Pheonix Copley

  • Thread starter Thread starter JETS GARAGE
  • Start date Start date
DryKing said:
This is Rob Blake we are talking about. If Quick wants to return, Rob will sign him but for far less than he is making now. End of day it will be Quick's decision.

My guess is that Quick retires when Kopitar's contract expires (and I hope he stays around until then as I'd like to see him in the HoF and he likely needs 33 more wins to get there).
Click to expand...

Quick is a bottom 3 goaltender. His upside is just staying healthy. He's not going to have a renaissance.

Open that spot for Copley or another Steady Eddie type. Cal is going to be given another chance next year.

Hopefully Quick can snag a good backup role on a contender in the East but the Kings need to move on.
 
Pickle_Pucks said:
Quick is a bottom 3 goaltender. His upside is just staying healthy. He's not going to have a renaissance.

Open that spot for Copley or another Steady Eddie type. Cal is going to be given another chance next year.

Hopefully Quick can snag a good backup role on a contender in the East but the Kings need to move on.
Click to expand...

Four things:

1) Cal will get another chance this season once he builds confidence
2) Quick was a top 5 goalie in the league last season in terms of analytics which means we do not need a renaissance, we need him to get back to form (even with a slight decline)
3) Quick is not, nor ever has been, a bottom 3 goaltender in the league
4) There is less than a 1% chance that Quick closes his career out on another team, unless that is his desire to do so. This is one of the things I respect about Blake, and a pillar to the team and Organization he has created and represents
 
Quick was supposed to be backing up and mentoring Cal at this point. All this talk of trading him or him signing somewhere else are silly.

If the defense and the system playing in front of these guys didn't go off the rails this season we wouldn't even be having this conversation and Quick would retire as a back up on a team competing in the playoffs again.

Like Mike Tyson says, “Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth.”
 
Copley’s on a one-way contract so he’d have to clear waivers if sent back down to Ontario yeah? Decisions if so. Keep up 3 goalies or trade Copley by the deadline? He would likely get claimed if keeps this up. Goaltending is crazy this year.
 
DryKing said:
Quick was a top 5 goalie in the league last season in terms of analytics
Click to expand...

I would genuinely like to know what metrics you're using for this assertion? I feel like every stat i looked at for last season had him square in the average to slightly below average category.
 
I believe one of the reasons why DL was let go was because of his non wavering support of the player regardless of his play. Does Blake fall into that same trap. We will see. Making the team should be what do you bring to the team right now and the near future. Not what you have done in the past. Especially 5 years ago.
 
Helvetica said:
I would genuinely like to know what metrics you're using for this assertion? I feel like every stat i looked at for last season had him square in the average to slightly below average category.
Click to expand...

Sure here you go - can you share what you are looking at as well?

21/22 Stats (min of 30 games played):

Goals saved above expected: 17.8 (7th in the league)
Goals saved above expected per 60: 0.398 (5th)
GAA better than expected: 0.40 (5th)
Wins above replacement: 2.97 (7th)

https://moneypuck.com/goalies.htm
 
Copley's stabilizing influence reminds me of when Potvin was brought in. The team started playing much better in front of him and they made that improbable run to seven games against the Divealanche in the second round. If it weren't for Ray Borque batting a puck destined for the back of the net out of the air... they might have advanced to the Western finals.
 
DryKing said:
Sure here you go - can you share what you are looking at as well?

21/22 Stats (min of 30 games played):

Goals saved above expected: 17.8 (7th in the league)
Goals saved above expected per 60: 0.398 (5th)
GAA better than expected: 0.40 (5th)
Wins above replacement: 2.97 (7th)

https://moneypuck.com/goalies.htm
Click to expand...

Quick was decent to good last season. It was probably the first time in 4 years that he wasn't outplayed by the backup. But you have to be wearing Purple and Gold glasses to think he was top 5 in the NHL. Top 5 were Shesterkin, Markstom, Saros, Vassy, and Andersen or Sorokin. That's what the Vezina voters thought too.

For WAR on "Moneypuck" he was 7th. 3 below Bob but 5 above Markstrom. When I see his peers, all I can conclude is that stat as calculated by that site has zero correlation to play on the ice.

On HockeyReference, Quick is 30th for GSAA, 33rd for GA%-, 25th in GPS. He put together a solid season but he wasn't a league leader.
 
hokiecat said:
Quick was decent to good last season. It was probably the first time in 4 years that he wasn't outplayed by the backup. But you have to be wearing Purple and Gold glasses to think he was top 5 in the NHL. Top 5 were Shesterkin, Markstom, Saros, Vassy, and Andersen or Sorokin. That's what the Vezina voters thought too.

For WAR on "Moneypuck" he was 7th. 3 below Bob but 5 above Markstrom. When I see his peers, all I can conclude is that stat as calculated by that site has zero correlation to play on the ice.

On HockeyReference, Quick is 30th for GSAA, 33rd for GA%-, 25th in GPS. He put together a solid season but he wasn't a league leader.
Click to expand...

Correction, I didn't say he was top 5 in the league, I said he was top 5 based on analytics which I justified. What you provided are typical stats which are factual but do not counter the fact that he was amongst the top in the league based on analytics.
 
DryKing said:
Sure here you go - can you share what you are looking at as well?

21/22 Stats (min of 30 games played):

Goals saved above expected: 17.8 (7th in the league)
Goals saved above expected per 60: 0.398 (5th)
GAA better than expected: 0.40 (5th)
Wins above replacement: 2.97 (7th)

https://moneypuck.com/goalies.htm
Click to expand...

Fair. I was definitely factoring in some of the other stats as well. He did play better than average if we start adding in the stats you linked for sure. Pretty good actually by some of those metrics. I personally wouldnt call him a top 5 goalie last season, but i would concede he played better than i originally thought. Thanks for linking that.
 
Helvetica said:
Fair. I was definitely factoring in some of the other stats as well. He did play better than average if we start adding in the stats you linked for sure. Pretty good actually by some of those metrics. I personally wouldnt call him a top 5 goalie last season, but i would concede he played better than i originally thought. Thanks for linking that.
Click to expand...

100% agree, factoring in everything I wouldn't consider him a top tier goalie last season (probably more upper mid tier). I was pretty surprised by last year's analytics as well.
 
DryKing said:
Correction, I didn't say he was top 5 in the league, I said he was top 5 based on analytics which I justified. What you provided are typical stats which are factual but do not counter the fact that he was amongst the top in the league based on analytics.
Click to expand...

That is one site's analytics. What I was showing you is that other sites looked at his Goals Saved Above Average, Goals Against - Percentage, and Goalie Point Shares and had him solidly middle of the pack.

And when Moneypuck has Quick 5 spots above Markstrom for Wins Above Replacement-- a guy who could have easily won the Vezina if it wasn't for Shesterkin-- then I don't consider their analytics to be credible. Evolving Hockey also had Quick middle of the pack last year. Probably because he was.
 
The saddest thing about Copley is he saved our season about a week after Lindgren did the same for Washington. The Kings can't even get lucky on a feel-good story.
 
hokiecat said:
That is one site's analytics. What I was showing you is that other sites looked at his Goals Saved Above Average, Goals Against - Percentage, and Goalie Point Shares and had him solidly middle of the pack.

And when Moneypuck has Quick 5 spots above Markstrom for Wins Above Replacement-- a guy who could have easily won the Vezina if it wasn't for Shesterkin-- then I don't consider their analytics to be credible. Evolving Hockey also had Quick middle of the pack last year. Probably because he was.
Click to expand...

Even within Evolving-Hockey I can pull categories in which Quick is far above average and that site does not have the complete spread of analytics which MoneyPuck provides. Veniza voting is a totally irrelevant statement to the argument as we are talking purely analytics. If players won awards based solely on analytics then there would be no need to vote...

If you want to conclude that MoneyPuck's data is irrelevant based on your opinion then so be it but - I'm not attempting to change your opinion either way (which clearly you have already preset).

End of the day, you asked me to show my work to back my statement which I did.
 
XPantericA said:
Copley's stabilizing influence reminds me of when Potvin was brought in. The team started playing much better in front of him and they made that improbable run to seven games against the Divealanche in the second round. If it weren't for Ray Borque batting a puck destined for the back of the net out of the air... they might have advanced to the Western finals.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree with the similarities also. Potvin was kinda floundering in Vancouver when Taylor scooped him up off waivers. Went 13-5-5 to close out the season with a 1.96GAA. Regardless of the stats, the calming and stabilizing influence was the difference maker.

Go Kings!!
 
DryKing said:
Even within Evolving-Hockey I can pull categories in which Quick is far above average and that site does not have the complete spread of analytics which MoneyPuck provides. Veniza voting is a totally irrelevant statement to the argument as we are talking purely analytics. If players won awards based solely on analytics then there would be no need to vote...

If you want to conclude that MoneyPuck's data is irrelevant based on your opinion then so be it but - I'm not attempting to change your opinion either way (which clearly you have already preset).

End of the day, you asked me to show my work to back my statement which I did.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. If you think Quick was far above average last season then we both have a 0% chance of changing each other's mind. IMO, the fact that Quick got 0 Vezina votes should have been a indicator that he was middle of the pack.
Hopefully Quick can bounce back to his 21-22 performance.
 
I'm at the Reign vs Firebirds game, Cal is not coming back to the Kings anytime soon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Now Chirping

Share this page

Back
Top