travel_dude
-
Posts
52,012 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by travel_dude
-
You assume we are the only team wanting to upgrade in nets. WPG, NYI, COL, and PHI had disappointing seasons. All hey have to do is offer a better pick or prospect. None of those teams have to protect the goalies they have. Perhaps they would prefer to lose one of their existing goalies. None of the goalies for those teams had amazing seasons.
-
Not sure why you expect a deal this far from the draft. If two GM has talked, they know what the other side is asking for. There is no rush by the dealing GM; they can hold off as long as the interest hasn't lessened.
-
Starters can't name their prices as much these days, unless they are tops in the league. I think the term given to Bishop is insane, but they don;t exactly handle goalies that well there. Too many cheaper options that used to be backups. I don't think he will get offered more than $4m anyway. Two years would be best, as it could give us enough time to get Gillies up to the right level. But even at 4 years, he is still a younger guy than Elliott and the same age as Bernier. There's no that many comparables this year for UFA's that are coming off big contracts. Pavelec, Bernier, Mason, Miller. Of those guys (except Miller), Mason has been more consistent and isn;t ready for the retirement home (like Miller will be in a short period of time).
-
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?
-
The cost is the cost; if it doesn't work for us, we move on. As some have suggested, we have a set deal in place for a trade with LV for said goalie. Washington is good, but I don't see them as having a better defense than us. They have a Trotz-based system which helps. Bringing in Grubauer is at worst bringing in a very good backup. Signing Mason (or similar) provides that fall-back in case he has some trouble adjusting in the early going. We have to look beyond the immediate. We can't just assume that Gillies, Rittich or Parsons is NHL ready in 2 years, or a starter in 3. We have to have a goalie to take us till we find the next great one. If that happens in 3 years, then we have a good problem.
-
It's not about what I think. It's about what BT feels he should do. No 2nd or 3rd in 2017. No 3rd in 2018? BT said the same about both goalies being the reason they got to the playoffs. Realistically he should not bring back both. BT tried out Setoguchi and Raymond. Both were moved on from. Same with Bollig. If he decides to move on from Elliott, then he has his reasons. If he decides to re-sign him as the starter or backup, then he has to live with that decision, which could mean his job.
-
Back to goalies. My preference would be Grubauer, then Raanta. Signing Mason as a UFA would help mitigate the risk. I do think that Elliott could be in for a turnaround season, but the cost (3rd) and a divided fanbase makes him being re-signed less likely to happen. If we are trading for MAF, then the price needs to be reasonable. Send them McDonald and something else. At full salary, he shouldn't command a big return. We are essentially helping them out of a cap crunch. We can likely use Rittich or Gillies as the backup, though I would like to insulate them for another year.
-
I admit I was not aware of that. Still makes my point that he was not a big contributor in the playoffs.
-
Weakness in the playoffs. Ovi was a non-factor this playoff season.
-
The weaknesses I am talking about were aging players (Marleau and Big Joe), injury before playoff (Big Joe) or disappearing players (Ovi). Last year, SJS was close to a cup, but fell to a superior goalie. This year they weren't even close.
-
Franson fits the puck-mover bill better than Stone does. Maybe not the greatest skater, but otherwise has solid PP and PK numbers. As I said before, Franson + Andersson or Franson + Stone as the 2nd and 3rd pair RD would be fine, as long as they don't pay Stone more than $2m. Re-signing Engelland would be a mistake, IMHO. I liked him on the PK, but that was about the only place where he was able to contribute effectively. He's lost a step or two and is no longer the fighter/threat he used to be. There's probably some better options for the Flames for the #4 spot, but Franson is probably the best fit from a dollar/term/usage perspective.
-
CAR had a one year window with Ward. Same with Niemi. Timing is very important, but you can't just limit yourself to the chance of your goalie having a Vezna year and MVP playoff. You have to have the team improving or stable for a few years, while having good to great goaltending. The Sharks and Caps have come close to winning or getting to the Finals, but have enough weaknesses on their team not related to goalies.
-
PITTS had Murray last year and MAF the other time. LA had Quick. Chicago had Crawford at the top of his game. This year the only ones left standing have had MVP calibre goalie performances for some or most of the playoffs. Just my opinion. I want the best goalie now and for years to come.
-
If you go that route, I hope you don't mind possibly ruining our two top goalie prospects. Neither has been consistent enough in the AHL to be considered as ready for starters in the NHL. Let's say they go that route. Miss the playoffs for a few years, but not bad enough to get a good pick. Picking 14th or picking between 16 and 31. Or picking as low as 6th again. Five years from then you have a good NHL player or another marginal player. On the other hand, you have teams like the Rangers or Candiens that compete for the cup almost every year. They are not as good as the Flames but have much better goaltending. Perhaps that's where the secret to winning the cup lies; having a good team and great goaltending.
