kehatch
-
Posts
10,467 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
33
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by kehatch
-
That is Gilles MO. There are parts of his game that get you excited. Flashes of goodness every so often. But the Flames don't need flashes of good play tarnished by 10 minutes of stink. He needs to show he can be consistent and he needs to show it before he is a NHL regular. It is the early preseason for sure and nobody should be making conclusions based on those two games. Though I think it is fair to say I wasn't high on our backups well before the preseason began. They haven't done anything to change my mind. Yet. I hope it is just yet.
-
It's his first game of the preseason and it was behind an AHL roster, but that was not a strong start by Rittich.
-
Probably just a logistics move to help with splitting the squad for China.
-
Bennett won't have any excuses after this season. He has a new coach. He will have the opportunity to play with good line mates. He is at the make it or break it point. Personally I think he is going to do well. I think it has been a mental thing with him. If he gets on a roll I think he will keep it going. I still want to see him with Tkachuk. I think the two of them could be an amazing pair giving us Monahan/Gaudreau, Backlund/Frolik, Bennett/Tkachuk.
-
That is the wrong question in my opinion. The questions should be: Are we comfortable Mike Smith will stay healthy and effective over a 100+ game season? If the answer is no (and given his injury history and age my answer is no) then you need to ask: Are we comfortable Rittich or Gilles can be effective as a starter over an extended period of time next season? If the answer is no then we have a serious problem (and my answer remains no because past performance shows that neither has been capable of that). It isn't that I have written either player off. But the objective of next season should be to win a Stanley Cup, not to give one of our goalies a chance to develop. Gilles still has a lot to prove in the AHL. Rittich would likely clear waivers and gives us some depth in the position. Both will likely be given another opportunity to show what they can do in the NHL. I just don't agree with gifting them an NHL position at the potential expense of a season. I also don't agree that a lack of options excuses the situation we are in, not when Treliving has had 4-seasons to fix this ongoing issue. I will give this post a rest because people have clearly stated their positions and there really isn't any new ground to talk about. I get that not everyone's answers to the above two questions are no, and that is fine. I also appreciate Cross's stance that goal tending is a difficult position to address and the cost outweighed the players available, I just think by now we should have a better plan B then David Rittich (and no plan beyond this season). I do think the lack of short and long term certainty in net is on our GM, even though I like the work he has done in most other areas.
-
Sorry Cross, but this is just more justification using conjecture as facts. The Penguins gave up MAF for nothing. We don't know it would have cost us Tkachuk. Bishop would not have cost us Backlund, it would have meant different decisions along the way, such as not having the cap to go after Neal. We also don't know what else was available or the content of those discussions. You are saying it is a matter of priorities, but a few posts ago you were saying that Treliving has been on every goalie transaction out there. This doesn't appear to be a situation where the GM is satisfied with our goaltending. Given his approach at every other position I can't imagine he is happy with the gamble he is taking in net. I agree getting a home grown solution is the preferred approach. But Rittich and Gilles did not achieve when given the opportunity. Gilles development has been rocky since leaving college and Rittich has never projected that high. Parsons has also struggled. We are running our of options to find our solution internally.
-
The fish that got away doesn't make the fisherman. We don't know what happened behind the scenes, that includes the ones mentioned above but also other opportunities. I would think part of the issue is that we have used our assets elsewhere limiting what we had to make a deal (some of it wasted on things like the Lazar trade.) At the end of the day Treliving hasn't been able to fix our issues in net. The swings he has made have been mostly misses, and he hasn't been able to bring in the obvious guys that have stabilized the teams they have went to. I really like our GM and I get that he has tried. But using Yoda math he gets a big "do not" for this one leaving a giant question mark to deal with this season.
-
I get that he has made the attempt. But some of that was intentional. It sounds like Tampa thought they had a deal in place for Bishop but Treliving aborted and went for Elliott instead. Talbot wasn't that expensive, we could have outbid Edmonton. There have been other opportunities. I get it is hard, but almost 20% of the teams in the NHL have addressed their goal tending issues via trade since Treliving became the GM. Don't get me wrong. I like our GM and I think he has done some very good things. Elliott was a reasonable shot at fixing goalie and Smith was a decent pick up last off season. And I don't think we are necessarily doomed in net, it is possible things could work out. I just think there is a very real chance they don't work out and , If the season is lost because of goal tending that will be an unfortunate outcome and it very well could (and probably should) cost Treliving his job.
