GDT - Game #40: Pens @ Sens, Jan 12, 2017, 7:30pm

spader wrote:Great game. That was a fun one to watch. I wonder if there are still a host of people on HF who think that Condon for a 5th was poor asset management.

Flo wrote:Urghhhh. Smells of desperation. Every jabs fan is laughing their asses off. He's the rebound king.
This ain't gonna end well.
...
Which is even more scary. Condon and Hammond duo likely means no playoffs.
...
Because he's a crappy goalie and that 5th could be better utilized? I seriously wonder if driedger wouldn't be better suited. How is trading for a crappy back up a good idea?
...
I definitely (think) they took the wrong guy. I think the isles trying to get rid of halak could have been convinced to part ways with Greiss(cue ev complaining about the logic of that) or even Ryan miller in Vancouver I'm sure they would like to unload and even retain cash. Michael Neuvirth is said to be on the block for really cheap too and philly is dying to unload a contract and that to me is a better idea than this guy. Maybe I'll be proven wrong but this guy is said to be the rebound king.

Tim wrote:All this talk of trying to trade for a better goalie is ridiculous. We just needed a plug for a few games, and we got that whole giving up pretty much nothing.

wprager wrote:
I think this gives Anderson flexibility to take off for a coupe days here and there. Condon was pretty good the first time Price went down; beat Ottawa once and lost in OT another time. Then when Price went down for good the team folded. It wasn't all Condon's fault. The team was not scoring.

wprager wrote:Here are some quotes from the time:

Flo wrote:Urghhhh. Smells of desperation. Every jabs fan is laughing their asses off. He's the rebound king.
This ain't gonna end well.
...
Which is even more scary. Condon and Hammond duo likely means no playoffs.
...
Because he's a crappy goalie and that 5th could be better utilized? I seriously wonder if driedger wouldn't be better suited. How is trading for a crappy back up a good idea?
...
I definitely (think) they took the wrong guy. I think the isles trying to get rid of halak could have been convinced to part ways with Greiss(cue ev complaining about the logic of that) or even Ryan miller in Vancouver I'm sure they would like to unload and even retain cash. Michael Neuvirth is said to be on the block for really cheap too and philly is dying to unload a contract and that to me is a better idea than this guy. Maybe I'll be proven wrong but this guy is said to be the rebound king.

Tim wrote:All this talk of trying to trade for a better goalie is ridiculous. We just needed a plug for a few games, and we got that whole giving up pretty much nothing.

wprager wrote:
I think this gives Anderson flexibility to take off for a coupe days here and there. Condon was pretty good the first time Price went down; beat Ottawa once and lost in OT another time. Then when Price went down for good the team folded. It wasn't all Condon's fault. The team was not scoring.

wprager wrote:Even those who defended this move never expected him to become the number one and good the city with O'Connor as the designated backup.  What is it now, 14 straight gauge or something like that? The only break he got was half a period before Hammond twisted his ankle.

P.S. Sorry, Flo, but you did say all that.

wprager wrote:I don't think rebounds were the issue in Montreal. Clearly he is not as good as the best goalie on the planet so he will look mediocre by comparison. But the whole team struggled to score, something like 102 goals over the last 48 games.  Condon was a year removed from the ECHL that year.

Flo The Action wrote:

wprager wrote:I don't think rebounds were the issue in Montreal. Clearly he is not as good as the best goalie on the planet so he will look mediocre by comparison. But the whole team struggled to score, something like 102 goals over the last 48 games.  Condon was a year removed from the ECHL that year.

Rebounds were a big issue if you ask the fans that watched the whole season. You'd think they know better than me and you that catch games here and there.

tim1_2 wrote:I don't get why W.P. Rager is bringing up ancient history at this point.  The Condon trade has worked out incredibly well so far.  If he never starts another game for us, we got our value out of it.  No one's arguing about this now.  

Great W last night.  Let's try and focus on the positive for once.

wprager wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

wprager wrote:I don't think rebounds were the issue in Montreal. Clearly he is not as good as the best goalie on the planet so he will look mediocre by comparison. But the whole team struggled to score, something like 102 goals over the last 48 games.  Condon was a year removed from the ECHL that year.

Rebounds were a big issue if you ask the fans that watched the whole season. You'd think they know better than me and you that catch games here and there.

According to some I watch more Habs games than Sens.  Truth be told, I listen to 690 whenever there isn't hockey talk on 1200 and they talked about lack of scoring a lot more than rebound control.

wprager wrote:

spader wrote:Great game. That was a fun one to watch. I wonder if there are still a host of people on HF who think that Condon for a 5th was poor asset management.

It's easy being right hindsight. What were people saying here when Condon was signed!