Goaltending

[cccsberg]

11 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

I agree that is likely. Plus, I don't see Rittich as a future starter. With this being Smiths last season I would prefer someone with starter upside was under him. 

Personally I would sign and trade Rittich for a young goalie prospect with potential, or sign the most promising KHL/European guy to backup in Stockton.  I would play Gillies as Smith's backup getting 25-30 games and give Parsons the net in the AHL.  If both Gillies and Parsons crap the bed then next year its all-out for a solution, though both have been elite and carried their respective teams to championships as starters.  If they don't you have your natural succession plan well underway and can either let Smith walk or perhaps re-sign him for 1 year while Parsons stays in the AHL another year.

[jjgallow]

On 02/06/2018 at 0:09 PM, kehatch said:

 

I get frustration. But the entire "until you face the reality of my irrational hyperbole we will never win a cup" rant is way over the top. 

 

 

ok.   Speaking of way over the top,

 

Lets be completely honest.  What you just wrote, is over the top.    If you spoke to a person like that in real life, they would deflect the topic and either never bring it up with you or if possible, never speak with you again.   You've been doing it online for years and I just need you to understand, that, this kind of unprovoked personal attack is completely over the top.

 

At no point were you personally attacked.    People state their opinions, which in no way are directed at you as a person, and you make it personal.

 

You just need to stop that.  

 

You have been doing it for years, and, when you started, to be honest, Most people on here, and other internet forums, behaved that way.  You need to look around and notice that you are seeing less and less of it now.   This isn't a 1996 Usenet chat.     You are seeing less and less of it from senior members on here, especially.

 

For years, I've had strong opinions, and unconventional ideas on here.   Some were aweful.  Some were Really good.   Lately, and I don't mean always, but lately, they've pretty much been on the mark.     Yours haven't.  I'm just being honest.   We were nearly a cup contender and you've been telling everyone the sky isn't falling through consecutive playoff misses.  Maybe we just have different  standards.  I'm not sure.   Pretty clear to me the sky already fell and we need a new sky now.     I know you are a very loyal fan and you will defend the Flames and the organization against any criticism and I do respect that.   I would fallow suit, if I thought it would win us more games.   That has not been the case, I doubt it ever will, and that is why, Sometimes, an honest approach is an appropriate option for fans.

 

ps.  I won't address your counter-arguement here because literally everyone knows our biggest issues center around defense and goaltending.   Not forwards.  And I can't even begin to validate the thought that maybe the solution is to pay our forwards more.     I have been stressing for multiple years on here that we have a defense and goalting gap which is substantially wider than our forwards.  We're seeing that first hand right now.   This is not crazy talk.  This is now the talk of every office lounge and day to day fan in the City, and, for a reason.

[DirtyDeeds]

I can't see how posters here can think our goaltending issues have been fixed.

 

While Smith was good for awhile he failed later after the injury for whatever reasons.. What is the difference between Elliott who started weak and finished strong and Smith who started strong and finished weak. Both failed to help us get into or get anywhere in the playoffs.

 

Smith was always and is a short term fix to hopefully(big stretch) last until we possibly develop one of our prospects... None of our Prospects have shown they are ready for an NHL starting role. One has shown glimpses of being capable of an NHL backup role. and Gillies needs to show some consistency before he can be given an NHL role.

 

I think as long as we are saddled with this goaltending coach, we will never really develop any of our prospects, no matter how promising they may seem. I still would like to see just one success story from this goalie coach, that The Flames are so adamant that is the answer. Anyone? After all the time he spent with the farm team and now the Flames, can anyone name just one goalie he has succeeded in developing?

[MAC331]

38 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I can't see how posters here can think our goaltending issues have been fixed.

 

While Smith was good for awhile he failed later after the injury for whatever reasons.. What is the difference between Elliott who started weak and finished strong and Smith who started strong and finished weak. Both failed to help us get into or get anywhere in the playoffs.

 

Smith was always and is a short term fix to hopefully(big stretch) last until we possibly develop one of our prospects... None of our Prospects have shown they are ready for an NHL starting role. One has shown glimpses of being capable of an NHL backup role. and Gillies needs to show some consistency before he can be given an NHL role.

 

I think as long as we are saddled with this goaltending coach, we will never really develop any of our prospects, no matter how promising they may seem. I still would like to see just one success story from this goalie coach, that The Flames are so adamant that is the answer. Anyone? After all the time he spent with the farm team and now the Flames, can anyone name just one goalie he has succeeded in developing?

