MAC331 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said: So much for that murphy is being bought out. I don't understand this part. Is there something physically wrong with him ? Was all this necessary just to get Eddie Lack ? Oh well I am not going to lose any sleep over this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 1 hour ago, The_People1 said: We all wanted a D from Carolina because they have so many... But the last guy we wanted was Murphy. I wonder if there was a deal to be made where we add a bit more to land one of their other kids. Especially Bouma or Stajan (clear room for Jankowski). Or eat the full $4-mil of Lack's contract. Good riddance to Keagan Kanzig though. What a horrible draft pick. We gambled on size and lost. I think Lack is a good backup. Carolina gave us a high risk high reward D to dump him to us. Not many other teams were looking for a backup. It was either us or a buyout. Can't say this for sure, but given i've heard Carolina has wanted Murphy gone for a while I think in order to get Lack for cheap and get Carolina to eat money they probably had to take Murphy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 8 minutes ago, cross16 said: Can't say this for sure, but given i've heard Carolina has wanted Murphy gone for a while I think in order to get Lack for cheap and get Carolina to eat money they probably had to take Murphy. Why didn't Carolina just bury Murphy like some have suggested we do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 8 minutes ago, The_People1 said: Why didn't Carolina just bury Murphy like some have suggested we do? Because burying a player cost you a roster spot, contract spot, and ice time from a prospect you want to develop. Carolina is deep in D prospects and probably doesn't want Murphy "clogging" things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 2 hours ago, phoenix66 said: Gives me a firm belief we will see the Vancouver Lack for us this year . Even better I'd like to see the Eddie Lack that played 1 year for the Moose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 35 minutes ago, Carty said: Isn't it too early to be negotiating term? I thought it was just talking time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, robrob74 said: Isn't it too early to be negotiating term? I thought it was just talking time? If you believe what the NHL tells you... yes they only talk about fit and interest and have zero salary discussions for an entire week.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, cross16 said: If you believe what the NHL tells you... yes they only talk about fit and interest and have zero salary discussions for an entire week.... Of course official NHL protocol is strictly followed NHL for the week leading up to the draft... That little $#%@ gnome would never misrepresent something or lie to all of us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, robrob74 said: Isn't it too early to be negotiating term? I thought it was just talking time? Is this 1.375M per season or 2.75M per ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 I was just thinking that with retention on both Smith & Lack while allowing for the Murphy buyout (part of the cost for Lack) we are spending 5.725 for the tandem. Roughly what MAF gets in salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, MAC331 said: Is this 1.375M per season or 2.75M per ? 2.75 per season. Found out this morning from Philly people. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 On 6/26/2017 at 6:40 PM, MAC331 said: Why is it so hard to accept our GM at face value when he has said Rittich needs another year in the AHL. He showed well and the GM is saying do it again. Plus having a few layers in case of an injury is smart. I have little to no confidence in BT when it comes to goaltending. To me it seems he has pretty much failed, when the only targetted need is slightly better than average goaltending. Our present goaltending tandem does not instill any more confidence than the Elliott Johnson combo last year. I am left with the feeling, lets throw these two out and see if they can stick to the wall.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 On 2017-06-30 at 1:08 PM, Carty said: That was confirmed today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 41 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said: I have little to no confidence in BT when it comes to goaltending. To me it seems he has pretty much failed, when the only targetted need is slightly better than average goaltending. Our present goaltending tandem does not instill any more confidence than the Elliott Johnson combo last year. I am left with the feeling, lets throw these two out and see if they can stick to the wall.... Who would give you confidence ? I am not going dispute you but every year is different. I think we are seeing a distinct effort to get us good experienced goaltending until such time as we get to our own prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertaBoy12 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 20 minutes ago, MAC331 said: Who would give you confidence ? I am not going dispute you but every year is different. I think we are seeing a distinct effort to get us good experienced goaltending until such time as we get to our own prospects. There is so many options out there. I dont really understand the problem with smith or lack. I didnt love the smith trade for the assets we gave up but at the same time hes a better goalie then elliott. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 2 hours ago, AlbertaBoy12 said: There is so many options out there. I dont really understand the problem with smith or lack. I didnt love the smith trade for the assets we gave up but at the same time hes a better goalie then elliott. Both our GM and GG are familiar with Smith and Lack respectively plus the response by both goalies to be thrilled coming here says a lot IMO. I think we will be in good hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 2 hours ago, MAC331 said: Who would give you confidence ? I am not going dispute you but every year is different. I think we are seeing a distinct effort to get us good experienced goaltending until such time as we get to our own prospects. I am hard pressed to say this is a sideways move. Elliott had much better numbers than Smith the previous 4 years to coming here. Smith however did play 60+ games a couple of seasons. Smith is long past his best year(2011-12) As to who I would prefer.. Well we let the Ben Bishop boat sail a couple of times. LA thought it important enough to prevent us from getting him last year. The few(handful) of better goalies better Goalies than Elliott are not or have not been available to us. (ie Fleury) Here are the top 50 goalie seasons recorded since 2010... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said: I am hard pressed to say this is a sideways move. Elliott had much better numbers than Smith the previous 4 years to coming here. Smith however did play 60+ games a couple of seasons. Smith is long past his best year(2011-12) As to who I would prefer.. Well we let the Ben Bishop boat sail a couple of times. LA thought it important enough to prevent us from getting him last year. The few(handful) of better goalies better Goalies than Elliott are not or have not been available to us. (ie Fleury) Here are the top 50 goalie seasons recorded since 2010... You have to look at the team's they were playing in front of. Eliott's numbers would have been much worse playing in front of that Arizona team. GAA is about the worst stat to judge goalies on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertaBoy12 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 5 minutes ago, JTech780 said: You have to look at the team's they were playing in front of. Eliott's numbers would have been much worse playing in front of that Arizona team. GAA is about the worst stat to judge goalies on. Seriously eh? rask and price are 49th and 50th on that list do we not want them on our team either? Maybe rask is on the back 9 of his career but still, I think smith will be good here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 Seeing what Steve Mason signed for today, I definetly would have preferred the flames go that route and save the assets rather than trading for smith. Pretty had to argue smith is an upgrade over Mason and It's marginal at best. One was free and one the Flames gave up a lot for in trade. Too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 sad thing is , Smith could guide us to a cup next year and all we will hear in here is "of course he did , look at the defense he was playing behind" and complain that Elliot wasnt given that opportunity , or that X player would have done it better . personally I think Mason is the Equivalent of Elliot.. lots of potential , Looks great on paper,but has never been able to run with the ball when its been handed to him . The powers that be obviously thought this was a better fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 16 minutes ago, JTech780 said: You have to look at the team's they were playing in front of. Eliott's numbers would have been much worse playing in front of that Arizona team. GAA is about the worst stat to judge goalies on. He topped the charts in Sv% too: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertaBoy12 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 12 minutes ago, cross16 said: Seeing what Steve Mason signed for today, I definetly would have preferred the flames go that route and save the assets rather than trading for smith. Pretty had to argue smith is an upgrade over Mason and It's marginal at best. One was free and one the Flames gave up a lot for in trade. Too bad. We dont really know if mason would have signed here, we can argue all day that he would have but who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted July 1, 2017 Report Share Posted July 1, 2017 I'll see your GAA and SV% argument and point out Mason faced a much easier workload devoid of high danger shots , Elliot didnt excel while also allowing his goals in even less of a workload with even less dangerous shots Smith on the other hand faced more workload than any other goaltender with only MAF and Halak facing more dangerous shots On 5/25/2017 at 11:25 AM, cross16 said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now