Goaltending

[cross]

Personally I think the rise of tandems is a talent issue. There are lots of good goalies in the league right now but not a lot of great ones and I don't think teams want to be trotting out "good" goalies for 50-60 games. Just entering an era where j don't think you'll see a lot of great goalies like Kipper, Roy, Brodeur etc.

 

Edit: also to expand because I think there are more good goalie then before I think teams are having to find ways to get them invovled. I think something the expansion draft has shown you is most teams in the NHL now go 2-3 goalies deep in terms of good or decent options and that just wasn't the case 15 years ago or so. The old model of riding 1 guy and just letting your next guy rise up behind him seems to be dead and teams want to try and get more young goalies invovled earlier on. 

[MAC331]

Personally I think the rise of tandems is a talent issue. There are lots of good goalies in the league right now but not a lot of great ones and I don't think teams want to be trotting out "good" goalies for 50-60 games. Just entering an era where j don't think you'll see a lot of great goalies like Kipper, Roy, Brodeur etc.

Hasn't that always been the case in the NHL ? there are your work horses that thrive on action and others that don't necessarily perform well under a heavy workload.

[Flyerfan52]

 

How soon before the analysts in hockey start to say goalies need to take (X)games off per year to prevent (X) from happening? I don't know if JJ was thinking along these lines when he was talking operations on the upswing in hockey, but the stats are taking over baseball with the pitchers now. 

Yet there are goalies that thrive with a heavy workload & don't do as with less. Best to match the workload to the goalie's strength.

I think people need to realize being a back up goalie is one of the hardest jobs in hockey.

It's a different mindset. After realizing he won't be that starter every player wants to be he has to adjust to mop-up in loses or go in cold after a starter is pulled or injured.

It's gotta be a tough adjustment.

[robrob74]

It's like with Ramo the last few years, he thrived on the first few games. He could win the third or fourth game but his game started to suffer around or after a 3rd game. He could've used a 3 or 4 on and 2 off rotation. He'd let in bad goals in the 3rd or 4th game and the 5th was a definite no-no. I suppose that was 2 years ago now and a bit before he got injured last season.

I think it's better to play that rotation, so that the goalie knows he has the game off when it is coming.

I would like us to play Elliott on a 4 games 1-2 games off rotation. If Johnson plays a good one he gets a 2nd start. But Elliot knows he gets the net after the possible two games.

Of course he has to play well enough to keep the net. I think he can. Hoping our D and possession get better this year

[jjgallow]

It's like with Ramo the last few years, he thrived on the first few games. He could win the third or fourth game but his game started to suffer around or after a 3rd game. He could've used a 3 or 4 on and 2 off rotation. He'd let in bad goals in the 3rd or 4th game and the 5th was a definite no-no. I suppose that was 2 years ago now and a bit before he got injured last season.

I think it's better to play that rotation, so that the goalie knows he has the game off when it is coming.

I would like us to play Elliott on a 4 games 1-2 games off rotation. If Johnson plays a good one he gets a 2nd start. But Elliot knows he gets the net after the possible two games.

Of course he has to play well enough to keep the net. I think he can. Hoping our D and possession get better this year

 

Most goalies, really.  Kipper definitely included.   Such a waste of some of this team's prime years overplaying him.

 

I am not sure of Any player performs optimally at an 82 game schedule.  

 

But the number of goalies who do, is between nill and none.

[rickross]

I just saw the Leafs signed Enroth to a $750k/1 yr contract. He was one of the goalies s lot of ppl thought we should have considered as a viable backup...even a potential starter. We have Chad Johnson now locked up for a similar price but you have to wonder if Enroth has some potential that's yet to be unearthed. Don't mind Johnson at all but Enroth is still intriguing

[jjgallow]

Yet there are goalies that thrive with a heavy workload & don't do as with less. Best to match the workload to the goalie's strength.

 

Some goalies have thrived with heavy workloads, but I've never seen an example of one that does worse with less.

