Player Discussion: Thomas Greiss

[blitzkriegs]

3yr @ 3mil is fair

I don't think 'fair' is part of the equation - it's the comparables.

...and his agent is looking right at this one as the high water mark: Dubnyk got 6/$26M.

 

[Kevin27NYI]

I don't think 'fair' is part of the equation - it's the comparables.

...and his agent is looking right at this one as the high water mark: Dubnyk got 6/$26M.

Yeah I think people are undervaluing Greiss' earning potential here

 

[Chardo]

I don't think 'fair' is part of the equation - it's the comparables.

...and his agent is looking right at this one as the high water mark: Dubnyk got 6/$26M.

And if that's the ask, I say thank you for your service.

 

[blitzkriegs]

And if that's the ask, I say thank you for your service.

I don't see the Isles going 6yrs. Greiss seems like he will end up with 3/12 or 4/15.

5 and 6 years on a goalie is too long and too risky.

 

[CupHolders]

I'm figuring he is offered something similar to Halak's deal... 4.5 x 4 years. Still allows an ELC goalie (Sorokin) to platoon and maybe win the starters position in 4 years.

I still feel Halak is moved at the TDL to a team on the wildcard cusp... Calgary or Winnipeg come to mind. They both have room on the roster for next year too.

 

[Chardo]

I'm figuring he is offered something similar to Halak's deal... 4.5 x 4 years. Still allows an ELC goalie (Sorokin) to platoon and maybe win the starters position in 4 years.

I still feel Halak is moved at the TDL to a team on the wildcard cusp... Calgary or Winnipeg come to mind. They both have room on the roster for next year too.

Halak's was a bad deal. Why repeat it?

You don't give 4 year contracts to goalies (especially 31 year old goalies), and you don't pay them $4.5M, because you don't have to.

 

[kasper11]

I don't think 'fair' is part of the equation - it's the comparables.

...and his agent is looking right at this one as the high water mark: Dubnyk got 6/$26M.

Yeah, but Dubnyk was 29 when he signed and coming off of a ridiculous season. I think Greiss can be signed for 4-5 years.

 

[CupHolders]

Halak's was a bad deal. Why repeat it?

You don't give 4 year contracts to goalies (especially 31 year old goalies), and you don't pay them $4.5M, because you don't have to.

Halak was, is and will be injury prone and inconsistent.

Greiss, is still a bit of an unknown, but he has been consistent for two years and is not injury prone.

I'm not advocating any number of years or cost for Greiss, clearly the Isles should try to get him for as cheap as possible.

But I do disagree with the notion that Goalie that can put up similar results to Griess will be easily plucked for cheap this offseason.

You run the risk into painting yourself into a corner ala:

Stamkos-> Nielsen-> Ladd.

I'll take Griess over hoping for someone like: Neurvirth, Mason, Lehrner, Elliott, Bernier to fit in as well.

Certainly, not going to get Bishop or Miller as cheap nor can you predict how well they can maintain their ability... which already may be in decline.

Greiss is 28.

EDIT: But if you insist on trying to find lightning in a bottle... Maybe, Scott Darling on Chicago. As a U of Maine alum Isles migh have an inside track.

 

[kasper11]

Halak's was a bad deal. Why repeat it?

You don't give 4 year contracts to goalies (especially 31 year old goalies), and you don't pay them $4.5M, because you don't have to.

You don't have to pay them $4.5M? Says who?

20 goalies make that much this year. The 15th highest paid goalie (or roughly average starter) makes $5.67M.

I think we may be able to sign Greiss for $3.5-4M if we do it soon. As far as I can tell, he has made under $7M for his career. He has never really had a big pay day in his career, so signing now in the $15M range and not risking his value going down due to bad play or injury would have some appeal to him.

If we choose not to sign him now for whatever reason, or can't, who do we get in the offseason for less than $4.5M? Ondres Pavelec? Steve Mason? Some other goaltender that is only cheap because they aren't good?

