AlbertaBoy12
-
Posts
3,402 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by AlbertaBoy12
-
-
1 hour ago, MAC331 said:
I really don't see MAF in the cards. Raanta I could see happening then it appears the decision would be Elliott vs Mason. I would stay with Elliott even at the expense of the 2018 3rd we would give up.
I didnt really ever seen MAF in the cards either,im assuming the acquisition cost wasent cheap, then on top of that we have his salary. BT has made it clear he doesnt want to give up assets for a short term older player, and 2 years with a guy costing 6 million is quite the cost. I get that everyone seems to think we need this legit high end #1, but even if we had that whos to say we would have beat the ducks. Im sure the team would perform just fine with elliott and raanta as our goalies with raanta getting the majority of the starts. Obviously it helps to have a world class goalie we just saw that in the cup finals, but you can win with an average goalie, I would argue that corey crawford is a good example of that. By average goalie I just mean hes no carey price or henrik in his prime for example.
-
3 hours ago, MAC331 said:
I guess I have my answer to a question I put in Realistic Trade thread. Dammit, was hoping we got this guy. THX cross
Im really not surprised, the hawks just have way more to offer or maybe the flames just werent as interested as we thought. BT said he wants to bring in some young guys next year, and clogging up the space with another free agent doesnt fit that bill.
-
2 hours ago, travel_dude said:
I'll ask it again....
Do you think it's worth a 2018 3rd rounder to sign Elliott for approximately the same goaltending as UFA Mason?
It really depends if you think mason is going to be more expensive then elliott in my opinion. I think mason is obviously a slightly better goaltender, but at the same time if hes not willing to accept a short term deal do you really want him here for 4 years? im not sure I do.
-
11 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
I think we have been doing way to much a that since Kipper departed. I don't think Elliott is bad goalie, what I would like to see is a 2 year deal for him and have the challenge begin to replace him. I think if the team had no real issues surrounding him maybe the team rallies around him.
I have said it before, and I agree, I wouldnt be surprised if elliot is back next year. I think it honestly depends what the cost is to bring in someone like grubauer or raanta, but I would be ok with a tandem of elliott and grubauer, just to see what we have with a grubauer for example. I think elliott was a good goalie for the team, hes not going to win us a championship but for right now hes good.
-
Nvm editted for stupid.
-
3 hours ago, zima said:
How funny is this Smid is back on the ice going to play with the Czechs Nice holiday for the D man gets paid for what 3 or 4 yrs and hits the ice what probably a total of 6 months Paid vacation nice work Smid to bad we can go to arbitration on him ask for a forfeit considering he didn't hold up to his end of the deal. I know he got hurt but to sit that long never play a game and get paid do we the flames pay him or is it insurance im not sure hope it is Insurance but if we still have to put an IR amount I guess we pay. Another Pronger type situation
What would be the point of that?
Its probably on the flames to pay him thats how contracts work.
-
9 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
The only way I see MAF here is if the Flames believe in their Goalie pipeline. MAF has 2 years remaining on his contract and I can't see picking him up being an expensive proposition or shouldn't be IMO. If the ask is to much walk away. BT could go with MAF and Johnson while not giving up that 3rd rd pick by bringing back Elliott.
If MAF can be had for a 3rd, which is basically what we are giving for elliott there isent much of a difference there. But I dont know if I agree that he will be a cheap acquisition regardless of the ED.
-
8 hours ago, phoenix66 said:
This one?
7 hours ago, travel_dude said:Here's a quote from The Herald....
TD got the right quote. I just dont think we pay the price for MAF to come here, and then deal with his contract it just doesnt seem like smart management to me especially with what we have in the pipe.
I think we are more likely to see as TD said there elliot coming back or a different veteran maybe even johnson come back with a younger guy we trade for like a grubauer. Its not the sexy trade or starter everyone wants in my opinion, but BT has always been a long term guy and bringing in a MAF or bishop didnt necessarily make long term sense.
It could always end up being a surprise and we could get MAF, but based on BT comments I think any veteran guy on long term/dollars is probably out of the question.
-
1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:
more fire fuel to suggest we're targeting MAF
I really doubt that, I cant remember BTs exact comments but para phrasing something like we dont want an old goaltender and we dont want to pay big term/dollars. It was in regards to bishop but I dont see them that differently.
-
32 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
I am suggesting to start out that way. I don't think we should be accepting of any defenseman being "only" offensive minded. Hopefully they are learning more than that down in Stockton. We know Stone can play with Brodie and we will also have to pay Stone to be here. I have noticed GG likes to have experience teamed with youth and I also like this approach in building our team the "right way".
Giordano, Hamilton
Brodie, Andersson
Bartkowski, Stone
Bartkowski is on a two way and we could use this spot to try out some of our LHSD prospects. Should Andersson not do well you can slide Stone back up with Brodie and rework the 3rd pairing.
