• Three goalies, three different contexts — Bobrovsky seventeen NHL games, Stolarz seven NHL games, Akhtyamov an AHL playoff run. No cross-goalie rate in this deck is like-for-like; each is presented on his own against the same pool.
• Bobrovsky’s sample is his Florida body of work. Acquired by Toronto in the 2026 offseason; all 331 tagged shots are his 2025–26 season with the Panthers, shown here to brief his new club. There is no Toronto team total in this deck, and his games are never rolled into one.
• Stolarz’s sample is small — 118 decided shots on 14 goals, against 327 for Bobrovsky and 401 for Akhtyamov; one goal moves his save % by about .008. Two import flags land in his set (03.30.2026_ANA P3: an exact-duplicate save row, and two goals tagged at the same clock). If that second goal is spurious, GA is 13 and Sv% is .889, and ST1/ST3 shift with it. Both are to be resolved before publishing.
• Baseline (“NHL pool”) = the seven other NHL goalies we track — 2,005 shots, includes backups — not a league average. A like-for-like level of play for Bobrovsky and Stolarz.
• For Akhtyamov’s AHL sample that pool is not a peer set, and GEM holds no AHL peer set at all. Every pool comparison on his slides is indicative of shot-type profile only, never of level.

• These three are not a tandem — three different contexts, so the shots-per-game and high-danger figures above cannot be read against each other.
• Stolarz — seven games is too few to read as a workload profile. Akhtyamov — his lighter high-danger share is a share by our tagging, and tagged AHL shot quality has no AHL baseline to sit against.
• Against the NHL pool’s overall .907: Bobrovsky .865 (−.041), Stolarz .881 (−.025), Akhtyamov .913 (+.006) — but Akhtyamov’s is AHL, so only the first two sit against that pool on comparable terms.

Florida sample — his 2025–26 season, shown to brief Toronto staff. On 327 decided shots these rows rest on larger populations than Stolarz’s, so the margins carry more weight.

• Two themes account for most of it: the interior — 25 of 44 goals from the slot — and plays arriving with speed off the rush.
• Ls is far and away his most-scored-on location — 18 of 44 goals.
• He is beaten across the full height of the net — glove high 9, around 8, blocker mid 7, blocker high 6, five-hole 6 — which argues against a single-side read.

Every row above rests on 10–44 decided shots out of 118 in total. A single clip moves most of them by several points; the one-timer row would fall to .950 on one goal.

Small sample — and it cuts both ways. The upper-glove row is 18 shots and the quick-release row 13; a difference of that size is a reason to open the clips, not a conclusion. If the duplicated goal in 03.30.2026_ANA is spurious, GA is 13, overall Sv% is .889, and the routine and should’ve-had rows move with it.

• The two clearest gaps are upper glove and routine shots — opposite ends of the difficulty range.
• Traffic and catch-and-shoot are thin individually and grouped for review.
• His should’ve-had share is the highest of the three — 28.6% against Bobrovsky’s 11.4% and Akhtyamov’s 17.1%.

AHL sample against an NHL pool. GEM holds no AHL peer set, so these rows describe how his shot-type profile sits beside NHL tagging, not how he would grade against AHL or NHL peers. Read the shape, not the margin.

AHL sample against an NHL pool — as on the previous slide, with no AHL peer set to substitute. A negative margin here is a prompt to review video, not evidence that he is below a peer group.

• The damage is interior and high-danger — 26 of 35 goals, and the slot / dot-lane subset is the widest gap.
• Ls is his most-scored-on location — 8 of 35 goals, more than any other.
• Glove high is where most goals ended up, but his upper-glove save rate is level with the pool — a placement pattern, not yet a demonstrated weakness.