2020/2021 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

No Kipper?

Close, but no, not when I’m also excluding some of the others.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Close, but no, not when I’m also excluding some of the others.

Kiprusoff started 70+ Seven straight years.

The only times he did were his first season (38) and last (24). And if you factor in his 26 playoff starts, he was only 6 away from 70 in 04.

He was as elite as it gets. So too was Iggy.

No one else was, and therein lay the rub.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Or Plante, Hall, Dryden, Sawchuk, Belfour. Hell, even Tony Esposito

Was arbitrarily looking from ~1985 onward (really '95ish, but a lot of the best then started in the 80s).

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Kiprusoff started 70+ Seven straight years.

The only times he did were his first season (38) and last (24). And if you factor in his 26 playoff starts, he was only 6 away from 70 in 04.

He was as elite as it gets. So too was Iggy.

No one else was, and therein lay the rub.

He wasn’t “as elite as it gets”. That’s Hasek, followed by Brodeur/Roy. Kipper was great but the fact that Sutter never got him a decent backup is why he started so much. I never considered his start numbers as a reason he was a great goalie. I put him Kipper a zone with with Luongo, MAF, Rask, etc.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He wasn’t “as elite as it gets”. That’s Hasek, followed by Brodeur/Roy. Kipper was great but the fact that Sutter never got him a decent backup is why he started so much. I never considered his start numbers as a reason he was a great goalie. I put him Kipper a zone with with Luongo, MAF, Rask, etc.

How long does a goalie need to be dominant to be elite? I haven’t looked in a while but Price’s stats are pretty pedestrian outside of a 3 year stretch no?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Weitz

How long does a goalie need to be dominant to be elite? I haven’t looked in a while but Price’s stats are pretty pedestrian outside of a 3 year stretch no?

No. First, I already said stats are not my guide when assessing goalies. But Price had great years stats wise 10 out of 14 years, especially considering his team. And in every poorer year he was hurt. He’s the best goalie of this generation of goalies.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No. First, I already said stats are not my guide when assessing goalies. But Price had great years stats wise 10 out of 14 years, especially considering his team. And in every poorer year he was hurt. He’s the best goalie of this generation of goalies.

I agree. In fact, Price's injuries this year is likely what has kept Calgary in the race. He's their best player and team leader, and the team just isn't the same without him.

[bax]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I agree. In fact, Price's injuries this year is likely what has kept Calgary in the race. He's their best player and team leader, and the team just isn't the same without him.

I just don't buy this. Price has been riding on reputation for a while now. Carey Price and his .901 save percentage isn't what's keeping Calgary in the race.

Heck, Jake Allen had only played 4 less games than Price and has a better save percentage. There is a reason Bergevin went out and added a legitimate goalie to the organization the off season.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by bax

I just don't buy this. Price has been riding on reputation for a while now. Carey Price and his .901 save percentage isn't what's keeping Calgary in the race.

Heck, Jake Allen had only played 4 less games than Price and has a better save percentage. There is a reason Bergevin went out and added a legitimate goalie to the organization the off season.

People are freaking out about Markstrom yet 10M price has worse numbers

Calgary half assing the season has kept Montreal in it, not the other way around. Christ Calgary who has been absolutely brutal to the the point they sold at the deadline has more wins.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He wasn’t “as elite as it gets”. That’s Hasek, followed by Brodeur/Roy. Kipper was great but the fact that Sutter never got him a decent backup is why he started so much. I never considered his start numbers as a reason he was a great goalie. I put him Kipper a zone with with Luongo, MAF, Rask, etc.

I agree that the Big 3, Hasek, Brodeur and Roy, are the only goalies who made their teams a threat to go to the Finals and win, regardless of the quality of the roster. I know Hasek actually didn’t, but he’s Hasek and Hull’s toe was in the crease.

Every other notable goalie is in that next tier, to me - Price, Fleury, Bob, Thomas, Kipper, Quick, Lunqvist, Luongo Joseph, Belfour, Turco, Rask etc in that they’re good but they can’t/couldn’t do it themselves.

Maybe that’s just the reality of the cap world and early 21st century hockey - but I also think those three goalies had something different. An aura, a way of perceiving the game, I dunno. But they had it.

When I say he was as elite as it gets, I mean that from the moment he arrived up to the last three months of his career here, there was never a time when you would reasonably want another goalie in the league starting for us.

Not Price, not Fleury, not Thomas, not Quick, Lunqvist, nobody.

And 70 starts seven straight years tells does bely an elite goaltender. Cam Talbot started 70 games once and then took five years to throw up a GAA under 3.

Price did it once, when he was 23. Fleury has never done it. Quick did it twice. Once for Rask.

Kipper may have had his down years, but he didn’t have them because he stopped being elite. One time, his goals against was 2.84. Oh, but he also won 45 games, 6th highest in league history - even when he was off, he was doing something top-10 all time for his position.

In other years where he had a pedestrian save percentage, his GAA never broke 2.70 (Markstrom’s norm over the last 6 years).

While starting 70 games a year from age 29-35.

He was over worked. As you point out, the failure to find a quality backup probably cost this team multiple playoff rounds and millions of dollars.

He was a bad man, and we were lucky to have him.

[powderjunkie]

I wish hockey-ref had an 'adjusted' sv% and gaa stat relative to league scoring that year (like they do for skaters points and goals).

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by shutout

You dont just jump from Good to GREAT.
Try taking small steps and go from good to being better.
All you have to do is keep improving and you will eventually get there.
No magic way to just become great. But staying where you are and doing nothing is definantly not the way to get better.

