[Trade] [TOR/SJ] Reimer, Morin for Stalock, Smith, pick

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Agreed on both posts above. Not saying Ramo is the answer, and Reimer would be a viable 1a/1b solution. I just have a feeling it is a Band-Aid solution. Perhaps a one year deal would be ok, but I am hopeful they can assess the goalie landscape and sign a guy they truly feel is a No. 1. Maybe it is Reimer, maybe Raanta or Murray.
Just need to ensure the Flames aren't spending the money they had this year on below average tending. Spend it on a legit guy with a cheap back-up or save it and spend it elsewhere in the lineup.

[Split98]

If Ortio keeps building on what he's starting right now, we can be pretty confident we have a 1B, with potential to elevate and legitimately steal a role here. That will play heavily on contract offers to fill that 1A role.

Ramo, I'd have had no problem giving the 1A and seeing what he signs for – but that injury shouldn't be taken lightly.

Which leaves Reimer, and I'm pretty happy about it. I think, if anything, Reimer will be had cheaper than we expect - and that's due to offers. Other teams will be calling Reimer and he will be quite busy July 1st. The benefit to us, however, is that they will be offering him backup roles and salary. I'm sure he will have his fair share of 2 year $2.5M offers. I wouldn't be surprised if Calgary's sub $4M multi-year offer looks mighty attractive.

Under $5M in goalies next year would be pretty refreshing after our $8.9M year.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by Split98

If Ortio keeps building on what he's starting right now, we can be pretty confident we have a 1B, with potential to elevate and legitimately steal a role here. That will play heavily on contract offers to fill that 1A role.

I'm not completely confident that we have even a backup in him yet (although it looks promising and I am hopeful). 1b means a capable starter. There is simply not nearly enough evidence to go around throwing that phrase at a guy who has only showed intermittent episodes of promise.

Again, I'm hopeful, but this is an old story repeated in half of the teams in the NHL every year. It'll be a while until we are pretty confident.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

I'm not completely confident that we have even a backup in him yet (although it looks promising and I am hopeful). 1b means a capable starter. There is simply not nearly enough evidence to go around throwing that phrase at a guy who has only showed intermittent episodes of promise.

Again, I'm hopeful, but this is an old story repeated in half of the teams in the NHL every year. It'll be a while until we are pretty confident.

I'm not completely confident quite yet, but I'm looking at seasons end with 15 more games.

If he keeps it up over that period, my confidence will have grown considerably. It's less than 20% of the season, but a decent handful of games to work with still.

If he's not a 1B, he's definitely a backup I would think. All that thinking of him as a 1B accomplishes here is contract negotiations with a UFA goalie. I'm sure his agent pushes quite a bit harder if Calgary's best option to start the season is Backstrom.

[PeteMoss]

One thing to keep in mind with Reimer - he gets hurt on a fairly regularly basis. Nothing major but seems to get dinged up every year.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

One thing to keep in mind with Reimer - he gets hurt on a fairly regularly basis. Nothing major but seems to get dinged up every year.

So did/does Ramo.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

One thing to keep in mind with Reimer - he gets hurt on a fairly regularly basis. Nothing major but seems to get dinged up every year.

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

So did/does Ramo.

Yeah, but if someone bought a car with engine problems and the wife said "Geez, the car keeps breaking down", you wouldn't say "So did the old one". We're trying to find a goaltending solution going forward, so it was a noteworthy point by PeteMoss.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

I think one of the silliest things fans do is look at a player who has had injuries and assume they will continue to get injured in the future at the same pace. This whole idea is ridiculous. Injuries are often chance accidents or collisions.

"Injury prone" is one of the stupidest concepts fans use in a lame attempt to predict a future they cannot know.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

So did/does Ramo.

Ramo's injury this year is not from being made of glass.

[IgiTang]

Cheap Goaltending leads to Cheap Goaltending beyond a RFA or Bridge deal.

You get what you pay for in that position IMO.

I cringe at the thought of Riemer in Flames Uni.

