Goaltending

[CalgarySTL]

26 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I agree, none of the younger ones are without risk.

 

But signing a 30+ goalie with a save percentage under .900 and showing no signs of getting better since an undisclosed injury in 2017.....

 

That is beyond risk.  This is the stuff of playing the jackpot.

 

And it's not without a cost.  Every game he plays is one more game we're not ensuring a future by playing a far more capable younger goalie.   If we're willing to go sub .900 we can pick up any number of 21 year old goalies who can deliver better right now in the NHL, for really not that much.

 

It might be different if we hadn't tried this method already for the last 6 or so years, and we hadn't seen 6 or so years of sub-optimal goaltending.  Then we'd have a real debate.

You're making waaaay bigger deal about this, than it really is.  It's a 1 year, show me deal... if it was a 3 or 4 year deal, i'd probably agree with you. No one else in our system looks ready (Gillies, Parsons, haven't seen Zagidulan yet, etc).  You're not getting a "superstar" without paying close to 10 mil a season and I don't think a guy like Jarri or whatever his name is, would be any better of a choice. We do not have the cap space... and it seems like it's been tougher to offload any contracts (frolik, brodie, neal, stone), than we'd like. 

 

Rittich was putting up all-star #'s until he got injured.  Why wouldn't you see if he can replicate his performance from last year. I'd be quite happy if he did & Talbot plays decent enough to give us a chance to win every night. He was playing behind one of the worst teams in the league the last couple years. I don't think Carey Price himself would have "great" numbers playing in that skid mark of a city (EDM).

[jjgallow]

8 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Jarry might end up being a worse solution because it puts pressure to start the starter.

 

I...would agree...that there are better options out there than Jarry.

 

Saros or Demko or Hart would be more appropriate examples really, with a higher price tag but worth it.

 

Or if that's too high a cost, then you're looking at Berdin or Ingram etc.

 

ONE thing, that I believe can't be stressed enough,  is that Schneider MIGHT just be one of the most under-rated prospects out there.   I really am undecided on him.   He could surprise this year.  He might be our one slim hope right now.   When you bring in all these old vets....  you take away the opportunity to find this stuff out.

[jjgallow]

21 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

just like i find it baffling .. nearly everybody on this board , has written off a great regular season because " only playoffs matter ".. but yet most are cheering the fact we just cut loose the All Time League Leader in Playoff save %....  all hes ever done is dial it up when he gets to the playoffs ..cant have it both ways 

 

I actually pointed this out and I agree with you.   If we Were going to keep any vet, you would think it would be the guy who showed up for us.   Granted Talbot had a great WC.     But I'm not disagreeing with you.  One of the things that Really bothers me about this switch is that we just shipped out the guy who showed up.   So how all that math works in my head is simply that I'm not nearly as high on Rittich as some on here are.

[robrob74]

24 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

But you are taking one year of his career .. and you cant overlook where he was 

a few years back , ive said it before.. it was all about finding the hotshot backup ready to be a starter .. in fact " the next Talbot " was a commonly used phrase .

Irony is WE were very close to getting him over Edmonton ..  how would everybody feel now ?

 

I agree full that the goal is to develop Rittich .. but to bash Talbot makes no sense over 1 bad year 

 

 

 

just like i find it baffling .. nearly everybody on this board , has written off a great regular season because " only playoffs matter ".. but yet most are cheering the fact we just cut loose the All Time League Leader in Playoff save %....  all hes ever done is dial it up when he gets to the playoffs ..cant have it both ways 

 

Well see, that is where we differ on the regular season. 

 

Awesome, the first line carried the team for about half of to possibly two-thirds of the season. I loved how they were dominant and wracking up the points. 

 

But the rest of the roster was not there. Then the 4th line carried the team from the all-star Break onwards... 

 

It is why I don’t see last season as a team success. I love that the 1st line took a step and I hope that they can continue upwards on the trajectory. 

 

We need to to figure out the rest of the roster.

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

Well see, that is where we differ on the regular season. 