Like it or not, if you want a starting goaltender, you have to either sign them before they prove their value or pay. Those are the only two options.

 

[Chardo]

You don't have to pay them $4.5M? Says who?

20 goalies make that much this year. The 15th highest paid goalie (or roughly average starter) makes $5.67M.

I think we may be able to sign Greiss for $3.5-4M if we do it soon. As far as I can tell, he has made under $7M for his career. He has never really had a big pay day in his career, so signing now in the $15M range and not risking his value going down due to bad play or injury would have some appeal to him.

If we choose not to sign him now for whatever reason, or can't, who do we get in the offseason for less than $4.5M? Ondres Pavelec? Steve Mason? Some other goaltender that is only cheap because they aren't good?

Like it or not, if you want a starting goaltender, you have to either sign them before they prove their value or pay. Those are the only two options.

And many of those 20 goalies have regrettable contracts that in hindsight the teams would rather not have done. If you can't sign Greiss low enough, you roll with Berube. There's a reason they kept him all along.

 

[crasherino]

Halak was, is and will be injury prone and inconsistent.

Greiss, is still a bit of an unknown, but he has been consistent for two years and is not injury prone.

I'm not advocating any number of years or cost for Greiss, clearly the Isles should try to get him for as cheap as possible.

But I do disagree with the notion that Goalie that can put up similar results to Griess will be easily plucked for cheap this offseason.

You run the risk into painting yourself into a corner ala:

Stamkos-> Nielsen-> Ladd.

I'll take Griess over hoping for someone like: Neurvirth, Mason, Lehrner, Elliott, Bernier to fit in as well.

Certainly, not going to get Bishop or Miller as cheap nor can you predict how well they can maintain their ability... which already may be in decline.

Greiss is 28.

EDIT: But if you insist on trying to find lightning in a bottle... Maybe, Scott Darling on Chicago. As a U of Maine alum Isles migh have an inside track.

Greiss is 31 on Sunday.

 

[Chardo]

Halak was, is and will be injury prone and inconsistent.

Greiss, is still a bit of an unknown, but he has been consistent for two years and is not injury prone.

I'm not advocating any number of years or cost for Greiss, clearly the Isles should try to get him for as cheap as possible.

But I do disagree with the notion that Goalie that can put up similar results to Griess will be easily plucked for cheap this offseason.

You run the risk into painting yourself into a corner ala:

Stamkos-> Nielsen-> Ladd.

I'll take Griess over hoping for someone like: Neurvirth, Mason, Lehrner, Elliott, Bernier to fit in as well.

Certainly, not going to get Bishop or Miller as cheap nor can you predict how well they can maintain their ability... which already may be in decline.

Greiss is 28.

EDIT: But if you insist on trying to find lightning in a bottle... Maybe, Scott Darling on Chicago. As a U of Maine alum Isles migh have an inside track.

Berube.

 

[CupHolders]

Greiss is 31 on Sunday.

Correct.

 

[CupHolders]

Berube.

So the plan will be for Berube to be the starter? Despite playing a dozen or so games in two years?

Ok then, you've made your point clearly and I respectfully disagree. I feel it is to great a risk, especially in John Tavares' final year.

 

[airbus220]

So the plan will be for Berube to be the starter?

Starter should be a thing of the past, see Price, Quick, ..., who also get long term contracts and are expensive. But if they are injured you lost.

Much better is to have 2 good backups who can play 41 games each. No need to pay for the ability to play starter workloads (every 2nd day). Those guys are much cheaper and easier to get because there are only 31 teams.
Besides Greiss there are others who perform good this season, Nilsson, Kinkaid, McElhinney, Grubauer, Darling, Raanta and there are others who just didn't get good opportunities but who were great last season.

Nilsson would be so good to have in a tandem, not expensive, then money could be spend elsewhere.

Also need to play Berube now to see what he can do.

