| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
 Posted - 05/10/2008 : 14:40:23
|
Toskala: GP 66 W 33 L 25 OT 6 G.A.A 2.74 SV% .904 SA 1824
Raycroft: GP 72 W 37 L 25 OT 9 G.A.A 2.99 SV% .894 SA 1931
Now i'm not actually saying Raycroft is better than Toskala but how can you say he is any worse? Their numbers while being the starting goalies for essentially the same team (if one goalie had a better team it was Toskala) But I do not see how Vesa brought any improvement to this team? Maybe I'm wrong but raycroft got you 37 wins? Maybe your team needs improvement elsewhere? I'm not bashing toskala but i think raycroft could easily have done what toskala did this year maybe even better. I spend a lot of time watching hockey and espcially goalies Goaltending is my passion ( I also work as a Goalie coach in the Sport Education program in quebec) I know Goaltending well and i have never understood the idea of raycroft being a bad goalie? the only weakness in raycroft's game is between the ears but a big part of that is his clubs misplaced lack of confidence in him....
Pasty
|
|
|
pensfan17
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
330 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2008 : 15:13:14
|
| Raycroft went 2-9-5 with a 3.90GAA and a 832SV%. Terrible stats. |
 |
|
|
Gostarsgo12
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
437 Posts |
Posted - 05/10/2008 : 16:01:14
|
I agree with you Pasty. I never understood why Raycroft was considered bad. Obviously I've seen him let some softies in but for guy who won the calder a couple years back it looked like a great career in front of him. But when you can't back it up the next year and then get traded to a pressure cooker like Toronto where the expectations are so high and your not playing as good as they hope you will your confidence goes down and now look at him. They just sit him on the bench where he sits there forever and you know what I didn't hear him complain once this year. So leafs trade this guy to Florida or Tampa where the people don't even know what the sport hockey is and at least give him hope to get his career back on track.
Go Stars!!! |
Edited by - Gostarsgo12 on 05/10/2008 16:11:26 |
|
|
|
Guest6576
( )
|
Posted - 05/10/2008 : 21:32:30
|
Raycroft had a significantly higher G.A.A. (Perspective...Osgood led the league this season with like a 2.09 G.A.A....Raycroft was almost in the 3s!!!) and had a lower save percentage than Toskala...in this day in age in the NHL a save percentage below .900 is considered horrid. How can you can you actually say the numbers are essentially the same?????
You ignored the fact it took Raycroft 6 more games to get those extra 4 wins, not that Toskala would have won those 6 games for sure but still the extra games have to be pointed out. There is also the fact that Raycroft benefitted from a better offense...the Leafs were 8th in goals for with 3.11 per game in 2006-2007...this past season the Leafs were 11th with 2.78 goals per game...not a big drop in rankings but 1/3 of a goal per game is a pretty significant drop.
Plus the Leafs had Peca for 35 games in 2006-2007 and he was an important PK and faceoff guy and McCabe while definitely not superstar was missed by Leafs this past season while hurt.
Toskala put up overall better numbers on a worse Leafs' team than the one Raycroft played for....That is how I can say Raycroft is worse.
Toskala won the Calder yes, but the year after....
GP30 G.A.A. 3.71 SV%.879
I lost all respect for Ferguson Jr. as a GM the moment I heard about the trade for an unproven Raycroft with those garbage numbers...and the pressure cooker thing is an excuse, if he can't handle it, then how good is he then, how will Raycroft ever handle the playoffs in any city if he can't even handle the regular season in Toronto??? Ed Belfour and Curtis Joseph have excelled in the so-called pressure cooker city of Toronto.
But anyways, Raycroft obviously has some talent so maybe he can bounce back...but I personally would not have wasted my time with him in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Guest6576
( )
|
Posted - 05/10/2008 : 21:35:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6576
Raycroft had a significantly higher G.A.A. (Perspective...Osgood led the league this season with like a 2.09 G.A.A....Raycroft was almost in the 3s!!!) and had a lower save percentage than Toskala...in this day in age in the NHL a save percentage below .900 is considered horrid. How can you can you actually say the numbers are essentially the same?????
You ignored the fact it took Raycroft 6 more games to get those extra 4 wins, not that Toskala would have won those 6 games for sure but still the extra games have to be pointed out. There is also the fact that Raycroft benefitted from a better offense...the Leafs were 8th in goals for with 3.11 per game in 2006-2007...this past season the Leafs were 11th with 2.78 goals per game...not a big drop in rankings but 1/3 of a goal per game is a pretty significant drop.
Plus the Leafs had Peca for 35 games in 2006-2007 and he was an important PK and faceoff guy and McCabe while definitely not superstar was missed by Leafs this past season while hurt.
