paxtang
Registered User
mattihp said:I am as a big Niittymäki and TPS fan as there is... But Niittymäki won't ever make it as a starter unless he has a strong backup. These other guys have the potential to be lone starters.
Explain.
mattihp said:I am as a big Niittymäki and TPS fan as there is... But Niittymäki won't ever make it as a starter unless he has a strong backup. These other guys have the potential to be lone starters.
big_steve said:Pardon my language but this is a dilly of a pickle, for me anyway. Hmm..........let me think:
1. Kari Lehtonen
2. Hannu Toivonen
3. Antero Niittymaki
4. Marc-Andre Fleury/Cam Ward(not sure who to go with here)
6. Henrik Lundqvist(wasn't that great at WHC & hasn't played on NA ice but has played great in the SEL, I feel this is an appropriate ranking)
IMO, as an NHLer, MA Fleury will either be in the top of that list (or second) or the very bottom.
007 said:It is hard to compare Lundqvist to Toivonen or MAF right now, and he may not be as good, but Lundqvist > Tellqvist, no doubt about it.
Personally, I'm surprised with Niittymäki: I haven't seen him play in a long time, but I always thought he looked so small playing deep in the net. I thought he might go the way of Jarmo Myllys.
Hedberg16 said:There should be no debate. Marc-Andre Fleury is the second best goalie PROSPECT in the world
\Hedberg16 said:Marc-Andre Fleury may not be a better goalie than Lundqvist now, but he is definately the number 2 goalie prospect in the world.
God Bless Canada said:One thing to remember about Niittymaki: he's 25. He's not a 21-year-old excelling in the AHL. Ward, Harding and Toivonen are. That's why I don't have Niittymaki as high as some.
FlyersFan10 said:No, he isn't. Far from it. Niitymaki and Toivenen are far superior to Marc-Andre Fleury. Actually, I'd say that Andy Chiodo has to be put ahead on the depth chart in Pittsburgh. When you consider that it was Chiodo who carried the baby Pens in the playoffs as far as they did, that man should be saluted.
He excels when he has the confidence that there's someone to back him up. On TPS he was always in a combo with another great goalie in Norrena, and they complemented each other very well, taking turns in being the starter. Niittymäki will be awesome against some teams, but not so good against gritty teams where they'll try to play the puck in close. It is good to have a security man with Niitty.paxtang said:Explain.
paxtang said:But Nitty was good last year, and he was good in Finland. He's had one bad year so far.
FlyersFan10 said:No, he isn't. Far from it. Niitymaki and Toivenen are far superior to Marc-Andre Fleury. Actually, I'd say that Andy Chiodo has to be put ahead on the depth chart in Pittsburgh. When you consider that it was Chiodo who carried the baby Pens in the playoffs as far as they did, that man should be saluted.
Ola said:I've seen allot of Toivonen and Nittymäki and IMO they aren't even close to Lundqvist. They are good prospects, Toivonen a better one then Nittymäki IMO, but neither have the same potential as Lundqvist. Henrik have the potential to become the best in the game. He had a weak WCH, and that shows that he isn't their yet. But you have to remember that it probably where the best WCH ever played and that Lundqvist didn't get much help from his defense. He also had won a championship in the SEL only two weeks before the WCH and had played 70+ games that season already and he is still really young.
Also some people talk about him not having player in NA as a negative thing, I can't understand that. NA is the ultimate challenge for a goaltender. For Lundqvist to beeing able to develop his game as much as he have without having played in NA yet is fantastic. He is so much better now then a bunch of experienced starters in the NHL. Toivonen and Nittymäki are standouts right now but you have to remember that its in the AHL. The talent level their isn't on the same planet as the one in the WCH and SEL. Lundqvist also made the 1st allstar team last year in a really good WCH. There have been allot of hype on Lundqvist lately, but I belive people will be suprised next year at how good he really is.
sevenSteen said:Yes, but he's 25.
Fleury still has some things to figure out but the new regulations on equipment make him even more of a prospect than he already was. Chiodo has done a nice job but he is more likely to be in the ECHL when Fleury takes over for Pittsburgh in two to three years. I really like Toivonen and Lehtonen for the same reason i like Fleury. Breathtaking quickness and agility. Such quick legs.Le Golie said:Chiodo ahead of Fleury.....classic.
Some people have a very difficult time with 'potential' and being able to identify player ceilings.
DoobieDoobieDo said:The keyword is POTENTIAL.
Point is that a great goalie can develop all through his career too..MojoJojo said:I think likelihood to reach that potential should be takn into consideration as well. When he was drafted, MAC had more potential than any other goaltender (including Lehtonen), but he's starting to look like a head case. Inconsistent, melts down in big games, quite often very sloppy. His reflexes are world class, but on balance theres more to ranking a prospect. O'sullivan, and Kostitsyn for example have as much potential as anyone in the 03 draft, but fell due to concerns about their health and attitude. I seen no reason not to apply the same logic to goal tenders. Having seen MAC stink up the joint to high heaven (as well as that first NHL game Vs LA when he stopped like 50 shots), I have to rank him lower than #2, much lower.
Partially the blame goes to the Penguins organization BTW, for not having a goalie coach. What a waste of talent to draft this guy at #1 and then let him drift through the AHL on his own.
Ola said:I've seen allot of Toivonen and Nittymäki and IMO they aren't even close to Lundqvist. They are good prospects, Toivonen a better one then Nittymäki IMO, but neither have the same potential as Lundqvist. Henrik have the potential to become the best in the game. He had a weak WCH, and that shows that he isn't their yet. But you have to remember that it probably where the best WCH ever played and that Lundqvist didn't get much help from his defense. He also had won a championship in the SEL only two weeks before the WCH and had played 70+ games that season already and he is still really young.
Also some people talk about him not having player in NA as a negative thing, I can't understand that. NA is the ultimate challenge for a goaltender. For Lundqvist to beeing able to develop his game as much as he have without having played in NA yet is fantastic. He is so much better now then a bunch of experienced starters in the NHL. Toivonen and Nittymäki are standouts right now but you have to remember that its in the AHL. The talent level their isn't on the same planet as the one in the WCH and SEL. Lundqvist also made the 1st allstar team last year in a really good WCH. There have been allot of hype on Lundqvist lately, but I belive people will be suprised next year at how good he really is.
They had Lorne Molleken who worked with the goaltenders in practice in the NHL, and they have both Gilles Meloche and Gilles Lefebvre as part-time goalie coach and goaltending consultant, respectively, in the AHL.MojoJojo said:I think likelihood to reach that potential should be takn into consideration as well. When he was drafted, MAC had more potential than any other goaltender (including Lehtonen), but he's starting to look like a head case. Inconsistent, melts down in big games, quite often very sloppy. His reflexes are world class, but on balance theres more to ranking a prospect. O'sullivan, and Kostitsyn for example have as much potential as any forwards in the 03 draft, but fell due to concerns about their health and attitude. I seen no reason not to apply the same logic to goal tenders. Having seen MAC stink up the joint to high heaven (as well as that first NHL game Vs LA when he stopped like 50 shots), I have to rank him lower than #2, much lower.
Partially the blame goes to the Penguins organization BTW, for not having a goalie coach. What a waste of talent to draft this guy at #1 and then let him drift through the AHL on his own.
DoobieDoobieDo said:The keyword is POTENTIAL.
As a Flyers fan I say Nittimaki, has played I say pretty well in his second year in the AHL, probably fluery thoughJR#9 said:All the Pens fans will say Fluery, all the B's fans will say Hannu and all the NYR fans will say Lundquist.
Miller IMO is too old for this group.