Miscellaneous NHL Discussion: Pre-Season Edition

[Hurricane28]

I read a stat on twitter that said 10% of players in the league are eligible for the Calder. Shows the youth movement even more

 

[Cyborg LeClair]

I read a stat on twitter that said 10% of players in the league are eligible for the Calder. Shows the youth movement even more

The last couple drafts have been loaded with talent. This is the next wave. Similar to the wave of talent that came in around 1980, 1990, 2003, and now teams have loaded up over the last couple years with NHL caliber prospects. Very exciting. These are kids who never had to use a wooden stick, always played with systems and traps. We're gonna see the players who can transcend those things. I think McDavid is built for this league right now with his speed and brain and he's gonna do things we didnt think possible a couple years ago

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

If worst came to worst and the Pens were in danger of losing Murray to Vegas because of MAF's NMC, I think they would buy out MAF.

Would Fleury ok being bought out?

He would have to approve a buyout would he not given his NMC?

 

[FLYguy3911]

Call me out for getting too ahead of myself, but I think this defense is going to be really good in a couple years and I would not invest long-term in one goalie. I believe once you get beyond the handful of truly elite goalies, the rest are pretty much products of the systems they are in. It's early, but look at Andersen going from that great blueline in Anaheim to Toronto. Look at how Emery performed in Chicago compared to how he performed here. Bryzgalov. Nightmare. You have a good blueline and a good structure in place, your goalie will look good. I think we are close to having that.

 

[Prongo]

Call me out for getting too ahead of myself, but I think this defense is going to be really good in a couple years and I would not invest long-term in one goalie. I believe once you get beyond the handful of truly elite goalies, the rest are pretty much products of the systems they are in. It's early, but look at Andersen going from that great blueline in Anaheim to Toronto. Look at how Emery performed in Chicago compared to how he performed here. Bryzgalov. Nightmare. You have a good blueline and a good structure in place, your goalie will look good. I think we are close to having that.

This was pretty much what I was trying to get at with my post.

Invest everywhere but try to keep the goalies on the low end.

 

[Psuhockey]

Call me out for getting too ahead of myself, but I think this defense is going to be really good in a couple years and I would not invest long-term in one goalie. I believe once you get beyond the handful of truly elite goalies, the rest are pretty much products of the systems they are in. It's early, but look at Andersen going from that great blueline in Anaheim to Toronto. Look at how Emery performed in Chicago compared to how he performed here. Bryzgalov. Nightmare. You have a good blueline and a good structure in place, your goalie will look good. I think we are close to having that.

I agree. Outside of the very top guys, it's a bad allocation of cap. I would rather pay another good defenseman big money than a goalie.

 

[PALE PWNR]

Precap there would be no question the Flyers should hold onto Mason or any other good player. However the salary cap has created a system where a GM has to take chances on younger cheaper players. That's just the reality. It would great if Hextall can get him on a two year deal to give the rookies more time but it's doubtful Mason would except that. So now do the Flyers spend big long term with extensions to Provorov and Konecny needed in two years?

Two years from now, Raffl, Read, Simmonds, Del Zotto, Streit, Schultz, will all have expired contracts, and Weise and Schenn will be on their last years of theirs. That's a lot of fluid cap space. Mason is someone we should be trying to fit at all costs IMO. And I think a 4-5 year deal for him is reasonable.

Edit: I appear to be in the vast minority on this and I really don't get it. Is 2010 so far removed from your minds at this point? We had two Top Pairings, and a ton of depth up front, and we STILL couldn't overcome the anchor in net.

 

[Rebels57]

Two years from now, Raffl, Read, Simmonds, Del Zotto, Streit, Schultz, will all have expired contracts, and Weise and Schenn will be on their last years of theirs. That's a lot of fluid cap space. Mason is someone we should be trying to fit at all costs IMO. And I think a 4-5 year deal for him is reasonable.

Edit: I appear to be in the vast minority on this and I really don't get it. Is 2010 so far removed from your minds at this point? We had two Top Pairings, and a ton of depth up front, and we STILL couldn't overcome the anchor in net.

I'm on the extend Mason train too, but it will depend on how he plays this season of course.

