Who do you WANT to be the Flames Starting Goalie Next Season [*NEW POLL 12·05·17]

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I'd want to say no to Murray for Bennett straight up, but I'd have to think long and hard. That's a tough decision.

I don't do it but I am a big believer in Bennett

[Vinny01]

http://m.calgarysun.com/2017/05/11/p...-gm-rutherford

Fleury is the "best team player in sports" Rutherford loves this guy

[nightfx]

Fleury-Johnson would be a really easy going, positive tandem.

No negative body language after a goal from those two.

[dissentowner]

MAF is first choice, if we can't get him then Mike Smith is my next choice.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by AT77

Lol nah, I just don't like Bennett, that's all.

Great, a new troll.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by btimbit

And when the very likely scenario of none of our goal prospects panning out happens, then what? Jump from stop gap to stop gap?

Get good goaltending, if a prospect pushes in a few years that's a fantastic problem to have, not one that should be purposely avoided

Ben bishop isn't a guarantee either. Which ben bishop are the stars even getting over the next 6 years? He wasn't great for the lightning or the kings this season and has a checkered past when it comes to injuries. Everyone thought Hiller and Elliott were going to be great decisions and they backfired as well.

The Flames' pro scouting has not yielded any success with goaltenders and I would hate to see them pick up the Troy Brouwer of goaltenders and be stuck with an albatross for the next 5-6 years. I'd rather take a short term deal that carries low risk and some upside with no assets being wasted like with Elliott. Tyler Parsons looks to be the real deal and I'd rather put my money on him panning out then the alternative. Cap space will become very important to this team down the road and we can't afford more screw ups.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by JurassicTunga12

one of these 4

Grubauer
Raanta
Fleury
Pickard

Leaning toward Grubauer.

[jayswin]

How do Pickard and Mike Smith keep making it into our wishlist? Honestly, I don't get it. It's amazing that Elliott is someone to stay clear of because of this season yet you'll see these names come up as goalies we'd actually replace him with.

Is it because you guys cheer for and watch the Flames so our own goalie inadequacies are in front of your face? These guys aren't upgrades, they're just names you know that aren't what you just watched in a Flames jersey.

[FireGilbert]

Went with Grubauer again as I think the Fleury acquisition cost will be too high. Also am scared of bringing in another veteran after Hiller and Elliott and would prefer to take a risk trying to find the next Talbot.

With Carolina and Dallas grabbing goalies, what teams other than Calgary are still in the market for one? Off the top of my head I have Vancouver, Winnipeg, Philly, and the Islanders.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

Went with Grubauer again as I think the Fleury acquisition cost will be too high. Also am scared of bringing in another veteran after Hiller and Elliott and would prefer to take a risk trying to find the next Talbot.

With Carolina and Dallas grabbing goalies, what teams other than Calgary are still in the market for one? Off the top of my head I have Vancouver, Winnipeg, Philly, and the Islanders.

From another thread:

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Vancouver - Markstrom (young and unproven)
Winnipeg - Hellebuyck (young and unproven)
Philadelphia - Neuvirth (not really a starter)
Vegas - Nobody
Islanders - Greiss (very, very meh IMO)
Buffalo - Lehner (injury prone, bit of a nutball)
Arizona - Smith (Old and injury prone and not very good, if they protect Domingue then young and proven)
Calgary - Nobody

Those are the teams that SHOULD be in the market for a starter, although some of them will likely just roll with what they have.

[FireGilbert]

^Thanks. I didn't include Vegas since they will have no problem getting a goalie. Also, I think Buffalo is set with Lehner and Nilsson is a good backup. Arizona is an interesting one. They definitely should be looking to upgrade but as a cap floor team with Smith already on a big contact they may decide to stick with him.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

^Thanks. I didn't include Vegas since they will have no problem getting a goalie. Also, I think Buffalo is set with Lehner and Nilsson is a good backup. Arizona is an interesting one. They definitely should be looking to upgrade but as a cap floor team with Smith already on a big contact they may decide to stick with him.

Yeah if I was Buffalo I probably stand pat with Lehner too, but they just changed management and maybe the new guy isn't a big Lehner fan?

Just spitballin..

I could see Arizona taking one of Dallas' goalies to get an extra pick from them.

Random AHL guy for Niemi/Lehtonen + pick or something like that.

It's a very Arizona thing to do these days. Although, unlike Bolland, Datsyuk and Pronger they would actually have to pay Niemi or Lehtonen, but they'd also be getting a guy who could play.

[PeteMoss]

Could see Vegas getting involved with the Flames on this.

Flames say take X goalie from whoever and trade to us and then take Brouwer
Flames give up 1st.

Another super long shot... see if you can get one of the big Russian prospect goalies - Samsonov, Shesterkin or Sorokin and convince them to come over this year (although both are under KHL contract for next year, so doubtful)

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by btimbit

You wouldn't?

Sure it'd suck if Bennett lights it up with the Pens, but I see a goalie of that quality way more beneficial to Calgary than Bannett.

Murray looks great, but there are countless goalies that looked great for a couple years and then were done.

No way would I trade a building block like Bennett for a goalie unless it was a package for Price.

The other factor here is Parsons. I know he is still only a CHL goalie and is a ways away, but he isn't just a good prospect, he's considered one of the best prospects in hockey. He has huge potential. Parsons is the real deal.

Trading Bennett to acquire Murray, and then having Parsons be better than Murray in 3 years, would make it one of the worst trades in franchise history.

No way would I give up Bennett for a goalie like Murray, and I really want Murray.

I would give up our 1st this year. I would do as much as Gillies and our 1st. But I wouldn't give up Bennett.

[Enoch Root]

Regarding giving up Bennett...

Ask yourself this: considering that there are other goalie options out there, do you honestly believe that Murray is so much better than the other options that it would be worth giving up Bennett to acquire him?

To put it another way, which would you prefer:

Grubrauer AND Bennett

or

Murray and no Bennett?

[Flash Walken]

Bennett by himself would not be enough to land Matt Murray.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Bennett by himself would not be enough to land Matt Murray.

I disagree.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I disagree.

Why?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Why?

Because goalies have proven to command a lot less than skaters on the trade market.

[IamNotKenKing]

Hearing a Mike Smith rumour.