Darcy Kuemper

[rt]

I always think of Kuemper as much younger than Raanta. Kuemper was born in May of 90 and Raanta in May of 89. Just the one year.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Not sure how comfortable I am with the idea of trading Kuemper. He's the guy that everyone rallied around and he proved that he could handle the workload, which Raanta to date has not.

Plus, he's signed at a sweetheart deal for next season, and if you want to spend money and cap space on some legitimate scoring help, you'd have more leeway to do it if you got rid of Raanta's $4.5M than Darcy's $1.5M.

 

[Mosby]

Imagine having 2 legitimate goalies where the second of the back-to-back games isn't an automatic throwaway. We can play either goalie and have a chance to steal the second game when the skaters are bagged.

 

[AZviaNJ]

Not sure how comfortable I am with the idea of trading Kuemper. He's the guy that everyone rallied around and he proved that he could handle the workload, which Raanta to date has not.

Plus, he's signed at a sweetheart deal for next season, and if you want to spend money and cap space on some legitimate scoring help, you'd have more leeway to do it if you got rid of Raanta's $4.5M than Darcy's $1.5M.

Raanta's only played 30+ games in a season once in his 6 NHL seasons, can't see teams lining up for that contract. Maybe Florida, given Antti played for Q in Chicago and performed well his 2nd year with the Hawks.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Raanta's only played 30+ games in a season once in his 6 NHL seasons, can't see teams lining up for that contract.

All the more reason to hold onto Kuemper rather than trade him. I don't trust Adin Hill to be our #1 goalie if we trade Darcy and then Raanta goes down again.

 

[YotesFan47]

We could easily split the workloads ~41/41, keep both guys fresh, and when we make the playoffs, use the hot hand.

 

[Dirty Old Man]

Yeah, if we can get the 17-18 Raanta and the 18-19 Kuemper, we're golden.

(the other way 'round, we're leaden)

 

[Thierry]

I'm not a Yotes fan (although I really wish you guys success) so I might sound ignorant, but here I go.

My friend says Kuemper is only as good as his backup. I told him I disagree and that he was stellar last year when Rantaa went down. This year, Kuemper is playing legit starting goaltender minutes and is showing very good numbers. Although it's true that having such a good backup must help, look at Montreal and Price in the last 5 years as a counter example.

I watched three games of Kuemper this season and I was really impress.

Do you guys think he could be your number one for years to come? Or the last 60 games were just great luck?

 

[XX]

Do you guys think he could be your number one for years to come? Or the last 60 games were just great luck?

75% his personal play, 25% the team in front of him. It's probably sustainable, because he doesn't get titled and he's not inconsistent.

 

[FinnishCoyote]

I remember when people said that Kuemper for Rieder and Wedgewood was a win for the Kings

 

[Prarievarg]

I remember when people said that Kuemper for Rieder and Wedgewood was a win for the Kings

People = Hinterland?

 

[SniperHF]

Some elements on the trade board thought we were kinda crazy to trade an RFA youngish winger for an expiring goalie who was supposedly being propped up by LA's defense. These were mostly the types wanting to go LOLCHAYKA just cause though.

If we're being kind, those folks probably were lagging behind and had not yet known about Rieder's injury and decline in play. And that, to be blunt, Rieder's numbers were boosted by playing on a team with terrible depth for a coach that loved him and fed him way better minutes than he'd get elsewhere. If Rieder hadn't gotten injured he'd have been perfect trade bait tbh.

I still say it wasn't really a bad deal for the Kings though, they weren't keeping Kuemper in all likelihood and got a look at Rieder for their trouble. NBD. Also we unloaded a contract slot which was always a problem for us a couple years ago.

 

[BUX7PHX]

We could easily split the workloads ~41/41, keep both guys fresh, and when we make the playoffs, use the hot hand.

From a salary standpoint, Raanta will make $4.25 M in AAV through the 2020-21 season. Kuemper will make $4.5 M in AAV starting next year until 2021-22 season. From the salary perspective, a 41/41 split makes sense.

I guess that my logic is still telling me that we would not lose much with a replacement instead of having Raanta in place. Right now, Raanta is at a .919 save percentage and is allowing 2.72 GAA. His record is 5-5-2. Jack Campbell's stats are much worse (2.99 GAA and .891 save percentage, yet he is only 4-6 in 10 games. I feel as if though one would expect that with worse underlying stats, the record would be significantly worse, but that is not the case. Better yet, we could look at the greatest backup we ever had in Jason LaBarbera. LaBarbera's best statistical year with the Coyotes was the 09-10 season where he had a .928 save percentage and allowed 2.13 GAA for an 8-3-1 record in 17 GP/13 starts. His next best year was in 2011-12, where he allowed 2.54 GAA with a .912 save percentage. His record? 3-9-3 in 19 GP/14 starts. Bottom line is that some goalies at this level can play well and still see a losing record. Some can play poorly and still win. The difference is that we could probably get a decent enough output from a backup earning 25-50% of what Raanta is, and use that toward somewhere else in the lineup.

 

[YotesFan47]

From a salary standpoint, Raanta will make $4.25 M in AAV through the 2020-21 season. Kuemper will make $4.5 M in AAV starting next year until 2021-22 season. From the salary perspective, a 41/41 split makes sense.

I guess that my logic is still telling me that we would not lose much with a replacement instead of having Raanta in place. Right now, Raanta is at a .919 save percentage and is allowing 2.72 GAA. His record is 5-5-2. Jack Campbell's stats are much worse (2.99 GAA and .891 save percentage, yet he is only 4-6 in 10 games. I feel as if though one would expect that with worse underlying stats, the record would be significantly worse, but that is not the case. Better yet, we could look at the greatest backup we ever had in Jason LaBarbera. LaBarbera's best statistical year with the Coyotes was the 09-10 season where he had a .928 save percentage and allowed 2.13 GAA for an 8-3-1 record in 17 GP/13 starts. His next best year was in 2011-12, where he allowed 2.54 GAA with a .912 save percentage. His record? 3-9-3 in 19 GP/14 starts. Bottom line is that some goalies at this level can play well and still see a losing record. Some can play poorly and still win. The difference is that we could probably get a decent enough output from a backup earning 25-50% of what Raanta is, and use that toward somewhere else in the lineup.

Woof, pulled that one from the grave

 

[Name Nameless]

Yeah, keep both. What you get for goalies are notoriously scraps of some reason.

Unless Toronto offers Matthews back or something. which they wont, just keep Raanta.

They are both great goalies.

 

[TheLegend]

Had this nugget on my morning timeline.....




In case it does show.... it says this:

Darcy Kuemper (.935%) can become the third goaltender in @ArizonaCoyotes / Jets history to post a GAA of 1.99 or lower before Christmas (min. 20 GP). The others:
Sean Burke (1.84 GAA in 2000-01)
Nikolai Khabibulin (1.85 GAA in 1998-99)

 

[BUX7PHX]

Woof, pulled that one from the grave

You can look at just about every team's backup, and probably do a market comparison to say how much a win is worth for each starter and backup. I guarantee that Raanta's salary per win is one of the worst in the NHL at his price point.

If we truly believe in the idea that a goalie can come from anywhere, and our expectations are to not use a 1st-3rd round pick on a goalie, wouldn't we use the same approach in a roster creation/free agent standpoint by basically ridding our team of a contract that is fit for someone who should be playing better/starting?

If the play between Kuemper and Raanta was so equal, then I concede. But it isn't. Raanta has clearly been our #2. So why not package that for someone to help elsewhere on the ice?

 

[Name Nameless]

You can look at just about every team's backup, and probably do a market comparison to say how much a win is worth for each starter and backup. I guarantee that Raanta's salary per win is one of the worst in the NHL at his price point.

If we truly believe in the idea that a goalie can come from anywhere, and our expectations are to not use a 1st-3rd round pick on a goalie, wouldn't we use the same approach in a roster creation/free agent standpoint by basically ridding our team of a contract that is fit for someone who should be playing better/starting?

If the play between Kuemper and Raanta was so equal, then I concede. But it isn't. Raanta has clearly been our #2. So why not package that for someone to help elsewhere on the ice?

Not holding the lack of scoring against Raanta. He has kept the team in in some rough games.

 

[YotesFan47]

You can look at just about every team's backup, and probably do a market comparison to say how much a win is worth for each starter and backup. I guarantee that Raanta's salary per win is one of the worst in the NHL at his price point.

If we truly believe in the idea that a goalie can come from anywhere, and our expectations are to not use a 1st-3rd round pick on a goalie, wouldn't we use the same approach in a roster creation/free agent standpoint by basically ridding our team of a contract that is fit for someone who should be playing better/starting?

If the play between Kuemper and Raanta was so equal, then I concede. But it isn't. Raanta has clearly been our #2. So why not package that for someone to help elsewhere on the ice?

No no sorry, I was being sarcastic. That post I had was from April, before this season had started and new information about our team had come to light.

 

[87turbobuick]

Remember 2009 thru 2011 when Bryzgalov was the toast of the town, he had a good defensive system in front of him.

