GDT: Around the League

zeroG

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 5, 2006
8,205
1,801
Somerville, MA
Also if those goalie played like bob this year isles would be nowhere near a playoff spot. 2 way street

you miss the point. like completely.

the isles play defense. bob would dominating because good defensive teams make it much easier for goaltenders. they mitigate confidence issues as well because they generally provide a much more stable and predictable game.

just watched the nhl on the fly segment on the isles last night and weekes made this precise point.

again, nobody's saying bob is playing fantastic. he's come in on the heels of a big signing, big move and change of scenery and was probably not as focused as he might've have been in normal year. i'm not counting on him becoming a world-beater given all that.

and neither would Q. he wants to control the things he can - ensure that the 5 guys on the ice play as a unit, check and manage the puck smartly. this team can be successful without a smoking hot goaltender if they do those things.
 

Prominence Problem

"Some may never live, but the crazy never die."
Sponsor
Dec 14, 2002
16,149
8,473
Blue Jay Way..
Watching the Avalanche tonight. They just look a step faster than all the other teams on TV. Now they have a hot goalie.
Glad the Panthers are done playing them this year. I definitely think they are better then when they played them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: harv33173

letsgrowcactus

Registered User
Jan 21, 2017
4,725
4,932
Watching the Avalanche tonight. They just look a step faster than all the other teams on TV. Now they have a hot goalie.
Glad the Panthers are done playing them this year. I definitely think they are better then when they played them.
Really happy for Francouz. He's been great for the Czechs in many international competitions playing behind our typically awful defence. Was hoping he'd see NHL playing time last year; got the chance this year and so far seems to be doing really well with it.
 

Crossbar

Registered User
Apr 29, 2003
6,676
777
48" above the ice
You fools act like reimer is bad and is just behind a good d now. He had similar numbers with us before last year. .913 and a .920. Last year was An anomaly
Dale says hello.

If Reimer is such a consistently good goalie besides last season, why did we have to trade him for Scott Darling's abysmal contract? Why didn't a team jump all over his availability and simply offer us something good for Reimer's services instead of taking Darling's anchor contract?
 

RainingRats

Registered User
Dec 28, 2008
21,649
4,797
Dale says hello.

If Reimer is such a consistently good goalie besides last season, why did we have to trade him for Scott Darling's abysmal contract? Why didn't a team jump all over his availability and simply offer us something good for Reimer's services instead of taking Darling's anchor contract?
Because we wanted elite goaltending, not just decent goaltending. If there was no cap, it's possible we keep Reimer as a backup.
Reimer had a bad year and was sold low, plus goalies have low trade value unless they're elite. There weren't a lot of goalie needs either, the market was very limited.
 

Crossbar

Registered User
Apr 29, 2003
6,676
777
48" above the ice
Because we wanted elite goaltending, not just decent goaltending. If there was no cap, it's possible we keep Reimer as a backup.
Reimer had a bad year and was sold low, plus goalies have low trade value unless they're elite. There weren't a lot of goalie needs either, the market was very limited.
Aren't we still taking on Darling's cap hit? If I'm not mistaken, 1.2 this season and 2.3 next season of dead cap space. Obviously less than Reimer's full 3.4 cap hit, but we're still taking some space up with Scott Darling's buyout who is not contributing to this team. Having 1 bad season shouldn't diminish a goalie's value to the point of having to accept another team's cap dump, unless GMs (including Dale) all thought Reims was low quality/risky beyond just last season alone IMO. We would have probably bought out Reims if Canes weren't an option.

I'm not defending Reimer, we needed a change and we needed a major upgrade in net, Lu retirement gave us that option thankfully to go after Bob. Perhaps Dale didn't want to tie up so much money in the goalie position, but I feel the Darling trade showed how bad Reims' value was.
 

Gentle Man

09/12
Nov 15, 2011
40,797
33,112
Ontario, CA
Aren't we still taking on Darling's cap hit? If I'm not mistaken, 1.2 this season and 2.3 next season of dead cap space. Obviously less than Reimer's full 3.4 cap hit, but we're still taking some space up with Scott Darling's buyout who is not contributing to this team. Having 1 bad season shouldn't diminish a goalie's value to the point of having to accept another team's cap dump, unless GMs (including Dale) all thought Reims was low quality/risky beyond just last season alone IMO. We would have probably bought out Reims if Canes weren't an option.

I'm not defending Reimer, we needed a change and we needed a major upgrade in net, Lu retirement gave us that option thankfully to go after Bob. Perhaps Dale didn't want to tie up so much money in the goalie position, but I feel the Darling trade showed how bad Reims' value was.

The difference was the poison pill in Reimers contract. Buying him out had huge cap implications this year and next.

Darling's is technically higher, but the big hit doesnt arrive till I believe 2 seasons from now. By then, Seattle would have joined and there is an expected big cap jump that will take place because of the expansion.

