Off Season Rumours

Hoags wrote:Anderson is the single biggest reason we've made the playoffs and even won a round against Montreal.  We might have even won the second one if Hammond didn't start.

St.Louis and Dallas are two teams who have been held back when their goaltending isn't as good as their opponent.  Look at SJ now that they don't have to rely on Niemi.  Look at Pittsburgh without FLOLeury.

Goaltending isn't overrated and certainly not on this team and the defense corps we put out in front of Andy.  I wouldn't pay a ton for goaltending but I wouldn't go cheap or try a 1A-1B system like Dallas either.

Maybe if we played a Hitchcock style defense which would make someone like Elliott look good.  But we don't.

I'm not sure about relying on the expansion draft.   I think a lot of teams will be making moves in anticipation of it and not losing assets for nothing.

Exactly!

The conference final goalies were Brian Elliott, Matt Murray, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Martin Jones.

Goaltending is overrated.

Flo The Action wrote:

Hoags wrote:Anderson is the single biggest reason we've made the playoffs and even won a round against Montreal.  We might have even won the second one if Hammond didn't start.

St.Louis and Dallas are two teams who have been held back when their goaltending isn't as good as their opponent.  Look at SJ now that they don't have to rely on Niemi.  Look at Pittsburgh without FLOLeury.

Goaltending isn't overrated and certainly not on this team and the defense corps we put out in front of Andy.  I wouldn't pay a ton for goaltending but I wouldn't go cheap or try a 1A-1B system like Dallas either.

Maybe if we played a Hitchcock style defense which would make someone like Elliott look good.  But we don't.

I'm not sure about relying on the expansion draft.   I think a lot of teams will be making moves in anticipation of it and not losing assets for nothing.

Exactly!

If it wasn't for Hammond (and the way the team played in front of him) we would not have made the playoffs at all.

Even if Anderson was in goal the first two games the Sens still lose that series because Stone was playing with a sore wrist (couldn't shoot, couldn't pass), everyone was exhausted, refs had a quick whistle.

Oh, and "perfect shot, 12" off the ice, just inside the post" -- or, as described by every analyst, an "AHL goal".

Ev wrote:

Hammond has been better than Anderson for over a year now. That's the issue. And Anderson is getting old. I don't agree that he's been amazing, his numbers are propped up by high shot totals.

Also we will be tighter defensively this season.

as for the bolded, that's the point. We would trade for a goalie who teams don't want to lose.

I don't see how Hammond is better in a short period of time. He had one amazing streak which he will never repeat again.

Yes Anderson is getting old but he's absolutely stolen games and playoff series for us we didn't deserve to win. He faces a high amount of shots but he's the best at stopping shots he can see. And he gets hung out to dry by our defense. He's inconsistent but then so is the team in front of him. He'd be great in front of a defensively coached team like St. Louis. Our defense has been awful past few seasons.

Yes we should be thinking of moving on from him soon but I am just saying you are downplaying his contributions here and we do need a good goalie for the future, not just an average one.

We don't know

Hoags wrote:

Ev wrote:

Hammond has been better than Anderson for over a year now. That's the issue. And Anderson is getting old. I don't agree that he's been amazing, his numbers are propped up by high shot totals.

Also we will be tighter defensively this season.

as for the bolded, that's the point. We would trade for a goalie who teams don't want to lose.

I don't see how Hammond is better in a short period of time. He had one amazing streak which he will never repeat again.

Yes Anderson is getting old but he's absolutely stolen games and playoff series for us we didn't deserve to win.  He faces a high amount of shots but he's the best at stopping shots he can see.   And he gets hung out to dry by our defense.  He's inconsistent but then so is the team in front of him.  He'd be great in front of a defensively coached team like St. Louis.  Our defense has been awful past few seasons.

Yes we should be thinking of moving on from him soon but I am just saying you are downplaying his contributions here and we do need a good goalie for the future, not just an average one.

We don't know

I'm highly skeptical of every other goalie we have in the system. Nothing seems to stand out.
I agree that this will be come an issue and I have no faith whatsoever that Hammond will ever come close to replicating what he did on that run.

Ev wrote:The conference final goalies were Brian Elliott, Matt Murray, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Martin Jones.

Goaltending is overrated.

It's not over-rated, but this is a team sport. An average goalie stops 9 out of 10 shots. A good goalie stops 12 of 13 (.923). A great goalie stops 15 out of 16 (.940). So if you play a tight defensive game in your end and block or otherwise prevent 6 of 16 shot attempts and have Peter Budaj in his prime in goal, or if you are the Ottawa Senators giving up 16 shots in the first, you're still down 1-0.

It's like the PK -- the best way to cut down on your short handed goals against is to cut down on the penalties taken.

Ev wrote:The conference final goalies were Brian Elliott, Matt Murray, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Martin Jones.

Goaltending is overrated.

Those teams have much better coaches and defence. Murray, Vasilevskiy and Jones are also all promising up and comers.

If we had players like Vlasic, Stralman, Hedman and a non lame duck coach like Cameron we'd have done much better.

Instead we had Jared Cowen(lol), a struggling Ceci and top-6 forward Borowiecki on defense. Methot is OK and Phaneuf came late in the season(and he's also just average).

You can't just critique the goalies in those series without considering the defense they have in front of them, how they are coached and how many quality chances they give up etc.

Anyone of those goalies would get lit up like a Christmas Tree in Ottawa.

Hoags wrote:

Ev wrote:The conference final goalies were Brian Elliott, Matt Murray, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Martin Jones.

Goaltending is overrated.

Those teams have much better coaches and defence.  Murray, Vasilevskiy and Jones are also all promising up and comers.

If we had players like Vlasic, Stralman, Hedman and a non lame duck coach like Cameron we'd have done much better.

Instead we had Jared Cowen(lol), a struggling Ceci and top-6 forward Borowiecki on defense.  Methot is OK and Phaneuf came late in the season(and he's also just average).

You can't just critique the goalies in those series without considering the defense they have in front of them, how they are coached and how many quality chances they give up etc.

Anyone of those goalies would get lit up like a Christmas Tree in Ottawa.

You are proving my exact point. You don't need a star goaltender to be a successful team. You just did all my arguing for me. You spend money elsewhere and worry about goalie after that.

Also Phaneuf is better than average. Come on.

Reports are that the LA Kings will strip Dustin Brown of the 'C'.

Ev wrote:

Hoags wrote:

Ev wrote:The conference final goalies were Brian Elliott, Matt Murray, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Martin Jones.

Goaltending is overrated.

Those teams have much better coaches and defence.  Murray, Vasilevskiy and Jones are also all promising up and comers.

If we had players like Vlasic, Stralman, Hedman and a non lame duck coach like Cameron we'd have done much better.

Instead we had Jared Cowen(lol), a struggling Ceci and top-6 forward Borowiecki on defense.  Methot is OK and Phaneuf came late in the season(and he's also just average).

You can't just critique the goalies in those series without considering the defense they have in front of them, how they are coached and how many quality chances they give up etc.

Anyone of those goalies would get lit up like a Christmas Tree in Ottawa.

You are proving my exact point. You don't need a star goaltender to be a successful team. You just did all my arguing for me. You spend money elsewhere and worry about goalie after that.

Also Phaneuf is better than average. Come on.

so lets get a Dung goal tender and a better coach and a better D and we can be the blues? No thanks. Let's get a good coach and a good D AND a good goal tender so we can win the cup.
You look at the Sharks that got an upgrade in nets from what they had and finally made it further then they ever had.

wprager wrote:Reports are that the LA Kings will strip Dustin Brown of the 'C'.

Wonder if it will go straight to their Norris "winner" doughty.

wprager wrote:Reports are that the LA Kings will strip Dustin Brown of the 'C'.

There's been rumours in the past of him being on the trade block. Wonder if this could be a prelude to them trying to move him. Huge contract for a diminishing asset on the 3rd line.

Goal tending is important but not as important as evidenced by the lack of high-profile goalie names in the conference finals.  Anti Niemi won the stanley cup with chicago and then they let him walk that very off-season.  Also goalies aren't often chosen in the first round any more in drafts.  

Doesn't mean you should have crappy goaltending either.  Dallas Stars with craig anderson likely would have gotten past the blues.  Bet they blow their load on a deal for MA Fleury this off-season.

I guess I'll side with Ev on this one but doesn't mean Michael Leighton should be our goaltender.

Dallas would do well to stay away from Fleury. Cup winner, 1st overall, he's going to cost a lot more than he's actually worth.

Flo The Action wrote:

wprager wrote:Reports are that the LA Kings will strip Dustin Brown of the 'C'.

There's been rumours in the past of him being on the trade block. Wonder if this could be a prelude to them trying to move him. Huge contract for a diminishing asset on the 3rd line.

Hahaha, who in the world would take on that contract for 6 more years? A 25 point guy who is now brittle because of his style of play...= buyout time.

I'd stay away from fleury also.

Flo The Action wrote:I'd stay away from fleury also.

Absolutely. Although, if they can shed Lehtonen in that deal and not pay much more that their 1st, it's probably worth it, if nothing more than as a boost to their mindset as a team with a Cup winner as their goalie.

Fleury would be an upgrade on our tenders