing, like in terms of like his movement and being able to get across? Because he certainly looks human to my eye when you get him moving and you notice that like, especially when he's trying to get across on his feet, looks a bit clumsy doing so obviously relatively speaking compared to when he's able to... That's a big body. When he's able to line it up, it's like he's just, it's absorbing him right in the middle of

the chest, right? First of all, slot line plays are, you know, that's how offense, that's why we see offense go up in the league. We're seeing more and more teams attempt these, right? So like these are the toughest chances, you know, for every goal tender. But again, there are some that have more success relative to others against that. And it's one of the few areas. There's two.

Slotline plays and breakaways over the past five years of the, data where he's consistently being around or slightly below expected. So a round average. And when you look at how good he is at everything else, that stands out. It stands out, especially if I'm the Buffalo Sabres, and I combine slot line chances against and breakaways, and I'm like one of the bottom five teams in the league.

So if those are the two of the areas that I give up the most amongst high danger chances more than any other team, not more than any other, but like I said, I think they were third last in one and fifth last in the other, and overall it grades out to like the fifth most expected goals in the league on those types of chances. If you're going to continue to give those up

and you're going to pay premium assets for a goaltender who that may be the one only, and again, the word relative matters here, but the one only relative weakness in his game, that makes no sense. Unless you're going to change how you play. because now you're coming in and you're like, okay, like he's not going to make more of those saves

than some of the guys you have already. Statistically, and we're talking five years of statistical numbers here. Like, it's not a one-year blip. Like, we've got the numbers back to 1718, right? And the years where he had down years, where years were the Winnipeg stumbled in their ability to take that away.

And that's one thing, Maurice, and like, they still give up great-hate chances. Every team does. But where they come from and the nature with which they're, were created even on the, you know, I remember years ago what they gave up on the power play, like point, point blank looks, letting guys walk right into prime areas, but again, in straight lines. Like, Hella Buck's understanding of sort of that relationship between the puck and how much

space a shooter has behind him in straight lines and the ability to close off the net is, like, has to be among the best in the national hockey league, the best in the world. But when you go east-west and there's a time frame required to reach, set that positioning. Again, the numbers don't fall off a cliff, but they drop notably to the point where if you're a team that gives up a ton of those, you're not getting the best out of him. And that's sort of the only point. It doesn't mean he's a bad goalie.

It just means you're putting him in spots where he's been less likely to succeed at the rate he has in years like last season and the other year where he won the Vezna trophy and all the other years where he's a Vezna final. Yes. Yeah. Well, no, I'm with you on that. And that's why, I mean, we've been pushing back on kind of the idea that. Yeah, Buffalo needs a goalie, but I would prefer others,

especially given the price that it's going to take and then the extension. Well, hey, listen, at the end of the day, if you're bottom five in the league and slot line plays and breakaways, goaltending might not be your biggest problem. Like, Eric Comrie had the lowest expected save percentage in the entire national hockey league. Right.

Like, there are other issues there. And I would even argue for all the focus on goaltending, it might not, like, Conor Hellebuck, I mean, outside of a very, I mean, he's in that small handful of guys, but outside of like a Shastairken or a Saros, I don't know that you're overcoming that environment. You might need to fix either, I don't know if it's personnel or systems,

but you're probably not going to be a team in that sort of area, that sort of ranking defensively, not just on those types of plays, but overall, and have a ton of success. Maybe you can get in the playoffs. Yeah. But history says you're not going far in them if you don't figure out how to defend those types

plays better than they have. Well, and I think that's totally fine. Like, that's the reality of, like, where they're at as an organization right now. It's like when you're young and offensively slanted on the way up, that is totally fine. There's going to be nights where you can just outscore your problems. It's going to affect you in terms of competing for a Stanley Cup, but considering where they're coming from, that's totally okay. And I guess my point is, especially given what you have in Levi, maybe for all the focus on goal attending, what I'm saying is with all those things in mind, that might not be the end. That might not be the answer to you. Maybe we're asking the wrong. Maybe a lot of people are asking the wrong questions

