Goaltending

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

which words were those again ?

 

basically half this thread

[420since1974]

OK, how about 2017/2018?

Who will be the Flame's NHL goaltenders?

 

McCollum is the goalie signed for the express purpose of being exposed in the expansion draft (if unclaimed, he'll play in Adirondack for one season).

Elliott, Johnson, and Rittich will all be UFAs, do we want any of them back for next season?

Gillies will be a RFA and waivers exempt.

McDonald and Parsons are signed in the minors and waivers exempt.

Schneider is done in the CHL, slide risk, waiver exempt, and exempt from the 50 contract limit (probably headed to the Thunder).

 

Personally, I would like to see the team's Goaltender positions settled sooner than later.

My current feeling is that the best option would be to sign a UFA such as Bishop or trade for someone like MA Fleury (if he'd add Calgary to his modified NTC/NMC (list of 18 teams that he would agree to be traded to).

I'd pay either of them up to $6M/yr on a 3 year term (NO CLAUSES).

 

If neither Rittich or Gillies are deemed ready to be NHL back-ups, I would not be adverse to bringing Johnson back at no more than $2M/yr for a 2 year term maximum.

Nothing to back it up, but I just have a feeling that Gillies will be the Flame's backup next season.

That may require re-signing Rittich or counting on McDonald to be the #1 G in Stockton, while Parsons takes the backup position.

[Carty]

1 hour ago, 420since1974 said:

My current feeling is that the best option would be to sign a UFA such as Bishop or trade for someone

 

Bishop was my first choice of attainable goalies last summer, and still is...   Unless a reasonable trade opens up for one of the few that are even better, it's a good option...   One of those two things has to happen because there is currently no goalie connected to the Flames that can be relied upon as a true starter...   Darling is also a pending UFA, but just isn't a bright blip on my radar...

 

For a backup, unless Elliott was playing hurt and we didn't hear about it, I can't see him coming back after his collapse in the last couple of games...   Not saying that his first choice would be as a backup, but after his slow start to the season and then the way it ended, his value just dropped and so did the odds of him getting a contract as a starter...   Either way, with a .880 SV% in the playoffs and being 32 years old, I just don't see it happening...   I wouldn't do it...

 

Johnson as a backup on a lower contract is a maybe...   But again, he had a pretty epic meltdown after a good run as well...   I would look for an upgrade elsewhere...

 

Other possibilities, sure, they might cut bait and go fish in a couple of other spots for two goalies again...   As much as I am not a big Marc-Andre Fleury fan, if they could get him for a very reasonable trade I would rather do that than bring either of Elliott or Johnson back...   Maybe someone else better than Fleury comes available in a trade that wouldn't open a new hole, only time will tell...   Hard to say at this point who might end up being a potential acquisition for a backup...    But after the way both goalies had catastrophic collapses this season, they will need to minimize the risk of that happening again...

 

Not saying it will happen, but it wouldn't surprise me if the Flames have a really close look at potentially using Gillies in the backup role next season...

[jjgallow]

https://flamesnation.ca/2017/04/20/tyler-parsons-is-headed-to-the-stockton-heat/

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

https://flamesnation.ca/2017/04/20/tyler-parsons-is-headed-to-the-stockton-heat/

 

Season over, ATO.  Now we have 5 there unless they release the kid and send back MAcdonald.

 

What's your feel of Darling?  UFA this summer, perhaps we could trade for his rights (conditional of course).

[Flyerfan52]

9 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Season over, ATO.  Now we have 5 there unless they release the kid and send back MAcdonald.

 

What's your feel of Darling?  UFA this summer, perhaps we could trade for his rights (conditional of course).

I have a good feeling about Darling being the next Talbot type going from backup to starter. From the local papers so do the Jets.

The Flames have the upper hand if they trade even a conditional pick for the rights of 1st negotiation since we have 0 goalies to protect while the Jets need to wait until after the LV draft since they want to protect Hellebuyck & run him as b/u or in tandem.

 

If we do trade for & sign him the next step should be trading for Montoya (2 years @ just over $1 million) as backup from the Habs or LV if they happen to select him (which I doubt as they'll probably pluck a skater off the Montreal roster).

