Joonas Korpisalo

[Viqsi]

You think he's gonna get paid like a starter if he plays 30 games next year?

Ah, but then we're forcing him into the role of a backup, and then "Are you not trying to win...?" applies all over again (if he's on the roster, one would expect Torts to go with the hot hand, right?). And if there's a goaltending controversy as a result, surely he will be paid something significant.

And even then, he may still be paid something significant, as EspenK rightfully points out.

Not that I object to the idea of keeping him as just a backup per se - just that RS45's dismissal of the concept seemed sufficiently comprehensive to cover such alternative scenarios. No wiggle room in there - he's better, you play him, end of story. Now, whether or not that's his actual position or just an unfortunate turn of phrase is something he'd have to clarify.

 

[theD86]

I think Korpi is going to be the goalie when Bob's contract is up.

 

[Monk]

Ah, but then we're forcing him into the role of a backup, and then "Are you not trying to win...?" applies all over again (if he's on the roster, one would expect Torts to go with the hot hand, right?). And if there's a goaltending controversy as a result, surely he will be paid something significant.

And even then, he may still be paid something significant, as EspenK rightfully points out.

Not that I object to the idea of keeping him as just a backup per se - just that RS45's dismissal of the concept seemed sufficiently comprehensive to cover such alternative scenarios. No wiggle room in there - he's better, you play him, end of story. Now, whether or not that's his actual position or just an unfortunate turn of phrase is something he'd have to clarify.

I feel like there are a lot of words being put in other peoples mouths in this conversation (or at least misunderstandings). This is a lot of angst over purely hypothetical situations.

I think if you have a goalie who has proven he can play at the starter level in the NHL, you let him continue to prove it - or maybe he falters and gets sent down. That's my understanding of RS45's point. You let the play dictate the money rather than the other way around. You let the play dictate how much each plays

 

[Viqsi]

I feel like there are a lot of words being put in other peoples mouths in this conversation (or at least misunderstandings).

Or both.
Alternative reply: HOW DARE YOU I NEVER SAID SUCH A THING I AM SO OFFENDED

Maybe I'm just misapplying my doctrine of Benefit Of The Doubt - I want to believe there's a better counterargument present than appears to be implied.

I think if you have a goalie who has proven he can play at the starter level in the NHL, you let him continue to prove it - or maybe he falters and gets sent down. That's my understanding of RS45's point. You let the play dictate the money rather than the other way around. You let the play dictate how much each plays

The concern there would be creating a goaltending controversy, and thus potentially a contract management controversy.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Maybe I'm just misapplying my doctrine of Benefit Of The Doubt - I want to believe there's a better counterargument present than appears to be implied.

You're saying "the better player should play" is not a worthy counterargument?

 

[blahblah]

^Pretty much DSL. The bottom line is to play your best players at the NHL level

It was quite clear that I understood that position from my first post; I acknowledged it and gave a counter. So I'm still completely baffled at what point it was that I was missing - I clearly had moved beyond that. Having said that many teams, for a myriad of reasons, keep players in the AHL longer than, perhaps, they need to be. It's not unusual and for teams like Detroit, one of them is for cap stability. Its worked really well for them over the years. My issue with you clearly wasn't your opinion on what I quoted - that is just a differing of opinion, it was when you wrote "Are you trying to win?" (or close to it) and pretty much ignoring or acknowledging that you wrote it.

I challenge some of you to run through your minds the possible scenarios for next season with a Bob/Korp combo and follow each of those scenarios to their ultimately resolutions. There actually aren't many good end results to be had. Some involve Korp sitting for a week or two at a time with no starts, others involve that for Bob. If it's Bob, that leads to not being able to trade Bob and Korps contract going up considerably, even on a bridge deal, and suddenly you have a 10-11 million combined cap for you goalies which could lead to premature cap crisis. Others involve the loss of organizational depth in the event Bob is injured again. Some involve goalie controversies.

I see no reason not to honor the final year of C-Macs contract as a CBJ. Korp is a phone call away if you need him.

Ultimately

 

[blahblah]

You're saying "the better player should play" is not a worthy counterargument?

Can't speak for Viqsi; but if both players were on the roster and active - CMac and Korp - clearly Korp plays.

That really isn't the point is it? If Korp is on the team that doesn't mean that he's going to play. Is it a distinct possibility that he only plays once every week or two? If C-Mac isn't on the team and Bob is getting the majority of the starts; are you going to send Korp down and bring Forseberg up? What does that do for the his development?

C-Mac is kind of like that 7th D-Man or 13th forward. You only start one goalie a game and if you have to pull your starter (injury isn't "pulling") the backup rarely ends up winning the game so there isn't much difference there in a win/loss consideration.