Never fall in love with a goalie, keep it to 2 year contracts and take advantage of the market. It should be possible to have 2 good goalies for 4M together and less than that. It's also needed to have a good goalie in Bridgeport if something happens. I love Greiss, wish he would stay, but need to keep an eye on cap hits, that's why it was important to get rid of Halak who can't play starter workloads but gets paid like a starter.

 

[blitzkriegs]

Starter should be a thing of the past, see Price, Quick, ..., who also get long term contracts and are expensive. But if they are injured you lost.

Much better is to have 2 good backups who can play 41 games each. No need to pay for the ability to play starter workloads (every 2nd day). Those guys are much cheaper and easier to get because there are only 31 teams.
Besides Greiss there are others who perform good this season, Nilsson, Kinkaid, McElhinney, Grubauer, Darling, Raanta and there are others who just didn't get good opportunities but who were great last season.

Nilsson would be so good to have in a tandem, not expensive, then money could be spend elsewhere.

Also need to play Berube now to see what he can do.

Never fall in love with a goalie, keep it to 2 year contracts and take advantage of the market. It should be possible to have 2 good goalies for 4M together and less than that. It's also needed to have a good goalie in Bridgeport if something happens. I love Greiss, wish he would stay, but need to keep an eye on cap hits, that's why it was important to get rid of Halak who can't play starter workloads but gets paid like a starter.

Sounds great in theory, but what playoff teams have successfully executed this plan or rolling out goalies, not giving term, and bringing in a new one to only pay $4M annually in cap hit?

 

[blitzkriegs]

And many of those 20 goalies have regrettable contracts that in hindsight the teams would rather not have done. If you can't sign Greiss low enough, you roll with Berube. There's a reason they kept him all along.

A lot of those deals were signed when the league went long on contracts to lower the cap hit. Plus, and this is significant - there were a LOT less long term contracts on the books in the league generally - whereas right now there's limited overall space in the league since the cap ain't goin up up up and a lot
of players remain signed tightening up how much contract space is available.

In more recent times, look at how STL and CAL 'solved' their goaltending. TBs has gone from 'amazing' to concerning. Once they lose Bishop, they have to get a 1A/B as it appears based on this year the apparent ain't ready for full time duty.

Plus, you have to consider the league w/PAs permission has condensed the schedule and a lot of top players are playing a lot of non-NHL games eventually impacting their NHL team.

 

[NYI365]

Would be fine offering 3 years say $10-12 million. I believe that is a fair offer.

 

[blitzkriegs]

I'm figuring he is offered something similar to Halak's deal... 4.5 x 4 years. Still allows an ELC goalie (Sorokin) to platoon and maybe win the starters position in 4 years.

I still feel Halak is moved at the TDL to a team on the wildcard cusp... Calgary or Winnipeg come to mind. They both have room on the roster for next year too.

WPG just seems clueless to their goalie situation. I don't think CJ and Halak get along well - he mentioned in an article that his time with Isles was not ideal or something like that - which seems to point to his crease partner bc he was fine before he got here and fine after he left.

 

[airbus220]

Plus, you have to consider the league w/PAs permission has condensed the schedule and a lot of top players are playing a lot of non-NHL games eventually impacting their NHL team.

Starter are not able anymore to play starter workloads. Where is Howard, he played great for few weeks and now. Varlamov can't play heavy workloads same as Halak. Mason struggled and other starter who make much money too. So why pay much money for a starter if performance can't be secured.

 

[airbus220]

Sounds great in theory, but what playoff teams have successfully executed this plan or rolling out goalies, not giving term, and bringing in a new one to only pay $4M annually in cap hit?

You need to take advantage of the market and act fast. I wanted to trade Halak after his first season but Snow waited too long and maybe was greedy, now it was too late. To be TOP in the league you need to be much faster.

 

[CupHolders]

Starter should be a thing of the past, see Price, Quick, ..., who also get long term contracts and are expensive. But if they are injured you lost.