[CheersMan]

Some goalies have thrived with heavy workloads, but I've never seen an example of one that does worse with less.

 

How about every single goaltender that made it to the NHL, having aspirations of being a steady NHL’er but never made it to #1 status?  You’re either a 1 or a 2.  I think we seen first-hand what a 1a and 1b means.

[robrob74]

We had more like a 2a & 2b last year.

But we also saw better play out of Ortio when he got starter minutes.

[xstrike]

I still can't believe STL traded away Elliott. In the playoffs this past season I thought he was the better GK and was a major reason STL managed to get the Sharks to game 7. That's my opinion, but he seemed better under pressure than Allen.

[cccsberg]

I still can't believe STL traded away Elliott. In the playoffs this past season I thought he was the better GK and was a major reason STL managed to get the Sharks to game 7. That's my opinion, but he seemed better under pressure than Allen.

see: Expansion Draft.  Some teams taking advantage of a limited market (StLouis) and others (Pittsburg, TBL) stubbornly waiting things out.  We'll see how it works out over the next year.

[cross16]

Elliott also asked for a trade if Allen was going to be the starter. he didn't want to be part of a 2 goalie system anymore, he wanted to start and St Louis, wisely, didn't want to lose Allen. They had to trade one of them. 

[travel_dude]

Elliott also asked for a trade if Allen was going to be the starter. he didn't want to be part of a 2 goalie system anymore, he wanted to start and St Louis, wisely, didn't want to lose Allen. They had to trade one of them. 

 

That is right.  He was tired of being 1b everytime they had another goalie in the system.  Halak, Allen, even Miller.

 

Tampa and Pitts were both looking to move a vet goalie because of the expansion.  Their asking price was too rich or the re-signing discussions were over budget for CGY.

[xstrike]

Yeah, I know. It's more of being incredulous. I suppose maybe they were worried if he could be a 1a or #1. I suppose the question to be answered is who the better GK is, Allen or Elliott.

[MAC331]

Yeah, I know. It's more of being incredulous. I suppose maybe they were worried if he could be a 1a or #1. I suppose the question to be answered is who the better GK is, Allen or Elliott.

In this case I think if you are STL you flip a coin and go with the younger goalie. Both Elliott and Allen are good goalies being paid almost equally, I think STL accommodated Elliott with this trade. Good for us.

[jjgallow]

How about every single goaltender that made it to the NHL, having aspirations of being a steady NHL’er but never made it to #1 status?  You’re either a 1 or a 2.  I think we seen first-hand what a 1a and 1b means.

 

It's typically a Stanley cup winning team.    And no, I don't think we know.   We know what 2a and 2b is.

 

 

1a and 1b is very different, and very worthwhile.   And the ability to keep them rested, as well as make it difficult for opponents to know what to expect, are some of the reasons.

 

Ranford and Fuhr,

 

Fleury and Murray

 

Crawford, Darling, and Raanta?   OMG

 

Quick and Jones

 

Thomas and Rask

 

 

 

Everyone in that list either IS, WAS, or Probably will be a starting goaltender.  Even Raanta, imho.

 

Every Stanley Cup won in the last 7 years, involved the goaltenders in that list.

 

 

Yes, you can win a cup with just one good goaltender, IF you're  a Powerhouse/Dynasty, like the Penguins of 2009.   But generally speaking, Cups are won by 1a, 1b tandems.

[travel_dude]

Johnson has shown that he can take on the reins of a #1.  Elliott has shown that as well, even if he hasn't gottent the workload to 100% convince people.  Given the compressed season, there is a high likelyhood that the split is 52/30 for Elliott and Johnson.  Looking forward to seeing what capable goalies can do for this team.  

[jjgallow]

Johnson has shown that he can take on the reins of a #1.  Elliott has shown that as well, even if he hasn't gottent the workload to 100% convince people.  Given the compressed season, there is a high likelyhood that the split is 52/30 for Elliott and Johnson.  Looking forward to seeing what capable goalies can do for this team.  

 

Have to admit, they nailed it.

[travel_dude]

Have to admit, they nailed it.

 

If you are not being sarcastic, then I agree.  Enroth was a value pickup, but I think we have the better player.  If you can put up a winning record and good stats on a team like Buffalo, then you are doing something right.

[jjgallow]

If you are not being sarcastic, then I agree.  Enroth was a value pickup, but I think we have the better player.  If you can put up a winning record and good stats on a team like Buffalo, then you are doing something right.

 

I'm not being sarcastic.   I wouldn't have done it that the way the Flames did, but from looking at it purely as an NHL goaltender upgrade, yes they nailed it.

 

I'm not saying I won't argue in the future

 

They did zero to upgrade their defence, and they basically gave up on the idea of NHL goaltender development for the time being.  My beef is not over in terms of an organizational strategy for goaltending.

 

But did they get the straight upgrade that they thought they needed?

 

Sure did.   Can't argue there.   Couldn't...if I wanted to  (and I do want to.. )

[travel_dude]

The giving up on developing NHL goalies is just opinion.  They gave up on a goalie.  Wasted effort up to this point on him, but they must have some solid evidence that he was never going to be the one.  They hit reset on that, and are starting in the AHL and other.  Murray is Gillies in a year or two, and have a few more horses waiting the corral.   

[DirtyDeeds]

It's typically a Stanley cup winning team.    And no, I don't think we know.   We know what 2a and 2b is.

 

 

1a and 1b is very different, and very worthwhile.   And the ability to keep them rested, as well as make it difficult for opponents to know what to expect, are some of the reasons.

 

Ranford and Fuhr,

 

Fleury and Murray

 

Crawford, Darling, and Raanta?   OMG

 

Quick and Jones

 

Thomas and Rask

 

 

 

Everyone in that list either IS, WAS, or Probably will be a starting goaltender.  Even Raanta, imho.

 

Every Stanley Cup won in the last 7 years, involved the goaltenders in that list.

 

 

Yes, you can win a cup with just one good goaltender, IF you're  a Powerhouse/Dynasty, like the Penguins of 2009.   But generally speaking, Cups are won by 1a, 1b tandems.

Not lately.

 

You have go back to 2010-2011 Boston Bruins to find a 1a-1b winning the cup and Tim Thomas played all the playoff games winning both the Vezina and Conn Smythe.

[CheersMan]

It's typically a Stanley cup winning team.    And no, I don't think we know.   We know what 2a and 2b is.

 

 

1a and 1b is very different, and very worthwhile.   And the ability to keep them rested, as well as make it difficult for opponents to know what to expect, are some of the reasons.

 

Ranford and Fuhr,

 

Fleury and Murray

 

Crawford, Darling, and Raanta?   OMG

 

Quick and Jones

 

Thomas and Rask

 

 

 

Everyone in that list either IS, WAS, or Probably will be a starting goaltender.  Even Raanta, imho.

 

Every Stanley Cup won in the last 7 years, involved the goaltenders in that list.

 

 

Yes, you can win a cup with just one good goaltender, IF you're  a Powerhouse/Dynasty, like the Penguins of 2009.   But generally speaking, Cups are won by 1a, 1b tandems.

 

A 1A, 1B goaltending duo sounds great, and it happens, but its not sustainable.  The only time it ever happens is when both compete relatively even by SA% measurement resulting in similar ice time or games played.  You ride the goaltender with the hot hand, if both are hot then you try to play them both.  If both are cold……….well then you have to play somebody.

 

Last season, we had two goaltenders that never rose to the occasion, that’s why they are both gone.  Ramo looked to be improving as the season went on, then the unfortunate injury.  Do we wait to see how Ramo heels come Sept and miss the boat on other available goaltenders or do we cut bait and move on?  The later is the less risk.

 

A 1A, 1B is an ideal situation, but in the end both are worthy and both want paid.  In a Cap world you can’t pay everyone and there’s only one net to tend. 