-
This isn't a problem that started in August. I said many times that there are limited options available right now, and that has been made more complicated by our lack of cap space and futures. But Treliving has had 4-years to address the problem. None of that changes that this is a problem that needs to be solved. You enjoy cleaning the sand out of your eyes and ears though.
-
Why? I didn't see a trade involving Hamilton for Hanafin and Lindholm. My guess is neither did you. I don't have the phone numbers to the other GMs. I have no idea who is available or what the cost might be. It doesn't change the fact that going into the season with the same two/three goalies as last season is a big gamble.
-
I wasn't being critical of Treliving. I am just saying that this is his team now and he has played his most impactful cards. Time to see what the team looks like. If it isn't a strong team then I do think criticism of the GM will be fair.
-
I get the argument of "I see the concern, but at this point we don't have a lot of options and there are some reasons to hope for good tending next season". What I don't get is the posters who refuse to acknowledge the gamble, the issues with addressing this position over the last half a decade, or who take offense that others aren't giddy about the situation we are in. Every horse is dead in August. There is very little new to discuss. Goaltending will remain a hot topic until the season starts because it remains are biggest question mark going into the season.
-
Agreed. That said, we are out of cap, we are out of futures, and outside of D we don't have anyone in the system that projects to be a major impact player. Treliving has now made his mark at coaching, defense, and forward. Outside of net, we are looking at tweaks and internal growth for progress. The next test will be to see if he can find a solution in net. Once that is done (hopefully sooner then later) we will be able to see if Treliving has built a team that can contend or if he has built a team that is in the large middle of the pack.
-
That is the eternal excuse. It isn't the goalies fault, it is the team in front of them. And I guess it could work if you look at 1 of the 31 teams in the NHL. But the reality is there are many teams worse then the Flames that have better goaltending. In fact, the Flames had better goaltending until Smith got hurt.
-
No, you don't get it. I am not saying the can't handle it. Smith has been a legitimate starter when healthy and Rittich had a good ratio of quality starts when doing spot duty as a back-up. Those are facts, and it is possible the Flames have adequate to good goaltending next season. But also facts: Smith is injury prone, coming off an injury, and will be 37. Rittich isn't a young up and comer, he is a 25 year old who had significant struggles when he had to carry the load. Expecting those two to take a step forward is naive, and not identifying a real possibility of a step back is foolhardy. What I am saying is that the Flames are taking a real gamble by going with the same two goalies as they did last season. Goaltending was a problem last season and it is more likely to regress then improve. It is also inconsistent with their approach in every other area (where they have spent significant assets to bring on depth and insurance). I strongly disagree with your assessment that the Flames shouldn't be going for a cup this season. We have given up futures, have our best players in their prime, and we just spent a bunch in free agency. We are in our window. I also think your assessment that the Flames can just go out and get a starter if things don't work out is naive. You can't just get a starter early season, and catching up from a poor start is very difficult. I am also getting tired of this 'lets just hope' approach to goaltending. First we ignored all the evidence to the contrary that Ramo/Berra/Ortio could be the guys. Then people just ignored Hiller's age and history because he had one decent season. Its the same situation and same debate. Just replace Hiller with Smith, Ramo with Rittich, and Ortio with Gilles. We are set up to have a repeat of the 15-16 goaltending all over again. We just need to add this seasons version of Backstrom. Beyond those guys it has been a series of budget half measures. Good goalies have been changing hand. The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop. Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run. Talbot was an MVP in Edmonton when they made the playoffs. Andersen is a big part of the Toronto movement. Jones is a legitimate starter in San Jose. I don't think being disappointed in having Smith/Rittich going into season unreasonable.
-
We might as well trade Gaudreau and Monahan and put Bennett and Jankowski in their place. I know both of those guys were 25 point forwards last season, but boy oh boy did they look good in flashes. I mean, Jankowski had 4 goals in one game. Imagine if he did that for 82 games? In fact, I have no idea why we picked up Neal. Gawdin was a 120+ point forward last season and Foo's production projects at 40+ goals over 82 games. Plus, both of these guys actually have RH shots on the RW. Why did we get Lindholm/Hanafin back for Hamilton when we could have just used Dube/Valimaki? And Ryan is just taking up Klimchuks spot. Ridiculous. At least Treliving didn't pollute goaltending like he did every other position. I mean, subpar performances last season should indicate stellar performances this season. Obviously. And Smith is like a fine wine, better with age and all that. It's really smart thinking not to add depth to the most important position, and one where we had significant struggles. Better to trust the current situation and do the exact same thing this season. What could go wrong??
