Goaltending

[jjgallow]

3 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Saros isn't available though, we need to keep that in mind. Nashville really knows goalies and always have. I'm envious of that part.

Whoever scouts goalies for them is/are rock solid.

By all accounts, they love Saros and Rinne has really taken him under his wing as his successor.

A big part of Rinne right now is Saros affording him more rest this year, Rinne's "off" years were just playing too much. Look at him now, worth every penny.

I'm pretty meh to Korpisammysalo. We can do better, even just standing still with Elliott and CJ.

 

Agreed, very much so, likely unavailable.  Yet, it's worth noting that if we want to get ourselves some age-appropriate goalie talent for our rebuilt team, we're going to have to make some kind of compromise.

 

That compromise can be in salary, it can be in trade value (overpaying), it can be in experience, it can be in age (we can do what we have done, and hope aging vets have enough gas in the tank).

 

Or, the compromise can in fact be in size.     Some teams that have ample goalie talent will be more willing to let go of the shorter talent.  Sometimes even if the performance is elite.

 

If I have to choose a compromise/risk, I think size sounds like a better one than many.

[jjgallow]

A few others.   I wonder if NYI would be willing to part with one?

 

Linus Soderstrom,  (NYI)

Ilya Sorokin, (NYI)

Gauthiuer Descloux  (free for the taking, 5'11)

[DirtyDeeds]

On 5/11/2017 at 8:00 PM, phoenix66 said:

I get what you are saying , but a couple things..

1) MAF will not be a high return, PItts is dealing from weakness and as you mentioned not enough teams to have a bidding war..I'll be surprised if its higher than a 2nd round pick at best - I expect a 3rd. 

2) talks wont start when playoffs end, they likely have already happened .. would not surprise me if the trade to wherever is sitting in Rutherford's desk drawer right now 

He will be traded within 24-48 hrs of their last game

3) If it is Buffalo, hypothetically , just saying the return will be even less than ours due to Jim helping his buddy

4) Buffalo is in perfect position to be next years Toronto .. they should have been this year , but they were badly managed

There is no deal in a drawer just waiting for the Pens to finish the season.

 

MAF has both a M-NTC and a NMC . He would have to sign off on any deal and be a part of any discussion as to where a deal was being made.

 

Do you really think any GM would be stupid enough to deal or even negotiate on their goaltender while in the middle of the playoffs???

[conundrumed]

10 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Agreed, very much so, likely unavailable.  Yet, it's worth noting that if we want to get ourselves some age-appropriate goalie talent for our rebuilt team, we're going to have to make some kind of compromise.

 

That compromise can be in salary, it can be in trade value (overpaying), it can be in experience, it can be in age (we can do what we have done, and hope aging vets have enough gas in the tank).

 

Or, the compromise can in fact be in size.     Some teams that have ample goalie talent will be more willing to let go of the shorter talent.  Sometimes even if the performance is elite.

 

If I have to choose a compromise/risk, I think size sounds like a better one than many.

Do we have age appropriate in Gillies and Rittich? Another question is, are our G coaches capable of bringing goalies along? Because the signs aren't great.

I'm sure people think I'm insane for suggesting Lehtonen(with a Dallas buyout) on the cheap and Elliott.

Anyone remember Roloson? He was better at 38 than he was at 28.

All subject matter should be open. We just want good goaltending, age be damned I say.

Dallas has constantly been covered by the Lehtonen excuse, but I definitely challenge that.

The Bishop signing will be laughable if they continue on with elbowing D.

[manu11]

16 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Murray's new contract is 3.75 x 3. Given the # of goalies slated to be looking for jobs you can get 1 with a bigger body of work in that range for nothing but the money. Highest I'd go is this year's 1st or go after someone else. If left exposed LV will take him & likely keep him but with a gentle nudge be persuarded to take Grubauer &/or Raanta/Hellberg as well making 1 available. Other options like the decision in Detroit have been mentioned.

 

The worst thing we could do is fixiate on 1 goalie & overpay. Especially in a buyers market.

I  agree with this, especially the last part! The more I think about it, we should definitely try to trade for one of the younger Backups with starter potential.

 

[DirtyDeeds]

17 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Do we "have to have" have age appropriate in Gillies and Rittich?

fixed that for you. Short answer is no matter. We could make do with older until our prospects are ready to step up, or go with younger if they are capable.

 

Another question is, are our G coaches capable of bringing goalies along? Because the signs aren't great.

I have no confidence in our goaltending coaching. None, zero, nada. They seemingly react too late to difficulties and don't seem to prepare the goalies under their care.

