wgknestrick
Registered User
- Aug 14, 2012
- 5,868
- 2,615
Where did you hear this? Not saying it isn't true (in fact I suspect it is true), just curious.
If that's the case then what use would it be form them to take Mike Smith, who turns 32 in March, as the #3 guy? Even Crawford is only 33 days younger than Fleury.
For the first time in his career, Fleury has actually taken steps to try to correct some of his issues. He's made changes to his routines and rituals, he's taking practices more seriously, he's more than willing to try out suggestions made by Bales, and so on. You could argue that he was forced to see the sports psychologist, but he'd said "no" when Shero had previously asked him to do it - so if he didn't want to do it, he wouldn't have.
I find it hard to believe that it's entirely coincidental that all the changes occurring had nothing to do with his excellent play this season. The guy has established himself as a top 10 starter this season and is only a hot streak away from getting his name into Vezina talks.
I would expect Bernier or Holtby to get the #3 position. The only one talking about Smith/Crawford here is you.
I don't know many people other than you who consider Fleury to be a "top 10 starter". You also have a significantly different definition of "excellent" than I do. I hope Fleury continues his above average play into the playoffs, but I'm not optimistic of either scenario coming true.
I would expect Bernier or Holtby to get the #3 position. The only one talking about Smith/Crawford here is you.
You really think this is the first time in Fleury's career that he tried to make improvements to his game? That withstanding, on a scale of minus 3 to 10, how would you say his puck-handling has improved this season?
I don't know many people other than you who consider Fleury to be a "top 10 starter". You also have a significantly different definition of "excellent" than I do. I hope Fleury continues his above average play into the playoffs, but I'm not optimistic of either scenario coming true.
I still have trouble understanding how Smith is still being tipped as the #3 goalie for the Olympic team. I'm not saying that Flower should get it, but I fail to see how Smith qualifies as a shoe-in for the spot either.
I still have trouble understanding how Smith is still being tipped as the #3 goalie for the Olympic team. I'm not saying that Flower should get it, but I fail to see how Smith qualifies as a shoe-in for the spot either.
$6M per year / 6 years ($36M) for next contract?
This came to my mind when I saw Varlamov's new contract. What do you think?