Confirmed with Link: Oilers sign Mikko Koskinen

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drivesaitl

Finding Hyman
Oct 8, 2017
46,083
56,565
Canuck hunting
Besides our pathetic special teams our goaltending was terrible last year.

Koskinen could be our savior if Talbot plays like last year again.

Whats the chance of Talbot struggling this season? I think he has a good season. We'll see about Koskinen, I have my doubts he will be much better than what we've had as backups.

The problems last season went far beyond goaltending. That we had fantastic goaltending the year before disguised a lot of the issues in this lineup.
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,395
4,606
I honestly rather would have just kept Montoya as the back up, passed on Koskinen, told Gryba to pound sand.

That saves about 2 million in cap space ... more than enough to sign Nurse long term, but we're basically forced into a bridge deal that could bite us in the ass in two years so we can take a chance on a KHL goalie that has 4 total NHL games in experience and because Chia wanted to be nice to Eric Gryba after signing him to an ill advised contract in the first place.

This Koskinen guy better be damn good, because there are real consequences and potential problems that could arise down the road because of that signing.

I think Benning and Caggiula also both got overpaid by a couple of hundred grand.

I understand the sentiment, but the bolded is crazy talk. If we'd had a decent backup last year, we'd have been in the playoffs.

Gryba I agree with you... and Pouliot the year before. Chia really seemed to dislike that guy (who was one of our better wingers the years prior).
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,395
4,606
Whats the chance of Talbot struggling this season? I think he has a good season. We'll see about Koskinen, I have my doubts he will be much better than what we've had as backups.

The problems last season went far beyond goaltending. That we had fantastic goaltending the year before disguised a lot of the issues in this lineup.

Your doubts are based on next to nothing... just like my hopes. :sarcasm: At least I have a frame of reference named Brossoit/Montoya... it's a pretty low baseline.
 

Soundwave

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
72,159
27,861
I understand the sentiment, but the bolded is crazy talk. If we'd had a decent backup last year, we'd have been in the playoffs.

Gryba I agree with you... and Pouliot the year before. Chia really seemed to dislike that guy (who was one of our better wingers the years prior).

No we wouldn't have, we would've needed Vezina tier back up to make playoffs.

There's a high chance Koskinen isn't even as good as Montoya. Dude has proven nothing, the KHL is a league where Ben Scrivens puts up solid numbers and Linus Omark has a PPG scoring rate comparable to what Sidney Crosby does in the NHL.
 

Drivesaitl

Finding Hyman
Oct 8, 2017
46,083
56,565
Canuck hunting
Your doubts are based on next to nothing... just like my hopes. :sarcasm: At least I have a frame of reference named Brossoit/Montoya... it's a pretty low baseline.

Its at least an NHL baseline. Myself I think Koskinen is Nilsson all over again. Not meaning any compliment with that.


Be glad to be wrong but I don't like what I see in his game.
 

Cypress

Registered User
Mar 4, 2018
571
341
I wouldn't be surprised if Koskinen is bad either, but all we really need from him is to give Talbot some motivation to earn his starting role instead of knowing he's slotted in as the starter for 70 games basically no matter what.
 

Mr Positive

Cap Crunch Incoming
Nov 20, 2013
36,081
16,519
No we wouldn't have, we would've needed Vezina tier back up to make playoffs.

There's a high chance Koskinen isn't even as good as Montoya. Dude has proven nothing, the KHL is a league where Ben Scrivens puts up solid numbers and Linus Omark has a PPG scoring rate comparable to what Sidney Crosby does in the NHL.
well, in making a lineup it is all about different types of gambles. I think the point of getting someone like Koskinen instead of established NHL goalies such as Lehtonen and Niemi is that those NHL goalies are established to not be starter material anymore. Koskinen has so much unknown about him, so sure his low end isn't established yet, so he could be horrible, but his ceiling isn't established either. Anyone who has lingering doubts about Talbot should love this signing because Chia got someone who might actually challenge Talbot to be our #1. If Koskinen sucks, we have Montoya ready to go. It's a 1 year deal with no long term risk

Also, it appears to be a smart gamble. It was not based on stat watching, like that goalie Colorado signed, but by scouting. Posters here have made a good case that his game would translate to the NHL well, and his style seems to be where goaltending is going.

