Stans goalie choices after last years cup win

Spunky Porkstacker · Apr 16, 2014

Doesn't seem like he had much of a choice. At the point he was at in keeping this team together he had little choice but to give Crow the $$$. Its easy to say he should have gotten someone for less, but who did he have to choose from. Sure, there has to be a goalie for less that would be stable enough to win that last game in June, but again, WHO?





http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-free-agency-top-5-goalies-available/





Here is the list as of July 4 2013
Ilya Bryzgalov 2012 cap hit 5,666,667
Ray Emery 2012 cap hit 1,150,000
Evgeni Nabokov 2012 cap hit 2,750,000
Tim Thomas 2012 cap hit 5,000,000
Rick DiPietro 2012 cap hit 4,500,000
Chris Mason, Jose Theodore, Al Montoya, and Khabibulin

roshinaya · Apr 16, 2014

Crawford still had a year left on his contract after last summer. I understand it was to reward him for his efforts, but it was not necessary to sign him last summer. The goalie market this off-season looks slightly better. Still thought it was a smart move, considering Crawford showed he could get it done. Maybe the term and pay is slightly high, but if he can repeat the performance from last year and then some, maybe getting that CS he could have arguably won last year, then the deal might look better. I am sure having a two-time #1 goalie SC winner, one time CS winner on the open-market would cause a frenzy. 



Goalie UFA 2014, sorted by sv% with GP-GAA-SV%


<div>Johnson, Chad 27 2.10 .925</div>
<div>Miller, Ryan 40 2.72 .924</div>
<div>Elliott, Brian 31 1.96 .922</div>
<div>Greiss, Thomas 25 2.29 .920</div>
<div>Montoya, Al 28 2.30 .920</div>
<div>Peters, Justin 21 2.50 .919</div>
<div>Halak, Jaroslav 40 2.23 .917</div>
<div>Hiller, Jonas 50 2.48 .911</div>
<div>Hutton, Carter 40 2.62 .910</div>
<div> </div>
<div>More here:</div>
<div>http://capgeek.com/ufa-finder/?position_id=G</div>

Variable · Apr 16, 2014

Any way you cut it was a bad move. All for reaons that have been covered in the other thread.

PatrickSharpRules · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Spunky Porkstacker" data-cid="225906" data-time="1397648157">
<div>

Doesn't seem like he had much of a choice. At the point he was at in keeping this team together he had little choice but to give Crow the $$$. Its easy to say he should have gotten someone for less, but who did he have to choose from. Sure, there has to be a goalie for less that would be stable enough to win that last game in June, but again, WHO?





http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-free-agency-top-5-goalies-available/





Here is the list as of July 4 2013
Ilya Bryzgalov 2012 cap hit 5,666,667
Ray Emery 2012 cap hit 1,150,000
Evgeni Nabokov 2012 cap hit 2,750,000
Tim Thomas 2012 cap hit 5,000,000
Rick DiPietro 2012 cap hit 4,500,000
Chris Mason, Jose Theodore, Al Montoya, and Khabibulin
</div>
</blockquote>



Why are we only looking at free agent goalies though? There were plenty of very good goalies moved in the summer and during this season. 



Cory Schneider is only getting 4 mil from new jersey, Halak is getting 3.75, Bernier is getting 2.9, Reimer 1.8... the prices and deals are out their, but as we all know deals don't come via free agency.

MassHavoc · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="225916" data-time="1397655833">
<div>

Why are we only looking at free agent goalies though? There were plenty of very good goalies moved in the summer and during this season. 



Cory Schneider is only getting 4 mil from new jersey, Halak is getting 3.75, Bernier is getting 2.9, Reimer 1.8... the prices and deals are out their, but as we all know deals don't come via free agency. 
</div>
</blockquote>

What went the other way for those guys? I don't know, it's an honest question. But I would assume if you want a goalie of his caliber and you want to keep the team together, you aren't going to trade for another goalie without losing another piece of your team. Besides. You can only get away with dumping a Stanley cup winning goalie so many times.

PatrickSharpRules · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MassHavoc" data-cid="225949" data-time="1397667829">
<div>

What went the other way for those guys? I don't know, it's an honest question. But I would assume if you want a goalie of his caliber and you want to keep the team together, you aren't going to trade for another goalie without losing another piece of your team. Besides. You can only get away with dumping a Stanley cup winning goalie so many times.
</div>
</blockquote>



For Schneider literally nothing, 1st round pick Bo Horvat I believe. I would've given them Ryan Hartman and another pick in a second for Schneider. 



