Article about UND's goalies

[mksioux]

Just wondering if anyone else has read this article on insidecollegehockey.com. Any comments?

[UND Fan]

That was to the point, wasn't it? Unfortunately, even though I didn't like reading it, he was probably quite accurate with his thoughts.

[jk]

Facts are facts, and it's hard to argue with a recitation of games played and records, etc. It's also no secret that goaltending was a problem between Belfour and Goehring.

My only real issue is with the suggestion that Goehring was anything less than a brilliant clutch goaltender. If anyone can appreciate how great he was, it is Sioux fans after the last few years. As for the year when Denver beat the Sioux in the Final Five, that Sioux team had just plain lost its edge. The whole team faded that year, not just Goehring.

Also, Wally Pipp didn't fall out of favor with the coaches. My recollection is that he got hurt, and a newcomer named Gehrig (amazing really how close the names are) stepped in and refused to give up the spot.

[The Sicatoka]

When you can do the job, the job is yours (ala Belfour and Goehring).

When you aren't doing the job they'll find someone who can.

How is that different from the rest of life?

[WPoS]

personally, I thought it was a rather informative article. Since I don't follow the Sue, it sure brought up some interesting stats.

WPoS

[mksioux]

Yes...the facts are the facts and UND has played musical goalies more than most programs. However, I didn't appreciate the way the writer tried to tie Karl Goehring into his agenda. He should have simply said that Karl was an aberration. To make Karl fit into his agenda, the writer focuses on one game out of 4 great years that Karl was clearly the #1 goalie. Yes, he got injured a couple times and Andy Kollar was good in relief...but once Karl won the starting role his freshman year, he was ALWAYS "the man" until he graduated. Heck, even when Karl was hurt for the regionals and Andy played well, Blais came back to Karl for the Frozen Four.

I don't think anyone can claim with a straight face that Karl's tenure at UND was anything but a great success.

[skateshattrick]

My only real issue is with the suggestion that Goehring was anything less than a brilliant clutch goaltender. If anyone can appreciate how great he was, it is Sioux fans after the last few years.

Very well put. I watched Jon Casey and his brilliant career with UND and Belfour during his great season in 1986-87, but Goehring was every bit as good as both, and in my opinion, the best I have ever seen at UND. His career goals against and shutouts attest to how good he was at UND. I also saw Karl play at many Ice Sharks games the year before he came to UND. If you saw him then, you knew that he was going to be special. I hope that he gets his shot in the pros and they overlook his lack of size. I have a feeling that whoever gives him a chance won't be disappointed.

[jimdahl]

Win % / goaltender with most playing time / # goaltenders / goals for UND / goals against

94-95 .500 Kvalevog 78% 3 151 167 Blais 1st year

95-96 .513 Kvalevog 81% 3 162 149

96-97 .744 Schweitzer 45% 3 190 125 NC

97-98 .782 Goehring 64% 2 188 113

98-99 .825 Goehring 73% 2 199 102

99-00 .761 Goehring 65% 3 192 95 NC

00-01 .728 Goehring 59% 3 183 121

01-02 .459 Kollar 43% 4 134 136

02-03 .663 Brandt 47% 4 172 116

Blais' preference for multiple goaltenders is indeed unusual (ex. Lucia's netminders have received between 72-93% of play time in his 4 years), which is why that's an obvious thing to jump on when the team is down. However, I don't see any numerical relationship between goaltender playing time and team quality. Though in the Kvalevog years high GA was the problem, low GF seemed to be the actual anomoly in 01-02. Don't forget that '03 was actually a pretty good season punctuated by an end-of-season offensive collapse (goaltending did not appreciably deteriorate).

As a relatively outspoken critic of "musical goalies", I do have to point out that one big difference in the 96-97 stats is that the Sioux switched goalies somewhat mid-season, whereas the last two seasons have involved more split playing time throughout. Though my personal inclination would be to try more to develop netminders, Blais' insistence on instant performance has certainly produced good results so far. My concern is more about any potential long-term effects it may have on recruiting.

