Goaltending

[kehatch]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

We get it , you don't think they can handle and we do, don't cry over your view not being adopted.

 

No, you don't get it.  I am not saying the can't handle it.  Smith has been a legitimate starter when healthy and Rittich had a good ratio of quality starts when doing spot duty as a back-up.  Those are facts, and it is possible the Flames have adequate to good goaltending next season.  But also facts: Smith is injury prone, coming off an injury, and will be 37.  Rittich isn't a young up and comer, he is a 25 year old who had significant struggles when he had to carry the load.  Expecting those two to take a step forward is naive, and not identifying a real possibility of a step back is foolhardy.  

 

What I am saying is that the Flames are taking a real gamble by going with the same two goalies as they did last season.  Goaltending was a problem last season and it is more likely to regress then improve.  It is also inconsistent with their approach in every other area (where they have spent significant assets to bring on depth and insurance).  I strongly disagree with your assessment that the Flames shouldn't be going for a cup this season.  We have given up futures, have our best players in their prime, and we just spent a bunch in free agency.  We are in our window.  I also think your assessment that the Flames can just go out and get a starter if things don't work out is naive.  You can't just get a starter early season, and catching up from a poor start is very difficult.  

 

I am also getting tired of this 'lets just hope' approach to goaltending.  First we ignored all the evidence to the contrary that Ramo/Berra/Ortio could be the guys.  Then people just ignored Hiller's age and history because he had one decent season.  Its the same situation and same debate.  Just replace Hiller with Smith, Ramo with Rittich, and Ortio with Gilles.  We are set up to have a repeat of the 15-16 goaltending all over again.  We just need to add this seasons version of Backstrom.  

 

Beyond those guys it has been a series of budget half measures.  Good goalies have been changing hand.  The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop.  Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run.  Talbot was an MVP in Edmonton when they made the playoffs.  Andersen is a big part of the Toronto movement.  Jones is a legitimate starter in San Jose.  I don't think being disappointed in having Smith/Rittich going into season unreasonable.  

[kehatch]

9 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I don’t agree. I understand the numbers/stats will say that goalies hold us back. It’s easy to place the blame on them because that’s what numbers say. Truth is we are a bonehead team that makes boneheaded mistakes at the wrong times that everyone knows you can’t make them. Other good teams make you pay. Then the goalies’ numbers go down and then the blame gets placed on them. 

 

Theyre not 100% to blame for this team’s failures. 

 

That said, I think we are screwed until we fix that part of the game because history has shown, only Carey Price can fix a team like ours. That is what everyone is asking for. 

On paper, we’ve looked better than the Canadiens, but in reality, were we? No.

 

That is the eternal excuse.  It isn't the goalies fault, it is the team in front of them.  And I guess it could work if you look at 1 of the 31 teams in the NHL.  But the reality is there are many teams worse then the Flames that have better goaltending.  In fact, the Flames had better goaltending until Smith got hurt. 

[cccsberg]

11 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

No, you don't get it.  I am not saying the can't handle it.  Smith has been a legitimate starter when healthy and Rittich had a good ratio of quality starts when doing spot duty as a back-up.  Those are facts, and it is possible the Flames have adequate to good goaltending next season.  But also facts: Smith is injury prone, coming off an injury, and will be 37.  Rittich isn't a young up and comer, he is a 25 year old who had significant struggles when he had to carry the load.  Expecting those two to take a step forward is naive, and not identifying a real possibility of a step back is foolhardy.  

 

What I am saying is that the Flames are taking a real gamble by going with the same two goalies as they did last season.  Goaltending was a problem last season and it is more likely to regress then improve.  It is also inconsistent with their approach in every other area (where they have spent significant assets to bring on depth and insurance).  I strongly disagree with your assessment that the Flames shouldn't be going for a cup this season.  We have given up futures, have our best players in their prime, and we just spent a bunch in free agency.  We are in our window.  I also think your assessment that the Flames can just go out and get a starter if things don't work out is naive.  You can't just get a starter early season, and catching up from a poor start is very difficult.  

 

I am also getting tired of this 'lets just hope' approach to goaltending.  First we ignored all the evidence to the contrary that Ramo/Berra/Ortio could be the guys.  Then people just ignored Hiller's age and history because he had one decent season.  Its the same situation and same debate.  Just replace Hiller with Smith, Ramo with Rittich, and Ortio with Gilles.  We are set up to have a repeat of the 15-16 goaltending all over again.  We just need to add this seasons version of Backstrom.  

