Harder Goalie Trade to Swallow: Kipper or Hill?

[NWSharkie]

I can't honestly get worked up about either trade. Neither goalie moved the needle for the Sharks they were on, and both trades arguably made the team better in the short term.

Kipper had earned his #3 spot on the depth chart and we got Vlasic for him instead of nothing. Hill was a disaster for the Sharks and getting anything for him was better than having him in between the pipes for us. I don't care how well he did afterwards, I'm just glad to have more momentum away from the wreckage of the team that DW and Joe Will left us with.

If we'd snagged a bona fide #1D or 1C-caliber player with the Kiprusoff pick, we'd have too many cup rings plugging our ears to hear the wails of Kipper-truthers. It wasn't Nabokov keeping those teams from scoring goals in the playoffs; I have names like Huskins, Wallin or Burish on my shit list instead.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Kipper. We keep him, we might win in 04.

We traded Hill when we were a bottom barrel team.

Kipper wasn’t going to magically improve his sub .900 save percentage as a 3rd string goalie here. Our real options were to trade Kipper for what we could or waive him and lose him for nothing. Kipper didn’t earn a spot when he was given the chance.

 

[SjMilhouse]

Kipprusoff made the finals.

Overarching thoughts:

Nabokov never lost a series where the Sharks averaged more then 2.00 g/game. At the same time, actually watching those games, Nabokov definitely failed to come up clutch again and again.

Kipprusoff was a Vezina-caliber goaltender. Hill simply isn't; he was an absolute passenger in that cup run. I continue to believe his numbers are a mirage. He works for Vegas and good for them both, but Kipper would have been an elite goalie anywhere.

Nabby was great but man did he give up some back breaking goals through the years in the playoffs.

 

[KarlssonsGroin]

Kipper wasn’t going to magically improve his sub .900 save percentage as a 3rd string goalie here. Our real options were to trade Kipper for what we could or waive him and lose him for nothing. Kipper didn’t earn a spot when he was given the chance.

no but if we keep him we might beat calgary cause they didnt have him

 

[TheBeard]

no but if we keep him we might beat calgary cause they didnt have him

a 1.85 GAA and .928 save percentage would have played well.

 

[Mattb124]

Kipper by a mile.

Hill is not very good, just more recent. People forget he was VGK's #3 last season behind Thompson and Brossoit, but ended up in net during the playoffs due to injuries. IMO his success was mostly due to playing behind a stacked defense.

 

[TheBeard]

Kipper by a mile.

Hill is not very good, just more recent. People forget he was VGK's #3 last season behind Thompson and Brossoit, but ended up in net during the playoffs due to injuries. IMO his success was mostly due to playing behind a stacked defense.

Say what you will, but effectiveness wasn't his problem so much as health. Having a career .912 S% considering some of the teams he played on is pretty damn good,

 

[Hangemhigh]

Neither player wanted to be here. But Hill bothers me the most. Could have gotten rid of Reimer instead.

 

[Wedontneedroads]

Easily Kipper. Not only is he a significantly better goalie than Hill, but he stopped the Sharks from reaching the SCF directly after being traded to Calgary.

Tough to blame the Sharks though. Kipper absolutely sucked for us that year.

I'll still die on the healthy Sturm = SCF hill, but it would wouldn't have even been a hill if Calgary didn't have Kipper.

Sure it sucks Vegas won with Hill, but the Sharks aren't even remotely competitive right now so I don't really care. If Vegas had gone through the Sharks you could make a case for Hill. My biggest gripe with Vegas is more about how they were set up for success coming into the league vs how the Sharks entered the league.

Certainly not fair, but life's not fair and I can't blame the NHL from correcting mistakes of the past.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

no but if we keep him we might beat calgary cause they didnt have him

Keeping three goalies is no easy task for an entire season and we don’t get Vlasic without that trade.

 

[Mattb124]

Say what you will, but effectiveness wasn't his problem so much as health. Having a career .912 S% considering some of the teams he played on is pretty damn good,

“Availability is the best ability.”

 

[karltonian]

Kiprusoff at his peak was a level above and arguably the best of his generation. It was pretty much him and Iginla carrying fodder to the playoffs each and every season

Only 5 seasons, and only 1 of those did they have any success. This was concurrent with Luongo and Lundquist, not to mention Brodeur was winning every Vezina around that one season, so the competition for best honors was quite stiff.