travel_dude
-
Posts
52,012 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by travel_dude
-
How often does MAF face those teams? Currently, not very often. Pretty select view of goalies, if you ask me. We faced EDM a bunch of times when we were struggling; October and twice in January. The 2-1 SO loss was close, but the 7-3 drubbing started with 3 goals in 5 minutes by CJ. That also began the nightmare that almost derailed our season..again. Anaheim was the last week of the season after Elliott cooled off. Prior to that it was 1-1 in December and a loss early November. The Pacific is not how I base the goaltending needs. Two series against Anaheim in three years is luck of the draw. Winning the division is the sure way of getting out of the division. You get a team that barely made the playoffs.
-
This past year is where I compare the recent performance. I think MAF had 36 games to Elliott's 49. The longevity is whether he is going to be good for another two years. The fit is for systems and comfort with the D. Elliott didn;t seem to mesh early on. Yes. he's a proven starter, but what if the same thing happens as with Elliott. Over 60 games, that might not matter so much, but we also don;t want to be in the same position as last year.
-
For myself, it's more of a question of longevity and fit. We thought we had traded for one of the more consistent goalies over the past few years. He comes here and starts off with a pathetic record. Has a strong 2017, but then drops again. The risk is real that MAF could come here and experience the same thing. Without looking at individual games this year, their stats are somewhat similar.
-
I don't think the current tandem is a viable option. One or the other. I think BT has more faith that Elliott could be one of the guys next year, but I don't think CJ has as much trust. He had his time in November/December and lost the faith in January-March. Elliott will cost you a 3rd in 2018. That is certain. MAF will be in the realm of what we got Elliott for originally. A 2nd and a conditional 3rd. Substitute a roster player or prospect if you like. A 1st for helping them out? No way. They only have so many options. MAF may not even have the Flames on his list.
-
The expansion list are due by the 17th. LV has between the 17th and the end of the 20th to make thier picks. The 20th is the day that the picks are made public, though I think you may hear the names prior to the release date.
-
Here's a quiote from Fransic about the cost of MAF; take it with a grain of salt, since he's also the one that reported the ask from Stevie Y was Tkachuk (#6). However, whatever wheeling and dealing might get done if the Flames are to get Fleury from Pittsburgh or via Vegas, the asking price would include several top prospects and/or a significant young roster player. In what world would that deal ever get made?
-
I know, but Grubauer is not guaranteed to sign here. Why wouldn't he? $2m question.
-
Grubauer is a pending RFA and Arbitration eligible. Would only be able to trade for his rights. Might get costly, though I don't know if he has much leverage. Raanta has one year remaining.
-
Funny, I think I mentioned that in another thread. I would try for Hayes and Raanta, but not using Backlund.
-
Mason will get more money fropm us than Mason. Waiting till after the draft is risky. Maybe a glut of goalies then, but the best ones are going to be available at the draft. I should say, most likely available. I'm not a big fan of signing a goalie in FA, as the price is usually higher then and the pickings slimmer. This year is so up in the air. Best ones available prior to the draft, leftovers available for trade, then UFA's. Any good UFA's are going to be in demand at that point.
-
The Dougie situation was brewing below the surface, and happened fairly quickly at the draft. BOS was worried about an OS. Elliott was a secondary deal that was being worked on, along with MAF and Bishop. BT was intent on leaving Buffalo with a goalie, so Elliott was just another option. There was some speculation about Gully, since he ahd to be interviewed. In the case of player agents, some stuff does get leaked; not always but sometimes. In this case, I agree that the deal will be announced within hours of the first valid rumour.
-
As Cross has said, we are debating a lot of goalies here, but the true targets lie somewhere below the surface. Other than sportscasters talking about what makes sense, we have only been linked to one goalie since last summer; Bishop. MAF makes sense as a true starter, but cost to obtain may be higher due to the playoffs. He may already be part of a deal to LV or another team. He may be the goalie PITTS decides to keep. Grubauer makes sense as a starter option, but the risk is he's not ready to do the job in year 1. The Flames do not want to go with an unproven starter and have no backup plan. Raanta is in the same boat as Grubauer. Saros may never even be available for trade. There is no benefit (unless overpayment) for them to move him. UFA's like Mason present a big risk, as they would need to be signed to more than one year. Mason's last playoff performance was worse than Elliott's. Elliott is a lightening rod for Flames fans. Whether he can have a bounceback season or not is secondary, as many point the finger to him for the terrible start and bad playoff games. CJ seems to get a pass, since he only was responsible for letting in the winning goal in game 4. Many feel that he saved the season for the Flames. I do find it odd that there is very little substance in the goalie rumours. Nothing substancial about MAF, Raanta, Grubauer, etc. No smoke. Maybe the fire is burning below the surface.
