Mike Smith's... woes? He blows? Eating crows? Who knows! (Also David Rittich exists!)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I think they probably need to find another option.

Something that I have maintained for quite a while now, although with the caveat that it is something that preferably is resolved affordably, and before the trade deadline.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Treliving now has the difficult task of both replacing him and putting him somewhere, but it has to be done.

It is a difficult task, and won't get done overnight. At minimum, I wouldn't expect Smith to go anywhere before Rittich returns. Gillies has been stone awful in the A this season, and if you gave him the net right now, he could actually be worse than Smith. I think some CPers forget that such a thing is even possible, but it is. Remember Philippe Sauve? His career average was as bad as Smith has been this year – 0.888 SV%, 3.45 GAA.

Meanwhile – I find it really amusing that a lot of posters were writing this game off in the GDT. One even called it a ‘scheduled loss’. But when the game turns out exactly as they predicted, the board flips its collective wig.

Put a decent goalie in the Flames' net tonight, probably you don't give up those two stinkers – but that's still four goals against, and by no means a guaranteed win. The whole roster has to take some heat for that – and the Bruins have to get some credit. They're a good team.

Smith is the Flames' worst problem right now, but not the only one.

[RedHawk12]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I hear what you're saying, but how many WINS does Smith have?

Everyone knows WINS are the most important and telling goaltender stats.

WINS.

Wins are definitely important. It's the most important stat in hockey.

Smith sucks, we get it. He needs to be replaced, we get it. But he has 12 wins, at least 2 of which he earned pretty much by himself. You can criticize his terrible play, but he's helped the team win a few as well and you can't just overlook that.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

I’d argue they won that game in spite of him. He didn’t even give himself a chance to make a save on any three of those goals.

We would disagree on that. Smith also made a clutch save in the late stages of the third to retain a one goal lead. But that is really beside my point, which is that even though Smith is not expected to play well on a consistent basis the team will continue to win games in spite of him. This significantly reduces the urgency of the situation.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by sun

The rest of the team is absolutely peaking at the right time. This could be career best seasons for Johnny, Monahan, Gio, Tkachuk, Lindholm, and Rittich.

The Flames can't afford to let this season go to waste, it could be the best shot they have for the foreseeable future with this core. Not only has Smith completely lost the plot, it's unwise to rely on a fairly untested G in Rittich to carry a workload he's never been close to carrying in his career.

See what Gillies can do for now and lose a trade for a league average goalie. The team is scoring at will, we don't need Price in his prime, we just need someone who can "make a ####ing save".

This. As a Flames fan, it has been SO long since we've had a team this strong. I really don't want to see it derailed because they're trying to be nice to a goalie that's clearly not good enough to help the team win at all.

Who knows if there is going to be another season where everything's aligning like this season. You would hope there would be with the core locked up, but you just never know.

And it's not like we need all world goaltending. We just need average back up goaltending that doesn't let in soft goals every game. Is that really too much to ask? Smith has gotten way too many chances already to find his game, and every chance he was given, he's failed.

When cheerleading Steinberg has given up on Smith, that's really saying something. I agree with his take that tonight was a test to see if the Flames can win with Smith as we head down the stretch and into the playoffs. And Smith has clearly shown he can't do it anymore. Just accept gracefully that you don't have it anymore, and stop hurting the team with the subpar play.

That's all we're asking. No one's against Mike Smith as a person or a professional. We just want the team to succeed, and I honestly can't see them going anywhere with Smith in net.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

It is a difficult task, and won't get done overnight. At minimum, I wouldn't expect Smith to go anywhere before Rittich returns. Gillies has been stone awful in the A this season, and if you gave him the net right now, he could actually be worse than Smith. I think some CPers forget that such a thing is even possible, but it is. Remember Philippe Sauve? His career average was as bad as Smith has been this year – 0.888 SV%, 3.45 GAA.

Meanwhile – I find it really amusing that a lot of posters were writing this game off in the GDT. One even called it a ‘scheduled loss’. But when the game turns out exactly as they predicted, the board flips its collective wig.

Put a decent goalie in the Flames' net tonight, probably you don't give up those two stinkers – but that's still four goals against, and by no means a guaranteed win. The whole roster has to take some heat for that – and the Bruins have to get some credit. They're a good team.

Smith is the Flames' worst problem right now, but not the only one.

Well, it would be 3 since the EN wouldn't have happened, and Flames probably win the game. It's hard to continue to press when the team has no confidence in the goalie making a routine save.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Well, it would be 3 since the EN wouldn't have happened, and Flames probably win the game.

Touché. Brain fart on my part. Still, the team looked a bit like it did in October – dominating play most of the time, but when they gave up a scoring chance, good grief.