about the buff. No, they are because I see a lot of, oh, if this team gets a goalie, look out. It's like, oh, just get a Connor Hallibuck on his team. And I guess what we're saying is he might not necessarily look like the Connor Hellibuck that he, though we've become accustomed to, if you just plant it into that spot. Connor's a hell of a goalie. Yes. And if he starts seeing those chances on the regular, like there are adjustments he can and will make. Like, he's also a really intelligent goal. Yeah. So I feel like, like for the purpose of illustrating this point, he's become a focal guy because he's the biggest name and because there is this discrepancy in his statistics, his underlying numbers. But I feel like I'm being too critical in that. So it's really

important that I couch this. No, but we're grading him as like the best goalie in the league and then adjusting everything to that. Right. It's like the Vasileski conversation, right? Like two-time cup winner, three-time finalist, Vezna's still number one goaltender in the world. But relative to everything he does well, he grades out 19th on screen chances. It's one of the few relative weaknesses. So when you see, and the world sees the goaltender as often as they've seen, Andre Vasselowski, you get the playoff time. What are teams going to do?

They're going to attack them with screens. I think if you look at the playoffs and look at the slot line plays that Winnipeg gave up, to Vegas, who's the team that's really good at creating them, like there's a reason that series ended as quickly as it did. Yeah. Okay, well, let's go. What are fits then then do actually make sense for it? Are you with me?

than New Jersey is a team that would make sense for that, especially, like, it would involve, I assume Vanichick going back the other way, right? He's got an extra year on his deal at a lower figure, and then you run with, like, a hella buck-shmead pairing if you're in New Jersey, like, because they were significantly improved defensively last year compared to the previously, right? A lot was made of, like, their offense, but I feel like just based on having the puck more and kind of using that speed, especially, like, you watch the race. Rangers series in round one, right? And there were games where they weren't giving them anything.

That was a great environment to be playing in. It was a bit trickier against Carolina in round two. But I think that would be a good spot for him, in my opinion, especially in their ability to defend off the rush. I don't think he'd be exposed to as many of those plays. I think L.A. would. We've talked about them as a fit before, right? I think they would make sense. What do you think about those two? Or if there's another one that you're, you kind of go as like, if Hellbuck was in this spot, it would be the perfect marriage of player and team. Yeah, you know, like Jersey was actually pretty good. Like, I think I had them like sort of middle of the pack top top half.

I'm trying to, again, Wi-Fi. But when I did this exercise with Connor before, they were a team that graded out more, like they were pretty good defensively when it came to those two particular types of chances. Like, they would have be a better fit. again, I can't answer what it's going to cost to get him and what you're going to have to give up to make that work and how long you can sign him.

They do give up a little more off the rushes, which is where other teams can create those types of chances. But overall, here's the thing, though. Overall, they were not bad. Like I said, in terms of expected goals against, you know, sixth in the slot line plays, but their goal is actually outperforms slot line play. Right.

Like they were already getting, you know, so that's one where I think you need to look at, where is a team, did they not get the goal tending? And does Connor Hellebuck plug more of those holes? At the end of the day, you're upgrading to one of the best goalies in the game. So as long as you don't give up the types of chances that,

you know, he's, again, relatively struggles with, you should be fine in theory. And listen, a lot of this too is you can give up a slot line play. If the goalie knows, there's a predictability. element to this. I would point to Aiden Hill and Vegas is a good example. Aiden Hill's numbers on slot line plays like Connor Hellebock's are slightly below expected. But on low slot line plays, because we've got subcategory, so anything below the hash marks where that pass is completed below the hash marks in tight, Aden Hill was exceptional.

High slot line plays, plays that make him go east-west from one side of the ice to the other, above the hash marks, he was well below expected. where did the Vegas Golden Knights rank in the playoffs in terms of slot line plays overall? They were actually 13th out of the 16 teams and you'd be like, hold on, how did this work? Like, Aiden Hill struggles with slot line plays and Vegas gave up the 13th most

and they won the Stanley Cup. Everything you're telling me is a bunch of crap. High slot line plays? Yeah. They gave up the third fewest. So again, and you can, I can look on the, now we take that as a stat and I look on the ice. Aiden Hill is huge. He's large.