-
If switching positions was the answer, many team would have done it. Big Buff could have been designated as a center, since he did play there frequently, but I think it relies on the number of game where you play that position. The penalties would be extreme for not complying with the rules; as in lost draft picks and major fines. Murray has a long career ahead of him, while Andersen is a bit older. Both are good. One had a great playoffs last year, while the other had a good one (they went with Gibson for part). I don't know that Anaheim ever makes that deal unless there was a Expansion Draft in their future.
-
Of course that is possible. If that's the case, MAF would be off the table. PITTS could stretch the talks out, knowing they had no intention of trading MAF, but what does that get them?
-
Too bad they didn't nix the Iggy or JBow deals. All we have from either is a pair of prospects. We traded a 2nd this year for a higer-ranked 1st rounder.
-
It sort of amounts to the same thing. If you can't finalize a deal with one team, but the other can be, would you bother waiting? I fail to see why trading for Bishop at TDL would need any sign off, though. It doesn't hamstring you to a long term deal; you are just paying out the remainder of his deal for a few months. After Sutter and Feaster messed up the team, I can understand the concern with the owners. It's one thing to agree to be a cap team (spend up to it no problem), but taking on long-term committment is another. Feaster offering the big term to Brad Richard. OS for ROR.
-
They said that KK was in the air at the time of the TDL and couldn't be reached.
-
I have heard that the delay in BT re-signing was that he wanted autonomy. He supposedly got it. Having the owners or Burke ok every deal would have been hard to take. Like buying out Wideman. Or trading for Bishop, if that's what you had landed on. Too difficult to make draft table deals if you need daddy to sign off.
-
I'm saying that is when he performed his best. Having no choice, the Flames had to play him. No days off. Carry the load no matter what. With a viable backup, you give him a break after a bad game. After game 2 against the Ducks, we should have had a fall back plan, but we didn't.
-
Elliott played his best when he was effecively replaced as starter and was trying to win the job back. Once CJ was no longer a viable option, his play started to degrade a bit. Having no option other than Elliott in the playoffs was a death blow. Put Elliott back in a position where he has to fight for the job and you would have a better result. Raanta/Grubauer and Elliott would be a reasonable response. Doesn't mean Elliott goes for it, but he does get an opportunity to increase his value. In the current market, it's relatively low.
-
LV's not on the list of places he would accept, so he can't be traded there against his will. He can agree to waive his NMC or he could agree to a trade to LV, but what is in it for him to do either? He can stick to his list of teams and call it a day. The bolded makes no sense unless he waives. If that is true, then sure LV can deal to take MAF over one of their other players. Depends if there are other offers in FA. Teams will either contact him in the negotiations period (so would the Flames if interested), so he should get some idea of the interest and the fit (starter/1a/1b/backup). He's going to accept whatever is the best offer or best fit. Hurt feelings only weigh in so much if you have other offers.
-
Neither of these are facts. 1) You can't trade him to LV. He either waives his NMC or he doesn't go there. Dealing with Vegas to have them take someone else will be costly. Vegas has several options of players to pick from on PITTS. 2) The trade need not include an exposable goalie, as they can sign anyone that fits the bill (or a minor trade).
-
If the Flames were big on MAF, they could offer the rights to CJ or Elliott in exchange. JR would need to sign him, but that gets worked out as part of the deal. Flames need to sweeten the pot, but how much more would we really need to go? PITTS issues are fixed in one fowl swoop. We should play hardball with PITTS. They needn't get a 1st for him. Not if we are one of the few options they have. I think they end up paying more to have Vegas not take Murray.
-
When I say desperate, I mean the only one with a hole at the position, as in no goalie signed yet. I would be okay with Elliott and a goalie like Raanta or Grubauer. At least that way you have options. If you are trading the equivalent to re-sign Elliott for MAF, then fine. You still should be looking at a Raanta. CJ did not give me much peace of mind the end of the season.
-
MAF will be around 34 when his current deal ends. Many goalies have gotten close to $6m extending at that age. If MAF does not want to go to LV, then he won't. Simple as that. I would suggest that some people in the world do not want to live in Vegas. There may be a team or two that wants him, but CGY is the only real one that is desperate. I can't see them trading at all costs, so JR may get stuck or just take the low ball offer we give, assuming we want him.
