darth_henning

Ortio is getting better, and has so far showed a consistency since call-up that has eluded him most of the last two years. At this point its too soon to call him a starter and not go for one. We have to go for a proven NHL goaltender in the off-season. But at the same time we have to give Ortio the chance to show whether he can be a starter. If he keeps this play up for the season and into next year play him as the starter, and we've managed to solve a hole. If his play drops off, then he's still a good backup to whoever we've signed Ortio Since Call-up Save% - GAA 0.946 - 2 0.941 - 2 0.800 - 5 0.920 - 2 0.935 - 2 0.913 - 2 (OT) His GAA is remarkably consistent other than the Ottawa game.

The problem is both sides of the debate are trying to pose the other side's arguments as straw men. No one has said that we should just hand Ortio the starter's job (at least that I can tell). No one has said that they don't see any way Ortio ever plays in the NHL (one comment kinda did that I saw but for the most part). And they the poke holes in one of those two arguments to prove their own points on keepig Ortio or going after someone new. Realistically we have about 5 million to spend in goal next year unless we manage to off-load at least 1 or more of our veteran contracts, and use all that money on goal (assuming we don't go for a 1RW or other upgrade in the lineup). We will not be able to buy a Stanley Cup goaltender for that. A couple of posters here have said we should, and I don't quite know where they think that money comes from. So from that premise there's really only two realistic options. 1) IF Ortio's performance collapses for the rest of the season, we go after a 4-mil #1 goaltender who can put up around league average numbers, and a 1-mil backup who can play 20-30 games. Play as appropriate next year. 2) If Ortio's performance maintans where its been since callup (ie. around 93% most games with 2GA most nights and the occasional bad game) then we sign him to a 660-1mil one year contract, and go for the best 4-mil tender we can afford to fill out the goaltending position. Next year we go with a 1A/1B rotation with an equal split of the games for the first 10 or 20. If Ortio can't maintain performance from this year, we relegate him to backup. If he CAN maintain the performance, then we start putting him onto the heavier workload and see if he might be capable of playing as a starter. I've seen several people claim on here that Ortio will never be more than a backup goaltender. And I raise my eyebrow at that. 2013-14 Flames 0.891 2.51 GAA 2013-14 AHL 0.926 2.33 GAA 2014-15 Flames 0.908 2.52GAA 2014-15 AHL 0.912 2.69GAA Misses most of the next year injured 2015-16 season start (2 games): 0.846 5.00 GAA 2015-16 since callup (5 games started): 0.9078 2.6GAA His record since call-up is almost identical to his NHL record in 14-15 and his AHL numbers the two years before. Not really seeing the regression here other than 2 games to start this season in very questionable circumstances when the entire team was horrendous. A 0.908 ties him with Ramo's season numbers, and is only a hair worse then Rinne this season. A 2.6 GAA puts him ahead of Ramo's season numbers and in the top 30. Should he simply be anointed the starter? God no. Should he be dismissed as someone who shouldn't be in goal for us in the nhl? That would be silly for a 24 year old goaltender who has played a total of 25 NHL games. He's an asset that currently is the level of a decent backup goaltender. He MIGHT be more than that, he MIGHT NOT. The only way to find out is to put him into the fire and see.

The problem is that that's a BIG if. I like Ortio. I think he has starter potential if he keeps playing like this. BUT, he's lost most of the last 2 years between injuries, bouncing between leagues, and bluntly inconsistent play. I think we're starting to see what he's really capable of, but the question is whether this is a short-term performance or sustainable. Right now no "fix" that we can afford (5 mil would be literally breaking the bank next year on our current contracts) will be a Stanley-Cup-Caliber starter. So we're looking at a league-average tender for a short term contract until either a) Gillies is a cup starter or b ) we buy a cup starter in trade or UFA. Ortio at this point looks promising, an the way he's playing a starting position with the flames is his to lose next year. If the flames are smart he gets a 660K - 1M one year "show me" contract beside a 4-mil proven NHL-average tender. If Ortio is ready to take the reigns, that would be fantastic. But if he's not, we still need a capable NHL tender to see us through the next 2-3 years pre-Gillies. Otherwise no matter how good our forwards and defense are we'll be fighting for draft position every year.

Even if he makes a full 1 mil (which isn't impossible), we can still afford 4 for the other tender. If he can keep this up for the rest of the season though, I see if he can play a starters workload next season.