 

Beyond those guys it has been a series of budget half measures.  Good goalies have been changing hand.  The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop.  Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run.  Talbot was an MVP in Edmonton when they made the playoffs.  Andersen is a big part of the Toronto movement.  Jones is a legitimate starter in San Jose.  I don't think being disappointed in having Smith/Rittich going into season unreasonable.  

No, you are beating a dead horse.  “Good goalies have been changing hands”?  BS: the only potentially good starter who changed hands this summer is Grubaer, who is far from proven.  “The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop”?  BS:  I guess just like last season when they also had Ben Bishop, who by the way is not available?  “It is also inconsistent with their approach in every other area”?  BS:  How many years in a row did our GM do the goalie shuffle going and getting the best available goalie(s) only to have it fizzle?  “Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run?”  Yeah, duh, Fleury is a likely Hall of Fame goalie, one of the best ever.  Should we have given up Tkachuk plus for a couple years of MAF?  Never, the rest of the team wasn’t in place to make that move.   We lost out on Anderson and Jones, just like 29 other teams.  So what’s your point?  They are not available.  Talbot has never been even close to league MVP, much less team MVP.  Even if we accepted your premise and gave up massive assets for him last year, even you would be all over BT now after Talbot crapped the bed this past season.  Is that due to your poor goalie evaluation skills or other things, things you refuse to acknowledge with our Flames goalies?

 

As for the Flames, if Smith plays less games the probability increases that he will not run into injuries from wear and tear.  Check.  Both Rittich and Gillies are both developing young goalies just getting their feet wet in the NHL.  As per normal young players we should expect they both will be better next year.  Check.  The Flames just hired a new coach who believes in accountability and doesn’t accept lackadaisical play, which should result in more consistent defensive play, and better goalie results.  Check.  The Flames brought in more speed in a better defensive player while moving out an offensive-minded guy who was a tire fire before pairing with Gio, plus are moving their second best D back to his preferred side, both of which “should” improve the D game and overall, plus goalie results.  Check.  

 

Having said all this you still have to play the games and we’ll see what happens.  It sure makes for good August blog fodder.

[kehatch]

30 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

No, you are beating a dead horse.  “Good goalies have been changing hands”?  BS: the only potentially good starter who changed hands this summer is Grubaer, who is far from proven.  “The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop”?  BS:  I guess just like last season when they also had Ben Bishop, who by the way is not available?  “It is also inconsistent with their approach in every other area”?  BS:  How many years in a row did our GM do the goalie shuffle going and getting the best available goalie(s) only to have it fizzle?  “Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run?”  Yeah, duh, Fleury is a likely Hall of Fame goalie, one of the best ever.  Should we have given up Tkachuk plus for a couple years of MAF?  Never, the rest of the team wasn’t in place to make that move.   We lost out on Anderson and Jones, just like 29 other teams.  So what’s your point?  They are not available.  Talbot has never been even close to league MVP, much less team MVP.  Even if we accepted your premise and gave up massive assets for him last year, even you would be all over BT now after Talbot crapped the bed this past season.  Is that due to your poor goalie evaluation skills or other things, things you refuse to acknowledge with our Flames goalies?

 

As for the Flames, if Smith plays less games the probability increases that he will not run into injuries from wear and tear.  Check.  Both Rittich and Gillies are both developing young goalies just getting their feet wet in the NHL.  As per normal young players we should expect they both will be better next year.  Check.  The Flames just hired a new coach who believes in accountability and doesn’t accept lackadaisical play, which should result in more consistent defensive play, and better goalie results.  Check.  The Flames brought in more speed in a better defensive player while moving out an offensive-minded guy who was a tire fire before pairing with Gio, plus are moving their second best D back to his preferred side, both of which “should” improve the D game and overall, plus goalie results.  Check.  

 

Having said all this you still have to play the games and we’ll see what happens.  It sure makes for good August blog fodder.

 

I get the argument of "I see the concern, but at this point we don't have a lot of options and there are some reasons to hope for good tending next season".  What I don't get is the posters who refuse to acknowledge the gamble, the issues with addressing this position over the last half a decade, or who take offense that others aren't giddy about the situation we are in.  

 

Every horse is dead in August.  There is very little new to discuss.  Goaltending will remain a hot topic until the season starts because it remains are biggest question mark going into the season.  