He gets. He plays deep Sean Burke style. He doesn't have to go far to get across. You're basically throwing pucks across the middle to slam it off his pads or his body because he gets there. They played to his strengths. And looking at that level of granularity, as much as it's not a perfect answer to all the questions that teams are asking as they try and make these big decisions, it can give you more of the important type of information to predict whether a guy is going to have success or not. Kevin, let's go to break.

when we come back, we'll keep on this topic and get into many other cases, you're listening to the Hockey Ptio cast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. Everything Canucks, before and after the games. Canucks Central with Dan Riccio and Satyar Shah. Subscribe and download the show on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Here on the HockeyedioCast, joined by Kevin Woodley, we're playing matchmaker between goalies who are theoretically available this summer and teams that would be interested. Kevin, I wanted to get. get into one with you here that I think is interesting. So we just talked about how we don't like the idea of Connor Hallibuck for the Sabres. Can I pitch you on a goalie I do like for them?

Sure. You can pitch me on anything. Can I pitch you on a little Jeremy Swayman? Man, if you're the Bruins, are you giving up the guy with that cap hit? Or is he an RFA this year? Does he need a new ticket? Well, let me give you, let me give you my pitch. Make your whole whole case.

The Bruins are absolutely, I think I can say hooped financially. I think that's a word I can say on radio. They have $67 million committed against the cap to six forwards, three defensemen, and one goalie. That doesn't include Forbert, Riley, Grizzlick, Orsboro, who are under contract next year, combining for $11 million that even if they dump them for literally nothing in return, they still essentially have $17 million to fill out half of their team without any picks as well to facilitate any of these moves or improve otherwise.

So this might be a moot point because maybe the Bruins look and say, well, we have the goalie that's going to win the Vesna this season in Linus Allmark. He's got two years left at $5 million per. I believe he's 29 years old. Maybe this is the right time to cash in on him and see if we can get legitimate value back as opposed to nothing in return. But if they are going to stick with Allmark, I just don't see any scenario where they can afford to match any sort of offer sheet against Jeremy Swayman, where if it's up to 4.29 million, it only costs a second round pick comp in return. And there's no way they can match.

There's no way they can pay Linus Lmark 5 million and Jeremy Swayman 4.29 Xxies. So he's your prime offer sheet candidate. So if Jeremy Sweman doesn't get an offer sheet, we know there's no offer sheets coming. And here's, because he's the, he's, you're right. He's the perfect example. Well, and it will be such an inspired move for the Sabres because if you are going to move up the pecking order in the Atlantic division, a team you're going to have to step over at some point here will be the Boston Bruins and they've got the excess

pet capital they could even if they wanted to get absolutely crazy they could go up to six million dollars and give a first and a third I don't think that's even necessary that's a bit overly ambitious I think you could get him for the second round pick comp but it's a nice fit right because I believe he's 25 years old in November so you pair him up with Devon Levi you could go with a 6040 or 50 50 50 split which would work for both guys make sense from a timeline perspective given the age and also So I just don't really see. A lot of the reason we hear for why teams don't give these offer sheets is fear of retaliation, right?

We don't want to give out an offer sheet to someone else's young player and then have that team come back and try to steal one of ours. Well, if you're the Sabres, you've already signed Tage Thompson, you've signed Dylan Cousins. You're going to sign Rasmus Dahlian and Owen Power this summer. If the Bruins really want to become spiteful and try to steal, I don't know, Matthew Savois or something, like five years from now after you've been kicking their butts for five years, they can go ahead. But that's a worry that would not preclude me from doing something like this if I were the Sabres. And I really like, I've been talking myself into it, right? Because you started off with, all right, Connor Hallibuck, that would make sense. He's an elite goalie.

