I am not a fan of the Lack signing, but I am also not willing to write him off so quickly either.
We all knew that when the Flames acquired him, that Lack had to work on his game. Like Gulutzan has stated, Lack has worked his butt off, and has improved since his time in Carolina.
Lack was good against St. Louis.
Against Detroit, he was neither good nor did I think he was necessarily bad. You hope that your goalie can make a couple of big saves, but at least he didn't let any bad goals in. The entire team didn't show up last night for the most part anyway, so it isn't like he lost Calgary that game.
Sample size is way too small for me to agree with one side or another when it comes to Lack. I personally will judge him when the sample size is a bit larger. He may yet prove to be a very savvy signing that helps propel the Flames into the playoffs. Who knows? Maybe he will have the inverse season to Johnson - maybe he will start off poorly (or maybe not poorly, but a bit underwhelming) and then finish strong.
At this point in the season, the Flames haven't needed him yet. The schedule has been fairly light, and most teams would ride their #1 goalie. Lack was a decent goalie for Vancouver before going to Carolina, and then Carolina decided to change his game up, and he ended up having a terrible time there. Takes a while to work out those kinks in his game. Maybe he will, or maybe he won't, but the schedule allows him that time, and if it works out, then the Flames are looking pretty strong. Too early to tell, and I don't think he has been bad, even with letting in those 5 goals. That's what happens when you let a goalie out to dry. Against a much better and much more dangerous team in St. Louis, he was good, and the team supported him. That to me shows that he is probably able to perform as a decent backup, but I still want to see a larger sample size before deciding for myself.
|