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

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You are a Riders fan. There is nothing more embarrassing than that.

What the f....? Why textcritic? There are plenty of us in here....no need to throw stones.

[foshizzle11]

Originally Posted by ToewsFan

I hate to say this but Smith is not the answer to the Flames inadequate goaltending. He will lead you to the land of the first round exit. I hope Jon Gillies or Tyler Parsons are going to progress sooner than later. The Flames need a new Kipper. If they find him, the Flames are Conference Finals bound. This team needs a good goalie to shatter the glass window, and reach the next level. Mike Smith is not the answer.

Seriously though, I believe the Flames know this and is a big reason why we didn't back up the truck to a guy like Bishop for 6 or 7 years. This is a stop gap, likely the best option we have until Gillies, Rittich or Parsons develops. If Smith performs well and our team does well while he is here, it was a great move by Tre. The salary is right and so is the term, can't argue too much here.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Zoller

Rittich isn't going back to the Czech League. I seriously can't believe people have Gillies > Rittich. Gillies missed almost a whole year of development. He needs at least 2 or 3 more years in the AHL. Rittich has shown he could graduate as soon as this year to a backup role. And Rittich is only 24 years old. 1 year older than Gillies and technically 2 years further in development. Rittich > Gillies imo and I don't think it's even close.

It's not even a numbers thing.

Rittich passes my eye test more. Just seems calmer and sharper in net.

[Enoch Root]

I think that pretty much everyone who watched the Heat last year would agree that Rittich was the superior goalie.

The disconnect comes from the fact that Gillies is perceived to have the higher upside. Rightly or wrongly, I agree with that assessment.

[zoom]

any guesses as to when the Penticton roster will be released?

[Snuffleupagus]

This isn't NHL 17 when picking players

From all accounts Mrazek is a cancer, reports of him blaming and shaming his teammates on goals must be true if all 30 GM's didn't want him.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by zoom

any guesses as to when the Penticton roster will be released?

No idea. But it is probably posted in the Rookie Tournament thread.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by 1_Flames_Fan

Definitely not Corey Price, possibly not even Carey Price

That would be just like the Flames to get the crappy brother....again!

[Mike F]

I'll be very, very interested to see who ends up with the better long term goaltending: Calgary or Phoenix...

Phoenix saw a guy in Raanta who has proven he can play in the NHL, and spent some significant assets to bring him in as their ling term starter.

Instead of spending assets to solve their long term solution now, the Flames picked up Phoenix's current #1 as a bridge band-aid in hopes that they can develop a starter for free from their own system, having at least one or two guys who look like good prospects at this time.

History has shown that the jump from junior or even the AHL to the NHL is huge, with the majority of even highly touted prospects failing to become legitimate starters. This gives Phoenix a big edge at this point, IMO. But, obviously, it'll take 2 or 3 years to conclusively determine.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I'll be very, very interested to see who ends up with the better long term goaltending: Calgary or Phoenix...

Phoenix saw a guy in Raanta who has proven he can play in the NHL, and spent some significant assets to bring him in as their ling term starter.

Instead of spending assets to solve their long term solution now, the Flames picked up Phoenix's current #1 as a bridge band-aid in hopes that they can develop a starter for free from their own system, having at least one or two guys who look like good prospects at this time.

History has shown that the jump from junior or even to the NHL is huge, with the majority of even highly touted prospects failing to become legitimate starters. This gives Phoenix a big edge at this point, IMO. But, obviously, it'll take 2 or 3 years to conclusively determine.

Very true, but the other thing the Flames have done is show a ton of faith to players that are within this system.

The Smith signing is equivalent to firing a warning shot off the bow of Rittich, Gillies and Parsons:

"Theres two jobs here. Come and take them."

[Flamenfame]

Originally Posted by RoughRiderRowdy

Lol your so delusional. Your posts are so ridiculous i would consider deactivating your account. Totally laughable your not even funny

Maybe learn to reply like a adult when in disagreement like the other posters did on my thoughts on Smith. I don't see how name calling and flaming lands you any credibility. And it's you're

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I'll be very, very interested to see who ends up with the better long term goaltending: Calgary or Phoenix...

Phoenix saw a guy in Raanta who has proven he can play in the NHL, and spent some significant assets to bring him in as their ling term starter.

Instead of spending assets to solve their long term solution now, the Flames picked up Phoenix's current #1 as a bridge band-aid in hopes that they can develop a starter for free from their own system, having at least one or two guys who look like good prospects at this time.

History has shown that the jump from junior or even the AHL to the NHL is huge, with the majority of even highly touted prospects failing to become legitimate starters. This gives Phoenix a big edge at this point, IMO. But, obviously, it'll take 2 or 3 years to conclusively determine.

I think the Flames have the better starter in the short term. And they have the higher-ceiling prospects for the long term.

But one of the goalies has to actually make that jump for their strategy to pay off.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think the Flames have the better starter in the short term. And they have the higher-ceiling prospects for the long term.

But one of the goalies has to actually make that jump for their strategy to pay off.

That is probably how the Flames have approached their goaltending question heading into this season and beyond, although I imagine they have also indicated that they are still evaluating, and not ready to make a long term commitment. If in two years there is no viable option for the Flames in goal from within their system they also still retain the option to improve from outside if necessary.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Flamenfame

Maybe learn to reply like a adult when in disagreement like the other posters did on my thoughts on Smith. I don't see how name calling and flaming lands you any credibility. And it's you're

It's "an adult", not "a adult"... ; )

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think the Flames have the better starter in the short term. And they have the higher-ceiling prospects for the long term.

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.

[jayswin]

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.

But not at starter games played. Elliot is a top five NHL goalie at non NHL starter games played.

[Enoch Root]

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.

context

[PepsiFree]

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.

In 54 games total over those 2 years, which is less than either Smith or Lundqvist played last year alone.

With goaltenders sample-size and games played is huge. Plus, if Raanta is better than Lundqvist because he had better numbers, doesn't that mean Smith is better too? Seems to make zero sense to say .922 in 29 games > .910 in 57 games > .914 in 55 games

[Enoch Root]

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

[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.

Like I said, time will tell. And the vastly different defense corps they'll play behind will muddle things. But having watched some (but not a tonne) of both goalies last year, Raanta looked like he had better game.