Quote:
Originally Posted by tvp2003
To everyone who is convinced Hiller is better than Ramo -- if that was the case, why did Ramo play 30+ games last season? Because Hiller was tired? Also, who ended up starting four out of the five games in the Anaheim series (despite losing 3 of them)?
My theory is that Hiller is more consistent, especially against lesser competition. He's a blocker, and against lesser teams, that is often good enough. However, against better teams (like Anaheim), he has a more difficult time because they have the ability to exploit his weaknesses. On the other hand, Ramo is more athletic and more dynamic, but also more inconsistent. That is why he gives us a chance against better teams (like Anaheim), but can also play some stinkers as well.
If Ortio can find the balance between the two -- athletic yet consistent -- I think you give him a chance to take the reigns. There is a reason why they brought Ramo back -- it was insurance in case Ortio didn't perform and all that was left was Hiller.
|
Why would you use that argument? Sure Ramo started 30 games. Hiller started more.
And he started the last 4 games against Anaheim because Hiller lost the first one, and because he looked pretty good in the second, despite a loss. Then he won the third game, so he started the fourth.
I still think Hartley preferred Hiller slightly, seeing as how he started him against Vancouver and Anaheim (despite Ramo getting the series clincher against the Canucks). Hiller's leash was just a tad longer IMO.
I'm not saying one is preferable versus each other- but as a combo with Ortio, I'd lean towards Hiller.