[News] Flames claim Joey MacDonald

[moon]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

Having watched a lot of Taylor this season I wish they'd start him and show the fans the player they signed and why he deserved the contract.

He deserved the contract because Kipper got hurt. If they were signing him due to his play they would have done so earlier and not picked up Joey Macdonald on waivers.

Originally Posted by Vulcan

I have my doubts too but it's not that simple. For another team to sign Taylor, Calgary gets first refusal rights because he's signed with their farm team, so it might make some teams not want the bother.

A one year, minimum deal is a bother?

He would have been easy as pie for another team to sign but the fact that every team in the league has a guy similar or better than Taylor in terms of NHL potential in their farm system means that the guy was unsigned going into the season and not needed by other teams in the league.

The organization that ran the farm team he played on didn't want to sign him to a deal until an emergency injury forced them to quickly grab someone and even then he was replaced a couple days later when someone else came available.

[tvp2003]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

The Flames seem to have an issue with drafting and developing goaltenders. Mike Vernon and Trevor Kidd are the only goaltenders ever drafted by the Calgary Flames to go on to have any sort of sustained NHL career. That's over 33 years.

And consider this:

(a) When Kidd was drafted, the Flames traded with New Jersey, swapping first rounders. Flames took Kidd 11th overall, Devils took Brodeur 20th.
(b) The best example of the Flames having no clue how to draft and develop a goaltender is Craig Anderson. Flames brass at the time, Craig Button I believe, let him re-enter the draft and he has forged out a pretty good career.
(c) Another example of not knowing how to develop a goaltender was Button again moving Giguere for peanuts (what eventually became Mika Elomo). The Flames almost ruined the guy.

The Flames certainly have a bad "history" of drafting and developing goalies -- not sure you can pin this to some overarching curse on the entire franchise though (it's not like the same owners/coaches/staff have been here the whole time). And you can't forget, Calgary did take a third-string nobody named Miikka Kiprusoff and turned him into the franchise leader in wins.

P.S. Thanks for mentioning the Calgary/New Jersey trade in 1990. Can't bring that up too many times

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

It is hard for any backup to get multitude of opportunities the way the Flames have historically handled their goaltending. Heck even Karlsson is putting up some impressive AHL numbers on an average team right now.

It would be nice if the Flames would actually give their backup some consistent starts, not only for the backup but also for Kipper. The Flames almost always have thrown a backup in tough to win situations like the second half of back to backs and then are amazed when the backup does not get a victory. I would say it would be tough to actually say that any of them including Irving have had a multitude of opportunities. It would be nice if they gave Irving 10 games to show what he actually has, but alas they are in a win now mode and that will probably not happen. So far the guy is 1-1 and his only loss is in a game where nobody else showed up. One thing seems obvious, a 33 year old Joey MacDonald does not seem like a long term solution.

Slow start.

Win now.

Ride your starter hard down the stretch in hopes you claw in.

Lose critical games down the stretch when your starter is either fatigued or the rest of the team lays an egg.

Wash, Rinse, Repeat the following season.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by moon

He deserved the contract because Kipper got hurt. If they were signing him due to his play they would have done so earlier and not picked up Joey Macdonald on waivers.



A one year, minimum deal is a bother?

He would have been easy as pie for another team to sign but the fact that every team in the league has a guy similar or better than Taylor in terms of NHL potential in their farm system means that the guy was unsigned going into the season and not needed by other teams in the league.

The organization that ran the farm team he played on didn't want to sign him to a deal until an emergency injury forced them to quickly grab someone and even then he was replaced a couple days later when someone else came available.

Every team in the league has at least 2 guys better than Taylor, likely 3 and maybe 4.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Well, like any other player, G's are not measured merely by games played in the nhl....things like development camps, training camps, AHL practices, NHL practices, etc all go into the determination of whether or not a guy fits in your plans long term...and all those listed ARE opportunities to impress and advance your career.

Fair enough, my broader point was that the Flames since they have had Kipper have never allowed for a situation where a backup goalie was placed in a position at the pro-level to develop (for any goalie, not just Irving). For Irving specifically, giving the guy 7 games where your odds of winning even with Kipper are probably around 33% and then saying "Hey the guy never wins, he only went 1-3-3 for a .357 winning percentage" is a little disingenous.

Kipper was in for 2 back to back games last year, he won the first 4-3 and lost the second 5-1 (he was pulled after letting in the first 4 shots that game).

He had a 5.79 GAA in those games with a .837 SV%.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by transplant99

DiPietro, Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Bacashihua, Munro, Lehtonen, Ward, Toivonen, Fleury, Montoya, Dubnyk, Schwarz, Schneider, Price, Rask, Bernier, Helenius, Varlamov, Irving, Pickard, McCollum

So where would you think the value lies?

