Out of Town Thread Part XIII

[Mrb1p]

No NHL team ever won the Cup with bad goaltending (you could argue Terry Sawchuk 1955, but whatever)

...But we've seen NHL teams win the Stanley Cup with bad or very mediocre (league-wise, of course) goaltenders. 2010 being a very obvious case.

Okayyyyy

 

[Mrb1p]

2010 had both mediocre goalies in Philly and Hawks.
Oilers in 06
Detroit with Osgood ?
Philly in 97?

I mean, it's certainly not impossible (Like it's not impossible to make it without a 1D or a 1C) but it's not a good plan at all.

 

[Wats]

Who says Vegas and Boston have great Offense?
The bruins have allowed the least amount of goals
The bruins are very top heavy.
The Knights went and got Stone for a reason
Thx for making my point.
The habs are middle of the pack in offence
Also. The knights aren’t a better team than the habs this year.

Your point is basically sorting league by goals for to determine quality of offense.

 

[MXD]

Okayyyyy

There's a difference between being a bad goaltender and bad goaltending. Niemi played pretty well in 2010. That didn't make him a good goaltender.

 

[Mrb1p]

There's a difference between being a bad goaltender and bad goaltending. Niemi played pretty well in 2010. That didn't make him a good goaltender.

Alright, good point.

But even the "bad goaltender having a good stretch" is pretty rare in itself.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Honestly though, why would you roll the dice?

You spend all this time building a great team only to have your goalie take you out. Look at the Senators with Patrick Lalime. They should've won multiple cups.

Because you're always rolling the dice, and most of the dice are basically the same.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Because you're always rolling the dice, and most of the dice are basically the same.

Right... just like John Druce.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Right... just like John Druce.

Or like Ben Bishop?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Or like Ben Bishop?

Ben Bishop is a solid goalie, he's not Patrick Lalime.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Ben Bishop is a solid goalie, he's not Patrick Lalime.

Sure, but he was available for a 4th.

 

[Zorba]

Your point is basically sorting league by goals for to determine quality of offense.

Your point is basically sorting league by goals for to determine quality of offense.

Um ya..
If the bruins and knights had a great offence they’d be scoring at a leafs rate.
Of course you go by goals for. You can’t say that the lowest scoring team has a good offence but plays a different style.
If you have offensive players you will score more goals, baskets, RBIs and touchdowns
It’s the way sports works.

 

[Zorba]

The Bruins have three players that would be better than Domi... The Knights have at least one and similar depth.

Yes they have the same problems scoring as the habs
Bruins win cuz they have s great D core. There’s no denying that. Their offence is top heavy
Almost every team in this league has a weakness

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Sure, but he was available for a 4th.

And it was a steal of a trade.

We've talked about this before. Bishop was as good as it gets for a goalie being available. The question mark surrounding him was his health. If you don't have netminding then he's absolutely a great gamble to take. He'd already had a couple of Vezina caliber seasons behind him. But his health was an issue and he was coming off a bad year, that's why he's making less than 5 mil a year. He was a gamble but a very smart one for a club without goaltending.

Franchise goalies aren't available very often. And when they do become available it's because something weird happens (think Mario Tremblay.) But teams don't give up Quicks, Rasks, Lundqvists or Price because they're consistent and you know what you're getting.

That doesn't mean they'll win you cups on their own any more than Connor McDavid will. If you have David Desharnais as your number one you're going nowhere.

You need a good team to win. But it's absolutely crazy to think that all goalies are the same and don't make any difference. That's like getting a team of Justin Williams and Claude Lemieuxs and John Druces and saying "SEE! It's all good!" Having a crappy inconsistent goalie is a great way to lose cups even if you have a great team.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Yeap, but there's lots of good goalies and they're available for pennies. Funny how that works.

There's not a lot of good goalies.. of course, people were chest bumping not long ago about guys like Eddie Lack, Cam Talbot, Jimmy Howard, Scott Darling, who were all available for pennies and now no one talks about them.

 

[WeThreeKings]

No NHL team ever won the Cup with bad goaltending (you could argue Terry Sawchuk 1955, but whatever)

...But we've seen NHL teams win the Stanley Cup with bad or very mediocre (league-wise, of course) goaltenders. 2010 being a very obvious case.

We've seen NFL teams win the Superbowl with bad QBs too, it doesn't mean that teams should be happy with Blake Bortles.. it means that sometimes you can have a team so good in other facets of the game that it can overcome a weak, valuable position, but it isn't a recipe you should stick to.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

We've seen NFL teams win the Superbowl with bad QBs too, it doesn't mean that teams should be happy with Blake Bortles.. it means that sometimes you can have a team so good in other facets of the game that it can overcome a weak, valuable position, but it isn't a recipe you should stick to.

And it's worth noting that a goalie can absolutely kill you. If a goalie is off his game you're toast.

 

[NotProkofievian]

And it was a steal of a trade.