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, kehatch said:

 

No, you don't get it.  I am not saying the can't handle it.  Smith has been a legitimate starter when healthy and Rittich had a good ratio of quality starts when doing spot duty as a back-up.  Those are facts, and it is possible the Flames have adequate to good goaltending next season.  But also facts: Smith is injury prone, coming off an injury, and will be 37.  Rittich isn't a young up and comer, he is a 25 year old who had significant struggles when he had to carry the load.  Expecting those two to take a step forward is naive, and not identifying a real possibility of a step back is foolhardy.  

 

What I am saying is that the Flames are taking a real gamble by going with the same two goalies as they did last season.  Goaltending was a problem last season and it is more likely to regress then improve.  It is also inconsistent with their approach in every other area (where they have spent significant assets to bring on depth and insurance).  I strongly disagree with your assessment that the Flames shouldn't be going for a cup this season.  We have given up futures, have our best players in their prime, and we just spent a bunch in free agency.  We are in our window.  I also think your assessment that the Flames can just go out and get a starter if things don't work out is naive.  You can't just get a starter early season, and catching up from a poor start is very difficult.  

 

I am also getting tired of this 'lets just hope' approach to goaltending.  First we ignored all the evidence to the contrary that Ramo/Berra/Ortio could be the guys.  Then people just ignored Hiller's age and history because he had one decent season.  Its the same situation and same debate.  Just replace Hiller with Smith, Ramo with Rittich, and Ortio with Gilles.  We are set up to have a repeat of the 15-16 goaltending all over again.  We just need to add this seasons version of Backstrom.  

 

Beyond those guys it has been a series of budget half measures.  Good goalies have been changing hand.  The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop.  Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run.  Talbot was an MVP in Edmonton when they made the playoffs.  Andersen is a big part of the Toronto movement.  Jones is a legitimate starter in San Jose.  I don't think being disappointed in having Smith/Rittich going into season unreasonable.  

The entire team was a problem last season. The effort in front of these two goalies was not good which is why I think your judgement of the situation is partially wrong. Are the Flames taking a gamble, sure but one worth taking now IMO.

[The_Tribal Chief]

I'd have to go with Kehatch on this one Goaltending this year for the flames is very sub-par Because of Smith and his age and his ability to be injury Prone i think we should signed a goalie aswell along with our moves cause as it has shown Goalies are a Very Important peice and a peice we are very Weak on

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, kehatch said:

 

No, you don't get it.  I am not saying the can't handle it.  Smith has been a legitimate starter when healthy and Rittich had a good ratio of quality starts when doing spot duty as a back-up.  Those are facts, and it is possible the Flames have adequate to good goaltending next season.  But also facts: Smith is injury prone, coming off an injury, and will be 37.  Rittich isn't a young up and comer, he is a 25 year old who had significant struggles when he had to carry the load.  Expecting those two to take a step forward is naive, and not identifying a real possibility of a step back is foolhardy.  

 

What I am saying is that the Flames are taking a real gamble by going with the same two goalies as they did last season.  Goaltending was a problem last season and it is more likely to regress then improve.  It is also inconsistent with their approach in every other area (where they have spent significant assets to bring on depth and insurance).  I strongly disagree with your assessment that the Flames shouldn't be going for a cup this season.  We have given up futures, have our best players in their prime, and we just spent a bunch in free agency.  We are in our window.  I also think your assessment that the Flames can just go out and get a starter if things don't work out is naive.  You can't just get a starter early season, and catching up from a poor start is very difficult.  

 

I am also getting tired of this 'lets just hope' approach to goaltending.  First we ignored all the evidence to the contrary that Ramo/Berra/Ortio could be the guys.  Then people just ignored Hiller's age and history because he had one decent season.  Its the same situation and same debate.  Just replace Hiller with Smith, Ramo with Rittich, and Ortio with Gilles.  We are set up to have a repeat of the 15-16 goaltending all over again.  We just need to add this seasons version of Backstrom.  

 

Beyond those guys it has been a series of budget half measures.  Good goalies have been changing hand.  The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop.  Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run.  Talbot was an MVP in Edmonton when they made the playoffs.  Andersen is a big part of the Toronto movement.  Jones is a legitimate starter in San Jose.  I don't think being disappointed in having Smith/Rittich going into season unreasonable.  

Name 3 logical targets the Flames should be considering.

[cccsberg]

1 hour ago, kehatch said:

 

I get the argument of "I see the concern, but at this point we don't have a lot of options and there are some reasons to hope for good tending next season".  What I don't get is the posters who refuse to acknowledge the gamble, the issues with addressing this position over the last half a decade, or who take offense that others aren't giddy about the situation we are in.  