That list is somewhat skewed, as 23-26 year old goalies are hardly starter material.

If we correct for that, we get:
DiPietro, Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Bacashihua, Munro, Lehtonen, Ward, Toivonen, Fleury, Montoya, Dubnyk, Schwarz, Schneider

And if we split this by draft spot, we get:
Top 5: Dipietro, Lehtonen, Fleury
5-10: Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Montoya
11-20: Schwarz, Dubnyk
21-30: Bacashihua, Foster, Ward, Toivonen, Schneider

So out of 14 players, we have 3 goaltenders who bowed out from injury (insignificant results), 3 career backups/journeymen, 4 late round busts, and 4 starters.

The detail I see is how risky the top 10 goalies are as skaters are much more stable in stock. Drafting goalies late 1st seems to be a gamble, but good payoff for input with approximate chance of becoming a legitimate NHLer only slightly higher than the skaters in that range. I wouldn't say don't draft goalies in the first period, but if you want to go all in, goalies in the bottom 15 or 20 are a reasonable venture.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by kirant

That list is somewhat skewed, as 23-26 year old goalies are hardly starter material.

If we correct for that, we get:
DiPietro, Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Bacashihua, Munro, Lehtonen, Ward, Toivonen, Fleury, Montoya, Dubnyk, Schwarz, Schneider

And if we split this by draft spot, we get:
Top 5: Dipietro, Lehtonen, Fleury
5-10: Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Montoya
11-20: Schwarz, Dubnyk
21-30: Bacashihua, Foster, Ward, Toivonen, Schneider

So out of 14 players, we have 3 goaltenders who bowed out from injury (insignificant results), 3 career backups/journeymen, 4 late round busts, and 4 starters.

The detail I see is how risky the top 10 goalies are as skaters are much more stable in stock. Drafting goalies late 1st seems to be a gamble, but good payoff for input with approximate chance of becoming a legitimate NHLer only slightly higher than the skaters in that range. I wouldn't say don't draft goalies in the first period, but if you want to go all in, goalies in the bottom 15 or 20 are a reasonable venture.

Maybe i am missing what you mean...but i started back in 2000 which would have the age range from 23-31.

Using some of those i listed not drafted in round 1...

Rinne is 30

Lundqvist is 30

Smith is 30

Howard is 28

Quick is 27

Halak is 27

Elliot is 27

All in the same range as those 1st rounders.

[transplant99]

double post

[magicpixels]

Originally Posted by kirant

That list is somewhat skewed, as 23-26 year old goalies are hardly starter material.

If we correct for that, we get:
DiPietro, Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Bacashihua, Munro, Lehtonen, Ward, Toivonen, Fleury, Montoya, Dubnyk, Schwarz, Schneider

And if we split this by draft spot, we get:
Top 5: Dipietro, Lehtonen, Fleury
5-10: Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Montoya
11-20: Schwarz, Dubnyk
21-30: Bacashihua, Foster, Ward, Toivonen, Schneider

So out of 14 players, we have 3 goaltenders who bowed out from injury (insignificant results), 3 career backups/journeymen, 4 late round busts, and 4 starters.

The detail I see is how risky the top 10 goalies are as skaters are much more stable in stock. Drafting goalies late 1st seems to be a gamble, but good payoff for input with approximate chance of becoming a legitimate NHLer only slightly higher than the skaters in that range. I wouldn't say don't draft goalies in the first period, but if you want to go all in, goalies in the bottom 15 or 20 are a reasonable venture.

4 out of 14. Sounds about the average success rate of any first round pick.

Just for fun. Go look at how many goalies are drafted between rounds 2 and 7 and see what percentage make it or break it. You will find more names that are starters but you'll find a significant number of busts.

[djsFlames]

Oh boy, some folks here are just obsessed with Irving it seems. They have this fixation like if he was sat for one start in favor of a guy no one's had the chance to see, it would be a crime against humanity.

Sure, he hasn't had enough games yet to properly gauge too much. But has the guy proven anything more to this point than being as good as a band aid back-up with perhaps a little upside beyond that? Sure, he's young, but he's not going to learn how to be all of that in 5 or 6 games of starting for a team that needs W's Now. Sure would have liked to see how Taylor stacked up to Irving coming in for a game. Wouldn't surprise me if he looked just as average or worse. But it would be worth a shot.

Now it looks like it'll be MacDonald's show if Kipper's out later than wednesday. UNLESS Irving stands on his head tonight and shows us that this is still his gig.

Not a bad pickup if they're looking for some stability for the rest of the season. But another trade has gotta be coming.