The downside is the cap hit. Right now we need to sign Nurse and it looks like that Koskinen money would be really useful right about now. However, goaltending is such a critical position, that Chia doing a smart experiment there has to be a good move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nabob and Cypress

Soundwave

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
72,159
27,861
well, in making a lineup it is all about different types of gambles. I think the point of getting someone like Koskinen instead of established NHL goalies such as Lehtonen and Niemi is that those NHL goalies are established to not be starter material anymore. Koskinen has so much unknown about him, so sure his low end isn't established yet, so he could be horrible, but his ceiling isn't established either. Anyone who has lingering doubts about Talbot should love this signing because Chia got someone who might actually challenge Talbot to be our #1. If Koskinen sucks, we have Montoya ready to go. It's a 1 year deal with no long term risk

Also, it appears to be a smart gamble. It was not based on stat watching, like that goalie Colorado signed, but by scouting. Posters here have made a good case that his game would translate to the NHL well, and his style seems to be where goaltending is going.

The downside is the cap hit. Right now we need to sign Nurse and it looks like that Koskinen money would be really useful right about now. However, goaltending is such a critical position, that Chia doing a smart experiment there has to be a good move.

I'm not really sold on this guy at all.

KHL is not a great league, the guy has 4 NHL games total experience.

Even if his KHL numbers were good for one 29 start season (last season) if you look more closely at his stats, his previous two years before that were nothing special.

So we're giving this guy a $2.5 mill contract (among the higher tier for NHL back ups) for one good 29 game KHL stretch and virtually no NHL experience.

Why should I trust Chia's "scouting" on this, he also thought Jonas Gustavsson and Broissoit would be servicable back ups and then spent a pick for no reason on Montoya.
 

Mr Positive

Cap Crunch Incoming
Nov 20, 2013
36,081
16,519
I'm not really sold on this guy at all.

KHL is not a great league, the guy has 4 NHL games total experience.

Even if his KHL numbers were good for one 29 start season (last season) if you look more closely at his stats, his previous two years before that were nothing special.

So we're giving this guy a $2.5 mill contract (among the higher tier for NHL back ups) for one good 29 game KHL stretch and virtually no NHL experience.

Why should I trust Chia's "scouting" on this, he also thought Jonas Gustavsson and Broissoit would be servicable back ups and then spent a pick for no reason on Montoya.
Chia also got Nilsson and Skinner though. Also, Brossoit was a prospect he inherited, and it would have been downright strange for Brossoit not to get a shot since the spot was there. All teams do it that way. As for Montoya, that's puzzling that you wouldn't want Chia to get an upgrade on Brossoit if you don't like Brossoit. Btw, Montoya was a mid season add, and I'd think that the scouting on Koskinen would have been more thorough because it didn't come out of nowhere or was time restricted. I don't even think Montoya is a bad back up. His stats weren't great, but not bad either, and a lot of players had slumping stats last season. It was just a season from hell really.

But if you really don't like Chia going after all these lesser talents who could only be back ups, then why not take a chance on an outsider like Koskinen? Would it have been better to get a washed up goalie as FA? Pay big assets for Grubauer? I truly don't know. I will say that imo Koskinen is overpaid, but who really knows all the factors involved? He might have had a lot of teams after him.
 

Spawn

Something in the water
Feb 20, 2006
43,655
15,137
Edmonton
Chia also got Nilsson and Skinner though. Also, Brossoit was a prospect he inherited, and it would have been downright strange for Brossoit not to get a shot since the spot was there. All teams do it that way. As for Montoya, that's puzzling that you wouldn't want Chia to get an upgrade on Brossoit if you don't like Brossoit. Btw, Montoya was a mid season add, and I'd think that the scouting on Koskinen would have been more thorough because it didn't come out of nowhere or was time restricted. I don't even think Montoya is a bad back up. His stats weren't great, but not bad either, and a lot of players had slumping stats last season. It was just a season from hell really.

But if you really don't like Chia going after all these lesser talents who could only be back ups, then why not take a chance on an outsider like Koskinen? Would it have been better to get a washed up goalie as FA? Pay big assets for Grubauer? I truly don't know. I will say that imo Koskinen is overpaid, but who really knows all the factors involved? He might have had a lot of teams after him.

Anders Nilsson posted a .901 save percentage here before being traded for a 5th rounder.

Hardly a "win" in Chia's books.

And Skinner is nothing at this point. A mid tier goalie prospect that is years away if he ever makes it. The back-up position is one spot that there is absolutely no defense to be made for Chia. He screwed it up all three years here. It's entirely reasonable to be highly skeptical of this add also.
 

Mr Positive

Cap Crunch Incoming
Nov 20, 2013
36,081
16,519
Anders Nilsson posted a .901 save percentage here before being traded for a 5th rounder.

Hardly a "win" in Chia's books.

And Skinner is nothing at this point. A mid tier goalie prospect that is years away if he ever makes it. The back-up position is one spot that there is absolutely no defense to be made for Chia. He screwed it up all three years here. It's entirely reasonable to be highly skeptical of this add also.
Nilsson showed some promise here. We got Nilsson for a failed prospect btw, so the pick we got for him was a win. That was just a season from hell too btw, since that was the year that McDavid, RNH and Klefbom were injured. Nilsson did find success after we traded him, so imo that vindicates the choice to get him. He had the talent.

There's also no doubt at all that Skinner's stock has rised a ton since Chia got him. It was a smart addition that shows good scouting, even if the player never makes the big show. Keep making finds like that, and we will find gems.

But yes, you would be right to be skeptical of Koskinen. None of us know if he will be good or bad.

To me, I like this because Skinner and Koskinen are the only additions that Chia has made with purpose. All of his other goalie adds were either made with little scouting due to time restrictions (Gustavsson, Montoya, Nilsson) or was a common target like Talbot that needed no scouting. So, we get to see what kind of player we get when Chia has tons of time to carefully select a target, and imo him finding Skinner makes me optimistic that what he sees in Koskinen is for real.
 

McDaddy

ruh roh
Jan 22, 2017
534
141
Edmonton
Anders Nilsson posted a .901 save percentage here before being traded for a 5th rounder.

Hardly a "win" in Chia's books.

And Skinner is nothing at this point. A mid tier goalie prospect that is years away if he ever makes it. The back-up position is one spot that there is absolutely no defense to be made for Chia. He screwed it up all three years here. It's entirely reasonable to be highly skeptical of this add also.
You really think Skinner is nothing? Sheesh, he's bound to be our starter, after flanking Talbot in 3 years. Go watch the WHL playoffs and the mem. cup run lol.
 

Tobias Kahun

Registered User
Oct 3, 2017
42,413
51,669
You really think Skinner is nothing? Sheesh, he's bound to be our starter, after flanking Talbot in 3 years. Go watch the WHL playoffs and the mem. cup run lol.
Little early to be saying that, Brossoit put up very good numbers in the WHL aswell in his D+1 and D+2 years.

Not saying Brossoit was as good of a prospect as Skinner, but goalies are such a crap shoot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDaddy and Aerrol

Spawn

Something in the water
Feb 20, 2006
43,655
15,137
Edmonton
You really think Skinner is nothing? Sheesh, he's bound to be our starter, after flanking Talbot in 3 years. Go watch the WHL playoffs and the mem. cup run lol.
Take a look at Laurent Brossoit's WHL playoffs and mem cup runs...

Yes, Skinner is a nothing player at this point. Maybe he'll work out. Maybe he wont. Odds are against him. Chiarelly certainly doesn't get some big check next to his name for a long shot goalie prospect, no matter how good a 20 game stretch he had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDaddy and Aerrol

Spawn

Something in the water
Feb 20, 2006
43,655
15,137
Edmonton
Nilsson showed some promise here. We got Nilsson for a failed prospect btw, so the pick we got for him was a win. That was just a season from hell too btw, since that was the year that McDavid, RNH and Klefbom were injured. Nilsson did find success after we traded him, so imo that vindicates the choice to get him. He had the talent.

There's also no doubt at all that Skinner's stock has rised a ton since Chia got him. It was a smart addition that shows good scouting, even if the player never makes the big show. Keep making finds like that, and we will find gems.

But yes, you would be right to be skeptical of Koskinen. None of us know if he will be good or bad.

To me, I like this because Skinner and Koskinen are the only additions that Chia has made with purpose. All of his other goalie adds were either made with little scouting due to time restrictions (Gustavsson, Montoya, Nilsson) or was a common target like Talbot that needed no scouting. So, we get to see what kind of player we get when Chia has tons of time to carefully select a target, and imo him finding Skinner makes me optimistic that what he sees in Koskinen is for real.
Man what does this paragraph even mean.

