Do the Leafs trade a goalie at the deadline?

[Daisy Jane]

Reims has a .927 even strength save percentage for his career. Bernier has a .922 save percentage for his career.

Reimer has had 4 seasons of atleast 30+ games started in his career. Bernier has only 2 seasons of 30+ games started.

Reimer has shown he is trending upwards in terms of potential/play/progression when holding the starters role as a Lead. Bernier has shown he has regressed/played poorer/not living up to the hypee as he's been in the starters role.

Toronto hasn't had a goaltender since Ed Belfour and the fanbase "screams we need one".

Please tell me why it would make sense to trade Reimer over Bernier? All I hear from people is because he's a UFA, injury prone, not consistent, etc. I just showed with a little bit of stats that Reimer has more career starts, a better save percentage, and progressed better in his career and continues to while one doesn't. Only in Leafland I tell ya..

Has Reimer even been healthy enough to play 40+ starts?
everytime he gets going - he gets hurt. sorry. for that alone it would make me wary to keep Reimer.

 

[MJ65]

How about Reimer to Carolina?

 

[BlueBaron]

How about Reimer to Carolina?

Might make sense.

 

[Daisy Jane]

How about Reimer to Carolina?

Might make sense.

finally. I've been saying that since I heard Ward was hurt.

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

Has Reimer even been healthy enough to play 40+ starts?
everytime he gets going - he gets hurt. sorry. for that alone it would make me wary to keep Reimer.

He can't be faulted for the 2010/2011 (his first) and 2012/2013 (lockout shortened) imo.

2011/2012 sure, however myself am getting over whiplash from a car accident last week and I haven't been able to work from the side effects and I'm only 23 years old.

To blame him for 2013/2014, and 2014/2015 kind of makes me chuckle as management brought in a guy who was less proven and fed him 102 starts over 2 seasons. I think it's safe for any logical fan to say the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 was a circus with the poor management we have.

Bernier struggled down the stretch last year, Reimer excelled.

To blame him this year for his injuries I do have to laugh as well being a former OCAA and OUA athlete. Numerous back to back and 3 games in 4 nights with having him practice on the 4th day on ice out of 5, a goalie to come out of that uninjured would be a miracle.

Not for excuses, but for any human being to do that would be a miracle.

 

[Daisy Jane]

He can't be faulted for the 2010/2011 (his first) and 2012/2013 (lockout shortened) imo.

2011/2012 sure, however myself am getting over whiplash from a car accident last week and I haven't been able to work from the side effects and I'm only 23 years old.

To blame him for 2013/2014, and 2014/2015 kind of makes me chuckle as management brought in a guy who was less proven and fed him 102 starts over 2 seasons. I think it's safe for any logical fan to say the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 was a circus with the poor management we have.

Bernier struggled down the stretch last year, Reimer excelled.

To blame him this year for his injuries I do have to laugh as well being a former OCAA and OUA athlete. Numerous back to back and 3 games in 4 nights with having him practice on the 4th day on ice out of 5, a goalie to come out of that uninjured would be a miracle.

Not many excuses, but for any human being to do that would be a miracle.

Okay fine. take out those two years and you have the crux of the situation

Reimer is never healthy enough.
then and i am seriously not going to go through this entire thing again - but ultimately, he wasn't constant enough to beat someone who had the same amount of questions until this year because it was HORRENDOUSLY bad - and yet again, he got hurt.

again.

 

[rrc1967]

The question that's been in my head over and over for the past week. Do the Leafs trade a goalie at the deadline?

I think trading either is pretty dumb. you're going to pay more to replace either.

unless you sign someone to come in to play a pure backup role.

Unless someone is going to blow your socks off, whats the point?

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

Okay fine. take out those two years and you have the crux of the situation

Reimer is never healthy enough.
then and i am seriously not going to go through this entire thing again - but ultimately, he wasn't constant enough to beat someone who had the same amount of questions until this year because it was HORRENDOUSLY bad - and yet again, he got hurt.

again.

Other than a whiplash (not his fault, wouldn't judge length of injury either but I can say it messes you up as a whole as I have it and can't return yet), MCL strain in 2012/2013 (missed a small amount) and this groin strain from overuse in the current season... I just don't see him as injury prone personally.

Given the fair shake like he was in 2010/2011 and this year now (management wanted to bring in Kiprusoff even in the lockout shortened season), he's excelled better than the other. Just my 2 cents

 

[BlueBaron]

finally. I've been saying that since I heard Ward was hurt.

How long is Ward out Daisy ?

I notice this is the last year of his contract too. Might be a match made in heaven.

I actually just made a proposal to CAR to see what they thought because the idea intrigues me.