Halak went for a lot, Bernier was swapped for Scrivens, and Reimer is under contract. Bottom line is, there is always a way to get something done.

MassHavoc · Apr 16, 2014

Should have sent someone Kevin Hayes.... haha

Ton · Apr 16, 2014

Why is Reimer all of the sudden the hot commodity? Because he plays "ok" on Toronto? Who cares. Crawford is a winner and performs in crunch time, that's why he's paid $6M and Reimer is stuck on the shitty Leafs making under $2M. You know why no other team has given him a shot? Because he's never consistent. LA would rather have Scrivens than Reimer, and Toronto with Bernier... that's how valued he is. You want to bank on spin the bottle every year to see which goaltender you're going to get? I don't.



No matter how you slice it, the Hawks have a winner in Crawford. You can give that up, pay your $2-$4M for an unproven goaltender and hope it works out, but chances are you'll be playing "revolving goaltender" for years until you've finally had enough and overpay another Cup winning goaltender to have some consistency at the position.



$6M is a lot, but the extra $1M is worth it when you know 100% what you're getting out of that guy. There's no guess work here and they solidified a position that is hard to find consistency with. I don't see how that's hard to understand. For the $1-2M they could save on another goaltender (and hope it works out) is it worth it? The Hawks time is now, it's not time to experiment with the goaltender position.



If the Hawks were a team that didn't plan on spending up to the Cap, then sure, it's pointless to pay a goaltender $6M (cough, Nashville, cough) but that's not the case. They'll have plenty of room to fill in depth. They don't have to build Team Canada here.

Ton · Apr 16, 2014

As far as the importance compared to other positions... take a look at the organizational depth and tell me you are comfortable with Simpson, Carruth, Whitney, or Tomkins compared to, lets say, Teravainen, McNeill, Danault, Clendening, Dahlbeck, Hartman, Johns, etc.. etc.. the list goes on. We have plenty of depth at every position. 



Saad, Shaw, and Leddy might be highly valued, but the reality is we have enough the depth in the system to recover without serious damage. The Hawks don't have any goaltending depth. Crawford is the workhorse here. Can you trust someone like Reimer for 60+ games a year? I doubt it. Then what, do you form a tandem? Might as well keep Crawford, it's probably cheaper that way.

the canadian dream · Apr 16, 2014

He's well liked in the dressing room and has character. Sometimes you gotta overpay a little for those qualities in this sport. Would you rather have a hot head like Bryzgalov in your dressing room? Or some guy who is a distraction (and there are a lot of goalies out there who are). When you have a guy that has the talent, who is dedicated and who has chemistry character wise and skill wise with the rest of the team you don't brush that aside to save a few bucks. Those qualities go a long way. 



And yet again here we are talking about cap numbers that aren't set in stone and have become nothing but abstract numbers in this league year after year. And Ton hit the nail on the head. Experimenting with the goalie position year after year? Fucking would kill a team in seconds.



P.S. LMFAO at Reimer. Reimer is bloody horrible. Save me the "it's his team" excuse. I watched countless Leaf games this season for fantasy purposes and James fucking Reimer is a career backup goalie who somehow got a starting roll in Toronto. Could make an hour long film reel of all the soft goals he allowed this season. He isn't mentally strong and he has holes all over in his technical game. One of the worst low playing goalies in the league and if you can't play low in this league? You are screwed.

Spunky Porkstacker · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="225974" data-time="1397677109">
<div>

Why is Reimer all of the sudden the hot commodity? Because he plays "ok" on Toronto? Who cares. Crawford is a winner and performs in crunch time, that's why he's paid $6M and Reimer is stuck on the shitty Leafs making under $2M. You know why no other team has given him a shot? Because he's never consistent. LA would rather have Scrivens than Reimer, and Toronto with Bernier... that's how valued he is. You want to bank on spin the bottle every year to see which goaltender you're going to get? I don't.



No matter how you slice it, the Hawks have a winner in Crawford. You can give that up, pay your $2-$4M for an unproven goaltender and hope it works out, but chances are you'll be playing "revolving goaltender" for years until you've finally had enough and overpay another Cup winning goaltender to have some consistency at the position.