Toskala put up overall better numbers on a worse Leafs' team than the one Raycroft played for....That is how I can say Raycroft is worse.
Toskala won the Calder yes, but the year after....
GP30 G.A.A. 3.71 SV%.879
I lost all respect for Ferguson Jr. as a GM the moment I heard about the trade for an unproven Raycroft with those garbage numbers...and the pressure cooker thing is an excuse, if he can't handle it, then how good is he then, how will Raycroft ever handle the playoffs in any city if he can't even handle the regular season in Toronto??? Ed Belfour and Curtis Joseph have excelled in the so-called pressure cooker city of Toronto.
But anyways, Raycroft obviously has some talent so maybe he can bounce back...but I personally would not have wasted my time with him in the first place.
D'oh! "Toskala won the Calder yes, but the year after...."
Obviously should have read Raycroft won the Calder. |
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 07:05:09
|
ok so for arguments sake lets say toskala could get you the same amount of wins because i believe he can, but then again so what if his adverage is .26 better and sv% .026 worse he got you the W and at the end of the year thats what counts, so what im saying why trade for a goalie that can do no better then what you already have?
Pasty |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 08:26:26
|
| The reason the Leafs traded for Toskala (IMO) is what he had done up to that point in his career. In SJ, he had been numbers than Nabokov and was sharing time. Toskala is a superior goalie statistically and other wise. He has also proven to be a gamer. I would venture to say that the Leafs lose 5-10 games more this season without Toskala in the mix. |
|
|
|
Leafsfan_94
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1070 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 09:43:35
|
i wouldnt say raycroft is better. but he is 10X better than everyone says he is. he was rookie of the year in 03 and that was no fluke. he played great. and for 06-07 he had a good year considering defensively the leafs suck. and he had better stats than toskala had this year. and for this year. he only played like what 18 games? and was held back the whole year and didnt get a chance to show what he really had.
Leafsfan_94
|
|
|
|
Pasty7
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2312 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 12:01:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Leafsfan_94
i wouldnt say raycroft is better. but he is 10X better than everyone says he is. he was rookie of the year in 03 and that was no fluke. he played great. and for 06-07 he had a good year considering defensively the leafs suck. and he had better stats than toskala had this year. and for this year. he only played like what 18 games? and was held back the whole year and didnt get a chance to show what he really had.
Leafsfan_94
this is exactly how i feel i went to two playoff games when mtl played boston the year raycroft won the calder and he was brilliant the only reason mtl didn;t finish that series in 4 was how awsome andrew raycroft was,,, i hope he gets another shot maybe in tampa becasue this kid can play.
Pasty |
|
|
|
Guest4720
( )
|
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 13:28:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pasty7
quote:
Originally posted by Leafsfan_94
i wouldnt say raycroft is better. but he is 10X better than everyone says he is. he was rookie of the year in 03 and that was no fluke. he played great. and for 06-07 he had a good year considering defensively the leafs suck. and he had better stats than toskala had this year. and for this year. he only played like what 18 games? and was held back the whole year and didnt get a chance to show what he really had.
Leafsfan_94
this is exactly how i feel i went to two playoff games when mtl played boston the year raycroft won the calder and he was brilliant the only reason mtl didn;t finish that series in 4 was how awsome andrew raycroft was,,, i hope he gets another shot maybe in tampa becasue this kid can play.
Pasty
ya but as soon as those RAYCROFT chants started in montreal, it got in his head and since then he hasnt been the same player... i agree with him being a good goalie... only when he has the confindence.... look at theodore everyone thought he was done and he carried the avs for most of the year.. |
|
|
|
Guest2369
( )
|
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 09:04:57
|
" i wouldnt say raycroft is better. but he is 10X better than everyone says he is. he was rookie of the year in 03 and that was no fluke."
You're right....it wasn't a fluke. It was his equipment.
In his rookie year, the restrictions on equipment were VER slack. As soon as they mandated smaller equipment for goaltenders, Raycroft put up terrible numbers - and has ever since. The 37 wins he posted two years ago with the Leafs was a ver misleading stat because his save % and GAA were absolutely terrible. Most of those wins came from the effort from the team in front of him - not as a result of good goaltending.
Raycroft is, at best, an average goaltender who benefitted probably more than any other goalie in the league from having big equipment. He seriously lacks athleticism, which is a big hallmark of today's goaltenders and he's obviously soft mentally.
