Marc-Andre Fleury as a Flame ?? could this be the Goaltender we get this summer ?

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

A Co worker of mine brought up a good point about Reimer. He was winning the Leafs games last season...therefore they got rid of him and played Sparks. It's quite clear what the Leafs were doing this season and that was tank.

I've been hard on Reimer myself but this makes me think differently about him. I thought if he was a starter he would have stayed but the Leafs wanted to lose.

Another thing is they tried to open contract negotiations and he wanted 6 mil/year to stay. So trading him at that point became the only option

[shadowlord]

I say get MAFleury for cheap (draft picks and/or unwanted contracts); and let him prove himself. If he doesn't work out, expose him in the expansion draft. I'd imagine Las Vegas wouldn't mind having a Stanley Cup winning goaltender on their roster -- or at least it would be tempting.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Not a huge Fleury fan, but I find the remarks about his age a bit puzzling.

He's 31 going on 32. 3 years left on his deal. 35 when he likely moves on. This isn't that old for a goalie. Guys have been (recently) very competitive at that position at 35 or older.

It's not that he's too old right now (obviously he isn't), it's that he's too old to be part of the solution. The Flames will hopefully be legitimate contenders in 3 years. At that time, if they run with Fleury, they would have to be looking for a new #1 goalie, right when they're ready to compete.

To me, that's brutal management.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It's not that he's too old right now (obviously he isn't), it's that he's too old to be part of the solution. The Flames will hopefully be legitimate contenders in 3 years. At that time, if they run with Fleury, they would have to be looking for a new #1 goalie, right when they're ready to compete.

To me, that's brutal management.

Pretty sure they are hoping Gillies will be that guy...and learning behind an all star vet is a bad thing now?

Really that is a senseless worry

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Pretty sure they are hoping Gillies will be that guy...and learning behind an all star vet is a bad thing now?

Really that is a senseless worry

You're so confident that Gillies is the guy - after 6 pro games - that this is a senseless worry?

I admire your confidence, but I would prefer to see better risk management than that.

I think Gillies is a fabulous prospect, but having your future bet on one guy, and just assuming he will fill the role, is straight from the Oiler school of management.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by shadowlord

I say get MAFleury for cheap (draft picks and/or unwanted contracts); and let him prove himself. If he doesn't work out, expose him in the expansion draft. I'd imagine Las Vegas wouldn't mind having a Stanley Cup winning goaltender on their roster -- or at least it would be tempting.

If he gets traded here he will still have his NMC (unless he waives it) and we would have to protect him in an expansion draft.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Jacks

If he gets traded here he will still have his NMC (unless he waives it) and we would have to protect him in an expansion draft.

Which wouldn't be a big deal if Gilles is exempt as expected. It would mean exposing Ortio, who cleared waivers when 29 other teams had a chance at him last season.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It's not that he's too old right now (obviously he isn't), it's that he's too old to be part of the solution. The Flames will hopefully be legitimate contenders in 3 years. At that time, if they run with Fleury, they would have to be looking for a new #1 goalie, right when they're ready to compete.

To me, that's brutal management.

So your plan would be to immediately acquire a goalie who's ready to step in and be our #1 for the next decade roughly?

That's awesome. Do tell how we go about that.

[jmac98]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

So your plan would be to immediately acquire a goalie who's ready to step in and be our #1 for the next decade roughly?

That's awesome. Do tell how we go about that.

Offer sheet Mrazek

[FlamesFanFromBC]

Better question would be "Who would you rather?"

MA Fleury at 5.75M cap hit + asset cost to acquire or James Reimer at UFA contract cost (~$6M)?

[jmac98]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanFromBC

Better question would be "Who would you rather?"

MA Fleury at 5.75M cap hit + asset cost to acquire or James Reimer at UFA contract cost (~$6M)?

Concussions scare me for both. But I'd take Fleury.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

So your plan would be to immediately acquire a goalie who's ready to step in and be our #1 for the next decade roughly?

That's awesome. Do tell how we go about that.

I have already addressed this. And that isn't what I said.

But your plan is to settle with Fleury and hope that Gillies is the one?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanFromBC

Better question would be "Who would you rather?"