Time restraints prevented him from scouting these guys?

Nilsson was a goalie from the KHL just the same as Koskinen.

Gustavsson and Montoya had been in the league for years.

You're trying to put lipstick on a pig.
 

Mr Positive

Cap Crunch Incoming
Nov 20, 2013
36,081
16,519
Man what does this paragraph even mean.

Time restraints prevented him from scouting these guys?

Nilsson was a goalie from the KHL just the same as Koskinen.

Gustavsson and Montoya had been in the league for years.

You're trying to put lipstick on a pig.
Chia just got here when he got Nilsson. There's no way he could have known enough about the player or team to really judge the fit. Also, just having goalies in the league for years doesn't mean they are scouted. The only thing you get is their stats, and for backups if you have only been looking for a month or two your scouting will be limited. And besides, guys like Gustavsson and Montoya were just common back up type additions. They hardly carry the GM's stamp.

Thats what I mean when I say that Koskinen was added with purpose while others were not. This add is the first pro goalie he's added where he has truly stuck his neck out on someone. The rest were the kind of choices any GM would have made.
 

Spawn

Something in the water
Feb 20, 2006
43,655
15,137
Edmonton
Chia just got here when he got Nilsson. There's no way he could have known enough about the player or team to really judge the fit. Also, just having goalies in the league for years doesn't mean they are scouted. The only thing you get is their stats, and for backups if you have only been looking for a month or two your scouting will be limited. And besides, guys like Gustavsson and Montoya were just common back up type additions. They hardly carry the GM's stamp.

Thats what I mean when I say that Koskinen was added with purpose while others were not. This add is the first pro goalie he's added where he has truly stuck his neck out on someone. The rest were the kind of choices any GM would have made.

You're going to pretty astounding lengths to justify garbage management.
 

Mr Positive

Cap Crunch Incoming
Nov 20, 2013
36,081
16,519
You're going to pretty astounding lengths to justify garbage management.
you are interpreting what you want to from what I wrote.

First off, I don't give Chia full credit for Nilsson, even though he was decent as a back up, we turned him into an asset for nothing, and he did show that he was talented elsewhere so it's not like he was a bomb like Gustavsson. Second, I don't give him full credit for getting Talbot, who was a big reason we made the playoffs. I consider both these moves to be simple moves that didn't use much effort to do, although with Talbot I think he got good value. Third, nowhere did I say that Koskinen will be a great goalie, and I even say we paid too much for him. I just like the move because it was made with purpose... so you could fully agree with me all while bashing Chia as hard as you want. If you believe that Chia is horrible, and that Koskinen was a move made with Chia's signature all over it, then that is reason to believe that Koskinen will be horrible. So... where is the conflict here? Do you believe that getting Gustavsson and Montoya were just such horrid gambles that they can't be forgiven or something?
 

Louis Cypher

Boys are back in town
Jun 11, 2007
3,759
3,075
Whats the chance of Talbot struggling this season? I think he has a good season. We'll see about Koskinen, I have my doubts he will be much better than what we've had as backups.

The problems last season went far beyond goaltending. That we had fantastic goaltending the year before disguised a lot of the issues in this lineup.

True about disguising our problems year before but if Talbot plays like crap or gets hurt this year our season is done if we stood pat with Montoya.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cypress

Louis Cypher

Boys are back in town
Jun 11, 2007
3,759
3,075
Putting our back up hopes in the hands of a 30 year old goalie with 4 NHL GP (and paying a premium for it to boot) is asking for trouble.

He's got to be better than Montoya and Brassoit.

Although I have a bad feeling Brassoit will do well in Winnipeg and we will look dumb for dumping him.
 

oXo Cube

Power Play Merchant
Nov 4, 2008
10,892
10,826
In your closet
I'm willing to give Koskinen a chance to prove he is worth it.

Problem is the bar is high because at 2.5M he will need to be the best backup in the NHL to be worth it.
 

Digger12

Gold Fever
Feb 27, 2002
18,313
990
Back o' beyond
He's got to be better than Montoya and Brassoit.

Although I have a bad feeling Brassoit will do well in Winnipeg and we will look dumb for dumping him.

I don't blame the team for moving on from Brossoit. Over his 5 years with the org he was only tracking to be a good (but not great) AHL goalie and in his one big audition to shore the netminding last year when the team really needed someone to make a save, his .883 sv% did nothing to inspire confidence from his teammates and his mental toughness was very questionable...as soon as one bad goal went in on him he would just fall apart.

He talked a good game, but that was about it.

That said, goalies are voodoo and you never know which nondescript goalie will find lightning in a bottle and turn himself into an NHL star...the big difference between the goalie position and every other positional player on a team is that the margin of error between mediocrity and stardom is so slim. The difference between an .900 and .920 sv% is less than 1 save per game if you face 30 shots. Compare that to a forward or dman who could make numerous mistakes in a game and it wouldn't end up costing the team.

LB couldn't get rid of that 1 mistake per game, and the team has other goalie prospects looking for that precious AHL icetime. You can't hold onto guys forever, they have their brief window to make their mark and they'd damn well better not screw it up. He failed.

If he becomes another Dubnyk, good on him but I won't blame the Oilers for it. Sometimes players just need to get to a 2nd or 3rd team before it all clicks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aerrol

Drivesaitl

Finding Hyman
Oct 8, 2017
46,083
56,565
Canuck hunting
I don't blame the team for moving on from Brossoit. Over his 5 years with the org he was only tracking to be a good (but not great) AHL goalie and in his one big audition to shore the netminding last year when the team really needed someone to make a save, his .883 sv% did nothing to inspire confidence from his teammates and his mental toughness was very questionable...as soon as one bad goal went in on him he would just fall apart.

He talked a good game, but that was about it.

That said, goalies are voodoo and you never know which nondescript goalie will find lightning in a bottle and turn himself into an NHL star...the big difference between the goalie position and every other positional player on a team is that the margin of error between mediocrity and stardom is so slim. The difference between an .900 and .920 sv% is less than 1 save per game if you face 30 shots. Compare that to a forward or dman who could make numerous mistakes in a game and it wouldn't end up costing the team.

LB couldn't get rid of that 1 mistake per game, and the team has other goalie prospects looking for that precious AHL icetime. You can't hold onto guys forever, they have their brief window to make their mark and they'd damn well better not screw it up. He failed.

If he becomes another Dubnyk, good on him but I won't blame the Oilers for it. Sometimes players just need to get to a 2nd or 3rd team before it all clicks.
Certainly this is commonly thought now but I don't know that the right parameters for accessing goalies are all there. Its a very complicated position, confounded by multiple styles existing. Even within goalies and goalie coaching circles its a confusing craft and not without some advice that starts to resemble superstition. Indeed its a position that selects for superstition because some shots you just won't save without some luck. So that goalies are told such things as don't open your body up, keep arm tightly against side, seal post etc, to the degree that they become rigid cardboard cutouts (Dubnyk here) and stop making reaction stops and glove stops for fear of opening up their form.

No position in the sports world is subject to more happenchance than goaltending. 2-3 deflections and puck goes in? better to just forget about it, but it gets in heads. Make 6 stops in a row on pucks you know you didn't see, you expect luck is going to run out..The goalie position basically creates superstition, creates subjective mindsets, and strategems that arguably counter each other. I think goalies getting hot is a result of finding the right form that works for them for awhile and combined with confidence that the puck is hitting them. Its classic "In the zone" thinking. What it also does is being hot stops their being too much processing. Goalies that are hot make innate stops. They track puck well, it becomes a basketball, and they see everything. They routinely make stops that at other times would feel like difficult stops. They become fearless, for awhile. It stops as soon as it starts.


This is why in goalie analysis I don't look at just the stats. I like to look at form. how the goalie plays, their technique. Not what is working in it but what can work in it. Do they seal post well, can they handle puck well. What does glove hand reaction look like, what does mechanical mobility across crease look like. When moving across how well do they seal 5 hole and then seal near post?

I think coaching should be about a certain type of mechanics like above. But all too often I feel that goalie coaching can also counter what the goalie was good at in the first place. If I'm in the business of speaking with goalies I would have them get back to their baseline when struggling. Even get them to keep diaries and video of when they are doing well. To look at what has changed.

Goaltending looks like voodoo because I think there is still lots to substantiate in the position and lots that is confusion or even superstitious to those even involved. Sorry for writing a book here. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aerrol and Digger12
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad