Do We Have a #1 Goalie? All Purpose Goalie Talk ‎ (Part II)

[Gary Nylund]

Bernier was good last year then he got hurt, which is no surprise. He has never shown the ability to handle a full time workload, and has shown major inconsistencies . Durability and consistency matter just as much as ability.

Bernier is a better goalie than our AHL caliber goalie, Reimer. Neither are the answer IMO.

Yeah it would be great if a goalie was durable, consistent and never had an off year. In the last 40 years there's been what, three goalies like that?

Seriously though, I'm not saying Bernier is the "answer" but I do think writing him off is premature.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I have doubts that Reimer is a legit (or at least top 20) starting goalie, and I don't see why Bernier would want to stick around during a rebuild.

I have heard some good things about Antoine Bibeau, I believe FUture watch rated him as our 3rd or 4th best prospect.

Wasn't there just a quote from Bernier a few days ago where he said he wanted to stick around?

 

[Gary Batman]

So 15 out of 21 cup winners drafted their goalies, big deal. You'd probably see about the same ratio (if not bigger) for other key players, #1 centre, #1 d-man etc.

I think almost all of us would agree that of course the draft is the way to build a team but it has zero to do with who is the better goalie Bernier, or Reimer.

Bernier was aces last year. How quickly some forget. If you guys are so sure he won't play like that again next year good for you. Then notion that LA traded him to us because "they saw something" is just nonsense. The fact they had quick had nothing to doo with it right? Get a grip guys.

LA had Quick, so they had to trade Bernier as he wanted to be a starter.

With that said, if LA thought of Bernier as a goaltender that could win cup in the future, they would've waited for a better offer, or bidding by multiple teams would've pulled the price much higher than what Leafs ended up paying.

 

[Gary Batman]

Wasn't there just a quote from Bernier a few days ago where he said he wanted to stick around?

Does he have much choice though? There aren't many teams, where he would walk in and be an instant upgrade for that team. At least not on top 20 teams. Might as well just stay with Toronto then. Besides, odds of overpaying are always higher with Nonis than some other GM.

 

[Nithoniniel]

LA had Quick, so they had to trade Bernier as he wanted to be a starter.

With that said, if LA thought of Bernier as a goaltender that could win cup in the future, they would've waited for a better offer, or bidding by multiple teams would've pulled the price much higher than what Leafs ended up paying.

Because they had Quick, Bernier never got much of a chance to prove himself as an NHL goaltender. Goaltenders that are not proven at the NHL level has very low trading value.

There is nothing to say that they would have got a higher offer in the future.

Does he have much choice though? There aren't many teams, where he would walk in and be an instant upgrade for that team. At least not on top 20 teams. Might as well just stay with Toronto then. Besides, odds of overpaying are always higher with Nonis than some other GM.

Of course he has a choice.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Bernier stated that he 100 percent wants to stay with the team ergo, I'd take it to be that to mean he'll probably take a contract that will allow him to stay instead of forcing management's hand.

He cited his own development in LA, when he first came up, Doughty was still in Junior, Quick wasn't even "discovered" yet, there were a lot of players that hadn't come together, and then when he did make the team full time, and went on the cup run , there were pieces in place and it didn't take a tonne of time as people want to say, it took like... (4ish? - i have to re-read the article), years. now. we don't have a lot of those pieces, but he was basically saying, you never know what trades take place, who ends up on UFA that you don't expect, the right coach makes the difference etc, and he sees a lot of that here in Toronto (with Morgan, etc), and he wants to be a big part of that.

 

[Gary Batman]

Because they had Quick, Bernier never got much of a chance to prove himself as an NHL goaltender. Goaltenders that are not proven at the NHL level has very low trading value.

There is nothing to say that they would have got a higher offer in the future.



Of course he has a choice.

With "he doesn't have much of a choice", I was referring to how it can't get much better for him.

Even though he is RFA, if he chooses to go out of Toronto, there aren't many (any?) teams out there that can offer him money, or even winning, for the resume he has. Bernier's best bet right now is to hope that Leafs keep him and sign him; as things are looking bleak for him outside of Toronto.

 

[Nithoniniel]

With "he doesn't have much of a choice", I was referring to how it can't get much better for him.

Even though he is RFA, if he chooses to go out of Toronto, there aren't many (any?) teams out there that can offer him money, or even winning, for the resume he has. Bernier's best bet right now is to hope that Leafs keep him and sign him; as things are looking bleak for him outside of Toronto.

On the contrary, I think many teams would be interested in giving a youngish goaltender who put up an elite season as late as last year a chance. Especially when the price wouldn't be so high, and there are very plausible reasons for his disappointing season this year.

 

[silentbob37*]

Wasn't there just a quote from Bernier a few days ago where he said he wanted to stick around?

Talk means nothing. Players rarely, if ever, publically state they want out or don't want to resign.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Talk means nothing. Players rarely, if ever, publically state they want out or don't want to resign.

yes. but players very rarely give examples of other teams and why he feels that it's the same here, and why he wants to.

seriously. sometimes talk means something.

 

[King Leaf]

Statistically that is a huge deal. You can't downplay numbers like that, you just can't.

Well I wouldn't say its a huge deal. Think about it this way, if you look at data over the past few decades I'm willing to bet in each season, a majority of the teams starters are goalies they developed. Because goalies simply aren't traded that often. Hell, trades don't even happen that often, on a team a of 22 what are the chances that multiples moves are made in the position that only comprises two players on the roster.

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

On the contrary, I think many teams would be interested in giving a youngish goaltender who put up an elite season as late as last year a chance. Especially when the price wouldn't be so high, and there are very plausible reasons for his disappointing season this year.

He definitely had an elite season, but on the contrary to the other fellas comment, one "elite" season on your NHL resume as a 27 year old in only a 55 game season where you wore down at the end of the season shouldn't garner you much attention unless your names Andrew Raycroft and John Ferguson JR

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

Just as it should be unfair to label James Reimer a "backup" when he clearly hasn't been given the chance he deserves when he proved early in his career he should be given the chance.

 

[KILLERLEAFFAN101]

Only the Leafs would go out and go acquire something that was not needed meanwhile they had something that actually brought hope back to a team after after not having it for so long. And now, of course, their plan is failing with the new goalie and personally I love it. Maybe the Leafs should learn trading for backup goalies never works haha

 

[YorkshireRose]

where else could bernier actually go and walk into a starter job other than another train wreck of a team? I think the reason hes so commited to the leafs is that we have no option but to start him and he has nowhere to go other than sideways, and better the devil you know

 

[King Leaf]

yes. but players very rarely give examples of other teams and why he feels that it's the same here, and why he wants to.

seriously. sometimes talk means something.

I think talk means something a lot of the time to be honest, if he didn't want to stay why would he say anything at all. Could have just said I'm not focusing on that right now, will decide when the season wraps up. I don't know why everybody automatically assumes a person is lying

He definitely had an elite season, but on the contrary to the other fellas comment, one "elite" season on your NHL resume as a 27 year old in only a 55 game season where you wore down at the end of the season shouldn't garner you much attention unless your names Andrew Raycroft and John Ferguson JR

Didn't Ranger fall on his leg and injure him?

 

[eddieO]

where else could bernier actually go and walk into a starter job other than another train wreck of a team? I think the reason hes so commited to the leafs is that we have no option but to start him and he has nowhere to go other than sideways, and better the devil you know

There's very few teams if any that would a) pay for Bernier with something like a second round pick and b) have him start as many games as the Leafs had him start. I would like to know the list that have both A and B. Edmonton is my only guess and I would LOVE their second for him.

 

[Daisy Jane]

I think talk means something a lot of the time to be honest, if he didn't want to stay why would he say anything at all. Could have just said I'm not focusing on that right now, will decide when the season wraps up. I don't know why everybody automatically assumes a person is lying



Didn't Ranger fall on his leg and injure him?

I know! I think Parise is a great example. He was all like we have the best fans, but I don't want to talk about my contract right now, we'll wait and see. will wait and see," and waiting and seeing saw NJD fans seeing Parise sign with Minnesota.

