[CP Story] The Treliving Goalie "Process"

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by New Era

All of the above. Like it or not, there is a blend of skill, acquisition cost and cap hit that have to be taken into consideration. They need a guy that can start 40-50 games, post a .910 S% or better, and cost no more than $5M a season over the next three years.

All of the above was the answer. You have to consider all three in any decision you make, and likely another 4 that I didn't include.

But weighting those is the key, and that key provides very different answers.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Sample00

Bingo, I noticed that Bishop wasnt on your list. Thoughts?

My bias I guess.

I don't like the cost to acquire a goaltender for one season. And if they can talk to him and get an extension I don't like the dollars and term needed to get it done. And even if that's successful I don't like the age and how he fits with all but Giordano.

If the Flames think Gillies is the man (he may not be) they need a 2-3 year goaltender, not a 30 year old for 7 years.

[GGG]

To me Fluery fits the best if you can dump Salary this year.

He gets us into playoff contention which over the next two years is where we need to be. His third year provides a stop gap if Gilles isn't quite ready. His cap hit relative to the market is reasonable for his skill level. So acquisition costs needs to be one of the late seconds and I think that's the answer.

It's skill and term need to fit. Acquisition cost for goalie provided it's less than our first is reasonable.

I'm also of the get us to Gilles or Macdonald rather than we need a Goalie to win us a cup mind set.

[edslunch]

The more I think about it I'm not sure Pittsburgh is so quick to unload Fleury. Yes there is a risk next year but they need to get through the season first and relying on Murray to be the starter for a long season is also a risk. They're defending champions and their window is now. A lot can happen between now and then - Murray doesn't pan out or gets injured, another team's starter gets injured and they can trade Fleury during the season, he decides to waive his NMC.... Worse comes to worse they buy him out prior to the expansion draft. Sure there are some not so great possible outcomes but NHL GMs are pretty cautious about the here and now too.

Maybe he is somewhat available now but it might take more than thought to get him.

[Commandant]

The case for Fleury

http://lastwordonsports.com/2016/06/...-playoff-team/

[Enoch Root]

That article articulates well why the Flames need a goalie (which we all know).

It makes a good case that the Pens would want to move him, but on that I don't entirely agree. Murray played great in the playoffs, but we've seen that before. He is still a big risk. On it's own, that wouldn't be too big of a deal, but the Pens are in win-now mode. This is their window, which makes trading Fleury much more of a risk.

I still highly doubt they move him for a late 2nd - probably something more like McDonald + a 2nd. And I wouldn't be keen on losing McDonald (which would likely mean we end up using one of the 2nds to draft a replacement).

Again, it comes down to acquisition cost - is Fleury a big enough improvement on other options to justify the cost to acquire? Keeping in mind that, while the playoffs would be nice, the Flames are NOT in win-now mode at this time. Not even close.

Fleury has a pretty big cap hit and - probably - a fairly big acquisition cost. Not sure he's worth it.

If the cost is a late 2nd (and the only other option turns out to be Reimer, who is asking for north of $4M), then sure.

But if the cost is higher than that, and other options are available (which is almost certainly the case this year), then no thanks.

[Roof-Daddy]

I keep flip-flopping back and forth on how badly teams are going to be looking to move a goalie even with the expansion draft looming.

On one hand I think some of them will want to unload a guy ASAP before the market floods but then on the other hand I think "will the market really flood?"

If Bishop, Elliot, Neuvirth, Varlamov, Bobrovsky, Fleury (waives NMC) are all re-signed/kept and become available in an expansion draft, Vegas isn't going to pick all of them.

Maybe some GM's will be willing to gamble that their guy isn't picked as opposed to giving him away for peanuts and weakening their team in the process for the 2016/17 season.

There will only be 29 goalies protected. That will leave close to what?...30-40 goalies exposed who are capable NHL goalies and/or up and coming young goalies with upside?

Only 3-5 (guessing) will be picked by Vegas.

Really going to be interesting to see how this all shakes out.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That article articulates well why the Flames need a goalie (which we all know).

It makes a good case that the Pens would want to move him, but on that I don't entirely agree. Murray played great in the playoffs, but we've seen that before. He is still a big risk. On it's own, that wouldn't be too big of a deal, but the Pens are in win-now mode. This is their window, which makes trading Fleury much more of a risk.

I still highly doubt they move him for a late 2nd - probably something more like McDonald + a 2nd. And I wouldn't be keen on losing McDonald (which would likely mean we end up using one of the 2nds to draft a replacement).