I don't think anyone would advise putting all our eggs in the Ortio basket. We still need a proven NHL goaltender. BUT, if Ortio finishes off the season in the form he's been since call-up, then I think it will be worth trying to see how much of the load he can take. So in full games since call-up: 0.946 2GA 0.941 2GA 0.800 5GA 0.920 2GA 0.935 2GA We were all wondering if Ortio could eve find consistency at a professional level. Seems like he's starting to show a bit of some. Question will be the next few games since its still a pretty small sample. Definitely looking like he needs a contract for next year to see what he can bring.

We do have to be careful with the contracts. No question there. As we learned with Raymond, Bollig, Smid, Engellend and Wideman (and even Stajan); length contracts for stop-gap players can become a problem quickly if things exceed expectations. I doubt Gillies is ready this year. At the absolute earliest 17/18, but probably 18/19. So if we go for an external goalie (around 4-5 mil is what we can afford right now), it has to be a 2 year contract so it can be moved easily if/when Gillies is ready or when we can afford to trade for a #1 starter at a higher price tag. Whoever is our starter next year is only a temporary measure and must be contracted as so. Oh I highly doubt it. I'm just saying if he comes in an puts out like 4 straight shutouts, then we kinda have to look at that. But realistically that's not going to happen. Just pointing out that it would be a hilarious bit of luck in a season where we've had none.

I think Ortio can be had for 1mil or less at this point. I'd be willing to pay that based on his post-call-up performance. Worst case scenario its a salary we can afford to bury if he regresses (though as a note, his first 8 games this year are better than the first 8 games played than either Ramo or Hiller this season...) But we have to look externally for a starter. Unless Backstrom shows he's somehow managed to retain form, which is ridiculously unlikely, but admittedly would be amazing. Hiller shouldn't see an NHL net from anywhere but the stands ever again. Ramo's injury could be career-altering, and will take up a lot of salary if we keep him. (unfortunate) Gillies/MacDonald aren't ready for NHL starter duties. The others I think at best project to backups.

Actually Yes, yes you should. Even Stanley Cup winning teams get shut out during their season. Even in front of their starting goaltender. The team failing to score has little to nothing to do with their tender. Because of our three uninjured options: Ortio isn't playing like a starter, but looks like a decent backup. Hiller looks like a bad AHL goalie, and at this point doesn't even deserve to be playing in the NHL quite bluntly. Backstrom hasn't played in over a year. We have no idea what he's able to bring. You could maybe argue he gets a couple games to find out if he can play like he used to or not. Of the three options, the only one that is a known NHL-caliber quantity currently is Ortio. He's not playing like a starter, and if we HAD a starter then he wouldn't get the starts. But we don't, and with him as the best available option, you go with it.

Nakladal has shown that he's a solid bottom pairing guy. Kevin is looking like a good 5D, with possible 4D upside. Admittedly a very limited sample size thus far though. At this point, they definitely squeeze out Smid and Wideman for next year. Engellend ha (surprisingly) played the best of our bottom 3 this year and brings a size that no others on our D core do. But even he's being challenged for a spot by Kulak and Wotherspoon. Biggest problem with D is going to be unloading money in the off-season. We have the players to replace the bottom 3, the question is whether we can unload enough contracts to do so.

YEah. None of those make sense. Sigalet's schedule is meaningless when earlier in the year it was playing either Hiller or Ramo for stretches to "get them going" so that holds no water. Of the 4 starts Ortio has had since calling up, we've lost all 4. Three of them by a 2-1 score. You can't blame the goalie for that. If they have then that's remarkably shortsighted. No, he's not played like an NHL starter. But given how he's been handled this season I doubt even Price would in that position.

Even the loss to Ottawa wasn't entirely on him. Yes, he might have been able to save the game with a timely save on one of the hat-trick, but the entire team also let him down at that time too.

He's also playing Colborne in the top 6 with Monahan and Ferland on a line. I think we're looking at intentional tank. Or Hartley with early onset dementia.

Well, the more we play Hiller the more it does seem like intent to tank. Ortio hasn't been the reason for any of our losses. No, he didn't save us against Ottawa, but at this point I'm not really upset. Ortio deserves a job next year, And if Hiller gets us that 1RW in the draft we need, then we have one less hole to worry about. So ..... at this point I'm good either way. a

If we could get Hellebuyck that would be gold. I see no reasonably likely scenario where the Jets even consider an offer for him though.

Yeah. Offer sheets are almost never a good idea for anyone. Even if we pay a bit more in trade for it, its better for future trades and relations with the league.

