Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
How long does the argument that his goaltenders don't have more to give is acceptable? How can we expect the team to improve if not improving goaltending is acceptable? This applies to the GM as well but sooner or later Flames goaltending has to improve because if it doesn't then this rebuild is going to be a failure. Somehow two coaching staffs have been fired for not improving the team yet this guy still has his job despite goaltending being the weak link that probably cost both Hartley and Gulutzan their jobs. You have to admit it's a little twilight zone how he's escaped scrutiny from management.
|
It’s acceptable until you can prove otherwise. The fact is, we really don’t know one way or another.
It’s entirely possible that he’s an excellent goalie coach, just as possible as him being a terrible one in fact.
The problem is the lack of control in study. All goaltenders get worse eventually, most goaltenders never become full-time NHLers. Those are facts, we know that. The question is, have the Flames just had a string of inevitable results without getting a goalie over the last few years to buck the trend, or acquired guys at the wrong time? We don’t know, because there is zero way of knowing how these guys would have faired if on another team.
Does Sigalet get the most out of his goaltenders? Or does he hurt their performance? There’s no strong evidence of either, but there is some weak evidence to support either.
He’s either a good goalie coach which is why he’s kept his job.
Or he’s a goalie coach who is actually the reason guys suddenly decline or don’t stick in the NHL, despite those being the odds on favourite results, and nobody but fans have noticed.
Or he’s somewhere in the middle.