Jump to content
The Official Site of the Calgary Flames

Recommended Posts

You have to look at more than just "meaningless" games.  Ortio was good at the end of the season, mostly.  A backup has to look good at all times.  Hathaway was very good in his first 5 games, but lost a step after the initial adrenaline wore off.  Cervenka could play in the NHL, but isn't a NHL player.  Big difference.

 

Agreed that how they progress is key.     

First you have to have the desire to go along with the talent. Cervanka never had that IMO, a lot of players don't.This is one of the reasons I question Chris Stewart.

These games Ortio played in may have been meaningless to us but he was playing against teams still in the hunt. Considering we had a few defensemen not giving it their all I would say he did exceptional on some nights.

First you have to have the desire to go along with the talent. Cervanka never had that IMO, a lot of players don't.This is one of the reasons I question Chris Stewart.

These games Ortio played in may have been meaningless to us but he was playing against teams still in the hunt. Considering we had a few defensemen not giving it their all I would say he did exceptional on some nights.

BTW put Hathaway on the 4th line, tell him to crash and bang and he will do just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stop with the "you always agree with me" stuff. When you have to say it so often and to so many people then clearly they don't agree with you.

Clearly I disagree with you over Ortio and how much trust the Flames should put on him. I disagree that Kuemper is only slightly ahead of Ortio. He has 100 percent more games played and his worst season is better then Ortio's best. He is miles ahead of Ortio who is, in my opinion, unproven at the NHL level and trending towards being a bust.

Yes but Kuemper also plays for a team that historically pads goalie stats. A 910 in Minnesota is likely a 901-905 in Calgary.not saying he's not a good prospect just not someone I'm confident to bring in as a starter yet.

I look at Talbot, had a better than 920 in New York. Those are the numbers I'd want to see in Minnesota to give me the confidence you have in him.

Absolutely bring him in to compete with Ortio but I think Ortio wins the fight for now.and that's for backup next year, either may one day he starters but not next season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but Kuemper also plays for a team that historically pads goalie stats. A 910 in Minnesota is likely a 901-905 in Calgary.not saying he's not a good prospect just not someone I'm confident to bring in as a starter yet.

I look at Talbot, had a better than 920 in New York. Those are the numbers I'd want to see in Minnesota to give me the confidence you have in him.

Absolutely bring him in to compete with Ortio but I think Ortio wins the fight for now.and that's for backup next year, either may one day he starters but not next season

 

You keep thinking of the old Wild, the Lemaire trap wild and forgetting that the Wild really havn't been that in over a decade. Dubnyk didn't suddenly start playing better when he got there, Dwayne Roloson was just as good with the Oilers as he was with the Wild and the Wild arn't even one of the best Defensive teams in the league. I think you severely overrate the impact the team has on goalie's stats. A team cannot made a so/so goalie great, not IMO.

 

The problem is what do people consider a starter? For me a ture starter is someone you can trust to give you more than half your games and play at league average or better for those games. I don't think that is Keumper and I don't think that is Ortio either so I agree with those that are skeptical of Keumper as a starter, but IMO the reason I have interest in Keumper is to tandem him with Ortio. I think the cost would be lower than a true starter and you've got some protection if Ortio can't get it done at the NHL level you can still go out at get another goalie becuase you didn't overpay in terms of assets or salary to get Keumper. Also allows for goalies to develop in behind becuase you arnt' paying a ton of money to a starter.

 

Thats why I personally like the idea of Keumper. I think the goal should be to find a stater but it isn't going to be easy. I don't think Keumper should be the number 1 target, but he should be on the list of goalies to check in on. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but Kuemper also plays for a team that historically pads goalie stats. A 910 in Minnesota is likely a 901-905 in Calgary.not saying he's not a good prospect just not someone I'm confident to bring in as a starter yet.

I look at Talbot, had a better than 920 in New York. Those are the numbers I'd want to see in Minnesota to give me the confidence you have in him.

Absolutely bring him in to compete with Ortio but I think Ortio wins the fight for now.and that's for backup next year, either may one day he starters but not next season

 

Go back in time and that may have been true.  But that hasn't been the case over the last number of years.  Kuemper's numbers are almost identical to Dubnyk's numbers this season.

 

As for Ortio, he hasn't won the right to anything because he hasn't done anything.  The Flames need to upgrade in goal.  

 

I am not saying the Flames should go all in for Kuemper.  But they need someone.  He is a guy that is on the list because he is probably available cheap and he looks ready to carry 55 games or so.  That said, if they can realistically get Andersen or someone like that then absolutely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with the first 4. I would even add Elliot/Allen (either one). Both have 2 yrs remaining on 2.5M contracts and whichever is not protected is in big danger of being lost. Elliot's play right now against Chicago could make Allen available.

I personally don't see Pavelec or Kuemper being an upgrade to our starters from this year(except Hiller)

 

I agree Phoenix66 - Elliott & Allen are better options than my #5... I guess I just composed my list based on goalies that I believe could be had by the Flames, and I don't think St. Louis would let either of those 2 go - they are very good goalies (especially Elliott in the playoffs right now - just wow!) but I definitely agree they would be better options if we have an opportunity to get them! :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Matt Murray should be crossed off any list that people have. I don't think there is anyway the Penguins let him go and even if there was an expansion draft there is no doubt in my mind they would protect Murray and let Fleury go.

 

Murray has looked great at the NHL level and was very good in New York last night. He won't go anywhere IMO.

 

The better debate, is should the Flames have interest in Fleury? IMO, yes they absolutely should. 

 

I agree with you that is what Pittsburgh should do.  But GMs don't always make decisions that make sense.  Pittsburgh has shown a lot of loyalty to Fleury, in part because he has Crosby's support.  They also have are also contenders and may want the experience.  So I wouldn't be totally shocked if they traded Murray and protected Fleury.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First you have to have the desire to go along with the talent. Cervanka never had that IMO, a lot of players don't.This is one of the reasons I question Chris Stewart.

These games Ortio played in may have been meaningless to us but he was playing against teams still in the hunt. Considering we had a few defensemen not giving it their all I would say he did exceptional on some nights.

BTW put Hathaway on the 4th line, tell him to crash and bang and he will do just fine.

 

Meaningless to the standings, but also no pressure to the team.  The earlier games were of more consequence and had more pressure.  Do you want a goalie to fold when the playoff push is on?  Speaking of his final games, how important to anybody were the Oilers, Arizona, Jets and Nucks games at the end?

 

Cervenka came to the Flames in time for January, no training camp, expected to play center, and came off a blood clot.  He didn't win any trust during his adjustment to NA hockey.  And the Flames were in win-now mode.  I don't give him a pass, but you can't really say he had no talent or desire.  Don't need to get into it because it's a non issue right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you that is what Pittsburgh should do.  But GMs don't always make decisions that make sense.  Pittsburgh has shown a lot of loyalty to Fleury, in part because he has Crosby's support.  They also have are also contenders and may want the experience.  So I wouldn't be totally shocked if they traded Murray and protected Fleury.  

 

Thank you Kehatch. This is exactly what I was getting at.

 

Additionally, when we get clarity as to whether or not NMCs and NTCs automatically take a "protected spot" in the event of expansion, here's our list (taken from General Fanager, the 4th Period, and War-on-ice):

 

Player / Cap Hit / Years / Clauses
Dennis Wideman / $5,250,000 / 1 / No Movement Clause (details unknown)
Mason Raymond / $3,150,000 / 1 / Modified NTC (details unknown)
Matt Stajan           / $3,125,000 / 2 / Modified NTC (details unknown)
Michael Frolik       / $4,300,000 / 4 / Modified NTC (player submits list of 10 teams that he cannot be traded to
Mark Giordano     / $6,750,000 / 6 / Full NTC in 2016-17 to 2019-20 + Modified NTC starting in 2020-21 for remainder of contract (player submits list of 10 teams to which he cannot be traded)
 
(I tried to put the above in a table several times, but I couldn't figure it out!)
 
Suffice to say, I don't think Flames brass would want the first 3 players on this list to take up a protected spot if the league announces that NTCs and NMCs are automatically protected, and expansion occurs THIS offseason. Wideman being there exposes one of Brodie or Hamilton. Yikes! Perhaps if the expansion draft occurs in the 2017 off-season, really only Stajan would be a concern - if I understand the details of expansion correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wideman and Raymond's contracts would expire before we get to the expansion. its not going to happen this off season. I just don't see how that's possible. 

 

Stajan is the one questionable guy who would be an issue therefore. It's also a factor that's going to make him harder to trade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meaningless to the standings, but also no pressure to the team.  The earlier games were of more consequence and had more pressure.  Do you want a goalie to fold when the playoff push is on?  Speaking of his final games, how important to anybody were the Oilers, Arizona, Jets and Nucks games at the end?

 

Cervenka came to the Flames in time for January, no training camp, expected to play center, and came off a blood clot.  He didn't win any trust during his adjustment to NA hockey.  And the Flames were in win-now mode.  I don't give him a pass, but you can't really say he had no talent or desire.  Don't need to get into it because it's a non issue right now.

I think they were important to Ortio and from everything I heard coming out of the dressing room we were to play out the season hard. I really don't care if you agree or not Ortio played well enough to put himself into consideration. Where he goes from here is up to him. You don't know if he is playoff calibre and neither do I, until any player has a full NHL year of experience do we know ? NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
Suffice to say, I don't think Flames brass would want the first 3 players on this list to take up a protected spot if the league announces that NTCs and NMCs are automatically protected, and expansion occurs THIS offseason. Wideman being there exposes one of Brodie or Hamilton. Yikes! Perhaps if the expansion draft occurs in the 2017 off-season, really only Stajan would be a concern - if I understand the details of expansion correctly.

 

 

That's the thing, its tough to know because the rules are not finalized. If you read the CBA under the section of NO Trade Clauses or No Move clauses there is  nothing in there that mentions expansion. In the case of a no trade clause thats to protect the player form getting trade but an expansion draft is not a trade process so therefore its out of the teams control, why should that be honoured in an expansion draft when technically the team is not agreeing to trade anyone. A NTC does not prvent a team from sending a player to the minors, why should it prevent them from un protecting someone in expansion?

 

I think if you read between the lines in what the NHL is saying they don't tend to honor NTC and would prefer to not honor NMCs either. They only left it open in case the PA rasises a huge issue about it but based on most of the comments I heard from Daly i'll be shocked if both NTC and NMCs are exempt and count as one of your players. The teams are probably going to lose their minds if that is the case.

 

We shall see... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stop with the "you always agree with me" stuff. When you have to say it so often and to so many people then clearly they don't agree with you.

Clearly I disagree with you over Ortio and how much trust the Flames should put on him. I disagree that Kuemper is only slightly ahead of Ortio. He has 100 percent more games played and his worst season is better then Ortio's best. He is miles ahead of Ortio who is, in my opinion, unproven at the NHL level and trending towards being a bust.

 

Ok well, I actually only really say it to you.   Kuemper is far from consensus on here.

 

If you don't want to agree with me, and it's that important to you, it's really simple.  Just pick another goalie.   Suggest Carey Price.   That's more in line with your arguements, if you ask me.

 

Otherwise, you're stuck with coming to the same conclusion as me, no matter how much you want to fight about it.

 

Sorry man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ortio's numbers even when he way playing well weren't great. Those were in games that didn't matter.

But you can't look at just a small sample. If you did there are a lot of poor goalies that would be in the running. The bottom line is he wasn't good over the course of this season. I really don't care that he wasn't horrible for a small stretch. So seeing him not be horrible over that small stretch certainly doesn't prove to me he belongs in the NHL full time.

Ortio has a lot to prove still. If he was on another team he wouldn't even be on the radar for us to look at as a backup let alone starter.

 

Well, when Ortio played well, he got shutouts (pre-season and regular).  And trended towards the .920 area over longer patches.  

 

So...you know.....in terms of numbers, shutouts are...pretty straightforward.   

 

 

I am sure you could do a breakdown on his small number of game to show otherwise.   And, I'm sure you could do that with any other goalie in the league.  

 

But, basically the conversation is going like this:

 

You're looking at a small sample (your first line).

 

You're saying you can't look at a small sample (second line).

 

I reply, looking at a small sample.

 

 

This is fun, no?   Surely.     Or we could just say, he's .901.  He's 25.   And leave it at that.  

 

 

So yeah.   That's where he is.  Not bad.  Not great.  And....sorry....look for past year trending if you want...but it just Ain't much different than Kuemper.   It ain't.

 

Is Kuemper a bit better right now?  Maybe.  Do we care?  I don't know...should we?

 

 

p.s.....The "Meaningless game" thing is getting a bit old.   Neither goalie is the go-to for "must win" games.   That's why they're backups.   It's kind of funny that we're applying that logic to one and not the other.  If anything, Ortio had tougher competition because the Flames were forced into that situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing, its tough to know because the rules are not finalized. If you read the CBA under the section of NO Trade Clauses or No Move clauses there is  nothing in there that mentions expansion. In the case of a no trade clause thats to protect the player form getting trade but an expansion draft is not a trade process so therefore its out of the teams control, why should that be honoured in an expansion draft when technically the team is not agreeing to trade anyone. A NTC does not prvent a team from sending a player to the minors, why should it prevent them from un protecting someone in expansion?

 

I think if you read between the lines in what the NHL is saying they don't tend to honor NTC and would prefer to not honor NMCs either. They only left it open in case the PA rasises a huge issue about it but based on most of the comments I heard from Daly i'll be shocked if both NTC and NMCs are exempt and count as one of your players. The teams are probably going to lose their minds if that is the case.

 

We shall see... 

 

The NTC/NMC thing gets even more blurry for a player at the end of those contracts.  Are you supposed to protect a player that you have no interest in re-signing before they go UFA?  If anything, it's worse for the player that could be picked in the expansion draft but has a NTC/NMC, so they instead end up not be signed as a UFA.

 

 

...

 

p.s.....The "Meaningless game" thing is getting a bit old.   Neither goalie is the go-to for "must win" games.   That's why they're backups.   It's kind of funny that we're applying that logic to one and not the other.  If anything, Ortio had tougher competition because the Flames were forced into that situation.

 

There are two types of meaningless games.  One would have been against the Nucks or Oilers or... after they were eliminated.

The other type is one where the Flames have no pressure, can play wide open, are playing guys that are playing over their heads...

 

I know you weren't responding to me directly with the meaningless games retort, but performances by players in these types of games have to be viewed differently than must-win games.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to say, Freddy Anderson is looking good. Im still partial to a low cost UFA but maybe this guy might be worth something in trade.

 

Hes probably going to demand in the 3.5-4.5 mil range and if we equate that to an offersheet we are looking at a first and third for the trade.

 

Maybe Dallas first and our third is the price? (if we get them) or our second/third? Possibly could do that if his contract gets done and agreed to as part of the deal. 4x4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NTC/NMC thing gets even more blurry for a player at the end of those contracts.  Are you supposed to protect a player that you have no interest in re-signing before they go UFA?  If anything, it's worse for the player that could be picked in the expansion draft but has a NTC/NMC, so they instead end up not be signed as a UFA.

 

 

 

There are two types of meaningless games.  One would have been against the Nucks or Oilers or... after they were eliminated.

The other type is one where the Flames have no pressure, can play wide open, are playing guys that are playing over their heads...

 

I know you weren't responding to me directly with the meaningless games retort, but performances by players in these types of games have to be viewed differently than must-win games.  

 

Agreed, and both types are valid, imho.  No question there.

 

It's just, when they're conflicting with each other, it becomes difficult to interpret.   Not only that, but for a goalie, how meaningful the game is for the Other team, may matter just as much.  If not more.

 

So when Ortio is going up against top NHL teams, and teams battling for playoff positions....Yes, it's true that the Flames are more relaxed.   And that's a factor.   But it becomes a bit of a pickle, when you try to compare him to a goalie such as Kuemper who ISN'T being put in against top teams, and ISN'T being put into the big battles.

 

The arguement can be made both ways and ultimately I just see it as a wash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ramo would be a better backup right now than Ortio, to a proven starter like many of the aforementioned... even a Niemi type during this rebuild. Some of you guys blow me away with your knowledge of managing team personnel but I do know the bottom line is that we need a proven bonafide upgrade (not potential) to confidently build the team around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ramo would be a better backup right now than Ortio, to a proven starter like many of the aforementioned... even a Niemi type during this rebuild. Some of you guys blow me away with your knowledge of managing team personnel but I do know the bottom line is that we need a proven bonafide upgrade (not potential) to confidently build the team around.

 

Ramo could be a fine backup, assuming full recovery.  But, he was a starter and paid starter dollars.  I am not in favor of paying over $3m for a backup.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramo could be a fine backup, assuming full recovery.  But, he was a starter and paid starter dollars.  I am not in favor of paying over $3m for a backup.

 

Particularly when the Goalie Budget is about 5.5-6million next year on the optimistic side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignoring tonight's amazing play by him, what do people think of trying to get Neuvirth out of Philly? I've been following him for a while (Washington is my second team after Calgary). and outside of his time with the Sabres he's got pretty respectable stats (Hell, even with them, his GAA was higher, but he had above-average Sv% still). Only a couple seasons where he has had 1a/1b starts in games played (2 with Washington and then this year in Philly), but he definitely has potential, and has 180 Games started (200) games played, so a decent sample size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramo could be a fine backup, assuming full recovery.  But, he was a starter and paid starter dollars.  I am not in favor of paying over $3m for a backup.

Maybe he will play for less if nobody else wants him. I'm dreaming but that's ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing, its tough to know because the rules are not finalized. If you read the CBA under the section of NO Trade Clauses or No Move clauses there is  nothing in there that mentions expansion. In the case of a no trade clause thats to protect the player form getting trade but an expansion draft is not a trade process so therefore its out of the teams control, why should that be honoured in an expansion draft when technically the team is not agreeing to trade anyone. A NTC does not prvent a team from sending a player to the minors, why should it prevent them from un protecting someone in expansion?

 

I think if you read between the lines in what the NHL is saying they don't tend to honor NTC and would prefer to not honor NMCs either. They only left it open in case the PA rasises a huge issue about it but based on most of the comments I heard from Daly i'll be shocked if both NTC and NMCs are exempt and count as one of your players. The teams are probably going to lose their minds if that is the case.

 

We shall see... 

 

Hi Cross! Ya, this is my interpretation as well. Because the CBA doesn't reference "expansion" at all regarding NMCs and NTCs, I'm left to assume the league would not take the position that NMCs and NTCs are to be honoured during any expansion process.

 

This, relating to my post on Matt Murray, would at least give Pittsburgh the option of protecting Murray over Fleury (instead of being forced to leave Murray unprotected). But again, it puts Pittsburgh in a difficult position and I can't see them throwing Fleury under the bus considering all the aforementioned reasons.

 

Well, I think we can bet that the NHLPA is going to do right by their players and try their hardest to push the league to honour NMCs and NTCs during expansion... so, if the League owes the NHLPA any favours... I mean, if they were going to follow the CBA to the letter, why has it taken so long to release these important details? One might think they'd be waiting for the announcement of expansion to do so, but with so many sports networks out there trying to report on the matter, I think it's still a topic of discussion for the league and the PA. You're right Cross, we'll have to wait and see how it all shakes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NMC's and the NTC's are a part of contracts between a hockey team and a player.

 

The NHL just approves contracts and make sure they are within the guidelines. There is not a contract between the NHL and the Player regarding the NMC or NTC. 

 

I don't see any reason why the NHL would have to honor a NTC or NMC for an expansion.

 

I can see why the NHL might want to put in place some regulations, to prevent the teams from hiding players through the NMC or NTC's in their contracts and I think they have to put up 25% of your cap is a small part towards that goal.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If push comes to shove I am sure the NHL wouldn't have to honour the NMC or NTC. The issue is that pushing and shoving takes time and they need things worked out by June.

If the PA chooses to dispute this they could derail the entire thing. Which makes it likely the NHL will compromise in the interest of moving things along.

Besides, the PA does have a lot of power. They managed to derail the first attempt at conference alignment for example and pushed that back by a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Niklas Backstrom? Is he absolutely off the slate with Calgary? He would make a great backup, IMO. If he isn't a hot item, maybe he would stay for le$$; maybe his past injury/s will work in Calgary'$ favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...