[Trade] Flames acquire Mike Smith (25% retained) for Chad Johnson, Brandon Hickey, & cond 3rd

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Here's some context: between March 6 and March 25 last season, Raanta started 9 of 10 games, and the last 8 in a row. Definitely a starter's work load. In that stretch, he had collective sv% of .923.

He's played the opposite of a starters workload, MikeF. You showing a 19 day stat line has literally nothing to do with what you think you're proving.

[Enoch Root]

I am amazed that the Rangers have let both Talbot and Raanta go, meanwhile Lundqvist is 35

Are they banking their future on Nell and Halversson?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I am amazed that the Rangers have let both Talbot and Raanta go, meanwhile Lundqvist is 35

Are they banking their future on Nell and Halversson?

Yeah but they've acquired some respectable assets in exchange and if you're the organization that developed those two guys you're probably confident in being able to produce another one when you need one.

The Rags' current trajectory works for it right now.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yeah but they've acquired some respectable assets in exchange and if you're the organization that developed those two guys you're probably confident in being able to produce another one when you need one.

The Rags' current trajectory works for it right now.

I can't imagine there is a GM that has ever lived that thought that. Goalies are witchcraft, you don't just throw them away and assume you can create more.

Having a couple extra 2nd round picks in your pocket would be small consolation for having organizational goalie problems.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yeah but they've acquired some respectable assets in exchange and if you're the organization that developed those two guys you're probably confident in being able to produce another one when you need one.

The Rags' current trajectory works for it right now.

But how much of Talbot's success and Raanta's projected level of play have to do with NYR's prowess in developing goalies?

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by jayswin

He's played the opposite of a starters workload, MikeF. You showing a 19 day stat line has literally nothing to do with what you think you're proving.

Huh? I showed a 9 starts in 19 days stretch (9 games out of 10 for his team) where his sv% remained consistent with his season sv%. What I was trying to prove was that a heavier workload did not lead to poorer stats. How does the evidence I provided have nothing to do with what I was trying to prove?

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

If the Rangers thought Raanta was better than Lundqvist, Raanta would still be a Ranger

Or, If Lundqvist didn't have a NMC and a buyout proof contract Raanta may have been the one staying

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Huh? I showed a 9 starts in 19 days (9 games out of 10 for his team) where his sv% remained consistent with his season sv%. What I was trying to prove was that a heavier workload did not lead to poorer stats. How does the evidence I provided have nothing to do with what I was trying to prove?

I think the disconnect is you don't understand what a starter's work load is. It's not arbitrary, it's not playing lots of games in a small period of time.

Statistics show that playing at a top starter level for 55+ games (or some number close to that) in a season is completely different than playing at a top starter level for a smaller number of games in a season.

Many, many back ups/prospects can put up strong/elite numbers while playing back up games played within a season. Whether those games are close together or spread apart has nothing to do with anything.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I think the disconnect is you don't understand what a starter's work load is. It's not arbitrary, it's not playing lots of games in a small period of time.

Statistics show that playing at a top starter level for 55+ games (or some number close to that) in a season is completely different than playing at a top starter level for a smaller number of games in a season.

Many, many back ups/prospects can put up strong/elite numbers while playing back up games played within a season. Whether those games are close together or spread apart has nothing to do with anything.

For sure. Even this year, Johnson and Elliott when on their runs of playing great and starting lots of games. But neither can sustain it over a season

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by btimbit

For sure. Even this year, Johnson and Elliott when on their runs of playing great and starting lots of games. But neither can sustain it over a season

Exactly, which is why Brad Treliving went after a proven starter, not another goalie that has put up great numbers with less then a starters work load, and I suspect we will be singing his praises for doing so as the season progresses.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Or, If Lundqvist didn't have a NMC and a buyout proof contract Raanta may have been the one staying

Neither of those things forced them to trade Raanta midway through his cap-friendly contract or stopped them from giving him a starter's workload.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I am amazed that the Rangers have let both Talbot and Raanta go, meanwhile Lundqvist is 35

Are they banking their future on Nell and Halversson?

Rangers always have the advantage of most top players being receptive to joining them in free agency. Things are set up well for them as in a couple of year Cam Talbot will be UFA and they could overpay him to come back as the Oilers will be in tough to spend over $6 million for a goaltender.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I think the disconnect is you don't understand what a starter's work load is. It's not arbitrary, it's not playing lots of games in a small period of time.

Statistics show that playing at a top starter level for 55+ games (or some number close to that) in a season is completely different than playing at a top starter level for a smaller number of games in a season.

Many, many back ups/prospects can put up strong/elite numbers while playing back up games played within a season. Whether those games are close together or spread apart has nothing to do with anything.

No, I understand that.

My subjective opinion was that Raanta looked better than Smith last year. To support that, I provided the only objective stats available - that his numbers overall were better than Lundquist's, and that his numbers didn't dip when he played a heavier workload. And FWIW, Rangers observers agreed that over the course of last season, he was overall the team's better goaltender:

Raanta is pretty close to the textbook definition of an ideal back-up goaltender. When he was between the pipes he always gave the Rangers a chance to win. And on some nights last season he looked sharper than the Rangers Hall of Fame-bound goaltender.

There’s no other way to say it: Raanta was the team’s most consistent goalie during the 2016-17 regular season.

Nowhere did I say that I guaranteed that his numbers playing 60 games would be exactly what they were playing 29.

The problem seems to be either (1) people trying to put those words in my mouth, or (2) people taking the position that stats are irrelevant when analyzing the season a #2 goalie had.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Or, If Lundqvist didn't have a NMC and a buyout proof contract Raanta may have been the one staying

Most teams have 2 goalies though , and they traded him and then ran out and grabbed Pavelec. Pretty bizarre, if they do in fact think he is starter material

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Most teams have 2 goalies though , and they traded him and then ran out and grabbed Pavelec. Pretty bizarre, if they do in fact think he is starter material

But most pay and play their clear #1 and they have little choice with using Lundquist, They also cleared out a tonne of cash in that trade with Stepan's $6.5m. Raanta was a UFA next year as well and likely would have been gone at the deadline or lost for nothing.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Mike F

As in you think Smith is better than Raanta short term? Not in my opinion. Raanta put up better numbers than Lundquist the last two years for NYR, and Lundquist is better than Smith.

Goalie numbers are often a reflection of team defense. Raanta played for a good defensive team. Smith played for one of the worst teams in the league. Comparing their numbers straight up is pointless IMO. Not to mention backups often see the weaker teams in the league making their stats even more questionable in terms of translating to a starter

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Goalie numbers are often a reflection of team defense. Raanta played for a good defensive team. Smith played for one of the worst teams in the league. Comparing their numbers straight up is pointless IMO.

Where did I compare Smith's numbers vs. Raanta's straight up?

I compared Raanta's vs. Lundquist's because they played behind the same defense.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Goalie numbers are often a reflection of team defense. Raanta played for a good defensive team. Smith played for one of the worst teams in the league.

Well that's... not true. The Rangers are not a good defensive team. 22nd in unblocked shot attempts against, 23rd in scoring chances against, 28th in high danger chances against.

Just because the Rangers can score and have had great goaltending in Lundqvist, Talbot, and Raanta the past few years, doesn't make them a good defensive team. The last time they were great defensively was 2013-14.

The Coyotes were worse, but that shouldn't take away from Lundqvist, Talbot, or Raanta. They were good despite the Rangers, not because.

[vilzeh]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Where did I compare Smith's numbers vs. Raanta's straight up?

I compared Raanta's vs. Lundquist's because they played behind the same defense.

I've been trying to keep my mouth shut, but it's Lundqvist. Thanks!

[Weitz]

I'm not sold on Smith, but I think he will provide solid enough goaltending for the Flames.

I would be concerned about his age and health. Because I wouldn't want Lack playing any games for me.