I think this board would implode with the Reimer debate... This says to me, he is not the solution.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I think one of the silliest things fans do is look at a player who has had injuries and assume they will continue to get injured in the future at the same pace. This whole idea is ridiculous. Injuries are often chance accidents or collisions.

"Injury prone" is one of the stupidest concepts fans use in a lame attempt to predict a future they cannot know.

There are definitely some studies around why or if athletes are injury prone. I don't think its something you can just discount as not happening.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/ar...-prone/385257/

https://www.newscientist.com/article...-injury-prone/

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

There are definitely some studies around why or if athletes are injury prone. I don't think its something you can just discount as not happening.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/ar...-prone/385257/

https://www.newscientist.com/article...-injury-prone/

Oh I have no doubt there are some athletes who are injury prone. But the amount of times that phrase is thrown around is absurd. Hockey is a contact sport and a great deal of injuries are pure luck. Sure conditioning, flexibility, muscle mass, all can make a difference. Sure some players play a more physical style and block more shots and can be more likely to get injured than players who don't. Someone COULD have a chronic shoulder issue (although we see that less these days with improved surgeries). But in the end anyone can get hit by a shot, anybody can have someone fall on their leg accidentally, anybody can get pushed awkwardly into the boards, any goalie have people pushed into them, fall on them, etc. The majority of injuries in hockey are chance or accidental IMO. Thus pointing to someone's injury history and then extrapolating that into the future is an extremely questionable endeavor. IMO it's definitely questionable when talking about goalies who often get injured due to players falling on them or pushing them into the net with force.

Anyways, just a pet peeve of mine. See it all the time where fans call a player injury prone but then you look at his injury history it's all accidental injuries that could've happened to anybody. It's a phrase that has some meaning but now fans apply it way too frequently and the phrase starts to become questionable when it's mis-applied so often.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

^Giordano is a prime example of that. A few freak injuries and suddenly he's injury prone according to some fans.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

^Giordano is a prime example of that. A few freak injuries and suddenly he's injury prone according to some fans.

I would say he's earned his injury rap as although he's got two 82 game seasons under his belt he's missed significant time over his career. I wouldn't call him injury prone but from year to year he's no lock to play over 70 games.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Who the hell is a lock to play over 70 games a year? Nobody! Cause freak accidents and injuries can happen to anybody. Silly statement.

[druetetective]

I agree the term is used to often but I don't think it is a ridiculous term at all.

Look at Joffrey Lupul, He has missed hundreds of games over the last 5 years. None of his injuries are a recurring issue. It's shoulder, foot, wrist, ankle, back, groin or concussion. You name it and he has been afflicted with it.

Joffrey Lupul is one of a dozen or two players whose bodies simply are prone to injury.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/player-bio/joffrey-lupul/bio

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by druetetective

I agree the term is used to often but I don't think it is a ridiculous term at all.

Look at Joffrey Lupul, He has missed hundreds of games over the last 5 years. None of his injuries are a recurring issue. It's shoulder, foot, wrist, ankle, back, groin or concussion. You name it and he has been afflicted with it.

Joffrey Lupul is one of a dozen or two players whose bodies simply are prone to injury.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/player-bio/joffrey-lupul/bio

Is he? Or is he just unlucky? Could those same injuries have happened to Jay Bouwmeester who was the NHL's ironman for a while? Quite a hazy distinction.

[Toonage]

I think Lupul is just a clutz. Pretty sure one of those injuries occurred when he stepped on a rake.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Who the hell is a lock to play over 70 games a year? Nobody! Cause freak accidents and injuries can happen to anybody. Silly statement.

You would be surprised that there are more than a few players that more than not play 70+ games every season. You only have to look at Jarome Iginla or Kipper to see it's very reasonable to expect 70+ games on an annual basis. Silly statement.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You would be surprised that there are more than a few players that more than not play 70+ games every season. Silly statement.

Of course there are. But were they a "lock" (your words) to play 70 games before the season started? No, of course not. Nobody is a lock to play 70 games because injuries can happen to anybody. I dunno, maybe you don't understand what the word "lock" means in that sentence? Lock implies it's guaranteed. 100% chance. Which makes it a silly statement by definition.