Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss
You can look at it two ways - neither looks good on Treliving:
1) Ortio isn't good enough to be in the NHL - then why give him a contract that gives him a one-way deal this year? Why keep him around to rot on the bench for months?
2) Ortio is good enough to be in the NHL - just didn't get a chance - why sign Ramo when he's shown to be below average at best? Why keep Hiller/Ramo around to start the year - send one down to Stockton - neither has shown to be anything more than below average, so its no big loss.
|
I think this is a situation where the coach and GM are not on the same page.
Hartley is on record as hating having 3 goalies. He picked his 1 and 2 as Ramo and Hiller. From his perspective Ortio wasn't in the conversation.
Meanwhile the GM needs to see Ortio play. He has two pending free agents and one pending RFA in net. He needs to know what he has in Ortio. Plus he didn't want to expose Ortio to waivers.
But it's concerning when a GM and coach are not on the same page. Ramo is put on waivers by the GM but is played in a record number of consecutive starts when he comes back. He does that over the guy the GM insisted stayed on the roster.
Both are at fault. The GM should have pushed the issue immediately with one of the goalies going down. But the coach needs to adapt better. Your one and two aren't cutting it and you have access to a three. It's silliness to not give that option a fair crack.