Well, doesn't make sense for the Sabres. UC Soros would obviously be ideal. He's going to become very expensive. It really feels like Jeremy Swayman could be someone that could be had for them that would not only affect a division rival, but also make you significantly better. So I like Jeremy. I mean, he's still developing. too, right? Like you're getting a goal-tender. Yeah, only 90 NHL games.

Yeah, there's still upside there that, you know, with playing time is the, you know, as we always say, goaltending is not a game of shots. It's a game of patterns, to quote the great Mitch Corn, and it's about recognizing those patterns, and the more time you have in the league to sort of identify them, the better you get at them. You know, listen, playing behind Boston and playing behind Buffalo, those are two different worlds.

And so you do worry a little bit about how, much it would translate. Certainly, one of the numbers when I pull up Swayman's chart right away that jumps out is a little worrisome for the Buffalo Sabres is the same as Conor Halibuck. Okay. And again, slotline plays are the most difficult plays in the league. Like these are, but we do have goalies that outperform expected on it. And the two that we've looked at for the Buffalo Sabres so far are two goalies that haven't.

And that's Connor Halibok and Jeremy Swim. I'm a little bit surprised at that number, to be honest with you, when I look at it and the way he plays. You know, he does tend to get a little locked in low and wide a little bit. He's really mobile from a wide stance, but the reality is, is when you play that low, it still, you know, adds inefficiencies to East West movement. It causes delays.

And the fact that, you know, over his NHL career so far, he's like, you know, minus, you know, he's below expected by a good six goals, which is not insignificant considering, you know, the low number of chances we've seen there. So that would be, you know, a little bit worrisome. There are only two numbers where he's sort of below expected that slot line plays and deflections. And the deflections I can actually see based on a style thing, there's a little drift in his game on purpose in Buffalo. We talked about this last time, the idea of Allmark and Swainman off open looks actually drifting back so that they're a body in motion.

So it's something broken plays, recoil, they can get to them. One thing you do leave yourself a little susceptible with that movement. is tips and deflections because you're caught moving one way and it can be, you know, routed the other way or you're not, again, you are giving up some, how much space you feel a little bit. So you, you know, in theory, you would be more susceptible to deflections and that comes up in the numbers. Everything else is really good. Like everything else is really positive, doesn't give up a lot of bad goals, which matters here. Um, you know, but on, on, when I look on high danger chances, because if you're playing behind the buffalo sabers,

um, that's something you're going to face slightly below expected. on breakaways, below expected on slot area, and below expected on slot line play. So there are some areas of his game that haven't been as exposed because Boston doesn't give up as much of those types of chances that he's going to see a lot more of in Buffalo unless they make other changes as we talked about before.

So that doesn't make it a bad bet because there are things he can do in his game to adjust to it. But don't expect him, you know, when you talk about save percentage, like it's a say, you're not plugging Jeremy, you're not plugging any goalie from one of the best defensive teams into one of the worst defensive teams

and expecting him to continue to run whatever, say, percentage he ran this year. I think he was in the 920s. His career numbers are off the chart. They're going to take a beating hit in Buffalo, assuming they play the same way, without him becoming a worst goal tenant. So I do like the idea of betting on the fact, though, that he is 25 with limited,

NHL experience as well in terms of like the runway like it appeals to me a bit more from a Sabre's perspective with the acknowledgement that the team itself could also improve in front of them over these next couple years as well just naturally right with the personnel getting better to the point where that's more appealing to me as a bet especially as a partner for devon levi than you're than you're traditional like let's bring in some veteran 30 plus year old goalie with limited upside and it's like oh he's the he's going to be his mentor but like i'd rather have these two guys to share the net and like grow together as opposed to the alternative. Well, yeah, we saw how important, like do not underestimate the relationship as much as people

might dismiss the post-game goalie hugs, the post-win goalie hugs between Linus Hallmark and Jeremy Swam and like there's a true partnership there. And so, yeah, if you're looking for somebody to, which very much, if you're getting Connor Hellabuck, we talked about it, 64 games or whatever the average was, like, that's not what you're getting. This is more, this would be more of a partnership. And I should add, like, as much as I dig down into that stat, Like, hey, like the Sabres give up a lot of this type of play,

and this is an area where, you know, he didn't have success, and yes, he'll be more exposed there than he was in Boston. Like, Jeremy Swam and still finished 11th and goals saved above expected. So for all, you know, the talk of the environment being favorable towards goaltenders, he still outplayed it by a significant margin. It has every year he's been in the NHL. So there's a lot to like. There's just a couple of chance types that again, and this may go back to our other conversation.