 

Every horse is dead in August.  There is very little new to discuss.  Goaltending will remain a hot topic until the season starts because it remains are biggest question mark going into the season.  

Yeah, this heat is going to be stifling this week....

 

I'll give you that of all the gambles the Flames are taking this year, goaltending is probably the biggest of them all.  As stated previously, I just don't see any good options out there, and we NEED to find out if Rittich and Gillies have a future or not.  If yes, then we likely can re-sign Smith for a year as a 1B, if no then we'll be scrambling next summer to find at least 1 replacement. 

[travel_dude]

20 minutes ago, cccsberg said:

Yeah, this heat is going to be stifling this week....

 

I'll give you that of all the gambles the Flames are taking this year, goaltending is probably the biggest of them all.  As stated previously, I just don't see any good options out there, and we NEED to find out if Rittich and Gillies have a future or not.  If yes, then we likely can re-sign Smith for a year as a 1B, if no then we'll be scrambling next summer to find at least 1 replacement. 

 

Well, we are going to find out what we have in Rittich fairly early in the season.  As for Gillies, I would like to see him develop into a consistent starter in Stockton before we make any kind of move to bring him in.  But that's just me.  We may have no choice.  Rittich may not show up good in camp.  Smith could have a season ending injury.

 

My point about Gillies is that he's been wildly inconsistent in the AHL.  18-14-1 in his first full year.  17-16-3 in his last season.  I won't point to his GAA or his SA%, because that doesn't show enough.  He's won games where he looked really good.  He's lost games where he looked really bad.  Peaks and valleys, but I am more concerned with the valleys.  Need to see that flatten out.  

[robrob74]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

That is the eternal excuse.  It isn't the goalies fault, it is the team in front of them.  And I guess it could work if you look at 1 of the 31 teams in the NHL.  But the reality is there are many teams worse then the Flames that have better goaltending.  In fact, the Flames had better goaltending until Smith got hurt. 

 

Exactly, and when he got hurt it proved that without him we could have drafted 1st overall when we should never have been in that position, as he bailed the team out for the first two months. 

 

Had he not not had to bail the team out at the beginning of the season so much yet still could’ve had an even better record had the team played in front of him, they’d have made the playoffs. Plus they mightv afforded to let backups play more and smith might not have gotten injured. 

 

Although didnt smith get an an injury from getting run last year? That’s a whole other topic, which it won’t matter who we get because they’re going to get run over a lot by our weak team.

[MAC331]

15 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Well, we are going to find out what we have in Rittich fairly early in the season.  As for Gillies, I would like to see him develop into a consistent starter in Stockton before we make any kind of move to bring him in.  But that's just me.  We may have no choice.  Rittich may not show up good in camp.  Smith could have a season ending injury.

 

My point about Gillies is that he's been wildly inconsistent in the AHL.  18-14-1 in his first full year.  17-16-3 in his last season.  I won't point to his GAA or his SA%, because that doesn't show enough.  He's won games where he looked really good.  He's lost games where he looked really bad.  Peaks and valleys, but I am more concerned with the valleys.  Need to see that flatten out.  

Unless you are there watching a goalie such as Gilles play every game you have no idea what those stats tell you.

[conundrumed]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Name 3 logical targets the Flames should be considering.

I have 1.

My input is Lehtonen.

Save your breath on why not.

I don't want to be a hog, so who else?

[kehatch]

1 hour ago, MAC331 said:

Name 3 logical targets the Flames should be considering.

 

Why? I didn't see a trade involving Hamilton for Hanafin and Lindholm. My guess is neither did you. I don't have the phone numbers to the other GMs.  I have no idea who is available or what the cost might be. It doesn't change the fact that going into the season with the same two/three goalies as last season is a big gamble. 

[MAC331]

21 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

Why? I didn't see a trade involving Hamilton for Hanafin and Lindholm. My guess is neither did you. I don't have the phone numbers to the other GMs.  I have no idea who is available or what the cost might be. It doesn't change the fact that going into the season with the same two/three goalies as last season is a big gamble. 

What ? what ? you have answers for everything else and you have no idea who would be under consideration by you. Our pipeline isn't good enough in your eyes but you have no suggestions for who should be a target consideration. Interesting.

[kehatch]

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

What ? what ? you have answers for everything else and you have no idea who would be under consideration by you. Our pipeline isn't good enough in your eyes but you have no suggestions for who should be a target consideration. Interesting.

