Hypothetical Goalie Situation

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Bernier has a crazy hot streak and all of a sudden he’s a good starter? People have short memories. Bernier has been trash for two years. Before this hot streak he was terrible. Why do we need to keep him? If you look at the underlying numbers, our defense has actually been decent at suppressing high danger shots against. Our goaltending was the worst in the league at high danger save percentage. Outside of one month of hockey, Bernier and Howard have been THE problem. Not the solution.

We are in a rebuild and should sacrifice everyone outside of a planned core that has any value whatsoever, acquiring whatever young asset possible, be it prospect or pick.

We need to keep some, ANY sense of stability.

And **** no, they've been part of the problem. It's far more troubling to distill everything down to "goalie gives up goals, goalie is problem", "goalie stands on head, goalie not problem".

Bernier has been solid all year. His numbers have looked better because they've suppressed HD stuff better. But even when his HD% was really bad... those shots are the ones most likely to go in. If he had appalling low danger chances going in (see Mrazek in his last year or Howard for most of the start of this year), he's a big issue.

People need to get this "we're in a rebuild, we need any asset, any at all, to get something". Because all shipping out anything that isn't nailed down does is unbolting your tub from the floor flipping the thing upside and praying to god that you win the lottery and your baby isn't maimed by the crashing tub. People look at the 76ers and Astros and take the wrong message. You will certainly have extraneous assets when you're in a decline towards a rebuild. But look at Edmonton in the early 2010s. They had some of the best core pieces you could hope for. Hall is an MVP, Eberle was a legit top 6 guy, RNH is a legit top 6C, McDavid is the best player in the league, and Draisaitl has worked out in a big way too. And yet, they've won a single playoff series from 2005-2006 to now. And they are perilously close to missing the playoffs again. They started tonight prior to the games, they're in. If they lose and the teams behind them win, they're out. Edmonton, after about a decade of gathering talent that were all pretty successful picks outside of Nail Yakupov, is STILL a bubble team and no more a contender than any other roster in hockey.

Show me you've got any kind of plan in net if you move Bernier and I'll of course think about trading him. But if the play is "Patrik Rybar + Calvin Pickard come on down because we suck and will suck anyway, **** off.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

The team next year is going to perform about the same as this year. If we don't have a legit goalie in play it really doesn't matter in the big picture. If we can get an asset for Bernier we should. The Asset returned is more valuable then just having a goalie locked in for next year when we really don't need one.

Signing Howard, Miller etc... to a one year just to get through the season is fine with me if that nets us an asset from Bernier.

There is "always" a goalie available when said goalie does not need to be talented. It's best wings use both roster spots to tryout young goalies anyway.

It really really isn't. Because you're not giving yourself a control at that point. You've got about 3-4 forwards worth a damn, you've got about 1.5 defensemen worth a damn, and you're signing onto saying "**** the goalie spot". So you'll not ever know if your team is actually improving unless everyone hits gangbusters. You won't have any progressive path forward just a lot of "Oh man, I really ****ing hope this works" and let me tell you, that's a scary spot to be in.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

This forum: Never use your top picks on goalies.
Also this forum: Bernier has been hot for a few games, someone will definitely give us a top pick for him!

Exactly.

When you're the one trash bag not burning in a dumpster fire, sure you look pretty good. But I can't see Bernier getting a high enough pick to make it worth it.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

We need to keep some, ANY sense of stability.

And **** no, they've been part of the problem. It's far more troubling to distill everything down to "goalie gives up goals, goalie is problem", "goalie stands on head, goalie not problem".

Bernier has been solid all year. His numbers have looked better because they've suppressed HD stuff better. But even when his HD% was really bad... those shots are the ones most likely to go in. If he had appalling low danger chances going in (see Mrazek in his last year or Howard for most of the start of this year), he's a big issue.

People need to get this "we're in a rebuild, we need any asset, any at all, to get something". Because all shipping out anything that isn't nailed down does is unbolting your tub from the floor flipping the thing upside and praying to god that you win the lottery and your baby isn't maimed by the crashing tub. People look at the 76ers and Astros and take the wrong message. You will certainly have extraneous assets when you're in a decline towards a rebuild. But look at Edmonton in the early 2010s. They had some of the best core pieces you could hope for. Hall is an MVP, Eberle was a legit top 6 guy, RNH is a legit top 6C, McDavid is the best player in the league, and Draisaitl has worked out in a big way too. And yet, they've won a single playoff series from 2005-2006 to now. And they are perilously close to missing the playoffs again. They started tonight prior to the games, they're in. If they lose and the teams behind them win, they're out. Edmonton, after about a decade of gathering talent that were all pretty successful picks outside of Nail Yakupov, is STILL a bubble team and no more a contender than any other roster in hockey.

Show me you've got any kind of plan in net if you move Bernier and I'll of course think about trading him. But if the play is "Patrik Rybar + Calvin Pickard come on down because we suck and will suck anyway, **** off.

“Bernier has been solid all year.” Is that a joke? Until late December Bernier and Howard have made our defense look worse. Sure high danger chances go in more often. That’s why you compare it to his peers. If he’s the worst at letting them in, that’s bad. If we’re a historically bad team that gives up middle of the road high danger scoring chances, what does that tell you? Your letting in f***ing beach balls and biscuits.

our stability is Larkin, hronek, Bertuzzi, Mantha, nemeth, Dekeyser, vets we can’t move like Nielsen. Between guys that are future core and guys that can’t be moved due to contract limitations we have plenty of stability. A trash goaltender and fourth line players aren’t going to change that.

you know what the plan for goalie would be? Trade for one. Sign one. Grab one off waivers. Import one from khl shl or Liiga. It won’t be hard to find a guy that’s as good as what Bernier has been this year outside of 10 games.

there are probly 10 guys in free agency I’d rather have then Bernier. Surely you can sign 1 out of 10.

and I’m not even arguing there would be a trade worth it. But the argument against trading him at all is totally batshit crazy.

 

[Retire91]

It really really isn't. Because you're not giving yourself a control at that point. You've got about 3-4 forwards worth a damn, you've got about 1.5 defensemen worth a damn, and you're signing onto saying "**** the goalie spot". So you'll not ever know if your team is actually improving unless everyone hits gangbusters. You won't have any progressive path forward just a lot of "Oh man, I really ****ing hope this works" and let me tell you, that's a scary spot to be in.

Bernier hasn't been playing core level hockey with any consistency to warrant worrying about him. This team is going to be awful for at least another 2 seasons. It really doesn't matter what happens in those two seasons and if Yzerman can't play revolving door over two seasons and end up with a goalie I would be shocked. That is not a big ask for a GM of his caliber.

I doubt Bernier would bring a high enough pick to even make any of this worth it. But no asset outside of the core that has value should be retained for any reason. There is no one outside the core on this team that can not be replaced in two seasons. You have to consider the next two seasons for what they are. A total write-off. Treating them any other way is bad asset management. If we play with an AHL goalie for 2.5 seasons so be it. I would do that for a first-round pick. I wouldn't do it for any less than a high second. I doubt Bernier would fetch any more than a 3rd so its not worth it anyway.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

One, we're basically saying the same thing in that Bernier is not going to be worth what it would take to reasonably trade him.

