Goaltending

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Those aging players and the disappearing ones mentioned are the only reason they are in the playoffs so I don't see them as weaknesses. Like I said most times it is the least injured with the hot goaltending that wins.

Weakness in the playoffs.  Ovi was a non-factor this playoff season.  

[MAC331]

7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Weakness in the playoffs.  Ovi was a non-factor this playoff season.  

He wasn't alone on that team and now look at PIT in the final, they have 3 stars without  shots on goal let alone scoring. LOL

[robrob74]

3 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

He wasn't alone on that team and now look at PIT in the final, they have 3 stars without  shots on goal let alone scoring. LOL

 

To use your season argument, those three stars with no points did get them to the finals though, while those other ones got them how far? :)-

[Carty]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

Weakness in the playoffs.  Ovi was a non-factor this playoff season.  

 

Ovi had both a bad knee and hamstring during the playoffs...   His wife posted a pic of the hammy after the Caps were eliminated...   https://www.russianmachineneverbreaks.com/2017/05/12/nastya-ovechkina-shares-grotesque-photo-of-a-bruise-on-alex-ovechkins-leg/

 

Part of the knee damage came from game 5 of the 1st round when Kadri caught him with a low bridge...   https://sports.yahoo.com/news/kadri-takes-ovechkins-knee-low-hip-check-001545273.html

 

It is quite unusual that I would ever defend Ovi, but it sure seems like he was playing hurt for most of the playoffs...

 

 

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, Carty said:

 

Ovi had both a bad knee and hamstring during the playoffs...   His wife posted a pic of the hammy after the Caps were eliminated...   https://www.russianmachineneverbreaks.com/2017/05/12/nastya-ovechkina-shares-grotesque-photo-of-a-bruise-on-alex-ovechkins-leg/

 

Part of the knee damage came from game 5 of the 1st round when Kadri caught him with a low bridge...   https://sports.yahoo.com/news/kadri-takes-ovechkins-knee-low-hip-check-001545273.html

 

It is quite unusual that I would ever defend Ovi, but it sure seems like he was playing hurt for most of the playoffs...

 

 

 

I admit I was not aware of that.  Still makes my point that he was not a big contributor in the playoffs.

[AlbertaBoy12]

Nvm editted for stupid. 

[travel_dude]

Back to goalies.

 

My preference would be Grubauer, then Raanta.  Signing Mason as a UFA would help mitigate the risk.

I do think that Elliott could be in for a turnaround season, but the cost (3rd) and a divided fanbase makes him being re-signed less likely to happen.

 

If we are trading for MAF, then the price needs to be reasonable.  Send them McDonald and something else.  At full salary, he shouldn't command a big return.  We are essentially helping them out of a cap crunch.  We can likely use Rittich or Gillies as the backup, though I would like to insulate them for another year.

 

 

[MAC331]

1 minute ago, travel_dude said:

Back to goalies.

 

My preference would be Grubauer, then Raanta.  Signing Mason as a UFA would help mitigate the risk.

I do think that Elliott could be in for a turnaround season, but the cost (3rd) and a divided fanbase makes him being re-signed less likely to happen.

 

If we are trading for MAF, then the price needs to be reasonable.  Send them McDonald and something else.  At full salary, he shouldn't command a big return.  We are essentially helping them out of a cap crunch.  We can likely use Rittich or Gillies as the backup, though I would like to insulate them for another year.

 

 

I think you are being to picky about losing a 3rd round pick for Elliott to stay. I don't like this attitude settling in of "well that didn't work" so let's try something else. Elliott was a part of why we got as far as we did this season and bringing him back also provides some familiarity for the rest of the team. I would also be for bringing in someone like Grubauer as part of the challenger mix we now have and see where this goes.

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I think you are being to picky about losing a 3rd round pick for Elliott to stay. I don't like this attitude settling in of "well that didn't work" so let's try something else. Elliott was a part of why we got as far as we did this season and bringing him back also provides some familiarity for the rest of the team. I would also be for bringing in someone like Grubauer as part of the challenger mix we now have and see where this goes.

 

It's not about what I think.  It's about what BT feels he should do.  No 2nd or 3rd in 2017.  No 3rd in 2018?  

BT said the same about both goalies being the reason they got to the playoffs.  Realistically he should not bring back both.  BT tried out Setoguchi and Raymond.  Both were moved on from.  Same with Bollig.  If he decides to move on from Elliott, then he has his reasons.

If he decides to re-sign him as the starter or backup, then he has to live with that decision, which could mean his job.

[Prids]

25 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's not about what I think.  It's about what BT feels he should do.  No 2nd or 3rd in 2017.  No 3rd in 2018?  

 

 

But what is it going to cost to bring in an unproven Grubauer? Now was are once again relying on a young goalie to come into Calgary. He was playing behind a really good Washington team. 

[travel_dude]

49 minutes ago, Prids said:

 

But what is it going to cost to bring in an unproven Grubauer? Now was are once again relying on a young goalie to come into Calgary. He was playing behind a really good Washington team. 

 

The cost is the cost; if it doesn't work for us, we move on.  As some have suggested, we have a set deal in place for a trade with LV for said goalie.

 

Washington is good, but I don't see them as having a better defense than us.  They have a Trotz-based system which helps.

Bringing in Grubauer is at worst bringing in a very good backup.  Signing Mason (or similar) provides that fall-back in case he has some trouble adjusting in the early going.  

 

We have to look beyond the immediate.  We can't just assume that Gillies, Rittich or Parsons is NHL ready in 2 years, or a starter in 3.  We have to have a goalie to take us till we find the next great one.  If that happens in 3 years, then we have a good problem.

 

[Flyerfan52]

3 hours ago, MAC331 said:

I think you are being to picky about losing a 3rd round pick for Elliott to stay. I don't like this attitude settling in of "well that didn't work" so let's try something else. Elliott was a part of why we got as far as we did this season and bringing him back also provides some familiarity for the rest of the team. I would also be for bringing in someone like Grubauer as part of the challenger mix we now have and see where this goes.

How often do we repeat what didn't work? Sometimes you just wash your hands & try something new.

[MAC331]

15 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

How often do we repeat what didn't work? Sometimes you just wash your hands & try something new.

I think we have been doing way to much a that since Kipper departed. I don't think Elliott is bad goalie, what I would like to see is a 2 year deal for him and have the challenge begin to replace him. I think if the team had no real issues surrounding him maybe the team rallies around him.

[AlbertaBoy12]

11 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I think we have been doing way to much a that since Kipper departed. I don't think Elliott is bad goalie, what I would like to see is a 2 year deal for him and have the challenge begin to replace him. I think if the team had no real issues surrounding him maybe the team rallies around him.

I have said it before, and I agree, I wouldnt be surprised if elliot is back next year. I think it honestly depends what the cost is to bring in someone like grubauer or raanta, but I would be ok with a tandem of elliott and grubauer, just to see what we have with a grubauer for example. I think elliott was a good goalie for the team, hes not going to win us a championship but for right now hes good.

[MAC331]

Just now, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I have said it before, and I agree, I wouldnt be surprised if elliot is back next year. I think it honestly depends what the cost is to bring in someone like grubauer or raanta, but I would be ok with a tandem of elliott and grubauer, just to see what we have with a grubauer for example. I think elliott was a good goalie for the team, hes not going to win us a championship but for right now hes good.

This is why I have trouble when some say it didn't work with Elliott, well what didn't work ? No we didn't go to the SC then again we were not really suppose to. As a team we overcame a lot this season, new coaching staff, new systems, new goalies and a lot of experimenting with defense pairings and forward lines. At the end of the day it is all the goalies fault it didn't work. I don't think so.

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

I have said it before, and I agree, I wouldnt be surprised if elliot is back next year. I think it honestly depends what the cost is to bring in someone like grubauer or raanta, but I would be ok with a tandem of elliott and grubauer, just to see what we have with a grubauer for example. I think elliott was a good goalie for the team, hes not going to win us a championship but for right now hes good.

 

I'll ask it again....

Do you think it's worth a 2018 3rd rounder to sign Elliott for approximately the same goaltending as UFA Mason?

[AlbertaBoy12]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'll ask it again....

Do you think it's worth a 2018 3rd rounder to sign Elliott for approximately the same goaltending as UFA Mason?

It really depends if you think mason is going to be more expensive then elliott in my opinion. I think mason is obviously a slightly better goaltender, but at the same time if hes not willing to accept a short term deal do you really want him here for 4 years? im not sure I do.

[travel_dude]

15 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:

It really depends if you think mason is going to be more expensive then elliott in my opinion. I think mason is obviously a slightly better goaltender, but at the same time if hes not willing to accept a short term deal do you really want him here for 4 years? im not sure I do.

 

Starters can't name their prices as much these days, unless they are tops in the league.  I think the term given to Bishop is insane, but they don;t exactly handle goalies that well there.  Too many cheaper options that used to be backups.  I don't think he will get offered more than $4m anyway.  Two years would be best, as it could give us enough time to get Gillies up to the right level.  But even at 4 years, he is still a younger guy than Elliott and the same age as Bernier.  

 

There's no that many comparables this year for UFA's that are coming off big contracts.  Pavelec, Bernier, Mason, Miller.  Of those guys (except Miller), Mason has been more consistent and isn;t ready for the retirement home (like Miller will be in a short period of time).

[phoenix66]

see this is what makes me keep circling back to believing MAF is the target .

 All the other names being touted as experiences starter options.. Mason, Howard, Miller, Elliot, Smith..etc.. none of them are affected by the ED

we are the only team who can take a backup or 1B option and protect them.. why hasn't BT filled that spot?.. we could so easily grab a Raanta, a Grubauer or similar.. and circle back to the starter after the ED via trade or Free agency.

Im open to ideas, but to me that only says he's planning on getting MAF and protecting him with it..

The only other option that comes to mind is he already has some LV deal worked out .. but again , he could just trade direct for one of those guys and not need to use LV

[travel_dude]

Not sure why you expect a deal this far from the draft.  If two GM has talked, they know what the other side is asking for.  There is no rush by the dealing GM; they can hold off as long as the interest hasn't lessened.  

[phoenix66]

23 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Not sure why you expect a deal this far from the draft.  If two GM has talked, they know what the other side is asking for.  There is no rush by the dealing GM; they can hold off as long as the interest hasn't lessened.  

Im talking about the ones that need to happen before the draft ,if they are going to happen at all.. Grubauer and Raanta being the most prominent.. like I said , we are the only team with the ability to trade for them , and protect them.. or they get lost to LV

 

Darling already got traded, Bishop already got traded ..

 

outside of those 2 , and possibly some similar ones. the rest are available after the ED.. its a waste of a valuable asset in that protection spot , we can add, what other teams have to get rid of or risk losing for nothing ..

If that is the plan for that spot, nothing is going to change in 3 weeks...we're not in a bidding war ... unless, he has different plans for that spot

[robrob74]

43 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Im talking about the ones that need to happen before the draft ,if they are going to happen at all.. Grubauer and Raanta being the most prominent.. like I said , we are the only team with the ability to trade for them , and protect them.. or they get lost to LV

 

Darling already got traded, Bishop already got traded ..

 

outside of those 2 , and possibly some similar ones. the rest are available after the ED.. its a waste of a valuable asset in that protection spot , we can add, what other teams have to get rid of or risk losing for nothing ..

If that is the plan for that spot, nothing is going to change in 3 weeks...we're not in a bidding war ... unless, he has different plans for that spot

 

 

Lets pretend we are looking at all teams? If this were an entry draft, out of all players left u protected, who would be BPA. There are going to be goalies available, but vegas can only choose how many? Who would be more valuable than a goalie that was unprotected? 

 

I see your logic and it makes sense. But they only choose one from each team. 

 

I havent looked into it, but I am in a spot where I can't wait to get the off-season going so a few things happen.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

Im talking about the ones that need to happen before the draft ,if they are going to happen at all.. Grubauer and Raanta being the most prominent.. like I said , we are the only team with the ability to trade for them , and protect them.. or they get lost to LV

 

Darling already got traded, Bishop already got traded ..

 

outside of those 2 , and possibly some similar ones. the rest are available after the ED.. its a waste of a valuable asset in that protection spot , we can add, what other teams have to get rid of or risk losing for nothing ..

If that is the plan for that spot, nothing is going to change in 3 weeks...we're not in a bidding war ... unless, he has different plans for that spot

 

You assume we are the only team wanting to upgrade in nets.  WPG, NYI, COL, and PHI had disappointing seasons.  All hey have to do is offer a better pick or prospect.  None of those teams have to protect the goalies they have.  Perhaps they would prefer to lose one of their existing goalies.  None of the goalies for those teams had amazing seasons.

 

 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

You assume we are the only team wanting to upgrade in nets.  WPG, NYI, COL, and PHI had disappointing seasons.  All hey have to do is offer a better pick or prospect.  None of those teams have to protect the goalies they have.  Perhaps they would prefer to lose one of their existing goalies.  None of the goalies for those teams had amazing seasons.

 

 

 

 

Does that include Mason then? Some here are suggesting him and from what i remember, he has had an up and down and up and down career. 

[phoenix66]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

You assume we are the only team wanting to upgrade in nets.  WPG, NYI, COL, and PHI had disappointing seasons.  All hey have to do is offer a better pick or prospect.  None of those teams have to protect the goalies they have.  Perhaps they would prefer to lose one of their existing goalies.  None of the goalies for those teams had amazing seasons.

 

 

All very good points.. these teams all are looking likely for a new starter , but they all also have a backup , or a prospect that they will want to protect already  (Hallebuyck,Greiss,Pickard,Stolarz).. i don't see any of these being tossed up for free, unless a top starter was acquired. and again , with the exception of Fleury , these can all be had after the ED now.. with the exception of Colorado it could be argued Raanta and Grubauer aren't upgrades to their current "next one"