 

[rrc1967]

Has Reimer even been healthy enough to play 40+ starts?
everytime he gets going - he gets hurt. sorry. for that alone it would make me wary to keep Reimer.

seriously?

perhaps you are looking at the games played and assuming for some strange reason that is all the games he suited up for?

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

seriously?

perhaps you are looking at the games played and assuming for some strange reason that is all the games he suited up for?

I just lol at the "games played in a season".

Not his fault Leafs Management was incompetent the last 2 seasons as well as coaching, and every move they made backfired. If only some people could see that

 

[Daisy Jane]

seriously?

perhaps you are looking at the games played and assuming for some strange reason that is all the games he suited up for?

I am asking a question so instead of people "LOLing" and being all "seriously? - maybe answer the question?

has Reimer been healthy enough to play for 40+ starts? yes or no?

going by my thinking, I'm going to assume no - if not, it would be really nice for someone to go "well, no - he's been injured" - which - would go to my point why i wouldn't want to keep a goalie who gets hurt all the time.

if i'm wrong, please let me know and i'll change my stance

 

[ACC1224]

Wouldn't be surprised if they are both here after the deadline.

 

[34]

Trade Bernier, he is hot garbage.

Keep Reimer, he is the better goalie for sure.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Other than a whiplash (not his fault, wouldn't judge length of injury either but I can say it messes you up as a whole as I have it and can't return yet), MCL strain in 2012/2013 (missed a small amount) and this groin strain from overuse in the current season... I just don't see him as injury prone personally.

Given the fair shake like he was in 2010/2011 and this year now (management wanted to bring in Kiprusoff even in the lockout shortened season), he's excelled better than the other. Just my 2 cents

again. i am not going to go into the whole fair shake, blah blah, because I fundamentally believe that is a load of hooey, and I say that as an athlete. basically and ultimately - this is my last stance on it: if Reimer believed for one moment he was better than Bernier, he would have played better - for at the very least, when they were inquiring to trade him they could. but could not because there was no market. Everything else -not getting starts, coaching, management - it's moot. you make hay with the sunshine you've got, and Reimer for a large amount of time did not. He's doing it not, which is good, however

Whiplash (not his fault)
MCL strain
Groin strain (and seriously? over use?)

Reimer gets started - and somehow gets injured.
AND -this is a contract year. so. (shrug) add that for inflation in his play.

i'd trade him, trade Bernier next year, and try again.

How long is Ward out Daisy ?

I notice this is the last year of his contract too. Might be a match made in heaven.

I actually just made a proposal to CAR to see what they thought because the idea intrigues me.

i don't know. but he has a concussion - and they're really pushing for a playoff spot + I don't know who their backup is or anything. However - I would do Ward + _________ (whatever _____) is- - for Reimer.

 

[MikeBabchuk]

I think they will resign Reimer for 1 year and then tell them, the best goalie next season gets an extension.

Why would Reimer agree with this?

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

Whiplash (not his fault)
MCL strain
Groin strain (and seriously? over use?)

Reimer gets started - and somehow gets injured.
AND -this is a contract year. so. (shrug) add that for inflation in his play.

As an athlete, you would know your groin is one of the most important muscles in your body and isn't something that should be bothered with.

I've only played at a semi professional level, and don't anymore, when I give my all every night I'm usually sore a bit afterwards. Doing that 3 out of 4 nights and going and practicing the next day? You're crazy

Love Leafs brass. But everyone who was attached to hockey (Button, O'Neil, Poulin, Noodles, Hayes, etc) said it was stupid and would happen.

Ride it out with Reims and let him prove people wrong (like he's doing now)

 

[barilko05]

I am asking a question so instead of people "LOLing" and being all "seriously? - maybe answer the question?

has Reimer been healthy enough to play for 40+ starts? yes or no?

going by my thinking, I'm going to assume no - if not, it would be really nice for someone to go "well, no - he's been injured" - which - would go to my point why i wouldn't want to keep a goalie who gets hurt all the time.

if i'm wrong, please let me know and i'll change my stance

Has he ever been "healthy" enough to play 40+? Sure. But in the years he was, he wasn't the designated #1, so Gustaffason and Bernier got the lion share of those starts. That wasn't because he was injured. He just wasn't as good as the other guy. Then there's the concussion. Getting one of those doesn't make you injury prone. It just makes you the guy in the wrong place at the wrong time. That leaves just this season as the only only time he's lost a "significant" amount of time due to an injury not caused by another player.

Look...he's not Glenn Hall. But he's also not Lupul. I think with a proper workload (no back to backs, please) and a decent back-up who can play 25 to 30 games, he'll be fine.