 

Awesome, the first line carried the team for about half of to possibly two-thirds of the season. I loved how they were dominant and wracking up the points. 

 

But the rest of the roster was not there. Then the 4th line carried the team from the all-star Break onwards... 

 

It is why I don’t see last season as a team success. I love that the 1st line took a step and I hope that they can continue upwards on the trajectory. 

 

We need to to figure out the rest of the roster.

no disagreement there .. improvement is needed .. much of it internal .. that's something BT needs to continue to work 

My reference is that , No , Smith did not have a great regular season .. but he showed up in the playoffs and showed what "taking it up a level " looks like .. and most could not wait to run him out of town ? why ? because of a poor regular season .. its kinda hypocritical

I'm certain the only reason he is not back is because  of the cap .. 2.75 is much better than $4M

[robrob74]

4 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I actually pointed this out and I agree with you.   If we Were going to keep any vet, you would think it would be the guy who showed up for us.   Granted Talbot had a great WC.     But I'm not disagreeing with you.  One of the things that Really bothers me about this switch is that we just shipped out the guy who showed up.   So how all that math works in my head is simply that I'm not nearly as high on Rittich as some on here are.

 

And I feel more secured by Rittich’s play than Gillies or any other goalie in the system so far. Rittich isn’t the 2nd coming of Kipper. He is what he is. He has great games and bad games and some games he is good enough to eek out wins. About an average NHL goalie.

 

 

[travel_dude]

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I actually pointed this out and I agree with you.   If we Were going to keep any vet, you would think it would be the guy who showed up for us.   Granted Talbot had a great WC.     But I'm not disagreeing with you.  One of the things that Really bothers me about this switch is that we just shipped out the guy who showed up.   So how all that math works in my head is simply that I'm not nearly as high on Rittich as some on here are.

 

So we shipped out a guy that showed up for 5 games and gave us one win.

Talbot did much more for them and they should have been in the 3rd round.

So, it comes down to an aging goalie with 5 games of "compete" recently vs 15 games of compete a few years ago from a guy with tons of mileage left.

571 games played versus 288.

 

I find it odd that you aren't saying good things about Rittich.

Pretty much saved the season for the team.

Was stellar for most of the season and had a minor injury.

 

I agree with goalie development being retarded here.

Doesn;t mean we can't do it right, but there is no magic pill right now.

Saros isn;t going anywhere, nor are any of the top prospect goalies.

 

[robrob74]

2 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

no disagreement there .. improvement is needed .. much of it internal .. that's something BT needs to continue to work 

My reference is that , No , Smith did not have a great regular season .. but he showed up in the playoffs and showed what "taking it up a level " looks like .. and most could not wait to run him out of town ? why ? because of a poor regular season .. its kinda hypocritical

I'm certain the only reason he is not back is because  of the cap .. 2.75 is much better than $4M

 

Yup. 

But I wonder, can we guarantee he will do that again in the regular season? If he plays the same, poor regular season, he may not get a chance to ramp up the playoffs. 

 

But like Jigalow thinks, it is possible Rittich regresses and we need someone to insulate that possibility. 

 

It is tough. 

 

If all we need is average and get some scoring throughout the lineup, I think it’s good. 

 

Are we div leaders with this team?

i would like to see more consistency throughout the lineup first to call it. 

 

I actually worry that Hathaway was a big piece to lose even if just a 4th liner. I hope we can find someone to replace what he brought. Everyone else seems to think it’s easy to do. I don’t, or we would have had more of it than just he and Bennett. 

[phoenix66]

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

So we shipped out a guy that showed up for 5 games and gave us one win.

Talbot did much more for them and they should have been in the 3rd round.

So, it comes down to an aging goalie with 5 games of "compete" recently vs 15 games of compete a few years ago from a guy with tons of mileage left.

571 games played versus 288.

 

I find it odd that you aren't saying good things about Rittich.

Pretty much saved the season for the team.

Was stellar for most of the season and had a minor injury.

