2019/2020 Trade Speculation and Rumors 2.0

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by bax

To be fair Raanta has always been considered a great goalie, just made of glass. Rask and Bishop have been some of the best goalies in the league for the last 5 years. Grubauer was highly thought of and never had a chance to be a starter until Colorado.

As for the backups Halak has been great for a number of years, Khudobin is proving these playoffs why he always ranks highly in these goalie analytics and Francouz was great in the KHL and transferred that over into in the NHL.

The point is that it is almost impossible to separate the goalie from the team. When great defensive teams have 2 goalies in the top 15 for stats, you have to assume that a significant portion of that is team-related. Especially when FOUR teams fall into that scenario - statistically, that is extremely unlikely for it not to be the case.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

GSAA is a flawed stat because it doesn't take shot quality into account, only volume. I would recommend GSAx, with the x referring to expected goals

https://www.chartinghockey.ca/daily-goalie-charts/

This is really good. Rittich is plotted but not Talbot from what I can tell. Admittedly I don't really understand each graph. Rittich doesn't look so hot but ahead of some big names though.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The point is that it is almost impossible to separate the goalie from the team. When great defensive teams have 2 goalies in the top 15 for stats, you have to assume that a significant portion of that is team-related. Especially when FOUR teams fall into that scenario - statistically, that is extremely unlikely for it not to be the case.

A quick sort of teams in the last three years (to match the goalie query timeline) shows Boston and Dallas as being top 5 in xGA/60 and high danger chances against per 60.

So that should put some concern on acquiring Boston or Dallas goaltenders.

Colorado is decent ... 12th,13th

Arizona though ... bottom 6-7 in chances against, and 19th in xGA

So the Arizona goaltenders aren't getting sheltered.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

This is really good. Rittich is plotted but not Talbot from what I can tell. Admittedly I don't really understand each graph. Rittich doesn't look so hot but ahead of some big names though.

You need to toggle the TOI down to snare Talbot as well.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

The more I think about Rittich, the more comfortable I am with him being a backup or even a 1B type, and seeing if he takes off.


Just because you have been given a chance doesn't mean you were 100% ready for that chance. You still sometimes have to develop while being given that chance, and take a step forward and 2 steps backward. It happens. It would obviously have been preferable if he took 2 steps forward without any steps backward, but it is what it is.



I have been on the fence about him for a while, including parts of the past season. However, there was that post measuring a bunch of goalies back a ways (I forgot who posted it up - sorry!), and Rittich's hard danger saves are really high up there. It is the rest of the shots that are mediocre. That makes sense to me thinking that those are the most 'fixable' parts of a goalie's game, no? That's where I see a goalie being great - can they make those game-changing (or game saving) saves.


Then there is of course giving up the bad goals. They are energy-draining, game-losing goals, especially when they come from initially stoppable saves. Can coaching and/or experience help Rittich there? It seems if he can improve in that area, then he would be a very good starter for the Flames... for any team in the NHL.


I am actually quite confused by who the Flames should be going after and who to stay away from. I don't think goaltending was a problem in Calgary this past season/playoffs, but I also don't think it was a strength either. This to me is the toughest area to figure out as far as what changes should or shouldn't happen this off-season.

It's tough. If you don't draft and develop a #1 goalie, none of the options to fill the spot are ever really perfect.

Murray - steady decline, looks like the structure of his game is being exposed due to East-West style offensive strategies that are the majority of strategies in the NHL now (whoever was on the fan this morning talking about this stuff was really interesting). 26 though - he could adapt and be a #1 goalie for a long time.

Kuemper - brilliant numbers, passes the eye test, long history of injury issues though

Markstrom - 31 at the start of next season. How dangerous will his contract be?

Fleury - amazing person, age may have caught up and $7M AAV is just bad.

All the options carry risks, but the team needs to seek improvement so there will be some risk. Whether it be in contract value/term, acquisition cost - or all of the above.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You need to toggle the TOI down to snare Talbot as well.

Nice, thank you.

Talbot about middle of the pack, almost even with King Henrik! Ahead of Rittich.

Murray, Dubnyk and Gibson right at the bottom. You would have built an All Star team with those three a year or two ago.

[Jiggy]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

It's tough. If you don't draft and develop a #1 goalie, none of the options to fill the spot are ever really perfect.

Murray - steady decline, looks like the structure of his game is being exposed due to East-West style offensive strategies that are the majority of strategies in the NHL now (whoever was on the fan this morning talking about this stuff was really interesting). 26 though - he could adapt and be a #1 goalie for a long time.

Kuemper - brilliant numbers, passes the eye test, long history of injury issues though

Markstrom - 31 at the start of next season. How dangerous will his contract be?

Fleury - amazing person, age may have caught up and $7M AAV is just bad.

All the options carry risks, but the team needs to seek improvement so there will be some risk. Whether it be in contract value/term, acquisition cost - or all of the above.

I feel when it comes to goalies they hit their peak from ages 30-35. So if it's a 5 year deal I wouldn't mind Markstrom at all.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The point is that it is almost impossible to separate the goalie from the team. When great defensive teams have 2 goalies in the top 15 for stats, you have to assume that a significant portion of that is team-related. Especially when FOUR teams fall into that scenario - statistically, that is extremely unlikely for it not to be the case.

Bingo beat me to it already, but that really isn't the case here. Colorado is middle of the pact for the chances they give up and Arizona stinks. Kuemper and Raanta keep that team afloat.

Objectively Kuemper ranks the best out of all of the goalies rumoured to be available no matter which metric you look at. If Treliving can find a way to add Hall + Kuemper without using this year's first and I will be extremely happy.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by bax

Bingo beat me to it already, but that really isn't the case here. Colorado is middle of the pact for the chances they give up and Arizona stinks. Kuemper and Raanta keep that team afloat.

Raanta has been a consistently excellent goalie. But the most important skill any athlete can have is the ability to be on the field/ice etc. Unfortunately he's just not a guy you can count on and no sense trying IMO. A few years aback he was really the one I wanted the Flames to focus on.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Raanta has been a consistently excellent goalie. But the most important skill any athlete can have is the ability to be on the field/ice etc. Unfortunately he's just not a guy you can count on and no sense trying IMO. A few years aback he was really the one I wanted the Flames to focus on.

I agree 100%. I am fully on board for spending assets on Kuemper though.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bingo

A quick sort of teams in the last three years (to match the goalie query timeline) shows Boston and Dallas as being top 5 in xGA/60 and high danger chances against per 60.

So that should put some concern on acquiring Boston or Dallas goaltenders.

Colorado is decent ... 12th,13th

Arizona though ... bottom 6-7 in chances against, and 19th in xGA

So the Arizona goaltenders aren't getting sheltered.

But they might be getting sheltered in quality of attempts, or how much shooters are being rushed.

At this point, those stats do not qualify the shot attempts enough

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

It's tough. If you don't draft and develop a #1 goalie, none of the options to fill the spot are ever really perfect.

Murray - steady decline, looks like the structure of his game is being exposed due to East-West style offensive strategies that are the majority of strategies in the NHL now (whoever was on the fan this morning talking about this stuff was really interesting). 26 though - he could adapt and be a #1 goalie for a long time.

Kuemper - brilliant numbers, passes the eye test, long history of injury issues though

Markstrom - 31 at the start of next season. How dangerous will his contract be?

Fleury - amazing person, age may have caught up and $7M AAV is just bad.

All the options carry risks, but the team needs to seek improvement so there will be some risk. Whether it be in contract value/term, acquisition cost - or all of the above.

31 is not old for a goalie at all

The current starters (still playing) are: 34, 32, 29 and 26 (and Fleury is 35)

Goalies peak much later than skaters

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by bax

Bingo beat me to it already, but that really isn't the case here. Colorado is middle of the pact for the chances they give up and Arizona stinks. Kuemper and Raanta keep that team afloat.

Objectively Kuemper ranks the best out of all of the goalies rumoured to be available no matter which metric you look at. If Treliving can find a way to add Hall + Kuemper without using this year's first and I will be extremely happy.

again, those stats list quantity, not quality, from each area. The assumption is that they average out. But that assumption does not always apply.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I wonder what is going to happen with MAF?

2 Years at 7 million per season (salary 6.5 mil and 6 million season 2) @ 35 years old, you have to figure he would be happily given away at this point.

They will have to sweeten the pot to get anyone to eat that contract.

[The Original FFIV]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I get a little worried about the whole Treliving, Maloney, OEL thing. Familiarity IMO should never trump track record or current state of play. When Treliving, Maloney, and OEL were in the same building in Arizona the results on the ice were poor so I was never fond of Maloney joining the organization nor would I be fond of the team acquiring a declining defenseman on a bad contract just because Treliving and Maloney think he's a good guy and they liked him in Phoenix when he was in his prime. I just hate when managers look back to the past when dealing with the present. Move on and base your evaluations on the present not the past.

Agreed. We don’t want to get into a Mike Keenan/Brian Noonan/Stephan Matteau Man crush cycle here.

[Flash Walken]

This isn't a rumour but I think Mark Borowiecki is a very likely candidate for one of the vacant spots the flames have on defense.

Probably comes in around 2-2.75 million per on a 3-4 year deal.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This isn't a rumour but I think Mark Borowiecki is a very likely candidate for one of the vacant spots the flames have on defense.

Probably comes in around 2-2.75 million per on a 3-4 year deal.

Why? This would be a classic bad contract deal.

[AustinL_NHL]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This isn't a rumour but I think Mark Borowiecki is a very likely candidate for one of the vacant spots the flames have on defense.

Probably comes in around 2-2.75 million per on a 3-4 year deal.

A 31-year old possession anchor D-man, who was Ottawa's #6 D-man, who's never made more than $1.2M, who's a safe bet to miss 20+ games a year, and has a career high of 18 points...

Any team that pays him that or gives him that kind of term (let along both) is an idiot.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL

A 31-year old possession anchor D-man, who was Ottawa's #6 D-man, who's never made more than $1.2M, who's a safe bet to miss 20+ games a year, and has a career high of 18 points...

Any team that pays him that or gives him that kind of term (let along both) is an idiot.

I don't like it either.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This isn't a rumour but I think Mark Borowiecki is a very likely candidate for one of the vacant spots the flames have on defense.

Probably comes in around 2-2.75 million per on a 3-4 year deal.

Yikes to that.

If we were looking for someone to provide that type of play, it's better off to sink 3.5-4M into Radko Gudas.