travel_dude
-
Posts
52,012 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by travel_dude
-
Any team that sees a hole in their net could do it, if they don't have a goalie with a NMC. The list is not long.
-
PITTS will only trade MAF prior to the expansion draft. The same is true for Raanta. You trade assets for two goalies and lose one to LV almost certainly. I don't have a problem with either, but you can only pick one. As stated elsewhere, I'm not the biggest MAF fan, and his playoff run will inflate his value in PITTS's mind. But, if you go that route, you need to look for a backup after the expansion.
-
I'm confused then. If you trade for MAF and sign Raanta, how do you manage to run that tandem? If you go 1a/1b, MAF would demand a trade. If you play Raanta as a backup, you would never sign him. The only possible use of Raanta or Grubaer is if you signed Elliott to be a 1b. Maybe that's all he deserves, but you have to think some team will make him a #1. Buffalo isn't about to trade Lehner. They may want to trade Niilson to avoid losing him for nothing.
-
Has 3 years left. Would be akin to trading for Price. A unicorn trade. The guys you listed as backups like Raanta and Grubauer should only be traded for to become a starter or 1b at the very least. Otherwise, you risk not being able to re-sign them. Saros is exempt, so they have no reason to deal him.
-
My bad. They have to select 3 goalies.
-
The last time was a bunch of has beens available. This time they have no minor system and will get goalies that are likely waiver eligible. Big problem trying to hold 3 goalies. Maybe those rules are relaxed, but I doubt it.
-
What I am saying is that not that many teams are in the market. Many teams have goalies that could get claimed unless they are traded. LV s probably only going to select 2 goalies at most, but a team exposing a good goalie is ripe. I would like to be in on Raanta now, Grubauer when WASH is done, but am not limited to those.
-
I think you are listening too much to Vancouver media. Miller is at best a one year placeholder. That is betting 100% on Gillies being ready in one year to go from AHL goalie or NHL backup to starter. Gillies has one year of pro experience. If BT signed him and he was Hiller quality, he would be fired. We are done with Bishop so let's call NY and tell them how good King Henrik was, and BTW would you like something to help you out of your expansion problems? Kreider and Raanta for 1st rounder, McDonald and Shinkaruk. Plus rights for Erixon.
-
By the look of things, we can start talks with NYR tomorrow.
-
I will agree with one thing. There is zero reason for Bishop to sign prior to July 1st. The other side of that is that his NTC list ends that day. Whether or not CGY was on the list, the bigger question is why LA would deal his right to us.
-
The teams that will get good return for assets are the ones that can't protect all their D; Anaheim, Nashville, etc. I can't see a bunch of teams lining up for him, unless they are trading a guy that they have to otherwise protect.
-
Of course not. But seeing as they have an abundance of D prospects, the cost may not be quite that high. We are all just speculating on the cost in trade of player X, but it depends on what the team sees the player as being.
-
If you went for Hanifin, then there is no issue.
-
He's going to get traded or claimed by Vegas. He may not re-sign here if we traded for him, but he has no option other than reporting. NY is going to want to get a good deal for him, so he may get close to what Talbot brought back. Or not. Depends on the market. To keep him for sure, they have to bribe LV not to take him. If CGY is interested, perhaps they would consider a prospect goalie plus some other pieces. That way NY can concentrate on bribing LV not to take Brendan Smith.
-
Asked this elsewhere: Does Shattenkirk make us that much better for the money? Would we be one of the deeper teams if we signed him?
-
I agree. The surplus of goalies might make getting a fair deal difficult, though. Had he had a better season end, there would be no question. I don't have a problem with him so much, but other teams look at the body of his work and ask - what's wrong with this guy's consistency?
-
Stockton Heat Updates [2016-2017]
travel_dude replied to travel_dude's topic in Calgary Wranglers and Flames Prospects
His save percentage in the ECHL was nothing to write home about either. He's still young for a goalie, but you would like to see something positive. Compare him to Demko, taken 2 spots later in 2014. Demko had a better SA% in the AHL last year. Doesn't mean I rate him higher (most do), but he did better in a better league. Just saying. -
Maybe, but his contract history hasn't been close to that. Ever. As a UFA, he would be lucky to get that, in a sellers market. It's not one and he didn;t do enough to warrant a big increase.
-
Howard I doubt the price would be similar. Cost to get him n trade. $4m+ even with retained salary. Reliable backup to mitigate health risk. Ellott Cost to re-sign 3rd in 2018 Salary likely less than $3m Reliable backup for a 1b situation.
-
The last two years have been an IR concern. An aging goalie with IR concerns is a risk.
-
I hope you are not suggesting Howard as a replacement for Elliott. That seem more likely to backfire than just re-signing Elliott to a 2 year deal.
-
You have a fixation on one team as being the issue. It's not. It's being good enough in games against them. We weren't in any but a couple this season. We got swept in the season series against EDM, but that means nothing either. The margin of victory between any teams can be so small that a single event can mean the difference. We were fortunate enough to get into the playoffs this year with the horrible start we had, but we coasted into the playoffs. If the team was good enough, we would not have lost the last weeks of the season. If the team was good enough we would have clinched much earlier. Our lineup was set from March onwards. There was little chance to change out players or tinker with lines once we got in the playoffs.. Build a team to win, coach it well enough against other teams and you don't have to worry about who you are playing.
-
Elliott clearly struggles in the playoffs, but so did every player we had. Backlund was basically a no-show. Tkachuk had no impact. Monahan and the PP was the only reason why we scored. We can "upgrade" the goalie all we want but we still have holes to fix. Maybe we bring in a backup or 1a/1b goalie that can win down the stretch. CJ was good up till December, but was a risk after that. We had to go all in on Elliott, and his game started to falter a bit in the final few weeks. I don't think there is an easy answer, and I doubt that it's simply signing a true #1. Fix the fourth line. Fix the bottom pairing. Find Brodie the right partner or move him back with Gio. Cement the top line RW spot. Find the right fit for Bennett. If we go with Bishop or MAF, there better be a 100% solid backup there as well. If we go with Elliott, then we need a guy to win the games he starts. If we go the Talbot route, then we better have a plan B or not be surprised with a bottom 5 finish.
-
Yeah, I guess he is selfish for wanting to spend time with his girl. I believe he cited that as the reason.
-
Facepalms like Bouma's deflection? How about Brodie taking a penalty with less than 5 minutes in a close game. Or Bouma's goalie interference after killing off a penalty. How about screening the goalie? Talbot has looked ordinary at times. He stops the pucks he can see. I would say he is a better goalie than Elliott, but I doubt we would have won with him in net. Maybe 2 games. Maybe none. The Ducks are winning the game because they don't stop coming at you. If you can't help the goalie out, you are not going to win.
