Confirmed with Link: Ducks sign Fasth to Two-Year Extension

[Nikko*]

Something I've noticed in the difference between Hiller and Fasth is the way the defenseman play in front of them. They seem more comfortable with Fasth, they are able to anticipate a little better and know which shots to step in front of and which to let through, which shots are going to produce dangerous rebounds, etc. With Hiller, they seem to second guess things because a lot of it is random. This is a hugely important aspect of a goaltender for the cohesion of rest of the team. Any of my fellow former (or current) defenseman know what I'm saying here?

 

[TheJoeMan]

Something I've noticed in the difference between Hiller and Fasth is the way the defenseman play in front of them. They seem more comfortable with Fasth, they are able to anticipate a little better and know which shots to step in front of and which to let through, which shots are going to produce dangerous rebounds, etc. With Hiller, they seem to second guess things because a lot of it is random. This is a hugely important aspect of a goaltender for the cohesion of rest of the team. Any of my fellow former (or current) defenseman know what I'm saying here?

With Hiller, what should be one save ends up being three or four saves or a goal. The way he stops the puck rarely allows him to shallow up the puck and thus leads to multiple rebounds. This causes the d-men to totally break down and scramble. Also the way he handles the puck totally efts up a breakout.

With Fasth he's shallows up rebounds or least puts them in a better spot allowing the d-men to do their job better. When he handles the puck he actually is able to pass it to his d-men. I think Hiller struggles with that because he catches with his strong hand (writing hand) and essentially handles his stick backwards.

There's no question our D plays a more confident game with Fasth in net.

 

[Nikko*]

With Hiller, what should be one save ends up being three or four saves or a goal. The way he stops the puck rarely allows him to shallow up the puck and thus leads to multiple rebounds. This causes the d-men to totally break down and scramble. Also the way he handles the puck totally efts up a breakout.

With Fasth he's shallows up rebounds or least puts them in a better spot allowing the d-men to do their job better. When he handles the puck he actually is able to pass it to his d-men. I think Hiller struggles with that because he catches with his strong hand (writing hand) and essentially handles his stick backwards.

There's no question our D plays a more confident game with Fasth in net.

Definitely. And confidence is a building block of success.

 

[PuqTalk]

With Hiller, what should be one save ends up being three or four saves or a goal. The way he stops the puck rarely allows him to shallow up the puck and thus leads to multiple rebounds. This causes the d-men to totally break down and scramble. Also the way he handles the puck totally efts up a breakout.

With Fasth he's shallows up rebounds or least puts them in a better spot allowing the d-men to do their job better. When he handles the puck he actually is able to pass it to his d-men. I think Hiller struggles with that because he catches with his strong hand (writing hand) and essentially handles his stick backwards.

There's no question our D plays a more confident game with Fasth in net.

Completely agree with you here. That being said, Hiller's athleticism does allow him to make those second and third saves which has lead to such a successful career so far. But as a viewer, even I've felt more comfortable watching Fasth so far this year.

 

[Nikko*]

Completely agree with you here. That being said, Hiller's athleticism does allow him to make those second and third saves which has lead to such a successful career so far. But as a viewer, even I've felt more comfortable watching Fasth so far this year.

I think it's a better fit for our dmen to have a goalie who you know is going to stop the shots he is supposed to. That allows the defense to know where and when to be at all times. Only in the St Louis game did he look inconsistent, but it didn't phase him in his next start. Thank god we took that shoot out, I feel like it did wonders for his confidence going forward to play a ****** game and have your forwards pick you up.

 

[Duck Off]

This has been beaten to death already, was it okay to let Beauch go? No. Was the trade itself acceptable? Yes. At the time, Lupul had no spot in our lineup, he wasn't performing great, and Fowler's emergence along with other defensive prospects we had allowed us to make that move.

The trade isn't acceptable IMO because it never had to be made. I cut Murray a slack when he moved Lupul because Lupul was always injured here, and Carlyle didn't do a very good job of using him. Still I don't cut Murray ANY slack on this move because it's a move that should have never had to happen. That's 100% on him.

After the playoff run that Sutton had with Ottawa the previous year, I really don't think anyone expected him to fall off from the number four spot we were hoping he could take over. That was not a bad move. That was a player not working out on the team.

Are you kidding me? You're telling me that Murray should base his evaluation off of one playoff performance instead of the entire rest of his career? Aside from one playoff series, Sutton had never shown he could handle a top 4 role. That was a horrible move. Again, Murray counting on a player to handle a role he had never proved capable. This wasn't some rookie. This was an aged vet who had one over achieving playoff performance. It wasn't a bad move, it was a horrible move that killed us that year. I don't see how you call it "a player not working out on a team" when he had never shown he could handle such a role for an extended period of time (on any team he played for).