 

This isn't a problem that started in August.  I said many times that there are limited options available right now, and that has been made more complicated by our lack of cap space and futures.  But Treliving has had 4-years to address the problem. 

 

None of that changes that this is a problem that needs to be solved.  You enjoy cleaning the sand out of your eyes and ears though.  

[YounGuns]

3 hours ago, kehatch said:

I am also getting tired of this 'lets just hope' approach to goaltending.  First we ignored all the evidence to the contrary that Ramo/Berra/Ortio could be the guys.  Then people just ignored Hiller's age and history because he had one decent season.  Its the same situation and same debate.  Just replace Hiller with Smith, Ramo with Rittich, and Ortio with Gilles.  We are set up to have a repeat of the 15-16 goaltending all over again.  We just need to add this seasons version of Backstrom.  

 

Beyond those guys it has been a series of budget half measures.  Good goalies have been changing hand.  The Stars are a big player for next season, in part because of Ben Bishop.  Fleury was a big part of the Vegas run.  Talbot was an MVP in Edmonton when they made the playoffs.  Andersen is a big part of the Toronto movement.  Jones is a legitimate starter in San Jose.  I don't think being disappointed in having Smith/Rittich going into season unreasonable.  

 

To be fair to our GMs, they certainly have tried to improve our goalie situation.  MAF "thought" he was being traded to Calgary, only the asking price was reportedly absurd and not worth it, and the trade fell through.  You have to remember, at the time the Penguins were giving up on MAF and were quite happy to expose him in the draft.  Although he is the ultimate team mate, and he's won cups, he also has had several collapses in both the regular season and post season, so he wasn't a "sure thing".  All he did since then was turn in the best season of his already pretty spectacular career, but even he has been a question mark and "gamble" at times.

 

We tried to get Bishop.  He went to LA instead, and then signed with Dallas.  Which in hindsight might have been the best for us.  There were reports he refused to come to Calgary anyways, but by all reports we were trying to get him.

 

Treliving did land one of the best options available in Smith.  Sure he's old, but Treliving knew we needed to do something after not being able to come to terms with Pittsburghs asking price for MAF.

 

And those are just the ones we know of.  Who knows what other conversations have been had with the various GMs around the league.  We'll never know what other "star" goaltender we were close to acquiring, if any.

 

The argument that the team has been gambling is somewhat valid if you're only looking at the results, but star goalies are like star centers or star defensemen...you almost need to draft them and develop them, as they just don't change hands very often and are very hard to come by, so I don't really know what people expect Treliving to do here, other than sell the farm or give away the likes of Tkachuk.  Even when we got Kipper - our last solid goaltender - at the time of the trade he was a nobody.  We hit the jack pot on him, but it's not like we traded for an all star.  We traded for depth pieces, took one of those "gambles" you seem to hate, and we just happened to land a star.

 

Also, it's worth considering that we do have some potential great pieces in Gillies and Parsons that are coming up in the system.  Gillies hasn't proven himself in the NHL yet, but he's still a prospect.  Parsons is continually rated as one of the best goalie prospects in the league, even after last season's less-than-impressive stats.  My point here is that you don't necessarily want to go and sell the farm for a legit number 1 when you could very well have a legit number 1 in the making in your own system already, and all you'd be doing by landing someone else is removing the opportunity for them to showcase their skills in the big league and possibly develop into the player we're trying to find.  Until I know what we have in Gillies or Parsons, I can see Treliving being hesitant to bring in someone for the long term, when he hopes they are our long term...

 

I will admit that goaltending is our biggest question mark going into this season, and could sink what might otherwise be a really promising season.  But I just don't see what other options Treliving has, or who is available.  I am confident that this concern is not lost on Treliving.

[kehatch]

15 minutes ago, YounGuns said:

 

To be fair to our GMs, they certainly have tried to improve our goalie situation. 

 

I get that he has made the attempt. But some of that was intentional. It sounds like Tampa thought they had a deal in place for Bishop but Treliving aborted and went for Elliott instead. Talbot wasn't that expensive, we could have outbid Edmonton.  There have been other opportunities. I get it is hard, but almost 20% of the teams in the NHL have addressed their goal tending issues via trade since Treliving became the GM.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I like our GM and I think he has done some very good things.  Elliott was a reasonable shot at fixing goalie and Smith was a decent pick up last off season.  And I don't think  we are necessarily doomed in net, it is possible things could work out.  I just think there is a very real chance they don't work out and ,  If the season is lost because of goal tending that will be an unfortunate outcome and it very well could (and probably should) cost Treliving his job.  

