Jonathan Bernier
by Quisp on Mar 12, 2010 10:40 PM PST
in Prospects
Email
PrintWatched the Dallas feed tonight, obviously, since that was the only feed available. The Dallas announcers remarked, with admiration, on the Kings' system of bringing the center back down low in the defensive zone, and how much more difficult that made it on on Dallas forwards. They also used the phrase, "when you play the L.A. Kings" more than once, and didn't follow it with "you can take the night off" or something similar. And they were impressed with Jonathan Bernier.
Me, I was nervous. Like, playoff game nervous. Jack Johnson's first game in '07 nervous. Bernier admitted he was nervous, too. Terry Murray couldn't tell.
As for the game itself, I expect someone will say it had a "playoff atmosphere." The Kings looked back on their heels to me. Stats show that they did a lot of things right (few giveaways, more hits, decisive face-off advantage), but I don't think I can remember a single Kings scoring chance after their first period goal. Dallas seemed on the verge of scoring for most of the last forty minutes, and probably deserved a better fate. But instead the Kings managed to turn a one-goal performance into a win.
You'd think this was one of those "goalie steals one for the team" games, but where are the highlight reel saves? Where's the clip of impossible recoveries and the Stars peppering him with shots and getting turned away as the breathless announcers ratchet up their play-by-play freak-out (e.g. "e-NOR-mous SAVE!" "I don't believe what I just saw!" etc.)? There wasn't any of that. All there was, was:
[shot] Shloop. [whistle]. [shot] Shloop. [whistle]. [shot] Shloop. [whistle]. Shloop is the sound of Bernier sucking up pucks. The announcers, I think, were starting to get exasperated as time after time after time the puck would hit Bernier in the chest and stick. What's wrong with these Dallas shooters? Don't they know not to shoot where the goalie ISN'T?
Positioning, and rebound-control.
It's really really boring. And if you're the other team, it causes gnashing of teeth. Pucks hit him in the logo because he's in the right place. And there's no rebound, so, sorry, the play is over, go back to the bench, next!
And, you know, maybe I was too quick to dismiss the "playoff atmosphere" descriptor, because that feeling -- the feeling of a goalie sucking up pucks and everything hitting him in the chest -- that's a familiar playoff game feeling, when the other team's goalie has your number, even as the bastard doesn't really seem to be doing anything. It messes with your mind, because it's not just that the other goalie is good, it's that maybe you suck, or you wouldn't be hitting him on the crest every ^%&$^#@*! time. (The Kings also did a good job of letting him see the shots, which helps.) Bernier's positioning, his fundamentals, his conservation of movement, etc., have all been remarked upon since he was in juniors. Kings fans have heard about it so much it now just goes in one ear and out the other.
But that's what it looks like.
Fifteen months ago, when Jonathan Quick was called up from Manchester, much was made of Quick's superior save percentage (their numbers were, if memory serves, virtually identical, but Quick had an advantage in save%, something like .920 to .905). At the time, someone smarter than me pointed out, yeah that's true, but then Quick faces six more shots per game than Bernier, so his SV% has to be higher. For a second, I was stumped. Why would Manchester allow more shots with Quick than with Bernier? Then I caught up: rebound control. Quick faces six more shots because he's causing the shots by giving up the rebounds. Bernier, on the other hand, the shots seem to hit him and stick.
"[Modano/Richards/etc.] shoots -- save, Bernier." [tweet] Grrrr.
It's not sexy stuff, really, except for the result. And this is why I am so looking forward to 1a and 1b in the Fall. It's also why if I'm Terry Murray, Bernier starts again on Sunday.
12 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Shoot this down if it doesn't make sense
But it seems like Quick is the acrobatic, athletic guy and Bernier is the fundamentals guy. Not that Quick is fundamentally unsound, or that Bernier has feet of clay. But they have different styles and strengths.
The thing is, raw athletic ability declines with age. Like how NFL running backs are washed up by their early 30s. I’ve seen Quick make saves by doing the splits, by reaching behind his back, etc. Dude isn’t going to be able to do that forever.
So I wonder if Quick will be the better goalie until about the age of maybe 28. But Bernier’s reliance on technique, positioning, etc. will make him the better long-term bet, as Quick becomes less flexible with age. Or perhaps Quick will adapt later in his career. Who knows? But that’s why it makes sense to me to keep the coming 1a + 1b arrangement in place for as long as possible, to ride Quick during his best years, but keep Bernier around for when Quick loses his edge.
I think that's just about right, re the qualities of each player
abd the point about quick’s athleticism declining with age? i can see that being a valid concern. however, different people age differently. hasek, for example, was still pretty spry and unorthodox right up into his geriatric stage. and, as you mention, sound fundamentals are required for everyone. some come by it more naturally, just as others are naturally more acrobatic.
i can also see making the argument that quick can learn the fundamentals whereas bernier isn’t going to “learn” the acrobatic thing. that’s a flawed argument, I think; but i mention it because i think it’s easy to make the evidence prove opposing arguments, especially when you’re dealing with prospects.