While a lot of people toss out "obviously it's up to management" if someone goes they 100 percent want to be here, and be a part of the rebuild, because I think I can be of help + i went through one before." [didn't say all of that but again read the article it's basically all there]. then I tend to believe that he wants to be here and be a part of the rebuild.

now if that's because he knows this is the only chance he can be a starter - that's just sugar on top of the doughnut. it doesn't change the fact he wants to be here. he could go and duke it out somewhere else. (now. where that somewhere else is - i don't know).

cliche is one thing, but you can also say a lot within it to get your message across. Studied it in school it's quite interesting really. it's not an exact science, but it's just speech patterns and what is said/not said. (so when people go you read too much into it - maybe. but it's always interesting to see what pans out anyway).


and yes. Ranger/Bergeron fell on his leg, causing his knee injury. now. the question is should he have been playing at all - that's a horse of a different colour. My thing is if you're wearing the jersey your healthy. While I think it's obvious that Bernier came to play way too soon to try to save the season, and I'll give a bit more leeway to that. (as it was evident in his movements and such) - he was "healthy."

the same way of -a lot of people want to infer that Reimer had a concussion or some kind of head injury in the LA game and that is what caused his spiral down. that was never stated etc. (and say it wasn't, and i give him the same leeway) - wearing the jersey = you're healthy and Reimer didn't play well either. NO one played well (before someone starts with me )

i will stand by my stance that I was v. mad at Reimer, I do think he left in a lot of weak goals down the stretch that cost us the game, and I wanted him off the team because he asked to be traded. and while that is all well and good that he is re-dedicated to the team now. and if things work out - they work out).

at this point i maintain you trade them both - get a stable goal tender, draft our own and move on.

 

[Paradoc]

1993 Patrick Roy
1994 Mike Richter
1995 Martin Brodeur
1996 Patrick Roy
1997 Chris Osgood
1998 Chris Osgood
1999 Ed Belfour
2000 Martin Brodeur
2001 Patrick Roy
2002 Dominik Hasek
2003 Martin Brodeur
2004 Nikolai Khabibulin
2006 Cam Ward
2007 J S Giguere
2008 Chris Osgood
2009 M A Fleury
2010 Antti Niemi
2011 Tim Thomas
2012 Jonathan Quick
2013 Corey Crawford
2014 Jonathan Quick


Bolded are goalies that won the cup with the team that drafted them or the team they first played for. Patrick Roy's wins for Colorado have been italicized because of two reasons: 1) He was already a proven cup winner at the time of trade 2) He was traded in unprecedented circumstances, which had never occurred before, nor have they occurred since.

EDIT: Since the NHL changed after 2004 lockout and intro to cap era, the cup winning team had home grown goaltender in all but one year.

You listed Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur (3 times), Chris Osgood (3 times) and Jonathan Quick (two times).

Now can you tell me what is one thing similar about the teams they play in front of?

Answer, they have one generational players on each of their teams or assembled one of the best teams in that decade.

So unless you're expecting us to draft a HOF or assemble one of the best teams in that decade, it's ridiculous that the only way to win the cup is to draft and develop our own goalie.

 

[King Leaf]

I know! I think Parise is a great example. He was all like we have the best fans, but I don't want to talk about my contract right now, we'll wait and see. will wait and see," and waiting and seeing saw NJD fans seeing Parise sign with Minnesota.

While a lot of people toss out "obviously it's up to management" if someone goes they 100 percent want to be here, and be a part of the rebuild, because I think I can be of help + i went through one before." [didn't say all of that but again read the article it's basically all there]. then I tend to believe that he wants to be here and be a part of the rebuild.

now if that's because he knows this is the only chance he can be a starter - that's just sugar on top of the doughnut. it doesn't change the fact he wants to be here. he could go and duke it out somewhere else. (now. where that somewhere else is - i don't know).

cliche is one thing, but you can also say a lot within it to get your message across. Studied it in school it's quite interesting really. it's not an exact science, but it's just speech patterns and what is said/not said. (so when people go you read too much into it - maybe. but it's always interesting to see what pans out anyway).


and yes. Ranger/Bergeron fell on his leg, causing his knee injury. now. the question is should he have been playing at all - that's a horse of a different colour. My thing is if you're wearing the jersey your healthy. While I think it's obvious that Bernier came to play way too soon to try to save the season, and I'll give a bit more leeway to that. (as it was evident in his movements and such) - he was "healthy."

the same way of -a lot of people want to infer that Reimer had a concussion or some kind of head injury in the LA game and that is what caused his spiral down. that was never stated etc. (and say it wasn't, and i give him the same leeway) - wearing the jersey = you're healthy and Reimer didn't play well either. NO one played well (before someone starts with me )

i will stand by my stance that I was v. mad at Reimer, I do think he left in a lot of weak goals down the stretch that cost us the game, and I wanted him off the team because he asked to be traded. and while that is all well and good that he is re-dedicated to the team now. and if things work out - they work out).

at this point i maintain you trade them both - get a stable goal tender, draft our own and move on.

