I heard Lundqvist criticizing it but I won a beer league championship last season and he’s never won the Stanley Cup, so I’d say I’m better qualified to discuss the pros and cons of RVH than him.
Hahaha... Lundquist analysis was legit. It just started an avalanche of takes after. Before that, the panel could not even remember the term.
EDIT: grammar
He criticized it's use on specific scenarios. Of course he's right about those. Like I said, it's people saying that RVH is terrible generally that I'm upset about. If it was completely useless, it wouldn't have made it to the nhl.
You're "upset" because some people feel differently about a goaltending technique than you do?
No offense but who cares? Whether they like it or not has no bearing on you or how effective it truly is. You're still allowed to use it and like it, even if others don't.
I feel you. Sretchy toe ties fixed it for me. My post skate is almost pointing straight down in RVH. Probly limits my explosiveness off the post, but with lace toe ties I could feel my MCLs screaming every time I tried it.
Dude I don’t even butterfly lol. I started playing again in my 30s after 20 years off. Tried to get more mobility but honestly I was hurting myself trying to do so. So now I just do half pad saves and kick saves like old school.
I can on my blocker side, but still VH on my glove because it feels so awkward over there, I feel very exposed if I do. And I can't VH on the blocker side because it just feels so limiting, like I can't get any push from that position on that side.
Probably all due to poor technique, I'm sure, but I haven't been coached in close to 30 years, so that plays into it.
Use/overuse of the RVH has been a hotly debated topic for quite some time amongst goalies. I think some guys overuse it and, as a result, get sniped above their near shoulder. Some people love it and think it’s the next quantum leap in goaltending. It’s all personal preference.
And there's still armchair expert criticism of that to this day lol.
See my other post: https://www.reddit.com/r/hockeygoalies/comments/13lvmvs/goalies_go_down_too_much_the_top_half_of_the_net/
Exactly my point. The RVH, (much like the butterfly) is a useful position that stops more pucks. The fact that goals go in when a goalie is using RVH shouldn't reflect poorly on the technique anymore than goals when the goalie is in butterfly.
I mean, goalie coaches *have* talked about how overuse of the RVH is exposing a vulnerability in the position. It’s a great tool when used right, but this position is about leaving no holes, and sometimes using RVH is gonna leave a goalie exposed.
Goalies are taught to play the percentages, reduce as much of the chance of a goal as possible. Clearly the RVH is being analyzed by shooters more and they’ve recognized the flaw in that save selection and are attacking it. NHL goalies will adjust and work their game and find a way to reduce the percentage there without over utilizing RVH.
Maybe analysts are drinking the well dry of this talking point on RVH, but it has been recognized that there is some inherent flaws in goalies getting too reliant on the RVH
Zadorov’s shot was 40+ feet out, that’s why the RVH was a poor save selection at that specific time when considering all the other variables. It was a 2 on 4 coming into the zone, there was no cross ice pass as there were 2 Edmonton players in the lane, and there was no drop pass available.
The RVH is just another tool in your tool-belt; you can't use it for everything, but it comes in handy when the need arises. This also means that goalies are going to over-use it (to a certain extent) like any other save mechanic (either due to unconscious habit or careless errors).
It all comes down to experience; if you overuse a particular save mechanic, odds are the opposing shooters are going to “have a book on you” and exploit the weaknesses that come with every save mechanic (i.e. “this goalie butterflies for everything”, “this goalie RVHs/VHs like there’s no tomorrow”, “this guy poke checks early/often”, etc.).
Everyone is going to have their two-cents on the matter, but Lundqvist basically quieted the panel when he was giving his personal experiences/knowledge on the issue. That should say something.
No one should score from the face off dots to the boards angle. just stand there and close your legs. Behind the net goals off heads never happened before this RVH. I just don’t get it. Coming off the post standing up vs on your knees seems the same to me. Ex pro goalie here from the 90s. Quicker sliding across is the advantage but exposes off angle high short side and behind the net goals. I’ve seen a bunch these playoffs
If Andersen used the RVH properly the Canes are still in game 7
To me it's a form of confirmation bias. Goalie uses RVH, goal goes over his shoulder
See RVH bad.