The core of this team has issues.
There are enough young pieces that they can continue to be competitive.
If you swap out pieces of the core that are providing this mediocrity you will be better. Lateral swaps, change of scenery trades, even getting back less because of a better contract or a hungier player are all small steps to help the franchise get better.

Start by changing the culture.
Whoever the leadership group (Giordano, Backlunc, Gaudreau) that told Tkachuk that he should tone down his game and not let things get out of control should all be moved. Sends a terrible message to the team.
Tkachuk should be moved because he did nothing but pout about it. If he was going to be the new leader of the team he should have stepped up and said up yours we need to be playing with more passion and be getting involved more instead of sitting idly by with his tail between his legs hugging his big paycheck like a teddy bear.

Team has the talent to complete with most teams if they are prepared, give a crap, and are skating and pushing the play. The fact that they dont do so means it is mostly a character, heart, and mental problem. Any changes at this point in time to those four players means that the team will be better.

Haven’t the Flames been trying to take small steps to becoming better every year? They’ve continuously improved on paper, but have cannot seem to get over the hump because they’ve basically peaked. I agree with you that the core Treliving decided to go with is flawed. But 2 things, I don’t think this team is that talented or skilled in comparison to the best teams in the league and I also don’t think the young players are going to help take this team any more than a bubble play team. They need to make a big move IMO.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I wish hockey-ref had an 'adjusted' sv% and gaa stat relative to league scoring that year (like they do for skaters points and goals).

I’m sure there’s some place that has it. I’d like to see save% based on chance quality too. The “normal” save% gives the same value to stopping a dump in and a breakaway.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I’m sure there’s some place that has it. I’d like to see save% based on chance quality too. The “normal” save% gives the same value to stopping a dump in and a breakaway.

At least those things somewhat even out for everyone, though each arena's stat guy can interpret things differently.

Would be interesting to know which guys' home stats deviate most from their road ones (ie. which buildings actually inflate shots, hits, etc.).

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I wish hockey-ref had an 'adjusted' sv% and gaa stat relative to league scoring that year (like they do for skaters points and goals).

What hockey needs is more detail in shot stats. Angle and distance are a start, but specifically we need:

- was it tightly contested or a clean look?
- was it shot at ice level or raised above the ground.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

At least those things somewhat even out for everyone, though each arena's stat guy can interpret things differently.

Would be interesting to know which guys' home stats deviate most from their road ones (ie. which buildings actually inflate shots, hits, etc.).

True. It’s funny though, usually certain home rinks exaggerate their teams shots (which just ends up making the opposing goalie look good). Wasn’t it LA that was bad?

As far as evening out, it’s more about single game save% which IMO often doesn’t tell a tale. Heck some posters whine about a low save % if a goalie lifts in one in the first 10 shots, when the numbers don’t really work that way.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

What hockey needs is more detail in shot stats. Angle and distance are a start, but specifically we need:

- was it tightly contested or a clean look?
- was it shot at ice level or raised above the ground.

It’s probably too much to ask, but a blind panel of 5 ex-goalies to rate each shot/save. Discard the outliers and avg the middle 3. Probably a 5pt scale.

They can also give their opinion on goalie interference calls. Spoiler alert: it’s interference every time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SportsJunky]

Speaking of goalies, with Korpisalo out for the rest of the year, Merzlikins has the net. Both guys will be UFAs after next season and CBJ will need to trade one of them maybe as soon as this offseason. If Elvis plays well I have to think Columbus keeps him and moves Korpisalo in a trade.

[Fischy13]

Did anyone see the tweet or hear the clip on 960 today, Sutter's comments to Bennett. "I wish I had more time with you. I know Joel Quenneville and I'll give him a call." - Darryl Sutter to Sam Bennett after finding out he had been traded.

Are you F'n kidding me. That says Darryl wanted that guy around. Hard working, playoff performer, physical, etc. "after finding out he had been traded". This if true, is a clear indication of poor communication between the Flames' departments. You have a new coach, who by these comments indicates wanted Sam here, and the GM trade him out from under you without letting him know?!?! I have been 100% behind Brad, and maybe Sam's performance to date in FLA adds to this, but come on. You can't have silos in this gig. FFS. I hope Sam is the next Savard and St. Louis. Our team has been done in by poor coaches, being cheap with them and its no different with out crap GM's not able to identify talent and trading them away.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Fischy13

Did anyone see the tweet or hear the clip on 960 today, Sutter's comments to Bennett. "I wish I had more time with you. I know Joel Quenneville and I'll give him a call." - Darryl Sutter to Sam Bennett after finding out he had been traded.

Are you F'n kidding me. That says Darryl wanted that guy around. Hard working, playoff performer, physical, etc. "after finding out he had been traded". This if true, is a clear indication of poor communication between the Flames' departments. You have a new coach, who by these comments indicates wanted Sam here, and the GM trade him out from under you without letting him know?!?! I have been 100% behind Brad, and maybe Sam's performance to date in FLA adds to this, but come on. You can't have silos in this gig. FFS. I hope Sam is the next Savard and St. Louis. Our team has been done in by poor coaches, being cheap with them and its no different with out crap GM's not able to identify talent and trading them away.

I don't think your interpretation is substantiated by the quotation.
Sutter was probably expecting Bennett to be traded - we all were. The Flames very likely communicated with him. They just didn't let Sutter have the final say on a strategic decision.

And the end of the day, the Flames got a good return for Bennett. Treliving would have been crazy to reject Florida's offer based on kind quote from Sutter.

It's possible that Bennett never even fully rescinded his trade request. We still lack information, and I think it's unfair to make such angry and definitive conclusions like this.