 

I'm sure people think I'm insane for suggesting Lehtonen(with a Dallas buyout) on the cheap and Elliott.

Anyone remember Roloson? He was better at 38 than he was at 28.

There is little correlation or reason to expect Lehtonen to have a superior twilight to his career that Roloson had with his career. Isn't this just wishful thinking? and you willing to bet with another of our season on a goaltender who is presently performing so poorly he has been a major reason for a very poor disappointing season for Dallas?

 

All subject matter should be open. We just want good goaltending, age be damned I say.

I want this too. We should have long been out of this goaltending rotation tryouts and see if they will work process.

 

 

Dallas has constantly been covered by the Lehtonen excuse, but I definitely challenge that.

The Bishop signing will be laughable if they continue on with elbowing D.

I think Flames Fans have a right to be disappointed over the goalie situation. Nothing much has been resolved with the exception Elliott and Johnson combo was a slight upgrade during the regular season.

[jjgallow]

20 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Do we have age appropriate in Gillies and Rittich?

 

I don't think so personally.   Gillies, at 23, has really dropped off.  He's worth developing but no longer something we can count on with any degree of confidence.    Obviously we will know more next year, he did finish the year stronger, and he missed an entire season.

 

I don't think so with Rittich either.  Not at the age of 25 next season.  He never stood out in any league before he got here.   He finished 14th overall in the AHL.   Had he done that at the age of 21, it would be interesting.

 

Quote

Another question is, are our G coaches capable of bringing goalies along? Because the signs aren't great.

 

This should be our Front and Center concern.  I agree.  So frustrating.  

 

Quote

Anyone remember Roloson? He was better at 38 than he was at 28.

 

While this is true, we wouldn't have found is performance at 38 acceptable imho.   His best years were when he was 31-33.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=11373

 

Much of this, again, can relate back to how our organization has managed to really mess up goalies.  He was with the Flames in what should have been his prime years.

 

I've seen very, very few examples of goalies improving in their late 30's.  Not Rolosson.   Maybe...maybe Tim Thomas? 

 

But the problem with this is:  For every goalie that improves in their 30's, there are 1000 of them that get worse.   It's more of a lottery thing, not a plan.  If your aging 30 something goalie happens to improve, Gravy.   But it's a statistically losing plan to go looking for that to happen.

 

Quote

All subject matter should be open. We just want good goaltending, age be damned I say.

 

Nobody agrees with free speech more than me    100%.    And there might be a way with a vet.  I just don't trust this organization to find it, when it's already statistically unfavourable.

 

Quote

Dallas has constantly been covered by the Lehtonen excuse, but I definitely challenge that.

The Bishop signing will be laughable if they continue on with elbowing D.

 

Yup.   All people see is the goalie.  Nobody sees how connected the goalie and the D are.    Something we need to be mindful of here as well.

 

And Not just that, but what's REALLY underestimated, is Goalie-D Chemistry.   Some goalies just work better with some D.  They are entirely interconnected.    And it's unbelievably overlooked despite being crucial.   This is one of the key reasons I would like to see a younger goalie Develop with our D as they develop.

[zima]

Ok I know I already talked about this in another forum but how about FLORIAN HARDY he is not owned by an NHL team that im aware of and I know his play in the IIHF does not equate to a NHL type Goalie but I wouldn't mind seeing him signed for a yr just to see where he stands as an NHL player might bring his play to a team who needs a goalie desperately. 

[jjgallow]

3 minutes ago, zima said:

Ok I know I already talked about this in another forum but how about FLORIAN HARDY he is not owned by an NHL team that im aware of and I know his play in the IIHF does not equate to a NHL type Goalie but I wouldn't mind seeing him signed for a yr just to see where he stands as an NHL player might bring his play to a team who needs a goalie desperately. 

 

IMHO, no.   He's 9th overall in the EBEL, which is not that great of a league, and he's 32.   

 

For us to take on a non-NHL 32 year old player, they would need to be #1 in their league, at a bare minimum, imho.

[phoenix66]

47 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

There is no deal in a drawer just waiting for the Pens to finish the season.

 

MAF has both a M-NTC and a NMC . He would have to sign off on any deal and be a part of any discussion as to where a deal was being made.

 

Do you really think any GM would be stupid enough to deal or even negotiate on their goaltender while in the middle of the playoffs???