What is the measure before you know a young goaltender is ready for prime time ? 3 wins in a row or 10 wins in a row, no soft goals ? Just curious

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I can't see how posters here can think our goaltending issues have been fixed.

 

While Smith was good for awhile he failed later after the injury for whatever reasons.. What is the difference between Elliott who started weak and finished strong and Smith who started strong and finished weak. Both failed to help us get into or get anywhere in the playoffs.

 

Smith was always and is a short term fix to hopefully(big stretch) last until we possibly develop one of our prospects... None of our Prospects have shown they are ready for an NHL starting role. One has shown glimpses of being capable of an NHL backup role. and Gillies needs to show some consistency before he can be given an NHL role.

 

I think as long as we are saddled with this goaltending coach, we will never really develop any of our prospects, no matter how promising they may seem. I still would like to see just one success story from this goalie coach, that The Flames are so adamant that is the answer. Anyone? After all the time he spent with the farm team and now the Flames, can anyone name just one goalie he has succeeded in developing?

 

Sigalet is the normal "good guy" story here.  Hasn't really been good or bad, just works at his job.  The GM may also feel that he hasn't had the talent to work with.  Maybe true, but what good is he if he can;t raise a prospect to at least a decent backup.

 

I agree with your assessment of Smith.  He was a surprise, then no surprise, then a brutal surprise.  Overall, he was typical of Flames goaltending since Kipper.  Honestly, I don;t know the answer to the starter question.  Or at least I don't know there is anything that BT is willing to do to solve it.  Would Grubauser or Saros be an upgarde over Smith this year?  Maybe not right away, but that's not the crucial thing is it.  The crucial thing is having a goalie that can become the next starter.  He has to have more leeway than Elliott did the first (only) year.  If that means you trade Smith now and take the risk, so be it.  Perhaps you take less risk and use a combo with Smith until the TDL.  

 

Any way you look at it, Smith is a ticking time bomb.  He could be great for another half season and tail off when you need him.  He could be bad right from day 1.  Rittich and Gillies may not be able to handle more than a backup role this season; as in less than 25 games.  If BT doesn't do a serious amount of looking, then there's a good chance he's going to have another lotto team.

[DirtyDeeds]

22 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

What is the measure before you know a young goaltender is ready for prime time ? 3 wins in a row or 10 wins in a row, no soft goals ? Just curious

To answer that question you have to let the prospects play here. There is no 3 win or 10 wins, each one is different and requires time in the NHL to develop.

 

If only it was so easy.. "3 wins in NHL and they are guaranteed a starter.... lol  nope.

 

We all wish our prospects would make it easy decision and step up right away when the realities is they need time in minors and on farm which takes longer.

[conundrumed]

You think we have goalie trouble, look at the Islanders, lol. They have Greiss and Gudlevkis.

It's tough for me to say it's the goalie coach's fault because if you're a good enough goalie I don't think a coach can ruin you.

These goalies have been going hard 24/7 since they were kids so I don't think it's a case of, "you're only as good as your last coach".

I think it will be very difficult to outbid the Canes or Isles on any of the names floating around, they have a lot more buying power than us right now in picks.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I can't see how posters here can think our goaltending issues have been fixed.

 

While Smith was good for awhile he failed later after the injury for whatever reasons.. What is the difference between Elliott who started weak and finished strong and Smith who started strong and finished weak. Both failed to help us get into or get anywhere in the playoffs.

 

Smith was always and is a short term fix to hopefully(big stretch) last until we possibly develop one of our prospects... None of our Prospects have shown they are ready for an NHL starting role. One has shown glimpses of being capable of an NHL backup role. and Gillies needs to show some consistency before he can be given an NHL role.

 

I think as long as we are saddled with this goaltending coach, we will never really develop any of our prospects, no matter how promising they may seem. I still would like to see just one success story from this goalie coach, that The Flames are so adamant that is the answer. Anyone? After all the time he spent with the farm team and now the Flames, can anyone name just one goalie he has succeeded in developing?

 

I really don’t! It’s scary! Right now I see the two closest prospects topping out as decent back up goalies. That’s okay if we have a starter. 

 

Can Parsons become one? How many years away is that?

 

my problem is that we’ve spent so many assets on trying to stop gap the position. I like Hamonic, but the picks that it cost to fill both positions lately, D and G, is what I am really upset about. 

 

With th our supposed depth on D in the system, we’ve possibly paid an arm and a leg for 3 years is Hamonic. I know I am a little too pissed about it, but I think it is somewhat warranted.

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, DirtyDeeds said:

To answer that question you have to let the prospects play here. There is no 3 win or 10 wins, each one is different and requires time in the NHL to develop.

 

If only it was so easy.. "3 wins in NHL and they are guaranteed a starter.... lol  nope.

 

We all wish our prospects would make it easy decision and step up right away when the realities is they need time in minors and on farm which takes longer.

This why I asked the QUESTION I wasn't pretending to provide the answer. Let Rittich be the back up now, I don't think he can learn much more in Stockton. This would be the season to see what he can do with 30 games at the NHL level. It isn't ever going to be an EASY decision and you have to go down the road to find out. There will never be some magic moment down in the A " I think he is now ready".

[robrob74]

10 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

This why I asked the QUESTION I wasn't pretending to provide the answer. Let Rittich be the back up now, I don't think he can learn much more in Stockton. This would be the season to see what he can do with 30 games at the NHL level. It isn't ever going to be an EASY decision and you have to go down the road to find out. There will never be some magic moment down in the A " I think he is now ready".

 

I am really tired of having our goalies dictating the starting schedule. Play them enough to be fresh. No overplayed goalies please. Rittich was awesome as a backup until he had to become the starter. That’s on team breakdowns too though. His mental game probably got torn to shreds after. Does he learn from it? ? 

[conundrumed]

31 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I am really tired of having our goalies dictating the starting schedule. Play them enough to be fresh. No overplayed goalies please. Rittich was awesome as a backup until he had to become the starter. That’s on team breakdowns too though. His mental game probably got torn to shreds after. Does he learn from it? ? 

Oh yeah, he does.

Not one person here thinks Rittich will be a starter.

Not one person here thought Rittich was much of a signing.

Not one person here thought Rittich would be better than Gillies.

At some point, I'm thinking, I actually believe in him.

He's not athletic enough, I hear.

Jesus man, he does full on sideways splits, what do you want?

He plays his position and stays in his net, I don't get the "not athletic enough" argument.

Those goalies that look oh so athletic. It's because their fundamentals are a mess too often so they have to be.

Rittich has a good shot at being our future goalie imho.

He just had his rookie NHL season. He's understudying to Smith, also known as pure emotion.

He still has a lot to learn, he undoubtedly sees the payoff, the spot is his if he grabs it.

That's a ton of motivation. I'm hoping we've underestimated him, yet again.

[robrob74]

16 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Oh yeah, he does.

Not one person here thinks Rittich will be a starter.

Not one person here thought Rittich was much of a signing.

Not one person here thought Rittich would be better than Gillies.

At some point, I'm thinking, I actually believe in him.

He's not athletic enough, I hear.

Jesus man, he does full on sideways splits, what do you want?

He plays his position and stays in his net, I don't get the "not athletic enough" argument.

Those goalies that look oh so athletic. It's because their fundamentals are a mess too often so they have to be.

Rittich has a good shot at being our future goalie imho.

He just had his rookie NHL season. He's understudying to Smith, also known as pure emotion.

He still has a lot to learn, he undoubtedly sees the payoff, the spot is his if he grabs it.

That's a ton of motivation. I'm hoping we've underestimated him, yet again.

 

I might be, only in that I see him as a very decent to good backup. And I am just playing it down because I know others don’t agree. 

 

If he gets regular backup starts, then his game stays on. I think two in a row was good and then 4 was too much. But maybe that’s where mental and stamina have to meet? If you’re tired, the mental game goes downhill.

[cccsberg]

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I really don’t! It’s scary! Right now I see the two closest prospects topping out as decent back up goalies. That’s okay if we have a starter. 

 

Can Parsons become one? How many years away is that?

 

my problem is that we’ve spent so many assets on trying to stop gap the position. I like Hamonic, but the picks that it cost to fill both positions lately, D and G, is what I am really upset about. 

 

With th our supposed depth on D in the system, we’ve possibly paid an arm and a leg for 3 years is Hamonic. I know I am a little too pissed about it, but I think it is somewhat warranted.

All your points may be valid (I disagree on the prospect goalies) but when are we going to move on past the upset, past the anger on the Hamonic trade and other things and look to the future?  We are where we are, everyone probably has some legitimate gripes but really, there's zero we can do about it now.  

[DirtyDeeds]

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I really don’t! It’s scary! Right now I see the two closest prospects topping out as decent back up goalies. That’s okay if we have a starter. 

 

Can Parsons become one? How many years away is that?

 

my problem is that we’ve spent so many assets on trying to stop gap the position. I like Hamonic, but the picks that it cost to fill both positions lately, D and G, is what I am really upset about. 