I get the counter, we're a marginally better team with that combo. Maybe that adds up to a 3 or 4 point difference; maybe it makes no difference at all. Hard to say since we haven't seen Korp or Bob come in much from sitting for a couple of weeks; especially Korp. With Bob its usually a short stint (2 or 3 games) or from injury; they want him back in. They may actually perform along the lines of how C-Mac does (or has).

Just some food for thought.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Can't speak for Viqsi; but if both players were on the roster and active - CMac and Korp - clearly Korp plays.

That really isn't the point is it? If Korp is on the team that doesn't mean that he's going to play. Is it a distinct possibility that he only plays once every week or two? If C-Mac isn't on the team and Bob is getting the majority of the starts; are you going to send Korp down and bring Forseberg up? What does that do for the his development?

C-Mac is kind of like that 7th D-Man or 13th forward. You only start one goalie a game and if you have to pull your starter (injury isn't "pulling") the backup rarely ends up winning the game so there isn't much difference there in a win/loss consideration.

I get the counter, we're a marginally better team with that combo. Maybe that adds up to a 3 or 4 point difference; maybe it makes no difference at all. Hard to say since we haven't seen Korp or Bob come in much from sitting for a couple of weeks; especially Korp. With Bob its usually a short stint (2 or 3 games) or from injury; they want him back in. They may actually perform along the lines of how C-Mac does (or has).

Just some food for thought.

I have hashed all the permutations through in my head and have no fixed opinion on the goalie situation. I don't need to make up my mind because a) it's way early and b) no one gives a **** what my opinion is anyway.

I began in this topic trying to achieve some clarity - Viqsi certainly addressed something I was missing. My last question was more of the same. When there's lots of food for thought, maybe the best answer is indeed the most obvious. (Or maybe it's not.)

 

[Viqsi]

You're saying "the better player should play" is not a worthy counterargument?

That's the "original" argument to which the whole "what about this financial consideration" thing applies. It's possible that that is not worthy of consideration, and I can understand that; I'm just looking for something stronger other than reiteration. For example, I don't see CMac as that much of a downgrade in a backup role.

 

[blahblah]

b) no one gives a **** what my opinion is anyway.

That's not true.

 

[Viqsi]

That's not true.

I dunno, when I saw that I just assumed I was accounted for because I'm a relative nobody.

 

[joshjoshjosh]

If Bob stays healthy next season (bear with me, here) then Joonas needs to stay in Cleveland and start 55 games. Let C-Mac play out the last year of his contract and punt this issue to 2017.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

That's not true.

I actually meant anyone who can make a decision about the goalies. But that's a nice thing to say anyway. Thanks.

 

[KJ Dangler]

Look, the bottom line is this, what gives the jackets the best shot of getting in the playoffs next year . All these external factors mean nothing, Torts needs to ice the best team possible next year . If that means Korpi lights camp up and is named the starter , and Bobs 7 mill,is sitting on the bench , so be it . It will all play itself out . If torts next year goes to a 65-35 split with Bob, and Korpi, it's not going to Ruin Korpi .

 

[blahblah]

I actually meant anyone who can make a decision about the goalies. But that's a nice thing to say anyway. Thanks.

Cool, gotcha - next time just add the FO somewhere in there...

 

[blahblah]

Look, the bottom line is this, what gives the jackets the best shot of getting in the playoffs next year . All these external factors mean nothing, Torts needs to ice the best team possible next year . If that means Korpi lights camp up and is named the starter , and Bobs 7 mill,is sitting on the bench , so be it . It will all play itself out . If torts next year goes to a 65-35 split with Bob, and Korpi, it's not going to Ruin Korpi .

While I appreciate your position; the team will not live or die based on the perception that the team will lose with C-Mac and win with Korp. The team will not fold, will not leave the city.

Possible cap concerns moving forward are relevant as are other things I posted. They illustrate the differences between fans and actually being part of the front office. They will be talked about in-depth and there will be a strategy on how to handle it. They will do what they think is best for the team - next year and beyond. They don't have the luxury of simply looking at next season. We aren't a team with an aging core that might only have one to two chances to win the Cup before a rebuild. This is a young team that they think are building to something. There is no urgency to have Korp on the team next season from the perspective; certainly not to the level we're projecting on the forums.

We kind of pretend like the opening night roster is what it would be later in the season. As I said Korp is a simple phone call away. You have options with Korp; less with the others we have. That gives you some flexibility. If Korp struggled next season, what are your options then? Call up Forseberg who really hasn't done much at this level? No, you'd probably end up making a trade giving up an asset and end up right back where you are now.