And to be honest, with our culture getting increasingly contrarian and egotistic, sometimes speaking in cliche is actually the bolder choice! So I don't think it makes much sense to dismiss anything because it's cliche anymore (and cliches are cliches for a reason, rabble rabble)

I don't toally agree on your 'if you're wearing the jersey you're healthy thing' because these guys really love the sport, it's everything to them, we've all put up with discomfort to do things we love to do. That being said I think it's a terrible idea to rush back from an injury, not smart risking your long term health. I blew my knee out playing hockey years ago and its still not right because I rushed back and ran cross country and did other stupid things you shouldn't do with a busted knee, so now I cringe when I hear pro athletes doing it.

 

[Gary Nylund]

From the list above you could just as easily take away the fact that it's very important to have a good goalie if you want to win the cup and whether or not you draft/develop him yourself or trade for him is irrelevant. Just think if Colorado had said we're not interested in Roy because history shows that we're better off drafting and developing a goalie ourselves. That would have obviously been dumb. Same principle applies here. There's an argument to be made for trading Bernier but the fact that he wasn't drafted by us is not relevant to that argument.

Maybe trading for Gilmour and later Sundin were bad ideas too. After all, they were "discarded" by their teams for a reason - isn't that how this argument goes?

 

[King Leaf]

You listed Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur (3 times), Chris Osgood (3 times) and Jonathan Quick (two times).

Now can you tell me what is one thing similar about the teams they play in front of?

Answer, they have one generational players on each of their teams or assembled one of the best teams in that decade.

So unless you're expecting us to draft a HOF or assemble one of the best teams in that decade, it's ridiculous that the only way to win the cup is to draft and develop our own goalie.

And you could easily say the same for Thomas, Niemi, and Crawford being on some of the best teams in the league of the past 7 or 8 years, and Belfour and Hasek were Hall of Famers. Cam Ward and Giguere are the only Ho hum goaltenders in that list that weren't exceptional/playing behind a deezed team.

 

[Nithoniniel]

He definitely had an elite season, but on the contrary to the other fellas comment, one "elite" season on your NHL resume as a 27 year old in only a 55 game season where you wore down at the end of the season shouldn't garner you much attention unless your names Andrew Raycroft and John Ferguson JR

Just as it should be unfair to label James Reimer a "backup" when he clearly hasn't been given the chance he deserves when he proved early in his career he should be given the chance.

Only the Leafs would go out and go acquire something that was not needed meanwhile they had something that actually brought hope back to a team after after not having it for so long. And now, of course, their plan is failing with the new goalie and personally I love it. Maybe the Leafs should learn trading for backup goalies never works haha

I don't understand your logic.

You have said yourself that both of them have put up about equal performance, even though I don't quite agree, then you go ahead talking about how unfair it is to label Reimer a backup only to turn around and call Bernier a backup yourself.

 

[BlueBaron]

You listed Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur (3 times), Chris Osgood (3 times) and Jonathan Quick (two times).

Now can you tell me what is one thing similar about the teams they play in front of?

Answer, they have one generational players on each of their teams or assembled one of the best teams in that decade.

So unless you're expecting us to draft a HOF or assemble one of the best teams in that decade, it's ridiculous that the only way to win the cup is to draft and develop our own goalie.

Also some of those goalies are pretty average. Chris Osgood is the most accomplished average goalie of all time and most of his cups could have been won with any number of other goalies.

Quick, Roy , Broduer are difference makers and the last two do not belong in the same conversation as most of those other guys considering you can argue they are the two best ever.

 

[darrylsittler27]

It's not like Bernier has any leverage...

They wont be contending next year and if he asks for too much they can balk. If he signs somewhere else say for $4.5M what is the compensation? A first +... no?