Carrying three goalies? or What to Do When Woll Comes Back?

[MK78]

Would Woll need to clear waivers if he was to be sent down if he doesnt play well and they need a roster spot, should Samsonov continue playing well and Jones can do backup.

 

[The Iceman]

I am certain Joseph Woll once healthy will get some games with the Marlies.
lots can happen between now and then.

often decisions are made for you.

 

[Squiffy]

Would Woll need to clear waivers if he was to be sent down if he doesnt play well and they need a roster spot, should Samsonov continue playing well and Jones can do backup.

Yes, Woll needs waivers this year.

I am certain Joseph Woll once healthy will get some games with the Marlies.
lots can happen between now and then.

often decisions are made for you.

Yes, can see a game or two of conditioning stint if he’s not immediately desperately needed.

 

[tmlfan98]

You're right there, but they aren't going to send him down, we can assume that exemption is going to expire with him still here.

Jones: .933 5v5 SV% and .872 5v5 HDSV% in 17 games so far
Samsonov since being called back up (to be as generous as possible to his numbers): .927 5v5 SV% and .857 5v5 HDSV% in 4 games, and only 2 of them were against bonafide playoff teams (both Winnipeg games).

IMO a sample size this small shouldn't be enough to save Samsonov's season. With Jarnkrok+McMann out, and all 8 dmen on the roster being waiver eligible and claim threats, running 3 goalies when Woll is back would mean either Reaves plays every night or Keefe runs 11/7. Sending down Samsonov again would mean Keefe can run 12/6 and not have to play Reaves every night until either Jarnkrok/McMann is back.

 

[Squiffy]

It’s a legit argument. The D depth worries me too. Click is ticking on sending Sammy down again if they are going to do it without exposing him to waivers again. Doesn’t sound to me like Woll is back before the waiver exemption expires.

 

[Evilhomer]

Seems fairly universal. All other parts unchanged, you waive a D?

I think it depends on whether they feel they will need Jones' cap space in order to bring in a trade deadline player.

 

[LeafEgo]

I think it depends on whether they feel they will need Jones' cap space in order to bring in a trade deadline player.

Even if you only need 875k cap space for the acquisition, you lose Jones for nothing instead of moving Sammy for an asset? Don't think Sammy is in the plans for next year anyway, but maybe.

Prefer Jones for the playoffs if we have to choose.

 

[ANDI P IS CUTE]

unless theres miracles we wont win any rounds anyway.

 

[horner]

Jones has a pretty solid playoff pedigree. Not just the numbers but Sammy had a softy each game last year. Between the three of them, might want Woll and the vet Jones going into the playoffs if you had to choose.

We ndd a defenseman teams need a goaltender

If Sammy keeps up playing like he has the last 3 games, he is worth at least a 2nd at the deadline.

If Woll comes back and doesn't miss a beat

Woll and jones

trade
Tanev for 2nd + 4th

Having a stronger D might be worth the gamble

 

[horner]

Even if you only need 875k cap space for the acquisition, you lose Jones for nothing instead of moving Sammy for an asset? Don't think Sammy is in the plans for next year anyway, but maybe.

Prefer Jones for the playoffs if we have to choose.

We are going nowhere with this defense.

Sammy at 50% retained may get us a 2nd +
If he continues to play this way. He would be the best goaltender on the market.

Use the 2nd + 4th for Tanev

 

[FerrisRox]

This is silly.

You waive Martin Jones. I doubt he would get claimed, and even if he did, who cares?

Jones doesn't matter. He played well for a brief stretch and helped the team out, but he's not an asset they should care about, at all.

It would be nonsensical to drop a depth defenseman - and risk losing him - in order to keep Jones as a band-aid. They can easily acquire another depth goalie if they lost Jones, but I highly doubt he would get claimed.

 

[Evilhomer]

This is silly.

You waive Martin Jones. I doubt he would get claimed, and even if he did, who cares?

Jones doesn't matter. He played well for a brief stretch and helped the team out, but he's not an asset they should care about, at all.

It would be nonsensical to drop a depth defenseman - and risk losing him - in order to keep Jones as a band-aid. They can easily acquire another depth goalie if they lost Jones, but I highly doubt he would get claimed.

I think this is right. I very much doubt Jones would be claimed.

 

[m1ker]

you keep jones

 

[Squiffy]

This is silly.

You waive Martin Jones. I doubt he would get claimed, and even if he did, who cares?

Jones doesn't matter. He played well for a brief stretch and helped the team out, but he's not an asset they should care about, at all.

It would be nonsensical to drop a depth defenseman - and risk losing him - in order to keep Jones as a band-aid. They can easily acquire another depth goalie if they lost Jones, but I highly doubt he would get claimed.

It’s an interesting call, nice to see the debate, and here’s another perfectly valid take. I am torn on it, even as it is still a hypothetical situation, but looming as reality.

It’s boiling down to goalie depth vs D depth, and which to roll the dice on if they have to.

You can acquire depth D as well right? Is that easier or harder then a goalie that has already stepped up and proved his worth as the third guy?

And then you can say it about D too, the depth D did a mostly commendable job filling through a rash of injuries, to me more surprisingly than Jones being servicable. I thought our D depth was terrible at the start of the year but it really stood up as well as anyone could hope getting down to the 9 guy at one point.

Personally I don’t think Jones gets through without a claim. Veteran goalie, minimum contract, recently proven can start at NHL level.. if no one else Philly needs a second guy right now.

 

[Buds17]

It’s an interesting call, nice to see the debate, and here’s another perfectly valid take. I am torn on it, even as it is still a hypothetical situation, but looming as reality.

It’s boiling down to goalie depth vs D depth, and which to roll the dice on if they have to.

You can acquire depth D as well right? Is that easier or harder then a goalie that has already stepped up and proved his worth as the third guy?

And then you can say it about D too, the depth D did a mostly commendable job filling through a rash of injuries, to me more surprisingly than Jones being servicable. I thought our D depth was terrible at the start of the year but it really stood up as well as anyone could hope getting down to the 9 guy at one point.

Personally I don’t think Jones gets through without a claim. Veteran goalie, minimum contract, recently proven can start at NHL level.. if no one else Philly needs a second guy right now.

If push comes to shove, I'd ultimately waive Lagesson over Jones. Lagesson is #8 on the D depth chart (two injuries away from full-time duty) whereas Jones is #3 for goalies at the worst of times (for him) and closer to playing.

 

[Squiffy]

If push comes to shove, I'd ultimately waive Lagesson over Jones. Lagesson is #8 on the D depth chart (two injuries away from full-time duty) whereas Jones is #3 for goalies at the worst of times (for him) and closer to playing.

If the call were which one is more likely to clear waivers, and hey, maybe that is the call, I don’t know, but I’d bet on Lagesson clearing over Jones.

 

[Buds17]

If the call were which one is more likely to clear waivers, and hey, maybe that is the call, I don’t know, but I’d bet on Lagesson clearing over Jones.

Agreed. I'd hope the main consideration is keeping the player deemed more valuable to the team (though making a bet on which player is more likely to clear waivers should factor in there too).