 

[Roo Mad Bro]

Call me out for getting too ahead of myself, but I think this defense is going to be really good in a couple years and I would not invest long-term in one goalie. I believe once you get beyond the handful of truly elite goalies, the rest are pretty much products of the systems they are in. It's early, but look at Andersen going from that great blueline in Anaheim to Toronto. Look at how Emery performed in Chicago compared to how he performed here. Bryzgalov. Nightmare. You have a good blueline and a good structure in place, your goalie will look good. I think we are close to having that.

Agreed. I'm wondering if that's the Flyers thought process as well by drafting/signing as many goalies as they have the past 2 years.

I really don't think Mason will be back.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Edit: I appear to be in the vast minority on this and I really don't get it. Is 2010 so far removed from your minds at this point? We had two Top Pairings, and a ton of depth up front, and we STILL couldn't overcome the anchor in net.

I just think there's a big difference between having nothing, or knowing we have second-rate goaltending (which has been the case so many times), and relying on prospects. Between Stolarz, Lyon, Sandstrom, Hart, and even Fedotov and Tomek, we should be able to come up with a frontline goaltender in a few years. We have never, ever had depth like this at the position. We might have to roll the dice on it, or we might choose to, so we can make the cap numbers work across the board. In saying that, I don't mean to suggest that I don't appreciate what Mason has done and is doing for us.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Would Fleury ok being bought out?

He would have to approve a buyout would he not given his NMC?

I don't think he'd have to waive anything to be bought out.

 

[FLYERSFAN18]

At this point I wouldn't want to pay more that 4.5 million a year to one netminder. You routinely see great goalies like Lundquist not play great in the playoffs while taking up 6 or 7 million against the cap. You really just need reliable, consistency goaltender with a great team in front of them. Having extra cap space not invested in goal will help build a better overall team

 

[Jgboys1]

This was pretty much what I was trying to get at with my post.

Invest everywhere but try to keep the goalies on the low end.

I like that philosophy. Spend as much as you can on very good team and just get a solid goalie that doesn't break the bank or our sallery cap.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

At this point I wouldn't want to pay more that 4.5 million a year to one netminder. You routinely see great goalies like Lundquist not play great in the playoffs while taking up 6 or 7 million against the cap. You really just need reliable, consistency goaltender with a great team in front of them. Having extra cap space not invested in goal will help build a better overall team

I don't disagree with your overarching point, that you don't need a Lundqvist to win the Cup, but I don't think that the bolded is true. Lundqvist has a career line in the playoffs of .921/2.28 with nine shutouts. Ben Bishop has an equally impressive line with a smaller sample size. Carey Price has a .912/2.62 line. Rask is .930/2.11. Rinne is .912/2.52. Holtby is .937/1.87. Crawford is right in that line, as is Schneider and Miller. The only higher paid guys with bad numbers are Bobrovsky and MAF. The rest of the high paid goalies are all pretty solid. There are certainly lower paid guys with better or similar numbers, and obviously the goal would be to have one of those guys, but I wouldn't characterize it as high paid goalies routinely not playing well. Any goalie can have a bad stretch at any time. Hank did not put up good numbers last year in the playoffs, but you give me a choice between Hank and a cheaper goalie that is "consistent," I'm taking Hank every day of the week.

 

[Appleyard]

At this point I wouldn't want to pay more that 4.5 million a year to one netminder. You routinely see great goalies like Lundquist not play great in the playoffs while taking up 6 or 7 million against the cap. You really just need reliable, consistency goaltender with a great team in front of them. Having extra cap space not invested in goal will help build a better overall team

In an ideal world... yeh... but these guys have agents and can look around the league.

If a team is not willing to pay $4.5m+ for a UFA eligable goalie they are not going to have a very good goalie!

Here is a list of actually legit, proven NHL starters who did not sign on a 'prove it'/bridge type deal as an RFA:

Lundqvist: $8.5m
Bobrovsky: $7.43m
Rinne: $7m
Rask: $7m
Price: $6.5m
Holtby: $6.1m
Crawford: $6m
Schneider: $6m
Miller: $6m
Bishop: $5.95m
Varmalov: $5.9m
Quick: $5.8m
Fleury: $5.75m
Smith: $5.67m
Luongo: $5.33m
Halak: $4.5m
Dubnyk: $4.33m
Anderson: $4.2m
Mason: $4.1m
Elliott: $2.5m

Elliott is pretty much the exception to the rule... and that is because people worried about him being a product of St. Louis D and system... especially with Allen playing well there too.

