cross16
-
Posts
30,202 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
517
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by cross16
-
Oh ya. You definetly do not gain an extra spot by not protecting a goalie.
-
The way i've understood it is protection is option not a requirement. I also would agree it would make no sense to punish a team for making more players available to an expansion franchise. At the end of the day too, Burke and Treliving are smart guys who have been around the block and have already made 2 moves necessary for satisfying expansion draft requirements. If there were rules that you had to protect a goalie I fully expect they would have complied with them already and they wouldn't leave it to chance.
-
Didn't have to, but likely wanted too. Scenarios broken down here (with reference to your Flyers) http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2014/7/3/5865615/flyers-salary-cap-pronger-ltir
-
Sounds like they were sending guys down in order to maximize the LTIR credit. If you can become cap complaint with the injured player that is better but it's not required.
-
It depends on the situation the team is in. If you are under the cap with the LTIR player then you are better to wait and put him on LTIR once the season starts. But if you are over the cap and that will get you under you can do it before the season. Don't know the flyers well enough to know what theirs was but you have options when it comes to LTIR.
-
in a situation like Franzens where the player is not going to play or report to camp you can put him on LTIR before the season and be cap compliant day 1. You do not need to be cap complaint with Franzen. So Franzen does effectively give them 10 mill in cap space because his LTIR credit is in effect right away before the season opens. They had to do the same thing last year as they were over the cap before training camp
-
That includes Franzen, who probably will never play again, so that's another 4 mill in cap space. 10 mill in cap space with really only Tatar to sign (who won't be that pricey) is not a cap issue in my mind. The problem with Mrzaek is your selling low. So if you are Detroit do you sell low on him or do you bank on him coming back next year and being the goalie of the future he was looking like 2 years ago. I'm thinking Detroit does the later
-
Cap space isn't an issue for them so yes I could see them doing that. I think they'd rather pay the 10 mill and give Mrzaek a chance to bounce back and prove what he was a few seasons ago rather than give up on him now.
-
Are you sure it was Friedman? I know Boomer one morning on the Fan a few weeks ago tried to make this claim but I never heard it linked to Friedman. either way it seems to be incorrect. If you go back and listen to interviews at the time of the trade both Armstrong and Treliving confirm that the 3rd is conditional to Elliott re-signing as well as being flipped.
-
Different gear Helps solve the goalie question in the minors. Highly doubt the Hitmen trade for him if he was going pro. Also means he's likely to start for the Hitmen who I believe are losing their starter this year.
-
Sorry my bad I read the site wrong. He was an All star once, as a young star, and finished 6th in the All star voting for goalies 2 years ago. Was a top 10 finalist for the Vezina 3 seasons ago. I think he gets a bad rap becuase of how poorly he finished in Columbus but he's a solid goalie IMO. Only 29 years old too.
-
Do you think? I would think they could but then all it would mean is that they then would not be able to sign Elliott. The pick is still theirs, it just has a condition attached to it and I know you can trade conditional picks.
-
Honestly I don't know because I don't see why Detroit would trade him. Last season this guy looked like one of the top 10 goalies in the league so I just cannot see why the trade that unless you pay and 2 picks is not paying. I won't even counter because i'd be just guessing. Mason has been a starter the last 4 years in Philly and is a 2 time All-Star. That is far more qualified than Mrazek if you are looking for a proven starter.
-
another chart but more evidence that IMO Steve Mason is likely the best choice out there (outside of trade candidates we aren't aware of). He's likely not a big upgrade over Elliott but I think he'll give you better goaltending and he can start 50 plus games Chart is over the last 3 years so includes Elliott's time in St Louis.
-
Because Elliott played like crap to start the season. Fair to say he had it in his mind but to me it's of very small consequence. Especially when you consider the Flames don't even have a goalie worth protecting. I think what is more likely is he is setting himself up for what spins out of the Expansion draft and if he can manage something there then we give him credit.
