Confirmed Signing with Link: [MIN] Alex Stalock extends with the Wild (3 years, $785K AAV)

[Yakupov64]

Koskinen is actually pretty good but yeah, I get your point.

I remember thinking the same exact thing about jori lehtera

 

[KevinRedkey]

Very unusual to see an older backup get 3yrs, but it's good for the Wild IMO.
I assume Stalock wanted the guaranteed money (1-way) rather than gambling later on.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

Because in 2 summers, when the expansion draft happens, this guarantees us having a goalie that's eligible for exposure without threat of losing Kahkonen or Dubnyk.

You are suggesting that the Wild would be unable to sign a back up next year or the year after to expose? Pretty odd imo

 

[Znith]

Very unusual to see an older backup get 3yrs, but it's good for the Wild IMO.
I assume Stalock wanted the guaranteed money (1-way) rather than gambling later on.

Yeah, if you're resigned to the fact of never being a starter, take the guaranteed money. A backup's life is extremely volatile

 

[Gainesvillain]

Wow, great deal for the Wild. As a backup, Stalock's better than most.

 

[KingPuckChoo]

this is a solid steal at $785k for an above avg backup

that's how you create capspace

 

[Wabit]

You are suggesting that the Wild would be unable to sign a back up next year or the year after to expose? Pretty odd imo

They are comfortable with what they have in Stalock and the price they have him at. Plus they can still shop for other goalies and send Stalock to the AHL without taking a cap hit.

Come next year and the year after there will be a few backups getting overpayed because they have the leverage.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

They are comfortable with what they have in Stalock and the price they have him at. Plus they can still shop for other goalies and send Stalock to the AHL without taking a cap hit.

Come next year and the year after there will be a few backups getting overpayed because they have the leverage.

That wasnt the argument though

 

[Wabit]

That wasnt the argument though

Could they yes, but if they are content to take care of it now, why bother?

 

[PAZ]

Stalock is the type of goalie that could be out of the NHL in any year. Makes sense for both parties IMO.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

I was wondering how a Stalock thread could hit 3 pages and was really expecting more jelly of the month jokes. Kinda disappointed.

 

[ref19]

Stalock is the type of goalie that could be out of the NHL in any year. Makes sense for both parties IMO.

I mean he’s as solid as they come for backups

 

[rynryn]

not sure why anyone has a big problem with this.

 

[Vitto79]

contract can get buried off the cap if he stinks.............so low risk and he took the money to stay in the league or atleast get paid

 

[2Pair]

I mean he’s as solid as they come for backups

In what way is he solid?

 

[rynryn]

it's a devil you know, we have a tender signed for the expansion rules, i'm pretty sure teammates like him. why no? Not your money. he can get buried if they want.

 

[2Pair]

it's a devil you know, we have a tender signed for the expansion rules, i'm pretty sure teammates like him. why no? Not your money. he can get buried if they want.

Those are all fine reasons why nobody needs to really hate this deal. Can you come up with any reasons to like it?

It's cool when your 13th forward is friends with everybody and "great in the room" but a backup goalie has to actually win you some games.

 

[rynryn]

Because you can "probably" all you want, but backups are backups because they generally aren't good enough to start. thus the "devil you know" part; stalock has been here long enough for bruce to have a better guess as to how he's feeling than he would an unfamiliar goalie. not by itself a reason not to try something else but with everything else there's no real reason to switch it up IMO. Don't have to love it--i can't think of any backup signing i'd "love".

 

[2Pair]

Because you can "probably" all you want, but backups are backups because they generally aren't good enough to start. thus the "devil you know" part; stalock has been here long enough for bruce to have a better guess as to how he's feeling than he would an unfamiliar goalie. not by itself a reason not to try something else but with everything else there's no real reason to switch it up IMO. Don't have to love it--i can't think of any backup signing i'd "love".

Makes zero sense

 

[rynryn]

Makes zero sense

That makes no sense? How often does he (bruce) say something like "I could tell in practice so and so wasn't going to have a good game"? One backup at that price point will be roughly as good as another unless you strike it rich somehow. I guess you can hate the re-signing if you want but I really don't see why. He's cheap, he's okay, he's familiar, he's signed for long enough to be eligible for expansion and not much longer. I honestly don't really care one way or the other. he's clearly not "goalie of the future" and anyone we sign to that spot wouldn't be either. He has as much chance as winning games as most backups.

 

[rynryn]

double

 

[2Pair]

That makes no sense? How often does he (bruce) say something like "I could tell in practice so and so wasn't going to have a good game"? One backup at that price point will be roughly as good as another unless you strike it rich somehow. I guess you can hate the re-signing if you want but I really don't see why. He's cheap, he's okay, he's familiar, he's signed for long enough to be eligible for expansion and not much longer. I honestly don't really care one way or the other. he's clearly not "goalie of the future" and anyone we sign to that spot wouldn't be either. He has as much chance as winning games as most backups.

Assuming all backups are terrible and just re-signing the terrible goalie you have because you already know he's terrible? That's your logic? I'm on board with your opinion that this isn't all that big of a deal in the grand scheme, but I certainly hope that Fenton puts a little more effort than that into player evals.

 

[rynryn]

Assuming all backups are terrible and just re-signing the terrible goalie you have because you already know he's terrible? That's your logic? I'm on board with your opinion that this isn't all that big of a deal in the grand scheme, but I certainly hope that Fenton puts a little more effort than that into player evals.

not assuming all backups are terrible. assuming all backups (available) are going to be roughly equal (ie backup quality)--i'm also assuming they have assessed what is out there and what's available and nothing stands out as markedly better right now.

I have no idea how you pulled the idea that i think all backups are terrible and might as well just sign the one we have without looking at anyone else out of that. We're not in the market for a 1B kind of guy to push Dubnyk so the field is what it is.