Again, it comes down to acquisition cost - is Fleury a big enough improvement on other options to justify the cost to acquire? Keeping in mind that, while the playoffs would be nice, the Flames are NOT in win-now mode at this time. Not even close.

Fleury has a pretty big cap hit and - probably - a fairly big acquisition cost. Not sure he's worth it.

If the cost is a late 2nd (and the only other option turns out to be Reimer, who is asking for north of $4M), then sure.

But if the cost is higher than that, and other options are available (which is almost certainly the case this year), then no thanks.

I agree, the Flames are not in "win now" mode, but I think the question that should be posed is "how far away are they from winning"? I think they are very close to entering a competitive window that will be open for a while, and that they could be a contending team with a seasoned, playoff tested, cup winning goalie starting in the next three years. Fleury is not just a stop-gap, and three years in the NHL is a long time.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Commandant

The case for Fleury

http://lastwordonsports.com/2016/06/...-playoff-team/

The premise is that Fluery would put up the same quality goalie stats playing with the Flames as he was with the Penguins.

Looking at the Flames best defensive d-men and comparing them with the best penguin d-men would bring that general assumption into question.

Same sort of situation as expecting Talbot to put up his NYR numbers with the Oilers. If Talbot has his NYR 2.00 GA and .931 Sv% and a shut out every 6.5 starts the Oilers would have made the playoffs last year.



Pittsburgh top PK d-men (over 2 minutes /game)... arguably best defensive d-men

Letang 6-0 200 1.9 hits/game +6
Cole 6-1 219 1.7 hits /game +6
Lovejoy 6-2 215 2.3 hits/game +5

Calgary top PK d-men (over 2 minutes/gm)

Gio 6-0 200 .8 hits/game -5
Brodie 6-1 182 .2 hits/game +4

--------------------------------

[JiriHrdina]

Hits are not measured consistently and a poor gauge for the overall physicality of a player. And plus minus is even more useless

[Textcritic]

^
Moreover, drawing an analogy between the Penguins and Flames relative to the Rangers and Oilers is laughable. The Oilers have an AHL level group of defensemen, and the Flames have a top-end core who were among the league leaders in SA allowed last season.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Hits are not measured consistently and a poor gauge for the overall physicality of a player. And plus minus is even more useless

Not to mention being a reflection of the passive defensive style the Flames employed last year.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Hits are not measured consistently and a poor gauge for the overall physicality of a player. And plus minus is even more useless

Not only that but if anyone actually thinks that the Pens top 3 comes close to the Flames top 3, well, I have to straight up question their hockey knowledge on any topic. Letang is a great player but there isn't a gap with Brodie, just different styles. Brodie might hit and score less but he is elite defensively, Letang would never be described as such. Gio and Hamilton are better players than any of Cole, Lovejoy, Daley, Dumoulin or Maatta. I think we will find that our top 3 will look much better under a structured coach than the 'system' employed under the last few years. I have no doubt that Pittsbugh's D would look far worse under a Hartley system, with the exception of Letang.

A better coach than Hartley should be able to wrangle better results out of our group next year, though probably not offensively. Maybe we should wait until a coach with a grasp of NHL defensive systems before we compare them to the Stanley Cup champions?

The fact that the Flames top 3 hits less than the Pens top 3 is extra meaningless, even for Ricardo. We are talking about an extra 2-4 combined hits per game difference between the Flames top guys and the Penguins. Give me a break, that is statistically insignificant even if hits were tracked accurately. There are some great peices on the backend in Calgary, to discount them because of how often they hit or their +/- is such a hilariously basic way of evaluating players.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Not only that but if anyone actually thinks that the Pens top 3 comes close to the Flames top 3, well, I have to straight up question their hockey knowledge on any topic. Letang is a great player but there isn't a gap with Brodie, just different styles. Brodie might hit and score less but he is elite defensively, Letang would never be described as such. Gio and Hamilton are better players than any of Cole, Lovejoy, Daley, Dumoulin or Maatta. I think we will find that our top 3 will look much better under a structured coach than the 'system' employed under the last few years. I have no doubt that Pittsbugh's D would look far worse under a Hartley system, with the exception of Letang.

A better coach than Hartley should be able to wrangle better results out of our group next year, though probably not offensively. Maybe we should wait until a coach with a grasp of NHL defensive systems before we compare them to the Stanley Cup champions?