-
Not that this is going to be a surprise as most people already assumed this but Shero today mentioned he isn't moving Schneider. Dropped the obligatory "that can change with 1 phone call" but sounds like Schneider is basically a no go. Also Friedman noted on the fan today that he feels MAF is likely going to Vegas unless Calgary can work a deal for him. Didn't sounds like he felt it was going to happen and was more continuing the line of thought that MAF will wind up in Vegas.
-
Circular argument, but did he do that because of the expansion draft or did he do it that way because his doesn't have the required trade pieces to get higher end talent? The deals you mentioned are low risk deals and picking up lower level talent that really isn't claim worthy for Vegas anyway. either way it's not really an argument i want to have because I don't want to come across like i'm upset with or don't like BT when I do. I'm not criticizing him I'm just stating I think the reality here is the Flames just, at this point, don't have a very rich talent level in the organization and that's why they are in good shape. Reality of a team coming out of a rebuild that has drafted only ok last 5-6 years.
-
Not that I want to suggest i'm being negative towards BT but I don't think he deserves credit here. The Flames are in good shape for the expansion draft because they have a talent deficient organization, not because they were well managed in preparing for it. You get in "trouble" with the Expansion draft because you have a lot of good players so I don't think you should criticize an organization for being good at their jobs. Flames aren't there but hopefully they will be in a few years.
-
Don't disagree but then I would argue the price needs to reflect that you are likely losing 2 players not 1. If you want to call up the Rangers and offer them a 1st round pick for Rannta I guarantee they make that trade even knowing they would lose Grabner. Call them up and offer them a 3rd I bet they say no because why lose 2 players and only get a 3rd rounder? It's all value. I don't think the idea that you will be picking up players for "cheap" because of the expansion draft is correct. The main issues with the expansion draft and trades are exposure requirements and protection lists. There are just not enough teams IMO that can make trades safely without jeopardizing the exposure rules or their own roster.
-
I would say that's the easiest way to look at it yes.
-
Well the point of the chart is to demonstrate workload but most important quantify what type of workload a goalie faces, which is why I find it very helpful. I find a common argument/discussion around goalies is save % etc without taking into account the work load and the quality of the shots against. You right if you want to compare the full situation you would need more context but that is true of any data. NOt sure how its deceptive. It only measures shots against/60 and high danger chances against/ 60 not shot location. So yes Mason is "ahead" of Elliott int he sense they faced similar chances against but Mason more shots. Allen, Grubauer and Elliott and faced a similar amount of shots but varied on the amount of high danger chances.
-
Neither team really had a choice. Andersson wanted to start and deserved to be paid and anaheim couldn't afford to give him the deal he got from TO. Elliott asked for a trade once the team told him they were committed to Allen long term, which IMO was the right move for them to do.
-
Not that stats are everything but I find this chart very telling, especially if we want to argue that Elliott is the best fall back. Looking at the chart you'll see that Elliott actually did not have that tough of a job, by comparison, this season and supports the fact that the Flames generally actually played well in front of him (unlike Johnson). Also Grabauer had some of he easiest workload around so again i'm becoming very cautious with the idea he can be a starter. More I look into it, the less i'm convinced. MAF also continues to be underrated by most prole here. also I think Mike Smith should be put into the discussion. yes I know he is old but the fact that he can turn out the numbers he does with the workload he does is impressive. Lots to suggest that he could be an above avg starter here based on how he performs in Pheonix.
-
Was also a much more highly regarded goalie. He had relegated Luongo to backup duty he was playing so well. Remember that was the trade deadline Luongo wanted out because the Nucks were playing Schneider more. The infamous "my contract sucks deadline". Was also a 2 time all-star when he was dealt.
-
Actually due to injuries the Penguins have really struggled defensively in these playoffs. They are a bottom 5 team in shots against and scoring chances against and have been the 9th worst in high danger chances against. Fleury really did carry them through the first 2 rounds. IMO he is the single biggest reason they beat Wsh. WSH outplayed them but MAF was much better than Holtby.
