Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

True, but I don't think Chicago and Tampa are there because of the goaltending. Lundqvist is the exception to the rule and even he's looked human a few times. Anaheim is arguably the most dominant team in the playoffs so far and they have the cheapest and most unproven goaltender. Crawford has looked terrible, it seems his ability in the playoffs is often questioned. Everybody says he looks slow and tired. He sure does look slow but he'd better be fresher than all the rest. He sat for a few games. He kicked out two fat rebounds last night that cost them a win. Chicago is extremely short on defensemen, most of it because they can't afford more because of their $6mil man. Basically their 5/6 defensemen are riding the bench, what little they've played has hurt them. Timonen was a game worst - 2 last night and he only played 8 minutes. Bishop hasn't been anything spectacular either. Is it their faults when they lose? Hardly. But they sure aren't doing much to help the situation. An extra $4-$5 mil can go a long way to beef up the defense. 

 

That's just my short opinion of it. Could be completely different next year. Who knows. 

I agree that having quality defensemen is much more important than a quality goalie (with respect to paying for them). My rationale is that a quality defenseman is on the ice for ~20 minutes a game and has much more of an impact than a quality goalie. If the defense is doing their job well, then there won't be any difficult shots faced/saves needed by the goalie. The goalie is out there for 60 minutes, but is really only used to make saves for an estimated 10 minutes total (less? more?).

 

Also, the difference in impact between a top defenseman (say Doughty) versus an average defenseman (say Gorges) is a much bigger gap than the difference between top goalie (Lundqvist) and average goalie (Neuvirth). The goaltender technique now-a-days will save the majority of the shots with little need for reaction time highlight saves.

 

I'm glad that GMTM seems to agree with this and is finding the goalie last in his team building.

Posted

Also worth noting how five years ago the goalie matchup in the Stanely Cup Finals was Leighton/Boucher vs Niemi.

And one team ended up bemoaning their bargain basement goaltending.

Posted

And the other let their goalie walk that offseason.

Wasn't that part of the plan outlined above? Once your bargain goalie is looking for a payday, you let another team give it to him and you find another young bargain.

Posted

Wasn't that part of the plan outlined above? Once your bargain goalie is looking for a payday, you let another team give it to him and you find another young bargain.

To be fair the Hawks were forced to choose between Niemi and Hjalmarsson that offseason. They chose right.

Posted

Wasn't that part of the plan outlined above? Once your bargain goalie is looking for a payday, you let another team give it to him and you find another young bargain.

 

I can see that becoming more of a trend. Sooner or later there will be fewer takers. 

Posted

Bishop is at $2.4M right now. Will be $5.95M next year.

 

The idea, I think, is that we don't need to go out and get an expensive goalie. You can buy low on guys with potential (Martin Jones, Cam Talbot, Jacob Markstrom, Eddie Lack, others) and ride them until they prove they should be paid.

For sure. But the question has always been, what happens when they prove they should be paid? So far their teams have ponied up. Right now the clear trend is go cheap until somebody emerges, then pay them. Should it be? Maybe not from a true cost/benefit perspective. But the problem is nothing can sink a good team like bad goaltending, so teams go the very risk-averse route with it.

Posted

Finally finished the game from last night.  The Ducks' forcheck is a thing of beauty.  The Hawks could barely gain the neutral zone at times.

 

If they threw a Sabres Sweater over either the Ducks or Lighting players and said this is your starting line up this year I would be ecstatic! Just 2 really fun teams to watch. 

Posted

If they threw a Sabres Sweater over either the Ducks or Lighting players and said this is your starting line up this year I would be ecstatic! Just 2 really fun teams to watch. 

I have found myself really rooting for the Ducks. They are a very good team and fun to watch.

 

I'm rooting for Tampa just so I don't have to watch the Rangers anymore. Yuck.

Posted

If they threw a Sabres Sweater over either the Ducks or Lighting players and said this is your starting line up this year I would be ecstatic! Just 2 really fun teams to watch.

Well... Obviously.

Posted

The King is ready tonight.

You gotta love a woman that can sing tenor.......

 

"No thanks, ma'am, back home we like the girls that sing soprano."

Posted

Did anybody hear Pierre clearly show he wasn't paying attention to the play? Said that the Rangers dman needs to keep the puck out of the middle of the ice when the turnover came while he attempted to pass it up the boards.

 

I love the NBC broadcast when Pierre isn't talking... But he almost always is.

Posted

The Lightning might just be the softest team in the league. 

Probably not even in the top ten for softest teams. They're not just a win away from the SCF because they get pushed around easily. It's just that everything they do is magnified right now against a well-balanced team on a big stage.

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...