 

With th our supposed depth on D in the system, we’ve possibly paid an arm and a leg for 3 years is Hamonic. I know I am a little too pissed about it, but I think it is somewhat warranted.

I just don't get all the Hamonic hate. He cost us a lot of picks yes but he is almost what we expected. He is still young, he started to fit into GG's system. I don't hold the rough start he had with Brodie.. Brodie had a terrible year. Yet many blame Hamonic because they struggled to start..

1. He comes at a decent term and price.
2. He is a true #4 or better D.
3. He plays tough in front of the net.
4. He is much be3tter than Stone.

Give him a break. The new coach and new system, now that he knows some of our D tenancies, he should turn out even better.

[robrob74]

45 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

All your points may be valid (I disagree on the prospect goalies) but when are we going to move on past the upset, past the anger on the Hamonic trade and other things and look to the future?  We are where we are, everyone probably has some legitimate gripes but really, there's zero we can do about it now.  

 

It just doesn’t make me confident about the future. I get BT is trying to build something. But there are too many gaps and very little to fill the holes.

 

If Gillies can fill the holes he has in his game, I can him being better. But he has too many gaffs to clean up. For his size, I think it could be a problem.

 

Deeds, I like Hamonic and he’s what the team needs. We are a relatively easy team to play. We hit, but I’d say we aren’t heavy in our own end. Hamonic does it. But what happens if he signs elsewhere when his contract ends? I think there are only 2 more seasons. In the long run it can be a big price to pay for 3 years of service. 

 

I like his contract. But it’s the price you pay I guess. On a team that’s supposed to be building for a future, I’d say it’s not as a safe trade as the Hamilton one. 

 

And i would trade Hamilton over Hamonic myself... for me it’s the cost to rent, not the player. 

[conundrumed]

8 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I just don't get all the Hamonic hate. He cost us a lot of picks yes but he is almost what we expected. He is still young, he started to fit into GG's system. I don't hold the rough start he had with Brodie.. Brodie had a terrible year. Yet many blame Hamonic because they struggled to start..

1. He comes at a decent term and price.
2. He is a true #4 or better D.
3. He plays tough in front of the net.
4. He is much be3tter than Stone.

Give him a break. The new coach and new system, now that he knows some of our D tenancies, he should turn out even better.

I can't believe how amazing the Isles' D has been without a leader. (sarcasm)

 

[conundrumed]

15 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I can't believe how amazing the Isles' D has been without a leader. (sarcasm)

 

Kind of interesting with the Isles. If you turn that trade around, it's been devastating for them. Giving up the most shots, by a lot.

You don't need a stats algorithm to see what happened. They traded Hamonic due to his western wishes.

It's Hamonic this Hamonic that on our side.

Look at the Isles, they are in complete dissaray.

The timeline is near exact us getting Hamonic.

Food for thought.

[robrob74]

34 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Kind of interesting with the Isles. If you turn that trade around, it's been devastating for them. Giving up the most shots, by a lot.

You don't need a stats algorithm to see what happened. They traded Hamonic due to his western wishes.

It's Hamonic this Hamonic that on our side.

Look at the Isles, they are in complete dissaray.

The timeline is near exact us getting Hamonic.

Food for thought.

 

I am totally not on him about his play. I live that he’s a team guy and sticks up for them, and the goalie especially. 

 

In beer league i get murdered for coming close to the crease. Until the flames got him, nobody ever even bumped a guy defending the front of our net. Plus react to anyone who touched our goalie.

 

this is why I say our team is not hard to play against. Ok, we’ve fought more than average. I don’t think that tells the whole story. It doesn’t tell me that guys are sticking up for each other, just that we are trying to change momentum, or the other way around.

[kehatch]

On 6/10/2018 at 6:55 PM, DirtyDeeds said:

I just don't get all the Hamonic hate. He cost us a lot of picks yes but he is almost what we expected. He is still young, he started to fit into GG's system. I don't hold the rough start he had with Brodie.. Brodie had a terrible year. Yet many blame Hamonic because they struggled to start..

1. He comes at a decent term and price.
2. He is a true #4 or better D.
3. He plays tough in front of the net.
4. He is much be3tter than Stone.

Give him a break. The new coach and new system, now that he knows some of our D tenancies, he should turn out even better.

 

I agree.  I think when you pay the same price for him as you did for Hamilton people are going to compare the two.  I also think it is fair to say if Treliving tried to move him now he isn't going to get the same value as he gave up.  But Hamonic is a quality player on a REALLY good contract and he fills a spot that is tough to fill.  I have no concerns with the trade or the player.  