The Darling trade was the lowest cost (cap wise) without sending assets back.
 

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,391
9,363
Once again, Panthers didn’t want to keep Reimer because they thought he wouldn’t be good enough to carry a backup role let alone starter role. If he could have been believed to bounce back and be great, $3.4M would be a steal and we wouldn’t have needed Bob. However, it wasn’t just Panthers who stared at stats and said, shucks this is a bad goalie we need to get rid of. Other teams said, he’s maybe a bad goalie, but we also know your defense sucks, but he’s not good enough to take a chance on without a dire need. Enter Carolina, and the rest is history.

Reimer is bouncing back partly because he got a fresh opportunity, but largely because their Dmen actually know what to do with rebounds and covering their man in front of the net. And they don’t cough up the puck like we do.

People who continue this “it’s all/mostly on the goalie” just don’t understand how much faster the puck moves versus a leg or an arm. And how defense must prevent free movement and shooting of said puck, to help the goalie. Otherwise the puck is in the net more than often than Serena Williams aces her serves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: austropanther

Jean Luc Discard

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
14,547
8,586
People who continue this “it’s all/mostly on the goalie” just don’t understand how much faster the puck moves versus a leg or an arm.

Goat lending is all about probabilities i.e. covering as much as the net possible when facing the puck. The Cats' defense can't cope with basic defensive duties so Dale has to go and purchase arguably the best goalie in the last five years and one that can play like he doesn't have a defense in front of him... which is true. It's truly amusing that some think that a goalie can make a so-called "big save" for a shot taken five feet away from the net when reasoning already states it's not possible to react that quickly and it boils down to probabilities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KW

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,391
9,363
Goat lending is all about probabilities i.e. covering as much as the net possible when facing the puck. The Cats' defense can't cope with basic defensive duties so Dale has to go and purchase arguably the best goalie in the last five years and one that can play like he doesn't have a defense in front of him... which is true. It's truly amusing that some think that a goalie can make a so-called "big save" for a shot taken five feet away from the net when reasoning already states it's not possible to react that quickly and it boils down to probabilities.
Yup, look at the Stars game. Bishop played badly. Bob played well. Bishop should have made some more saves, but he didn’t. The Strahl goal, the Scevior one possibly, maybe Acc’s penalty shot.

Bob on the other hand was compromised badly by defense on Stars first, second (although a great shot), and third. Only the fourth one (Benn) is on Bob. No goalie would have saved 1, 2 and 3 without dumb luck. One and three were on Mike Matheson. Two was poor PK execution and a great shot. With reasonable defense, other things being equal, it’s a 7-2 game and Bob keeps improving his sv% and people drop the “Bob sucks” meme.
 

letsgrowcactus

Registered User
Jan 21, 2017
4,725
4,932
The difference was the poison pill in Reimers contract. Buying him out had huge cap implications this year and next.

Darling's is technically higher, but the big hit doesnt arrive till I believe 2 seasons from now. By then, Seattle would have joined and there is an expected big cap jump that will take place because of the expansion.

The Darling trade was the lowest cost (cap wise) without sending assets back.
Next year is when Darling's cap is the biggest issue at 2.33 million. After that it's 1.18 mill for the final two years. Reimer's contract would've been 400k cheaper to buy out overall but would have carried a cap hit of 3.20 mill next year because of his signing bonus.
It was easily a win for Carolina, getting rid of Darling's awful contract while acquiring a goalie who is actually serviceable. And it worked for us too, because we needed to get rid of Reimer's contract and this spread out the money in a way that's more manageable, without costing us any assets.
We'll still have at least 14.3 mill of our cap hit tied in "goaltending money" next year with Bobrovski + Driedger as our actual goalies, Luongo + Darling as recapture penalty/buyout (that's presuming Montembeault doesn't play well enough to claim the backup position back and earn even more money than Driedger). Obviously Bob's contract is here to stay but it'll be nice in a few years to at least get Lu and Darling off the books...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boothinator

Crossbar

Registered User
Apr 29, 2003
6,676
777
48" above the ice
As of today (Dec 27th) CBJ has Atkinson, Anderson, Bemstrom, Bjorkstrand, Dubinsky, Milano, Murray, Nutivaara, Peeke and Harrington all out with injury/illness and they are only 1 point behind us in the standings with 1 extra game played (they are tied with Tampa). With all these guys missing and the players they lost in the offseason, it's pretty amazing they aren't rock bottom with Detroit :amazed:
 

KW

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 21, 2006
12,391
9,363
As of today (Dec 27th) CBJ has Atkinson, Anderson, Bemstrom, Bjorkstrand, Dubinsky, Milano, Murray, Nutivaara, Peeke and Harrington all out with injury/illness and they are only 1 point behind us in the standings with 1 extra game played (they are tied with Tampa). With all these guys missing and the players they lost in the offseason, it's pretty amazing they aren't rock bottom with Detroit :amazed:
SOME coaches matter?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad