Article: Don't Blame This Season On Gus and Fleury

[Justin Hein]

View full article

[Citizen Strife]

I made a list last week about Minnesota's goals for and against compared to the top 10 in both points and goals for and against. Minnesota ended up 30-40 goals behind in both categories.  So, yeah, there is some offensive punch missing in the middle/bottom 6 that hopefully gets fixed up.  Rossi and Faber making improvements may not be enough to counteract things if everyone else stands pat, including Gus and Fleury.

[Will D. Ness]

As good as Rossi has been this year, I'm betting he leads the team in missing these high danger shots.  

On the other end, there was a nasty stretch of Gus and Fleury letting in softies early in the year.  They cleaned it up but still never got over 0.9 save % due to having a 3rd D pairing that was atrocious.  

For the most part, both goalies have looked ok post all-star.

[Protec]

I'm not much of an advanced analytics guy but it's interesting to see datasets derived from other analytics tools to reach conclusions while glossing-over the uncertainty or nuance in that.

I watched Fleury this season make a lot of big saves and competing hard. Did he get burned on wide open breakaways like last night??? Yeah, grade A chances are super hard to stop against NHL scorers. 

Last night was a great example of Fleury's season, Gus too perhaps but the Wild lost 4-3, one empty netter. The other three against was a wide open break by a tip scorer and two deflections...

Yes, you'd like the tendy to make those saves but if you think about it, what's the guy supposed to do about those kinds of goals?

I think the Wild just need an off season reset and remove Johansson.

[B1GKappa97]

Too late, I have already blamed them for this year. Fluery played similarly to last season, but I don't know how you look at Gus giving up damn near an entire extra goal per game and don't put a lot of blame on him. 

We scored more goals this season than we scored last year (248 v 239) so I'm not sure why its the Forwards' fault that they were more productive and lost. 

Its pretty obvious that the goalies, Gus in particular, are to blame.

MAF was essentially the same as last year but Gus really cratered and took the team with him.

Edited April 19 by B1GKappa97

[Imyourhuckleberry]

35 minutes ago, Will D. Ness said:

On the other end, there was a nasty stretch of Gus and Fleury letting in softies early in the year.  They cleaned it up but still never got over 0.9 save % due to having a 3rd D pairing that was atrocious.  

For the most part, both goalies have looked ok post all-star.

November 7th was Addison's last game with the Wild. Chisholm wasn't a defensive stalwart, nor Goligoski, but both were better than Addison. Spurgeon could add a lot even if he isn't 100% as good as he was prior injury. If he's only slightly above average, he's still keeping a poor defender off of the ice.

Wild goalie save percentages after November 7th:

Gustavsson = .906

Fleury = .894

[mnfaninnc]

I like what Justin said about analytics. If you dive into the numbers, they can reveal a lot, but what are those? Suggestions. The eye test is always the strongest indicator, and the analytics have to match up with the eye test to be valid. 

In this case did they? I do not believe this is the case, but if you look at all 3 units + special teams, I think you'll find the story.

The most important PKer is the goalie. Their sv% was not good on the kill. In fact, our PK unit was simply bad. 5v5 is one thing, but if you're special teams can't hold up, it doesn't mean as much. Our PK unit deserved its F.

The largest impact in standings points, I think, came from the leads we coughed up in the 3rd period. LaPanta used to laud our record in these situations, but down the stretch it was loss after loss, sometimes in regulation, sometimes in OT. On this, you have to blame skaters for giving up chances, but the goalies also have to stand tall. Giving up softies here deflates a whole team. They gave them up. This was a problem. So, analytics doesn't account for the "when" factor. 

Also, I think the above was a systematic problem. I'm not sold that Heinzy was comfortable with the system reads of when defenders pinch. For instance, in the Vegas game where we were up 1-0, Middleton pinches and has to believe that a forward covers. Rossi was late getting over, but as Middleton pinches, Vegas player makes a short drop pass towards the middle, and that player immediately sends it up the ice to a breaking forward. Rossi has to reverse course, makes a gallant effort to get to the trailer, but is just not fast enough. The trailer snaps one past Goose, who has to make that save. This is an example of the whole team letting themselves down, not just the goalie.

Another one was where Zuccarello has to take out his man on a 2-2, gets ole'd when he tries to check him and the ensuing 2-1 scores in the 3rd. Was it a weak goal? My memory thinks it wasn't strong. But, Zuccarello has to make that play, and then the goalie has to cover for Zuccarello's mistake. Both failed.

I won't spend much time on this, but the defensive pairing of Goligoski-Merrill was an outright disaster. Nothing really the goalies could do about that one.

Offensively, we missed so many nets with good-great scoring chances. That has to be near the top of the list. This was everyone, but guys like Moose, Hartman, Zuccarello (the vets) have to get those on net. The younger guys do to, but the vets should be held to a higher standard. 