I mean... Mason's current deal was $4.1m and that was signed when he was an RFA. It was actually kind of a 'prove it' deal.

Guys like Murray, Mrazek, Jones & Allen would be on $5m+ if they were UFA's.

If you want a cheap, good goalie the only way to get one is draft and develop them... then sign them to a long bridge just before they hit their prime.

If Mason plays ~50 games this year and posts a ~.917+ sv% he will get $5m or more... and he will have every right to ask for that.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Agreed. I'm wondering if that's the Flyers thought process as well by drafting/signing as many goalies as they have the past 2 years.

I really don't think Mason will be back.

I really don't know what they are going to do. But they will choose one guy and let the other guy walk to LV/free agency and have Stolarz and Lyon battle for the backup.
it is a tough call because while both guys are good goaltenders they cannot be trusted to stay healthy and play enough games to really be trusted to be the clear cut #1

 

[BernieParent]

In an ideal world... yeh... but these guys have agents and can look around the league.

If a team is not willing to pay $4.5m+ for a UFA eligable goalie they are not going to have a very good goalie!

Here is a list of actually legit, proven NHL starters who did not sign on a 'prove it'/bridge type deal as an RFA:

Lundqvist: $8.5m
Bobrovsky: $7.43m
Rinne: $7m
Rask: $7m
Price: $6.5m
Holtby: $6.1m
Crawford: $6m
Schneider: $6m
Miller: $6m
Bishop: $5.95m
Varmalov: $5.9m
Quick: $5.8m
Fleury: $5.75m
Smith: $5.67m
Luongo: $5.33m
Halak: $4.5m
Dubnyk: $4.33m
Anderson: $4.2m
Mason: $4.1m
Elliott: $2.5m

Elliott is pretty much the exception to the rule... and that is because people worried about him being a product of St. Louis D and system... especially with Allen playing well there too.

I mean... Mason's current deal was $4.1m and that was signed when he was an RFA. It was actually kind of a 'prove it' deal.

Guys like Murray, Mrazek, Jones & Allen would be on $5m+ if they were UFA's.

If you want a cheap, good goalie the only way to get one is draft and develop them... then sign them to a long bridge just before they hit their prime.

If Mason plays ~50 games this year and posts a ~.917+ sv% he will get $5m or more... and he will have every right to ask for that.

I'd be okay with resigning Mason at $5-5.3 million but the length should be 3 years maximum.

 

[Appleyard]

I'd be okay with resigning Mason at $5-5.3 million but the length should be 3 years maximum.

I concur. I could *maybe* push it to 4... he will be 33 at the end of that... and:

Stolarz will be 27
Lyon will be 28
Sandström will be 24
Hart will be 22

But yeh... the shorter the better, and I think 3 would be the ideal.

 

[FLYguy3911]

I do wonder what the market is going to look like for UFA goalies this year. Not many spots open up each year and this year there is the expansion draft. Bishop is the big name expected to move. Fleury is going to move one way or another. Does a team desperate for a goalie opt to acquire a guy like that or do they go to the free agent market?

 

[PALE PWNR]

Tampa will have a very hard time moving Bishop I think.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Tampa will have a very hard time moving Bishop I think.

I think they will move Vasilievsky. Bishop, like you said is going to be hard to move and I don't think has the value. They're going to eat salad or trade him for peanuts. Vasilievsky on the other hand should fetch a king's ransom to a team with question marks in net or an aging netminder (Calgary? Dallas? Phoenix? Edmonton? Carolina? Ottawa?). There really are a lot of teams that could use the services of a Vasilievsky.

 

[Curufinwe]

Would Fleury ok being bought out?

He would have to approve a buyout would he not given his NMC?

NMCs don't prevent buyouts - see Umberger, RJ.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

They're not going to move Vasilievskiy.

 

[TCTC]

They got Bishop for Cory Conacher and a 4th round pick. So even if they have to trade him for peanuts it wouldn't be that much of a loss asset-wise.

I would never trade Vasilevskiy over Bishop. He's just too talented.

 

[FatTugboatFlahr]

They're not going to move Vasilievskiy.

Yes.