Ottawa Senators (present and past) TIDBITS & QUICK HITS!

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

You could ask for more than a 916 save percentage in today's NHL

I'm not really one for advanced stats personally, I prefer the old eye test, but I'd say Anderson has had to make saves that are above and beyond the 'normal' tough saves to keep the Sens in games.  I'm very impressed with Hammond, so I'm not really scoffing at the suggestion that he could do the job, but as well as Anderson?  I don't think so.

And .916 is pretty relative.  Would you take someone with a .921 that plays for a team with good defence, or a guy at .916 with one of the worst defences in the league?  I'd probably take the .916 guy.

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

You could ask for more than a 916 save percentage in today's NHL

I'm not really one for advanced stats personally, I prefer the old eye test, but I'd say Anderson has had to make saves that are above and beyond the 'normal' tough saves to keep the Sens in games.  I'm very impressed with Hammond, so I'm not really scoffing at the suggestion that he could do the job, but as well as Anderson?  I don't think so.

And .916 is pretty relative.  Would you take someone with a .921 that plays for a team with good defence, or a guy at .916 with one of the worst defences in the league?  I'd probably take the .916 guy.

Defence doesn't really inflate a save percentage. Jon Quick always has crappy save percentage. In fact Anderson's should be higher since he faces more shots than any other goalie.

if he was truly stealing games he'd be what he was at last year

Sens live and die by their offense

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:In the history of this franchise - perhaps excluding the expansion years, has this team ever needed a veteran left hander more than it does now?  Even a player with moderate success in the NHL for more than 5 years would be a blessing.

How...repeat: how are we still close to a playoff spot??  Forget Karlsson for the Hart, if we make the playoffs how about Anderson for Hart?

Karlsson will probably win the Hart at this rate.

You can add a veteran D on either side at this point. A righty to push Ceci down or a lefty to help him on the 2nd pairing. Either way.

I'd take either, but a lefty would give Ceci a partner to grow with, as opposed to sticking him with Wier and hoping one of them doesn't crap their pants on a shift by shift basis.

Yeah. Anyway, maybe you could say the same for Wiercioch having a partner to grow with.



All I can say is I hope this veteran D comes in and Ceci gets a lot better and proves me wrong. We all know that the next time I'm wrong will be the first time, though. People keep ignoring that he's been paired with Methot and it didn't work so I really don't know what to say anymore.

Stéphan Da Costa just scored a great goal vs Dynamo in the KHL... pic.twitter.com/yxCbY5v7QV

— Robert Söderlind (@HockeyWebCast) January 20, 2016

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

You could ask for more than a 916 save percentage in today's NHL

I'm not really one for advanced stats personally, I prefer the old eye test, but I'd say Anderson has had to make saves that are above and beyond the 'normal' tough saves to keep the Sens in games.  I'm very impressed with Hammond, so I'm not really scoffing at the suggestion that he could do the job, but as well as Anderson?  I don't think so.

And .916 is pretty relative.  Would you take someone with a .921 that plays for a team with good defence, or a guy at .916 with one of the worst defences in the league?  I'd probably take the .916 guy.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

You could ask for more than a 916 save percentage in today's NHL

I'm not really one for advanced stats personally, I prefer the old eye test, but I'd say Anderson has had to make saves that are above and beyond the 'normal' tough saves to keep the Sens in games.  I'm very impressed with Hammond, so I'm not really scoffing at the suggestion that he could do the job, but as well as Anderson?  I don't think so.

And .916 is pretty relative.  Would you take someone with a .921 that plays for a team with good defence, or a guy at .916 with one of the worst defences in the league?  I'd probably take the .916 guy.

Defence doesn't really inflate a save percentage. Jon Quick always has crappy save percentage. In fact Anderson's should be higher since he faces more shots than any other goalie.

if he was truly stealing games he'd be what he was at last year

Sens live and die by their offense

If we're on the outside looking in at deadline time, do you trade Anderson? No, because he gives you a chance to win every night. I am not sure you can say the same about Hammond.

