Rob Grover asked me to forward this to HOCKEY-L for him.
 
>Date: Tue, 12 Dec 95 17:37:31 -0500
>From: [log in to unmask] (Rob Grover)
>Organization: University of Maine
>Subject: Goalies
>
>People always seem to talk about goalies.  I have a question though- what
>makes a goalie a good goalie?  The easy answer is save percentage.  However,
>many critics make comments and say that a goalie isn't that good because he
>doesn't face tough shots(i.e. BU's Noble).  Maine's Marsh has a better save
>percentage than Allison, but Allison is an All-American goalie and has started
>in all but a handful of games(at least one Marsh start came because Ali had
>the flu-Maine/Brown).
>Some goalies challenge the shooter while others sit back and wait for a puck.
>Is there an advantage to either?  Does a particular style make one a bad/good
>goalie?  In SI a few years ago(last year?), there was an article about goalies
>who use the butterfly technique.  It appears that many young goalies are
>adopting this technique because successful NHL goalies use it.  Is it better
>to stay on your feet or drop into the butterfly?  Discussion of the Maine-Mass
>Lowell game seems to indicate that Fillion should not have dropped to the ice
>for Roenick's first shot attempt.  Could that have been the difference in the
>game?  Does that make him a bad goalie?  At what point does a goalies
>leadership ability counteract his shot-saving ability?  In other words:  is it
>better to have a not-so-good goalie on the ice if he motivates the team?
>Sorry for so many questions on my first post- but since goalies are such an
>important part of the game, I wondered what qualities make one a good goalie.
>
>Rob
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.