The fact that the Flames top 3 hits less than the Pens top 3 is extra meaningless, even for Ricardo. We are talking about an extra 2-4 combined hits per game difference between the Flames top guys and the Penguins. Give me a break, that is statistically insignificant even if hits were tracked accurately. There are some great peices on the backend in Calgary, to discount them because of how often they hit or their +/- is such a hilariously basic way of evaluating players.

Does having a larger more physical defense corps help or hurt a goalie?




The characteristics of the Flames defense is not to stop goals but to score them. That is a simple fact. If there was a selke award for best defensive defenseman would there be a Flame in the top 60?


Do top PK play smaller D-men that don't hit or clear the crease


Why the heck did the CP posters rate Regher ahead of Gio and Brodie as all time best Flames D-men? Regher's couple of hits a game were a meaningless indicator of his style of play and value to his teams?


----------------------------------------

I find it interesting that Corsi and advanced Stats in general are all just expansions of plus/minus that evoke a lot more variable (judgmental) statistics.

In plus/minus the goal is scored and either you were on or off the ice. simple.

In advanced stats - It might be a shot on goal, it might be blocked, it might be a scoring chance... or a dump in from centre that had no chance of not being stopped....... BUT people can make a blanket statement (especially to pump the tires of their favorite players) that =/- the undeniably pure stat is meaningless and then not follow up saying that advanced stats are absolutely meaningless.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Hits are not measured consistently and a poor gauge for the overall physicality of a player. And plus minus is even more useless

Here are the Flame D that played more than 40 games ranked by hits/game.

Engelland
Hamilton
Gio
Wideman
Russell
Brodie

What order would you have rated them as to physicality?

------------------------



Are all advanced stats worthless?

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Does having a larger more physical defense corps help or hurt a goalie?




The characteristics of the Flames defense is not to stop goals but to score them. That is a simple fact. If there was a selke award for best defensive defenseman would there be a Flame in the top 60?


Do top PK play smaller D-men that don't hit or clear the crease


Why the heck did the CP posters rate Regher ahead of Gio and Brodie as all time best Flames D-men? Regher's couple of hits a game were a meaningless indicator of his style of play and value to his teams?


----------------------------------------

I find it interesting that Corsi and advanced Stats in general are all just expansions of plus/minus that evoke a lot more variable (judgmental) statistics.

In plus/minus the goal is scored and either you were on or off the ice. simple.

In advanced stats - It might be a shot on goal, it might be blocked, it might be a scoring chance... or a dump in from centre that had no chance of not being stopped....... BUT people can make a blanket statement (especially to pump the tires of their favorite players) that =/- the undeniably pure stat is meaningless and then not follow up saying that advanced stats are absolutely meaningless.

I would like it if Brodie was 6'6" and hit like a truck, but that's not who he is. Obviously if you were drawing up a blueprint, you would want a top 4 of guys that are all huge, fast, talented and played like Pronger. Unfortunately there aren't enough of those guys to go around. How do you propose we get those guys? We have Gio, Brodie and Hamilton right now. Is it your contention that the team can't be successful because these guys aren't physical enough? How would you fix that?

You clearly have a huge issue with the composition of the team as it's currently designed. Do you really think they have less of a chance of winning because these players are on the team? Do you not think it's possible that a good coach could get play these guys to their strengths and be successful or do you think all is already lost? If so, why bother watching? Getting the types of players you want is a tall order. You have to draft those guys, other teams won't give them up. Why yell in the wind over it?

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Here are the Flame D that played more than 40 games ranked by hits/game.

Engelland
Hamilton
Gio
Wideman
Russell
Brodie

What order would you have rated them as to physicality?

------------------------



Are all advanced stats worthless?

Which advanced stats do you think you are using?

[Mass_nerder]

If it came down to two goalies, where one had slightly better numbers but a higher acquisition cost, I would rather go for the cheaper one.

[Bingo]

Well part of my Treliving process article came true!

My guess is that Fredrik Andersen is high on both clubs lists, which is a shame for the Flames as they are in the same division. If I was Treliving I’d make an offer to the Ducks right away (if he hasn’t already), and hope that they take this offer to the Leafs and ask them to match. The result will likely be Andersen dealt to Toronto as the Leafs would be the Ducks preferred destination for the big Dane, but the Flames win in this scenario as well.

With the Andersen to Toronto deal done quickly before the Draft, every remaining club with a goaltender and a problem will quickly be contacting the Flames, likely by lowering their demands for a return. With one chair left at the party you can’t mess around when that music stops.

[Enoch Root]

^ well played!