biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 26,246
- 11,353
It does because Niemi has one year left. Then you just keep 3 goalies for this one year
Keeping 3 goalies for a year is not a solution to the 3-goalie-problem.
It does because Niemi has one year left. Then you just keep 3 goalies for this one year
We just signed Marco Sturm before dumping him too.
Between our surplus and the Sharks lack of goaltenders, we should be able to make a deal. Miller wants to play in Cali.
And it's a good thing Piarre McGuire didn't get the pens job because he would scoop him on waivers any chance he got. He called the Markstrom throw in, grand larceny
We just signed Marco Sturm before dumping him too.
Between our surplus and the Sharks lack of goaltenders, we should be able to make a deal. Miller wants to play in Cali.
And it's a good thing Piarre McGuire didn't get the pens job because he would scoop him on waivers any chance he got. He called the Markstrom throw in, grand larceny
There are a few teams that are thin in goal and have no prospects that are NHL ready. Philadelphia & Islanders are 2 teams that lack goaltending depth and could use an upgrade in the #2 spot.
So you fix our surplus of goalies by....having the same amount of goalies. That fixes nothing! Markstrom wants out now!
Probably a 4th rounder, be nice to package him with Hansen to get a serviceable player or a decent young AHLer with potential.
Better than waiver wire returns.Getting a 4th for him is giving him away
Kinda sad to think in just over a year we traded 2 legit #1 goalies and one of the highest ranks goalie prospect. Gillis really made a big mess out of things.
Curious why you feel that way?Sorry to snip down your posts, I appreciate the detail, just wanted to focus in on the only point I may differ on: I take a top 10 pick in a decent draft any day for a goalie that isn't Patrick Roy, Dom Hasek, etc.
I imagine his value is off the charts, he was the centre piece in the Luongo deal.
A 1st in 2015 and a top prospect?
People were actually advocating trading Lack instead after the Miller signing, as if Markstrom made him redundant.No kidding.
What ridiculous hype for an obscure throwaway project from the very beginning. I wont miss that part of it.
I'd rather have Schneider and Lack in net right now then having to spend $6mill/yr on Miller and getting Horvat in return. It's not even close IMO. Schneider just provides so much more value.
Curious why you feel that way?
When we had Luongo in his prime, I sure as hell wouldn't have traded him for a #9 pick. You're saying you would have?
People were actually advocating trading Lack instead after the Miller signing, as if Markstrom made him redundant.
Pretty ridiciulous.
Finally something that puts to rest all the panic about Lack being the one who will be traded.
I understand that, but I don't understand why this would make it beneficial to go out of your way to trade a goalie away for a guy who has similar/better value according to the market but less on-ice value. I don't see the logic there.The trade market for goalies is very soft and has been for a number of years. Teams simply won't give up a lot for one.
Getting a 4th for him is giving him away
I understand that, but I don't understand why this would make it beneficial to go out of your way to trade a goalie away for a guy who has similar/better value according to the market but less on-ice value. I don't see the logic there.
If anything, the market functioning that way tells me that if you have a great goalie, whatever you do, don't trade him. Even if you get better return than the market dictates, you're probably still getting a lesser on-ice asset.
Game 8. Oh Farhan.
How do you have such high value of this guy? He's a long term project that hasn't shown us anything. Not to mention we have another guy thats already farther along than he is by a mile. I say trade him for a pick and move on with our lives. I have zero attachment to the guy. We have no time to work on a project here right now.