Im pretty sure what you are suggesting here is the most likely situation for our D corp going into next season. Unless stone doesnt come back, I dont think the flames want another long term commitment in the top 4 unless they can find a young guy ala hamilton to slide in. That D group actually doesnt look half bad if andersson can make some strides over the summer in terms of fitness, the consistency in his game should come easier. I dont mind the bartowski stone pairing,, but I think that would be a last resort, as I wasent a huge fan of bartowski, he seems to have a lot of the tools but lacks the smarts. Id rather see kulak step in for 3rd pairing duties along side stone and then have bartowski as my #7.
-
15 minutes ago, cross16 said:
So here is the cautionary tale on Grubauer, His save % against playoff teams over the last 2 years is 0.88 and he has won 5 games (1 this year) against playoffs teams. Now to be fair to him he typically doesn't play against playoff teams so we are talking about 16 games over 2 years so a small sample size. I'm not saying he isn't good but there is a cautionary tale against being aggressive trying to acquire backups based on their numbers.
Yea I didnt know that. But im wondering what talbots numbers were against playoff teams before his trade, because im assuming those games against playoff teams were also on back to backs sometimes. Im just assuming based on BTs comments that hes not looking at someone like MAF,, I think hes either going for a younger guy or sticking with our current tandem as a placeholder for our younger prospects.
-
1
-
-
Im really starting to wonder if grubauer is that guy who the flames should be trying to trade for. Obviously he doesnt have the greatest size for a goalie, but hes been very good in a backup role for washington and hes lighting up the world championships right now. Im assuming the sticking point right now is that its hard to give washington a similar deal to what new york got for talbot as we have next to no picks this summer, but at the same time we dont really want to trade our 1st.
I would assume at this point matt murray is #1 for the flames and grubauer is #2 in terms of goals to acquire. Im assuming this because of BT comments on ben bishop, I dont think hes interested in going for fleury and I would be surprised to see him go for an older goal in free agency.
-
48 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
That's kind of what I was alluding to. MAF holds some of the cards because JR painted himself into a corner. He's lived there for many many years. WHy would he want to move just to make it easy for the GM. Even being painted into a corner, he can still come out ahead. Could make a deal with Vegas not to take one of their other prized players. Trade Murray for a ton. Much easier deal to make.
Actually ive heard alot of rumors that the pens might trade murray for a ton, simply because they are high on tristan jarry. Its probably all talk, but keeping tristan jarry with the big club next year + MAF, then trading murray as you said for a ton could be a great move for the team. If they trade MAF then they have tristan jarry + murray next year in the future, and both guys are young, very high end goaltenders. Goaltending is one of those positions where I think its hard to say having two young studs that are raedy for NHL duty is a bad thing, yeah you could trade one of them but then you have to bring in a veteran back up( theres nothing wrong with that). If I was the pens I would be seriously considering trading murray for assets and bringing up tristan jarry to play under MAF next year especially if they win the cup this spring.
-
28 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
I'm not against that but I don't think it will take 4M. People get carried away with this soft goal BS, watch the current teams and there are soft goals going in against the so called best goalies. I think it is more important that your team has the maturity to have faith as a team they can over come those situations.
I dont think it will take 4m either that was more the high end for me. I dont think the soft goal BS is that bad either, elliott was very good down the stretch and I would assume he will be very good next year as well.
-
10 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
I don't think there should be any doubt that Elliott should be in the consideration.
ive said it before but id much rather have elliot back at 2 years say 4 million then sign a guy like ben bishop long term. I think elliot can be better next year and if even average elliot some where between the first half and second half shows up we will be fine in net. The "collapse" in the playoffs so to speak had to have been a one off, elliot has a track record of being very good in the post season. Id be bringing him back next year and not letting him get away, because hes a better stop gap till some of our younger goalies are ready.
-
1 minute ago, MAC331 said:
Which one wins the Vezina ?
Well now that you ask im assuming ortio, since hes top of the dog pile in terms of stats in the SHL playoffs. But ive heard really good things about soderstrom, so he may be a dark horse.
-
4 minutes ago, MAC331 said:
Have you seen any of these names you are throwing around actually play ?
You dont need to see them play if they have a amazing stats in the SHL, I would be willing to bet one of the guys off that list goes on to win the vezina next season.
-
3 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:
Considering his girlfriends struggles & disease, I would not hesitate to say sorry to my country, if I was in the same situation. There are many things in life more important than your profession. The one caveat in this choice is if they need money for stuff like treatments then I can see him accepting. Does the worlds pay much if anything? or is playing for your country still a "you should want to do it for free thing?"
Just quoting you because I agree.