We've talked about this before. Bishop was as good as it gets for a goalie being available. The question mark surrounding him was his health. If you don't have netminding then he's absolutely a great gamble to take. He'd already had a couple of Vezina caliber seasons behind him. But his health was an issue and he was coming off a bad year, that's why he's making less than 5 mil a year. He was a gamble but a very smart one for a club without goaltending.

Franchise goalies aren't available very often. And when they do become available it's because something weird happens (think Mario Tremblay.) But teams don't give up Quicks, Rasks, Lundqvists or Price because they're consistent and you know what you're getting.

That doesn't mean they'll win you cups on their own any more than Connor McDavid will. If you have David Desharnais as your number one you're going nowhere.

You need a good team to win. But it's absolutely crazy to think that all goalies are the same and don't make any difference. That's like getting a team of Justin Williams and Claude Lemieuxs and John Druces and saying "SEE! It's all good!" Having a crappy inconsistent goalie is a great way to lose cups even if you have a great team.

Teams don't give up Quicks, Rasks, Lundqvists and Prices because they're irrationally risk averse, to the point where they'd sacrifice a potentially substantial reward. Goaltending is ripe with potential for arbitrage. The belief is that you need one of these premium goaltenders, but what you really need is good goaltending. And that's way more common and cheap today than it's ever been. With league parity being what it is you need to make tough decisions to bring excess value into your franchise.

That means trading good players when their value exceeds their utility to your franchise, as was clearly the case with Price. Some idiot would have paid a king's ransom for him instead of picking up a cheap starter.

 

[WeThreeKings]

And it's worth noting that a goalie can absolutely kill you. If a goalie is off his game you're toast.

Absolutely.

There's a long way to go from "You shouldn't invest X amount of cap into a goalie" to "Goalies don't matter"

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Teams don't give up Quicks, Rasks, Lundqvists and Prices because they're irrationally risk averse, to the point where they'd sacrifice a potentially substantial reward. Goaltending is ripe with potential for arbitrage. The belief is that you need one of these premium goaltenders, but what you really need is good goaltending. And that's way more common and cheap today than it's ever been. With league parity being what it is you need to make tough decisions to bring excess value into your franchise.

That means trading good players when their value exceeds their utility to your franchise, as was clearly the case with Price. Some idiot would have paid a king's ransom for him instead of picking up a cheap starter.

I don't think you NEED an elite goalie to win anymore than you NEED Crosby to win.

But having them helps out a lot.

Price making his money isn't going to prevent us from winning a cup anymore than Lundqvist's prevented the Rangers from winning one. If you're stupid enough to play DD as your first line center you won't go anywhere just like you won't go anywhere if you trade Taylor Hall for a bag of hammers.

 

[NotProkofievian]

There's not a lot of good goalies.. of course, people were chest bumping not long ago about guys like Eddie Lack, Cam Talbot, Jimmy Howard, Scott Darling, who were all available for pennies and now no one talks about them.

There are, though, and more importantly many of them have been moved for a very small price.

 

[WeThreeKings]

There are, though, and more importantly many of them have been moved for a very small price.

Your bar must be pretty low for 'good goalies', because there isn't a lot of goalies out there that are good and they are all disproportionately in the East at the moment.

But hey, the Blues certainly don't care that they wasted a bunch of contending years on Jake Allen and Brian Elliott.

 

[MXD]

We've seen NFL teams win the Superbowl with bad QBs too, it doesn't mean that teams should be happy with Blake Bortles.. it means that sometimes you can have a team so good in other facets of the game that it can overcome a weak, valuable position, but it isn't a recipe you should stick to.

And even then...
Niemi played well in 2010. Had he played badly, the Hawks wouldn't have won the Cup.

Goaltending is absolutely crucial. You. Can't. Win. With. Awful. Goaltending. You have more chances to with an awful defense/awful offense than with awful goaltending.

But a guy like Niemi can be good. Cam Ward can be good.

 

[NotProkofievian]

I don't think you NEED an elite goalie to win anymore than you NEED Crosby to win.

But having them helps out a lot.

Price making his money isn't going to prevent us from winning a cup anymore than Lundqvist's prevented the Rangers from winning one. If you're stupid enough to play DD as your first line center you won't go anywhere just like you won't go anywhere if you trade Taylor Hall for a bag of hammers.

Not taking advantage of opportunities is what stops teams from getting ahead. We missed a huge opportunity to cash in Price's excess value. Now we're stuck with Mr. 0.914 for better or worse. We're going to watch a similar thing happen with Weber.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Your bar must be pretty low for 'good goalies', because there isn't a lot of goalies out there that are good and they are all disproportionately in the East at the moment.

But hey, the Blues certainly don't care that they wasted a bunch of contending years on Jake Allen and Brian Elliott.

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.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Not taking advantage of opportunities is what stops teams from getting ahead. We missed a huge opportunity to cash in Price's excess value. Now we're stuck with Mr. 0.914 for better or worse. We're going to watch a similar thing happen with Weber.

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.

Want to be opportunistic? Trade Shaw.