$6M is a lot, but the extra $1M is worth it when you know 100% what you're getting out of that guy. There's no guess work here and they solidified a position that is hard to find consistency with. I don't see how that's hard to understand. For the $1-2M they could save on another goaltender (and hope it works out) is it worth it? The Hawks time is now, it's not time to experiment with the goaltender position.



If the Hawks were a team that didn't plan on spending up to the Cap, then sure, it's pointless to pay a goaltender $6M (cough, Nashville, cough) but that's not the case. They'll have plenty of room to fill in depth. They don't have to build Team Canada here.
</div>
</blockquote>







:music-rockon: Great points !

Pez68 · Apr 16, 2014

Continuing from the other thread.
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="The Deadliest Man Alive" data-cid="225921" data-time="1397658376">
<div>

Of those starters, how many have a Cup win?



Since the NHL got the Cup for good, there have been 67 goalies to win it in as many years. Hawks have one. I think I would bank on that. 
</div>
</blockquote>



And neither of the goalies the Hawks had....had won a cup....the first time they won a cup. They hadn't won shit, actually. That argument is pure nonsense.



Oh, and FYI, when Raanta was getting regular starts from 11-27 through 1-12. His record? 12-1-3. .912 save percentage. 2.18 GAA. Hawks can't win a cup with that kind of goaltending? I guess they're not winning with a .917 and 2.26 GAA either.

Pez68 · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="225974" data-time="1397677109">
<div>

Why is Reimer all of the sudden the hot commodity? Because he plays "ok" on Toronto? Who cares. Crawford is a winner and performs in crunch time, that's why he's paid $6M and Reimer is stuck on the shitty Leafs making under $2M. You know why no other team has given him a shot? Because he's never consistent. LA would rather have Scrivens than Reimer, and Toronto with Bernier... that's how valued he is. You want to bank on spin the bottle every year to see which goaltender you're going to get? I don't.



No matter how you slice it, the Hawks have a winner in Crawford. You can give that up, pay your $2-$4M for an unproven goaltender and hope it works out, but chances are you'll be playing "revolving goaltender" for years until you've finally had enough and overpay another Cup winning goaltender to have some consistency at the position.



$6M is a lot, but the extra $1M is worth it when you know 100% what you're getting out of that guy. There's no guess work here and they solidified a position that is hard to find consistency with. I don't see how that's hard to understand. For the $1-2M they could save on another goaltender (and hope it works out) is it worth it? The Hawks time is now, it's not time to experiment with the goaltender position.



If the Hawks were a team that didn't plan on spending up to the Cap, then sure, it's pointless to pay a goaltender $6M (cough, Nashville, cough) but that's not the case. They'll have plenty of room to fill in depth. They don't have to build Team Canada here.
</div>
</blockquote>



You should know better than anyone that goaltending is NEVER guaranteed. Even with proven winners and hall of famers. So, no, you don't know 100% what you're getting out of the guy. Which is why I have such a hard time paying a goalie $6M per.



They better hope the cap goes up pretty substantially, or they are going to have some very difficult decisions to make next offseason. Is overpaying for Crawford worth losing 2-3 key members of the 2014 Stanley Cup winning team, and replacing them with league minimum guys? Crawford wasn't good enough to overcome that lack of depth in 2010-2011 or 2011-2012. What makes you think he will be in 2015-2016? Because the Hawks WILL lose key players because of his overpayment. It's not a matter of if, but who.



P.S. The Hawks went to the WCF with Khabibulin as their goalie. They won a cup with Niemi. They won a cup with Crawford. The revolving goaltender has served them just fine over the last 5 years.



Also, if not for Crawford's SUCK in 2011-2012....who knows where the Hawks end up? Where's the supporting evidence for paying a goalie big bucks being a good idea?

PatrickSharpRules · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="225974" data-time="1397677109">
<div>

Why is Reimer all of the sudden the hot commodity? Because he plays "ok" on Toronto? Who cares. Crawford is a winner and performs in crunch time, that's why he's paid $6M and Reimer is stuck on the shitty Leafs making under $2M. You know why no other team has given him a shot? Because he's never consistent. LA would rather have Scrivens than Reimer, and Toronto with Bernier... that's how valued he is. You want to bank on spin the bottle every year to see which goaltender you're going to get? I don't.