[skateshattrick]

Blais' preference for multiple goaltenders is indeed unusual

Is it really that unusual to split time between goaltenders? Playing devil's advocate, most teams in the WCHA split time between at least 2 goalies. Denver split time between its 2 goalies Berkhoel and Dubielwicz; UMD did with Reichmuth and Anderson; Minnesota mostly used Weber this year, but in 2001, Hauser had 35 starts, Johnson 6 and Weber 10 (not that much different than this year where Brandt and Siembeda had about the same, and Ranfranz had 10 starts); MSU-Mankato split between Volp and Jensen and Nixon had 3 starts; Wisconsin used both Bruckler and and Kabatoff; Tech used both Ellsworth and Rogers; St. Cloud used both Montgomery and Moreland.

The last 2 years have been a little odd for the Sioux because there have been 3 in the mix rather than 2, but I really believe that is a function of very inconsistent goaltending or poor goaltending. When Dean has a good goaltender, he plays him as he did with Karl and with Schweitzer before he got beat out by an excellent goaltender in Karl. Dean does like to have 2 goalies in case of injury and just to push the No. 1 guy.

[jimdahl]

Looking at playing time of the listed counter-examples confirms for me that UND is quite unusual. Since 1996 the MOST a UND goaltender has been on the ice was 73%, then it drops to the mid-60s in a hurry, and 3 years below 50% (none of the other examples listed ever break 50%)! Apologies to disinterested people for the long stats dump:

Denver split time between its 2 goalies Berkhoel and Dubielwicz

2002-03 Dubie 58%

2001-02 Dubie 58%

2000-01 Dubie 67%

1999-00 Wagner 76%

UMD did with Reichmuth and Anderson

2002-03 Reichmuth 74%

Minnesota mostly used Weber this year, but in 2001, Hauser had 35 starts, Johnson 6 and Weber 10

2001-02 Hauser 74%

MSU-Mankato split between Volp and Jensen and Nixon had 3 starts

2002-03 Jenson 53%

Wisconsin used both Bruckler and and Kabatoff

2002-03 Bruckler 55%

Tech used both Ellsworth and Rogers

2001-02 Ellsworth 65%

St. Cloud used both Montgomery and Moreland

2002-03 Moreland 64%

As far as statistical significance, the sample of Blais' coaching is too small for me to bet too much that Blais' unusual numbers are a result of his coaching habits rather than anomolies (which I did imply). Sample size aside, 3 of the last 7 years in which no netminder exceeded 50% of the ice time, when compared to the other percentages listed above (which were intentionally chosen to show that other coach's DO play multiple goalies), is at least interesting, if not significant.

[skateshattrick]

Looking at playing time of the listed counter-examples confirms for me that UND is quite unusual. Since 1996 the MOST a UND goaltender has been on the ice was 73%, then it drops to the mid-60s in a hurry, and 3 years below 50% (none of the other examples listed ever break 50%)! Apologies to disinterested people for the long stats dump:

Denver split time between its 2 goalies Berkhoel and Dubielwicz

2002-03 Dubie 58%

2001-02 Dubie 58%

2000-01 Dubie 67%

1999-00 Wagner 76%

UMD did with Reichmuth and Anderson

2002-03 Reichmuth 74%

Minnesota mostly used Weber this year, but in 2001, Hauser had 35 starts, Johnson 6 and Weber 10

2001-02 Hauser 74%

MSU-Mankato split between Volp and Jensen and Nixon had 3 starts

2002-03 Jenson 53%

Wisconsin used both Bruckler and and Kabatoff

2002-03 Bruckler 55%

Tech used both Ellsworth and Rogers

2001-02 Ellsworth 65%

St. Cloud used both Montgomery and Moreland

2002-03 Moreland 64%

As far as statistical significance, the sample of Blais' coaching is too small for me to bet too much that Blais' unusual numbers are a result of his coaching habits rather than anomolies (which I did imply). Sample size aside, 3 of the last 7 years in which no netminder exceeded 50% of the ice time, when compared to the other percentages listed above (which were intentionally chosen to show that other coach's DO play multiple goalies), is at least interesting, if not significant.

