Keetley Named Player of the Week

[Tilley]

http://theahl.com/news/league/index....rticle_id=8999

He has continued to impress early this season. With Irving struggling to start the season, Keetley's experience should help to solidify things defensively.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Professional hockey was owned by Flames this week.
Iginla NHL player of the week
Keetley in the AHL

Congrats Keetley!

[Cactus Jack]

Good to see Keetley play well, I think he has just as good a chance to make it as a starter as Irving. I see Irving has terrible numbers in his first 2 starts, is it just a matter of him needing to adjust to a better level of hockey?
________
Infants Depakote

[Tilley]

I do think it will take time for Irving to adjust to pro hockey.

The game in Des Moines was a terrible effort from the whole team. Irving got no help from an ECHL defense. I didn't see the game vs. Rochester but it was Palin's, Eriksson's, and Pelech's first game back.

Irving does have a long way to go. He was beaten by relatively easy shots in the Des Moines game. I'm not concerned with his performances yet as the first couple of games McElhinney played in Omaha were quite the adventure as well.

[Pauly]

12 months from now Matt Keetley will be backing up Miikka Kiprusoff. Thats a slam dunk no-brainer & Darryl laid out the groundwork for it to happen earlier this summer (i.e. only signing McIlhenney to a 1 yr. deal)

Congrats Keeter, keep it up

[JiriHrdina]

Irving was always going to be a guy that took a long time to get to the NHL - I never viewed him as a guy that was going to make the NHL right out of junior - he'll need a couple seasons at least down there.

Patience with goalies is key - the nice thing though is that we've got 4 legitimate guys in the pipeline.

If one gets a starter out of that group you're gold. A starter and a back-up would be incredible.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Pauly

12 months from now Matt Keetley will be backing up Miikka Kiprusoff. Thats a slam dunk no-brainer & Darryl laid out the groundwork for it to happen earlier this summer (i.e. only signing McIlhenney to a 1 yr. deal)

Actually, that wasn't Sutter's idea. Curtis McElhinney was pitched a three year deal and turned it down.

I suppose it's fashionable to latch onto the Prospect Du Jour, but Curtis McElhinney is still considered more than a stop-gap goalie by the organization. Dude was a second team AHL All-Star (and that's keeping these types of accolades in perspective). I think he's terribly underrated.

All of this of course, is a good problem to have. But you hate to see young goalies do better elsewhere.

Congratulations to Keetley, BTW.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Professional hockey was owned by Flames this week.
Iginla NHL player of the week
Keetley in the AHL

Congrats Keetley!

Indeed

Congrats to Keetley

[Pauly]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Actually, that wasn't Sutter's idea. Curtis McElhinney was pitched a three year deal and turned it down.

I suppose it's fashionable to latch onto the Prospect Du Jour, but Curtis McElhinney is still considered more than a stop-gap goalie by the organization. Dude was a second team AHL All-Star (and that's keeping these types of accolades in perspective). I think he's terribly underrated.

All of this of course, is a good problem to have. But you hate to see young goalies do better elsewhere.

Congratulations to Keetley, BTW.

I didnt realize that, never heard anything about it. Whats the logic on McIlhenney's part on that, 3 years guaranteed on a one-way contract in the NHL after being in the minors for a number of years vs. 1 year at only 500k...doesnt make much sense on the surface

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Pauly

I didnt realize that, never heard anything about it. Whats the logic on McIlhenney's part on that, 3 years guaranteed on a one-way contract in the NHL after being in the minors for a number of years vs. 1 year at only 500k...doesnt make much sense on the surface

Yeah Sutter did say that. I guess McE wants to be a starter.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Pauly

I didnt realize that, never heard anything about it. Whats the logic on McIlhenney's part on that, 3 years guaranteed on a one-way contract in the NHL after being in the minors for a number of years vs. 1 year at only 500k...doesnt make much sense on the surface

Opportunity?

Multiple years playing sparingly behind Miikka Kiprusoff (and his long term deal) or a shorter road to playing a more substantial role somewhere else.

Sutter was probably looking at it from an asset management viewpoint. Just because you've got a mittful of promising young goalies doesn't mean you let them walk one by one.

[Pauly]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Opportunity?

Multiple years playing sparingly behind Miikka Kiprusoff (and his long term deal) or a shorter road to playing a more substantial role somewhere else.

Sutter was probably looking at it from an asset management viewpoint. Just because you've got a mittful of promising young goalies doesn't mean you let them walk one by one.

Yeah and who doesnt want an opportunity. Doesnt mean he's going to get it. I'd take the security anyday, if another team see's some potential in him and is willing to give him a chance Darryl would have accomodated it anyways.

Darryl is one of the only GM's in the league that will do anything to accomodate his guys if they dont fit in the plan. Knowing that, McIlhenney shoulda took the 3 years, either way he gets his chance here or Darryl would move him IF some other team actually wanted him. If no teams actually want him then he made a bad career decision, lost 2 years of guaranteed NHL salary. Again, if some team DOES want him, he still woulda been better off with the 3 year and a trade to move him if he actually has value.