 

I agree with goalie development being retarded here.

Doesn;t mean we can't do it right, but there is no magic pill right now.

Saros isn;t going anywhere, nor are any of the top prospect goalies.

 

don't get me wrong , if we had to lose Smith , I'm very Happy Talbot is the replacement 

I'm just referring to the overlaying attitude that he be run out of town 

I for one would have been perfectly happy re-signing him with the emphasis now being on developing Rittich

[robrob74]

Just now, phoenix66 said:

don't get me wrong , if we had to lose Smith , I'm very Happy Talbot is the replacement 

I'm just referring to the overlaying attitude that he be run out of town 

I for one would have been perfectly happy re-signing him with the emphasis now being on developing Rittich

 

That was kind of the odd thing though, they kept giving the net back to Smith. They’ll need smith down the road, let’s pet his ego. In the process I felt it unfair to what Rittich was accomplishing. It really pissed me off. 

 

If if I were Rittich I’d not sign here. But RFA, he kind of has no choice. 

 

If if I were a team looking for a goalie I might offer a 3.5 for him. 

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

That was kind of the odd thing though, they kept giving the net back to Smith. They’ll need smith down the road, let’s pet his ego. In the process I felt it unfair to what Rittich was accomplishing. It really pissed me off. 

 

If if I were Rittich I’d not sign here. But RFA, he kind of has no choice. 

 

If if I were a team looking for a goalie I might offer a 3.5 for him. 

you do know Rittich was injured since January right ?

[robrob74]

5 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

you do know Rittich was injured since January right ?

 

Yup, but it started earlier in the year. It was a whole season thing. 

[travel_dude]

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

 

That was kind of the odd thing though, they kept giving the net back to Smith. They’ll need smith down the road, let’s pet his ego. In the process I felt it unfair to what Rittich was accomplishing. It really pissed me off. 

 

If if I were Rittich I’d not sign here. But RFA, he kind of has no choice. 

 

If if I were a team looking for a goalie I might offer a 3.5 for him. 

 

It's tough when the other guy has compromising pics of the coach.  JK.

I think they ruined his season a bit.

Try to change the stud goalie into a D-man.

Tkachuk loved playing in front of him.

 

He'll get his chance this season, and Talbot is just going to be insurance he doesn;t get burned out.

Talbot is a team first guy.

He wants to get starter money again, but he's a risk even after a good year.

The worse thing is that a goalie that worked with King Henrik might actually have advice to a younger goalie.

He wants to stick it to the Oilers.

Prove them wrong.

Open up the doors for next year.

A strong season with limited starts is going to show that more than 50 games will. 

[robrob74]

2 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

It's tough when the other guy has compromising pics of the coach.  JK.

I think they ruined his season a bit.

Try to change the stud goalie into a D-man.

Tkachuk loved playing in front of him.

 

He'll get his chance this season, and Talbot is just going to be insurance he doesn;t get burned out.

Talbot is a team first guy.

He wants to get starter money again, but he's a risk even after a good year.

The worse thing is that a goalie that worked with King Henrik might actually have advice to a younger goalie.

He wants to stick it to the Oilers.

Prove them wrong.

Open up the doors for next year.

A strong season with limited starts is going to show that more than 50 games will. 

 

You charted the .94? S% in the 26 games. Then a .920+ the 2nd year. Those are good numbers for limited activity. 

 

Around .920 would be a big win.

[JTech780]

Mrazek signed 2 years at $3.125m and Lehner signed at 1 year for $5m. That's a good term for Lehner but a lot of money for a guy that has had 1 good year. I wouldn't have minded Mrazek at that price, but Treliving might not have wanted to go to 2 years.

[cross16]

For better or worse, it’s pretty clear that after the season the flames decided Rittich was their guy and they were going to give him every opportunity. I don’t think they were ever in the Lehner or Mrzaek sweepstakes because they weren’t looking for people who want to start, they were only looking for someone to backup Rittich

 

Given the market for free agents(ignoring trade market as I have no idea) I think it’s the right call. 