[cross16]

I like Darling as well. The common criticism on him will be that he plays behind the Hawks, but I don't think people realize that the Hawks are not one of the better defensive teams in the league and are only about middle of the pack. Flames were actually a better defensive unit than the Hawks in almost all measures. They really rely on good goaltending and Darling doesn't drop off from Crawford at all. I was really impressed with him in the playoff a few years ago when he came in and really saved the series for the Hawks. 

 

Only downside to him is that being a UFA and so many Talbot comparison does the bidding get out of control? He could easily wind up as the best goalie out of this UFA crop but are we willing to throw 5 million or more at him?

 

If you can get a 3 year deal around 4 million or less I would bring him in over Elliott personally. 

[jjgallow]

11 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Season over, ATO.  Now we have 5 there unless they release the kid and send back MAcdonald.

 

What's your feel of Darling?  UFA this summer, perhaps we could trade for his rights (conditional of course).

I like Darling.  I don't see him as a final solution but I like him.     I also like Elliot, maybe more.   I don't think either of them are your solution to winning a cup.

 

I would still like to see the Flames take some risks on building up some younger goalies.   I don't know who they are yet, but I would imagine some will become available.   "Playing it safe" with a veteran is unlikely to win a cup.  It'll give you adequate in the regular season.   And in the playoffs, maybe less.  And yeah.  Gillies didn't have a perfect season, but he finished strong.

 

If he comes into training camp and steals the show, I would give him a shot at the NHL.
 

 

 

 

[JTech780]

42 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I like Darling as well. The common criticism on him will be that he plays behind the Hawks, but I don't think people realize that the Hawks are not one of the better defensive teams in the league and are only about middle of the pack. Flames were actually a better defensive unit than the Hawks in almost all measures. They really rely on good goaltending and Darling doesn't drop off from Crawford at all. I was really impressed with him in the playoff a few years ago when he came in and really saved the series for the Hawks. 

 

Only downside to him is that being a UFA and so many Talbot comparison does the bidding get out of control? He could easily wind up as the best goalie out of this UFA crop but are we willing to throw 5 million or more at him?

 

If you can get a 3 year deal around 4 million or less I would bring him in over Elliott personally. 

 

I was wondering with Chicago getting swept and having cap issues, if they would move Crawford and keep the cheaper Darling. I think they will be looking to shed some salary again to improve their depth.

 

Crawford has 3 more years at $6m.

 

Darling made the league minimum this year, I don't think he will get much more than $2.5m.

[Flyerfan52]

36 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I was wondering with Chicago getting swept and having cap issues, if they would move Crawford and keep the cheaper Darling. I think they will be looking to shed some salary again to improve their depth.

 

Crawford has 3 more years at $6m.

 

Darling made the league minimum this year, I don't think he will get much more than $2.5m.

They'd probably be very open to trading Crawford & keeping the younger Darling as Chicago is always shedding cap to ice a team. The 3 years @ $6 miilion is the snag as there are so many goalies looking for a team this summer & Crawford never gets his due as a top goalie. He has more SC rings than Price but isn't seen in that light.

Thing is, why give up assets when you can get a goalie almost as good as a UFA for less $s.

[phoenix66]

I feel the time / window to go find the next Talbot, Jones, Anderson has closed. That window was last summer.

To do it now, you are suddenly impeding the growth of our own prospects. Gillies could be ready for prime time backup duty as early as next season , but realistically the season after .

We learned this year this team is ready to start doing playoff damage , but now need (as close as you can get nowadays) the sure thing , proven guy at the back.

 

I was all for Elliot last year , Great stats, amazing playoff run, a history of playing well. But he was still a gamble.. he had never been given #1 status, never been given that chance..there was no reason to believe he'd fail. But he was still a well calculated gamble.

For the most part I was against the elite guy last season cuz of where we were..a non playoff building team.. there were too many reasons THAT GUY could still fail here .. but no longer .

 

i see the Flames with only 3 options..

