Out of Town Thread Part XIII

[WeThreeKings]

Yep, every good team that didn't win the cup missed their chance because of goaltending, but Price, the greatest goaltender of all time can't be expected to win the cup because of the team in front of him.

And around and around we go.

But the point is that you can't completely write off the value of one position because Antti Niemi won the cup once.. because then I can point to the Penguins winning the cup without Letang and riding Ron Hainsey and f***ing Justin Schultz (acquired for peanuts) to say, why get a good defenseman, when you can get a guy like Schultz, for pennies and win the cup.

Or what about centers, the Hawks won with Handzus as a #2C... so who cares about C depth when the Hawks won with Handzus as a 2 who was acquired for.. peanuts.

It's just bad logic to use an once in awhile occasion to devalue a position. Hockey is a team sport, there's multiple constitutions of line ups that CAN win, but you need elite talent and you need more of it, firing in the play-offs, than your opponent to win.. and elite talent scoring is more likely when your goaltending sucks, but no one can make or win by themselves even Connor McDavid, the best player in the world, at C, can't make the Oilers into a play-off team, let alone a contender.. that doesn't devalue the center position.

 

[NotProkofievian]

If the Habs make it, Carey Price will likely be in the top ten for the Hart this year. He's been behind a trainwreck of a D for much of the year. .914 doesn't bother me at all with the team he's on.

As for being opportunistic... sure, I'm all for that. But you don't deal off a franchise goalie for a guy coming off an injury and a bad year. You fix what's broken not what's working.

Yeah, you do, and I think I've been vindicated on this point.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Yeah, you do, and I think I've been vindicated on this point.

You're free to make reference to it. But nobody in their right mind would have done what you suggested. The only way getting rid of Price would have made sense is a full on rebuild and that's a totally different conversation. And in that case, I wouldn't have gone after Bishop either because I'd want to bottomfeed.

Totally agree on being opportunistic though. Shaw's value is higher than it should be. Deal him.

 

[Lshap]

Niemi won a Cup with Chicago in 2010, but let's not forget the goalie at the other end of the ice was Michael Leighton. If you ever need a living example of the saying, "In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king"...

 

[NotProkofievian]

But the point is that you can't completely write off the value of one position because Antti Niemi won the cup once.. because then I can point to the Penguins winning the cup without Letang and riding Ron Hainsey and ****ing Justin Schultz (acquired for peanuts) to say, why get a good defenseman, when you can get a guy like Schultz, for pennies and win the cup.

Or what about centers, the Hawks won with Handzus as a #2C... so who cares about C depth when the Hawks won with Handzus as a 2 who was acquired for.. peanuts.

It's just bad logic to use an once in awhile occasion to devalue a position. Hockey is a team sport, there's multiple constitutions of line ups that CAN win, but you need elite talent and you need more of it, firing in the play-offs, than your opponent to win.. and elite talent scoring is more likely when your goaltending sucks, but no one can make or win by themselves even Connor McDavid, the best player in the world, at C, can't make the Oilers into a play-off team, let alone a contender.. that doesn't devalue the center position.

That's not my logic. My logic is that 0.915 goaltending can be had for a song and that's all you need, and by the way, that's all we're getting out of the thoroughbred at the moment. I'm just saying that it's going to be hilarious to me to watch you all squirm when an undesirable goaltender hoists the cup while our thoroughbred sits at home dusting his Hart.

Really getting our money's worth. I am so glad that we don't have more assets and a different starter in net. There's just no possible way anyone else could be 0.914 for us these days.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Niemi won a Cup with Chicago in 2010, but let's not forget the goalie at the other end of the ice was Michael Leighton. If you ever need a living example of the saying, "In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king"...

Flyers and Blues are really good examples of teams who could've won cups with better goaltending but the Senators to me are the most clear example. You put together a great team only to watch it get crushed because of a mediocre goalie. It doesn't get more depressing than that.

That's not my logic. My logic is that 0.915 goaltending can be had for a song and that's all you need, and by the way, that's all we're getting out of the thoroughbred at the moment. I'm just saying that it's going to be hilarious to me to watch you all squirm when an undesirable goaltender hoists the cup while our thoroughbred sits at home dusting his Hart.

Really getting our money's worth. I am so glad that we don't have more assets and a different starter in net. There's just no possible way anyone else could be 0.914 for us these days.

Nobody is going to squirm about anything. Nobody is saying you need Lundqvist to win a cup. You need a great TEAM to win a cup. If you don't have one, you won't win.

That doesn't mean it's a good idea to go into the playoffs with a scrub and hope for the best. To me it's mindbogglingly stupid to do this because all of the painstaking moves you've made to build your team can unravel with bad netminding. You can win with 'good enough' goaltending for sure if you can make up for it elsewhere, just like you can win with 'good enough' scoring if you can make it up on the back end.

The best player in the league can't make the playoffs right now...

 

[NotProkofievian]

You're free to make reference to it. But nobody in their right mind would have done what you suggested. The only way getting rid of Price would have made sense is a full on rebuild and that's a totally different conversation. And in that case, I wouldn't have gone after Bishop either because I'd want to bottomfeed.

There's this book by Richard Thaler called ''Misbehaving'' in which he describes being hired by an NFL team to make some recommendations for the NFL draft. He and his grad students came up with some interesting ideas and gave them to the Redskins (I think it was them) and on draft day he watched the Redskins do the exact opposite of what he recommended.

Point being that people in their ''right mind'' are often just a bunch of fearful ninnies, or convinced of their own bullshit.

To really get ahead, you have to be a little bit ''crazy'' and a little bit lucky, too. Nobody builds a cup winner doing the obvious things.

Totally agree on being opportunistic though. Shaw's value is higher than it should be. Deal him.

There's a lot of sell high candidates on this team. We don't have to trade all of them, but it would make me feel better if we at least started the process.

 

[Lshap]

Flyers and Blues are really good examples of teams who could've won cups with better goaltending but the Senators to me are the most clear example. You put together a great team only to watch it get crushed because of a mediocre goalie. It doesn't get more depressing than that.

I was actually gonna' keep typing about that exact thing...

Four years ago, hot goaltending from Andrew Hammond dragged Ottawa into the playoffs. But the moment he fizzled out, they were eliminated. He looked great during their stretch run, but didn't have the skill/strength for the long haul.

This year's playoffs will be very interesting from a goaltending perspective. St Louis, San Jose, and Calgary have great teams with extremely wonky goaltending. Can't see any getting too far with such unreliable guys in the net. In fact, the entire WC is a garage-sale of used goalie parts. The only two teams with any success in nets is Vegas and, further down, Rinne and Hellebuyck. Yeah, Rinne went to the SCF, but he's been declining and doesn't look great.

Whoever comes out of the West will likely be the best of a weak group of goalies. Right now, the Eastern Conference looks wayy better, thanks mostly to far superior goaltending.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

There's this book by Richard Thaler called ''Misbehaving'' in which he describes being hired by an NFL team to make some recommendations for the NFL draft. He and his grad students came up with some interesting ideas and gave them to the Redskins (I think it was them) and on draft day he watched the Redskins do the exact opposite of what he recommended.

Point being that people in their ''right mind'' are often just a bunch of fearful ninnies, or convinced of their own bull****.

To really get ahead, you have to be a little bit ''crazy'' and a little bit lucky, too. Nobody builds a cup winner doing the obvious things.

I'm okay with a gamble if it makes sense. Trading away a franchise player who's one year removed from the Hart so that I can hope that another goalie coming off injury and a bad year might pan out is not a smart gamble to take. This is especially true if you're just doing it for cap reasons. I don't mind paying Price 10 mil at all. He's been one of the most impactful players in the league over the years and I don't mind paying coin to players who perform. I'd much rather chintz out on the supporting cast than on a franchise goalie. The ten million dollar deal to Price doesn't kill you, the five million dollar deal to Alzner does.

What might've made sense would've been to unload Price and just start over. That at least makes some sense to me and at least we'd be picking a direction. But if you do that... why pick up Bishop? Go get Ben Scrivens instead and race to the bottom.

What makes zero sense is paying Price 10 mil and then letting two star players leave and getting an AHL D. Wtf is that?

There's a lot of sell high candidates on this team. We don't have to trade all of them, but it would make me feel better if we at least started the process.

And I'm totally fine with doing some of that. Shaw is at the top of the list as far as I'm concerned. Weber I'd be okay with but if you're doing it for futures then you have to trade Price as well. Our D is horrific as is. Price will drown without help back there so if you're dealing off Weber and going with an AHL D then it's a rebuild.

 

[Rapala]

Holtby got his act together last year and can perhaps find the same bubble this year. Murray proved it's possible with his two straight and he also can get hot who knows. The thing is once you've done it the pressure becomes more bearable the next time around. Jonathan Quick was another great example of a goaltender who could perform with the higher stakes in play.

 

[Lshap]

There's this book by Richard Thaler called ''Misbehaving'' in which he describes being hired by an NFL team to make some recommendations for the NFL draft. He and his grad students came up with some interesting ideas and gave them to the Redskins (I think it was them) and on draft day he watched the Redskins do the exact opposite of what he recommended.

Point being that people in their ''right mind'' are often just a bunch of fearful ninnies, or convinced of their own bull****.

To really get ahead, you have to be a little bit ''crazy'' and a little bit lucky, too. Nobody builds a cup winner doing the obvious things.

There's a lot of sell high candidates on this team. We don't have to trade all of them, but it would make me feel better if we at least started the process.

It would be interesting to find examples of GMs who won a Cup -- or at least came close -- thanks to off-the-map crazy moves that paid off. Kekalainen in Columbus would be this year's candidate, although right now it looks like plain ol' crazy.

Drawing a blank at the moment... most winning GMs seem to be of the same fearful ninny ilk who followed the beaten path and got lucky.

 

[NotProkofievian]

I'm okay with a gamble if it makes sense. Trading away a franchise player who's one year removed from the Hart so that I can hope that another goalie coming off injury and a bad year might pan out is not a smart gamble to take. This is especially true if you're just doing it for cap reasons. I don't mind paying Price 10 mil at all. He's been one of the most impactful players in the league over the years and I don't mind paying coin to players who perform. I'd much rather chintz out on the supporting cast than on a franchise goalie. The ten million dollar deal to Price doesn't kill you, the five million dollar deal to Alzner does.

What might've made sense would've been to unload Price and just start over. That at least makes some sense to me and at least we'd be picking a direction. But if you do that... why pick up Bishop? Go get Ben Scrivens instead and race to the bottom.

What makes zero sense is paying Price 10 mil and then letting two star players leave and getting an AHL D. Wtf is that?

You can sort of flip this argument on its head, though. You can't really have the argument that we absolutely need Price because he's a franchise goaltender and a performance guarantee, but then also have the argument that Bishop would stop you from tanking. That's all Price is doing currently, and nothing more. The difference is that we'd be sitting pretty with all the futures we'd have from Price.

Alternatively, if Bishop didn't work out who cares, we're tanking. In all situations we're further ahead. It's an arbitrage.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You can sort of flip this argument on its head, though. You can't really have the argument that we absolutely need Price because he's a franchise goaltender and a performance guarantee, but then also have the argument that Bishop would stop you from tanking. That's all Price is doing currently, and nothing more. The difference is that we'd be sitting pretty with all the futures we'd have from Price.

Alternatively, if Bishop didn't work out who cares, we're tanking. In all situations we're further ahead. It's an arbitrage.

I'm simply saying that if I want to tank I wouldn't go after Bishop who had shown he can win Vezinas when healthy. If I'm going to tank I'm going to do it deliberately. Just go with Scrivens and make sure you finish low.

 

[NotProkofievian]

It would be interesting to find examples of GMs who won a Cup -- or at least came close -- thanks to off-the-map crazy moves that paid off. Kekalainen in Columbus would be this year's candidate, although right now it looks like plain ol' crazy.

Drawing a blank at the moment... most winning GMs seem to be of the same fearful ninny ilk who followed the beaten path and got lucky.

Lord Kek is actually a pretty good example of someone being convinced by their own bullshit. I wonder if anyone in the CBJ brass asked Jarmo this pretty basic question: what would you rather have on June 30th, the rights to Artemi Panarin and Sergei Bobrovsky, or the assets that they would have returned on trade deadline day? Pretty simple answer to that question, IMO, and yet...

 

[Kimota]

Leafs losing 4-0 against Hawks in the first. It's like their wooping against Tampa has damaged them psychologically like the loss against the Leafs did to the Habs.

 

[David Suzuki]

We are too mentally fragile to compete, too many divas, not enough hearts.

the bottom line is the Leafs had a chance to rebound from a terrible loss, make a statement after an off-ice incident, and pull within 2 points of home ice. And they decided to play like garbage and get run out of the building. There's something wrong with that picture

There's not a single team in the East that I honestly think we can beat. Isles and Caps will run us over
Funny enough, Boston maybe one of the least physical team this year in the east

Holy ****, what the he'll is wrong with this team?

I've got some concerns about our mental fortitude and unwillingness to compete, I wonder if this coach is the right person to be coaching and leading this particular team as well

Tonight hasn't alleviated any of those worries thus far

The ******* look like they have quit, the whole bloody lot of them including the coaching staff

 

[japhi]

Yep, every good team that didn't win the cup missed their chance because of goaltending, but Price, the greatest goaltender of all time can't be expected to win the cup because of the team in front of him.

And around and around we go.

Who has ever called Price the greatest goalie of all time? Not sure many think he is even the greatest Hab, I bet most have him after Plante, Roy and Dryden. You are showing your hand here.

And this debate is silly. To win a Cup you either need a team of elite players, one of which might be a goalie. Or a great team that gets hot, usually led by a star goalie. Bruins the most recent example, a pretty good team that only has a Cup because of an elite HOF tender. Pens and Hawks, elite team with a decent goalie.

I don’t know of any examples of a mediocre goalie leading a mediocre team to a cup win. Maybe Carolina? Ward was a rookie and they got hot, not sure that is a model other teams should follow?

I do agree that decent goaltending can be had for cheap but standing up Bishop as the example of how easy good goaltending is to get is akin to arguing that first round picks don’t matter, we can just pull Kucherov’s in the late second round. Sure the Stars stole Bishop but there are 12 other teams that will hit the playoffs with concerns around goaltending. Great goaltending is in fact very hard to find.

 

[MarkovsKnee]

Damn. Toronto getting their asses kicked by Chicago following that TB ass kicking.

 

[googlymoogly]

Damn. Toronto getting their asses kicked by Chicago following that TB ass kicking.

They can score but they don't have a goalie.

 

[HabsWhiteKnightLOL]

Niemi won a Cup with Chicago in 2010, but let's not forget the goalie at the other end of the ice was Michael Leighton. If you ever need a living example of the saying, "In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king"...

hawks 2010 was stacked asf

 

[japhi]

They can score but they don't have a goalie.

No worries they can grab a top guy for a fourth. A guy like Bishop should be easy to wheel.

Very easy to get cup worthy goaltending, just see above in the thread.

 

[MarkovsKnee]

They can score but they don't have a goalie.

First 2 goals were terrible by Andersen. The 3rd goal was a bad turnover by Tavares and a great play by Kane. The 4th one was laughably bad D.

 

[MarkovsKnee]

5-0. Leafs D sucks. What was that about not needing Gardiner?

 

[Lshap]

hawks 2010 was stacked asf

That's true, the Hawks were stacked. Flyers were pretty stacked themselves. Ironically, both teams featured two of the worst starting goalies to ever appear in the SCF.