Goaltending

[MAC331]

Just now, phoenix66 said:

I see that being the ceiling of his next contract , at his age , even though he still plays at a high level I believe his big paydays are behind him .

 

But seriously after the run he's having , any doubts we should be targeting MAF should be gone. I dont think Ive ever seen a player so loose , so "im just having fun" in a game 7.. it rubs off on your teammates.

 

Wondering , when was the last time a Conn Smythe winner got traded right after the playoffs ??  could happen!

 

"Hey MAF.. you just won the Stanley Cup!.. what are you going to do now?"

"I'm going to Calgary !"

I think you are getting ahead of yourself. He has the experience to be real good at times but he blows hot and cold during stretches. My question to you is what do you give up for him ?

[phoenix66]

5 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I think you are getting ahead of yourself. He has the experience to be real good at times but he blows hot and cold during stretches. My question to you is what do you give up for him ?

I think you will find it wont be a lot . likely no more than next years 2nd rounder . I dont hold much stock in this seasons lapse, he was relegated to backup .. knows a trade is coming .. how motivated are you when you know you're some where that  is about to cast you off? (see Bishop, Ben)

His last 5 seasons are nothing to sneeze at ..

 

2012-13	28	PIT	NHL	33	31	23	8	0	74	881	807	.916	2.39	1	1858	15	.484	5	95	3.60	5.9	0	2	2	2	AS-14
2013-14	29	PIT	NHL	64	64	39	18	5	150	1774	1624	.915	2.37	5	3792	33	.516	11	98	2.86	11.1	0	0	0	4	AS-8
2014-15	30	PIT	NHL	64	64	34	20	9	146	1831	1685	.920	2.32	10	3776	35	.547	6	93	10.28	12.2	0	1	1	6	AS-7,Hart-18
2015-16	31	PIT	NHL	58	58	35	17	6	132	1665	1533	.921	2.29	5	3463	33	.569	5	93	9.76	11.0	0	1	1	2	AS-8
2016-17	32	PIT	NHL	38	34	18	10	7	107	1181	1074	.909	3.02	1	2125	16	.471	5	105	-4.80	6.4	0	0	0	6

 

 

and hate to add this , but its important ...:)

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	12	9	3	0	28	334	306	.916	2.33	0	0	720:51	19	5	2

[MAC331]

21 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I think you will find it wont be a lot . likely no more than next years 2nd rounder . I dont hold much stock in this seasons lapse, he was relegated to backup .. knows a trade is coming .. how motivated are you when you know you're some where that  is about to cast you off? (see Bishop, Ben)

His last 5 seasons are nothing to sneeze at ..

 

2012-13	28	PIT	NHL	33	31	23	8	0	74	881	807	.916	2.39	1	1858	15	.484	5	95	3.60	5.9	0	2	2	2	AS-14
2013-14	29	PIT	NHL	64	64	39	18	5	150	1774	1624	.915	2.37	5	3792	33	.516	11	98	2.86	11.1	0	0	0	4	AS-8
2014-15	30	PIT	NHL	64	64	34	20	9	146	1831	1685	.920	2.32	10	3776	35	.547	6	93	10.28	12.2	0	1	1	6	AS-7,Hart-18
2015-16	31	PIT	NHL	58	58	35	17	6	132	1665	1533	.921	2.29	5	3463	33	.569	5	93	9.76	11.0	0	1	1	2	AS-8
2016-17	32	PIT	NHL	38	34	18	10	7	107	1181	1074	.909	3.02	1	2125	16	.471	5	105	-4.80	6.4	0	0	0	6

 

 

and hate to add this , but its important ...:)

 

Opponent	Anaheim Ducks	12	9	3	0	28	334	306	.916	2.33	0	0	720:51	19	5	2

MAF has a been good and bad throughout his career, my thinking is his best years are behind him. He wouldn't be my choice.

[JTech780]

If I had to rank the goaltenders who have been rumoured to be available in order of my interest:

 

1.Petr Mrazek

2.Phillipp Grubauer

3.Marc-Andre Fleury

4.Ryan Miller

5.Brian Elliott

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, JTech780 said:

If I had to rank the goaltenders who have been rumoured to be available in order of my interest:

 

1.Petr Mrazek

2.Phillipp Grubauer

3.Marc-Andre Fleury

4.Ryan Miller

5.Brian Elliott

LOL why not be honest and drop Elliott off your list, we all know you don't want him back.

[JTech780]

30 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

LOL why not be honest and drop Elliott off your list, we all know you don't want him back.

 

I thought about it, but the guys I would put ahead of him I am just not really sure about. Howard is a good goalie, but injury history concerns me. Raanta is intriguing, but I am not sure that I buy that he is capable of being a number 1.

[MAC331]

Just now, JTech780 said:

 

I thought about it, but the guys I would put ahead of him I am just not really sure about. Howard is a good goalie, but injury history concerns me. Raanta is intriguing, but I am not sure that I buy that he is capable of being a number 1.

Why are you so high on Grubauer ? hasn't seen a lot of action

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, JTech780 said:

If I had to rank the goaltenders who have been rumoured to be available in order of my interest:

 

1.Petr Mrazek

2.Phillipp Grubauer

3.Marc-Andre Fleury

4.Ryan Miller

5.Brian Elliott

 

If you consider the playoffs as a reason to get a certain goalie, why would you ever consider Miller?  From your list as a possible starter here, I would say that MAF, Mzarek, Grubauer are all possibles.  Would add Raanta.  If the Flames go with one of the backups turned starters, then we also sign Elliott (or equivalent) in FA.  

[JTech780]

29 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

If you consider the playoffs as a reason to get a certain goalie, why would you ever consider Miller?  From your list as a possible starter here, I would say that MAF, Mzarek, Grubauer are all possibles.  Would add Raanta.  If the Flames go with one of the backups turned starters, then we also sign Elliott (or equivalent) in FA.  

 

Outside of the last two years Miller has been great in the playoffs.  Last time he was in the playoffs it was with the Canucks, I feel like that doesn't need much more explanations. 

[JTech780]

40 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Why are you so high on Grubauer ? hasn't seen a lot of action

 

He has put up numbers everywhere he has gone, and he is still young, he is ready to take the reins as a number 1 

[travel_dude]

34 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

Outside of the last two years Miller has been great in the playoffs.  Last time he was in the playoffs it was with the Canucks, I feel like that doesn't need much more explanations. 

Before the Nucks, he was brought in to help the Blues.  That didn't work.

He's going on 37 and the last time he had success in the playoffs was 6 years ago.  Success as in a decent SA%.

I'm not sure how he would be an upgrade in the playoffs to Elliott.  

[JTech780]

Just now, travel_dude said:

Before the Nucks, he was brought in to help the Blues.  That didn't work.

He's going on 37 and the last time he had success in the playoffs was 6 years ago.  Success as in a decent SA%.

I'm not sure how he would be an upgrade in the playoffs to Elliott.  

 

My issue with Elliott isn't limited to his performance in the playoffs, outside of a 10 game run Elliott was well below average. I am not bringing him back based on a 10 game stretch.

[zima]

Why would any one think MAF will come to Canada unless Montreal and of course not going to happen with Price as # 1. LV Knights will be his destination they will through big bucks at him and he will be in a place where it all happens every knight get it . Money talks Unless the wife has different thoughts then it will be LV no question.

[JTech780]

3 minutes ago, zima said:

Why would any one think MAF will come to Canada unless Montreal and of course not going to happen with Price as # 1. LV Knights will be his destination they will through big bucks at him and he will be in a place where it all happens every knight get it . Money talks Unless the wife has different thoughts then it will be LV no question.

 

He has two more years on his contract and a limited NTC, so he only gets so much control on where he ends up.

[travel_dude]

9 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

My issue with Elliott isn't limited to his performance in the playoffs, outside of a 10 game run Elliott was well below average. I am not bringing him back based on a 10 game stretch.

 

If you think that bringing in a 37 year old goalie that played for the last 3 years on a losing team is smart, then go ahead.  I would take chances on Smith long before I would ever sign Miller.

[JustAFlamer]

Cap world = i am more worried at throwing term and $$ at unproven #1, or massive $$ at a proven #1 that may be in decline.

5 goalies in past 2 seasons would throw up warning flags and raise cost for anyone we went after to come here,

 

i still say both Johnson and Elliot were above average when comparing to league, however i also state this based on basically ignoring the first 2 months where entire team was garbage, and trying to learn new system as well as defence/goalie trust/chemistry issues.

With the goalies in Stockton knocking on door, would say sign either Elliot or Johnson to 2y prove it contract (cheap), see what we have in Rittich or Gilles

AND get someone to take a long look at Goalie Coach.

 

Right now between us and Dallas we are the 2 teams Goalies go to, to Die.

[Flyerfan52]

2 minutes ago, zima said:

Why would any one think MAF will come to Canada unless Montreal and of course not going to happen with Price as # 1. LV Knights will be his destination they will through big bucks at him and he will be in a place where it all happens every knight get it . Money talks Unless the wife has different thoughts then it will be LV no question.

The big $s doesn't apply unless he's bought out. Otherwise the 2 remaining years on his contract (5.75 in cap & real $s) apply.

****************************************************************************************

Does anyone think we should offer the Hero of France a 2 year, 2 way contract? He's 33 & I don't know much about him other than this IIHF Worlds but his play against Finland & now Canada impresses. Florian Hardy is of course the 1 I mean. Due to the short seasons in Europe he might be an off the wall pickup for backup.

Best case we get a late bloomer like Thomas. Worst case we send him to the ECHL on the cheap.

[phoenix66]

I think we look to much at whether a goalie is good, and not enough at the system he plays in .Good or bad. I'd like to hope the Flames take that into account when they make their decision. There's more to my opinions on who would be a good fit, than just how do they play now.

For example, I mentioned last week, it bugged me when Elliot make the comment , in reference to "The Goal" that "he would have chosen the same save selection"

Elliot is a positional goalie.. he plays a certain position , based on game situation .

This makes him prone to tip-ins, deflections, crowded crease goals etc.(sound familiar?)

He needs to play in a system where he almost always sees the shot , and the defense keeps the play away from his crease . (like St Louis)

 

Last night Talbot said, in regards to the game winning goal "I wasnt able to read the shooters release in time"

he makes his plays based on knowing what kind of shot is coming based on how the puck carrier is releasing ..

this is the new way , and the most successful goalies are good at it(Lundqvist, Dubnyk,Bob, Price, etc).. you almost always have to beat him clean, (or yank his pad lol) 

 

MAF currently plays in "our " system .. PITT and CGY use the same playbook, so that tells he should have the same level of play here . I noticed when he goes down for traffic, he covers post to post, doesnt allow many crowd goals.. you have to beat him clean.

Holtby, is more positional.. once PIT discovered a hole on his Glove side, they exploited

Jonathan Quick.. if you can get the puck up , you'll beat him most times. but he;s successful in our conference because so many teams play a crowded crease area game.. he allows almost nothing along the ice 

 

My reservation with Grubauer, is he plays a similar style to Holtby, and also the book on him is a weak high glove side .. which tells me , in our system.. any teams that can pick spots , will beat him more than not 

 

we need a goalie that has shown success , in system that faces screen shots, scrambles in front of the net .. they need to be athletic, and cover most of the net when theyre blind ..  Johnson is very good at it , he just has some tendencies to get out of position with no recovery plan .. but if you notice he doesnt allow a lot of ice level goals

 

with Bishop gone,  MAF tops my list for that .. I don't believe Grubauer would have much more success than Elliot here 

Mrazek is quite similar , as is Lehner 

 

 

that being said-- Jason Botterill(Pittsburgh AGM) just became the new Buffalo GM

The odds of Fleury now being traded to Buffalo and Lehner coming available just went up 

[MAC331]

27 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I think we look to much at whether a goalie is good, and not enough at the system he plays in .Good or bad. I'd like to hope the Flames take that into account when they make their decision. There's more to my opinions on who would be a good fit, than just how do they play now.

For example, I mentioned last week, it bugged me when Elliot make the comment , in reference to "The Goal" that "he would have chosen the same save selection"

Elliot is a positional goalie.. he plays a certain position , based on game situation .

This makes him prone to tip-ins, deflections, crowded crease goals etc.(sound familiar?)

He needs to play in a system where he almost always sees the shot , and the defense keeps the play away from his crease . (like St Louis)

 

Last night Talbot said, in regards to the game winning goal "I wasnt able to read the shooters release in time"

he makes his plays based on knowing what kind of shot is coming based on how the puck carrier is releasing ..

this is the new way , and the most successful goalies are good at it(Lundqvist, Dubnyk,Bob, Price, etc).. you almost always have to beat him clean, (or yank his pad lol) 

 

MAF currently plays in "our " system .. PITT and CGY use the same playbook, so that tells he should have the same level of play here . I noticed when he goes down for traffic, he covers post to post, doesnt allow many crowd goals.. you have to beat him clean.

Holtby, is more positional.. once PIT discovered a hole on his Glove side, they exploited

Jonathan Quick.. if you can get the puck up , you'll beat him most times. but he;s successful in our conference because so many teams play a crowded crease area game.. he allows almost nothing along the ice 

 

My reservation with Grubauer, is he plays a similar style to Holtby, and also the book on him is a weak high glove side .. which tells me , in our system.. any teams that can pick spots , will beat him more than not 

 

we need a goalie that has shown success , in system that faces screen shots, scrambles in front of the net .. they need to be athletic, and cover most of the net when theyre blind ..  Johnson is very good at it , he just has some tendencies to get out of position with no recovery plan .. but if you notice he doesnt allow a lot of ice level goals

 

with Bishop gone,  MAF tops my list for that .. I don't believe Grubauer would have much more success than Elliot here 

Mrazek is quite similar , as is Lehner 

 

 

that being said-- Jason Botterill(Pittsburgh AGM) just became the new Buffalo GM

The odds of Fleury now being traded to Buffalo and Lehner coming available just went up 

You have a very active mind

[travel_dude]

39 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

that being said-- Jason Botterill(Pittsburgh AGM) just became the new Buffalo GM

The odds of Fleury now being traded to Buffalo and Lehner coming available just went up 

 

I don't get that line of thinking.  There is no benefit to PITTS to make the trade, as they would lose Lehner for nothing.  