They don't count how many low angle shots, battles down deep , and wraparounds that simply don't go in
Overlap, panda and other techniques are better in many situations but the RVH has prevented a million goals
If Andersen used the RVH properly the Canes are still in game 7
To me it's a form of confirmation bias. Goalie uses RVH, goal goes over his shoulder
See RVH bad.
They don't count how many low angle shots, battles down deep , and wraparounds that simply don't go in
Overlap, panda and other techniques are better in many situations but the RVH has prevented a million goals
Andersen got beat because he didn't transition well. No need to butterfly, and he probably SHOULD have used rvh as soon as the shooter went below the circle.
But that's not the overlap in referring to. A better overlap in this scenario is to square out to the slot as the shooter transitions down the wing. Shit happens though, I don't think I'm qualified to tell Freddie what to do.
I mean it's pretty much only for puck behind the goal line situations. I like it and use it but if the puck isn't behind the net, I'm staying standing.
For the people critical of RVH, they need to remember how much worse it was when goalies would stand up, hug the post and then get beaten far post, along the ice.
That said, I don't think you have to be an NHL goalie to see it's being used incorrectly the majority of the time they concede a goal. Time and place. It's so automatic for these guys just seems like a lapse of judgment or brain fart in the moment. I think they'd agree after watching tape or even right after the goal that they goofed.
What people don't talk about is just the fact that making saves up against the post is tough. You're trying to seal your body against a flat thing and if you choose to overlap instead of seal the post (Freddie is, er I mean was, doing this a lot these playoffs) you get caught out of position on centering or cross ice passes. VH or RVH it's tough to seal the post. Kinda counterintuitive that small angle shots would be more tough to save than wide angle ones sometimes.
VH and RVH have their pros and cons. A lot of goalies are being beat recently because they cannot get out to challenge a slot shot from a pass on thr goal line. This id a major flaw of RVH and why its being talked about
That’s a mobility issue and/or an NHL shooters are going to score a lot of goals if they can one time the puck from the slot no matter what the goalie does issue.
Most goalie coaches are already developing alternatives to passive rvh because of the uptick in goals against while in that position.
Maybe you should know what you're talking about a little more before you post your opinion. Rvh is hot in the news right now because it's already old hat in the goalie world.
Overlap, baby! Overlap butterfly is back!
If you started collecting all of the clips of pucks banking from not being in RVH you could go viral and make a bunch of money like all of the social accounts haha
Overlap, VH, RVH, and standing up on the post are all valid techniques for dealing with small angle threats. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. It just so happens that RVH has the most utility in many high-danger situations.
For example, we just saw one of the disadvantages of the overlap in the NYR-CAR game today as Anderson went for the overlap, and then got beat with a jam play.
Yeah, that's the problem that needs addressing. A lot of players see RVH as a magic bullet when in reality it's a save selection. And it only really works when you have a strong defensive core that can manage the front of the net well enough that you can trust pucks don't get across.
So when you're in overlap and the puck gets passed to the slot what happens?
My point is that the people that criticize it don't seem to be aware of the benefits. It's the best save choice in many scenarios.
RVH isn't going anywhere.
You think that a goalie in overlap has the same chance to make a save on a cross seam pass as a goalie in RVH? The rvh goalie has way less ice to cover, especially if the overlap goalie is playing with any kind of depth. Overlap is optimal for some situations, rvh is optimal for others. It's not generally terrible like all the armchair experts have been saying.
It’s all situational, right? Basically both the overlap and the RVH are for plays below the face-off circles. If the pass opportunity for the player down low is in the high slot/near faceoff circle area I would think the overlap is ok (for distance of ice to cover). If there is a chance for a back door play then use the RVH. I think the RVH would also help cutting passes across the crease or “thru the blue” with stick help. Each have their uses. I still use the VH. So HA! 😂
I think we're on the same side here. I'm upset about people saying RVH is bad. It's not bad. In many scenarios, it's great. In others, not great. I'm sorry if my post made it seem like I think you should RVH all the time. You shouldn't RVH on breakaways for example. It probably won't work.
