Goaltending

[MAC331]

17 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

They were never the best, that's the part I just never got, why people saw that.   They were both statistically quite average in the leagues they came from.  Ramo was actually famous for getting scored on from the opposite side of the ice.  And quite frankly, they were old balls too.

 

Clearly if you're switching to North American ice you want to groom a young promising goalie.  IMHO, we have never done that properly.

 

 

I suppose, if we wanted a young up and coming goalie from a respectable league like the SHL, who has great playoff performance, we could try that?

 

http://www.quanthockey.com/shl/en/seasons/2016-17-shl-goalies-playoff-stats.html

Rk	Age		Name	GP	GAA	SV%	W	L	SO	TIME	G	A	P	PIM
1	25		Joni Ortio	7	2.12	0.933	3	4	1	368	0	0	0	0
2	31		David Rautio	11	2.01	0.928	5	5	3	658	0	0	0	0
3	20		Linus Söderström	16	2.11	0.922	12	4	0	993	0	0	0	0
4	26		Joacim Eriksson	5	2.36	0.918	2	3	1	305	0	0	0	0
5	22		Marcus Högberg	6	2.47	0.915	2	4	0	340	0	0	0	0
6	23		Stefan Steen	6	2.97	0.904	2	4	0	364	0	0	0	0
7	24		Johan Gustafsson	14	2.54	0.904	7	7	2	804	0	1	1	2
8	29		Oscar Ahlsenfelt	9	2.65	0.902	5	4	0	566	0	0	0	0
9	19		Felix Sandström	13	2.83	0.901	6	4	2	595	0	1	1	0
10	32		Cristopher Nihlstorp	4	3.16	0.875	2	2	0	247	0	0	0	0

Have you seen any of these names you are throwing around actually play ?

[AlbertaBoy12]

4 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Have you seen any of these names you are throwing around actually play ?

You dont need to see them play if they have a amazing stats in the SHL, I would be willing to bet one of the guys off that list goes on to win the vezina next season.

[MAC331]

17 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

he's only 24?? A year older than Gillies ? 

and maybe thats the problem , people get wrapped up in the stats from the other league, we've all learned those stats mean nothing .. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he's the first one to graduate to backup , he was one of the best in the A this year .

 

i think we are on the same page ,  theres just that fine line I see between rushing your prospects and letting them rot in the minors .

I feel now , if we do the Talbot / Darling thing , we hurt Gillies because the paths are so close together, but Elliot is not going to give us enough bridge  time . I think still Gillies is 3-4 years away from being able to own the net.

Mrazek I like but pretty sure Detroit has him #1 on their depth chart.. If we were to go that style of route I think I'd go after Raanta.. solid backup numbers in 2 cities now .Just that you're gambling he can be a #1 workload again , to high a room for failure 

 

While Bishop is my obvious #1 choice , it would still entail the numbers being good enough to keep him moveable if ever somebody took over ..a proven #1 is always tradeable, and i firmly believe while 6 wont a bad thing , i think you can get him on a 5     numbers wise, Fleury makes most sense.. still plays at a high level.. proven playofffs and shorter term you could always extend if necessary to bridge your gap

Smith would be great but again I dont think he has enough years left at his level to get us to the next

I disagree on your assessment of where Gilles is at with his development and would put his readiness for the NHL at 2 years. If BT is back to Elliott as the option I would only do a 2 year deal at 3.5M per season.

DET has a problem and his name is Howard, they are no moving that contract and they are needing some new parts for their partial retooling. I don't know if we have those parts or if BT would consider using a 1st round pick on Mrazek. I will leave the trading parts to BT but Mrazek would be the right age a calibre of goalie worth trading for IMO.

Fleury no thx

Smith no thx

Bishop as I said go for him either way he will not be cheap.

[MAC331]

Just now, AlbertaBoy12 said:

You dont need to see them play if they have a amazing stats in the SHL, I would be willing to bet one of the guys off that list goes on to win the vezina next season.

Which one wins the Vezina ?

[AlbertaBoy12]

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

Which one wins the Vezina ?

Well now that you ask im assuming ortio, since hes top of the dog pile in terms of stats in the SHL playoffs. But ive heard really good things about soderstrom, so he may be a dark horse. 

[DirtyDeeds]

4 hours ago, rocketdoctor said:

I'm with sticking with what we have got for next season so young tenders get more pro experience in AHL/ECHL

 

So to me there is no benfit in gambloing 6M a year for Bishop.

 

another good article suggesting Pengies should be our target  http://www.flamesfrom80feet.ca/2017/05/poached-from-pittsburgh-why-its.html

 

 

 

 

This is pretty much where I am. I am not so sure that any of our prospects are ready to step up yet and most of the handful of upgrade options would be quite costly. 

 

This paragraph in that article sums it up pretty good:

That run was no fluke and showed me Elliott can be a #1. His playoff performance could have been better however in my mind  he earned another chance with that string of wins. I just wouldn't place a long term mortgage on him yet.

[MAC331]

38 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

This is pretty much where I am. I am not so sure that any of our prospects are ready to step up yet and most of the handful of upgrade options would be quite costly. 

 

This paragraph in that article sums it up pretty good:

That run was no fluke and showed me Elliott can be a #1. His playoff performance could have been better however in my mind  he earned another chance with that string of wins. I just wouldn't place a long term mortgage on him yet.

I don't think there should be any doubt that Elliott should be in the consideration.

[AlbertaBoy12]

10 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I don't think there should be any doubt that Elliott should be in the consideration.

ive said it before but id much rather have elliot back at 2 years say 4 million then sign a guy like ben bishop long term. I think elliot can be better next year and if even average elliot some where between the first half and second half shows up we will be fine in net. The "collapse" in the playoffs so to speak had to have been a one off, elliot has a track record of being very good in the post season. Id be bringing him back next year and not letting him get away, because hes a better stop gap till some of our younger goalies are ready.

[MAC331]

15 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

ive said it before but id much rather have elliot back at 2 years say 4 million then sign a guy like ben bishop long term. I think elliot can be better next year and if even average elliot some where between the first half and second half shows up we will be fine in net. The "collapse" in the playoffs so to speak had to have been a one off, elliot has a track record of being very good in the post season. Id be bringing him back next year and not letting him get away, because hes a better stop gap till some of our younger goalies are ready.

I'm not against that but I don't think it will take 4M. People get carried away with this soft goal BS, watch the current teams and there are soft goals going in against the so called best goalies. I think it is more important that your team has the maturity to have faith as a team they can over come those situations.

[AlbertaBoy12]

28 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I'm not against that but I don't think it will take 4M. People get carried away with this soft goal BS, watch the current teams and there are soft goals going in against the so called best goalies. I think it is more important that your team has the maturity to have faith as a team they can over come those situations.

I dont think it will take 4m either that was more the high end for me. I dont think the soft goal BS is that bad either, elliott was very good down the stretch and I would assume he will be very good next year as well.

[Thebrewcrew]

11 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Totally agree.   Although I'm not fixated on Bishop, to be honest.   Do you mean for free?  Or as a trade?

 

Anton has struggled to make the jump, on the other hand CBJ is a pretty harsh team to make that jump with.   

 

I still maintain that I wish the Flames had gotten four guys like this.  Two in the NHL, two in the AHL.  Develop all 4 until you discover your Matt Murray.    Swap out prospects who aren't getting it done with other prospects if necessary.

 

I know that just scares the pants off everyone here.  And I get it.   But the 4-0 playoff loss with veteran goalies hasn't been a bowl of cherries either.

I agree, that's why goalies like Grubauer, Forsberg etc interest me. I think the Flames are still 3 or 4 years away from being true cup contenders. I would prefer a young guy like Grubauer who will grow with this team as they transform from a playoff hopeful to a contender over a Bishop who is great right now and likely will be for a handful of years, but may be trending downhill (with a bad contract) as this team matures and is ready to contend. 

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

I disagree on your assessment of where Gilles is at with his development and would put his readiness for the NHL at 2 years. If BT is back to Elliott as the option I would only do a 2 year deal at 3.5M per season.

DET has a problem and his name is Howard, they are no moving that contract and they are needing some new parts for their partial retooling. I don't know if we have those parts or if BT would consider using a 1st round pick on Mrazek. I will leave the trading parts to BT but Mrazek would be the right age a calibre of goalie worth trading for IMO.

Fleury no thx

Smith no thx

Bishop as I said go for him either way he will not be cheap.

I think he can certainly be ready for full time back up duty by next season , but to be the bonafide #1 , that could be a bit of a rush .. but hey , his own play will dictate the pace , I just think they want him to mature properly in the system and not rush him in . It so easy to move them in too quick and ruin them .

 

Interesting on Detroit, weirder things have happened .. I'm certainly not against going after him if they make him available , I just dont see Detroit doing that .. I think if push came to shove, Howard gets bought out if they need the cap that bad .

 

Another I've looked into that I initially wasn't keen on but have come around on is Lehner . New GM in Buffalo could go either way , but I'm thinking they keep him . Should he come available thats a place I'd be looking too.

 

 

 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, DirtyDeeds said:

This is pretty much where I am. I am not so sure that any of our prospects are ready to step up yet and most of the handful of upgrade options would be quite costly. 

 

This paragraph in that article sums it up pretty good:

That run was no fluke and showed me Elliott can be a #1. His playoff performance could have been better however in my mind  he earned another chance with that string of wins. I just wouldn't place a long term mortgage on him yet.

 

 

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.

[robrob74]

23 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

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.  

 

 

Mid elliott stopped the few goals he let in that he did see, the series might have been different. 

 

Maybe we do only win win two games.  Hopefully a few of those losses were a learning experience NOT to take the foot off of the gas.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I dont think it will take 4m either that was more the high end for me. I dont think the soft goal BS is that bad either, elliott was very good down the stretch and I would assume he will be very good next year as well.

 

What did Ramo get? He will get Ramo money or more. 

[MAC331]

5 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Mid elliott stopped the few goals he let in that he did see, the series might have been different. 

 

Maybe we do only win win two games.  Hopefully a few of those losses were a learning experience NOT to take the foot off of the gas.

It was ANA that did NOT take their foot off the gas and that my friend is the maturity factor we do not have yet. As BT has said the team will get better from within and I agree with him. We have a very good talented core, give them a few years experience and some better complimentary player watch out for us.

 

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

I think he can certainly be ready for full time back up duty by next season , but to be the bonafide #1 , that could be a bit of a rush .. but hey , his own play will dictate the pace , I just think they want him to mature properly in the system and not rush him in . It so easy to move them in too quick and ruin them .

 

Interesting on Detroit, weirder things have happened .. I'm certainly not against going after him if they make him available , I just dont see Detroit doing that .. I think if push came to shove, Howard gets bought out if they need the cap that bad .

 

Another I've looked into that I initially wasn't keen on but have come around on is Lehner . New GM in Buffalo could go either way , but I'm thinking they keep him . Should he come available thats a place I'd be looking too.

 

 

 

It may be better just to have Gilles do a full year in Stockton and use Rittich as our call up option.

I don't think DET buys out Howard, they will be making some cap room by moving out Mrazek's 4M.

Hard to say with Lehner, I think he rubbed some people there the wrong way so we will see. He would be one to keep an eye on for sure.

[MAC331]

Just now, robrob74 said:

 

What did Ramo get? He will get Ramo money or more. 

Ramo was just under 4M but he was over paid IMO and I don't that mistake being made again.

[robrob74]

Just now, MAC331 said:

It was ANA that did NOT take their foot off the gas and that my friend is the maturity factor we do not have yet. As BT has said the team will get better from within and I agree with him. We have a very good talented core, give them a few years experience and some better complimentary player watch out for us.

 

It may be better just to have Gilles do a full year in Stockton and use Rittich as our call up option.

I don't think DET buys out Howard, they will be making some cap room by moving out Mrazek's 4M.

Hard to say with Lehner, I think he rubbed some people there the wrong way so we will see. He would be one to keep an eye on for sure.

 

 

I am talking about how we controlled one or two of those games. Then we held back and tried to protect a lead, thus giving them the momentum. Teams should never do that because it kills all of the momentum built up, and it's so hard to get it back. We could not get it back. I think we controlled most of the series, but I agree, we will be really good in the near future. 

[robrob74]

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

Ramo was just under 4M but he was over paid IMO and I don't that mistake being made again.

 

I think he was overpaid as well. But I also think that Elliott is a better goalie, which was why I was using that is the measuring stick. I am thinking Elliott will get around 4. 

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

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.

I actually thought Backlund had a great series in a non scoring kind of way , but agreed the whole team needs to be better .

 

I keep coming back to this , and people think I'm nuts ,  but in this day and age of CORSI, and stats on everything , I think it bears weight .

Every team, every player , has a Kryptonite. Ours is Anaheim.

For years it was Edmonton for us,  Boston couldn't beat Montreal in the playoffs ,  Just ask Washington if Kryptonite is real, they win Presidents Cups and cant beat Pittsburgh.

Until we learn to beat Anaheim it does not matter how good we get..  we either hope somebody else takes them out , or we learn to do it ourselves.

 

I'm sure that played into how some players played , whether they know it , or want to admit it or not .

 

That being said , Ive gone into depth as to why I think Elliot needs to be replaced, at no time have I said he's a bad goalie , in fact where he plays next year I hope he goes lights out .. he deserves it .. it just wont be here 

The biggest reason for me ?  This ..combined with his career body of work ..

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	12	1	7	3	37	320	283	.884	3.20	0	0	694:25	23	7	0

 

and if you think thats coincidence , and maybe ST Louis just had an issue with the Ducks as well,   here is Jake Allen 

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	7	5	1	0	10	163	153	.939	1.56	1	0	385:07	3	2	0

 

Not only is Anaheim OUR Kryptonite..Their Elliot's too. 3 teams , and he hasnt beat them since his first year in Ottawa.  This is like Superman recruiting Supergirl to fight Kryptonite..you not only have to get Anaheim out of your heads, but out of Elliot's too.

