Ramo vs Hiller | Who Stays?

[devo22]

Said it all year: re-sign Ramo, trade Hiller. Hiller is a good goalie, but I'm much more comfortable with Ramo in net.

[Erick Estrada]

Goaltending IMO is arguably the biggest need of upgrade in the near future and I don't think Ramo or Hiller is a long term solution. Ramo will still be looked at as one of the 2nd tier goaltenders in free agency because his numbers just aren't that great so I don't think he's going to command a big contract if the Flames want to keep him. However seeing Hiller is signed for another year and goaltender trade market is soft I would just ride things out with Hiller and Ortio and see where things end up at the end of next season.

[Itse]

Hillers has better career stats, better regular season stats and better postseason stats. Regular season games were split about 60/40 in favour of Hiller.

That said, both are pretty average goalies. I'm hoping Ortio is ready to step in, in which case what really matters is having a guy that's okay with being the guy that's just waiting to be pushed out by the younger guy.

[standinmotion]

No disrespect to the "trade Hiller, sign Ramo" crowd: why would a team want to trade for Hiller when they can just sign Ramo for free? We are all in agreement that they are about the same, so skills is not a factor. There could be an edge situation where a team may wan to trade for Hiller; but I think the market would be very small, and hence the Flames won't get much in return at all.

[madmike]

Originally Posted by standinmotion

No disrespect to the "trade Hiller, sign Ramo" crowd: why would a team want to trade for Hiller when they can just sign Ramo for free? We are all in agreement that they are about the same, so skills is not a factor. There could be an edge situation where a team may wan to trade for Hiller; but I think the market would be very small, and hence the Flames won't get much in return at all.

I agree with this. I just can't see there being any kind of market for Hiller. He's an older, middle of the road starter. There's really not a lot of incentive for a team to pick him up - unless they're looking for a short-term deal to hit the cap floor.

[Geeoff]

I think a team will offer Ramo a better situation/contract than the Flames will. We can count on him being gone IMO.

[Righteous1]

Ortio is from Turku, Finland...you simply do not trade him or he will make you regret it.

[Finger Cookin]

I'd like to see if we can re-sign Ramo and sneak Ortio to the AHL early in training camp, like what happened with Markstrom this past season. That would give us more time to assess and explore options. Failing that, my preference would be to go with Hiller and Ortio.

[Red Menace]

I don't think there is a marked difference between the 2.
I wouldn't be surprised if Ortio is the starter by year end next season.
If we can trade one of Ramo/Hiller for some assets I'm all for it...better than one walking away for nothing...but I do'nt think it matters much which one goes.

[Finger Cookin]

There's little trade value for either goalie, and especially for Ramo who is available for free July 1.

[Phanuthier]

I would prefer Ramo by a hair as well, but based upon how Hartley starts the 2, I think we end up with Hiller.

[corporatejay]

They are equal, so it depends what you think you can get for Hiller and what Ramo wants in terms of money/term.

If Ramo would take 2 years at the same price as Hiller, trade Hiller for assets. If he wants a longer term and more money, keep hiller.

[tvp2003]

No way the Flames expose Ortio to waivers. So what are the odds that Calgary re-signs Ramo and carries three goaltenders to start the season? Slim to none?

One other factor: Ramo is 28, turns 29 in July. Hiller turned 33 in February. Ramo may want a longer term (minimum 3-years); given his play against Anaheim, he might have earned it. If so, the Flames might be out of the running unless they are willing to commit to him longer term (which I'd be okay with). Meanwhile, Hiller will be at best a veteran backup in a few years, which would also sit fine with me because I think he'd be a good one (durable, relatively dependable).

It's a bit of a gamble. If you truly think Ortio will be the guy in two years, let him play 30-40 games next year and keep Hiller to play the rest. If you're not sure, signing Ramo longer term might give you some more security, plus the ability to trade Hiller for an asset.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by standinmotion

No disrespect to the "trade Hiller, sign Ramo" crowd: why would a team want to trade for Hiller when they can just sign Ramo for free? We are all in agreement that they are about the same, so skills is not a factor. There could be an edge situation where a team may wan to trade for Hiller; but I think the market would be very small, and hence the Flames won't get much in return at all.

Not advocating either way, but the scenario envisions signing Ramo befoer he's a UFA. You'd have Hiller as well. So you could trade whoever gets you more.

I disagree about the goalie market. While neither is an elite starter, they are both competent and can be a more than adequate backup.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

I'd like to see if we can re-sign Ramo and sneak Ortio to the AHL early in training camp, like what happened with Markstrom this past season. That would give us more time to assess and explore options. Failing that, my preference would be to go with Hiller and Ortio.

It's too risky. Losing Ortio for nothing would be terrible. And Markstrom cleared waivers because he was really bad in his few NHL stints. Ortio was quite good when he was up this year. I don't see any way Ortio clears waivers.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by standinmotion

No disrespect to the "trade Hiller, sign Ramo" crowd: why would a team want to trade for Hiller when they can just sign Ramo for free? We are all in agreement that they are about the same, so skills is not a factor. There could be an edge situation where a team may wan to trade for Hiller; but I think the market would be very small, and hence the Flames won't get much in return at all.

Lets talk about Edmonton for a moment. Do you think FA goalies want to go to Edmonton? No.

Do you think Edmonton would love to have a goalie of Hiller's stature? Yes.

Who cares if the Flames don't get much in return, they still get something. That means they aren't losing an asset for nothing. That's a big deal, regardless if it's a 2nd rounder or a 5th rounder. Not to mention Ramo is slightly favoured and seems to be more consistent than Hiller.

[Huntingwhale]

Good question because both goalies play a completely different style, yet put up similar numbers.

Hiller is the kind of goalie that plays deep in his net. He's a blocker, not a shot absorber. Reminds me a lot of Giguere. Many more rebounds, often makes the first save and due to his style of playing deep, he has his eye on the back door play. Can usually stop those type of passes.

Ramo is much more aggressive. Plays far out of his net and has better rebound control. More atheletic and plays the Finnish style of absoring rebounds and deflecting them to corners. Plays aggressive and out of the paint, so if you get him moving side to side you can score on him. I wouldn't say he reminds me of Kipper. More like a Niemi.

Both guys are prone to the occasional weak goal. I found Ramo to be more likely to steal a game. It depends on what kind of style the team wants to play. This year we saw a style that saw the Flames collapse down and block the passing/shooting lanes. I personally think if Hartley wants the team to play that way, Ramo suits that style much more. I found Ramo to fight through traffic more often, rather then Hiller who was more of a get in position type guy and hope it hits you. If only we had a hybrid goalie who could blend both their styles.

My vote is to keep Ramo, but I certainly wouldn't fault Treliving if he went with Hiller. Goaltending was solid, but not super spectacular all year. A lot better then I thought it would be. I really like the 1A/1B tandem and it worked good for us. If one guy was starting to slip, the other guy came in and usually stabilized the net until the cycle continued. I loved how goaltending was never really a weakness at any point. You could always count on the other guy coming in and giving the team a chance to win.

I'll be honest, I don't like the fact that Ortio has a 1-way contract next season. I think he will be a good #1, but he's not there yet. He's had good streaks in the NHL, but he's one of those guy I think we benefit from ''over-ripening'' in the AHL. I would personally prefer to see Hiller and Ramo back together next season and Ortio make the bigs in the 2016-2017 season.

However that would mean Ramo signing a 1 year contract, and I certainly wouldn't fault him for wanting to cash in. This might be his only chance to do so, and he deserves it.

[SofaProfessor]

Put me in the sign Ramo, trade Hiller crowd. Although I'm not sure how good the market will be for a goalie like Hiller. I could see Edmonton welcoming him with open arms but I don't know if there are many more willing trade partners than that. Side note: how amazing would it be if Edmonton traded for Hiller, left him out to dry in game 1 of the season, and he left on a red eye flight to go play in the Swiss Elite League for the rest of his career?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

Lets talk about Edmonton for a moment. Do you think FA goalies want to go to Edmonton? No.

Do you think Edmonton would love to have a goalie of Hiller's stature? Yes.

Who cares if the Flames don't get much in return, they still get something. That means they aren't losing an asset for nothing. That's a big deal, regardless if it's a 2nd rounder or a 5th rounder. Not to mention Ramo is slightly favoured and seems to be more consistent than Hiller.

Agreed. If Ramo is a UFA, there's a good chance he's in Edmonton. If Ortio is exposed to waivers, same thing.

If you can sign Ramo to good dollars, you can at least then choose where he goes.

It'd be funny if you trade Ramo to Edmonton for a 5th without signing him and then he doesn't sign with them and goes to, say Buffalo.

[GioforPM]

[QUOTE=Huntingwhale;5295887]Good question because both goalies play a completely different style, yet put up similar numbers.

Hiller is the kind of goalie that plays deep in his net. He's a blocker, not a shot absorber. Reminds me a lot of Giguere. Many more rebounds, often makes the first save and due to his style of playing deep, he has his eye on the back door play. Can usually stop those type of passes.

Ramo is much more aggressive. Plays far out of his net and has better rebound control. More atheletic and plays the Finnish style of absoring rebounds and deflecting them to corners. Plays aggressive and out of the paint, so if you get him moving side to side you can score on him. I wouldn't say he reminds me of Kipper. More like a Niemi.

Both guys are prone to the occasional weak goal. I found Ramo to be more likely to steal a game. It depends on what kind of style the team wants to play. This year we saw a style that saw the Flames collapse down and block the passing/shooting lanes. I personally think if Hartley wants the team to play that way, Ramo suits that style much more. I found Ramo to fight through traffic more often, rather then Hiller who was more of a get in position type guy and hope it hits you. If only we had a hybrid goalie who could blend both their styles.

QUOTE]

The guys coming up are just that I think.

I agree with your comments about style. I must say, though, Ramo's style scares the hell out of me when he slides way out of the net (twice at least last night).