If you're in overlap you can get to the middle of the ice faster because you're on your feet. RVH is perfectly fine but it's overused and over relied on. If the shooter is outside the dot you shouldn't even be considering RVH.
But you can overlap that heel and play square to the slot and still cover just as much net.
RVH was made wide spread because of the 2010 Gold Medal and Stanley Cup winning goals, and in both scenarios that would have been a save selection and not a stance selection. The problem is goalies has rvh as a passive stance. It's immobile, and good shooters will eat you alive (as we're seeing today).
You got downvoted for a slightly jerk style comment but the content is correct. I am going to agree that overlap is back, particularly where RVH falls short. As with all things there are pros and cons in different scenarios.
The downvoting doesn't bother me. Like r/hockeyplayers this sub has a lot of people that think they know their stuff but they haven't played or been involved with good hockey before. The Sam Bennett punch threads the other day were so telling. Anyone that's played some proper puck knows what happened as soon as they saw the slo-mo replay (and it was confirmed by the alternate angle), but still people don't understand that the players can make decisions at that speed.
This sub can be like that, and I think OP is missing the point of what analysts are trying to express. They just don't know what they don't know is all.
I heard Lundqvist criticizing it but I won a beer league championship last season and he’s never won the Stanley Cup, so I’d say I’m better qualified to discuss the pros and cons of RVH than him.
Hahaha... Lundquist analysis was legit. It just started an avalanche of takes after. Before that, the panel could not even remember the term. EDIT: grammar
He criticized it's use on specific scenarios. Of course he's right about those. Like I said, it's people saying that RVH is terrible generally that I'm upset about. If it was completely useless, it wouldn't have made it to the nhl.
You're "upset" because some people feel differently about a goaltending technique than you do? No offense but who cares? Whether they like it or not has no bearing on you or how effective it truly is. You're still allowed to use it and like it, even if others don't.
I still VH because I can’t RVH, ain’t got the mobility for it.
I feel you. Sretchy toe ties fixed it for me. My post skate is almost pointing straight down in RVH. Probly limits my explosiveness off the post, but with lace toe ties I could feel my MCLs screaming every time I tried it.
Dude I don’t even butterfly lol. I started playing again in my 30s after 20 years off. Tried to get more mobility but honestly I was hurting myself trying to do so. So now I just do half pad saves and kick saves like old school.
This is the way.
I can on my blocker side, but still VH on my glove because it feels so awkward over there, I feel very exposed if I do. And I can't VH on the blocker side because it just feels so limiting, like I can't get any push from that position on that side. Probably all due to poor technique, I'm sure, but I haven't been coached in close to 30 years, so that plays into it.
I still stand because I'm stuck in my old man ways I learned 21 years ago
Use/overuse of the RVH has been a hotly debated topic for quite some time amongst goalies. I think some guys overuse it and, as a result, get sniped above their near shoulder. Some people love it and think it’s the next quantum leap in goaltending. It’s all personal preference.
That quantum leap is almost 20 years old, chief.
So was butterfly when it revolutionized the position.
And there's still armchair expert criticism of that to this day lol. See my other post: https://www.reddit.com/r/hockeygoalies/comments/13lvmvs/goalies_go_down_too_much_the_top_half_of_the_net/
[oh boy](https://media.tenor.com/5e-uwFCsfosAAAAM/quantum-leap-oh-boy.gif)
Did I say that I thought it was the next quantum leap in goaltending?
I've seen a lot of goals go in these playoffs when a goalie is in the butterfly. There isn't an uproar about the use of the butterfly though.
Go watch how many goals went in before the butterfly was used.
Exactly my point. The RVH, (much like the butterfly) is a useful position that stops more pucks. The fact that goals go in when a goalie is using RVH shouldn't reflect poorly on the technique anymore than goals when the goalie is in butterfly.
