Confirmed with Link: Coyotes claim Eric Comrie off waivers from WPG

hbk

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
22,924
9,409
Visit site
They have Hill in that case, unless they think Comrie is better, but the stats do not show that. That move still puzzles me.
Who’s the starter in the A of u deal Raanta and recall Hill? What has Hill proven in the A for that matter? Hill had a decent short stretch in the NHL. Teams didn’t have a book on him. They do now. He has not been dominant at the AHL level. Let’s not act like Hill is this Uber top 10 goalie prospect. He’s not.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,977
9,038
Who’s the starter in the A of u deal Raanta and recall Hill? What has Hill proven in the A for that matter? Hill had a decent short stretch in the NHL. Teams didn’t have a book on him. They do now. He has not been dominant at the AHL level. Let’s not act like Hill is this Uber top 10 goalie prospect. He’s not.
I agree, but what has Comrie done? Their stats are almost identical.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,977
9,038
He was more highly touted as a prospect. Most Coyote posters hadn’t heard of Hill until last season.
You and I both know that means nothing. I don't think either will be a NHL regular. Is Comrie waiver exempt?
 

hbk

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
22,924
9,409
Visit site
You and I both know that means nothing. I don't think either will be a NHL regular. Is Comrie waiver exempt?

How did we acquire Comrie?

I’m not claiming Comrie is the second coming of Patrick Roy and I’m not claiming Hill isn’t able to become a full time NHL netminder.

Until Hill however establishes himself as a dominant AHL guy I’m hesitant to name him the heir apparent. I get why they grabbed another guy in Comrie.
 

The Feckless Puck

Registered Loser
Sponsor
Oct 26, 2006
18,235
10,480
Until Hill however establishes himself as a dominant AHL guy I’m hesitant to name him the heir apparent. I get why they grabbed another guy in Comrie.

Right now the apparent "heir apparent" is Prosvetov. He's Chayka's draft pick, and it's pretty clear the GM favors him over everyone else in the goalie rotation. From Chayka's comments about why he got Comrie, it's pretty clear that Hill's on his last chance with the club.

And, like @TheLegend said, Hill didn't exactly get off to the best start in Tucson.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,977
9,038
How did we acquire Comrie?

I’m not claiming Comrie is the second coming of Patrick Roy and I’m not claiming Hill isn’t able to become a full time NHL netminder.

Until Hill however establishes himself as a dominant AHL guy I’m hesitant to name him the heir apparent. I get why they grabbed another guy in Comrie.
Explain this move. Both Hill and Comrie have almost identical records. Even if Chayka feels Comrie is better than Hill where will he get playing time to further his development? We also have a disgruntled Hill as our #1 in Tucson, knowing full well he will not see another NHL game with this organization. The way I see it this hurts both Comrie and Hill. What don't I see.
 

The Feckless Puck

Registered Loser
Sponsor
Oct 26, 2006
18,235
10,480
Explain this move. Both Hill and Comrie have almost identical records. Even if Chayka feels Comrie is better than Hill where will he get playing time to further his development? We also have a disgruntled Hill as our #1 in Tucson, knowing full well he will not see another NHL game with this organization. The way I see it this hurts both Comrie and Hill. What don't I see.

I'll explain the move.

Chayka likes Comrie, or at least his stats analysis does. Corey Schwab also likes Comrie.

Hill was in the system before Chayka got here, so Chayka feels no loyalty to him beyond the stat sheet. But the fact that Comrie and Hill are virtually indistinguishable in stats does not change the fact that Chayka likes the former and doesn't trust the latter anymore.

Now, since Raanta is made, essentially, of glass, Chayka felt like he could possibly need a long-term backup to Kuemper. That Raanta recovered faster than the team expected probably does not assuage their worry that he might go back on the IR, and potentially soon. So that - and Chayka's folder full of "Guys I'd Like" - is the reason why we have Comrie. Chayka isn't interested much in developing him - he just thinks that Comrie is a better option.

Where Chayka's going to go from here is anyone's guess.
 

TheLegend

Megathread Gadfly
Aug 30, 2009
35,925
27,391
Buzzing BoH
Right now the apparent "heir apparent" is Prosvetov. He's Chayka's draft pick, and it's pretty clear the GM favors him over everyone else in the goalie rotation. From Chayka's comments about why he got Comrie, it's pretty clear that Hill's on his last chance with the club.

And, like @TheLegend said, Hill didn't exactly get off to the best start in Tucson.


Boxscore from Sunday's game in San Antonio.

TheAHL.com | The American Hockey League

Hill was given a 2-0 lead. SA got them both back on power plays in the second, but then got three more the first 11 minutes before Hill was pulled. Four of SAs goal came from just in front of the net, but without seeing the play it's impossible to if that's on Hill or his defense. He made 25 saves on 30 shots but only had 6 in the last 9 he faced in the third.
 

hbk

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
22,924
9,409
Visit site
Explain this move. Both Hill and Comrie have almost identical records. Even if Chayka feels Comrie is better than Hill where will he get playing time to further his development? We also have a disgruntled Hill as our #1 in Tucson, knowing full well he will not see another NHL game with this organization. The way I see it this hurts both Comrie and Hill. What don't I see.

Comrie allows Hill (the player who isn’t subject to waivers) to continue to develop and log heavy minutes in the A.