1) Bishop.. proven #1, Proven playoff performer ( dude is Mr Game 7 shutout for gosh sakes).. will likely need at least a 4 year deal, but if necessary he will always be tradeable , you wont be stuck with that contract 

2) Fleury-- if he even is available, i still think they must have a deal already with LV or he would have been traded by now..or hes already told them he will waive for the draft.. but if he is , only 2 seasons left on a $5.75M..cap friendly , term friendly , and if you had any questions left about whether he can still play .. just watch the playoffs 

 

or , hate to say it..  dont think we will get past the 1st 2.. but if we do..

 

3) re-sign Elliot -- 1 year deal..and work in Gillies and / or Rittich by the end of the season .  I know this wont be popular , but .. this was an abnormal year . he will be motivated to redeem himself.. he will bounce back wherever he is. He obviously cant handle a #1 workload , but hes awesome at platooning.. give him the Jake allen treatment with a rookie backup . hard to look past history over 5 minutes or even 3 games.. its possible we overworked him and hes just not a #1 workload guy

3b) if the price is low, and theyre even available, . you could also look at Lehner or Smith in trade before considering Elliot back

 

The only way I veer from this map is for some weird reason the tables flip and the Penguins are forced to trade Murray..then I'm all over him 

 

If we have faith in our own system , the "Next Talbot" is already sitting in Stockton..if you're going to trade for one , you may as well include Gillies in the deal. Right now Murray is the only one Id even consider listening to regarding that ..and even then I'm not sure I'd pull the trigger 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

 

I was wondering with Chicago getting swept and having cap issues, if they would move Crawford and keep the cheaper Darling. I think they will be looking to shed some salary again to improve their depth.

 

Crawford has 3 more years at $6m.

 

Darling made the league minimum this year, I don't think he will get much more than $2.5m.

 

Very possible. I just feel Hawks are really high on Crawford and for all he has done there I think they would be hard pressed to let him go. Could always change though but I get where you are coming from. Not sure if you are suggesting this or not but I wouldn't aggressively pursue Crawford if i'm Calgary.

 

I'm most definitely not advocating that Darling should get 4-5 million, but if there is a team out there that sees him as a starter and gets desperate that is where it could get to. There are teams out there desperate enough for goaltending, see Dallas, Calgary, WPG, probably Philly. 

[travel_dude]

As much as I like Bishop, I felt the same way about Elliott.  Could be a star on this team or another slow starter. Either goalie could be steller next year or could be terrible.  I would hate to pick up Bishop and he has a bad season. I don't think we know yet if Gillies is NHL ready.  He was for one game.  I would like to see him play 40+ games in the AHL next season before I decide.

 

So that leaves MAF, who I am not a big fan of.  

 

That leaves some backup that has starter potential.  Risky, but if you get a good one, the worst you get is a good backup.  Doesn't guarantee to fix the problem, but also doesn't tie you to $6m per.

[JTech780]

45 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

 

2) Fleury-- if he even is available, i still think they must have a deal already with LV or he would have been traded by now..or hes already told them he will waive for the draft.. but if he is , only 2 seasons left on a $5.75M..cap friendly , term friendly , and if you had any questions left about whether he can still play .. just watch the playoffs 

 

I think they kept Fleury for the exact situation they are in now.

 

I don't think they will have any problem moving Fleury.

[manu11]

I'm really curious what the Flames will do at this position in the offseason. If they think that one of Gibson and Parson is the future in goal, then I don't think they should sign Bishop as he would want a 4-5 year deal. And I don't think he is going to sign here with the intention to be traded again after 2 years!

Personally I hope we move on from Elliott! He was brought here in hopes to beeing that Nr.1 goalie and outside a 15-20 game stretch hasn't been good this season. I'd also like to not pay that additional 2018 3rd for him.

Maybe you could use that pick in a trade, I think Raanta would be a very good target. He played well, especially for the Rangers this season, when Lundqvist was injured/needed a rest. The Rangers could very well lose him to Expansion and he has a very cheap cap hit for 1 mil.

[phoenix66]

35 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

 

I think they kept Fleury for the exact situation they are in now.