If you're Buffalo, you might need to fix how much of those chance types you, about that type of chance if you're going to, you know, solve this problem. Like Jeremy Swamon's expected save percentage, and I probably shouldn't just said that so quickly because I actually have it on goals, goals saved rather than expected. On a permanent basis, raw goal save above expected support logic, had him tie for seventh best in the league with Jake Ottinger. And we should also note there's a lot of HL and NCAA success here as well, right? Like it's not necessarily just a bet on the 90-h-h-old games.

He's played. You're kind of betting on the profile. of goalie that he is. He's a really smart goaltender. Like I'm a big fan of Jeremy Swyman. And so when I switch over here to, like I said, as I'm at 11th, so not too far off there. But when we look at environment,

his expected say percentage was 890, which is right just slightly above league average. So again, and actually nine points below Linus Lmark's expected. He had a tougher environment because he probably got tougher starts. That's the nature of the beast as the backup. It's the way it works. And he got the toughest start of the season with no momentum, more rhythm or timing.

But he, that was his expected say percentage. 890, so slightly above average. Eric Comrie's expected say percentage last year was 870. 870. So if Jeremy Sweman ends up in that environment, now listen, like there was circumstances there. Like Comrie got a lot of the starts when they were missing Michael Samuelson on the back end

and their defense was nowhere near as good once that depth chart wasn't at peak power things slipped pardon the pun with power but things slipped significantly and so you know again it just goes to show you like

it's you're not likely to get that bad in environment because Peca Lukinens was 884 and Craig Anderson's was 888 so it's not like the saber sucked in front of everyone Eric just goes got a lot of the toughest starts when they were not at full health,

and he got hammered. But the point would be, if you throw Swamen into that environment, like I'm not saying his overall numbers are going to be that far down. Eric was still above expected. But he's, you know, knock 20 points off expected. Like you're talking about a good year being in the 905 range, not in the 925 range. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Those are 80s numbers. They are. Okay, we got to get moving. We've talked like two goalies here. there were false advertising. We said we're going to matchmake everyone and then we just, we do one. I can't give all the day. John Gibson, a player that we have talked about a lot.

I cannot quit him. I still cannot quit him. He turns 30 in July over the past four seasons, 9-02, say percentage in nearly 200 games played. He has not hit 905 in a single season in that time. Something about that, though, Kevin, just does not sit right with me. And I'll give you the floor here in a second. What I will say, this is obviously a matter of my head, battle. my heart here. But I just think if you apply a bit of common sense in terms of environment and also

impact beyond just the actual personnel, I think that's important here, right? The Ducks last year gave up 39.1 shots against per game, which is the highest recorded total we've ever had to date. No goalie faced more inner slot shots than John Gibson last year. He faced 452 of Gordner's Sport Logic. Next up was UC Soros at 431 and then no other goal he was at 400. And that's considering he only had, I think, what, 52 or 53 games played, which is 10 less than most of the other league leaders. I just, he had 14 wins, eight of them were classified as steals for sport logic. I just, what I keep coming back to is I think there is some sort of a cumulative effect here that's more difficult to quantify for us in terms of playing in such a bleak environment where I don't think it's a coincidence that his number has dropped off as the team plummeted towards the basement. and I would, if you're talking yourself into John Gibson as a reclamation project,

it's a matter of you put him in a more competitive environment. He, by all accounts, is a very competitive goalie himself. And that added layer of motivation would lead to better results. Talk me out of it. Like, I could go both ways on this. The buyer beware for me on John Gibson is that there are nights where I watch him play behind the Anaheim Ducks and I swear they're just trying to kill the guy. Yeah.