[Thebrewcrew]

If I recall correctly we wanted Talbot but I believe it was reported Sather preferred to give him to EDM for less than trade him to his old rival at market value 

[MAC331]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

This isn't a problem that started in August.  I said many times that there are limited options available right now, and that has been made more complicated by our lack of cap space and futures.  But Treliving has had 4-years to address the problem. 

 

None of that changes that this is a problem that needs to be solved.  You enjoy cleaning the sand out of your eyes and ears though.  

You seem to be the one harping the loudest about a perceived problem, some will see it that way but I don't. Now is the perfect time for BT to play this out with the guys we have and I think this is what will happen. You putting your desires for something different in every post won't change that.

Came up empty for any suggestions, I see.

[Cowtownguy]

I wish that we had a better option in net. While I am concerned about Smith getting injured, I am also worried about Monahan or Johnny going down as I am not convinced that the rest of the team can fill in for them. Treliving must know the risk as he is the one who might be fired if things go south. 

[sak22]

I don't see how Talbot would be a massive upgrade on the current situation, if anything Talbot is one of the guys I'd be most afraid of having at the moment.  Looking at the hindsight and he plays the same way for 3 years here as he did in Edmonton, we are probably slightly better in '16 and lose Chucky, maybe win a round or 2 in '17, but this season would have still been a disaster.  I see a bounce back for sure because he has the contract motivation, but I wouldn't be wanting him on a long term high dollar deal knowing his low point put him as one of the worst starters in the league.  

 

I don't know if there have been any real long term improvements available in the last few years outside of what has been tried, I think go back to the Elliot move, say the end result is the same but he has a .920% I think the chances that he is re-signed in Calgary is higher.  It just had the worst possible outcome to end for him.  Going into this year, I wasn't the biggest fan of Smith's play last year, but I think the goaltending we received last year would suffice if we can improve by a half-goal a game.  I know thats a lofty goal, but given that I believe this team has shed some of the deadweight and should be able to run 4 lines that can score why shouldn't it be possible.

[conundrumed]

7 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Why? I didn't see a trade involving Hamilton for Hanafin and Lindholm. My guess is neither did you. I don't have the phone numbers to the other GMs.  I have no idea who is available or what the cost might be. It doesn't change the fact that going into the season with the same two/three goalies as last season is a big gamble. 

Jesus man. We get it.

Smith will be injured and Rittich will suck.

Do you have another take?

[Cowtownguy]

44 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I don't see how Talbot would be a massive upgrade on the current situation, if anything Talbot is one of the guys I'd be most afraid of having at the moment.  Looking at the hindsight and he plays the same way for 3 years here as he did in Edmonton, we are probably slightly better in '16 and lose Chucky, maybe win a round or 2 in '17, but this season would have still been a disaster.  I see a bounce back for sure because he has the contract motivation, but I wouldn't be wanting him on a long term high dollar deal knowing his low point put him as one of the worst starters in the league.  

 

I don't know if there have been any real long term improvements available in the last few years outside of what has been tried, I think go back to the Elliot move, say the end result is the same but he has a .920% I think the chances that he is re-signed in Calgary is higher.  It just had the worst possible outcome to end for him.  Going into this year, I wasn't the biggest fan of Smith's play last year, but I think the goaltending we received last year would suffice if we can improve by a half-goal a game.  I know thats a lofty goal, but given that I believe this team has shed some of the deadweight and should be able to run 4 lines that can score why shouldn't it be possible.

Well sak, what is scary is that our fortunes this year may hang on Smith's groin.

[MAC331]

28 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Well sak, what is scary is that our fortunes this year may hang on Smith's groin.

Well then as a team you wouldn't deserve to win.

[sak22]

5 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

Well sak, what is scary is that our fortunes this year may hang on Smith's groin.

They may, but if we get our GF/game up to 3.13 I think we can win with the quality that Rittich and Gillies played at last year, assuming that there is no drop off, you should win more than you lose.  Rittich held teams to 3 or less regulation goals in 68% of his starts, Gillies did in 77% of his starts and Smith did 78%.  A 2.90 GAA didn't stop Washington this year or Pittsburgh the year before at 2.79.  But I'm not investing all my hopes in this team in this year, but I don't believe the window of opportunity is this year alone.  I believe in gambling on what you know versus what you don't know and I'm fine with Rittich or Gillies over Mrazek, Lehner or the other options that were available for free this summer.