 

I don't think they will have any problem moving Fleury.

but don't forget , he holds all the cards.. NMC.. if he doesnt want to leave he doesnt have to , and that makes Murray available.. if theres not already a Plan in place , theyre taking an awful risk leaving it to the last minute hoping he'll agree to whatever they find for him..

 

who knows?  maybe thats why BT signed a guy with 1 year left ..maybe that conversation ended with "ok ,Deal.. but come get him  next June"

[cross16]

2 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

but don't forget , he holds all the cards.. NMC.. if he doesnt want to leave he doesnt have to , and that makes Murray available.. if theres not already a Plan in place , theyre taking an awful risk leaving it to the last minute hoping he'll agree to whatever they find for him..

 

who knows?  maybe thats why BT signed a guy with 1 year left ..maybe that conversation ended with "ok ,Deal.. but come get him  next June"

 

By all reports. Fleury and the Pens have an very good relationship. It's been mentioned by a few sources too that Fleury wants to start so if Pittsburgh is going to turn it over to Murray, which they will, he wants to go somewhere else. 

 

 

[MAC331]

19 hours ago, JTech780 said:

 

I was wondering with Chicago getting swept and having cap issues, if they would move Crawford and keep the cheaper Darling. I think they will be looking to shed some salary again to improve their depth.

 

Crawford has 3 more years at $6m.

 

Darling made the league minimum this year, I don't think he will get much more than $2.5m.

I would take Darling for 3 years at 2.5M in a heartbeat. This would be a move that should allow the further assessment period for all our prospect goalies. If we could get Darling at this kind of money I would consider signing back Johnson as back up.

[MAC331]

18 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Very possible. I just feel Hawks are really high on Crawford and for all he has done there I think they would be hard pressed to let him go. Could always change though but I get where you are coming from. Not sure if you are suggesting this or not but I wouldn't aggressively pursue Crawford if i'm Calgary.

 

I'm most definitely not advocating that Darling should get 4-5 million, but if there is a team out there that sees him as a starter and gets desperate that is where it could get to. There are teams out there desperate enough for goaltending, see Dallas, Calgary, WPG, probably Philly. 

Crawford is one of the core boys there, he isn't going anywhere. We are still searching for our core goalie for our group and Darling could be our guy.

[jjgallow]

 

Ok.    I'm going to speak my mind, and here's why:

             This season started with "fire the coach and get new goalies".   Most felt this was the way to go.

             I started this season agreeing with only ONE goaltending decision this organisation made:  Signing Elliot.

             My opinion this entire season has consistently been that we are Not ready to make the playoffs, and even if we did, we would basically regret it.

            Elliot has been phenomenal this season, and he is, as we all know, the main reason we made the playoffs.

 

So, this has been an issue for this team since Kipper of 2005+:  

    You CAN't just RIDE a hot goalie for an Entire season.   If that's how you intend to make the playoffs, don't bother.  It won't work.

 

    This organzation has been doing this with hot goalies for a stretch 12 years now and it has never, ever, ever been successful.

 

    If you look at the entire NHL league, it is basically NEVER successful, but for a Very, very few exceptions with the help of generational players at their peak (Lemiuex, Crosby etc).

 

Why we continue to do this, I can only speculate.

 

But what I can confidently say is:  Elliot was fantastic this season, and he was thus Highly overplayed this season.

 

He's maybe even worth a 3rd round pick.  I'm the wrong person to ask, because I don't believe in giving up picks.

 

He's definitely not the problem.

 

The problem is that the team Relied on him so heavily all year, rode him too hard, and, also, didn't develop any other goalies they could trust.

 

So there.  lol

 

[MAC331]

39 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Ok.    I'm going to speak my mind, and here's why:

             This season started with "fire the coach and get new goalies".   Most felt this was the way to go.

             I started this season agreeing with only ONE goaltending decision this organisation made:  Signing Elliot.

             My opinion this entire season has consistently been that we are Not ready to make the playoffs, and even if we did, we would basically regret it.

            Elliot has been phenomenal this season, and he is, as we all know, the main reason we made the playoffs.

