I don't think we should be throwing Skinner under a bus personally. He was choice 3 and wasn't really expected to be in the NHL much this season. Having said that, I do think he will turn into a solid NHL goalie in 2 years. So tossing him under the bus is counter productive but does follow a long history of Oiler's destroying goalie prospects. You're a big fan... name all the goalies we've drafted and developed to play for us?
Having said that.. yeah, he stunk up the joint for sure. We have 2 wins in 15 games and I think it's fair to say it isn't just goaltending. I'd actually say it's all the things that a lot of us have been saying since preseason....
Goalies aren't good enough
D isn't good enough
Bottom 6 isn't good enough
No 3C
It all adds up to a big shit salad and it doesn't taste very good.lol
For a different analogy.. I know you love my Czech ones.. the goalies that play for us at the World Jr's usually end up near the bottom for stats with 4 GAA and save percentages well below .900. They're all slowly becoming NHL goalies. Turns out they didn't suck, the teams did.
ftr my comments on Skinner post game were borne out of frustration. My opinion on things is stated well by
@Took a pill in Sbisa
So that I wouldn't get rid of Skinner or anything. he shouldn't be in put in the spot. Goalies take longer to develop and its premature to discard.
That said I wouldn't throw top picks at goalie prospects. Its the hardest position to predict due to how much development, variables are involved. But moreso its my sense that in the NHL at least, and maybe hockey world in general, teams tend to be reactive when it comes to goalies. That they get discarded, moved etc. All but the elites do, invariably.
My position is that I would have kept Talbot all along because he's fundamentally a good goalie and a known prospect. We knew what we had in him, no guesswork, and he's bettter than anything we have now. This is not retro analysis. I was one of the few posters saying to KEEP Talbot. That he was the best goalie we'd had in our stable since Roloson.
So due to the percieved nature of teams discarding goalies or moving them why not just capitalize on that? If I'm a GM I wait till a TDL or even a next offseason and see what is available, and make signing one already established or promosing goalie a priority.
This leads me to another thought. Because I am naturally somewhat analytically disposed, I would love to see stats on what positions in hockey are most retained or discarded by respective drafting teams. A factorial analysis could plot that with some before and and after metric of games played.
This could have implications on drafts. If its shown that some positions are more highly discarded by NHL teams, and even players that go onto have successful careers, than it might make sense to load up on other teams discards, often available cheaper. Indeed the Vegas Golden Knights success was borne out of such a theory of what other teams would be willing to dispose of or prioritize. The Knights, in their drafting and collection of players fairly reveal inadequacies in other clubs perspectives on their own players.