No matter how you slice it, the Hawks have a winner in Crawford. You can give that up, pay your $2-$4M for an unproven goaltender and hope it works out, but chances are you'll be playing "revolving goaltender" for years until you've finally had enough and overpay another Cup winning goaltender to have some consistency at the position.



$6M is a lot, but the extra $1M is worth it when you know 100% what you're getting out of that guy. There's no guess work here and they solidified a position that is hard to find consistency with. I don't see how that's hard to understand. For the $1-2M they could save on another goaltender (and hope it works out) is it worth it? The Hawks time is now, it's not time to experiment with the goaltender position.



If the Hawks were a team that didn't plan on spending up to the Cap, then sure, it's pointless to pay a goaltender $6M (cough, Nashville, cough) but that's not the case. They'll have plenty of room to fill in depth. They don't have to build Team Canada here.
</div>
</blockquote>



Just because Reimers named was mentioned among a slew of other goalies does not mean he is this "hot commodity". Fact of the matter is, if the Hawks are paying a goaltender 6 million a year I would like a Vezina candidate, as I said I firmly believe the revolving door could work here. 



Also, grabbing a 4 million a year guy would not be much of an experiment. With the dominance of our skaters, puck possession, miniscule amount shorthanded, you do not need a top goalie to win it all. We have proven that twice now, and I think we could easily do it again.

Pez68 · Apr 16, 2014

SC winning goalies over the last 10 years.



2003 - Brodeur

2004 - Khabibulin

2006 - Ward

2007 - Giguere

2008 - Osgood

2009 - Fleury

2010 - Niemi

2011 - Thomas

2012 - Quick

2013 - Crawford



Obviously whether or not a goalie has won a cup before is irrelevant. Who cares if they have won a cup before. All you should care about is whether or not they are good enough to win you a cup NOW.



Also, how many of those guys got a nice pay day and have yet to even come close to duplicating their SC winning season's performance?



Did keeping their SC winning goalie and giving him a nice big contract work out for any of those teams? I'd say..no.

Variable · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PSR" data-cid="226000" data-time="1397690811">
<div>

Just because Reimers named was mentioned among a slew of other goalies does not mean he is this "hot commodity". Fact of the matter is, if the Hawks are paying a goaltender 6 million a year I would like a Vezina candidate, as I said I firmly believe the revolving door could work here. 



Also, grabbing a 4 million a year guy would not be much of an experiment. With the dominance of our skaters, puck possession, miniscule amount shorthanded, you do not need a top goalie to win it all. We have proven that twice now, and I think we could easily do it again. 
</div>
</blockquote>



It shouldn't even be a question if it can work....it's worked lol. We've already seen it. That's what I don't get about all this hand wringing of "experimenting" with goalies. They've been doing that for the better part of 6 years now.

Variable · Apr 16, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="225976" data-time="1397678079">
<div>

As far as the importance compared to other positions... take a look at the organizational depth and tell me you are comfortable with Simpson, Carruth, Whitney, or Tomkins compared to, lets say, Teravainen, McNeill, Danault, Clendening, Dahlbeck, Hartman, Johns, etc.. etc.. the list goes on. We have plenty of depth at every position. 



Saad, Shaw, and Leddy might be highly valued, but the reality is we have enough the depth in the system to recover without serious damage. The Hawks don't have any goaltending depth. Crawford is the workhorse here. Can you trust someone like Reimer for 60+ games a year? I doubt it. Then what, do you form a tandem? Might as well keep Crawford, it's probably cheaper that way.
</div>


</blockquote>



How many open starting positions are there for forwards compared to goalies Ton? This shouldn't be hard to understand why a goalie like Crawford is so much more replaceable than a player like Saad or Leddy. This is simple stuff.

Ton · Apr 17, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Variable" data-cid="226009" data-time="1397693607">
<div>

How many open starting positions are there for forwards compared to goalies Ton? This shouldn't be hard to understand why a goalie like Crawford is so much more replaceable than a player like Saad or Leddy. This is simple stuff.
</div>
</blockquote>



But he's not, because there is no one in the pipeline.