[GM_3300]

19 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

no disagreement there .. improvement is needed .. much of it internal .. that's something BT needs to continue to work 

My reference is that , No , Smith did not have a great regular season .. but he showed up in the playoffs and showed what "taking it up a level " looks like .. and most could not wait to run him out of town ? why ? because of a poor regular season .. its kinda hypocritical

I'm certain the only reason he is not back is because  of the cap .. 2.75 is much better than $4M

Listening to Burke over the weekend with respect to fans and sportswriters turning on players and coaches is like the "kiss of death" for them, there is no coming back and you might as well deal them.

[GM_3300]

16 hours ago, cross16 said:

For better or worse, it’s pretty clear that after the season the flames decided Rittich was their guy and they were going to give him every opportunity. I don’t think they were ever in the Lehner or Mrzaek sweepstakes because they weren’t looking for people who want to start, they were only looking for someone to backup Rittich

 

Given the market for free agents(ignoring trade market as I have no idea) I think it’s the right call. 

Certainly looks that way.

[jjgallow]

On 7/1/2019 at 4:39 PM, cross16 said:

For better or worse, it’s pretty clear that after the season the flames decided Rittich was their guy and they were going to give him every opportunity. I don’t think they were ever in the Lehner or Mrzaek sweepstakes because they weren’t looking for people who want to start, they were only looking for someone to backup Rittich

 

Given the market for free agents(ignoring trade market as I have no idea) I think it’s the right call. 

 

I stepped away for a few days there, wisely...    I agree with your post, it is both diplomatic and has some truth to it.

 

Yes, within the constraints of free agent availability at that particular point in time, and within the constraint of Rittich being their clear #1, then they absolutely did the right thing.

 

The issue is the constraints themselves.   And given the Flames goaltending track record since Kipper (as well as how Kipper was managed), I find it very very difficult to give them benefit of the doubt.

 

1.  Assuming that Rittich is a #1, and capable of winning a cup, is hard to fathom.  Either they are crazy high on this guy, or not serious about winning the cup. 

              The First thing you have to do is ignore his play after his injury.

                 You have to assume that, despite getting progressively worse after it, he will now get progressively better.

              You have to ignore his age, and assume that he still has a lot of improvement left.

              You have to ignore that Most goalies enter the NHL hot, until teams figure out their number. 

                            And assume this was not the case of his very Brief success in the NHL.

              You have to ignore that he played a lot of not great teams.  Although there was a period where this could be argued.

 

2. Finding it critical to act exactly when they did, is incredibly difficult to justify.   It looked like a panic move. 

         On Talbot:

               Yes, at that moment in time, Talbot was the most prominent backup fit.  IF you ignore everything since his last injury (such as all of last year).

               That..is SUCH a massive IF.  And quite frankly I don't trust how the Oilers prevent/handle injuries.

               Then there's his age.   Younger than Smith but that should not be the measure.   Talbot's most Likely on the decline.

 

         On the Timing:        "Shoring up the holes" is a shortsighted move which might as well be "clogging up the pipeline"

               Flames are assuming that NO decent goaltender will become available between now and the season start. 

                       Despite all of history saying otherwise.

                     Despite a Binnington presenting themselves almost every year.   

                          They have forfeited any opportunistic moves.  As they have in previous years.

               

               Flames ignored all trading opportunities despite many extremely promising prospects being available in what is the most important position in the game.

 

               Flames are assuming they have nothing in house worth backup status.   

                               Schneider could surprise.  Gillies could surprise.  Now we will not know until it is far too late int he season.

 

 

Overall, they are just not taking this position seriously.   Maybe they think they can just score more goals.   Worked for them last year in the regular season, to my surprise.   But goals don't come that easy when it matters.  Not against teams that take this position seriously.

[flames-fan-in-jets-land]

58 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I stepped away for a few days there, wisely...    I agree with your post, it is both diplomatic and has some truth to it.