********. It's not really his fault if either or both decide to walk. As far as I'm concerned, we don't even need to entertain the idea of trading either. Period.

Sure, it'd be amazing to get both of them locked up before the off-season. But let's focus on the season at hand first and foremost. You don't deal either of them when we're in the playoff hunt.

Murray's evaluation is based off performance of the team. A nice prospect pool is great, but it's team performance that decides how a GM is doing. I never said Murray should trade them. I'm implying that his fate could very well be determined about how things go with those two. They walk, and we rebuild IMO. Part of a GMs job is convincing FA's to stay or sign. If in a span of 3 years he: loses the two superstars because they don't want to re-sign, he loses arguably their top prospect because he didn't want to be here, and he trades one of our best prospects for a player he could have just re-signed (that wanted to stay). Well that's a pretty big **** up. Regardless of reasoning, it falls on Murray. Was it Carlyle's fault that the team didn't buy into what he taught? He proved (and currently is with another team) that he's a very good coach. No it's not his fault, but he gets the blame. Same for Murray.

 

[Duck Off]

We should bring back Brian Burke

Lol that was weird timing for you to say that. What color am I thinking of?

Beauch was coming off of major knee surgery, and he DID struggle with the leafs for a while, also how did Anaheim have the money? they were trying to become a more offensive team, Sutton had a great run w/Ottawa before we signed him how could Anaheim have predicted he'd fall off so much, and wouldn't fit the system?

I'm not going to go over specfics of how we could have afforded him because I am not going to track down those roster moves again. However, I (and someone else, Snark I think?) went over the numbers in specific detail that season and it was close. With a few small maneuvers it ended up being something like 750k difference? Yes Beauchemin did struggle there in Toronto. However, he struggled the entire time he was there. I think it was more based on Wilson's system rather than health, but obviously that's pure speculation on my part. I'm taking into fact that he played well pretty quickly upon returning here.

Becoming more offensive is fine, but you don't create a giant hole in your top 4 to do so. That's asinine. Sutton's issue was definitely not just system. Did he fall off? Or did he just simply revert back to what he had been his entire career with the exception of that playoff run, a bottom pairing defenseman? IMO you judge a guy based on what he's done most of his career, not one playoff run.

Of course losing Gardiner sucked, but he is currently 8th on the leafs depth chart, you know how we know his value is decreasing? Leaf fans are offering him up all over the place

I don't know how you place him 8th. He'll be back up soon. Regardless though, he's still a terrific prospect, that could of in the very least fetched us a bigger piece.

Most Leaf fans here are clueless. I don't judge any Leaf player based on their comments, because there's too many clueless ones.

 

[Duck Off]

I don't think you're seeing the forest for the trees.

I'm simply not judging him only on his drafting, which has been excellent. It's a combination of a lot of things. I personally believe the biggest factor in determining how a GM has done is team performance. Which before this year, has been subpar.

 

[Duck Off]

Completely agree with you here. That being said, Hiller's athleticism does allow him to make those second and third saves which has lead to such a successful career so far. But as a viewer, even I've felt more comfortable watching Fasth so far this year.

Agreed. Fasth just looks more in control. He plays the percentages. He'll never be flashy but there's nothing wrong with that. I think trying to be too flashy gets Hiller into trouble sometimes. There's times when he should just get infront of a puck, and he tries to glove it. Hiller is better at the desperation saves though.

In fairness to Hiller though, Fasth has had the luxury of having big defenseman clear the rebounds he does give up. Hiller hasn't had that since Pronger left. Granted he's had it this year like Fasth though.

 

[bumperkisser]

Agreed. Fasth just looks more in control. He plays the percentages. He'll never be flashy but there's nothing wrong with that. I think trying to be too flashy gets Hiller into trouble sometimes. There's times when he should just get infront of a puck, and he tries to glove it. Hiller is better at the desperation saves though.

In fairness to Hiller though, Fasth has had the luxury of having big defenseman clear the rebounds he does give up. Hiller hasn't had that since Pronger left. Granted he's had it this year like Fasth though.

the last couple games hiller's played the team has completely left him out to try. They've been so fatigued when he's in net. I dont really think they aren't "confident" in him. As for rebound control, I really find it funny considering fasth's worse part of his game is his rebound control. Hiller's is bad as well no doubt, but his is definitely better than fasth's is...
The thing that fasth has shown right now is that he'll make basically save all the shots that he SHOULD save and he'll maybe make a save that he shouldn't.
Hiller is prone to the soft goal which can be deflating but he'll also make the huge stop.