Right. Like it's brutal. And so I do believe that, you know, the adjusted numbers we have are like the fact that he finished anywhere near expected, he was just slightly below this year, given the types of chances he saw on a regular basis and the unpredictability of the environment in front of him. Like, I still think I would like to see him on a good team. But here's the thing. If you put him on the 95 devils that don't give up a lot of shots. Like I also have questions and I think it would be fair to have those questions. how, like, he's a really good busy goalie. Has he ever had to play behind a team where he's not busy? Because there's a, and he's also a goalie that,

like, on that sliding scale between feel and technique, he slides to more towards the, like, the technical game is tightened up, but they've been careful not to make him a robotic technical goaltender. They don't want to lose the instinct that makes him special. Right. And so they've tried to balance that. But with that sliding scale, the side that he's on, probably comes more inconsistency, a little bit more ups and downs.

And I would argue that if you put him on a team that doesn't give up a lot of shots, there's at least a risk. I'm not saying it's for sure, but there's at least a risk that he struggles to adjust after all these years of being shelled to not being busy. That finding that rhythm, finding his timing on a night-in, night-out basis with 25 shots, might be a lot different than, you know, what did he average? Like, over 30. I think 37 per game.

Yeah. So obviously that's extreme. Yeah. And but then you could also argue like it's hard to stay consistent. Like he's gone through everything. He's gone through periods where they got a little bit better, but then they couldn't score. Yeah, I mean, he's had to be, like, if he, if he's won a game the past couple years, it's been because he was by far the best player on the ice, right?

There were very few games where he was bad and they would still win. And he's capable of winning new games and getting on a run that could win a bunch. I think that's why I can't quit it. Like I watch a game against the Panthers this past season. I think he did it back to back years in Florida. It's like stopping bullets in his teeth. Where he had 50 plus saves in each of those games. And I'm just like, my brain cannot come around to the idea that this guy is not good at stopping bucks.

And even though the aggregate tells you the past four years that he has not been good, I just for a guy who's not necessarily that old, who doesn't have that much tread on him to be. all of a sudden just lose it that way when you still see those contained performances. I don't know, maybe I'm being foolish for thinking you could extrapolate it over a longer sample on a better team and a better environment,

but I feel like there's something there. I don't think he just all of a sudden became a bad goalie. No, but there's a lot of goalie people like that that would like to see. I know there's goalie people that are worried about him like holding up in terms of like the way he plays.

Well, I mean, I think he's changed the way he trains. I was one of the people in the early days. like he pulls his body apart so much when he moves that it wasn't a surprise that he got injured. But I think you've seen a tightening technically of that aspect, and I think you've seen him change the way he trains to the point where I don't think that's as big a concern. I mean, he's survived relatively healthy behind, like I said, what's pretty much a firing squad. He might as well just giving him a cigarette and a bandana over his eyes a lot of those nights, right? So I don't have those concerns to the degree I did early in his career.

and yet there are other goalie people that, like, they don't love some of the technical stuff. They think he could be tighter and that with more consistency. And, you know, for all the five-bell saves, there are some that make you grown. And we've talked about how low-percentage goals, for as much as we focus on the big saves, you know, you give up a low-percentage goal. Your team loses 87% of the games unless the goalie at the other end also gives up a low-percentage goal. And, you know, I think some of this is just volume. but John Gibson was tied for the most low percentage goals in the National Hockey League last year.

I think it's hard to maintain your focus when the season is hopeless as it was. Yeah, it's like even if I play a well-in-day, who cares? But again, statistically and some of the eye-test stuff, technically, those are the questions that come. Me, really easy to say from here, I don't have to worry about the investment in the ticket and the tournament's left on there. I want to see John Gibson. Behind a good team. to be a great defensive team, just a good team with a chance to win. Because a lot of the stuff for him is like there were nights where even when they were a little

tighter defensively, like I said, they couldn't score. And they were going to every night where it's like one or two is one or two too too too many. Like you have to be perfect. It's a really tough way to play the position mentally. I used to ask goalies back in the Kipper soft days. He was the prime example of this. Would you rather play behind the team that Kipper played with the Daryl-Callegger Flames 1.0?