 

Yes, within the constraints of free agent availability at that particular point in time, and within the constraint of Rittich being their clear #1, then they absolutely did the right thing.

 

The issue is the constraints themselves.   And given the Flames goaltending track record since Kipper (as well as how Kipper was managed), I find it very very difficult to give them benefit of the doubt.

 

1.  Assuming that Rittich is a #1, and capable of winning a cup, is hard to fathom.  Either they are crazy high on this guy, or not serious about winning the cup. 

              The First thing you have to do is ignore his play after his injury.

                 You have to assume that, despite getting progressively worse after it, he will now get progressively better.

              You have to ignore his age, and assume that he still has a lot of improvement left.

              You have to ignore that Most goalies enter the NHL hot, until teams figure out their number. 

                            And assume this was not the case of his very Brief success in the NHL.

              You have to ignore that he played a lot of not great teams.  Although there was a period where this could be argued.

 

2. Finding it critical to act exactly when they did, is incredibly difficult to justify.   It looked like a panic move. 

         On Talbot:

               Yes, at that moment in time, Talbot was the most prominent backup fit.  IF you ignore everything since his last injury (such as all of last year).

               That..is SUCH a massive IF.  And quite frankly I don't trust how the Oilers prevent/handle injuries.

               Then there's his age.   Younger than Smith but that should not be the measure.   Talbot's most Likely on the decline.

 

         On the Timing:        "Shoring up the holes" is a shortsighted move which might as well be "clogging up the pipeline"

               Flames are assuming that NO decent goaltender will become available between now and the season start. 

                       Despite all of history saying otherwise.

                     Despite a Binnington presenting themselves almost every year.   

                          They have forfeited any opportunistic moves.  As they have in previous years.

               

               Flames ignored all trading opportunities despite many extremely promising prospects being available in what is the most important position in the game.

 

               Flames are assuming they have nothing in house worth backup status.   

                               Schneider could surprise.  Gillies could surprise.  Now we will not know until it is far too late int he season.

 

 

Overall, they are just not taking this position seriously.   Maybe they think they can just score more goals.   Worked for them last year in the regular season, to my surprise.   But goals don't come that easy when it matters.  Not against teams that take this position seriously.

You don't know that.

 

 

So in other words, even though Rittich isn't signed (he will) and in all reality still unproven, last years "starter" is gone, and the progress of the kids in the system is anyones guess the team should still have waited until the 11th hour to sign a backup?

 

 

[travel_dude]

56 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I stepped away for a few days there, wisely...    I agree with your post, it is both diplomatic and has some truth to it.

 

Yes, within the constraints of free agent availability at that particular point in time, and within the constraint of Rittich being their clear #1, then they absolutely did the right thing.

 

The issue is the constraints themselves.   And given the Flames goaltending track record since Kipper (as well as how Kipper was managed), I find it very very difficult to give them benefit of the doubt.

 

1.  Assuming that Rittich is a #1, and capable of winning a cup, is hard to fathom.  Either they are crazy high on this guy, or not serious about winning the cup. 

              The First thing you have to do is ignore his play after his injury.

                 You have to assume that, despite getting progressively worse after it, he will now get progressively better.

              You have to ignore his age, and assume that he still has a lot of improvement left.

              You have to ignore that Most goalies enter the NHL hot, until teams figure out their number. 

                            And assume this was not the case of his very Brief success in the NHL.

              You have to ignore that he played a lot of not great teams.  Although there was a period where this could be argued.

 

2. Finding it critical to act exactly when they did, is incredibly difficult to justify.   It looked like a panic move. 

         On Talbot:

               Yes, at that moment in time, Talbot was the most prominent backup fit.  IF you ignore everything since his last injury (such as all of last year).

               That..is SUCH a massive IF.  And quite frankly I don't trust how the Oilers prevent/handle injuries.

               Then there's his age.   Younger than Smith but that should not be the measure.   Talbot's most Likely on the decline.