Our PP. The statistics show us in the middle of the league. But, one part of the stats that doesn't show up is when. When we needed the goal, our PP let us down, and sometimes in real deflating fashion. We also had a tendency to give up big chances the other way. Last I heard, we were 13th on the PP. While I'd really rather have a ranking based on the amount of PP time it takes to score a goal, I just have to think we should have been better. Having a threat in Ovechkin's office would make a PK unit have to at least respect it. Right now they don't and they can defender our LHS heavy PP a little tighter. While this unit certainly isn't an F, a C is about as good as it can be.

In conclusion, I think Justin is likely right, you cannot hang this season on the goalies alone. To the eye test, there is plenty of blame to go everywhere, yes, even to Kaprizov and his east west passes at the top of the zone that went the other way. 

I believe a new system is coming and it will probably be tighter in the defensive end, as well as forcing the middle more in the offensive end. This will help. 

One last thing. Injuries. One thing that Heinzy had a tendency to do was shorten his bench in the 3rd period. He simply couldn't trust the depth on the roster. Time and time again, this shortened unit gave up late goals and late chances. What if Heinzy would have been able to trust all of his players? What if he could have rolled all his lines and pairings? Could late game fatigue have been a factor? You could probably get away with this with a lot of kids playing, but, if you've got some older vets playing, fatigue becomes a factor on b2bs and 3/4. But, could you really trust Lettieri, Lucchini and Shaw late in games? Could you trust Merrill-Goligoski? I think 1 part of this question may come from our organizational depth and the lack we were able to have this season.

[mnfaninnc]

18 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

Fluery played similarly to last season, but I don't know how you look at Gus giving up damn near an entire extra goal per game and don't put a lot of blame on him. 

Goose had a good 2nd half of the year last season, but the 1st half it was mostly Fleury's net. I'm doing this from memory, but last season, Fleury got more of the hard starts. This season Goose got more. Couple that with last season our defense was much better, and healthier, and this season it was not would be a reason for the difference. 

[mnfaninnc]

5 minutes ago, Imyourhuckleberry said:

Wild goalie save percentages after November 7th:

Gustavsson = .906

Fleury = .894

Also in this statistic is the Bogosian affect. It wasn't just getting rid of Addison, it was who he was replaced with.

[Imyourhuckleberry]

2 hours ago, mnfaninnc said:

The most important PKer is the goalie. Their sv% was not good on the kill. In fact, our PK unit was simply bad. 5v5 is one thing, but if you're special teams can't hold up, it doesn't mean as much. Our PK unit deserved its F.

Gustavsson's PK save% was .879 on the season, and .917 the prior year.

Fleury's PK save% was .813 on the season, and has not been above .855 any of his seasons with Minnesota.

Fleury also allowed 7 shorthanded goals on 30 shots(.767), while Gustavsson allowed 2 shorthanded goals on 26 shots(.923). I'm confident Fleury faced more dangerous opportunities there, but it doesn't look great.

Gustavsson did let in a few soft goals and was a little worse against high danger chances in 5v5 play, but overall, he was the stronger goalie despite far more shots against from potent offenses.

Fleury did have a better save% even strength, but his struggles against the man advantage(and with the man advantage) tanked his overall percentage.

[Citizen Strife]

The Wild ended up 10th in PP% yet 30th in PK%

Talk about a disparity.

 

Edited April 19 by Citizen Strife

[Dean]

IMO. Goaltending was average or below this year but I don’t think it’s the reason for season. I also think it’s the easiest problem for wild to fix. 
    The goaltending was bad because the team was bad. I think the lack of  quality center depth an a weak d core are more to blame. The forwards didn’t help out . They didn’t slow other teams down or tie up sticks like they should. The d core gave up the middle of the ice consistently.  They didn’t have the strength to clear the front of net or stop the cycle like they have In past.  
    Brian Boyle made that comment about the west playing team d. We didn’t play 5 man d this year. To many guys out of position or losing battles to play 5 man defense.  So I find it hard to blame the goalies when they never really had a coherent team in front of them till around all star break. I also think this team’s willingness to give up during games or not showing up for games adds to the goalie issues. It was nice to hear Hynes elude to this in his presser last night he made it seem like he’s aware of guys lack of effort . It was nice to hear Middletons interview in second period. He thought maybe they should try harder in. 3 rd to put a show on for the fans.  That is the problem! This team is entitled! Maybe put a show on for the fans that pay your salaries and show up for your no shows.  Guys with that attitude should be sent to Utah to skate for pay checks. We need guys who skate to win . That would be a big step in solving the goaltending. 
   Billy and coach can fix the goaltending by upgrading the d core in offseason an implementing a better defensive system. 
   Th pk I think could be fixed but I doubt it will be. IMO the biggest problem is Fred on pk.  They have to find him something to do so he’ll be pk 1 guy all year next year. I think k nat should take his job on special teams . The Dewey’s on pk put pressure on other team due to there speed an ability to score short handed. Fred puts no pressure on anyone. They freely move around. Moose can at least rub a guy out on boards . Not Fred . His lack of length, size , speed or fight makes it to easy for the other teams power play to move around , get there sticks free and get a shot from where they want.  The pk is bad because of the personnel. Ek isn’t bad , moose isn’t bad. Fred is and has dragged this team down 5x5 and special teams . 
   They wrote a story about how Fred has been hurt all year. That’s why we shouldn’t be upset with his lack of everything this year. Yet last night there he is playing. Taking opportunities again.  Is he hurt? What is this clown doing on this team? I’m so over Fred g as a member of the wild. Please trade him 

[mnfaninnc]

17 hours ago, Imyourhuckleberry said:

Gustavsson's PK save% was .879 on the season, and .917 the prior year.

Fleury's PK save% was .813 on the season, and has not been above .855 any of his seasons with Minnesota.

Fleury also allowed 7 shorthanded goals on 30 shots(.767), while Gustavsson allowed 2 shorthanded goals on 26 shots(.923). I'm confident Fleury faced more dangerous opportunities there, but it doesn't look great.

Gustavsson did let in a few soft goals and was a little worse against high danger chances in 5v5 play, but overall, he was the stronger goalie despite far more shots against from potent offenses.

Fleury did have a better save% even strength, but his struggles against the man advantage(and with the man advantage) tanked his overall percentage.

So, these stats match the eye test. Factor in that Goose usually got the harder starts, and we have to conclude that he was the better netminder. 

During the season, I felt we got to see a lot of "big" saves, but we couldn't string together that consistency to count on the "big" saves. Perhaps it was that we were giving up too many opportunities for that when it counted?

Then comes the chicken or the egg argument. Was it the leaky defense? I think that had a lot to do with it, especially before Chisholm was claimed. The defense and forwards played alright, but made huge mistakes in the 3rd period when pressed. What we didn't get a lot of, was goalies bailing the team out. 

I would suggest that this major factor had to do with a lack of confidence. I think the goalies played lacking confidence in the defense and then lacking confidence in themselves. I think the gameplan was constructed with Evason's system in place, but the new coaches lacked confidence in that system. And with our shooters, many of them lacked confidence in beating the opposing goaltender, and they missed nets trying to be too fine. I'd also say if Goligoski-Merrill pair were on the ice, nobody had any confidence they were skating off the ice unscored upon.

This might be what Goose was talking about with himself. He's got to play with confidence. When he's on, he's really tough to beat. He wasn't on for streaky portions of the season. I think Fleury has plenty of confidence in himself. From what I see, when reflexes go or diminish, you know that stuff you should have had got through. Frustration over that comes in. 

[mnfaninnc]

I just looked at the basic stats for both goalies. My how things have changed.? 

Last season, one of the cautions we had on giving Goose the low level starter money was that he only played 41 games, or top backup minutes. This season, he only starts 43 games???

Fleury, on the other hand, only starts 36 games??? That is worth a $2.5m extension? 

Also, the most important thing not covered in the stat lines was the reversal of the "tough" starts. Goose carried the load here this year, while only doing that for about 1/2 a season last year. The revealing part of that is that Fleury's numbers went down when his competition was less. That trend should have scared any GM! This IS the thing you look for when a player is done. We could see it in Goligoski last season, we saw it in Merrill this season, and the evidence is there for Fleury too. 

Also, I mentioned something early in the year about Foligno and his extension. The only thing that worried me was the Foligno family history of when things start to fall apart. Just like the old saying with cars, once they hit 100,000 miles, get rid of them. Foligno history says once they hit 33, watch out, double check all wheels and breaks, they start falling apart. Foligno only played 55 games this year. Last year was 65. This was my only red flag in resigning him, but it is worth monitoring. IMO, our Foligno is the one in the best shape.

[Up North Guy]

5 hours ago, mnfaninnc said:

I just looked at the basic stats for both goalies. My how things have changed.? 

Last season, one of the cautions we had on giving Goose the low level starter money was that he only played 41 games, or top backup minutes. This season, he only starts 43 games???

Fleury, on the other hand, only starts 36 games??? That is worth a $2.5m extension? 

Also, the most important thing not covered in the stat lines was the reversal of the "tough" starts. Goose carried the load here this year, while only doing that for about 1/2 a season last year. The revealing part of that is that Fleury's numbers went down when his competition was less. That trend should have scared any GM! This IS the thing you look for when a player is done. We could see it in Goligoski last season, we saw it in Merrill this season, and the evidence is there for Fleury too. 

Also, I mentioned something early in the year about Foligno and his extension. The only thing that worried me was the Foligno family history of when things start to fall apart. Just like the old saying with cars, once they hit 100,000 miles, get rid of them. Foligno history says once they hit 33, watch out, double check all wheels and breaks, they start falling apart. Foligno only played 55 games this year. Last year was 65. This was my only red flag in resigning him, but it is worth monitoring. IMO, our Foligno is the one in the best shape.

I will probably be wrong as my wife tells me frequently, but I just believe that Gus is going to have a bounce back year next year. He showed us he could do it last year so it is there. Sometimes it takes a while and/or some adversity to fully develop. He has had a lot going on this year being a new father and being placed as the #1 goalie. It just feels to me like a great chance to recover.