We better be on the phones with Anaheim...

[Goodlad]

Originally Posted by Kolbe31

I just don't understand the "rebuild" attitude. We have a good team that works hard and can win, in my opinion, a lot of games if we get some decent goaltending. Why dismiss the opportunity to get a better goalie for the sake of a "rebuild"? We are good now, let's go.

Because it costs us assets. Assets we don't want to give up this early in a rebuild, especially when we still don't really know what we have in the current crop of goalies.

[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

Frankly that's the fantasy of fans of many bad teams: "if only we had goaltending." I'd say it's almost never the case that a goalie would turn around a team like that.

But don't we deserve to have at least base-line .900% 3.00 GAA goaltending this season? Is that really too much to ask?

[moon]

Originally Posted by Kolbe31

I just don't understand the "rebuild" attitude. We have a good team that works hard and can win, in my opinion, a lot of games if we get some decent goaltending. Why dismiss the opportunity to get a better goalie for the sake of a "rebuild"? We are good now, let's go.

Good team? We are 2nd last in the conference. Even with good, better than average goaltending this team looks like a 7th/8th at best and still not a lock for the play-offs. I think after watching so many years of 6th-11th place hockey fans are sick of the team being "good" and want to see a team that is able to contend for the Cup and be a solid bet to make the play-offs long term.

Adding a stop gap solution in net, one that likely is at best a 15-20th best goalie in the league, seems exactly like the short sighted moves that had this team just missing the play-offs for 3 years in a row and resulting in the current team having one of, if not the, worst groups of talent in the league.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

But don't we deserve to have at least base-line .900% 3.00 GAA goaltending this season? Is that really too much to ask?

Of course not, but they're commited to giving these unproven goalies a try. That's the plan and everyone knew it wasn't going to be easy.

[Erick Estrada]

Have to see how Berra does but I think the team does need a capable starter to bridge the gap and right now I don't see that in Ramo. I believe this will be taken care of one way or another as goaltending has always been one of the most important positions to Burke as he believes in building out from the goaltender forward. The asking prices will be extremely high though so not sure if anything is going to happen this early in the season.

[Henry Fool]

Either you have faith in your Euro scouting or you hire scouts that you do trust. You don't abandon your plans a few weeks into it just because things didn't work out overnight.

[getbak]

The only goalie trade that Feaster should be working on is one that will send MacDonald to a team that needs a capable third stringer they can keep on the farm and have available in case of injury (like he did with Karlsson last year).

[Kolbe31]

Originally Posted by moon

Good team? We are 2nd last in the conference. Even with good, better than average goaltending this team looks like a 7th/8th at best and still not a lock for the play-offs. I think after watching so many years of 6th-11th place hockey fans are sick of the team being "good" and want to see a team that is able to contend for the Cup and be a solid bet to make the play-offs long term.

Adding a stop gap solution in net, one that likely is at best a 15-20th best goalie in the league, seems exactly like the short sighted moves that had this team just missing the play-offs for 3 years in a row and resulting in the current team having one of, if not the, worst groups of talent in the league.

As a fan, what I'm sick of is the attitude over the last 6 months that we need to be bad before we can be good. That we can't make trades to make us better. I'm not suggesting we need to give up top end prospects to 'win now'. I'm not saying make whatever trade is necessary to get a decent goalie. But I think Feaster would be stupid to not explore possibilities. If something make sense, get it done. We win the last two games (against two of the league's best) with better goaltending. I also think we start 5-0, not 3-0-2.

There's no exact science to a rebuild. You continue to assess your team, and make it better where you can. Being a bad team and not improving on purpose is the Edmonton Oiler model of management. Surely we can find a better mentor.

[browna]

I find it a bit contradictory for those saying we shouldn't be making reactionary decisions on goaltending, when we've just effectively dumped the goalie that's played in over half the games so far, with a .500 record (yes, OT points).

What was the plan from Hartley and Feaster in the first place in the offseason? Was it to play guys like Berra/Ortio/Ramo? Yet they didn't; McDonald outperformed all of those guys, clearly, enough to get more then half the games so far.