 

This season we are lined up perfectly for a 1A, 1B, and they both might play great and equally, but I’ll guarantee you one will be gone next season.

[jjgallow]

The giving up on developing NHL goalies is just opinion.  They gave up on a goalie.  Wasted effort up to this point on him, but they must have some solid evidence that he was never going to be the one.  They hit reset on that, and are starting in the AHL and other.  Murray is Gillies in a year or two, and have a few more horses waiting the corral.   

 

In a sense, everything on here is an opinion, I suppose.

 

But a more accurate way to describe it imho:

 

They only had one goalie ready to develop at the NHL level (speaks to past oraganizational commitment here)

They gave up that goalie   (speaks to present organizational commitment)

They didn't acquire any goalie capable of development at the NHL level (speaks to near-term commitment here)

 

I think this would make sense, if they were gunning for the cup this year.

 

Oh wait, there's Matt Murray ....it still doesn't make sense.

 

As long as Gillies, or Murray etc turns out, we're fine.   But that's a risk the Flames could have and did not mitigate for this offseason.

 

 

The Flames upgraded their goaltending.  Can't argue.

 

However, I look at this as:   Did the Flames acquire players that can help them win a cup?

 

No.

[travel_dude]

A 1A, 1B goaltending duo sounds great, and it happens, but its not sustainable.  The only time it ever happens is when both compete relatively even by SA% measurement resulting in similar ice time or games played.  You ride the goaltender with the hot hand, if both are hot then you try to play them both.  If both are cold……….well then you have to play somebody.

 

Last season, we had two goaltenders that never rose to the occasion, that’s why they are both gone.  Ramo looked to be improving as the season went on, then the unfortunate injury.  Do we wait to see how Ramo heels come Sept and miss the boat on other available goaltenders or do we cut bait and move on?  The later is the less risk.

 

A 1A, 1B is an ideal situation, but in the end both are worthy and both want paid.  In a Cap world you can’t pay everyone and there’s only one net to tend. 

 

This season we are lined up perfectly for a 1A, 1B, and they both might play great and equally, but I’ll guarantee you one will be gone next season.

 

There are no guarantees for anything.  Johnson has never been a starter.  He took on that role in Buffalo (actually a 1a) due to injury issues to their real #1.  He's 30 this year, so he's not going to get a lot of other offers unless he goes UFA.  The Flames will most likely have to sign him to be able to expose him to the draft.  He won't likely get claimed; there are too many other goalies out there.

The Flames could trade for a goalie with another year remaining to satisfy the requirement, I suppose.

 

Elliott is looking for a team that believes in him.  He will sign an extension if he is able to have a decent season.

 

If both goalies play well, the Flames will re-sign both.  Elliott will want more, but isn't going to get over $6m.  Johnson will be similar to what he got before.  That is reasonable expense for a tandem.  

 

 

In a sense, everything on here is an opinion, I suppose.

 

But a more accurate way to describe it imho:

 

They only had one goalie ready to develop at the NHL level (speaks to past oraganizational commitment here)

They gave up that goalie   (speaks to present organizational commitment)

They didn't acquire any goalie capable of development at the NHL level (speaks to near-term commitment here)

.....

 

However, I look at this as:   Did the Flames acquire players that can help them win a cup?

 

No.

 

You can't really say that Ortio was burning up the AHL, so he wasn't a NHL goalie being developed.  

We chose MacDonald over Demko - no proof either will be a NHL goalie.

Did I miss a bunch of NHL-capable goalies on the market?  Murray and Vasilevskiy weren't available to us.

 

Murray won Pitts the cup, but MAF got them to the playoffs.  Bishop got TBL to the playoffs and the start of playoffs.  Had Bishop been healthy, we may not be talking about Pitts being the powerhouse with elite goaltending.  

 

Who was the best goalie in regular season and playoffs combined?  Wasn't Murray, unless you talk about wins in the playoffs.  So, a competant goalie with above average regular season stats can be the guy that brings the cup to a city.