I really cant believe this is a conversation, brodie doesnt have anything to prove at the world champonships. Brodie had a rough year with his girlfriends disease as you said and I really dont believe its right to judge him not wanting to go to the worlds for whatever reason it is.
No matter how much you love something, you need a break and if you are having family troubles that doesnt make anything easier, im sure plenty of people could speak to that on experience. Im pretty sure NHL players dont get paid for the worlds, but their insurance is covered along with accommodations etc.
-
4 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
Yeah...again....too old, and never even stood out in his previous league. He turned out surprisingly well but still not well enough to actually mean anything.
well hes not that old for a goalie. Honestly it shows you how much voodoo goalies can be, considering ortio is tops in the SHL in the playoffs stats wise, but couldnt do anything in the AHL or NHL to save his life. Sometimes players just cant hack it at the next level.
-
8 hours ago, JTech780 said:
If Treliving goes back to Elliott, he better be damn sure that Elliott's going to get the job done, because if he sinks with Elliott two seasons in a row, it might cost him his job.
I personally have zero faith that Elliott can get the job done, and they way the team sagged everytime he let in a weak goal tells me they don't have much faith in him either.
Honestly goalies are such voodoo elliott could rebound and have a season like he did in st louis or we could get bishop and he could have a run like hiller. We really dont know what any goalie will be season to season, unless they are carey price caliber. I dont think you can expect anything unless you get your goalie from the top of the pile ie price, quick, then you have your above average goaltenders that can end up having average seasons due to consistency or average goalies have above average seasons.
Im pretty sure 90% of people thought our goaltending was solved when we got elliott + johnson, and for the most part it was. After elliots slow start to the year he was pretty good, obviously he let a few stinkers in, in the playoffs. But if im BT, I bring elliott back, I dont think anyone is going to offer him big term and he seems to like calgary. I dont see it being unreasonable to get him for 2 years at 3-4 m and he should be better next year.
-
1 minute ago, JTech780 said:
I don't think Bishop gets anywhere near $7m. I think he will end up under $6m. My guess is that he gets 5 years Max.
I just don't see Elliott as a rebound candidate, what we saw from Elliott this year is what he is. I don't see him getting better. I do see Bishop rebounding.
Its possible. The other problem like I said is that goalies are voodoo, and if we are even offering him 6m for 5 its not exaclty like he has a long history of being elite.
12-13 Ottawa 2.45 .922 (13 games)
13-14 TB 2.23 .924
14-15 TB 2.32 .916
15-16 TB 2.06 .926
This year TB 2.55 .911
LA 2.49 .900 (7 games)
So While I can see him possibly rebounding and obviously you dont need a huge sample size to judge a goalies future worth. But for a 31 year old goalie as of november next year I want more if im offering him even 6 million a year for 5 years. Granted he does have great numbers in a couple playoff series, im just not sold.
-
21 minutes ago, JTech780 said:
Prior to this season Bishop had played 60+ games in the past 3 seasons. Elliott hasn't played more than 55 games and that was 7 seasons ago.
If we re-sign Elliott we are giving up a 3rd round pick.
A number 1 goalie is always tradeable. I don't think you you can try and save a spot for a future goalie. You go get the best goalie you can right now and deal with making room for the younger goalies when the earn their spot.
That wasent really my point. Bishop missed the playoffs when tampa made their run, and im not sold on the idea of paying bishop big money. I dont think bishop will be a #1 goalie much longer, and considering how goalies are complete voodoo we could end up with a starter for a few years like kipper as phoneix said or we could end up with an inconistent aging playing with a bad contract. A goalie making 7 million a year is not easy to trade, and I dont think bishop mantains his current numbers.
-
I dont see the obsession with bishop, he has a history of injuries while he does have decent numbers our bets that elliot could rebound are far more worth the cap space then trading assets for negotiating rights or for signing bishop to a long term deal. A long term deal to bishop could get us in trouble especially with what we have in the pipeline.
-
2 hours ago, cross16 said:
Appreciate it. We should start a campaign. Needs to be a first time for everything
Cross for GM? Make the flames great again.
-
2
-
Goaltending
in Flames Talk
Posted
I would disagree corey crawford was 21 in GAA tied with brian elliot among goalies with more then 30 games played both had a 2.55 GAA. Also he was 13th in save percentage at .918, and I would argue that around .915-.920 is the average for goalies, of course you could argue that he had a down year but his career high is .926, really it doesnt matter. I think there is the high end goalies like price, bobrovsky, dubnyk, maybe a couple other guys, then theres alot of middle of the pack guys and then the guys who arent really great.
Either way its irrelevant where you rank them, my point being elliott and crawford had similar stats the big difference being crawford was consistent most of the season where elliott was not. If we can find a consistent goalie that gives us average stats, we will be just fine.