Now, after a sub par game, that goalie they probably really didn't want, but was the best option on the ice, gets kicked out the door just like that.

If the coach and the GM had a clear plan for goaltending coming into this season that actually included McDonald playing this many games so far, it's suddenly now changed less then a month in.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by browna

I find it a bit contradictory for those saying we shouldn't be making reactionary decisions on goaltending, when we've just effectively dumped the goalie that's played in over half the games so far, with a .500 record (yes, OT points).

What was the plan from Hartley and Feaster in the first place in the offseason? Was it to play guys like Berra/Ortio/Ramo? Yet they didn't; McDonald outperformed all of those guys, clearly, enough to get more then half the games.

Now, after a sub par game, that goalie they really didn't want, but was the best option on the ice, gets kicked out the door just like that. If the coach and the GM had a clear plan for goaltending coming into this season that actually included McDonald playing this many games, it's suddenly changed less then a month in.

The plan is to see what they have in the younger goalies. MacDonald was there to help out with that. How it plays out from game to game is up to the coaches and depends on many variables. Obviously they didn't plan out who plays which specific game before the season.

[browna]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

The plan is to see what they have in the younger goalies. MacDonald was there to help out with that. How it plays out from game to game is up to the coaches and depends on many variables. Obviously they didn't plan out who plays which specific game before the season.

So if MacDonald wins that game against Detroit, does he still go on waivers?

[driveway]

5 years is probably a bit on the long side, but reasonable - depending on what kind of definition one chooses to apply to when the rebuild 'ends'.

Recent examples whom we hope to emulate:

Pittsburgh: Utter garbage for 4 seasons and 1 lockout, 2001-02 through 2005-06. Draft Fleury '03, Malkin and Letang '04; Crosby '05; J. Staal '06. Made the playoffs in 06-07, finals in '08 and won the cup in '09.

Chicago: Crap for ten years from 1997-98 through 2007-08 except for one weird year (01-02) when Eric Daze's 38 goals helped them into the playoffs. Draft Seabrook, Crawford, Byfuglien '03; Hjalmarsson in '05; Toews '06; Kane '07; made the third round of the playoffs in '09 and won the cup in '10.

Los Angeles: Crap from 02-03 to 08-09. Draft: Brown '03; Kopitar and Quick '05; Bernier '06; Simmonds '07; Doughty and Voynov '08; Schenn '09. Acquire Richards in '11 and Carter in '12. Make the playoffs in '10 and '11, win the Cup in '12.

Boston was also crap in 05-06 and 06-07, drafting Kessel, Lucic, and Marchand in '06.

Now we've been out of the playoffs without being truly awful from 2009-10 to 2011-12 and seriously bad in 12-13, so we're more in line with the Los Angeles Kings pattern than the Blackhawks or Penguins. An important thing to note: only the Bruins managed to rebound without at least one top-2 pick and they got Kessel at #5.

If we think of 2012-2013 as the first year of our rebuild and Monahan as the first really significant draft choice, we're probably looking at at least two more years of being really bad and ideally two top-2 draft picks before we can start to have an expectation of being a playoff team again.

Of course, for these success stories it's also important to remember the Islanders, Panthers, Blue Jackets, and Thrashers who have also stunk terribly through the same time as the Penguins, Hawks, and Kings without seeing much of any result.

To sum up: now is a bad time to trade for a goalie who could conceivably win us a game or two.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by browna

So if MacDonald wins that game against Detroit, does he still go on waivers?

I genuinely don't understand what you're arguing.

[browna]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

I genuinely don't understand what you're arguing.

To those who are saying that Feaster/Hartley aren't/shouldn't be reactionary when it comes to goaltending, in so far as bringing in someone else; the proof is it seems that they are being reactionary with they way they've handed things so far.

[stemit14]

Let's just give kipper a call and ask him to come back... I miss him already. I'm sure he misses us too... It's too cold to be fishing in Finland right now.