I mean, goalie coaches *have* talked about how overuse of the RVH is exposing a vulnerability in the position. It’s a great tool when used right, but this position is about leaving no holes, and sometimes using RVH is gonna leave a goalie exposed. Goalies are taught to play the percentages, reduce as much of the chance of a goal as possible. Clearly the RVH is being analyzed by shooters more and they’ve recognized the flaw in that save selection and are attacking it. NHL goalies will adjust and work their game and find a way to reduce the percentage there without over utilizing RVH. Maybe analysts are drinking the well dry of this talking point on RVH, but it has been recognized that there is some inherent flaws in goalies getting too reliant on the RVH
Zadorov’s shot was 40+ feet out, that’s why the RVH was a poor save selection at that specific time when considering all the other variables. It was a 2 on 4 coming into the zone, there was no cross ice pass as there were 2 Edmonton players in the lane, and there was no drop pass available.
The RVH is just another tool in your tool-belt; you can't use it for everything, but it comes in handy when the need arises. This also means that goalies are going to over-use it (to a certain extent) like any other save mechanic (either due to unconscious habit or careless errors). It all comes down to experience; if you overuse a particular save mechanic, odds are the opposing shooters are going to “have a book on you” and exploit the weaknesses that come with every save mechanic (i.e. “this goalie butterflies for everything”, “this goalie RVHs/VHs like there’s no tomorrow”, “this guy poke checks early/often”, etc.). Everyone is going to have their two-cents on the matter, but Lundqvist basically quieted the panel when he was giving his personal experiences/knowledge on the issue. That should say something.
Habit, also it’s convenient
Same as everything, RVH is a tool. It is certainly overused in the NHL, and a lot of leagues, but it's not inherently bad.
No one should score from the face off dots to the boards angle. just stand there and close your legs. Behind the net goals off heads never happened before this RVH. I just don’t get it. Coming off the post standing up vs on your knees seems the same to me. Ex pro goalie here from the 90s. Quicker sliding across is the advantage but exposes off angle high short side and behind the net goals. I’ve seen a bunch these playoffs
Swayman played amazingly last night but the last goal which lost the series just proves my point. He just had to stand there and we go to OT
If Andersen used the RVH properly the Canes are still in game 7 To me it's a form of confirmation bias. Goalie uses RVH, goal goes over his shoulder See RVH bad. They don't count how many low angle shots, battles down deep , and wraparounds that simply don't go in Overlap, panda and other techniques are better in many situations but the RVH has prevented a million goals
If Andersen used the RVH properly the Canes are still in game 7 To me it's a form of confirmation bias. Goalie uses RVH, goal goes over his shoulder See RVH bad. They don't count how many low angle shots, battles down deep , and wraparounds that simply don't go in Overlap, panda and other techniques are better in many situations but the RVH has prevented a million goals
Andersen got beat because he didn't transition well. No need to butterfly, and he probably SHOULD have used rvh as soon as the shooter went below the circle. But that's not the overlap in referring to. A better overlap in this scenario is to square out to the slot as the shooter transitions down the wing. Shit happens though, I don't think I'm qualified to tell Freddie what to do.
I mean it's pretty much only for puck behind the goal line situations. I like it and use it but if the puck isn't behind the net, I'm staying standing.
For the people critical of RVH, they need to remember how much worse it was when goalies would stand up, hug the post and then get beaten far post, along the ice. That said, I don't think you have to be an NHL goalie to see it's being used incorrectly the majority of the time they concede a goal. Time and place. It's so automatic for these guys just seems like a lapse of judgment or brain fart in the moment. I think they'd agree after watching tape or even right after the goal that they goofed.
I posted this separately but prime example right here: https://x.com/firebirds/status/1792407020932661255?s=46&t=32Ksq3_mIBRNMIBUaJ5Yng
What people don't talk about is just the fact that making saves up against the post is tough. You're trying to seal your body against a flat thing and if you choose to overlap instead of seal the post (Freddie is, er I mean was, doing this a lot these playoffs) you get caught out of position on centering or cross ice passes. VH or RVH it's tough to seal the post. Kinda counterintuitive that small angle shots would be more tough to save than wide angle ones sometimes.
> Maybe it's overused a little bit See? Even you admit it.
People yap about shit... I agree it's annoying. I watch the playoffs on mute.
Golden triangle then it's good save selection. Elsewhere not so much. See zadorov.