 

[Canis Latrans]

You can look at just about every team's backup, and probably do a market comparison to say how much a win is worth for each starter and backup. I guarantee that Raanta's salary per win is one of the worst in the NHL at his price point.

If we truly believe in the idea that a goalie can come from anywhere, and our expectations are to not use a 1st-3rd round pick on a goalie, wouldn't we use the same approach in a roster creation/free agent standpoint by basically ridding our team of a contract that is fit for someone who should be playing better/starting?

If the play between Kuemper and Raanta was so equal, then I concede. But it isn't. Raanta has clearly been our #2. So why not package that for someone to help elsewhere on the ice?

There are a lot of factors that are quite difficult to account for from a fan's perspective on this though. For instance, if Kuemper is getting his rest days more often because Raanta is so reliable, then Keumper's stats may be seeing a boost he would not be able to maintain with a higher workload. Secondly, were Raanta to be getting more regular minutes, he may perform better as well as he'd be less rusty going into games. Similarly, it's not clear that the workload for a new backup is the right amount. It may be too many minutes for another backup to play at such a high level, forcing Kuemper into more games where he's not going in at 100%. It's also possible that tape on backups is sparse enough that teams can't pick them apart as easily, whereas with both Kuemper and Raanta should have a fair bit of tape for teams to digest on them at this point. One final point I'd add, but I can't cite any source on this as I just seem to recall reading it a bit ago - I believe that Raanta has faced more difficult shots, so the gap might not be as wide between the two.

Now aside from all that, you're probably right that when you add everything up, the advantage of having the tandem in net is less than whatever asset they could acquire to reinforce some other weak point on the team.

 

[BUX7PHX]

There are a lot of factors that are quite difficult to account for from a fan's perspective on this though. For instance, if Kuemper is getting his rest days more often because Raanta is so reliable, then Keumper's stats may be seeing a boost he would not be able to maintain with a higher workload. Secondly, were Raanta to be getting more regular minutes, he may perform better as well as he'd be less rusty going into games. Similarly, it's not clear that the workload for a new backup is the right amount. It may be too many minutes for another backup to play at such a high level, forcing Kuemper into more games where he's not going in at 100%. It's also possible that tape on backups is sparse enough that teams can't pick them apart as easily, whereas with both Kuemper and Raanta should have a fair bit of tape for teams to digest on them at this point. One final point I'd add, but I can't cite any source on this as I just seem to recall reading it a bit ago - I believe that Raanta has faced more difficult shots, so the gap might not be as wide between the two.

Now aside from all that, you're probably right that when you add everything up, the advantage of having the tandem in net is less than whatever asset they could acquire to reinforce some other weak point on the team.

I agree with what you are saying. I can only relate to when I was a lacrosse goalie in my younger and more athletic days, haha.

I kind of take the approach that the player has to be ready for anything and everything. Player A is sick and you have to be the man for a back-to-back (we've seen it). Speaking to those athletic days, I was yo-yo'ed a little bit - wound up playing the 2nd and 4th quarters in about 60% of the games on the year. All I could do was be ready to play, regardless of circumstance. Now, we are talking totally different levels of competition, as well as time between games, etc. But the logic remains the same - you can only be as ready as you prepare yourself to be.

I think that a GM, coach and front office consider that you have about 11-15 back-to-back sets, so your backup should be getting as many of those as possible. I think you also see where the goalie is at as a #1 - if he starts to slump, you have to plan for about another 10-20 games. That can include injuries as well. Rare circumstances with injuries forces the #2 to be the #1, but we have seen that here, too, hahaha.

While I think that the time is over to see Mike Smith and his 60+ game seasons, I think that 52 games or more is a good number to value from your #1. The other 30 can belong to 1 or 2 goalies anyhow (backups get hurt, too), which is enough of a sample size to bump you out of the playoffs with a bad showing by your #2s, but that also speaks to the quality of the team in front, as someone else posted. I think that we are seeing enough defensive quality that we could coax a similar record and/or stats out of a more modestly paid player. I also wonder if this is a direction that the NHL is going - for many years, it was lock up your goalie long term for high end money. Now, I think that teams are willing to go in a direction of giving a starter deals within a $4-6 M range because that mark of about 50-55 games for a starter is the norm. The backup is getting $1-4 M and we are seeing teams cap themselves at about $10 M combined for goalies. In my mind, I think that we should be ahead of the game and getting deals like Raanta's and Kuemper's and reducing that total cap hit down to $6-7.5 M. Use the $2.5 -4 M to improve elsewhere.