Are the Sens mishandling the goalie situation?

LOL, that last sequence of posts is positively adorable.

PS: rooneypoo, you are a handsome, witty fellow. Keep on posting!

LOL

CockRoche wrote:That was more a lame joke than anything.

Sort of. I have always been civil, yet still I think it was Cap'nClutch that didn't want to hear my view for some reason.

Still baffles me a little bit to be honest. Meh.

I haven't been on since Friday at around 2:30pm so it certainly wasn't me that did anything to your posts.

CockRoche is just making stuff up, it seems.

Big Ev wrote:CockRoche is just making stuff up, it seems.

I'm guessing another admin (looks like SD) must have deleted a post of his that was deemed unacceptable. I haven't seen it so I can't comment.

wprager wrote:

Big Ev wrote:CockRoche is just making stuff up, it seems.

I'm guessing another admin (looks like SD) must have deleted a post of his that was deemed unacceptable. I haven't seen it so I can't comment.

I don't recall doing anything.

Imagine if the Sens weren't anti-Russian and signed Bobrovsky ... then we'd really have an interesting conversation on goalies in Ottawa

SpezDispenser wrote:

wprager wrote:

Big Ev wrote:CockRoche is just making stuff up, it seems.

I'm guessing another admin (looks like SD) must have deleted a post of his that was deemed unacceptable. I haven't seen it so I can't comment.

I don't recall doing anything.

Sorry, I took your comment, following Roche's, to mean that something wasn't civil.

We have a mystery on our hands.

Big Ev wrote:CockRoche is just making stuff up, it seems.

Am I missing something? What did I make up?

I assure you I am innocent on all charges. Please explain what you think I did wrong?

All my posts are still there. Nothing has been deleted from my account. Not sure what the confusion is and why my name was brought up?

You said yourself that you "have been censored by the admins". The admins say they haven't censored anything. What's up with that?

The fog is slowly starting to lift. CR must be talking about an incident on another thread that happened during a goalie discussion. And he just came on here to say "Sorry, I can't discuss goalies anymore, ha-ha".

wprager wrote:The fog is slowly starting to lift. CR must be talking about an incident on another thread that happened during a goalie discussion. And he just came on here to say "Sorry, I can't discuss goalies anymore, ha-ha".

Ahhhhh, I see now. Yes, my original comment in this thread was just another way of me saying "no comment".

I didn't mean to start mass hysteria, but I can see why it may have looked like I said something wrong that could have been deleted.

Now that that's all out of the way, care to add your take on the Sens' handling of the goalie situation?

IMO the biggest mishandling was trading for Leclaire with that contract. And I said so right from the start. He had *one* season that could be considered good, getting 9 shutouts as a rookie on an average (at best) team. He did not come close to a repeat performance after that, and was sidelined for most of a year following what amounted to a surgical reconstruction of hit ankle. It was a mistake by Columbus to give him that contract, and a bigger mistake by Murray to take it on.

I know others have said it before, but Murray has a great track record with drafting, but pretty close to terrible with trades. Although, I suppose that means a trade involving picks coming our way is, then, not a bad trade (Lehner).

I personally don't think the ship has sailed on Leclaire but I've been very happy with the play of Elliott lately. The guy is in the zone. Some of those stops vs. the Habs were off the charts good. What a way to follow up stopping two breakaways in the previous game.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:I personally don't think the ship has sailed on Leclaire but I've been very happy with the play of Elliott lately. The guy is in the zone. Some of those stops vs. the Habs were off the charts good. What a way to follow up stopping two breakaways in the previous game.

Maybe it hasn't sailed yet, but I don't think it will be in Port Ottawa when it does. I can't see how he could be re-signed here, and a trade seems equally unlikely. I am 100% Ok with moving him at the trade deadline and letting Lehner backup Elliott for the last couple of months of the season, maybe even get a start or two or three. I doubt we are going to make much of a move in the post-season (first round win would be nice, advancing to the ECF would be a big over-achievement) so I don't have any qualms about having a rookie as a backup and what if Elliott goes down.

Of course that's assuming Lehner gets to be #1 in Bingo, and that someone steps up as a trade partner for Leclaire.

All I'm trying to say is the Sens should be trying to get Leclaire back in the net and there's little to nothing he's shown this season to suggest he won't be good in net for us. Elliott has been great lately and I'm quite happy with his play. It can only be a good thing to have both of them playing and playing well right? I don't see bringing Lehner up after the Trade deadline (Assuming Leclaire is gone) to back up Elliott as a good thing nor do I see it as at all likely.

Leclaire is injury prone I get that but, leaving him on the bench potentially until the 17th vs. the Canes or even later doesn't help the Sens. You need two goalies that can play and leaving Leclaire on the bench could lead to a situation like last season where Leclaire gets a shot out of pure desperation.

wprager wrote:Now that that's all out of the way, care to add your take on the Sens' handling of the goalie situation?IMO the biggest mishandling was trading for Leclaire with that contract. And I said so right from the start. He had *one* season that could be considered good, getting 9 shutouts as a rookie on an average (at best) team. He did not come close to a repeat performance after that, and was sidelined for most of a year following what amounted to a surgical reconstruction of hit ankle. It was a mistake by Columbus to give him that contract, and a bigger mistake by Murray to take it on.

I know others have said it before, but Murray has a great track record with drafting, but pretty close to terrible with trades. Although, I suppose that means a trade involving picks coming our way is, then, not a bad trade (Lehner).

I won't comment on the past and the trade because I don't think that was the intent of Cap'n Clutch's original blog; I think he wants to know our thoughts more on what is currently happening with the starting rotation. Plus, I think we all know Leclaire was damaged goods at the time we traded for him, with no idea what that draft pick could turn into. The past is the past.

I have no problems with the way Elliott is being handled right now. He is absolutely known for being a very streaky goalie both good and bad. Elliott is going to get us a bunch of wins and we have to take advantage of that while we can. That is what you are seeing right now. When Elliott has one bad game, but most likely two, Leclaire will get a game in.

In saying that, Leclaire is the kind of goalie, with his injury history and style of play that needs to get into a groove to play well. With what Wamsley has been working on style-wise with Leclaire, this is even more pressing for Pascal. When he does finally get into a game, there will be no middle ground; he will be on his game or off. I don't think, and I say this honestly, I don't think the Sens really care how Leclaire will play when he gets in. There is no way to prepare for a game with him in the net. He is there at this point to give Elliott a rest, that is it. Leclaire is so unpredictable on the ice and it shows with the way the players play with him in the goal crease. Leclaire is done with the Senators after this season and I will even go as far as saying he is done in the NHL. You can't count on him for anything anymore and he isn't even worth paying minimum salary. You will need a third goalie to call up for the same salary throughout the year to cover for him when he goes down.

I am happy Lehner did not get to see NHL action this round of being called up. Practicing with the team was enough. Is it ideal? No, but you can't change the fact that he is where he is. He is the first callup and we will see him up a couple more times. I predicted he would play 4-5 games in the NHL this year once I found out he wasn't going back to the Soo and I stand by that.

So Wprager, I didn't get into the trade like you did as I tried to answer the original blog question. I think you can tell how I feel about the Columbus trade anyway.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:I personally don't think the ship has sailed on Leclaire but I've been very happy with the play of Elliott lately. The guy is in the zone. Some of those stops vs. the Habs were off the charts good. What a way to follow up stopping two breakaways in the previous game.

I can't believe I read this. The ship has sailed, hit and iceberg, sunk and destroyed a lot of lives in the process. You are forgetting that Lehner is being rushed because of Leclaire correct?

Shocking that you have this view, I'm at a loss for words. Almost.