[News] Dube and Gillies assigned to Stockton. Mangiapane activated off IR

[PeteMoss]

Obviously Stockton has issues defensively. But you don't just replace a long term vet with some guy who's stinking it up in the AHL.

If the Flames wanted to replace Smith, the Leafs just got Michael Hutchinson for a late pick. Its not like you're going to have to give up a 2nd rounder from some AHL guy who's actually playing reasonable (i.e. Scott Wedgewood or Dustin Tokarski if you want a guy who's played in the NHL before).

Just because you don't see the guy play, doesn't mean he hasn't been awful. Some posters on here must think the sun doesn't come up if they keep curtains closed because they can't see it.

[Coach]

Sigh. It's not a replacement. One game. Maybe two. Whats the hurt? Would Smith really be sitting there getting sour because they brought in someone to try in his place while he's being awful? Do we care if he cares? I don't. Don't be awful, then you'd see more of a Frolik-type response to any concerns he might have.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Coach

Isn't hope the plan every night with Smith in net?

It's not hope. It's giving a young player a test when you can. January games, the team is in the class of the league and our back up sucks. Whats the harm? You lose a game mid-season you were in tough to win anyways because again, your back up sucks. Try another back up? What if Smith was hurt? He's not a viable option, he might as well be. Thats when we would be hoping because we have no clue.

We have no clue but the organization seems to
Again if Gillies was playing well this would have merit
But people are advocating for a guy that has been amongst the worst goalies in the ahl

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Coach

Sigh. It's not a replacement. One game. Maybe two. Whats the hurt? Would Smith really be sitting there getting sour because they brought in someone to try in his place while he's being awful? Do we care if he cares? I don't.

The team is trying to win games
They think Smith gives them a better chance than Gillies
And based on Gillies stats that’s not an irrational conclusion
If the best argument is “what’s the hurt” it’s pretty thin

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

We have no clue but the organization seems to
Again if Gillies was playing well this would have merit
But people are advocating for a guy that has been amongst the worst goalies in the ahl

Its not advocating for Gillies over Smith permanently. It's no different than wanting a guy like Neal to have a game or two off in place of a young guy. Bottom-end players get rotated out all the time. So do backup goaltenders on other teams. Why is the goalie (specifically ours) coddled so much more?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Coach

Its not advocating for Gillies over Smith permanently. It's no different than wanting a guy like Neal to have a game or two off in place of a young guy. Bottom-end players get rotated out all the time. So do backup goaltenders on other teams. Why is the goalie (specifically ours) coddled so much more?

Because the guy behind him as been even worse

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Because the guy behind him as been even worse

Okay we have 2 boxes. In one there is nothing. Zero. We know there is zero. In the other box there is very likely zero. 99.9999% chance of zero. But also a chance of a timbit. Nothing remarkable but maybe a pleasant surprise for a moment. What box do you open?

I understand the coaches obviously have their reasons and are likely just, but you have to understand that perspective, no?

[PepsiFree]

“What’s the hurt” is the same boneheaded logic that could be used to play just about anyone, including Mike Smith.

The hurt would be that we lose.
The upside would be that we win.

With Smith, looks like your chances are better at the latter than with Gillies, who stinks right now.

“What’s the hurt?” I don’t know, I like winning, it’s fun, it gets us into the playoffs. I don’t really think lowering your chances of doing that is a no-harm option.

I’d be absolutely fine giving another goalie a chance over Smith, but let’s not just throw into anyone regardless of how poorly they’re playing. It seems like some posters are losing the plot a little bit.

Winning > Losing
Smith > Gillies, as sad as that is

[Enoch Root]

We know that Smith isn't giving us decent backup goaltending. We can hope that he rebounds, or we can try something else.

Gillies last year.: 3-5-1, .896, 2.88 on a bad team (his games were mostly 2nd half)
Smith this year: 12-9-1, .886, 3.09 on a really good team that is much better defensively.

Has Gillies struggled this year on a terrible Heat team? Yes. But he has also shown that he can play in the NHL. And his stats on a bad team last year are better than Smith's on a good team this year. And playing in the NHL can actually be easier in many ways, because the defense is so much better, and the game is more predictable. Just be square to the play (something Smith isn't) and trust your defense.

Another way we can evaluate Smith is relative to his tandem partner - how do their stats compare, playing behind the same team? The answer: Smith's Sv% is .037 behind Rittich, and his GAA is .72 higher. Only Niemi in Montreal, and Bernier in Detroit have as big of a gap behind their starter as Smith does. And I am sure everyone agrees that Niemi and Bernier have not been getting the job done either.

Smith simply isn't getting it done. To dismiss Gillies outright, simply because his numbers in the AHL aren't good, is too simplistic, and not a valid argument, IMO.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

“What’s the hurt” is the same boneheaded logic that could be used to play just about anyone, including Mike Smith.

The hurt would be that we lose.
The upside would be that we win.

With Smith, looks like your chances are better at the latter than with Gillies, who stinks right now.

“What’s the hurt?” I don’t know, I like winning, it’s fun, it gets us into the playoffs. I don’t really think lowering your chances of doing that is a no-harm option.

I’d be absolutely fine giving another goalie a chance over Smith, but let’s not just throw into anyone regardless of how poorly they’re playing. It seems like some posters are losing the plot a little bit.