Statistics can be skewed for whatever purpose that you want. What is the significance of 50%? Why is that more significant than 60% if the goaltending is being shared? I grant you that the last 2 years have been unusual because 3 are in the mix, and that accounts for less than 50%. Before that time, the Sioux have generally split the time (like many schools--see Denver, AAU) between 2 goaltenders with one goaltender getting more starts, particularly against tougher opponents.

Have you also considered that many of the starts by the 2nd and 3rd goalies may be against less than quality opponents? Where does that factor into the equation? I will grant you that the last 2 years have been unusual because Dean was trying to find ANYONE to step up and play (recall where Brandt and Siembeda were ranked nationally in save % for most of the year; recall Kollar giving up dump-ins from center ice or beyond the year before and many weak goals), but the Sioux do not have a "history" of playing musical goalies. The Sioux have had years with great goaltenders that played a lot (Casey, Jensen, Belfour and Goehring, and even Schweitzer after Christmas in 1996-7) and years where the goaltending has been poor (Kvalevog, Dickson, Kollar, Siembeda) and thus, the goaltending has been shared until one emerged.

[ScottM]

I would submit that the better Sioux goalies of seasons yore, have benefitted from a very solid team in the offense, defense and special teams which kept the puck away from them. Even Belfour would have had problems if he was left hanging out to dry as often as Kollar, Siembida and Brandt were the past couple of seasons. Like the old adage goes, "The other team can't score if they don't have the puck."

[jimdahl]

I would submit that the better Sioux goalies of seasons yore, have benefitted from a very solid team in the offense, defense and special teams which kept the puck away from them.  Even Belfour would have had problems if he was left hanging out to dry as often as Kollar, Siembida and Brandt were the past couple of seasons.

For the other stats geeks on the quality of 02-03 Sioux goaltending:

• Brandt's GAA last year actually put him at #7 all-time at UND, tied with Goehring '99.
  
• His GAA was #2 in the WCHA behind only McElhinney (as ScottM said, when your team has the puck...)
  
• Brandt's SV% was #6 in the WCHA, tied with Dubie and well ahead of NCAA ring-owning Weber.
  

"The other team can't score if they don't have the puck."

That was the big point of my stats table: I don't see any relationship between goalie rotation and winning. Low scoring in recent years stands out as a more anomalous stat. Kollar played '01-02 in front of the lowest-scoring UND team in Blais' tenure; Brandt in '02-03 in front of the next lowest since Kvalevog. The offensive slump certainly affected fans' perceptions of goaltending.

[sprig]

I would submit that the better Sioux goalies of seasons yore, have benefitted from a very solid team in the offense, defense and special teams which kept the puck away from them.  Even Belfour would have had problems if he was left hanging out to dry as often as Kollar, Siembida and Brandt were the past couple of seasons.  Like the old adage goes, "The other team can't score if they don't have the puck."   

I agree with you, Scott. Thinking about the NHL-like teams of the early 80's, they gave up almost no chances, and the reputation of goalie's Iwabucci, Jenson, and Casey is inflated, imo, due to it (they were all good goalies). I didn't get to see the Sioux much during Goehring's years, but in the games I did see, it appeared the Sioux played a much more wide open game, and gave up lots more good chances than the early 80' teams (and the 87 team). Karl's numbers behind that team are awesome, and because of that, I have to believe he is the best Sioux goalie ever.

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

ScottM is absolutely right. I think that Brandt is better than his numbers show, if you remember we didn't let up a lot of shots this year (Same case can also be made for Weber). Brandt's GAA shows that he let up less than almost anybody last year, but the SV% indicates not a whole lot of shots. I'm prett confident that Brandt can be our #1 next year, and if either Parise (Jordan) or Zieglemann can beat him out, it bodes pretty well for how good we can be between the pipes next year.