I wish we had used a callup before the deadline on him rather than having to burn one of our 4, but he I think has to stay up the remainder of the season for assessment. That is true. Didn't mean to put it all on Ortio, everyone had a meltdown. But Ortio's play slipped with the rest of the team's as well, and I think he had a chance on two of those goals. Two of the three shouldn't have even gotten to him though. So multiple faults.

I don't think you can blame the goalie when you lose a game 2-1 with one of those 2 a power play goal. That's because everyone else isn't scoring enough. Since his callup Ortio's save % (GA) by game is: 0.920 (2GA) 0.800 (5GA) 0.941 (2GA) 0.946 (2GA) He did come in for half of the Anaheim game on the 15th of Feb and only had a 0.818 (2 goals on 11 shots), but did so in relief of Hiller who has a 0.765 (4 goals on 17 shots) When you have a 0.92+ with 2GA in 3 games and lose all three, the problem isn't the goalie. Yes, his 3rd period meltdown against Ottawa cost us that game. But on the whole, he's putting up good numbers in a small sample. Sending him down at this point is utterly illogical. If he can manage the same for another dozen games of the season, then we have a very interesting goalie option next year with an affordable contract. Yes, he's week top corner, but every goalie has a particular weakness that gets exploited. Unless games like the one against OTT become the norm, I don't worry to much about that. And we do have a goalie coach for a reason.

1) Keep Smid on either LTIR all season, or let him retire. Back and neck injuries are not good, and if he's smart, he'll get out while he's still walking. 2) definitely re-sign him for the next year if he's willing to stay. 1-1.5 mil for 3rd pairing would be perfectly fair (if we can move out other money to make room. 3) even if we have to retain 1-2 mil of salary, I'd move him. We don't have a space for him, and we need whatever cap room we can get.

If we could somehow get a guy like Kinkaid sure, but I don't see that as a realistic option. NJD isn't going to give him up without a good return, and most of our good trade chips are gone now without making more holes on the team. Maybe BT has more great trades in him, but even his magic runs out at some point. Yes, its a possible scenario, but I think the most likely one is a stop gap.

Personally I think that bringing up someone we drafted to play a core role on a cup team is better than bringing in an outsider, unless there's a significant upside difference in favor of bringing in someone else. But that's just personal preference. More importantly, we can only really afford 4-5 mil on a goalie starter this year if we're going to re-sign the players we need and stay under the cap. So we're a tad limited on options there. We can't go after a Stanley-cup caliber tender simply due to cost. So a stop-gap is really all we can manage at this time.

Already been dealt with. Both he and ...i forget if it was nak or spoon... were sent down and immediately recalled as paper transactions. Ortio deserves the majority of the remaining starts. But I still give Backstrom a half dozen. If he plays well, I'd be willing to dangle a 1-1.5 mil 1 year contract to see if he bites. Worst case, easy to waive if he plays badly, Best case, we find an acceptable starter to hold the fort till Gillies gets here.

Not yet. But should be soon. But agreed, I'd rather undersell and be surprised than oversell and be disappointed. I can see Shink challenging for a spot next year. Not sure if he'll crack the lineup yet, but definitely 2nd line potential IN TIME. Four of 7 down. Goalie and RW were going to have to wait till the off-season anyway. Wideman trade got killed by suspension since apparently one was in the works. Drat.

Matthews is a center though is he not? Say we won the lottery, would it be worth trading down a spot to let someone else have Matthews and get a RW (which is our real main need) as well as a pick in another round which we could then flip for another player?

At this point the priority should be: 1) Continue auditioning Ortio - we need to see what he can bring at the NHL level and if he needs a contract next year 2) Give Backstrom a few games - post-surgery he may well be able to put up numbers that are good enough for a starter 3) Use Hiller only if necessary - we know what he doesn't have. Ortio is hopefully good enough to be a backup next year. IF Backstrom can be decent we may have a starter to sign for 2 years who could play the #1 position until Gillies is ready. Both of those are BIG IFs, and need to be figured out ASAP

Realistically, Ortio COULD be a good NHL backup goalie, IF he becomes consistent. Gillies SHOULD be an NHL Starter. MacDonald MAY be an NHL starter. Both of them are 2 years off at the least. Therefore we need a starting goalie in the short term. Were Ramo not injured I'd take the chance since he's put up around league average numbers after we ditched the 3-goalie elbowing-storm. But he's had a major injury which could be a problem in the future. We need about a 4-5 million starter who can put up league average for 2-3 years till Gillies is ready. Keep Ortio as backup and see if he can really fill the role. Who that is I don't know.