Glad it worked out for us. Less salary tied up long-term, Flames are better off. Keetley will be ready next year anyways to step up.

[Reggie Dunlop]

I can't speak to the specific motivations of Curtis McElhinney, only lay out a possible reason.

Nonetheless, Matt Keetley has a significant ways to go to reach the level of Curtis McElhinney.

[Pauly]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

I can't speak to the specific motivations of Curtis McElhinney, only lay out a possible reason.

Nonetheless, Matt Keetley has a significant ways to go to reach the level of Curtis McElhinney.

He'll get there Reg, Keetley has a tonne more upside when he does too...have some faith, guy is still 2 or 3 years younger than McElhinney and already lighting it up as a starter in the AHL. Cant recall McElhinney doing that in his 2nd year in the AHL. Keetley will be fine.

It is a good problem to have tho, all these young goaltending options. Hopefully by the time Keetley is ready to move up with the big club, Irving is ready to move into a full-time starting role in QC. That would be nice if it all worked out smoothly like that, nice transition into their respective roles for both Keetley & Irving.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Huh? McElhinney was an AHL All Star in his sophomore season.

Keetley has a player of the week honor. McElhinney's been there, done that, on several occasions.

Hold your horses for a while. You do realize that Curtis McElhinney is 25 years old? Little early to be writing him off so casually.

[Pauly]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Huh? McElhinney was an AHL All Star in his sophomore season.

Keetley has a player of the week honor. McElhinney's been there, done that, on several occasions.

Hold your horses for a while. You do realize that Curtis McElhinney is 25 years old? Little early to be writing him off so casually.

Wow Reg...someone's a little bitter/snappy tonight I see. I never once wrote McElhinney off. And yes I am very aware of his age. Read every post I wrote. I did not realize Sutter initially offered him a 3 yr. deal. My whole posts were in response to that. I believe that eventually Keetley will be a better pro than McIlhenney, you may disagree, totally fine. I'm entitled to my opinion, as you are yours. I also stated a few times we as an organization are lucky to have so many good young goalies (i.e. Keetley, McIlhenney & Irving) in the system.

I've been nothing but constructive on all my posts on this topic. You're taking this site a little too serious having to try and put people in their place everytime they disagree with you, relax and enjoy the fact we're all here for the same reason, the enjoyment of the game and more specifically the enjoyment of our team.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Pauly

He'll get there Reg, Keetley has a tonne more upside when he does too...have some faith, guy is still 2 or 3 years younger than McElhinney and already lighting it up as a starter in the AHL. Cant recall McElhinney doing that in his 2nd year in the AHL. Keetley will be fine.

It is a good problem to have tho, all these young goaltending options. Hopefully by the time Keetley is ready to move up with the big club, Irving is ready to move into a full-time starting role in QC. That would be nice if it all worked out smoothly like that, nice transition into their respective roles for both Keetley & Irving.

Yeah, McElhinney was a AHL all star and player of the week many, many times.

I don't know what Sutter's plan is with all these young goalies and Kiprusoff still kicking around for half a decade though

[dobbles]

pauly, i don't think reggie at all overreacted. he simply stated a response to your post. on the surface it can be frustrating as you seemingly write mcelhinney off even if you don't directly say it. the guy played great ahl hockey for a couple seasons. then all of a sudden because keetley got player of the week he will replace him next season?

i will say though, that i think mcelhinney will leave after the season. because being a backup in calgary means you get to see 5-10 games a year. if he wants any type of shot at a regular nhl gig, it won't be in calgary. had he signed a 3 year contract, he would really be shutting the door on a realistic chance at a more playing time when his contract was up. he wont get the chance to shine even as a backup in calgary, so might as well give it a go somewhere else.

and keetley has been playing lights out so far. behind the hodge podge of defensemen, he still put up decent numbers and as everyone has returned, he looked even better. he played 3 days in a row opening weekend which surprised me, but still was solid then.

[edn88]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

I don't know what Sutter's plan is with all these young goalies and Kiprusoff still kicking around for half a decade though

If Kipper plays five more productive years for us at 72 games per year - great, otherwise, you will see one of the young guys step in for more games.

As well, having good goaltender prospects is not a bad thing - can be used to trade for other assets when needed. Plus having some good young talent in your system is good in case the injury bug gets you.

[Tilley]

When do you think Sutter drafts another goalie? As it's been stated there are four good, young goaltenders in the system with three (Keetley, Irving, Lalande) being about the same age.

I would think that during 2010 Sutter drafts a goalie in the fourth or fifth rounds. Depending on the development of Keetley and/or Irving, they should be well established and may provide an indication of whether they are NHL starter material or not.

It's a nice problem to have and allows Sutter to focus on filling forward and defensive holes in the prospect base.