-
I expect some improvement from him, but I pencilled him in on the 3rd pair. At two years it wouldn't be a huge risk. If he doesn't rate a 2nd pair spot, then we move on.
-
I think we can do better for a top 4. I doubt he gets the big offers in the summer. If you signed a combo of Stone and Franson for less than $4m, I think we would be improved over last season. You could slot Andersson on the 3rd pair (RD) and use Stone (LD) to help him on the defensive side of things. FRanson provides Brodie with a better possession partner. Gio ($6.75) Hammy ($5.75) Brodie ($4.65) Franson ($2m x 3 years) Stone ($2m x 2 years) Andersson ($755k)* * If Kylington make the team ahead of Andersson, then you move Stone to RD. Stone sign a show me deal and can get a bigger payday in 2 years. Franson signs a longer term for less than his recent deals to play on a playoff team.
-
You know if it was the same team that lost 28 or 29 in a row, I would agree with you. It's not. I think you are projecting your own feelings about a particular team onto the Flames players. Maybe it enters their minds about as much as a team they always beat. Think about it for a minute, then move on.
-
Only two years since 2008-09 have the Flames made the playoffs, so they weren't very good teams those years. Average out about two games per year played in Anaheim (yes they have beat them in Calgary) and we are talking about 12 games playing with a crap team. Gio and Backlund are probably the only players that have played all those years since 2009, though likely not every single game.
-
I don't know that paying Stone top 4 money makes sense. I think he would be a perfect fit for 3rd pairing. Play him with a puck mover, and use him for shutdown and occasional offensive bursts. So that would be a salary around $2m. I hope it doesn't come down to Stone vs Alzner for top 4. I would be looking for a trade or cheaper UFA signing to fill the top 4 slot. Franson would be cheaper than Stone. If we signed Franson, we could alternate him with one of our D prospects like Andersson with Brodie.
-
I'm sure that every game in Anaheim is just another game to the players. The media like the story line. The fans get upset over another loss. It's no different than dominating EDM for their re-build years; losing a game is important to the fans. Every loss in the last 12 years is different. There's no one piece that is consistent in the losses. Is it goaltending; well even Kipper failed to prevent the tying goal when Getzlaf gloved it in while laying in the crease (he laughed about it) Is goalscoring the issue; at times we don't manufacture enough good scoring chances Are our players getting pushed around or the coach can't adapt to playing against the trap Is our defense leaky? Do we take penalties too much? Hockey has changed so much over those years. The teams have changed so much. The way a team plays in front of a goalie has as much or more to do with the game result.
-
With CGY vs ANA, it must have been in the heads of every player that has played for the Flames since 2004.
-
I would do this for Hickey's rights. I think he would help them more then he would us. Would hate to give up Andersson or Kylington at this stage. Maybe I am higher on Kylington due to his skating abilities, but I also think Hickey may be more of a risk to us signing him.
-
You do recall his (and the team's) end-of-season struggles, not just against Ducks? Rinne against the Ducks also had a healthy Johansson and Fisher. Rinne against the Hawks had a healthy Fiala. Goalies are voodoo. That's because the teams in front of them change over time, have injuries, or play in a cup final to a team that has scouted their goalie for the entire playoffs. MAF had a great playoffs, in the games where his team won or scored more than 4 he let in. No point in trying to convince you, so I'll let it drop. You see the goalie's history against certain teams as the reason for the loss. I see close games that changed as a result of iffy calls and breakdowns of a system that allowed them to win. How many blown chances to clear a puck do you give another team. How many odd-man rushes do you allow?
-
I'm not even sure Alzner is an upgrade over Engelland. I may be wrong about him, but I am not a big fan.
-
Perhaps it's more simplistic than that. Maybe MAF isn't that great a goalie over a stretch of time. Perhaps they intended to go with Murray all along, but due to his early injury they gave it to MAF. As soon as he was healthy and MAF had a bad game, they had enough of an excuse to put him back in. Or in the case of Rinne, he goes cold after a week off. I don't think it matters who you put in nets, if your system is working. Game 1 was a beer league special for officiating. Game 2 not a lot better, but a stretch of bad play (3 1/2 minutes) by the TEAM took them from tied on the road in the 3rd period to down by 3. Nashville had more than enough opportunity to score in game 2. They failed. Maybe Saros is a kickstart to the team, but somehow I think you stick with the MVP of the playoffs at this point. EDIT - not trying to be argumentative here, just pointing out that focusing on the goalie style or failure against a certain team doesn't win you a cup. Whatever gaps you have can be protected elsewhere.
