Recalled/Assigned: Goalies waived

TheHudlinator

Registered User
Nov 21, 2011
28,824
7,602
Victoria,BC
Why put it to chance? Is it possible Irving could be picked up off waivers? Yes
Is it possible that they select Irving to be the back-up? Yes.

So what happens if the stars align and you lose your backup? What if a divisional rival takes your backup, forcing you to play the lesser goaltender? Blame it on bad luck?

A good manager would have the stones to pick a goalie and waive the other

I don't like it but I don't think it is that big of a deal as at this point only teams that are carrying players that don't have to go through waivers can claim Irving and I think the only team that has a goalie they can demote for Irving is Toronto. I hope he doesn't get pick up as I am a big supporter of his and think he won the job today but at the same time Karlsson didn't look bad either and I can understand why they wanted an extra day.
 

MarkGio

Registered User
Nov 6, 2010
12,533
11
You must have some kind of hate for Feaster if you actually think this wasn't a calculated decision, if you actually believe anyone reaches the top of management in professional sports by "rolling the dice" you are nuts

If you think every manager is competent.... or even free of error...

Lots of GMs take risks, and sometimes they are proven to be mistakes or unreasonable. When the sum of all poor choices are greater than the sum of smart choices, one is no longer competent. I'm not saying Feaster is at that point, but I'm not going to be dishonest of his short comings. I actually like Feaster and give him the benefit of the doubt more often than not.

Stick around a little while, you might jump to such rash conclusions
 

Lunatik

Registered User
Oct 12, 2012
56,248
8,384
If you think every manager is competent.... or even free of error...

Lots of GMs take risks, and sometimes they are proven to be mistakes or unreasonable. When the sum of all poor choices are greater than the sum of smart choices, one is no longer competent. I'm not saying Feaster is at that point, but I'm not going to be dishonest of his short comings. I actually like Feaster and give him the benefit of the doubt more often than not.

Stick around a little while, you might jump to such rash conclusions
you claimed and I quote:
He didn't assess ****, he rolled the dice.

Maybe you have a different meaning of "didn't assess ****" but I took that to mean that you were saying he didn't assess anything.

I also never said anyone was perfect and infallible, I was saying they put thought into decisions.
Perhaps you shouldn't make such a bold statement if you don't want to be called out on it.
 

BVicious

Registered User
Jun 15, 2012
1,774
0
GMs don't plan anything. Everything is off the cuff. Ownership lets them control million dollar empires, and only hire stupid people to do it.

Think about how dumb that sounds. Weather we believe in Feaster's direction or not, at the end of the day, blame the owners. Don't think they just give him FULL rein of the team and not make final decisions.

Just remember what owner was the most vocal about the lockout.
 

Zoombie

Registered User
Oct 28, 2011
911
0
This is crazy. I'm sure they have a plan though, should be interesting to see what happens. In such a short season the backup would play few games anyways, and we were going to lose Leland at the end of the season anyways IIRC.
 

FLAMESFAN

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,920
1,013
Who care. Neither will be claimed. They both suck.

I don't know why people are surprised. I've been saying for almost a year now that Irving was very overrated. This move shows that neither one is a big part of the future of the team, or any other team if they don't get claimed. Whoever "wins" the spot though will have a chance to prove themselves. Whoever losses, needs to be put to the curb. We have too many goalies period.
 

tmurfin

That’s the joke
May 8, 2010
11,243
1,280
Just seen on Twitter that only Kipper and Irving are on the ice, looks like Irving won the job
 

Calculon

unholy acting talent
Jan 20, 2006
16,578
4,035
Error 503
Good for Irving. I still think he has the potential to be a starter in the NHL.

Doubt Karlsson would be content to play third string in the AHL. He's gone.
 
May 27, 2012
17,070
856
Earth
It was a smart move by Calgary,by sending them down they now have the option to call or up or send send down Irving or Karlsson any time they want without going through waivers.
 

kirant

Kiprusoffarian
Dec 2, 2011
293
0
It was a smart move by Calgary,by sending them down they now have the option to call or up or send send down Irving or Karlsson any time they want without going through waivers.

I'm not sure they'll be able to move Karlsson. It sounds like he's not going to go to the AHL, since he hasn't been assigned to the Heat yet. By that, I think we can interpret that they're looking for a team to loan him to...probably Europe.
 
May 27, 2012
17,070
856
Earth
I'm not sure they'll be able to move Karlsson. It sounds like he's not going to go to the AHL, since he hasn't been assigned to the Heat yet. By that, I think we can interpret that they're looking for a team to loan him to...probably Europe.

Yeah makes sense, wasn't a fan of Karlsson. Its good that the flames are giving Irivng the back up goalie.
 

Johnny Hoxville

The Return of a Legend
Jul 15, 2006
37,549
9,343
Calgary
I'm glad to see Irving will be the backup. I have not given up on him yet and think it is short sighted to do so. He is not the first goaltender to struggle for a period of time and won't be the last.
 

MarkGio

Registered User
Nov 6, 2010
12,533
11
you claimed and I quote:


Maybe you have a different meaning of "didn't assess ****" but I took that to mean that you were saying he didn't assess anything.

I also never said anyone was perfect and infallible, I was saying they put thought into decisions.
Perhaps you shouldn't make such a bold statement if you don't want to be called out on it.

Maybe --> you <-- have a different meaning to good reading comprehension. I said he didn't assess **** in response to someone else claiming Feaster assessed that the goalies would clear. Unless you knew FOR A FACT that the goalies would clear, it wouldn't have been a gamble (roll of the dice).
 

Lunatik

Registered User
Oct 12, 2012
56,248
8,384
Maybe --> you <-- have a different meaning to good reading comprehension. I said he didn't assess **** in response to someone else claiming Feaster assessed that the goalies would clear. Unless you knew FOR A FACT that the goalies would clear, it wouldn't have been a gamble (roll of the dice).
You can assess things and still take a calculated risk, what you said was suggesting he never put any thought into it. Which is clearly not true.

But either way, Feaster was right and things worked out how he expected.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad