Sign in with your NHL account:
  • Submit
  • Or
  • Sign in with Google

Jump to content


Photo

Barry Brust, Versus Johnny Bower


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
14 replies to this topic

#1 jjgallow

jjgallow

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,543 posts

Posted 25 November 2012 - 01:05 PM

http://ingoalmag.com...shutout-record/

Just kidding....but, like...can we sign him to a two-way?

I know we don't have room, but you just...Can't have your minor-league goaltender breaking Any of Johnny Bower's records without having the guy on a two-way contract.

Let me be straight up about this...we have too many goaltending prospects right now.

For sure we do.

But that's what trades are for, no?

#2 swtrooper

swtrooper

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,396 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 09:16 PM

Kinda funny, just jumped on NHL.com to check out the AHL roundup and guess who they didnt mention? Way to go NHL, way to go!

#3 Carty

Carty

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,131 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:33 PM

Even though he is 29 and had a pretty lousy record from his time with the Kings in 06/07, you don't break a record like Bowers without having other teams that are in need of support in net taking a closer look...

#4 renman74

renman74

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 55 posts

Posted 27 November 2012 - 12:37 PM

best case scenario we have a tim thomas :P

#5 kehatch

kehatch

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,651 posts

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:27 PM

Brust was asked about his streak. "Strategically placed horse shoe" was his response. You don't sign a 29 year old goalie to an NHL contract based on a 5-game sample in the AHL.

I don't understand how you can right off Ramo because he isn't in the top 5 in SV% in the KHL (despite being regarded as an elite tender at that level) and then suggest we sign a guy who was middle of the road in the DEL last season and bounced from AHL team to team prior to that.

I am not saying Brust doesn't have a chance. Goalies are unpredictable. He wouldn't be the first guy to break out late. But if he does get a chance it isn't based on a 5-game stint.

It would be a cool story. And personally I don't care if our next starter or backup is Ramo, Brust, Taylor, Irving, or anyone else. I just want someone that can win us a few games and has the potential to replace Kipper.

#6 Carty

Carty

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,131 posts

Posted 27 November 2012 - 10:19 PM

Brust was asked about his streak. "Strategically placed horse shoe" was his response. You don't sign a 29 year old goalie to an NHL contract based on a 5-game sample in the AHL.

Hear ya Kehatch, all I was saying was that if you break a record like Bowers, some other teams that are in need of support in net would be watching him closer for a while...

I don't understand how you can right off Ramo because he isn't in the top 5 in SV% in the KHL (despite being regarded as an elite tender at that level) and then suggest we sign a guy who was middle of the road in the DEL last season and bounced from AHL team to team prior to that.

I still think Ramo might be the guy to eventually replace Kipper, and I hope Ramo gets to come over this spring so that we can all see how he will do here...

I am not saying Brust doesn't have a chance. Goalies are unpredictable. He wouldn't be the first guy to break out late. But if he does get a chance it isn't based on a 5-game stint.

If Brust was to have a break out, I would cheer him on if he got a shot at a backup position in the NHL even if it wasn't with the Flames... Because at 29, he is running out of chances...

It would be a cool story. And personally I don't care if our next starter or backup is Ramo, Brust, Taylor, Irving, or anyone else. I just want someone that can win us a few games and has the potential to replace Kipper.

Exactly... :)



#7 jjgallow

jjgallow

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,543 posts

Posted 27 November 2012 - 11:22 PM

I don't understand how you can right off Ramo because he isn't in the top 5 in SV% in the KHL (despite being regarded as an elite tender at that level) and then suggest we sign a guy who was middle of the road in the DEL last season and bounced from AHL team to team prior to that.


Hello Kehatch, I really don't have it out for Ramo. The biggest difference, to me, is that we gave up a 2nd round pick for Ramo. I'm so very tired of the annual 2nd-round pick handout. Brust is essentially a free agent signing at minimal cost.

To answer your question: Would I have given up on Brust three years ago when he was 26? YES.

So, that is how I can write off Ramo. Furthermore, the chances of Ramo ever breaking Johnny Bower's records, or accomplishing anything significant at the NHL level, are next to none. For every feel good story like Barry Brust or Tim Thomas, there are hundreds of Karri Ramos who will never exceed expectations. We just don't have enough 2nd round picks for them all in the hopes of finding that needle in the haystack.

I agree with you that we don't know nearly enough about Brust. The same can be said for Ramo. I have little or no regard for "analysts" or other folk who say he would be great in the NHL. That doesn't hold a drop of water until Ramo succeeds in the NHL (or the KHL, for that matter).

So why, then, are you so risk-averse to signing Brust as a free agent, and in the same breath, so defensive of Ramo, who we gave up a 2nd round pick for? It seems to me we have the risk/benefit on this backwards.

#8 kehatch

kehatch

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,651 posts

Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:30 PM

Hello Kehatch, I really don't have it out for Ramo. The biggest difference, to me, is that we gave up a 2nd round pick for Ramo. I'm so very tired of the annual 2nd-round pick handout. Brust is essentially a free agent signing at minimal cost.

To answer your question: Would I have given up on Brust three years ago when he was 26? YES.

So, that is how I can write off Ramo. Furthermore, the chances of Ramo ever breaking Johnny Bower's records, or accomplishing anything significant at the NHL level, are next to none. For every feel good story like Barry Brust or Tim Thomas, there are hundreds of Karri Ramos who will never exceed expectations. We just don't have enough 2nd round picks for them all in the hopes of finding that needle in the haystack.

I agree with you that we don't know nearly enough about Brust. The same can be said for Ramo. I have little or no regard for "analysts" or other folk who say he would be great in the NHL. That doesn't hold a drop of water until Ramo succeeds in the NHL (or the KHL, for that matter).

So why, then, are you so risk-averse to signing Brust as a free agent, and in the same breath, so defensive of Ramo, who we gave up a 2nd round pick for? It seems to me we have the risk/benefit on this backwards.


I am neither defensive or risk-averse.

I have no illusions Ramo is a shoe in to be an NHL starter, let alone a good one. I just don't think that him not being in the top 5 in KHL SV% tells you anything. He is a proven starter at the KHL level and we won't know how that translates to the NHL until we see him in the NHL.

I am not against giving Brust an NHL contract if the Flames see NHL potential in him. But I don't think 5-games is enough to change the Flames impression of him since they inked him to an AHL only contract. Though I think he, Taylor, Irving, and Karlson are all in the running for the back-up position this season.

The problem I have is that fans are ultra impatient when it comes to goal tenders. And you have to be ultra patient to evaluate them correctly. Especially if you aren't an expert judge and are trying to do it based on results and statistics.

Ortio was great, then he was crap, now he is great again. Karlson was crap, then great, now crap. Its Skizo. The list goes on. Brust was an AHL tender until the last 5-games. But now he should get an NHL contract. Ramo, a proven elite tender at the KHL level, isn't elite any more because he is merely very good to start the season.

I just don't buy into this Ortio is the best European prospect because of X SV%, or Ramo is no good because of X SV%. Not over a portion of a single season. I think we need to be a more patient and moderate when talking about goalies.

#9 jjgallow

jjgallow

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,543 posts

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:22 PM

Ortio was great, then he was crap, now he is great again. Karlson was crap, then great, now crap. Its Skizo. The list goes on. Brust was an AHL tender until the last 5-games. But now he should get an NHL contract. Ramo, a proven elite tender at the KHL level, isn't elite any more because he is merely very good to start the season.

I just don't buy into this Ortio is the best European prospect because of X SV%, or Ramo is no good because of X SV%. Not over a portion of a single season. I think we need to be a more patient and moderate when talking about goalies.


Ramo's mediocrity has been fairly consistent over his whole career, I would argue.

Ortio is young, and his inconsistency should be expected. I agree that our evaluation should be more patient and consistent. I just don't agree that it has to be negative. Everyone gave up on Ortio based on about three AHL games. What were they thinking? He was 19. (ps...I never said he was the best European prospect)

If were are willing to give up on a player like Ortio after 3 AHL games, then I think we can have some discussion on Brust after 5 games. That's all.

#10 kehatch

kehatch

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,651 posts

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:23 PM

Where Kipper has placed on the SV% leader board since lockout:

11/12: 9
10/11: 34
09/10: 10
08/09: 32
07/08: 30
06/07: 9
05/06: 3

By the way you evaluate goalies I guess Kipper is a mediocre to poor goalie. Wins on a mediocre team be damned.

Sorry man, but you don't have the first clue on how good Ramo or Ortio is or is not.

And for the record, where did I say anything negative about Ortio?

#11 jjgallow

jjgallow

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,543 posts

Posted 02 December 2012 - 11:34 AM

Where Kipper has placed on the SV% leader board since lockout:

11/12: 9
10/11: 34
09/10: 10
08/09: 32
07/08: 30
06/07: 9
05/06: 3

By the way you evaluate goalies I guess Kipper is a mediocre to poor goalie. Wins on a mediocre team be damned.

Sorry man, but you don't have the first clue on how good Ramo or Ortio is or is not.
Correct. But I know that we made a mistake giving up on Ortio (and many others), which led to giving up a 2nd rounder for Ramo, which costs us up front. Better management of goaltending prospects would have eliminated this wasteful trade. That I know.

And for the record, where did I say anything negative about Ortio?
you...said that he sucked. Maybe I didn't understand the context?