 

[MikeBabchuk]

Bernier has no value, so he stays. Maybe he redeems himself in the next year and a half.

Reimer is playing great. If we keep him, he could regress, and then we miss out. If we trade him, he could keep his play up, and then we miss out.

I'd say try to negotiate a deal with him by the deadline. If he doesn't want to re-sign, trade him. If he wants more than a Talbot-like contract, trade him. If he's willing to sign at a reasonable rate, keep him and see what he can do going forward.

I don't disagree with your comments; they certainly present worthy contemplations.

I must ask, however, what would a "reasonable rate" be, then? Would it be reasonable for Reimer to sign any contract worse than Bernier's or Talbot's? I would suggest absolutely not. Maybe he takes something like 2 years, 8 million (4 per) but I would reckon that to be the bear minimum, and obviously he owes the Leafs no favours.

Ultimately shipping out Reimer for, say, a 2nd round pick, amounts to Bernier being handed back the starting job, unearned, just because management made the mistake of locking him up. Shouldn't management attempt to remedy the previous mistake rather than absolving themselves, as well as Bernier, for his long-standing poor play? It could turn out to be another major gaffe letting Reimer go during what appears to be a legitimate breakout season--whatever that translates to in the long-run--it certainly indicates improved play and a viable option in goal for a number of seasons.

Moving Bernier now makes no practical business sense, indeed, because his value is at an all-time low. But that was the excuse last summer, let's keep in mind. Is it reasonable to expect Bernier to improve next season to better than a .915 save %? I would suggest that to be unlikely, and even then, .915 is now below average and perhaps the best management could reconcile for him as an upcoming UFA would be a 4th-5th round pick, if anything at all.

Meanwhile, Reimer walks for nothing and we have no viable goaltending replacement, or otherwise we could have to expend assets to acquire one, likely a pick and a prospect for a goalie under contract--more than we got in the return for the expiring Reimer!

So does this scenario really make sense? Or does it make more sense to hold on to Reimer and attempt to negotiate a contact, hope Bernier finishes the season strong, and then expend Bernier for whatever the team can get, if anything at all, in the off-season?

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

Has he ever been "healthy" enough to play 40+? Sure. But in the years he was, he wasn't the designated #1, so Gustaffason and Bernier got the lion share of those starts. That wasn't because he was injured. He just wasn't as good as the other guy. Then there's the concussion. Getting one of those doesn't make you injury prone. It just makes you the guy in the wrong place at the wrong time. That leaves just this season as the only only time he's lost a "significant" amount of time due to an injury not caused by another player.

Look...he's not Glenn Hall. But he's also not Lupul. I think with a proper workload (no back to backs, please) and a decent back-up who can play 25 to 30 games, he'll be fine.

He started collectively 52 games combined in the AHL and NHL in 2010/2011.

2011/2012 started 34 in the concussion/whiplash season, second to Gustavsson (Reimer was starter and started 4-1-1 before being run)

2012/2013 started 31 of 48 in the lockout shortened season and 7 playoff starts (to be a jerk 38 out of 55 games).

The last couple years have been different of course. And I solely blame management and Carlyle for it. Bernier was given the role, showed he can't handle it.

Reimers been in a starters role (everyone whines and says not over 40+ games and quite frankly I don't believe that's his fault) but he's had above .920 save percentage in the years he worked a starters load other than the whiplash year.

My favourite thing is, IF he keeps it up, he's one of only 4 goalies since having an above .920 save percentage in atleast 30+ starts in atleat 3 seasons from 2010.

The others? Lundqvist, Price, and Luongo

 

[Daisy Jane]

Has he ever been "healthy" enough to play 40+? Sure. But in the years he was, he wasn't the designated #1, so Gustaffason and Bernier got the lion share of those starts. That wasn't because he was injured. He just wasn't as good as the other guy. Then there's the concussion. Getting one of those doesn't make you injury prone. It just makes you the guy in the wrong place at the wrong time. That leaves just this season as the only only time he's lost a "significant" amount of time due to an injury not caused by another player.

Look...he's not Glenn Hall. But he's also not Lupul. I think with a proper workload (no back to backs, please) and a decent back-up who can play 25 to 30 games, he'll be fine.

and Lupul had a back injury, infection from the back injury, a slapshot broken arm, smashed between two players, broke a finger a FLUKE move, and hurt his knee because marchand sat on him weird.

when you break it down - it doesn't make him injury prone either. however. weird crap happens to Lupul, and you can't trust him, to stay healthy, right?

some ppl could have that issue w/Reimer.

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

I don't disagree with your comments; they certainly present worthy contemplations.