It's hard to continue to press when the team has no confidence in the goalie making a routine save.

Those guys are not paid a collective $80 million a year just to do the easy things. If one guy fails to do his job, that doesn't excuse the others for not doing theirs.

[dino7c]

12 wins in 22 games is NOT good

this isn't a 21 team league anymore. Two games over .500 is a non playoff team

SMITH DOES NOT HAVE A GOOD RECORD

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by dino7c

12 wins in 22 games is NOT good

this isn't a 21 team league anymore. Two games under .500 is a non playoff team

SMITH DOES NOT HAVE A GOOD RECORD

Exactly. And of those 12 wins, how many were actually because of Smith vs. in spite of Smith? It makes his record look even worse if you take that into account.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dino7c

12 wins in 22 games is NOT good

this isn't a 21 team league anymore. Two games over .500 is a non playoff team

SMITH DOES NOT HAVE A GOOD RECORD

No he doesn’t. But the defenders of the status quo will say that is good enough for a backup if your starter keeps playing like Rittich is playing.

Which is where my concern ultimately lies. Rittich is not Dominik Hasek. At least he hasn’t proven to be. And so we do need more than a token backup. We need a guy who can win big games against good teams should the need arise.

[RedHawk12]

Originally Posted by dino7c

12 wins in 22 games is NOT good

this isn't a 21 team league anymore. Two games over .500 is a non playoff team

SMITH DOES NOT HAVE A GOOD RECORD

Agree to disagree. For a backup that's a decent record.

You're frustrated he's losing us games, like all of us are. But he's not counted on to carry the load come playoff time (hopefully).

[RedHawk12]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

No he doesn’t. But the defenders of the status quo will say that is good enough for a backup if your starter keeps playing like Rittich is playing.

Which is where my concern ultimately lies. Rittich is not Dominik Hasek. At least he hasn’t proven to be. And so we do need more than a token backup. We need a guy who can win big games against good teams should the need arise.

Haha yes I guess you're right. I'd prefer a better backup, in an ideal world.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by RedHawk12

Agree to disagree. For a backup that's a decent record.

You're frustrated he's losing us games, like all of us are. But he's not counted on to carry the load come playoff time (hopefully).

If his record was 5-3, then sure I'd agree with you, he's got a decent record for a back up. The fact that he's played half the games, and is responsible for 9 of the 13 losses tells me that record is anything but decent, and that it's not the amount of games a back up would be playing.

Lets be honest. If Smith was treated like a back up, he'd be on waivers 10 games ago.

[cam_wmh]

How’s Parsons doing?

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

How’s Parsons doing?

I believe he's been hurt for most of the year, but in his 6 games with Stockton, he's gone 3-3-0 with an .880 SV%. Not excellent.

[RedHawk12]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

If his record was 5-3, then sure I'd agree with you, he's got a decent record for a back up. The fact that he's played half the games, and is responsible for 9 of the 13 losses tells me that record is anything but decent, and that it's not the amount of games a back up would be playing.

Lets be honest. If Smith was treated like a back up, he'd be on waivers 10 games ago.

I would agree with that. If he stays on the team, hopefully he plays far less than half of the remaining games.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dino7c

12 wins in 22 games is NOT good

this isn't a 21 team league anymore. Two games over .500 is a non playoff team

Wrong.

In every game there is exactly one (1) winner and one (1) loser. A dead average team is one that wins 41 games per season, plus some number of loser points. Sixteen of 31 teams make the playoffs, so that dead average team should be right on the bubble.

Winning 12 out of 22 prorates to 45 wins in an 82-game season. Last season, six of the 16 playoff teams had 45 wins or fewer. No team with 45 wins or more missed the playoffs.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

If his record was 5-3, then sure I'd agree with you, he's got a decent record for a back up. The fact that he's played half the games, and is responsible for 9 of the 13 losses tells me that record is anything but decent, and that it's not the amount of games a back up would be playing.

Lets be honest. If Smith was treated like a back up, he'd be on waivers 10 games ago.

But we then also need to be honest about all the attendant reasons why Smith was not on waivers ten games ago. His situation is a hell of a lot more complicated than it is dealing with a minor-league 'tweener.

Everyone is frustrated by Mike Smith's performance this season, but the solution is not as straightforward and simple as dispatching him to Stockton.

[dino7c]

Team is too good for the backup to have such a poor record..."good enough" isn't good enough anymore. Team is elite

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I believe he's been hurt for most of the year, but in his 6 games with Stockton, he's gone 3-3-0 with an .880 SV%. Not excellent.

Parsons returned from injury last week, and was stellar in his first two games back. He stumbled in his last game on New Year's Eve.