[robrob74]

I really don’t have a hate on for Hamonic. I do however, hate the situation that brought him here. The picks, his only 3 years on contract and if he doesn’t stay and we can’t recoup any of the cost, then it’s a poor trade. 

 

I think he’ll do great this year. I just hope that for the cost that we have playing here for a long time. If it’s only the three years, then those draft picks potentially play longer than that, adding more to the team. 

 

For me, it’s growing long term success. Trading picks is not very productive for long term... Hamilton was, but I am unsure of Hamonic. 

 

Plus, I think it is the accumulative picks in many deals that irks n most. 

[travel_dude]

On 6/10/2018 at 7:36 PM, conundrumed said:

Kind of interesting with the Isles. If you turn that trade around, it's been devastating for them. Giving up the most shots, by a lot.

You don't need a stats algorithm to see what happened. They traded Hamonic due to his western wishes.

It's Hamonic this Hamonic that on our side.

Look at the Isles, they are in complete dissaray.

The timeline is near exact us getting Hamonic.

Food for thought.

 

I'm sure we will regret the loss of the 1st rounder.  It is what it is.  I don't really care.

I like Hammer in our top 4, just didn't like the results with Brodie, who everyone seems to agree was less than stellar this season.

 

Maybe try matching the D based on best fit, not handedness.  Look at all the results (EV, PK, PP) and see what you can draw from that.

Not you Conumdrumed, but BP.

Maybe Valimaki or Kylington is exactly the kind of player to match him with.  Or maybe it's Gio or Kulak or Andersson.  

[conundrumed]

41 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'm sure we will regret the loss of the 1st rounder.  It is what it is.  I don't really care.

I like Hammer in our top 4, just didn't like the results with Brodie, who everyone seems to agree was less than stellar this season.

 

Maybe try matching the D based on best fit, not handedness.  Look at all the results (EV, PK, PP) and see what you can draw from that.

Not you Conumdrumed, but BP.

Maybe Valimaki or Kylington is exactly the kind of player to match him with.  Or maybe it's Gio or Kulak or Andersson.  

C'mon, td, give me 7 figures and I'll show everyone the love.lol

But I'd need the GM role to add/subtract the roster to smithereens with Grade A prospects, lol.

[Heartbreaker]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

I like Hammer in our top 4, just didn't like the results with Brodie, who everyone seems to agree was less than stellar this season.

 

Maybe try matching the D based on best fit, not handedness.  Look at all the results (EV, PK, PP) and see what you can draw from that.

 

As long as we're not trying to put Giordano and Brodie back together, I'm agree. There seems to be a lot of messages going around on the board about how Brodie's problem this year was not playing on the right side with Giordano. 

 

Giordano - Hamilton > Giordano - Brodie. 

 

In my opinion, that's what makes Brodie expendable - not just the bad season. 

 

I like TJ a lot, and I think he'll be fine. I think that the extenuating circumstances this season probably had a lot to do with his play, and I hope he rebounds. However, I don't endorse breaking up a pair that is considered one of the best in the league. 

 

Love. 

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, Heartbreaker said:

 

As long as we're not trying to put Giordano and Brodie back together, I'm agree. There seems to be a lot of messages going around on the board about how Brodie's problem this year was not playing on the right side with Giordano. 

 

Giordano - Hamilton > Giordano - Brodie. 

 

In my opinion, that's what makes Brodie expendable - not just the bad season. 

 

I like TJ a lot, and I think he'll be fine. I think that the extenuating circumstances this season probably had a lot to do with his play, and I hope he rebounds. However, I don't endorse breaking up a pair that is considered one of the best in the league. 

 

Love. 

 

I expect Brodie to be dealt.

But all I was saying is make decisions based on fact not bias.

[MAC331]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I'm sure we will regret the loss of the 1st rounder.  It is what it is.  I don't really care.

I like Hammer in our top 4, just didn't like the results with Brodie, who everyone seems to agree was less than stellar this season.

 

Maybe try matching the D based on best fit, not handedness.  Look at all the results (EV, PK, PP) and see what you can draw from that.

Not you Conumdrumed, but BP.

Maybe Valimaki or Kylington is exactly the kind of player to match him with.  Or maybe it's Gio or Kulak or Andersson.  

If Brodie is traded I don't think it is out of the question that we may see Valimaki and Kylington round out the D with Kulak. From what I hear Valimaki is a solid player that has some maturity to him. Kylington although 21 he has 3 years in the A and should be well prepared to contribute. This would be the season to get them in there to gain some experience.