[phoenix66]

18 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I don't get that line of thinking.  There is no benefit to PITTS to make the trade, as they would lose Lehner for nothing.  

Pitts needs to trade Fleury..  Botterill and Rutherford have a working history, if he wants Fleury in Buffalo he has the inside track

 - when they make the trade, that makes Lehner available... Calgary trades for Lehner

[cross16]

I dont' see the line of thinking where Botteril would want to acquire Fleury. Buffalo was 4th best in save percentage last year but dead last in shots against, one of the worst scoring teams 5 on 5 and were terrible trying to hold leads. 

Goaltending isn't a real pressing issue for them so not sure why a new GM would waste assets addressing that position when so many other needs remain. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

Pitts needs to trade Fleury..  Botterill and Rutherford have a working history, if he wants Fleury in Buffalo he has the inside track

 - when they make the trade, that makes Lehner available... Calgary trades for Lehner

 

Inside track?  MAF has a no trade list, and BUFF would be the last place he would go.  

To humour your trade idea, how does Buffalo trade for a goalie and still have Lehner available for trade to CGY?  Buffalo would have to make Lehner available to LV.  He would be one of the better options for LV.  So he's gone for nothing.  No benefit to BUFF at all, other than trading assets for a goalie and losing another goalie for nothing.

 

 

[phoenix66]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

I dont' see the line of thinking where Botteril would want to acquire Fleury. Buffalo was 4th best in save percentage last year but dead last in shots against, one of the worst scoring teams 5 on 5 and were terrible trying to hold leads. 

Goaltending isn't a real pressing issue for them so not sure why a new GM would waste assets addressing that position when so many other needs remain. 

I'd like to think that's right ,cuz there's not a whole lot of other logical places to trade MAF but Calgary,  but new GM's like to make a mark.. adding a Champion Goalie does that . Also remember the first thing Murray did was bring in Lehner from Ottawa

I can just see it happening is all.. and if it does , we should be all over Lehner. 

 

35 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Inside track?  MAF has a no trade list, and BUFF would be the last place he would go.  

To humour your trade idea, how does Buffalo trade for a goalie and still have Lehner available for trade to CGY?  Buffalo would have to make Lehner available to LV.  He would be one of the better options for LV.  So he's gone for nothing.  No benefit to BUFF at all, other than trading assets for a goalie and losing another goalie for nothing.

 

 

makes the trade with Pittsburgh and then turns around and trades Lehners rights to Calgary? Before the expansion draft even happens ? Then Calgary Protects Lehner.. LV never gets a crack at him at all..

Even if Pittsburgh with the cup in 7 games , season is over before the 15th of June ..it all gets done before the draft

 

 

Again , I dont think this happens .. I just said the odds of it went way up ..

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

I'd like to think that's right ,cuz there's not a whole lot of other logical places to trade MAF but Calgary,  but new GM's like to make a mark.. adding a Champion Goalie does that . Also remember the first thing Murray did was bring in Lehner from Ottawa

I can just see it happening is all.. and if it does , we should be all over Lehner. 

 

makes the trade with Pittsburgh and then turns around and trades Lehners rights to Calgary? Before the expansion draft even happens ? Then Calgary Protects Lehner.. LV never gets a crack at him at all..

Even if Pittsburgh with the cup in 7 games , season is over before the 15th of June ..it all gets done before the draft

 

 

Again , I dont think this happens .. I just said the odds of it went way up ..

 

The window would be very short to do that.  Like a couple of days if PITTS goes to the final.  The list of protected players is due on the 17th.  MAF trade will come down to the wire, and like I said Buffalo would be on his list of no-go cities.  Speculation, but not exactly a team trending towards the cup.

 

To summarize:

Buffalo pays a high price for MAF in trade.

Buffalo trades rights to Lehner for no better than a 3rd.

They have upgraded their goaltending, but at what cost.

 

The logistics is the difficult part of any three team deals.  CGY would just as likely be in on MAF, so Buffalo wouldn't have any deal in place with CGY until after Buffalo closes the deal.  If MAF doesn't go, they would have to have a goalie signed to have one to protect.

 

I just don't think this is even remotely likely.  I'm no GM, but I think the risk is way higher than the reward.  Buffalo has a team a few years away from being a playoff team, so trading for MAF doesn't fit.  They would be better off sticking with what they had and developing a prospect goalie over the next 3-5 years.