It's more metaphorical to say that it's very likely JR already knows where he is trading MAF to. Its just as silly a notion to believe that talks will start from scratch as soon as the season ends . Obviously either party can walk away before its final , but you can bet frameworks are already in place . He's had all season to figure it out

Deals get worked out and finalized later all the time.. even McPhee has said he already has deals worked out 

Of course he can be having conversations ..probably all starting with "if this leaks all deals are off "

 

Terms of his NMC are that they apply to waivers only -- and he must be protected to the ED as long as hes on the roster 

Hes had an 18 team acceptance list for trades.. so JR would definitely know who he can troll the waters with already 

[travel_dude]

27 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

It's more metaphorical to say that it's very likely JR already knows where he is trading MAF to. Its just as silly a notion to believe that talks will start from scratch as soon as the season ends . Obviously either party can walk away before its final , but you can bet frameworks are already in place . He's had all season to figure it out

Deals get worked out and finalized later all the time.. even McPhee has said he already has deals worked out 

Of course he can be having conversations ..probably all starting with "if this leaks all deals are off "

 

Terms of his NMC are that they apply to waivers only -- and he must be protected to the ED as long as hes on the roster 

Hes had an 18 team acceptance list for trades.. so JR would definitely know who he can troll the waters with already 

 

Just need to point out the the only way he ends up in Vegas is if he waives his NMC.

 

The rest is just you speculating, since the landscape changes rapidly.  Dallas was in the market.  Carolina was in the market.  JR blew off the Flames last summer, or maybe it was BT that did that.  If MAF craps the bed in this round, do you think those "deals in his drawer" still exist?  If Murray ends up replacing MAF and craps the bed, do you think they still deal MAF?

 

BT has said that many deal take a long time, but the final deal can happen pretty fast.  You can call it a framework, but really its just the start of the discussions.  The original an final deals don't always resemble each other.  Or the deal never happens.  We heard a lot about the Bishop trade that didn't happen.  The sticking point may have been the 6th overall that was going to be Tkachuk.    

[jjgallow]

9 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

 If Murray ends up replacing MAF and craps the bed, do you think they still deal MAF?
 

 

Actually...yes.  It's super hard to argue with a Stanley Cup.  And at 22 years of age, I think they would forgive a bed crapping given his performance over the last two years.

 

Of course, we're all just speculating.  But not over whether MAF gets traded.  We're speculating over what for, and how much.  I think the biggest unkown is if MAF keeps getting shutouts.

 

That's the only thing that could make this really interesting....if MAF wins them the cup, for instance.  

 

And I still think they'd trade him.   But it'd be for an astounding amount and I wouldn't want to be in that race, personally.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

 

I'm pretty meh to Korpisammysalo. 

 

I'm guessing you mean Tommy Swalo... The ex-Oilers goalie and I swear he was paid off to lose to Belarus in the Olympics... 

 

Korpisalo is interesting because he showed flashes 2 seasons ago but got stuck being a Vezina goalie this season.  If cheap, like don't sign Elliott and keep the 3rd, trade 3rd for Korpisalo.

[Flyerfan52]

20 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but NHL Radio was also saying it's a front loaded deal at $6 for the first 3-ish years and then diminishing, but they did not detail it year x year.

Basically getting a couple of diminished years to get the term Bishop wanted, but he essentially gets paid the $6 he wanted for the first 3-4.

 

 

									2019-20	2020-21	2021-22	2022-23
									$4,250,000	$4,250,000	$4,250,000	UFA

CapFriendly has the break down.

Like many UFA sighings last summer it's very signing bonus laden. 13.5 of the 19.5 is those bonuses. Sure looks like the agents & players are expecting another stoppage.

[travel_dude]

19 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Actually...yes.  It's super hard to argue with a Stanley Cup.  And at 22 years of age, I think they would forgive a bed crapping given his performance over the last two years.

 

Of course, we're all just speculating.  But not over whether MAF gets traded.  We're speculating over what for, and how much.  I think the biggest unkown is if MAF keeps getting shutouts.

 

That's the only thing that could make this really interesting....if MAF wins them the cup, for instance.  

 

And I still think they'd trade him.   But it'd be for an astounding amount and I wouldn't want to be in that race, personally.

 

An extreme example, but the point is we are speculating.  They may not trade MAF.  The reasons would be unknown.  They may decide that keeping MAF makes the most sense to them and go for a sizeable return from a Murray trade.  It may not make sense to you, but GM's also have a bigger picture to look at.  

[Flyerfan52]

8 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

An extreme example, but the point is we are speculating.  They may not trade MAF.  The reasons would be unknown.  They may decide that keeping MAF makes the most sense to them and go for a sizeable return from a Murray trade.  It may not make sense to you, but GM's also have a bigger picture to look at.  