MA Fleury at 5.75M cap hit + asset cost to acquire or James Reimer at UFA contract cost (~$6M)?

No way Reimer gets $6M

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I have already addressed this. And that isn't what I said.

But your plan is to settle with Fleury and hope that Gillies is the one?

Any medium term goalie can be used to buy some time to assess Gillies. And if it's determined in one season, two seasons, three seasons, or whenever that he's not the one, other goalies can be acquired. It's not like this offseason is the only narrow window to obtain a starting goalie in the next 3-5 or 5-10 seasons.

[Roof-Daddy]

Really good teams transition goalies all the time and don't miss a beat.

San Jose transitioned from Nabakov to Niemi to Jones over a decade or so, were always competitive.

Chicago transitioned from Khabibulin to Huet to Niemi to Carwford and won 3 Cups and were competitive.

Detroit transitioned Chevaldae to Osgood to Vernon to Osgood to Hasek to Osgood to Howard to Mrazek and have been a playoff team the whole time and won multiple Cups.

Anaheim has been competitive for years minus one seasons going from Giguere to Hiller to Andersen

We all just watched Pittsburgh transition from Fleury to Murray all the way to a Cup win.

If the Flames acquire Fleury, I'm not worried about them transitioning from him to another goalie while in the midst of a Cup contending window, I just hope the acquisition cost is low and that BT actually builds the Flames into a legitimate contender in the first place.

[jmac98]

Excellent post, Roof Daddy.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I have already addressed this. And that isn't what I said.

But your plan is to settle with Fleury and hope that Gillies is the one?

I'd say go with the best option for the immediate future at the best acquisition cost.

If Fleury can be had at a good price, covering the next few years is a perfectly acceptable option, and the next step can be addressed as we move along. Your post made it sound as though Fleury will expire and vanish in thee years time and that Gilies will be forced to step in immediately. That isn't how it works. There would be ample time to address the next step were we to go with a stop-gap the next few seasons.

[dammage79]

Yeah, the only quick fix for the Flames goaltending issues is to just get a decent one. Doesn't HAVE to be an all star, doesn't HAVE to be 22 and on the upswing.

Thats why I'm fine if names ike Halak or Fleury become Flames. Not the most optimal solutions in the world but solutions none the less. At this stage I feel like the old adage "beggars can't be choosers" applies to the Flames. And fans should anticipate this as such.

Treliving may have to overpay in the end to get a suitable goalie but I don't think bargain hunting is going help. Reimer may be the best bargain but then again he may force a stupid contract as well, which s a bigger gamble than taking on the Fleurys and Halaks of the world.

I just don't know what the best option is other than anything but Hiller/Ramo.

And I cannot wrap my head around this "home plate" goalie speak I've been hearing about the last couple of weeks. To me it just sounds like a goalie who can stop pucks but for the hipster number crunchers.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dammage79

And I cannot wrap my head around this "home plate" goalie speak I've been hearing about the last couple of weeks. To me it just sounds like a goalie who can stop pucks but for the hipster number crunchers.

It's like this.

Team A allows 50 shots from dangerous scoring areas and 50 shots from less dangerous scoring areas.

Team B allows 40 shots from dangerous scoring areas and 60 shots from less dangerous scoring areas.

Team B's goalie is expected to have better percentages and appears better at stopping pucks. But is he really? Maybe, and maybe not.

You just want to be able to filter out whether a goalie's save percentage is good because he's stopping a lot of dangerous shots, or because he's not facing as many. Focusing on performance in dangerous scoring areas is more predictive when talking about different teams.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I have already addressed this. And that isn't what I said.

But your plan is to settle with Fleury and hope that Gillies is the one?

Doesn't have to be Gillies. Have you forgotten about Ortio, MacDonald and Schneider? Is Fleury the last goalie we could ever trade for? Will we ever draft another young guy?

Fleury might not be your ideal, and I get that, as there is clearly some risk. But to dismiss considering Fleury as bad management doesn't seem fair. No matter who they acquire, there will be no guarantee that player will be a stand-out, No. 1 goalie in 3 years.