I must ask, however, what would a "reasonable rate" be, then? Would it be reasonable for Reimer to sign any contract worse than Bernier's or Talbot's? I would suggest absolutely not. Maybe he takes something like 2 years, 8 million (4 per) but I would reckon that to be the bear minimum, and obviously he owes the Leafs no favours.

Ultimately shipping out Reimer for, say, a 2nd round pick, amounts to Bernier being handed back the starting job, unearned, just because management made the mistake of locking him up. Shouldn't management attempt to remedy the previous mistake rather than absolving themselves, as well as Bernier, for his long-standing poor play? It could turn out to be another major gaffe letting Reimer go during what appears to be a legitimate breakout season--whatever that translates to in the long-run--it certainly indicates improved play and a viable option in goal for a number of seasons.

Moving Bernier now makes no practical business sense, indeed, because his value is at an all-time low. But that was the excuse last summer, let's keep in mind. Is it reasonable to expect Bernier to improve next season to better than a .915 save %? I would suggest that to be unlikely, and even then, .915 is now below average and perhaps the best management could reconcile for him as an upcoming UFA would be a 4th-5th round pick, if anything at all.

Meanwhile, Reimer walks for nothing and we have no viable goaltending replacement, or otherwise we could have to expend assets to acquire one, likely a pick and a prospect for a goalie under contract--more than we got in the return for the expiring Reimer!

So does this scenario really make sense? Or does it make more sense to hold on to Reimer and attempt to negotiate a contact, hope Bernier finishes the season strong, and then expend Bernier for whatever the team can get, if anything at all, in the off-season?

Logic. Finally,

 

[Menzinger]

Sure, I'd move either of them but I wouldn't expect much in a return.

Maybe a 2nd if the Leafs are lucky.

 

[GBLeaf]

I don't think Reimer ever becomes more than what he already is. I think he has more value right now, where the team taking him has no long-term commitments to him.

I'd try and get a 2nd for him.

 

[King Leaf]

I don't disagree with your comments; they certainly present worthy contemplations.

I must ask, however, what would a "reasonable rate" be, then? Would it be reasonable for Reimer to sign any contract worse than Bernier's or Talbot's? I would suggest absolutely not. Maybe he takes something like 2 years, 8 million (4 per) but I would reckon that to be the bear minimum, and obviously he owes the Leafs no favours.

Ultimately shipping out Reimer for, say, a 2nd round pick, amounts to Bernier being handed back the starting job, unearned, just because management made the mistake of locking him up. Shouldn't management attempt to remedy the previous mistake rather than absolving themselves, as well as Bernier, for his long-standing poor play? It could turn out to be another major gaffe letting Reimer go during what appears to be a legitimate breakout season--whatever that translates to in the long-run--it certainly indicates improved play and a viable option in goal for a number of seasons.

Moving Bernier now makes no practical business sense, indeed, because his value is at an all-time low. But that was the excuse last summer, let's keep in mind. Is it reasonable to expect Bernier to improve next season to better than a .915 save %? I would suggest that to be unlikely, and even then, .915 is now below average and perhaps the best management could reconcile for him as an upcoming UFA would be a 4th-5th round pick, if anything at all.

Meanwhile, Reimer walks for nothing and we have no viable goaltending replacement, or otherwise we could have to expend assets to acquire one, likely a pick and a prospect for a goalie under contract--more than we got in the return for the expiring Reimer!

So does this scenario really make sense? Or does it make more sense to hold on to Reimer and attempt to negotiate a contact, hope Bernier finishes the season strong, and then expend Bernier for whatever the team can get, if anything at all, in the off-season?

You're right, which is why it wouldn't surprise me if neither goalie gets traded. People forget we're still in a rebuild and we still have time to see what we have. There's no point trading either goalie for the sake of trading a goalie. They both do have value and we shouldn't feel the need trade either one.

As for Reimer not wanting to resign, honestly that's pure speculation and nobody will really know what he's thinking. You could easily say that the Leafs not trading him despite us being a rebuilding team and him being a pending UFA will make him feel valued and willing to sign to a short term deal.

and Lupul had a back injury, infection from the back injury, a slapshot broken arm, smashed between two players, broke a finger a FLUKE move, and hurt his knee because marchand sat on him weird.

when you break it down - it doesn't make him injury prone either. however. weird crap happens to Lupul, and you can't trust him, to stay healthy, right?

some ppl could have that issue w/Reimer.

You're totally right about this, I don't really understand what people are debating with you about. Doesn't make him a bad goalie or expendable, its just a fact that he has a tendency to get injured. It would be like someone trying to argue that Bernier isn't small.