Toskala's numbers from this season are also somewhat skewed from the beginning of the year. If you look at the first two months, he struggled and that was a result of moving from a place (San Jose) where nobody talks about hockey to the biggest hockey centre in the world. Some players - especially goalies - take some time to adjust to a change like that. If you look at his numbers from December onward, though, you'll see the type of goalie he really is. He has far better intangibles than Raycroft and he's a better big game goalie. In my opinion, Toskala was the better goaltender in the tandem he was in with Nabokov in San Jose - and Evgeni is probably going to win the Vezina this year so that really says something. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 14:17:21
|
If you looked at the two goalies numbers in the past three seasons, you would quite surprised. I put together the stats from every goalie who has played 50 or more games in the past three regular season. Here is what I found when comparing the two goalies.
Toskala has played in 20 more games over the past three years. Toskala also has 35 more wins, and has a win % of .582 compared to Raycrofts .388. Considering games where the team got points (a win, OT loss, or shootout lose), Toskala got points in 66% of his games compared to 52% for Raycroft.
Above this, Toskala faced pretty close to the same shots per game (26 for Toskala vs 27 for Raycroft). Toskala also has a higher save percentage by almost 20 points and and better GAA by more than 1/2 a goal per game.
I don't see how statistically they can measure up at all. Toskala is the better goalie and his numbers prove it. Sure, argue all you want about better teams better defense in SJ, but Toskala produced better numbers playing more often and facing nearly 400 more shots over the three year period.
|
|
|
|
Guest6642
( )
|
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 15:10:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pasty7
ok so for arguments sake lets say toskala could get you the same amount of wins because i believe he can, but then again so what if his adverage is .26 better and sv% .026 worse he got you the W and at the end of the year thats what counts, so what im saying why trade for a goalie that can do no better then what you already have?
Pasty
But he is better, you CHOOSE to call those numbers the same, in MY opinion, I think they are significantly different...0.25 goals per game means 1 goal every 4 games...that 1 goal can be huge...it is the difference between a 1 goal loss and 1 point in OT...it is the difference between a regulation win and an OT loss. Why are you tossing that aside like nothing? You don't think the Leafs were desperate for every single point down the stretch....1% is a big difference 1 goal every 100 shots (approximately every 2-3 games...you do not think 1 more goal every 2-3 games can make the difference in winning 4 more games...you do not think think 0.33 goals per game from the offense made a difference in the win totals??? |
|
|
|
Guest6642
( )
|
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 15:14:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Leafsfan_94
i wouldnt say raycroft is better. but he is 10X better than everyone says he is. he was rookie of the year in 03 and that was no fluke. he played great. and for 06-07 he had a good year considering defensively the leafs suck. and he had better stats than toskala had this year. and for this year. he only played like what 18 games? and was held back the whole year and didnt get a chance to show what he really had.
Leafsfan_94
He didn't have better stats than Toskala, the stats were posted up top....the 07-08 Leafs were a worse than the 06-07 Leafs and Toskala STILL put up better stats.
Toskala only played like 18 games as a backkp for the Sharks last season (about the same as Raycroft this season) and Toskala'a stats were way better. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 15:56:52
|
Toskala played 38 games in his last season with the Sharks, going 26-10-0-1 with a .908 save %, 2.35 GAA, and 4 shutouts
|
|
|
|
Guest4985
( )
|
Posted - 11/09/2008 : 13:14:32
|
| Stats are one thing but anyone who, like me, watched Raycroft play on a regular basis knows that he was a much worse goalie technically. He had poor positioning and was absolutely terrible at moving laterally which, combined with his bad rebound control, resulted in many goals that Toskala, and any competent NHL goalie, would have stopped. He is the worst example of the new goaltending style that I call "drop to your knees and pray it hits you". Check out 75% of the goalies out there and that's what they do. What sets them apart from Raycroft is that they can quickly get up and move laterally if necessary. (See Nicklas Backstrom in Minnesota for a great example of how this SHOULD be done). |
|
|
|
Porkchop73
PickupHockey Pro
640 Posts |
Posted - 11/09/2008 : 13:18:22
|
| Everyone for the past I don't how many years get to the see the leafs play every saturday night whether you like them or not. So it is very easy to say Toskala is ten times the goaltender Raycroft hopes to be. Just watch past games with Raycroft and games with Toskala, you do not need stats to see the difference. |
|
|
|
Guest2767
( )
|
Posted - 11/09/2008 : 13:30:42
|
| Put the stats aside, Watch Toskala play a couple games and watch Raycroft play a couple games and then come tell me who plays a better game. Toskala is so much more consistent. You never know what your gettin from Raycroft. He goes from winning the calder trophy to being a backup goaltender that your scared to use. Toskala was great in San Jose and hes still doing amazing in Toronto. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Andrew Raycroft better than Vesa Toskala 