Winning > Losing
Smith > Gillies, as sad as that is

One game while our starter is hurt and backup is known garbage is going to cost us the playoffs?

I get Gillies' numbers are awful, it's also on a totally different team that has it's high end talent pillaged.

Either way, everything is great all things considered, for me though that's why I'd like to see more tinkering with the stuff thats not. Not via trade to upset the squad, just a trying of certain things.

If everything else is in full motion, why not experiment with the stuff not going right (Backup, Neal, PP2)?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Coach

Okay we have 2 boxes. In one there is nothing. Zero. We know there is zero. In the other box there is very likely zero. 99.9999% chance of zero. But also a chance of a timbit. Nothing remarkable but maybe a pleasant surprise for a moment. What box do you open?

I understand the coaches obviously have their reasons and are likely just, but you have to understand that perspective, no?

I don’t think whatever the example is represents a fair illustration of this situation
The flames do not believe smith represents nothing

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I don’t think whatever the example is represents a fair illustration of this situation
The flames do not believe smith represents nothing

Its to represent that one is known and poor, and one has a chance to be not that. Not that Smith=0. It's his chance of being not Mike Smith.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

We know that Smith isn't giving us decent backup goaltending. We can hope that he rebounds, or we can try something else.

Gillies last year.: 3-5-1, .896, 2.88 on a bad team (his games were mostly 2nd half)
Smith this year: 12-9-1, .886, 3.09 on a really good team that is much better defensively.

Has Gillies struggled this year on a terrible Heat team? Yes. But he has also shown that he can play in the NHL. And his stats on a bad team last year are better than Smith's on a good team this year. And playing in the NHL can actually be easier in many ways, because the defense is so much better, and the game is more predictable. Just be square to the play and trust your defense.

Another way we can evaluate Smith is relative to his tandem partner - how do their stats compare, playing behind the same team? The answer: Smith's Sv% is .037 behind Rittich, and his GAA is .72 higher. Only Niemi in Montreal, and Bernier in Detroit have as big of a gap behind their starter as Smith does. And I am sure everyone agrees that Niemi and Bernier have not been getting the job done either.

Smith simply isn't getting it done. To dismiss Gillies outright, simply because his numbers in the AHL aren't good, is too simplistic, and not a valid argument, IMO.

And to assume management is making this decision purely on ahl stats is also naive

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

And to assume management is making this decision purely on ahl stats is also naive

I never said they are. I was referring to posters in this thread.

[Strange Brew]

Has anyone who has watched Gillies play a decent number of games this year be willing to argue he should be playing in the NHL this year?

[monkeyman]

There are other reasons to play Gillies, and I think it's disingenuous to say we had a better chance with Smith. We were lucky to escape Detroit with two points and this team has not had a lot of success this year in btb games. So do you play a guy with absolutely no future with the team past this year, a guy lacking confidence, or do you play a guy you hope can make a push as a competent back-up next year?
This allows Smith to maybe build some confidence having just won a game and not putting him in a position to immediately fail.
This allows you to evaluate and give a guy some experience you hope will take the next step.
Gillies would obviously be motivated playing back in Boston.
I think there were several good reasons to play Gillies and I see not doing so as a lost opportunity.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Has anyone who has watched Gillies play a decent number of games this year be willing to argue he should be playing in the NHL this year?

I've watched some (but not a lot because they are awful), and he wasn't great. But the number of rebounds, wide open guys, and cross-ice T-ups, were atrocious. It has to wear on a guy.

IMO, goaltending in the NHL is more about good positioning than it is in lower and younger leagues. And on that note, one of the criticisms of Gillies last year was over-committing, being too active. Goalies have to learn to be quieter in the NHL.

And that is something that Smith will never be. He always had an aggressive, attacking style. Unfortunately, his body won't let him do that anymore.

[SeanCharles]

Originally Posted by dammage79

I don't know what to think of Mangipane. I know lots of posters here think highly of him but I've never really gotten the jist of why. He makes some really nice plays but nothing ever comes of it and I think his staking from a stand still is wonky. I guess I mean his acceleration. And he's not overly fast for a guy his size. I think he has some great attributes but really lacking in others.

For where he was drafted Mangiapane is a great add to the prospect pool.

But yea I agree with you in that he doesn't look overly promising at the NHL level.

He looks to be a depth guy who is too good for the AHL but can't seem to find his niche in the NHL.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Repeat that all you want.

And I will say this.

Save percentage can be as close to a useless stat as there is, without context. It is a team stat, first, then a goalie stat next.

There are shots that goalies should stop, shots they could stop, and shots they can’t reasonably stop. Team play gives you the proportion.

Then goalie works with that. Smith is failing too often with group 1.

None of what you say means that every other goalie on earth is automatically an improvement over Smith. He is not the only goalie in the world who fails to stop shots that he should.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Because you don’t just hand an nhl start to a young goalie playing poorly out of hope
Hope is not a plan
Bottom line is the team seems to believe that Smith gives them a better chance to win compared to Gillies

Other people would make a good case by arguing that the bottom line is that Smith has a long history in the NHL, a big contract, and team loyalty. Also that many starts have been given to him with a fair amount of hope, and that he has let them down.