Ev wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

You could ask for more than a 916 save percentage in today's NHL

I'm not really one for advanced stats personally, I prefer the old eye test, but I'd say Anderson has had to make saves that are above and beyond the 'normal' tough saves to keep the Sens in games.  I'm very impressed with Hammond, so I'm not really scoffing at the suggestion that he could do the job, but as well as Anderson?  I don't think so.

And .916 is pretty relative.  Would you take someone with a .921 that plays for a team with good defence, or a guy at .916 with one of the worst defences in the league?  I'd probably take the .916 guy.

Defence doesn't really inflate a save percentage. Jon Quick always has crappy save percentage. In fact Anderson's should be higher since he faces more shots than any other goalie.

if he was truly stealing games he'd be what he was at last year

Sens live and die by their offense

If we're on the outside looking in at deadline time, do you trade Anderson? No, because he gives you a chance to win every night. I am not sure you can say the same about Hammond.

Hammond is 23-5-3 in his career so far. I would certainly say he gives them a chance to win every night.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Ev wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

You could ask for more than a 916 save percentage in today's NHL

I'm not really one for advanced stats personally, I prefer the old eye test, but I'd say Anderson has had to make saves that are above and beyond the 'normal' tough saves to keep the Sens in games.  I'm very impressed with Hammond, so I'm not really scoffing at the suggestion that he could do the job, but as well as Anderson?  I don't think so.

And .916 is pretty relative.  Would you take someone with a .921 that plays for a team with good defence, or a guy at .916 with one of the worst defences in the league?  I'd probably take the .916 guy.

Defence doesn't really inflate a save percentage. Jon Quick always has crappy save percentage. In fact Anderson's should be higher since he faces more shots than any other goalie.

if he was truly stealing games he'd be what he was at last year

Sens live and die by their offense

If we're on the outside looking in at deadline time, do you trade Anderson? No, because he gives you a chance to win every night. I am not sure you can say the same about Hammond.

Hammond is 23-5-3 in his career so far. I would certainly say he gives them a chance to win every night.

3-4-1 this year.

wprager wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:

SpezDispensed wrote:

Ev wrote:Anderson has been overrated this year. For me he hasn't stolen a lot of games. Shots against doesn't mean he's amazing if he stops all but 2 or 3. If we had Hammond in every game we'd have the same record or maybe better IMO.

Perhaps, but Anderson has been amazing 90% of the time.  I agree, a lot of shots don't tell the story, but you've watched, he's made incredible saves nightly to keep the Sens in the game and give them a chance.  You couldn't ask for anything more with the D we have.

You could ask for more than a 916 save percentage in today's NHL

I'm not really one for advanced stats personally, I prefer the old eye test, but I'd say Anderson has had to make saves that are above and beyond the 'normal' tough saves to keep the Sens in games.  I'm very impressed with Hammond, so I'm not really scoffing at the suggestion that he could do the job, but as well as Anderson?  I don't think so.

And .916 is pretty relative.  Would you take someone with a .921 that plays for a team with good defence, or a guy at .916 with one of the worst defences in the league?  I'd probably take the .916 guy.

Completely disagree!  He's made saves that you expect a #1 to make.  You *do* expect a #1 to make some highlight reel saves.  I watch the highlights sometimes and you rarely see Anderson in them, not as much as Rinne, Crawford, Price -- of course and so on.  He's had highlight reel saves, for sure, but no more than pretty much any other goalie in the league.  And given that he's faced the most shots, you would expect the number of highlight real ones to also be up, right?  

He's had to make more saves, in total.  That much cannot be disputed.  While he's facing 33.5 shots per game, Flyers goalies are facing 32.1 (next worst in the league); but the Sens are giving up 2.98 goals per game the Flyers are giving up just 2.57.  They have given up 24 fewer goals than the Sens in only 2 fewer games played.  How did all those extra goals get scored?  Well, Anderson's .916 is not really dragged down much by Hammond's or O'Connor's .912  (and Driedger is 1.000 lifetime, right?) but over in Philly you have the #1 Mason with a very similar .915, but Neuvirth is at .936!  

You can feel sorry for Anderson with the amount of work he faces each night, but he's really not that far ahead of others, who *are* doing better.