Cornell Goaltenders

CowbellGuy · March 01, 2007, 12:18:01 PM

[quote Omie]Scrivens ... also seems to be a more acrobatic goalie.[/quote]

That's usually because he's caught out of position a lot or goes down way too early. Someone like Lenny was often almost boring to watch because he was so good positionally, played the angles, and never panicked. At the other end of the spectrum was someone like McKee who was really just a reaction goalie. And, at least at this level, a really good reaction goalie can be effective. In the pros that typically doesn't fly and, like McKee, they find they need to learn good technique to go along with their inherent talent.

So to summarize the analogy, Davenport is more like Lenny and Scrivens is more like McKee. Scrivens tends to look more spectacular in net, but not necessarily for the right reasons.

Trotsky · March 01, 2007, 01:05:53 PM

[quote JohnnieAg'99]we bring in BC-type smurfs as Mike starts trying to learn how to play an open style of hockey and no goalie looks good[/quote]The goaltending has looked soft this year, but let's not go overboard. Davenport was 6th in the ECAC in GAA. Scrivens was 1st: http://www.ecachockeyleague.com/leaguestats/men

Jim Hyla · March 01, 2007, 01:51:00 PM

[quote Trotsky][quote JohnnieAg'99]we bring in BC-type smurfs as Mike starts trying to learn how to play an open style of hockey and no goalie looks good[/quote]The goaltending has looked soft this year, but let's not go overboard. Davenport was 6th in the ECAC in GAA. Scrivens was 1st: http://www.ecachockeyleague.com/leaguestats/men[/quote]

Well not to pick on you, but since everybody has been trying to show their point backed by stats, let's see how ridiculous they can be.

Code Select


          Sav %  GAA  Record  %
Davenport .903  2.38  7-3-2  .667
Scrivens  .918  2.17  3-5-2  .400

So Scrivens has better stats except he loses more?? Maybe the teams they each play and how our team plays around them makes a difference. 4 GA Princeton is a good example. Now can we keep this thread going for another week?::burnout::

mtmack25 · March 01, 2007, 03:12:32 PM

[quote calgARI '07]

Compare this season's defense to those years and it is not even close. [/quote]

I would add to this a comparison of forwards as well. They have changed from big and defensive minded to smaller and offensive minded.

Under 6' tall:

2002-2003: Abbott, Abbott, Hornby, Pegoraro, Vesce

2006-2007: Barlow, Gallagher, Milo, Romano, Scali, Scott

Even the "small" guys in 02-03 played big. Scott might try to play like a big guy, but he doesn't succeed like the older guys.

Lenny and McKee benefited from a stronger defense and stronger defensive forwards. I am not knocking their talent, but their defense was good across the board.

Trotsky · March 01, 2007, 04:16:09 PM

[quote Jim Hyla]Now can we keep this thread going for another week?::burnout::[/quote]Easily.

hockeydude · March 01, 2007, 04:17:45 PM

I am not saying that every goal that has gone in is because of the defense. Granted on some of them maybe he wasn't out challenging as far as he should and maybe some rebounds got away that he wish wouldn't have. Or maybe if he had dislocated is left knee and touched the crossbar with the back of his skate he would have made the save ;-). I just don't think you can say that he has played "pretty bad" at times this year. If you look at the goals given up you can't say that any were really his fault or soft goals. Many of them have been defflections off of our own guys, giveaways in our own zone, powerplay goals from blown assignments, and odd man rushes. I don't understand how you can say the goalie should be held accountable for this stuff.

Townie · March 02, 2007, 02:56:45 AM

[quote hockeydude]I am not saying that every goal that has gone in is because of the defense. Granted on some of them maybe he wasn't out challenging as far as he should and maybe some rebounds got away that he wish wouldn't have. Or maybe if he had dislocated is left knee and touched the crossbar with the back of his skate he would have made the save ;-). I just don't think you can say that he has played "pretty bad" at times this year. If you look at the goals given up you can't say that any were really his fault or soft goals. Many of them have been defflections off of our own guys, giveaways in our own zone, powerplay goals from blown assignments, and odd man rushes. I don't understand how you can say the goalie should be held accountable for this stuff.[/quote]

Let me preface that I agree with Beeeej and don't find your tone offensive.

Opinions aside, we can't dispute the fact that Schafer saw fit to pull Davenport several times. How would you explain that?

I don't agree that Troy hasn't given up some soft goals. I've seen them in Lynah. I do agree that he has suffered from an overall weaker defense leading to more opportunities for our opponents. Seminoff's absence doesn't help.

Sidebar: You carry the confident tone of one who knows hockey well, which I can respect. Without revealing your true identity, can you provide a little background??

Trotsky · March 02, 2007, 05:20:04 AM

[quote Jim Hyla]So Scrivens has better stats except he loses more?[/quote]I was trying to show that both goaltenders, although not as good as Lenny and McKee, have performed well relative to the rest of the conference. I was not comparing Troy and Ben.

