Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
Yes, it will cost us a roster spot. It will cost us uncertainty in a goalie situation just like we had earlier in the year. It will cost us flexibility in bringing in a proven goalie should one become available in a trade.
As far as Nilsson goes, he hasn't proven anything yet. Scrivens looked good for a few games last year (remember "Scrivezina"?) and where is he now? For every backup goalie that blossoms on another team, there's a dozen that stay at the same level, and another couple dozen that end up as career AHL/tweeners or go to Europe.
Many people confuse the possible with the probable. Those people make bad decisions because of it. I hope the Flames set a slightly higher bar than the jokesters in Edmonton when it comes to evaluating the chances of a hockey more being a likely improvement versus random flailing about in the hopes of getting lucky.
|
Re: the uncertainty, what could be more uncertain than having the world goalies in the league? Every time the other team shoots it's uncertain. Anyways you waive Hiller and go with Khubodin/Ramo for the rest of the season, there's no uncertainty. Not sure how this would limit trading for a proven goalie later. So out of your three "downsides", I see the only legit one being the roster spot. And if the only downside to trying to improve our goaltending this season is a roster spot, you do it 10/10 times.
We're not looking for the "goalie of the future" here, which is what the Oilers are always trying for. We just need a guy to give us average NHL goaltending for 55 games so that the team has a shot at the playoffs. There is nothing to lose, even if he's horrible it's on par with our current tandem.