Peace.

 

[Valdiz]

Is it just me, or does this thread needs to be renamed into "Joonas Korpisalo and the Chamber of goalie issues"?)
Not truying to be a smart**s, but it seems that discussion shifted from Korpi to all the goalies & cap space and whatnot.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Cool, gotcha - next time just add the FO somewhere in there...

Yeah it was poorly worded. There's a first time for everything...

 

[KJ Dangler]

While I appreciate your position; the team will not live or die based on the perception that the team will lose with C-Mac and win with Korp. The team will not fold, will not leave the city.

Possible cap concerns moving forward are relevant as are other things I posted. They illustrate the differences between fans and actually being part of the front office. They will be talked about in-depth and there will be a strategy on how to handle it. They will do what they think is best for the team - next year and beyond. They don't have the luxury of simply looking at next season. We aren't a team with an aging core that might only have one to two chances to win the Cup before a rebuild. This is a young team that they think are building to something. There is no urgency to have Korp on the team next season from the perspective; certainly not to the level we're projecting on the forums.

We kind of pretend like the opening night roster is what it would be later in the season. As I said Korp is a simple phone call away. You have options with Korp; less with the others we have. That gives you some flexibility. If Korp struggled next season, what are your options then? Call up Forseberg who really hasn't done much at this level? No, you'd probably end up making a trade giving up an asset and end up right back where you are now.

Peace.

I agree, there's certainly no reason to rush Korpi, all I'm saying is that Torts needs to play the best players period next year , and not worry about all this bs . As of right now, I honestly think Korpi is the more consistent goalie, and gives us the best chance to win on a daily basis . And when I say that , I'm considering a healthy Bob . Now, maybe Bob comes back, stays healthy , and doesn't let in all the soft goals he did this year with our improved defense . I think what we are missing in Torts point of view, he feels that Korpi can push Bob for the starting job. Actual competition that will make bob have to get better to keep his job. We've never really had that dynamic before.

 

[blahblah]

I agree, there's certainly no reason to rush Korpi, all I'm saying is that Torts needs to play the best players period next year , and not worry about all this bs .

BS eh? Yeah, I'm sure the FO views analysis and planning as BS.

Real competition with your 7.5 million dollar goalie? There are many things that this team needs, but it can never be said that Bob slacks and needs to be looking over his shoulder to get the most out of him. It's kind of funny because it's like we want a goalie controversy.

 

[Cowumbus]

Just give me the two goalies that give us the greatest chance at winning. If cap problems come along we will deal with it later. I am tired of not making the playoffs, or being out of the race by Christmas. I don't care who is in net, it just better be the two goalies you think can win the most games. Winning is what matters.

 

[Jackets Woodchuck]

If Bob stays healthy next season (bear with me, here) then Joonas needs to stay in Cleveland and start 55 games. Let C-Mac play out the last year of his contract and punt this issue to 2017.

Isn't Merzlikins going to be in Cleveland next year? I'm assuming he'd get more than 21 starts.

 

[KJ Dangler]

BS eh? Yeah, I'm sure the FO views analysis and planning as BS.

Real competition with your 7.5 million dollar goalie? There are many things that this team needs, but it can never be said that Bob slacks and needs to be looking over his shoulder to get the most out of him. It's kind of funny because it's like we want a goalie controversy.

Good organizations want competition, and pushing to get the best out of their players. They shouldnt worry about players feelings. I never said Bob slacks, but hes certainly been very inconsistent, and let in many soft goals since he was a vezina canidate. Are you ok with Clarkson getting first line minutes due to the salary we have to pay him ? Or do you want the best players playing ? The way I look at it, I'm glad Torts seems to be commited to giving Bob a shot to be the man, and keep Korpi here to play regularly as well. After some time, if Korpi continues to be this good, you now have the ability to move Bob, and his huge cap hit, and get a great asset in return as well.

 

[theD86]

If Bob stays healthy next season (bear with me, here) then Joonas needs to stay in Cleveland and start 55 games. Let C-Mac play out the last year of his contract and punt this issue to 2017.

Porty said 2 weeks ago Korpi is NOT going back to Erie. He's proven his worth. I think Mac is gone.

 

[blahblah]

Are you ok with Clarkson getting first line minutes due to the salary we have to pay him ? Or do you want the best players playing ?

With all due respect that is about the worst analogy I have ever seen in my life. I really can't take this conversation seriously anymore.

I've pretty much said my peace. I'll just leave with this. Korp would be a simple phone call away. The people around here make it sound like we would have to move mountains to get him up here.

And out.