Jonathan Bernier 2019-20 Game Log | Hockey-Reference.com


What team wants a goalie who is, in your estimation, a really bad goalie with a hot streak that they owe 3M to next year? If he were a rental like Howard, sure, retain whatever you want and WOOOO, but he's got another year and he's not abjectly terrible at 3M. And what, get a goalie like Eric Comrie who will give up 5 a night and give you no chance? Sign some rando like Matej Machovsky to actually play in the NHL and give you literally no chance from the word go? Bernier has had precious few of those "whelp, we're cooked" about five minutes in and one of them, he was flu-ridden. I'm not arguing that Bernier is some golden god that you've got to keep. But "this team is going to be awful so let's not even try" is nonsense. THAT is bat**** insane. You already have the makings of a core here. If you have any faith in Larkin, Zadina, Hronek, Seider, etc. you don't strip the team down to nothing. If you have worries about Larkin? Deal him NOW for something very big rather than wait a couple years and he's seen you evaporate the team around him.

Consider them a total write-off in expecting success. Considering a total write-off in terms of you should deal anyone with an iota of value? Good luck explaining to your future core why they should be alright with you building the team around them. Don't keep guys just to keep guys, but don't move them just to move them!

e: When I said solid, I didn't mean good. I meant that the team didn't give up in front of him in most games. You don't generally have the 6 or 7-1 games with a healthy Bernier.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

One, we're basically saying the same thing in that Bernier is not going to be worth what it would take to reasonably trade him.

Jonathan Bernier 2019-20 Game Log | Hockey-Reference.com


What team wants a goalie who is, in your estimation, a really bad goalie with a hot streak that they owe 3M to next year? If he were a rental like Howard, sure, retain whatever you want and WOOOO, but he's got another year and he's not abjectly terrible at 3M. And what, get a goalie like Eric Comrie who will give up 5 a night and give you no chance? Sign some rando like Matej Machovsky to actually play in the NHL and give you literally no chance from the word go? Bernier has had precious few of those "whelp, we're cooked" about five minutes in and one of them, he was flu-ridden. I'm not arguing that Bernier is some golden god that you've got to keep. But "this team is going to be awful so let's not even try" is nonsense. THAT is bat**** insane. You already have the makings of a core here. If you have any faith in Larkin, Zadina, Hronek, Seider, etc. you don't strip the team down to nothing. If you have worries about Larkin? Deal him NOW for something very big rather than wait a couple years and he's seen you evaporate the team around him.

Consider them a total write-off in expecting success. Considering a total write-off in terms of you should deal anyone with an iota of value? Good luck explaining to your future core why they should be alright with you building the team around them. Don't keep guys just to keep guys, but don't move them just to move them!

e: When I said solid, I didn't mean good. I meant that the team didn't give up in front of him in most games. You don't generally have the 6 or 7-1 games with a healthy Bernier.

I just think an average back up goalie like Bernier is easily replaceable. Like I said, there are close to 10 guys available in July that I think could play as good as Bernier.

so I think it’s silly to fear going into the offseason without him. I don’t think we get a good offer for him, so I guess the conversation really doesn’t matter. It’s just the fear to lose him is odd. This team doesn’t sink or swim over the course of an entire year because you have Bernier as opposed to (name free agent)

and no I don’t think “oh were gunna suck so who cares” so stop projecting that. What I think is berniers average level of play can be replaced VERY easily, so the team doesn’t get worse next year by trading him. (Though, unless there is another trade to be had I.e. georgiev, they will struggle the remainder of this year.)

 

[Squirrel in the Hole]

What would a suitable deal be for Bernier? Would, say, Florida's 3rd, be enough to trade him?

 

[ShelbyZ]

What would a suitable deal be for Bernier? Would, say, Florida's 3rd, be enough to trade him?

If the Wings were to deal Bernier to Florida, I'd probably want Montembault or Driedger as part of the return.

 

[ThankGord]

What would a suitable deal be for Bernier? Would, say, Florida's 3rd, be enough to trade him?

Would rather keep Bernier than have a mid-3rd and a nightmare in net.

A 2nd gets me thinkin...

 

[kliq]

Would rather keep Bernier than have a mid-3rd and a nightmare in net.

A 2nd gets me thinkin...

I agree with this, especially considering we are in no rush to move him. He's not a UFA this year.