Target analysis
BSB faithful happy qualifiers. It’s been a while since you last heard from me, but I thought it was time to pause and give some analysis on the first-round goalkeeping match with this Vitek Vanecek report. The Rangers’ date with the Devils lives up to expectations that had seemingly been steadfast for months, but strangely was only confirmed late last week. Hockey is a strange sport sometimes.
After years of somewhat unreliable scoring, the Devils have looked to a more consistent player in Vitek Vanecek to give them the lowest goal average in the league this season. The 27-year-old Czech was a rusher in his first three seasons in the NHL, holding save percentages between 0.908 and 0.911 in each of those years. It was exactly what the Devils were hoping for to stabilize their young and talented lineup, but will it be enough to get past the Rangers in the first round? Let’s break it down.
position
Let’s start with Vanecek’s general setup. He has a fairly broad stance, with an upper body posture that I informally refer to as the “huge” stance. It’s not all that different from the James Reimer or the Giguere youth in the situation. A unique aspect is that Vanecek’s shoulder points face straight forward and downward, causing the goalkeeper to use their arms for the cross, rather than the chest.
This pose makes it easier to compress your core, which helps keep a compressed fight through traffic or blasting sideways, but creates balancing challenges.
As your shoulders roll back and your chest puffs out, it’s easier to keep your weight moving upward, which will keep you lighter on your feet and more balanced. When your weight is moving forward and downward, you can’t fight gravity as effectively and tend to collapse in side plays, which makes recovery more difficult.
For goalkeepers who use this, the only explanation I have is that they are simply more comfortable with this stance, as it provides no useful advantage in implementing save techniques.
Crease movement/depth
What helps Vanecek overcome these skeletal deficiencies is that he is a talented athlete. He is able to overcome some technical shortcomings in his game with athleticism and movement. He has powerful lateral thrusts and active gauntlets, which help cover the distance in the greatest chances of danger. He’s a warrior at the crease and rarely gets out of play, making some ridiculous saves on the ball.
However, he tends to get too carried away and withdraw himself from the situation more than he should. (Think of the less insane mathematician Jonathan Quick.) There is definitely another tool Vanecek could unlock if he can stick to a more technical and disciplined game, rather than relying too heavily on his athletic ability.
It also tends to play a bit higher in the crease than many of its contemporary counterparts. We’ve seen the pendulum swing back from the ‘goal-line’ days of Henrik Lundqvist, where there is real value in trimming corners off the top a bit.
There is a point of diminishing returns, though, in terms of how much angle you take and how far from the net you take yourself. This is likely a large contributor to Vanecek’s wandering habit.
performance
It is curious that a goalkeeper with a dubious technical foundation can be both consistent and statistical. Looking under the hood a bit shows it hit its numbers in different ways each season*. In his rookie year, Vanecek was very good while playing shortstop, but slightly below average in power.
The next season he was better in power, but worse in penalties. Sticking to that theme, the Capitals ranked 11thy and 12y In the league in those years on the PK, despite very different individual results for Vanicek. He’s had a better season in both categories, but has similar average GAA and Save% stats as he did in Washington. The improvement in the kill penalty makes sense in this context, since the demons had rank four Best PK in the NHL this year.
By looking at his graph, one can infer that in his 27-year-old season, Vanecek has taken this huge step forward. However, looking at his GSAA stats playing for a high performing team, Vanecek was only in the middle of the pack, with a GSAA of 7.65 goals saved above average over the 52 GP.
For comparison purposes, the Rangers performed pretty much at a similar level as New Jersey during this season, with the only significant difference being success in the OT/SO. We all know Igor Shesterkin had a down season by his lofty standards, but he still edged out Vanecek in the GSAA, with an above-average 19.1 goals made, albeit in six more games.
Since Vanecek has only played 3 seasons, it’s hard to draw any definitive conclusions about his abilities versus his stats, but he seems consistent despite his inconsistencies.
equipment
Adding the bag of contrasts, albeit a more self-versatile one, is Vanecek’s gear. He’s wearing one of the prettiest tailored ensembles I’ve seen in quite some time. In an updated homage to Martin Brodeur’s Heaton Helite IV collection from the mid-’90s, Vanecek uses the Bauer Mach line, its flagship solid pad. He also has a very sharp Brodeur-inspired paint job.
However, and I stress that this is just a personal preference, he chose to wear a Bauer NME mask, which to me looks like an awkward fishbowl on the head. It’s wide where it needs to be narrow and creates a really weird face shape for the cage. Not for me, but kudos to a great set, overall.
Dealing with the imp
I’m going to qualify this, because I haven’t found much Vanecek tape handling on the disc. From what I can remember when I watched him live, he appears to be a competent and easygoing goblin handler. He won’t be a third defenseman there, but he shouldn’t turn the puck recklessly either.
Exploitable vulnerabilities
We’ve discussed some exploitable vulnerabilities, so far. Getting Vanecek to run with the sometimes suspect Devil Defense is a good recipe for success. However, the biggest weakness the Rangers can exploit is rebounds, especially on the powerplay.
Vanecek doesn’t manage rebounds well and has a negative GSAA against high-risk scoring opportunities. When you look at the logical connection between bad rebounds and high-risk scoring opportunities, the Rangers’ sometimes lethal force can cause some bouts.
Otherwise, these types of odds in a fixed time zone may result in better odds against weaker streak encounters; With Kid Line being able to create additional possession in the area or scoring opportunities if Vanecek can’t control rebounds and stop plays. Since the Rangers don’t want to get into a lane meeting with the smaller, faster Devils, exploiting rebound control issues and using it to increase possession or other chaos in front of the New Jersey net can certainly pay off.
Alternatively, since the Rangers do not design their offense around rebounding opportunities, their passing abilities have the potential to knock Vanecek out of position regularly, given his tendency toward over-driving. With the goalkeeper being a technical wild card, there are always a number of avenues to take. The downside is that the sport always has the potential to steal a series if you don’t bury your chances.
Conclusion of the Vitek Vanecek style report
Away from the wreckage of the Florida goalkeeping train, Vansek may be the Rangers’ best goaltending game, on paper. Although a very talented goalkeeper, being the technically inferior goalkeeper in a team whose defense is not well organized offers a number of opportunities to find an advantage. Moreover, with the inexperience of the playoffs and a goaltender from around the world among the Rangers’ tubes, this match could be the difference between two very even teams.
However, as the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for.
* All stats via Hockey evolution
Related
Tags: Stanley Cup Playoffs, Vitek Vanicek
Classified: Objective Analysis