Our offensive and defensive prospects are much closer to Leddy/Saad than Simpson or even Raanta, for example, is to Crawford. You say this team is deep, and that's because we have the best front office in the league. They have a lot to work with in the pipeline, kids like Morin, Teravainen, Johns (and many many more) where are they going to play? They will eventually take someones job. They aren't keeping all these guys around forever. You're talking about strengthening a log jammed position and weakening a position where we have frail depth. How does that make sense?



Again, you're taking a chance that one of these unproven netminders can handle the pressure and fit in with the team/system, when you already know Crawford can. You think the Oilers in the 80's would have traded Fuhr? The Islanders with Billy Smith? Probably not, because they knew those guys could handle the pressure and they were a perfect fit on those teams, they had trust. You're playing with an awfully important position by spinning the wheel again in goalie roulette, when you already have a guy that fits.



I trust Stan. We have 20 guys signed through next season at $67M, the cap should be around $71M. I don't see what the problem is. Toews and Kane will be due after that season, but once again the cap will probably go up. What's the issue? We don't have to lose anybody. Worst case scenario is they do a salary dump with Versteeg next season.



The bottom line is, now is not the time to see if some unproven kid can crack it as a starting goaltender for a Cup contending team. They need someone with experience that can handle the pressure and win championship games.

BlackHawkPaul · Apr 17, 2014

From what I posted in the Keith thread:

Craw is an UFA in 2020, so the educated guess is that the Hawks stick with him. Who knows what an above average goaltender will go for in a couple of seasons because of possible cap increases.
Khabi is UFA (1.7m cap hit) - Possibly retiring (LTIR)

Labarbera is UFA (1m cap hit) Probably can sign for the same $$, but not a very proven netminder-- even for a backup. Had one decent season. (Buried in AHL- not against cap)
Raanta is RFA (925k) cap hit) Still green at the NHL level. What does he sign for, plus is he fine being a permanent backup until Craw's deal is up or is moved? 


<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="226057" data-time="1397748633">
<div>

But he's not, because there is no one in the pipeline.



Our offensive and defensive prospects are much closer to Leddy/Saad than Simpson or even Raanta, for example, is to Crawford. You say this team is deep, and that's because we have the best front office in the league. They have a lot to work with in the pipeline, kids like Morin, Teravainen, Johns (and many many more) where are they going to play? They will eventually take someones job. They aren't keeping all these guys around forever. You're talking about strengthening a log jammed position and weakening a position where we have frail depth. How does that make sense?



Again, you're taking a chance that one of these unproven netminders can handle the pressure and fit in with the team/system, when you already know Crawford can. You think the Oilers in the 80's would have traded Fuhr? The Islanders with Billy Smith? Probably not, because they knew those guys could handle the pressure and they were a perfect fit on those teams, they had trust. You're playing with an awfully important position by spinning the wheel again in goalie roulette, when you already have a guy that fits.



I trust Stan. We have 20 guys signed through next season at $67M, the cap should be around $71M. I don't see what the problem is. Toews and Kane will be due after that season, but once again the cap will probably go up. What's the issue? We don't have to lose anybody. Worst case scenario is they do a salary dump with Versteeg next season.



The bottom line is, now is not the time to see if some unproven kid can crack it as a starting goaltender for a Cup contending team. They need someone with experience that can handle the pressure and win championship games.
</div>
</blockquote>

Basically, this.

Chief Walking Stick · Apr 17, 2014

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="BHP" data-cid="226062" data-time="1397749926">

From what I posted in the Keith thread:

Craw is an UFA in 2020, so the educated guess is that the Hawks stick with him. Who knows what an above average goaltender will go for in a couple of seasons because of possible cap increases.
Khabi is UFA (1.7m cap hit) - Possibly retiring (LTIR)
Labarbera is UFA (1m cap hit) Probably can sign for the same $$, but not a very proven netminder-- even for a backup. Had one decent season. (Buried in AHL- not against cap)
Raanta is RFA (925k) cap hit) Still green at the NHL level. What does he sign for, plus is he fine being a permanent backup until Craw's deal is up or is moved?

Basically, this.</blockquote>
I knew him saying salary "dump" would get you excited.

Stans goalie choices after last years cup win

CCS Donator

fnord

New member

New member

Moderator

New member

Moderator

New member

New member

New member

CCS Donator

Fire Waldron

Fire Waldron

New member

Fire Waldron

New member

New member

New member

Fartbarf

CCS Donator