 

So, this has been an issue for this team since Kipper of 2005+:  

    You CAN't just RIDE a hot goalie for an Entire season.   If that's how you intend to make the playoffs, don't bother.  It won't work.

 

    This organzation has been doing this with hot goalies for a stretch 12 years now and it has never, ever, ever been successful.

 

    If you look at the entire NHL league, it is basically NEVER successful, but for a Very, very few exceptions with the help of generational players at their peak (Lemiuex, Crosby etc).

 

Why we continue to do this, I can only speculate.

 

But what I can confidently say is:  Elliot was fantastic this season, and he was thus Highly overplayed this season.

 

He's maybe even worth a 3rd round pick.  I'm the wrong person to ask, because I don't believe in giving up picks.

 

He's definitely not the problem.

 

The problem is that the team Relied on him so heavily all year, rode him too hard, and, also, didn't develop any other goalies they could trust.

 

So there.  lol

 

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions right or wrong. I don't know who you consider as "most" ??? Most people I know realized this team would have to work through some adjustments to a new coaching staff with new systems. Most fans are not good at managing realistic expectations, all they want is wins at all costs.

What was wrong with signing Johnson a very well known commodity as a back up goaltender ?

regardless off your personal opinion why would any team "regret" getting into the playoffs ? Do you not value how experience is gained ?

I would say both goaltenders were instrumental throughout this season as they are relied upon to do so. Outside of Elliott's slow start I think both performed according to their track records.

[travel_dude]

I am going to go out on a limb here.  I hope they re-sign Elliott and pick up a future starter like Darling.  I may be wrong, but waiting to July 1st means we don't owe STL anything.  If so, I would wait till then.  He wants to come back, and there won't be a lineup at his door.  I have no interest in CJ.  He was fine when we needed him in November/December, but after that was barely NHL level.  

 

Trade for Darling rights; no more than a B prospect.  Sign for $900k.  Crawford has a NMC, they they are stuck with him, unless they trade for a similar starter.

Sign Elliott as a UFA; no more than $3.5-4m.  

 

[Flyerfan52]

13 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

I am going to go out on a limb here.  I hope they re-sign Elliott and pick up a future starter like Darling.  I may be wrong, but waiting to July 1st means we don't owe STL anything.  If so, I would wait till then.  He wants to come back, and there won't be a lineup at his door.  I have no interest in CJ.  He was fine when we needed him in November/December, but after that was barely NHL level.  

 

Trade for Darling rights; no more than a B prospect.  Sign for $900k.  Crawford has a NMC, they they are stuck with him, unless they trade for a similar starter.

Sign Elliott as a UFA; no more than $3.5-4m.  

 

Not a chance Darling signs for $0.9 as many teams (including the Flyers & Jets will offer more). With his big chance to be a starter & get a payday he's not going for ELC money. Chicago will get a pick better than a B prospect just for right of 1st negotiation.

Elliott's showing @ the begining of the season combined with his playoffs move him back to good backup territory. $2 million or less on a 2 year deal.

 

As you said, you are going out on a limb but the 1 you picked has dry rot.

[MAC331]

1 minute ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Not a chance Darling signs for $0.9 as many teams (including the Flyers & Jets will offer more). With his big chance to be a starter & get a payday he's not going for ELC money. Chicago will get a pick better than a B prospect just for right of 1st negotiation.

Elliott's showing @ the begining of the season combined with his playoffs move him back to good backup territory. $2 million or less on a 2 year deal.

 

As you said, you are going out on a limb but the 1 you picked has dry rot.

Do you think 3 years at 2.5M would do the deal ? I think Elliott will be allowed to hit the market.

[Flyerfan52]

6 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Do you think 3 years at 2.5M would do the deal ? I think Elliott will be allowed to hit the market.

I'd make that my 1st offer but re-visit it since Wpg would likely offer 4.0 if it's only 3 years term (allowing Comrie to mature in the AHL & Hellebuyck to find himself as a NHL backup.

If we're willing to pay Elliott 3.5-4.0 I'd rather take the chance on Darling.