Much better is to have 2 good backups who can play 41 games each. No need to pay for the ability to play starter workloads (every 2nd day). Those guys are much cheaper and easier to get because there are only 31 teams.
Besides Greiss there are others who perform good this season, Nilsson, Kinkaid, McElhinney, Grubauer, Darling, Raanta and there are others who just didn't get good opportunities but who were great last season.

Nilsson would be so good to have in a tandem, not expensive, then money could be spend elsewhere.

Also need to play Berube now to see what he can do.

Never fall in love with a goalie, keep it to 2 year contracts and take advantage of the market. It should be possible to have 2 good goalies for 4M together and less than that. It's also needed to have a good goalie in Bridgeport if something happens. I love Greiss, wish he would stay, but need to keep an eye on cap hits, that's why it was important to get rid of Halak who can't play starter workloads but gets paid like a starter.

As already said "good in theory..."

And yes, I really mean that it is good theoretically. Personally I would love a Billie Smith Rollie Melanson tandem. But in order to execute that model successfully you have to identify and acquire two goalies who will be able to deliver when necessary. I believe that harder to do than some realize.

Everyone of the goalies you mentioned has had periods of atrocious play. This year you can point to your examples as success as much as point to the following as failures: Lack, Gusstavson, Enroth, Elliott, Allen. And again, all of those goalies at one point looked promising.

But the point I originally wanted to convey is getting lost in addressing specific posts. What Greiss has done is being under appreciated and it's a mistake to expect to just plug someone in his place and gain the same results.

Ideally the Isles can keep him for three years at a 3+ cap hit and have another goalie to play 30-35 games. I just think it will cost more and longer than people expect. And I don't think the Isles can just easily pickup another option and be certain of the similar results.

 

[Chardo]

So the plan will be for Berube to be the starter? Despite playing a dozen or so games in two years?

Ok then, you've made your point clearly and I respectfully disagree. I feel it is to great a risk, especially in John Tavares' final year.

I'm not saying Berube should be the starter. Just saying that's a better choice than overpaying Greiss.

 

[airbus220]

Everyone of the goalies you mentioned has had periods of atrocious play. This year you can point to your examples as success as much as point to the following as failures: Lack, Gusstavson, Enroth, Elliott, Allen. And again, all of those goalies at one point looked promising.

But the point I originally wanted to convey is getting lost in addressing specific posts. What Greiss has done is being under appreciated and it's a mistake to expect to just plug someone in his place and gain the same results.

At the same time you can't be sure that Greiss or any other starter will be good next season or in 2 years. But if you spend not much money there's only a little loss if things turn bad and you have much better chances to make changes and save the season.
If Greiss would have played starter workloads in October and November I'm sure he would have struggled too, but I wouldn't use him as a starter and wouldn't pay him as a starter.

Allen's case is very easy, he never proved to be a starter and got his contract because of wishful thinking. Of course you need to use your goalies to their strength, much easier if you want to use one only for 41 games and accordingly pay backup money.

Last season Elliott had much time into the season because Allen played the majority of the games. No wonder Elliott could go on an amazing run later in the season till he got injured. This season he played consecutive games early including stupid b2b. That's not how he should be used and CGY got the results they deserved.

Enroth didn't get the same chance as Andersen did. Andersen had bad games at the start too. Enroth didn't play for 2 weeks not only once and then was sent down.

Gustavsson and Lack I never wanted, but every season you can find a goalie. Last offseason I wanted Nilsson, he was great in EDM when he wasn't overused and he would be my first choice for next season.

Most important is the usage. Nobody else played the workload Halak played early in Bettman's stupid wcoh and the stupid german coach didn't care that Halak had to play an NHL season. Then stupid Snow played him 8 consecutive games. Too many idiots. I can run down every goalie too.

 

[airbus220]

I'm not saying Berube should be the starter. Just saying that's a better choice than overpaying Greiss.

I think so too, signing Berube cheap for 800k and using him to his strength is much better than paying Greiss 4M and use him as a starter.