What has Hill accomplished to justify his dissatisfaction? He put up a .906 save percentage last year which is fairly mediocre. He’s got to put up starter AHL numbers before we create room for him as a backup.

Comrie allows us to move Raanta at some point without impacting Hill’s development in the short term. Based on his start so far in the AHL it looks like Hill needs it.

When you can argue that Hill has established himself as a 1G in the AHL then this becomes a legitimate debate. We aren’t there yet.

Comrie is on our roster because he can’t clear waivers. I get that. I would argue his last 2 seasons in the A where he put up a .916 save percentage and a winning record that he is further along in his development than Hill. I don’t believe that “lead” is insurmountable but if AZ wanted Raanta insurance and wanted to ensure that Hill could further his development in the A I’m not sure why anyone would oppose this move. It’s very understandable.
 
Last edited:

hbk

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
22,924
9,409
Visit site
Right now the apparent "heir apparent" is Prosvetov. He's Chayka's draft pick, and it's pretty clear the GM favors him over everyone else in the goalie rotation. From Chayka's comments about why he got Comrie, it's pretty clear that Hill's on his last chance with the club.

And, like @TheLegend said, Hill didn't exactly get off to the best start in Tucson.
I like Provotsev. I think he’s a fine G prospect. Likely 3-4 years away before we know what he’s going to be in the NHL.
 

Jamieh

Registered User
Apr 25, 2012
11,231
6,259
Why is there even a question when to the team adds to the cupboard without cost?? It's a found wallet.
 

Name Nameless

Don't go more than 10 seconds back on challenges
Apr 12, 2017
6,548
3,004
I mean, we still have to pay his salary and he's taking up a spot on the 50-man roster, but otherwise, yeah.

Well, he will take a spot among the 23 shortly, when (or if) he ever gets a visa.

I do get the feeling that means Chayka wants to trade a goalie. So, if Raanta is healthy now, he will start against Vegas as showcasing? Or? Is it Kuemper he wants to trade, believing Kuemper has the most trade-value compared to long-time expectations? That would bring out the pitchforks, wouldn't it.

Ok, I give up. I can't guess what's going on. Hoping they really meant what they said when they said they liked Comrie. 8.75 mill in cap hit for a tandem next year would have been OK, if the team wasn't so filled with half-high contracts already. So, probably not OK.

Not wanting to help out, say, Sharks with a goalie, personally. You kind of never gets so much back for a goalie?
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,977
9,038
I'll explain the move.

Chayka likes Comrie, or at least his stats analysis does. Corey Schwab also likes Comrie.

Hill was in the system before Chayka got here, so Chayka feels no loyalty to him beyond the stat sheet. But the fact that Comrie and Hill are virtually indistinguishable in stats does not change the fact that Chayka likes the former and doesn't trust the latter anymore.

Now, since Raanta is made, essentially, of glass, Chayka felt like he could possibly need a long-term backup to Kuemper. That Raanta recovered faster than the team expected probably does not assuage their worry that he might go back on the IR, and potentially soon. So that - and Chayka's folder full of "Guys I'd Like" - is the reason why we have Comrie. Chayka isn't interested much in developing him - he just thinks that Comrie is a better option.

Where Chayka's going to go from here is anyone's guess.
So, until Raanta gets hurt Comrie sits, using up a contract and $$, not getting playing time. I can't see Comrie being good with this, unless we trade one of our goalies for scoring help in the near future.
 

Jamieh

Registered User
Apr 25, 2012
11,231
6,259
So, until Raanta gets hurt Comrie sits, using up a contract and $$, not getting playing time. I can't see Comrie being good with this, unless we trade one of our goalies for scoring help in the near future.
Do you think Comrie would rather be riding the buses for the Moose for $200K or sitting in AZ for $700K? That's twice today Jakey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larmex99

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,977
9,038
Why is there even a question when to the team adds to the cupboard without cost?? It's a found wallet.
I agree, if we could put him in the AHL to continue his development, not sitting on the bench "hoping" one of our goalies get hurt so he can play a game. How is this benefiting anyone, especially Comrie.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,977
9,038
Comrie allows Hill (the player who isn’t subject to waivers) to continue to develop and log heavy minutes in the A.

What has Hill accomplished to justify his dissatisfaction? He put up a .906 save percentage last year which is fairly mediocre. He’s got to put up starter AHL numbers before we create room for him as a backup.

Comrie allows us to move Raanta at some point without impacting Hill’s development in the short term. Based on his start so far in the AHL it looks like Hill needs it.

When you can argue that Hill has established himself as a 1G in the AHL then this becomes a legitimate debate. We aren’t there yet.

Comrie is on our roster because he can’t clear waivers. I get that. I would argue his last 2 seasons in the A where he put up a .916 save percentage and a winning record that he is further along in his development than Hill. I don’t believe that “lead” is insurmountable but if AZ wanted Raanta insurance and wanted to ensure that Hill could further his development in the A I’m not sure why anyone would oppose this move. It’s very understandable.
So, Chaka likes Comrie better than Hill, but lets Hill further his development while the same time stunting Comrie's? What team in their right mind would want Raanta until they are satisfied that his injuries are behind him and that he is worth that contract? That could take most of the year.
 

Jamieh

Registered User
Apr 25, 2012
11,231
6,259
Me think you are severely over thinking this Jakey. Stunting his development??
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->