 

         On the Timing:        "Shoring up the holes" is a shortsighted move which might as well be "clogging up the pipeline"

               Flames are assuming that NO decent goaltender will become available between now and the season start. 

                       Despite all of history saying otherwise.

                     Despite a Binnington presenting themselves almost every year.   

                          They have forfeited any opportunistic moves.  As they have in previous years.

               

               Flames ignored all trading opportunities despite many extremely promising prospects being available in what is the most important position in the game.

 

               Flames are assuming they have nothing in house worth backup status.   

                               Schneider could surprise.  Gillies could surprise.  Now we will not know until it is far too late int he season.

 

 

Overall, they are just not taking this position seriously.   Maybe they think they can just score more goals.   Worked for them last year in the regular season, to my surprise.   But goals don't come that easy when it matters.  Not against teams that take this position seriously.

 

You can't just point to one type of goalie and say they are the only type to win a cup.

MAF took how long before he won one.

He was anything but hot starting out.

Just one example.

Bingington and Murray are examples of the rare ones that did it early on in their careers.

Murray turned an injury replacement into a cup run.

Binginton arrived on the scene of a team on the verge of a rebuild.

His rise to glory is well storied.

 

Goalies are voodoo.

We are as likely to have a free agent like Zag turn into a winner as Spencer Knight. 

Team playing style influences how they develop as NHL goalies.

Coming in at the right moment helps.

 

Rittich played in the AHL lights out to bad.

Inconsistent.

His first set of games, he played more good than bad.

Still wasn't consistent.

His second season was great and he became consistent.

Playing injured his game fell off.

Playing the puck too much because that's what they wanted from him over strong play.

 

Talbot is a shot in the dark, but Smith would have been a shot in the dark with a blindfold after spinning in circles.

Standing on one leg.  I'm not sure all these great options that you are talking about that are available. 

[jjgallow]

 

Quote

Goalies are voodoo.

 

Sorry in advance for snippeting, I did read it all.  I wrote a detailed 2-pager disputing all that you said lol, and then thought, there is no need for this.  We all have our opinions.

 

Here's the thing.   They're not voodoo.   This is an excuse we use, as victims of the Flames goalie system.  It is a lie we tell ourselves to feel better.

 

Goalies seem like voodoo when you have a development system like Voodoo and you acquire them like they're voodoo, and you coach them like voodoo.

 

We have to stop excusing aweful development, aweful trades, and aweful management of goalies as "Okay" because it's "Voodoo".

 

MAF was a very young Stanley cup winner who had a rough patch, when he was young.  He was identified early by scouts, drafted in the first round, was incredibly successful.   When he slumped, I suggested trading for him on here.  The response I got was "I'd rather have Ramo" which didn't make any more sense at that time than it does now.   But  in the same response, was "Goalies are voodoo anyway".  A young goalie like MAF, if he has a rough patch, you buy low.   It's an opportunity.    We wait until goalies are old and in decline, and then we clog our development system up relying on their decline.

 

Our system is the voodoo.  This Doesn't happen to serious contender teams.  We need to fix it.   We know this.

 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

Sorry in advance for snippeting, I did read it all.  I wrote a detailed 2-pager disputing all that you said lol, and then thought, there is no need for this.  We all have our opinions.

 

Here's the thing.   They're not voodoo.   This is an excuse we use, as victims of the Flames goalie system.  It is a lie we tell ourselves to feel better.

 

Goalies seem like voodoo when you have a development system like Voodoo and you acquire them like they're voodoo, and you coach them like voodoo.

 

We have to stop excusing aweful development, aweful trades, and aweful management of goalies as "Okay" because it's "Voodoo".

 

MAF was a very young Stanley cup winner who had a rough patch, when he was young.  He was identified early by scouts, drafted in the first round, was incredibly successful.   When he slumped, I suggested trading for him on here.  The response I got was "I'd rather have Ramo" which didn't make any more sense at that time than it does now.   But  in the same response, was "Goalies are voodoo anyway".  A young goalie like MAF, if he has a rough patch, you buy low.   It's an opportunity.    We wait until goalies are old and in decline, and then we clog our development system up relying on their decline.