[TurnedTheCorner]

CP does not disappoint. 400+ replies on a waiver move. Imagine if there was news!

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by kirant

That list is somewhat skewed, as 23-26 year old goalies are hardly starter material.

If we correct for that, we get:
DiPietro, Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Bacashihua, Munro, Lehtonen, Ward, Toivonen, Fleury, Montoya, Dubnyk, Schwarz, Schneider

And if we split this by draft spot, we get:
Top 5: Dipietro, Lehtonen, Fleury
5-10: Krahn, Leclaire, Blackburn, Montoya
11-20: Schwarz, Dubnyk
21-30: Bacashihua, Foster, Ward, Toivonen, Schneider

So out of 14 players, we have 3 goaltenders who bowed out from injury (insignificant results), 3 career backups/journeymen, 4 late round busts, and 4 starters.

The detail I see is how risky the top 10 goalies are as skaters are much more stable in stock. Drafting goalies late 1st seems to be a gamble, but good payoff for input with approximate chance of becoming a legitimate NHLer only slightly higher than the skaters in that range. I wouldn't say don't draft goalies in the first period, but if you want to go all in, goalies in the bottom 15 or 20 are a reasonable venture.

Someone on Hfboards did something like this with dman drafted in the top 5 going back to JBo and came to the same conclusion that its not worth drafting dman high either compared to forwards. Some of the names were Jbo, Barker, E. Johnson and J. Johnson. I think it was an argument against taking Seth Jones over guys like Mckinnon and Drouin.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by tvp2003

The Flames certainly have a bad "history" of drafting and developing goalies -- not sure you can pin this to some overarching curse on the entire franchise though (it's not like the same owners/coaches/staff have been here the whole time). And you can't forget, Calgary did take a third-string nobody named Miikka Kiprusoff and turned him into the franchise leader in wins.

P.S. Thanks for mentioning the Calgary/New Jersey trade in 1990. Can't bring that up too many times

I guess my point was really why even try? I'd be curious to see what would happen if an NHL team just started a "no goalies" drafting policy and instead concentrated their efforts on the pro side to try and get goalies in the 22-28 range who may have worn out their welcome from other organizations.

[Pierre "Monster" McGuire]

Joey MacDonald will be #35 for the Flames.

[bubbsy]

so don't know much about macdonald, hopefully he's got something to him.

At the end of the day, if the flames are an avg to below-avg team as they have shown this season, then i'd rather just lose with a kid trying to prove himself rather than a 33 year old career backup.

Win Now, Win Now, Win Now!
- flames brass. let's hear more about 'intellectual honesty'

[moon]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Oh boy, some folks here are just obsessed with Irving it seems. They have this fixation like if he was sat for one start in favor of a guy no one's had the chance to see, it would be a crime against humanity.

Who is saying anything like this?

I see some guys saying that Irving hasn't got a fair chance to show what he is, others saying Irving is a better choice to start over Taylor and maybe Macdonald and some saying Irving has got a tough ride from the Flames but I have not seen anyone being anywhere close to being obsessed with him or saying anything close "it would be a crime against humanity."

It is a big thread though so perhaps I missed those posts.

[Zamboniman]

There is another explanation for why Feaster made this decision:

Feaster isn't the one who made this decision.


There's been an odor of ownership meddling in hockey decisions pungently surrounding this team for a while now.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Zamboniman

There is another explanation for why Feaster made this decision:

Feaster isn't the one who made this decision.


There's been an odor of ownership meddling in hockey decisions pungently surrounding this team for a while now.

Irving is average, and his attitude isn't the greatest. Feels like the same whining that went on with Kobasew and Boyd. I don't get how we are all singing their praises about development and drafting improving since Feaster's crew came in and now we don't trust them with this. If they can find diamonds like Bart and Johnny than maybe they have an eye for removing nuggets of crap as well. Or maybe Mcdonald was brought in to bring out Irving's do or die A game who knows but there isn't any conspiracy going on here.

[dammage79]

Dean Molberg ‏@fan960boomer
Press box at #flames game is jammed with scouts. 16 other teams represented tonight. Loooong time since I've seen this many. #tradewinds?

Something is most certainly up.

[Mccree]

Originally Posted by Psytic

Someone on Hfboards did something like this with dman drafted in the top 5 going back to JBo and came to the same conclusion that its not worth drafting dman high either compared to forwards. Some of the names were Jbo, Barker, E. Johnson and J. Johnson. I think it was an argument against taking Seth Jones over guys like Mckinnon and Drouin.

Is that just a function of there being less goalie and defenseman positions available. More forwards needed so more get drafted therefore more likely to find a forward that is good?