If you read the Body language , you can see he doesn't have the confidence of his teammates, although they will always say the right things. The "slumping " after a goal, the deflated look.. there's no confidence that he will shake it off and slam the door.. don't know if you noticed, but they didnt do it after  the goal Johnson allowed on the next shot .They actually seemed to get mad.

 

Of the many reasons I have Bishop on the top of  my list ,  career, playoffs , consistency of excellence .. this pushes him over the top for me 

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	9	7	0	2	11	240	229	.954	1.24	1	2	533:30	6	1	0

 

 

Scoff all u want at the notion that "focussing on Anaheim " is a mistake , but somewhere it has to be addressed that until we beat Anaheim, we are going nowhere .. we can win presidents cups , and probably still lose to Anaheim if we don't address it .. it may as well play a part in the selection of who # 1 is next year 

[MAC331]

Just now, robrob74 said:

 

I think he was overpaid as well. But I also think that Elliott is a better goalie, which was why I was using that is the measuring stick. I am thinking Elliott will get around 4. 

I can't see BT doing 4M and the goalie market is full of options.

[MAC331]

Just now, phoenix66 said:

I actually thought Backlund had a great series in a non scoring kind of way , but agreed the whole team needs to be better .

 

I keep coming back to this , and people think I'm nuts ,  but in this day and age of CORSI, and stats on everything , I think it bears weight .

Every team, every player , has a Kryptonite. Ours is Anaheim.

For years it was Edmonton for us,  Boston couldn't beat Montreal in the playoffs ,  Just ask Washington if Kryptonite is real, they win Presidents Cups and cant beat Pittsburgh.

Until we learn to beat Anaheim it does not matter how good we get..  we either hope somebody else takes them out , or we learn to do it ourselves.

 

I'm sure that played into how some players played , whether they know it , or want to admit it or not .

 

That being said , Ive gone into depth as to why I think Elliot needs to be replaced, at no time have I said he's a bad goalie , in fact where he plays next year I hope he goes lights out .. he deserves it .. it just wont be here 

The biggest reason for me ?  This ..combined with his career body of work ..

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	12	1	7	3	37	320	283	.884	3.20	0	0	694:25	23	7	0

 

and if you think thats coincidence , and maybe ST Louis just had an issue with the Ducks as well,   here is Jake Allen 

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	7	5	1	0	10	163	153	.939	1.56	1	0	385:07	3	2	0

 

Not only is Anaheim OUR Kryptonite..Their Elliot's too. 3 teams , and he hasnt beat them since his first year in Ottawa.  This is like Superman recruiting Supergirl to fight Kryptonite..you not only have to get Anaheim out of your heads, but out of Elliot's too.

If you read the Body language , you can see he doesn't have the confidence of his teammates, although they will always say the right things. The "slumping " after a goal, the deflated look.. there's no confidence that he will shake it off and slam the door.. don't know if you noticed, but they didnt do it after  the goal Johnson allowed on the next shot .They actually seemed to get mad.

 

Of the many reasons I have Bishop on the top of  my list ,  career, playoffs , consistency of excellence .. this pushes him over the top for me 

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	9	7	0	2	11	240	229	.954	1.24	1	2	533:30	6	1	0

 

 

Scoff all u want at the notion that "focussing on Anaheim " is a mistake , but somewhere it has to be addressed that until we beat Anaheim, we are going nowhere .. we can win presidents cups , and probably still lose to Anaheim if we don't address it .. it may as well play a part in the selection of who # 1 is next year 

I'm SOLD now. LOL

[robrob74]

Just now, MAC331 said:

I can't see BT doing 4M and the goalie market is full of options.

 

I don't know... We talk about contracts and what they're worth. It feels like 4 to me for some reason. I don't want to do 4 either. 4M is starter money? He's pretty much a starter, and not a back up. Maybe 3.5... I don't think any lower. I also look at Dallas' goalies, or Halak...

[MAC331]

Just now, robrob74 said:

 

I don't know... We talk about contracts and what they're worth. It feels like 4 to me for some reason. I don't want to do 4 either. 4M is starter money? He's pretty much a starter, and not a back up. Maybe 3.5... I don't think any lower. I also look at Dallas' goalies, or Halak...

I am sure BT looks at those contracts as well and says I won't do that.

[phoenix66]

3 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I don't know... We talk about contracts and what they're worth. It feels like 4 to me for some reason. I don't want to do 4 either. 4M is starter money? He's pretty much a starter, and not a back up. Maybe 3.5... I don't think any lower. I also look at Dallas' goalies, or Halak...

whereever he signs, I see 3.7, 3.8  2- 3 years 

 

and please , tell me you mean as comparables, and not that you want one of Dallas's goalies??  lol