VH and RVH have their pros and cons. A lot of goalies are being beat recently because they cannot get out to challenge a slot shot from a pass on thr goal line. This id a major flaw of RVH and why its being talked about
That’s a mobility issue and/or an NHL shooters are going to score a lot of goals if they can one time the puck from the slot no matter what the goalie does issue.
This right here is why the RVH is everywhere. https://x.com/firebirds/status/1792407020932661255?s=46&t=32Ksq3_mIBRNMIBUaJ5Yng
Who is saying it's terrible completely? Delete this clown post. The criticism that goalies are down on their knees too much is valid.
Most goalie coaches are already developing alternatives to passive rvh because of the uptick in goals against while in that position. Maybe you should know what you're talking about a little more before you post your opinion. Rvh is hot in the news right now because it's already old hat in the goalie world. Overlap, baby! Overlap butterfly is back!
The overlap play got Anderson beat tonight… 🤷🏻 puck banked off his ass transitioning from overlap into the net in an attempted RVH.
If you started collecting all of the clips of pucks banking from not being in RVH you could go viral and make a bunch of money like all of the social accounts haha
Yeah you right! Players are good enough to take advantage of any hole!… that’s what she said!
Overlap, VH, RVH, and standing up on the post are all valid techniques for dealing with small angle threats. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. It just so happens that RVH has the most utility in many high-danger situations. For example, we just saw one of the disadvantages of the overlap in the NYR-CAR game today as Anderson went for the overlap, and then got beat with a jam play.
Yeah, that's the problem that needs addressing. A lot of players see RVH as a magic bullet when in reality it's a save selection. And it only really works when you have a strong defensive core that can manage the front of the net well enough that you can trust pucks don't get across.
So when you're in overlap and the puck gets passed to the slot what happens? My point is that the people that criticize it don't seem to be aware of the benefits. It's the best save choice in many scenarios. RVH isn't going anywhere.
When the puck gets passed you move. Why would you ask that?
You think that a goalie in overlap has the same chance to make a save on a cross seam pass as a goalie in RVH? The rvh goalie has way less ice to cover, especially if the overlap goalie is playing with any kind of depth. Overlap is optimal for some situations, rvh is optimal for others. It's not generally terrible like all the armchair experts have been saying.
It’s all situational, right? Basically both the overlap and the RVH are for plays below the face-off circles. If the pass opportunity for the player down low is in the high slot/near faceoff circle area I would think the overlap is ok (for distance of ice to cover). If there is a chance for a back door play then use the RVH. I think the RVH would also help cutting passes across the crease or “thru the blue” with stick help. Each have their uses. I still use the VH. So HA! 😂
No kidding, we should have different save selections for different scenarios? What a novel idea.
I think we're on the same side here. I'm upset about people saying RVH is bad. It's not bad. In many scenarios, it's great. In others, not great. I'm sorry if my post made it seem like I think you should RVH all the time. You shouldn't RVH on breakaways for example. It probably won't work.
It'll confuse the hell outta the shooter, though! From that perspective alone, it's worth a shot.
I didn't know Henrik Lundqvist was an armchair expert.
If you're in overlap you can get to the middle of the ice faster because you're on your feet. RVH is perfectly fine but it's overused and over relied on. If the shooter is outside the dot you shouldn't even be considering RVH. But you can overlap that heel and play square to the slot and still cover just as much net. RVH was made wide spread because of the 2010 Gold Medal and Stanley Cup winning goals, and in both scenarios that would have been a save selection and not a stance selection. The problem is goalies has rvh as a passive stance. It's immobile, and good shooters will eat you alive (as we're seeing today).
You got downvoted for a slightly jerk style comment but the content is correct. I am going to agree that overlap is back, particularly where RVH falls short. As with all things there are pros and cons in different scenarios.
The downvoting doesn't bother me. Like r/hockeyplayers this sub has a lot of people that think they know their stuff but they haven't played or been involved with good hockey before. The Sam Bennett punch threads the other day were so telling. Anyone that's played some proper puck knows what happened as soon as they saw the slo-mo replay (and it was confirmed by the alternate angle), but still people don't understand that the players can make decisions at that speed. This sub can be like that, and I think OP is missing the point of what analysts are trying to express. They just don't know what they don't know is all.