Goaltending

[phoenix66]

18 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

These posts are for everyone, it is good hearing the thoughts.

I do think Nashville is significantly better from the net out and look at the time it has taken for their day in the sun. let me say this, at this level of hockey and talent the separations are not as extreme as they used to be, parity has creeped in. Yes I believe the SC should be a goal at level every year but certain deficiencies also hold you back to a certain degree as slightly as this may be. Experience of the individuals becomes collective IMO for a team to be prepared for all situations necessary to win through all the playoffs. I will use the ANA series an the example, yes we were close in effort and could have won a few games however when they needed to gear it up to push for the win their experience took over. It wasn't all goaltending IMO it was our team not mature enough to answer the bell yet.

agreed.. but the one factor to remember, is how tight we looked.. like we cant make a mistake. That stems from the goalie.. when you're scared of a soft goal, it holds you back.

 we saw it , soft goal. we didn't get mad and bear down .. we deflated like "great ..here we go".. nobody will say it publicly, but the body language screamed of no faith in the goaltender 

[phoenix66]

10 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I'm not sure I agree with your thinking or your expectations, both are ahead of schedule IMO but that's OK for you. I look at all the teams in the West and see good teams with the exception of VAN and ARZ. We have to keep improving with talent adds and the talent we have maturing with experience. I am not as sure as you are that MAF is that much of an upgrade on Elliott, both will provide you good goaltending. I would rather sign Elliott and trade for someone like Grubauer who not only would challenge Elliott but would give all our prospects a target to knock off if they want to be our #1.

I believe the bolded is a given,   the team this year . is not good enough next year .And nest year you have to believe the same thing 

where we vary , is that I'm not wiling to sacrifice or gamble the next 2 seasons to get where we will end up ..

Grubauer could be the next Talbot, or he could be the Next Ramo.. we dont know.

Obviously there is no guarantee of MAF or even Carey Price himself being here, what he is somewhere else.. but you have a bigger sample size to work with 

Elliot came in with ??... can he handle a load?  can he be a Bona Fide #1?.. can he consistently deliver his past performance over a bigger area.. I think he answered those.(no)

I think you need to plug the hole, not test out a new theory... if not MAF, then Smith , Miller, etc.. someone who has done it .. then I'm all for tossing a Grubauer in the passenger seat .. I'm just not willing to hand them the keys and hope they know how to drive

[MAC331]

Just now, phoenix66 said:

agreed.. but the one factor to remember, is how tight we looked.. like we cant make a mistake. That stems from the goalie.. when you're scared of a soft goal, it holds you back.

 we saw it , soft goal. we didn't get mad and bear down .. we deflated like "great ..here we go".. nobody will say it publicly, but the body language screamed of no faith in the goaltender 

Again I disagree, I think that stems from a lack of maturity and experience. All the playoff teams are facing soft goals but the more experienced ones push through them. You are taking a one way look at your argument, what about the 5 or 6 exceptional saves Elliott was making to bailout some of the poor defensive play at times so the score wasn't 7-2 ?

I think you need to quit making this a goaltending problem only, it wasn't.

[MAC331]

Just now, phoenix66 said:

I believe the bolded is a given,   the team this year . is not good enough next year .And nest year you have to believe the same thing 

where we vary , is that I'm not wiling to sacrifice or gamble the next 2 seasons to get where we will end up ..

Grubauer could be the next Talbot, or he could be the Next Ramo.. we dont know.

Obviously there is no guarantee of MAF or even Carey Price himself being here, what he is somewhere else.. but you have a bigger sample size to work with 

Elliot came in with ??... can he handle a load?  can he be a Bona Fide #1?.. can he consistently deliver his past performance over a bigger area.. I think he answered those.(no)

I think you need to plug the hole, not test out a new theory... if not MAF, then Smith , Miller, etc.. someone who has done it .. then I'm all for tossing a Grubauer in the passenger seat .. I'm just not willing to hand them the keys and hope they know how to drive

I see, well good luck with your perspective.

BTW what I suggested is not a new theory just planning for an exchange of dealing with the immediate, interim and replacement which should enhance your chances with good goaltenders.

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, MAC331 said:

Again I disagree, I think that stems from a lack of maturity and experience. All the playoff teams are facing soft goals but the more experienced ones push through them. You are taking a one way look at your argument, what about the 5 or 6 exceptional saves Elliott was making to bailout some of the poor defensive play at times so the score wasn't 7-2 ?

I think you need to quit making this a goaltending problem only, it wasn't.

Oh its not a goaltending only issue, I've never said it was.. but this is a goaltending thread.   I've said more than once, its not the only issue.. but that its a major one that needs to be addressed.

it was a major feat to jump from #30 to mid pack in tendng this year.. but we need to be top 10

[MAC331]

12 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Oh its not a goaltending only issue, I've never said it was.. but this is a goaltending thread.   I've said more than once, its not the only issue.. but that its a major one that needs to be addressed.

it was a major feat to jump from #30 to mid pack in tendng this year.. but we need to be top 10

No guarantees for that either with the options available. You won't convince me MAF comes riding in here on a white horse to save us. I would rather take solid steps towards our attempt to have elite goaltending.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Yes, with conviction.

This year alone, if MAF is in net , we are the ones playing the Preds right now. Final 4 anything can happen

We lost to the Ducks primarily due to Goaltending .. the OIlers lost because they had no second line 

just with the current roster, we got swept by Edmonton, that's an 8 point swing right there , the difference between us flipping positions.. we get ONE MORE win at anywhere in the season above that ?  we win the Division 

 

We lost to the Ducks for reasons other than goaltending.  Game 1 was the infamous 2 on 0.  A late game 5-3 didn't lead to a tying goal.  Game 2 was the weak call on Dougie to allow the Bouma deflection.  And then the Brodie call to snuff out the comeback.  Game 3 was letting Anaheim back in the game, much like EDM did in their loss to Anaheim in OT.  Game 4 was 2 goals against.

 

We lose a shootout to EDM and give up 3 goals on 5 shots (CJ) in another game.  Those are the relevant games.  No goalie seemed to be able to help us in the first month of the season, but somehow MAF wins those games.  People were calling for Gully's and Cameron's head for the systems used.  Maybe MAF would have fared a bit better.  Or not.

 

Would you have given up Tkachuk for MAF last draft?  Would you give up a 1st and/or high prospects this year?

 

I'm not saying MAF wouldn't be an upgrade to the overall body of work that Elliott provided.  I just don't know what his results would look like next season.  BT has one chance to build the goaltending at a reasonable cost and he needs to bat 1000.    

[phoenix66]

43 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

No guarantees for that either with the options available. You won't convince me MAF comes riding in here on a white horse to save us. I would rather take solid steps towards our attempt to have elite goaltending.

There will never be a guarantee, like i said before we could get Price and he could fall on his face.  We both want the same thing , It wont be the end of the world if they resign Elliot, but if they do , they better have the one behind him that can truly push him. I'm just contending that we need an upgrade at the #1, with at least history to back up why we made that decision to do so . If we get a Fleury (type) we can solidify him with Johnson and keep that path open for our system tenders to have the ability to steal the job 

[phoenix66]

8 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

We lost to the Ducks for reasons other than goaltending.  Game 1 was the infamous 2 on 0.  A late game 5-3 didn't lead to a tying goal.  Game 2 was the weak call on Dougie to allow the Bouma deflection.  And then the Brodie call to snuff out the comeback.  Game 3 was letting Anaheim back in the game, much like EDM did in their loss to Anaheim in OT.  Game 4 was 2 goals against.

 

We lose a shootout to EDM and give up 3 goals on 5 shots (CJ) in another game.  Those are the relevant games.  No goalie seemed to be able to help us in the first month of the season, but somehow MAF wins those games.  People were calling for Gully's and Cameron's head for the systems used.  Maybe MAF would have fared a bit better.  Or not.

 

Would you have given up Tkachuk for MAF last draft?  Would you give up a 1st and/or high prospects this year?

 

I'm not saying MAF wouldn't be an upgrade to the overall body of work that Elliott provided.  I just don't know what his results would look like next season.  BT has one chance to build the goaltending at a reasonable cost and he needs to bat 1000.    

absolutely not , Last year we missed the playoffs , the year before we got lucky.. we were nowhere near as forward as we came this year .. Last year was the year to roll the dice on an up and comer..  we rolled on Elliot and Johnson , we got improvement , but the team passed the level of goaltending where before it was way behind. The opportunity was there to make the gamble look like genius, but they didnt run with it.. 

 

yes there were team issues  as well, but those are the moments the tender needs to make one awesome save , that brings the team energy.. at worst the easy ones need to be made every time

[MAC331]

3 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

There will never be a guarantee, like i said before we could get Price and he could fall on his face.  We both want the same thing , It wont be the end of the world if they resign Elliot, but if they do , they better have the one behind him that can truly push him. I'm just contending that we need an upgrade at the #1, with at least history to back up why we made that decision to do so . If we get a Fleury (type) we can solidify him with Johnson and keep that path open for our system tenders to have the ability to steal the job 

Yes you could go Fleury and Johnson for close to 8M to carry you through to your prospects. I think what I suggested with Elliott and possibly Grubauer allows you to do the same at a lower cost and more positive possibilities being added to the challenge for everyone.

[phoenix66]

2 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Yes you could go Fleury and Johnson for close to 8M to carry you through to your prospects. I think what I suggested with Elliott and possibly Grubauer allows you to do the same at a lower cost and more positive possibilities being added to the challenge for everyone.

See , we do agree on one thing.. it cant be the same Johnson / Elliot tandem again

[cross16]

I'm of the opinion that better goaltending would only have given the Flames a chance to extend the series to maybe at least 6 games.  IN order to win that series someone was going to have to step up and produce 5 on 5 and the way that series was going that wasn't looking likely. Can't win a series scoring 2 5 on 5 goals in 4 games. 

 

Goaltending is important obviously but I think as important is finding someone who can add some scoring as well as generate more chances. The Flames are a solid team defensively but are a bottom tier team in terms of both their ability to product chances and capitalize on them. You can get all the goatlending you want but if you don't improve in that area you aren't going to go any further than they did this year. So I don't disagree with the logic that certain goalies are not worth pushing all the chips in for.

 

On Fleury, I would be interested for sure and I don't believe at all that the cost would be a first and a prospect. First straight up maybe but I don't think the cost would be as high as some are speculating here as it just never is that high for goalies. Schenider in his prime cost the 9th overall pick so why is Fleury later in his career (and with likely less suitors) going to cost the 16th overall pick plus more?

Having said that I also happen to believe that Fleury isn't a realistic option as I think he's going to Vegas.

 

[MAC331]

35 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

See , we do agree on one thing.. it cant be the same Johnson / Elliot tandem again

I think Johnson has proven himself to be a reliable back up but that is where it ends for him IMO. Grubauer possibly has higher potential and it would take a number of games to get a proper perspective on him but in the mean time you have another hopefully better more experienced goalie to carry most the load.

[Flyerfan52]

4 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Question for you. Do see our team going right to the SC with someone like MAF over the next 2 seasons ?

I would say unless BT is going to go for a franchise type goalie like TOR did with Andersson, resign Elliott for 2 more seasons at 3.5M. Take a serious look at the development Gilles, Rittich, MacDonald, Schneider and Parsons need over those 2 years so they are ready to take the reins.

I see the prospective goalies as "birds in the bush" as we won't be sure any will ever be a starter. Therefore I want the "bird in the hand" to be more than a bridge.

I lean towards a current backup (Grubauer, Raatna) as they are somewhat proven but #2 behind a top 5 starter. I do want to shelter my bet a tad with a goalie with more starts & let the duo duel it out for the starters reins.

If we get MAF & a current b/p @ under the cost of that b/u & a UFA like Mason/Elliott I go for it but refuse to overpay just for the hope Fleury is the bridge & that our prospect is the next Price/Holtby/Rask/Rinne/Kipper.

[travel_dude]

43 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I'm of the opinion that better goaltending would only have given the Flames a chance to extend the series to maybe at least 6 games.  IN order to win that series someone was going to have to step up and produce 5 on 5 and the way that series was going that wasn't looking likely. Can't win a series scoring 2 5 on 5 goals in 4 games. 

 

 

We had several chances to win games against Ahaheim, but failed to deliver.  Scoring one goal in an elimination game isn't impressive.  I suppose you could argue that the meltdown was all on the goalie, but what happened to the pushback after the Ducks scored to make it 4-3?  

 

No matter who we get for next year, we better fix the lineup (or usage) so we aren't overplaying role players when we need scoring. 

[Flyerfan52]

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

We had several chances to win games against Ahaheim, but failed to deliver.  Scoring one goal in an elimination game isn't impressive.  I suppose you could argue that the meltdown was all on the goalie, but what happened to the pushback after the Ducks scored to make it 4-3?  

 

No matter who we get for next year, we better fix the lineup (or usage) so we aren't overplaying role players when we need scoring. 

That's why I'm for slightly downgrading our forward talent for more heart & upping our D.

With a better D & goalies it wouldn't cause hearts up front to drop going down a goal.

When we had Kipper & an excellent D every game was viewed as winable. It was only when his backup (unproven because they were spectators) would let in a goal (soft or hard) that they were demoralized. With a proper tandem where 1 was a starter & the other believes he can be (isn't behind Holtby or Lundqvist) there shouldn't be that fall off.

[manu11]

3 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

I think you need to plug the hole, not test out a new theory... if not MAF, then Smith , Miller, etc.. someone who has done it .. then I'm all for tossing a Grubauer in the passenger seat .. I'm just not willing to hand them the keys and hope they know how to drive

 

Well if you trade for the likes of Fleury or M.Smith you pretty much have the plan that this is your Nr.1 guy. At this point I don't see the need to give up a 2nd round pick or more to trade for Grubauer or Raanta just to be a backup. I think if you aqcuire one of them, then you do that with the confidence that they are going to be your Nr.1 guy.

[MAC331]

30 minutes ago, manu11 said:

 

Well if you trade for the likes of Fleury or M.Smith you pretty much have the plan that this is your Nr.1 guy. At this point I don't see the need to give up a 2nd round pick or more to trade for Grubauer or Raanta just to be a backup. I think if you aqcuire one of them, then you do that with the confidence that they are going to be your Nr.1 guy.

These are choices BT and staff will need to be making but let's make no mistake here we are trying to end up with the right #1 for an extended period if we can. Goalies such as MAF and Smith buy you time that's all. Having a similar situation like Elliott had in STL with someone like Grubauer pushing you keep some continuity in the line because you never know what you have until they pan out or they don't.

[cross16]

I don't think Grabauer is going to be an option for the Flames. Capitals only have he and Holtby to expose and they are not going to expose Hotlby. I'm betting Grabauer gets claimed by Vegas in the expansion draft given McPhee originally drafted him, they want at least 1 young goalie to groom, and he is easily the best piece you are going to get off Washington once they protect who they should protect. 

The only downside is he is an RFA but given Vegas can likely offering him more playing time, a brighter future and maybe even more $ i can't see that being a tough negotiation. Would come down to does Vegas prefer Grabauer or Dimitry Orlov and I think Grabauer is by far the more attractive piece for them. 

[MAC331]

Just now, cross16 said:

I don't think Grabauer is going to be an option for the Flames. Capitals only have he and Holtby to expose and they are not going to expose Hotlby. I'm betting Grabauer gets claimed by Vegas in the expansion draft given McPhee originally drafted him, they want at least 1 young goalie to groom, and he is easily the best piece you are going to get off Washington once they protect who they should protect. 

You could be right there, good point.

[manu11]

9 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I don't think Grabauer is going to be an option for the Flames. Capitals only have he and Holtby to expose and they are not going to expose Hotlby. I'm betting Grabauer gets claimed by Vegas in the expansion draft given McPhee originally drafted him, they want at least 1 young goalie to groom, and he is easily the best piece you are going to get off Washington once they protect who they should protect. 

 

If we trade for MAF or Smith then that's the guy we're protecting, so you could be right. Unless Vegas ends up with both Grubauer and Raanta, I don't see them beeing available after the ED. 

 

 

[travel_dude]

If we trade for a goalie before the draft, then we would only pick one.  We can solve the backup spot in the summer.   If Vegas wants Elliott or CJ, they can have them as pending UFA's.  Suits us just fine.  I don't see them persuing either after July 1st.

 

I would be okay with MAF, assuming the cost was a 3rd in 2018 or less.  If not, then here is my shopping list:

 

Young Starters (possibly 1a/1b)

Raanta

Grubauer

Korpisalo

Saros (most costly due to exempt status and future with team)

 

Ready to be #1

Mrazek (most costly because he was gifted the starter job) 

Schneider (possibly available because NJ in rebuild mode; may need to have NJ retain some salary)

Mason (UFA signing or trade very little for his rights)

 

I guess I am starting to feel like we either go for a starter-in-the-making or one that has years left on his treads.  The three bona fide starters I listed have had good seasons on meh teams.  No offense FF52.  

[robrob74]

4 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

There will never be a guarantee, like i said before we could get Price and he could fall on his face.  We both want the same thing , It wont be the end of the world if they resign Elliot, but if they do , they better have the one behind him that can truly push him. I'm just contending that we need an upgrade at the #1, with at least history to back up why we made that decision to do so . If we get a Fleury (type) we can solidify him with Johnson and keep that path open for our system tenders to have the ability to steal the job 

 

One playoff loss was not due to goaltending but two games were all goaltending, and one was a mix of both. So I would say you're right, but in those two games that were due to goaltending, 

 

we really should have  been  at least tied 2-2 if goaltending was better. 

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

If we trade for a goalie before the draft, then we would only pick one.  We can solve the backup spot in the summer.   If Vegas wants Elliott or CJ, they can have them as pending UFA's.  Suits us just fine.  I don't see them persuing either after July 1st.

 

I would be okay with MAF, assuming the cost was a 3rd in 2018 or less.  If not, then here is my shopping list:

 

Young Starters (possibly 1a/1b)

Raanta

Grubauer

Korpisalo

Saros (most costly due to exempt status and future with team)

 

Ready to be #1

Mrazek (most costly because he was gifted the starter job) 

Schneider (possibly available because NJ in rebuild mode; may need to have NJ retain some salary)

Mason (UFA signing or trade very little for his rights)

 

I guess I am starting to feel like we either go for a starter-in-the-making or one that has years left on his treads.  The three bona fide starters I listed have had good seasons on meh teams.  No offense FF52.  

Mrazek for me, I just don't know what the cost would be. He is 25 with good background while being eased into almost 5 years of NHL experience. Good one to grow with our team.

[Flyerfan52]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

I don't think Grabauer is going to be an option for the Flames. Capitals only have he and Holtby to expose and they are not going to expose Hotlby. I'm betting Grabauer gets claimed by Vegas in the expansion draft given McPhee originally drafted him, they want at least 1 young goalie to groom, and he is easily the best piece you are going to get off Washington once they protect who they should protect. 

The only downside is he is an RFA but given Vegas can likely offering him more playing time, a brighter future and maybe even more $ i can't see that being a tough negotiation. Would come down to does Vegas prefer Grabauer or Dimitry Orlov and I think Grabauer is by far the more attractive piece for them. 

The problem with that arguement is that Washington could sign someone like Ray Emery in the month left to expose. That's a backup plan if Phoenix Copley doesn't meet exposure regulations (I believe he does).

The Caps pocket a fairly high draft pick or @ lest decent player/prospect (more than worth it)  rather than lose Grubauer for nothing.