The Vancouver like decision to keep Luongo over Schneider since that's where the offers were? Only to trade him as well & in desperation sign a Miller type.

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

The Vancouver like decision to keep Luongo over Schneider since that's where the offers were? Only to trade him as well & in desperation sign a Miller type.

 

Forget who they got for the trade.  Horvat?

 

Luongo was a DiPietro style deal in the days of the 12 year deals.  I don't think VAN was smart to trade Schneider.  

 

Let's face it, JR had the chance to trade MAF to CGY in the summer and held out for too much.  I can't say in any certainty there will be teams lining up for him in early June, or late May of Ottawa burns them.  JR has some choices if there are no takers, but none of them are good.  Buy out MAF.  Offer LV a lot not to take Murray.  Convince MAF to go to Vegas.  Or trade Murray.

[cross16]

There are rumours circulating that Vegas and the Pens already have an agreement in place that will send Fleury to Vegas. 

[conundrumed]

Just now, cross16 said:

There are rumours circulating that Vegas and the Pens already have an agreement in place that will send Fleury to Vegas. 

I'm thinking that's right. Rutherford took a big risk. It's paying off, but not without injuring the return.

They win another cup, he's a genius. That's why you risk it. Great move so far.

I doubt teams are lining up to help out the Pens with significant returns.

Why would you? They are the reigning champs...

I suspect MAF is the starter in LV next yr.

[cross16]

2 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I'm thinking that's right. Rutherford took a big risk. It's paying off, but not without injuring the return.

They win another cup, he's a genius. That's why you risk it. Great move so far.

I doubt teams are lining up to help out the Pens with significant returns.

Why would you? They are the reigning champs...

I suspect MAF is the starter in LV next yr.

 

Vegas claiming Fleury helps the Pens too though. He is a luxury they don't need so losing him via expansion means they don't lose any other, and arguably more important, pieces off their roster. Not to mention gives them 5.7 mill in cap space. Fleury going to Vegas is a win-win for both Pens and Vegas which is why i think it will happen. 

[travel_dude]

32 minutes ago, cross16 said:

There are rumours circulating that Vegas and the Pens already have an agreement in place that will send Fleury to Vegas. 

 

Either he waives his NMC to be claimed for nothing or he gets traded elsewhere or stays.  I don't get how the PENS would have a deal in place for a trade to LV.  If you mean they have an agreement that they will expose MAF and LV will choose MAF, that is different.  How does MAF benefit in that scenario?  

[cross16]

12 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Either he waives his NMC to be claimed for nothing or he gets traded elsewhere or stays.  I don't get how the PENS would have a deal in place for a trade to LV.  If you mean they have an agreement that they will expose MAF and LV will choose MAF, that is different.  How does MAF benefit in that scenario?  

 

Yes my assumption is it's a deal that will allow Vegas to claim MAF via the expansion draft or at least an understanding thst it will happen. There is no word on whether or not a "deal" is in place in terms of assets moving or if it's just an understanding the MAF will be available. MAF benefits by going to one of the few teams that needs a number 1 and playing a lot plus gets t okay in Vegas and be part of an expansion team. I known people assume no one wants to do that but I bet some will find the experience exciting. 

 

That being said nothing stops Vegas from claiming Fleury and the flames having a deal in place to acquire him from Vegas either. ?

[conundrumed]

5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Either he waives his NMC to be claimed for nothing or he gets traded elsewhere or stays.  I don't get how the PENS would have a deal in place for a trade to LV.  If you mean they have an agreement that they will expose MAF and LV will choose MAF, that is different.  How does MAF benefit in that scenario?  

I'm sure it is speculative, as cross did say, "rumours".

That being said, it wouldn't shock me.

No salary retained is maybe the hinge.

Hard to know. If I'm a GM I'm thinking "enjoy that corner you've painted yourself into, choke on it".

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Vegas claiming Fleury helps the Pens too though. He is a luxury they don't need so losing him via expansion means they don't lose any other, and arguably more important, pieces off their roster. Not to mention gives them 5.7 mill in cap space. Fleury going to Vegas is a win-win for both Pens and Vegas which is why i think it will happen. 

 

Why not use the NMC and force a buy out in that case.  He can still go to LV as a UFA afterwards on a new contract.  

[cross16]

9 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Why not use the NMC and force a buy out in that case.  He can still go to LV as a UFA afterwards on a new contract.  

 

Why burn a bridge? Small world and I don't think it says much about Fleurys character to go out of his way to screw over a team that was very good to him.