where they were great defensively, but they didn't score. Or would you rather have a team that's not as good defensively? It gives up more chances, but you know they can bail you out at the other end. To a man, every goalie says, give me the team that can bail me out and score some goals at the other end. So I don't feel like I have to be perfect every night. Even if the structure in front of me is good and it makes my life easier, the idea, the expectation that I need to be perfect to have a chance

because we're not going to score any is something that a lot of goalies want no part of. and Gibson's also face that as well as poor defense. Like I just, I'm with you. I'd be more hesitant if I was actually in that position, but I want to see somebody make that move. I think it's very possible. Well, I want to see. For the first time, I think it actually could happen this summer.

And that's where you want to go in and really dig through the numbers. Like, you know, slot area, straight lines. He's exceptional, which matches what you had. Slot line, not quite so much. again a little more east-west. But I would want to go through each and every number, what we give up as a team, and then I'm digging through the video.

So if there is something that doesn't match, is there something we can either do differently to mitigate it, or is there something I can quickly change with him that would mitigate it? Because I think he's worth the risk. I'm with you. And I want to see him playing a good team. I want to see Lucas Dostal get more time as well, right? He's played 100 AHL games the past three years.

I've seen no reason why he shouldn't play 40 games for the ducks next year. I think they're going to be improved. with a change of coaching staff and also just better players, better help. Like I want to see that. I guess I'll give you the floor here. We have like five minutes left.

Do you want to talk about... Oh my God. I felt like we're only halfway through. What's one topic? What's one goalie or one situation that really you want to highlight right now that catches your eye or you think is interesting? Oh, man.

I think the hell in Vegas, we've already done the Aiden, or we've already done the Hellebuck one. Do you want to do the Leafs? Do you want to do hurricanes goalies? We can do... I think hurricanes are going to bring back their goalies. Okay.

And there, yeah, scratch that. I don't want to talk about the Hurricanes goals. I'm really curious to see where this goes. Yeah. Because this is the thing. I think too many people actually dismissed his performance in the playoffs. Like his adjusted say percentage in the postseason. And I said this, I think with you or maybe with one of the other shows here on Sportsnet 650,

like as we went into the cup final, Aiden Hill's adjusted Sabrescentage was better than Sergey Barovsky's and yet everybody wanted to hand Sergey Bobrovsky and this isn't any criticism of him he would have been a worthy Con Smyth but I wasn't even hearing any Aden Hill buzz on Con Smyth and his numbers again smaller sample because he came in later in the playoffs but his numbers were better and he wasn't

insulated overall expected say percentage was around 890 in the playoffs so it's not like they were he was playing behind a team that had him facing like a 9-10 a Justin, and some guys did. Like his expected was 890. It was not stingy. But if you dig in, like I talked about what this... Yeah, I think they were carefully like manic manufacturing chances.

Yeah. What they gave up fit his strengths. What they didn't give up would have exploited his weaknesses. And I think we saw that with Bob where Vegas was very good at getting to screens that other teams weren't able to get to. And there's a guy who statistically over the last, like these are prime example. statistically over the last number of years screens were an issue for Bob for three rounds nobody got them

Vegas gets them in the final round there are saves I'm convinced he makes that would have had us dropping our jaws on backdoor plays to Marshal I reround one of them on a low high cross crease one T power play feed

from Jack Eichel he makes that save if Aaron if Echblatt isn't in his way taking away his eyes so these little granular things matter. And so how many teams look at Aden Hill and buy on the plus three and a half

adjusted save percentage? How many teams look at his four-year history? How many teams are willing to recognize that if we don't play the same way to his strengths, we might not get the same. Well, I think he would be smart to stay there for at least another year or two, but this is also a good time for him after that performance to sell high on himself. Kevin, we got to get out of here. Thank you for taking the time to come chat with us. Follow Kevin at Kevin as in goal on Twitter. We'll be back tomorrow with another episode of the HockeyPediocast as always streaming on the Sportsnet Radio Network.