No clue what thats supposed to mean but Pickard is cheap RFA goalie - backup for now and has starter potential. We can waive The Chad and we either have him in Roch or he gets claimed. I'd rather have Pickard over The Chad as next year we will need capspace and he is good foe that while not being a bad goalie on top. We lose money probably as we have to pay The Chad if he doesnt get claimed but we lose nothing else. If the Chad ends up in Rochester we could trade him to the first team with long term injury to their key goalies or get him back in Buffalo if we get an injury....
Worst case scenario Ullmark and The Chad play 38 games each. Thats if none of the 4 gets injured, we dont lose The Chad when waiving him and if we cant trade him away if he does clear waivers. Id do it in a heartbeat, The Chad is here on relatively expensive, 1 year contract and hes UFA. We are not committed to him. Pickard is RFA and will be cheaper for years if he does wrk out good for us. But we do lose money value so I can see why Botts wouldnt want to gamble on it.
Erm theres no proof that we have 1 goalie better than Pickard, let alone 2. Not saying Pickard is upgrade either but he is projecting as a cheap and useful asset for a few years unlike the 2 goalies we do have. We dont have cap problems this year but we will have cap problems from next year onwards. If Pickard helps me with that I take a gamble. Its not a massive gamble as hes at least a servicable backup.
Meaningless charts warrior. He played 50 games for the worst team in the last decade. Totally fair to judge how good he is based on this.
90.4% with this. At least be consistent...
The Avs were better defensively than the Sabres and goaltending was a big part of why they were so bad. This is why we look into things instead of throwing poop at the wall.