[tboneund]

Karl Goehring was arguably the best goalie to play at UND and those of us who were able to watch him play for a year or more got used to having a brick wall in front of the net. As some have pointed out Brandt

[skateshattrick]

I would submit that the better Sioux goalies of seasons yore, have benefitted from a very solid team in the offense, defense and special teams which kept the puck away from them. Even Belfour would have had problems if he was left hanging out to dry as often as Kollar, Siembida and Brandt were the past couple of seasons. Like the old adage goes, "The other team can't score if they don't have the puck."

I absolutely disagree. The Sioux in 1986-87 were a gambling team and often left Belfour "out to dry" but he would stop some of the shots that he was not supposed to stop (breakaways) and stopped all of the shots that he was supposed to stop. Jon Casey almost singlehandedly beat RPI in the playoffs when they had Oates and Carter despite the fact that the Sioux were outshot badly (Casey had over 50 saves in each of the playoff games). Karl had great teams in front of him, but I can think of about 5 goals total in his career that you can consider soft.

By contrast, Kollar gave up 7 goals in a game against Denver in 2000-01 in a game that the Sioux dominated. TWICE in the same game he followed a puck that hit the boards or glass behind him, only to have it ricochet in front for easy tap in goals. He also gave up at least 2 goals from beyond center ice on dump ins, one against Minnesota in the Hall of Fame game and I believe the other against Mankato. Those are killers because they put the team in a hole and the players don't have confidence that the goalie will make the big save when needed. The only time that I have ever another goal from beyond center ice in a college game was the dump-in against Kvalevog in the 1996 playoff game against Wisconsin at the end of the 2nd OT. I watched Kollar play for the Ice Sharks and the Sioux. He posted comparable numbers to Karl, but anyone who watched him knew that he was not in the same class as Karl. He was a good backup, but not ever in the top 5 in the WCHA.

I agree that Brandt has gotten better, but he is not even in the same class as Karl, Jon Casey, Belfour, Jensen. He is still plagued by inconsistency and the inability to make a great save when needed. I saw him in St. Cloud last year and he was brutal. 7 goals on about 25 shots, and at least 3 or 4 were very weak. I never saw Karl have a game like that in his career, let alone Casey or Belfour. That was not the only game. He was also horrible in the 3rd period of the 5-4 loss in CC in which the Sioux blew the 3-0 lead.

I bleed Sioux green, but I am objective. For those of you who think that Kollar and Brandt are that good, I challenge you to get objective opinions from other WCHA fans on USCHO about them. I suspect that most other fans see what I see--they are at best average goalies.

[sagard]

Just a couple of points.

1. As soon as UND returns to being a Frozen Four type team, nobody except us Gophers fans will be talking about how Blais treats his goalies.

2. The problem with UND goaltending last year was that Brandt did not play enough in the WCHA.

If Brandt does get booted off the team, the UND goalies will be unproven. Statistically, Jordan Parise looks to me like a fantastic late recruit.

[Goon]

Karl Goehring was arguably the best goalie to play at UND and those of us who were able to watch him play for a year or more got used to having a brick wall in front of the net. As some have pointed out Brandt

[PCM]

Karl had great teams in front of him, but I can think of about 5 goals total in his career that you can consider soft."

Karl Goehring might be the best Sioux goalie of all time, but I dare say that if your statement were true, the Sioux would have won more than one national championship during his time at UND.

7 goals on about 25 shots, and at least 3 or 4 were very weak. I never saw Karl have a game like that in his career, let alone Casey or Belfour.

Apparently you weren't at this game in 1999 against Mankato at the old Ralph. Karl gave up 6 goals on 18 shots. And then there was this game against Michigan Tech in 2000 in which Karl gave up 5 goals on 20 shots.

I was and still am a big fan of Goehring's, but he was capable of having bad games and giving up soft goals. But for the most part, he was a solid and consistent goalie. Sioux fans were spoiled by having him in the nets for four great years.