 

Our system is the voodoo.  This Doesn't happen to serious contender teams.  We need to fix it.   We know this.

 

 

Agreed that we have not got it right yet.

Seems like you condensed 2 pages to 1.

Bravo.

 

Goalies are voodoo just means that top draft picks rarely pan out.  A handful have.

Then again, some that went later look like potential stars.

Saros is an example of a guy drafted that looks like the real thing.

And yet, he only played 31 games last year with average to above average numbers.  

Would he have been the best one for a backup, 1b, 1a, starter?

Remains to be seen.

Trending towards likely.

 

And if you suggest he was the best available, he would have fetched the equivalent of a Tkachuk pick and a prospect.

 

But the rest still remains true.  Do we have the right coach.  Can we develop the right way.

Goalies are voodoo.

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Agreed that we have not got it right yet.

Seems like you condensed 2 pages to 1.

Bravo.

 

Goalies are voodoo just means that top draft picks rarely pan out.  A handful have.

Then again, some that went later look like potential stars.

Saros is an example of a guy drafted that looks like the real thing.

And yet, he only played 31 games last year with average to above average numbers.  

Would he have been the best one for a backup, 1b, 1a, starter?

Remains to be seen.

Trending towards likely.

 

And if you suggest he was the best available, he would have fetched the equivalent of a Tkachuk pick and a prospect.

 

But the rest still remains true.  Do we have the right coach.  Can we develop the right way.

Goalies are voodoo.

 

 

Saros might cost that much now,  but he definitely didn't when we were debating him back in 2016.   I take it you are referring to the time when you said I was always complaining and never offered solutions,  so I offered Saros?

 

 

At that time it would have been no more than a 2nd rounder or an equivalent prospect in another position. 

 

But it was shot down,  on the grounds of filling holes with an aging vet would give us better chances.

 

And the question of how long I am willing to wait.

 

 

Answer:  I will always wait however long it takes to do things right because no NHL team has ever won a cup by half-assing it in net.  Period.  Saros was a better choice then, he still looks like the better choice now, our revolving door of retired and mediocre has not helped the team in any way,

 

And it never will.

 

So I continue to wait.  And yes  there are cheaper equivalents now too.

 

Quick fixes always mean waiting even longer.  Sometimes until the next rebuild.

 

[travel_dude]

8 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

Saros might cost that much now,  but he definitely didn't when we were debating him back in 2016.   I take it you are referring to the time when you said I was always complaining and never offered solutions,  so I offered Saros?

 

 

At that time it would have been no more than a 2nd rounder or an equivalent prospect in another position. 

 

But it was shot down,  on the grounds of filling holes with an aging vet would give us better chances.

 

And the question of how long I am willing to wait.

 

 

Answer:  I will always wait however long it takes to do things right because no NHL team has ever won a cup by half-assing it in net.  Period.  Saros was a better choice then, he still looks like the better choice now, our revolving door of retired and mediocre has not helped the team in any way,

 

And it never will.

 

So I continue to wait.  And yes  there are cheaper equivalents now too.

 

Quick fixes always mean waiting even longer.  Sometimes until the next rebuild.

 

I'm not going to go back there to see the context because it relly doesn't matter today.

Would Nashville have traded for less?

We were supposedly offering Tkachuk pick for MAF.

Or maybe that was Bishop.

 

It really comes down to what is available for how much.

Teams are not going to give up top goalie prospects for little.

Andersen could have been had, but ANA didn't want him in the West.

Anyone of value is going to be held onto.

 

Drafting is a good way to get a top goalie, if he develops into one.

Sometimes completely out of our control.

ANyway, we are going in circles here.

Enjoy the debate.

Perhaps if Talbot or Rittich beat the odds and become that next Renne or whatever, you might change your mind.

Imagine that.  A goalie we have for 5 years that posts a .925 SA%.

Would be nice for a change to not go throught the goalie search every year.