Those stats are exactly what they say they are, and that's why we acquired Ramo in the first place (as well as many other goaltending prospects in those years). Absolutely, Kipper was mediocre for about a three-year period starting in late 2007, ending in early 2011 (he was Much better last year...dominant).

There have been countless threads and discussions on this. Thousands of disapointed fans have weighted in. For three years, you couldn't even turn on the fan 960 without hearing the "kipper debate", almost 24/7.

So...I would hardly call this a good example of stats lying.

On the ice, and this is just my opinion...I thought his reflexes were still great in those years, but he lacked concentration. One of his weaknesses was letting goals in through traffic. The extra variables seemed to distract him more than they did in 04-06.

The other weakness (and I still think this may be his greatest..possibly Only weakness):

Rebounds. We all know that most of the goals Kipper let in...even in those mediocre years, he could not be faulted on. And I think that's where you're trying to prove to me that stats lie. But...they don't lie. Kipper has always let in an unusually high number of rebounds. Most of them are "unsavable"...by any goalie, so we forgive him.

However, the goalie has a responsibly to deflect the first shot to favourable possession areas for his team. Kipper has never been good at this. He is often caught deflecting the first shot directly onto the stick of the opposing team. Leading to dramatic, but unnecessary scoring opportunities.

To me, that's an issue of concentration. Just as letting goals in through traffic is. A goalie must be able to focus only on Relevant variables to make the next save. To be a dominant goalie, they must have the capacity to focus on maintaining possession After the save. Very few goalies can do this.

To me, the "next move" will never be a strong suit for Kipper. Luckily, he can stick-handle well. I believe he's at his best when he maintains possession after the first save, either by a stoppage in play or by stick-handling a pass to another Flames player.

We saw him do this last year, and we've seen him do it in 04/05/06. So, he IS capable of it.

The Cause of it...I strongly believe, is being overplayed. Kipper was Still overplayed last year, but at least his games were managed with Some thought to this (as was made clear, very publicly, by Feaster).

The Solution...in my mind, is actually giving some of these great young goaltenders we have some trust and faith. Not only will some of them surprise us, but we'll get much better play out of Kipper. He is Vezina-capable, if managed properly.

And on stats...no. They don't lie. They just get misinterpreted.

#12 cross16

cross16

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,292 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 09:01 PM

I don't like the 2nd for Ramo and really that whole trade either, but Ortio had nothing to do with that trade. Flames needed a goalie that potential could push for starts in the next year or two and that isn't Ortio regardless of how they developed him. Ortio is a proejct and Flames wanted someone that was a much shorter term project. Again not that I agree with giving up the 2nd but the anatomy of the trade had nothing to do with Ortio IMO who I happens to believe they've developed well. They tried him out, it didn't work, and they quickly sent him back to where he was comfortable.

In terms of Brust, keep something in mind, Troy Ward. I've read a great deal of articles and feedback that rave about Troy Ward and how good the Heat are defensivly. Brust is good sure, but I think the fact that Ward and the Heat play a VERY tight game plan help a great deal.

#13 Flames_fan_47

Flames_fan_47

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:58 AM

I don't like the 2nd for Ramo


How do you figure Ramo cost a 2nd? Bourque for Cammelleri straight up would have never gone. Bourque and a 2nd for Cammelleri and a 5th is much more enticing.

Patrick Holland for Karri Ramo. It is what it is. Holland was a 7th round pick for a developed goalie that might play. The risk is worth the chance but the Flames did not give up a 2nd for Ramo.

The Habs don't trade Cammi and a 5th, for Bourque and a 7th!

#14 kehatch

kehatch

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,651 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:46 AM

How do you figure Ramo cost a 2nd? Bourque for Cammelleri straight up would have never gone. Bourque and a 2nd for Cammelleri and a 5th is much more enticing.

Patrick Holland for Karri Ramo. It is what it is. Holland was a 7th round pick for a developed goalie that might play. The risk is worth the chance but the Flames did not give up a 2nd for Ramo.

The Habs don't trade Cammi and a 5th, for Bourque and a 7th!


Agreed. It really was Holland for Ramo. Made sense for Montreal who didn't need Ramo with Price in net long term. Made sense for Calgary who has a glut of prospects like Holland.

Given how poorly Bourque played before and after the trade combined with the potential in Cammalleri I am fine with the deal. Especially after the Flames recouped the second.

#15 cross16

cross16

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,292 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 05:57 PM

How do you figure Ramo cost a 2nd? Bourque for Cammelleri straight up would have never gone. Bourque and a 2nd for Cammelleri and a 5th is much more enticing.

Patrick Holland for Karri Ramo. It is what it is. Holland was a 7th round pick for a developed goalie that might play. The risk is worth the chance but the Flames did not give up a 2nd for Ramo.

The Habs don't trade Cammi and a 5th, for Bourque and a 7th!

Not my personal belief I was just working off the previous posters idea.