Quote:
Originally Posted by djsFlames
I guess Price fast tracked the backup role and went straight to tandem for a couple years to break in but..
Talbot..was a backup first in NY
Murray..even spent time backing up MAF
Holtby..spent time backing up Neuvirth and Varlamov first
Dubnyk..backed up Khabibulin for a year or two, split in Arizona before Minny
Bishop and Elliott both backed up in Ottawa prior to Tampa and St Loo
Could go on but rather go to bed. Don't know what universe you live in though claiming that its typical for starters to jump straight into that role.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by combustiblefuel
This is so not true. Name 5 goalies who just became starters in the NHL in the last 40 years with out backing up first.
|
Talbot was not a highly regarded young goalie. More of a backup that developed into a starter later in his career. We're talking about a 23 year old Jon Gillies and whether he should be in the AHL or NHL at his age. Talbot didn't see any NHL time til age 26/27. They aren't comparable in the slightest. There's no point comparing Talbot's career path with Gillies as nothing about them is similar. Talbot wasn't even drafted.
Dubnyk played his first 3 pro season entirely in the minors. Jon Gillies has 1 year of pro under his belt. Dubnyk was arguably almost ruined by playing in front of the horrid Oiler's defense and losing all confidence in himself. The Oilers tried to fast track him into a starter/tandem and it failed. Some goalies take longer than others. Dubnyk needed 3 years in the minors before he played in the NHL and arguably should've had more. Gillies only has 1 and that was in a tandem. Of course Dubnyk came from juniors and Gillies played in college. If anything the Dubnyk case argues for leaving the kid in the minors longer.
Murray is an interesting case. Probably would've been fast tracked as PIT's starter if they didn't have such a highly paid and highly popular guy sitting in front of him. I think many organizations would've had him in the AHL and then straight into starter status. But yes, you are right in that he did spend some time backing up in the NHL. I still don't see that as the ideal for goalie development and Treliving's interviews say much the same.
Murray and Gibson have some similarity. Personally I don't think Gibson backing up in ANA helped his development much, I would have rather seen him play more in the AHL and then be handed the reins. I still think that's a lot more ideal. Instead of ANA having Gibson work out his kinks and develop in the AHL they've basically had him develop on the job while in a tandem or as a starter. Lots of extra pressure on that kid but he is one of the most highly regarded young goalies in a while. It looks like he'll be fine in the long run but I'm not sure the way they handled and developed him is the ideal.
Highly regarded young goalies that moved straight into starter status without spending much if any time backing up at all?
Ryan Miller
Roberto Luongo
Jonathan Quick
Carey Price
Patrick Roy
to name a few off the top of my head.
Anyways I probably shouldn't have generalized as each goalie is a unique case. Clearly some have backed up, some came up into tandems. But saying young goalies need to backup first makes absolutely no sense to me and it flies in the face of what our GM has said over and over again.
Sure at some point before he's a starter Gillies may spend a bit of time backing up. But now is not that time. Jon Gillies has 1 season of pro under his belt where he played in a tandem with David Rittich. Because he missed almost a complete year due to injury there are good arguments as to why this kid needs to play. Sitting on the bench isn't teaching a goalie anything and there's only so much you learn with a goalie coach. Our GM keeps saying things along these lines. Young goalies have to see pucks in game situations. How many times has Treliving talked about this in regards to Gillies? Over and over again.
What the heck is Jon Gillies gonna learn sitting on the bench in the NHL? It puts the kid in an awkward situation if the coach loses any faith in him and then has to start riding our relatively old starter. That isn't a good situation for Smith, Gulutzan or Gillies.
Clearly its ideal for Gillies to be playing games in the minors this year, getting in a groove, learning how to dominate pro. If any goalie was to replace Lack this year then Rittich makes a lot more sense because he's already played more pro than Gillies and didn't lose a year to injury. Treliving has said that people outside the organization thought Rittich was one of the best goalies in the AHL last year. And Treliving has talked about Rittich having more pro experience and thus hinting that he's more NHL ready than Gillies.
Our GM doesn't want Gillies backing up, they want him playing games. Basically Treliving has refuted your earlier argument in numerous interviews over the past few months.