[Dorkmaster]

There's nothing wrong if the right deal comes up to make an upgrade, but I don't think trading for Hiller or Fasth would make sense given that they're 31 and we're not anywhere near ready to contend right now. Gibson is untouchable and would Andersen be any better than what we already have?

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by browna

To those who are saying that Feaster/Hartley aren't/shouldn't be reactionary when it comes to goaltending, in so far as bringing in someone else; the proof is it seems that they are being reactionary with they way they've handed things so far.

MacDonald is in a different category. He was there to provide stability, which is not to say that he didn't have the opportunity to run with it by playing really well. But realistically they're not hoping that he'll suddenly reinvent himself as a starter.

The plan I refer to is about the new guys. They brought them in, they hope one of them has what it takes. Bringing in Berra now just seems like a natural progression of the plan.

Now, if MacDonald had clearly outplayed Rämö, he'd no doubt get to stay. But as it stands, you might as well have the new guys up if you're not getting anything better from the veteran.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Dorkmaster

There's nothing wrong if the right deal comes up to make an upgrade, but I don't think trading for Hiller or Fasth would make sense given that they're 31 and we're not anywhere near ready to contend right now. Gibson is untouchable and would Andersen be any better than what we already have?

I think Andersen and Gibson will both be hard to trade for. Andersen is showing solid improvement from a good season last year and could easily be an NHL goaltender inside of a year.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Kolbe31

As a fan, what I'm sick of is the attitude over the last 6 months that we need to be bad before we can be good. That we can't make trades to make us better. I'm not suggesting we need to give up top end prospects to 'win now'. I'm not saying make whatever trade is necessary to get a decent goalie. But I think Feaster would be stupid to not explore possibilities. If something make sense, get it done. We win the last two games (against two of the league's best) with better goaltending. I also think we start 5-0, not 3-0-2.

There's no exact science to a rebuild. You continue to assess your team, and make it better where you can. Being a bad team and not improving on purpose is the Edmonton Oiler model of management. Surely we can find a better mentor.

Yes, thank you.

EDIT: Sorry for the following ranty novel.

A rebuild is not "year 1 of ____". It's not weighed in a measurement of time. There are not certain things you HAVE to do at certain times and certain things you MUST NOT do at others. A rebuild is taking what you have, and changing it from top to bottom, with the obvious intention of success. Just sitting around and waiting on high end draft picks to solve your problems is the Edmonton way of going about it. We do not want to be Edmonton.

Rebuilding is about obtaining draft picks and prospects to a point where in certain scenarios you can move some of them for proven commodities. Take our center 'depth' for instance. We have roughly 4-5 guys who play a similar game at a similar skill level, so there is no reason we can't move 2 of them for a proven player in a position we are not as deep in.

It's just one example, but there are multiple different ways to rebuild a team, and NONE of them are by a set schedule. This is not "year 1 of 5," this is simply just the second season that we have been in a rebuilding phase. It's not the second of 5 seasons, or 3 seasons, or whatever. It's just the second season.

If we can move assets for an asset in a position that we need, we should do it. Gillies is a few years away, and he is only the most LIKELY 'next guy' for the Flames. He may not ever translate his game. Plus, if we acquire a reliable goaltender and Berra or Ramo turn out to be studs? Then that is just MORE expendable assets that we have at our disposal.

If we don't make a move all season because we just want to "see what we have", even if Berra and Ramo don't perform, then you're creating a culture where it's ok to lose. It's never ok to lose. Not even if you're just waiting for a goalie to prove himself. If you keep going back to goalies who perform poorly, you're setting a precedent that says "we're ok with losing."

Rebuilds aren't measured in time people, we don't have 2 or 4 years left. It began when it began and it's over when it's over. Patience is key, but you don't avoid making moves just because you think you're on some set schedule. That's poor asset management.

Plus, to be frank, I'll be surprised if Ramo improves much. The same flaws in his game now (second shot, positioning, etc) are flaws he had in the KHL as well. Those things aren't magically going to disappear. The very things that have cost us a few games with him in net are part of his game.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Sim mode thread! Take a drink!