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.