I bleed Sioux green, but I am objective.

What a coincidence. Me too!

For those of you who think that Kollar and Brandt are that good, I challenge you to get objective opinions from other WCHA fans on USCHO about them. I suspect that most other fans see what I see--they are at best average goalies.

I don't see anyone claiming that Kollar and Brandt are "that good." Kollar proved to be an excellent backup goalie. Thank goodness we had him in 2000 when Karl was injured. Kollar also played well in 2000-2001 when Goehring had an off year by his standards.

As for Brandt, I thought he played well toward the end of the season. He was brilliant against Duluth in the WCHA Final Five and looked very good against Denver. Lack of offense proved to be UND's undoing last season, not defense and not goaltending.

[skateshattrick]

Kollar also played well in 2000-2001 when Goehring had an off year by his standards.

As for Brandt, I thought he played well toward the end of the season. He was brilliant against Duluth in the WCHA Final Five and looked very good against Denver. Lack of offense proved to be UND's undoing last season, not defense and not goaltending.

You said it all when you said by Karl's standards. His "off" year in 2000-01 resulted in a 16-6-6 record with a 2.38 GAA, 3 shutouts and a save % of .918. Brandt's freshman year, he was 4-4 with a 3.23 GAA and a save % of .902. Last year, he was 11-4-4 with a 2.40 GAA and a .895 save %. You also said it when you said defense was not the problem, with the Sioux seldom giving up over 25 shots per night. Brandt's best is not as good as Karl's worst, particularly save percentage. Karl also played big in big games.

I don't agree that lack of offense was the problem last year, and neither did the coaching staff. I guess I will side with them and blame it on inconsistent goaltending.

[schmidtdoggydog]

My only real issue is with the suggestion that Goehring was anything less than a brilliant clutch goaltender. If anyone can appreciate how great he was, it is Sioux fans after the last few years. As for the year when Denver beat the Sioux in the Final Five, that Sioux team had just plain lost its edge. The whole team faded that year, not just Goehring.

Agreed. The article was fine, but to say that UND has not had a go to guy in net for some time is ridiculous, especially when considering that Karl was named one of the WCHA's top 50 players of 50 years!

Those of us who had the pleasure of watching him play know the truth.

[The Sicatoka]

2. The problem with UND goaltending last year was that Brandt did not play enough in the WCHA.

Considering Jake has the second best returning* conference GAA (2.40) and had a conference 0.903 save percentage last year, it's tough to argue with sagard's assessment.

* Yes, that's an assumption.

[PCM]

I don't agree that lack of offense was the problem last year, and neither did the coaching staff. I guess I will side with them and blame it on inconsistent goaltending.

The date UND's season-ending slide began was Feb. 8, 2003. That's when the Sioux lost at home for the first time that season to Michigan Tech, a team they beat 8-0 the previous night. From that date on, UND was 4-8-2. During this stretch, they averaged 2.57 goals per game while giving up 2.86 goals per game. UND's power play was at 18.6 percent (14-75).

In the last 14 games of the season, lack of scoring -- especially in the third period -- was the biggest problem for the Sioux. Take away the 10 goals in 2 games against the bottom-feeding Badgers and UND averaged slightly better than two goals per game.

During the playoffs, the Sioux averaged just 2 goals per game and their power play was 2-23 (8.6 percent). Contrast that to the 2000 championship Sioux team that averaged 4.36 goals per game throughout the season with a much tougher schedule. During the playoffs, the 2000 Sioux averaged a stunning 4.5 goals per game and were at 24 percent on the power play.

Giving up 2.86 goals per game doesn't look so bad when you're averaging 4 per game.

[sagard]

In the last 14 games of the season, lack of scoring -- especially in the third period -- was the biggest problem for the Sioux. Take away the 10 goals in 2 games against the bottom-feeding Badgers and UND averaged slightly better than two goals per game.

If I were a Sioux fan, this is the number one thing I'd be concerned about. Goalies and defensive lapses are often forgiven if you are scoring 4+ per game.