As far as your last comment, about “keeping jb around until jq loses his edge,” I don’t think that’s a feasible strategy for two reasons. the first is that these things are not that cut and dried, for reasons you already mentioned. you can’t just plan that kind of thing, years down the road. the second thing is, their contracts will expire long before that ever happens, and some decisions will have to have been made by that time. the third is, it’s by no means “written” that both of these guys are going to prove themselves to be #1 goalies. quick is great right now, but look at mason last year and mason this year. bernier has played 7 NHL games. Jamie storr had stellar numbers, even in the NHL, and look what happened to him (I’m still not really sure what happened there, actually).
For the so-called record, I do think both of them will stick, and I think it’s pretty likely one of them will be dealt at some point a couple of years down the road, a la Giguere/Hiller/Bryzgalov. But I choose not to worry about that for a couple of years.
Wait till this year.
Definitely a 1A/1B situation ...
… should be put in place for ‘10-’11.
Quick is not “great right now”, by any stretch of the imagination. He’s been an average to below average goaltender. The league average save percentage is .911, Quick’s is .909. Of the 30 goaltenders who have faced 1000 or more shots this season, Quick is tied for 20th in save percentage and is 19th in GAA. Quick’s very good performance in the shootout raises him a few notches, perhaps to the middle of the pack … but that obviously gets thrown out completely once the team (hopefully) qualifies for the postseason.
Quick’s played almost every game behind a good team, and that’s why his win total is so high this season — but I think that at some point this season, the Kings will pay for running him out there so often. Physically, Quick might be somewhat restored by the Olympic break, but the mental pressure he’s faced this season as the ONLY option in goal might burn him out when the team needs him most.
In no way should Quick be automatically inserted as the number one next season. Bernier’s done everything expected of him at this point; he’s earned a real shot in the NHL to show what he is capable of doing.
I'm sure the decision will be delayed as long as possible
Or until there is an obvious winner. The inflection point will probably be when one or the other’s contract comes up, and a big raise is due.
Rebound Control?
One thing to point out is that while JB may have better rebound control than Quick, that shouldn’t give any impression that Quick is in anyway rebound susceptible or that he gives up a lot of rebounds. He doesn’t.
The other thing not taken into account is how their styles/skills could very well account for more or less shots. A shot stopped by a sprawling Quick may very well bounce off his pad for a rebound, whereas that same shot would be in the net if JB was in goal. I suppose this is where GAA comes in?
As for Sunday, I hope you meant start JB if Quick is NOT available. I think it’s in Quick’s and the team’s best interest to have this be a one time thing. So I expect to see Quick back for Sunday.
I assume Quick will not be available Sunday and Bernier will start.
Since it’s an emergency call-up, Bernier has to go back when Quick returns. The Kings can of course burn one of their remaining three call-ups, but they need to be careful with those, because they may need them later.
Wait till this year.
it's true that Quick's style accounts for the extra rebounds
but that’s circular. Bernier’s style accounts for the smaller number of rebounds. Neither player’s style is virtuous in and of itself. It’s the results.
Wait till this year.
Also/but/however
Quick has not been sharp post-Olympics. I have been yammering about the danger of burning him out ever since Ersberg’s first couple of games which made it apparent that EE was going to get practically no ice-time. If Quick isn’t able to regain his form, I would blame the Kings for riding him too hard (i.e. not bringing up Bernier earlier, or making a deal for a decent back-up), but I would also expect that Bernier is called up ASAP.
I think it’s probable that Bernier heads back to Manchester soon. However, one alternate scenario is that Bernier starts on Sunday, plays great, Quick comes back, Bernier returns to Manch, and then Quick proceeds to not play very well. If that happens, what’s the responsible thing for management to do?
Or how about this: EE gets in a game or two in the last 15 and he sucks. In that scenario, what’s the responsible thing to do?
The Quick/Bernier tandem is good. The Quick/Ersberg tandem is only good if Ersberg never plays.
People will of course counter that Bernier has only played 5 or 7 (or whatever it is) NHL games. But Ersberg has barely played at all this year, and going back a year and a half, he’s lost most of his games. Bernier, meanwhile, has played 50+ games this year in the AHL. He is far more game-ready in every sense than EE.
Wait till this year.
Perish the thought
But what if Manchester doesn’t have a poor playoff run, or they don’t even make the playoffs? Sounds like they’ve been faltering. Assuming that the Kings are still playing when Manchester packs it up for the summer, could/would Bernier come back to LA?
I don’t recall whether the playoff rosters have to be set in stone before the tournament starts. In MLB these days, you can readjust your roster between series. There must be some kind of provision for injury replacements. Maybe Ersberg comes down with some kind of mystery ailment (upper body injury/hangnail) as soon as Bernier is free.
emergency call-ups are allowed, yes
but in general, you get (I think it’s) four call-ups after the trade deadline, and I believe we used one on Parse. Bernier is here as an emergency call-up.
Wait till this year.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