-
The problem is the GM has taken half measures to address the goal tending. Rather then get Bishop a few years ago they got Elliott. Before that it was Hiller. It was Johnson as a backup instead of getting a potential starter. Then it was a cheap but older goalie in Smith. I was fine with most of that because it made more sense to get a temporary solution while you developed a solution internally. But they haven't been able to do the latter. Which is why I am not a fan of just waiting to see if Rittich can take an unlikely step forward.
-
Then you will be too late. You are correct that it's a mistake to evaluate the goaltending without considering the play in front. It is also bad to cherry pick the good games and ignore the bad (which people do all the time) or give the goalies a pass because of the team in front of them (which is what you are doing). The Flames were not the worst defensive team in the NHL last season. But over 82 games they had average goaltending from the starter and poor goaltending from the backups. There is little reason to believe it will be better this season, and given the age / injury to our starter there is a legitimate concern it could be worse.
-
It depends how you define defensive player. His lack of speed will limit his time on the PK. But 5 on 5 he started most often in the D zone and excelled. He wasn't just a passenger on the 3M line. He was a driver. He is a smart player and he is willing to do the work. As for goal scoring, he was tied for second in goals scored on the team despite missing games. He is very good in front of the net and has put the puck in at all levels. I don't see that changing.
-
Which is why Tkachuk probably isn't signing a contract until the summer. He produced at a 0.72 PPG pace playing on a defensive line. His goals per games played average was better then Monahan's, projecting at 40 over 82 games. There is a very real chance Tkachuk is second in points and first in goals next season. That is just talking about the offensive numbers. He is the second best defensive forward on the team, one of the best agitators in the league, and he was third in points despite missing 14 games. Gaudreau and Monahan had arguably better sophomore years, at least offensively. I am not discounting those guys. But with the cap going up I doubt he signs for less then them. It may even be more if he takes a (likely) step forward this season. Especially if he stays healthy (the one knock against him).
-
It's pretty tough to do with an injury prone starter and a limited backup.
-
If Smith wasn't injury prone, 37, and coming off of an injury / terrible finish I wouldn't have a problem with Rittich as the backup. But I fully expect whomever does backup Smith to have to carry the load for an extended period. I don't want Rittich to be that guy. We are invested at every other position. That is true based on assets spent, positions filled, cap space, and term. But in net we have a 37 year old in his final year, a guy that projects to be a career back up (at best), and two guys who have disappointed in their pro careers to date. I also want Gilles in the AHL for a season to see how he does. I just want to upgrade Rittich to a better 1B option as insurance for this year and potentially for future years. But I get some people see more in Rittich then I do. If you see a potential starter or a guy that can cover 30+ games then fine. I just don't see it that way.
-
Not true. Murray, Vasilevsky, Talbot, etc pushed their way onto the roster by playing exceptionally well in the AHL and then taking advantage of their NHL opportunity when it came around. They didn't play "okay" in the AHL, crap the bed during their NHL opportunity, and then be gifted an NHL spot based on the a feeling that they maybe could be might be close.
-
Rittich is a goalie that can play 1 out of 5 games cherry picked for his success. I don't think he has the talent to carry the starter role even briefly though. He isn't a rookie and I don't see the upside. Gilles has the opportunity to prove he is a starter, but he was statistically almost the worst goalie in the NHL last season. Let's see him rebound in the AHL first before we expect quality NHL starts. Keep in mind, we hope to be talking about 100+ game season, not 82 games. Smith's durability is a big question mark, especially at 37. We need a solid plan B and we don't have one at the moment. Could Rittich or Gilles be the guy this season. Maybe. But I wouldn't bet a large sum of money on that. If I was Treliving I certainly wouldn't bet my job on that. Better to find a better plan B and be pleasently surprised if Gilles forces his way onto the rotation.
-
I agree. But, the team has done a good job keeping the cupboard stocked despite the lack of picks. In part through strong drafting, in part through acquiring players like Foo. Also, the team gets a bit of a pass given the number of young impact players on the roster.