Team goaltending in recent seasons (not including eng):

2000 2.61 .904
2001 2.00 .922
2002 1.68 .927
2003 1.26 .939
2004 1.82 .921
2005 1.24 .947
2006 2.05 .911
2007 2.40 .902

redice · March 02, 2007, 08:16:43 AM

[quote Townie][quote hockeydude]I am not saying that every goal that has gone in is because of the defense. Granted on some of them maybe he wasn't out challenging as far as he should and maybe some rebounds got away that he wish wouldn't have. Or maybe if he had dislocated is left knee and touched the crossbar with the back of his skate he would have made the save ;-). I just don't think you can say that he has played "pretty bad" at times this year. If you look at the goals given up you can't say that any were really his fault or soft goals. Many of them have been defflections off of our own guys, giveaways in our own zone, powerplay goals from blown assignments, and odd man rushes. I don't understand how you can say the goalie should be held accountable for this stuff.[/quote]

Let me preface that I agree with Beeeej and don't find your tone offensive.

Opinions aside, we can't dispute the fact that Schafer saw fit to pull Davenport several times. How would you explain that?

I don't agree that Troy hasn't given up some soft goals. I've seen them in Lynah. I do agree that he has suffered from an overall weaker defense leading to more opportunities for our opponents. Seminoff's absence doesn't help.

Sidebar: You carry the confident tone of one who knows hockey well, which I can respect. Without revealing your true identity, can you provide a little background??[/quote]

You are so correct that Troy has given up some soft goals. ALL goalies do!! That includes Scrivens, McKee, LeNeveu, and, yes, Dryden. It happens. They're all human beings. They're all imperfect. With all of the variables, trying to decide who is the least imperfect is a (somewhat) subjective exercise. The only true value is that it gives us something to do between games. ::rolleyes::

Jim Hyla · March 02, 2007, 01:21:46 PM

[quote redice] The only true value is that it gives us something to do between games. ::rolleyes::[/quote]How true!

Jeff Hopkins '82 · March 02, 2007, 05:11:38 PM

[quote redice][quote Townie][quote hockeydude]I am not saying that every goal that has gone in is because of the defense. Granted on some of them maybe he wasn't out challenging as far as he should and maybe some rebounds got away that he wish wouldn't have. Or maybe if he had dislocated is left knee and touched the crossbar with the back of his skate he would have made the save ;-). I just don't think you can say that he has played "pretty bad" at times this year. If you look at the goals given up you can't say that any were really his fault or soft goals. Many of them have been defflections off of our own guys, giveaways in our own zone, powerplay goals from blown assignments, and odd man rushes. I don't understand how you can say the goalie should be held accountable for this stuff.[/quote]

Let me preface that I agree with Beeeej and don't find your tone offensive.

Opinions aside, we can't dispute the fact that Schafer saw fit to pull Davenport several times. How would you explain that?

I don't agree that Troy hasn't given up some soft goals. I've seen them in Lynah. I do agree that he has suffered from an overall weaker defense leading to more opportunities for our opponents. Seminoff's absence doesn't help.

Sidebar: You carry the confident tone of one who knows hockey well, which I can respect. Without revealing your true identity, can you provide a little background??[/quote]

You are so correct that Troy has given up some soft goals. ALL goalies do!! That includes Scrivens, McKee, LeNeveu, and, yes, Dryden. It happens. They're all human beings. They're all imperfect. With all of the variables, trying to decide who is the least imperfect is a (somewhat) subjective exercise. The only true value is that it gives us something to do between games. ::rolleyes::[/quote]

Dryden didn't. It was Brian Cropper. ::rolleyes::

Cactus12 · March 02, 2007, 07:17:00 PM

This is a good interpretation... and it's why many people on this forum find much greater comfort in Davenport starting (myself included).

redice · March 02, 2007, 11:11:04 PM

[quote Jeff Hopkins '82]

Dryden didn't. It was Brian Cropper. ::rolleyes::[/quote]

Silly me for missing that!!**]

bandrews37 · March 07, 2007, 12:46:12 AM

That's not really a fair assessment, though, Jim. Of Scrivens' decisions this year (he's 3-6-2 overall, right?) he's gotten the decision in three games where he came on in relief of Troy - and those have been two losses and a tie. If you remove those where he came in down several goals and ended up with the decision, he's 3-4-1 - not great, but not too bad, I suppose. And Troy becomes 11-7-3 - still not too bad, but not great, either.

On top of that, as was pointed out earlier, Troy's gotten the benefit of more offensive support in front of him.

I think the safest bet is that we'll see both goalies this weekend, especially if the series goes three games. I have to figure that whoever starts will be on a relatively short leash.

Jim Hyla · March 07, 2007, 08:15:21 AM

[quote bandrews37]That's not really a fair assessment, though, Jim. Of Scrivens' decisions this year (he's 3-6-2 overall, right?) he's gotten the decision in three games where he came on in relief of Troy - and those have been two losses and a tie. If you remove those where he came in down several goals and ended up with the decision, he's 3-4-1 - not great, but not too bad, I suppose. And Troy becomes 11-7-3 - still not too bad, but not great, either.

On top of that, as was pointed out earlier, Troy's gotten the benefit of more offensive support in front of him.

I think the safest bet is that we'll see both goalies this weekend, especially if the series goes three games. I have to figure that whoever starts will be on a relatively short leash.[/quote]

I wasn't trying to make the case of one goalie being better than another, rather how sometimes it can be foolish to look at stats. Your refinement of the stats just reinforces the point that you can't make decisions based upon just that. I'd rather trust the judgement of a coach that I trust.