[Trade] Flames acquire Mike Smith (25% retained) for Chad Johnson, Brandon Hickey, & cond 3rd

[sempuki]

MOD EDIT: No insults please.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It could be worse. Could be paying 8 million bucks for Hiller and Ramo.

It could be worse. Could be Elliott back.

It could be worse. Could end up being Mike Smith for a 2nd round pick.

I suppose Mike Smith for a 3rd would be worse, since then we'd miss the playoffs altogether and the trade would be a bonafied disaster. We all better hope it's Mike Smith for a 2nd or this is gonna be a really rough year.

I get that he's a placeholder and we hope one of the prospects takes over in the next couple of years, I just dislike that plan. Would have preferred the get a younger keeper and let them battle the prospects instead but he's who we have now. I know many do but I simply don't have faith that an old goaltenders is going to get better or for that matter stay even. Time always wins and he's oooooold. Hopefully he to put together a solid year or two and maybe the flames can put together a run.

Big picture maybe we kept some other assets not getting a younger goalie so we can get the defender or winger we need. Look at me all silver linings and everything.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Why are people quoting career numbers on a 35 year old netminder? I mean, if you want to look at his career he's had one good season ever, the rest have been at best average, but even so you're not getting "prime" Mike Smith and his .916 save percentage from 08-09. People cannot possibly be this blind.

Right, six years ago. And in 2010, Ryan Miller was the best goalie on the planet. Is he the savior now?

I get that people want to be optimistic but this is just insane.

OK. How about last year then? (which I've already posted in this thread a couple times)

League average high danger sv% - 81.17%
Mike Smith high danger sv% - 83.73%

League average medium danger sv% - 92.50%
Mike Smith medium danger sv% - 92.61%

League average low danger sv% - 97.91%
Mike Smith low danger sv% - 98.01%

So above league average in all 3 categories last season.

This is a problem?

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Everyone needs to relax. Just played a game of NHL 17 with Smith in net for the Flames. Beat the Oilers 5-2. Smith with 36 saves.

We're in good hands.

Good hands indeed, just yesterday I said Smith is the perfect stop gap

His record against the Oilers is an impressive 15-3-1

And against all other pacific teams except Calgary he's 62-35-10 with 15 shutouts.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Lundqvist has sharply declined in play, eh? He was unreal in the World Cup, he was unreal in the playoffs, and he was unreal wearing 35 at the WHC.

Anderson was just in the conference final, he's older than Smith. Pekka Rinne is a year younger. Tim Thomas won a Stanley Cup and a Vezina on the back half of his 30s. For two years, it's a minimal risk.

I disagree.

League average goaltending last year was .913%.

Here is the list of goalies aged 35+ that played 45+ games and had a save percentage of .913% or greater since 05/06:

1.Thomas
2.Loungo
3.Kiprusoff
4.Brodeur
5.Vokoun
6.Theodore
7.Miller
8.Hedberg
9.Roloson
10.Hasek

The 35+ goalies to play 55+ games and sport last years's league average save percentage:
1.Thomas
2.Luongo
3.Brodeur
4.Kiprusoff
5.Roloson
6.Hasek

Only six goalies have managed that feat in 12 seasons.

It seems like a very big risk to me. I think this move was a bad bet by Treliving if he was looking for a goalie that can carry a starter's workload and give league average netminding.
.
.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

He's kind of a head case too. Not sure how the pressure in a Canadian market is going to help.

I would've been fine losing him in the expansion draft for nothing.

Ah, good old Jordon. First you were happy at the anticipated return you were getting for Smith, then you let out a big "oomph" at the return you got, then you state that he'll probably have a career ending injury next season, now you would have been happy to lose him for nothing?

You realize that when you go through the motions on your lazy trolling of Flames fans for over a decade now (while being the worst kind of bandwagon fan out there, literally switching teams because Calgary was losing at the time) that we can see all your posts in succession, right?

"Hahaha, Calgary sucks, you're gonna get hosed, can't wait!"

"Oh crap, that sucked"

"Well, I for one would have been happy to lose him for free, so Calgary still sucks!".

"Anyways, congrats Flames fans. He's likely to suffer a career ending injury this season, but whatevs".

[Flash Walken]

I think for me the trade is just 'meh'.

It could work out great, but he's a 35 year old goalie, so it's not exactly likely. The acquisition cost was arguably more than what it cost to acquire Elliott, and Smith has twice the salary liability if it doesn't work out.

At this point, I'm super glad Elliott didn't have an extra year on the end of his deal.

This feels like a very lateral move with strong potential to bust.

Is next year's draft supposed to be any good?

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by madmike

Very meh trade in my opinion. I'd really almost rather go with Elliott - although it's unlikely he would sign for two years or less I guess.

Elliott is a mental midget, when the playoffs come around he plays like a cream-puff and always has.

When Mike Smith got into the playoffs he was his teams best player.

[VilleN]

I think this trade was great. Mainly because it exposes the people who take this way too seriously. Disappointment to mild anger is fine, but some of the reactions are hilarious... like children who didn't get what they wanted for Xmas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think for me the trade is just 'meh'.

It could work out great, but he's a 35 year old goalie, so it's not exactly likely. The acquisition cost was arguably more than what it cost to acquire Elliott, and Smith has twice the salary liability if it doesn't work out.

At this point, I'm super glad Elliott didn't have an extra year on the end of his deal.

This feels like a very lateral move with strong potential to bust.

Is next year's draft supposed to be any good?

You post was all reasonably apprehensive about the move, which is just as justified as the optimism, but why the nonsense with the last line? You're above that, imo.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by jayswin

You post was all reasonably apprehensive about the move, which is just as justified as the optimism, but why the nonsense with the last line? You're above that, imo.

oh, haha, it looks like i'm saying the flames will be a lottery team.

No, I'm inquiring about the perceived value of a 2nd round pick in next years draft.

[Caged Great]

Smith is and always has been a good goalie that was stuck behind some terrible Coyote teams. He even got them to the conference finals that one year when the team in front of him was fairly mediocre.

The Flames have a good team in front of him and with the likelihood that they will be able to add a couple additional threats up on top of what we already have, the team should be in a good position to content for not only the division but also for the top spot in the conference. That would have occurred whether we got Smith, Raanta, Mason, Howard, or anyone who was decent. Even if we went with Elliott and Johnson, that would have occurred as the team was hampered by having no 1st line RW and having 4 #7 D-men playing in roles 4-7 last year until Stone arrived.

Realistically the Flames lineup next year should look like this

Gaudreau-Monahan-New potential acquisition/Ferland
Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik
Ferland/Versteeg-Bennett-Brouwer/Versteeg/Ferland/Jankowski (depends on expansion draft)
Lazar-Stajan-Chiasson

Giordano-Hamilton
Brodie-#4 like Stone
#4/5 guy like Russell-Andersson/Kulak

Smith
Gillies

That starts to look like a team with few weaknesses. That is a realistic scenario thanks to all the expiring contracts.

[Red Slinger]

I don't mind the trade in terms of what the Flames gave up and I don't mind the salary either. To get a real good goalie the team would have had to give up a lot more. It's always better to develop your own if possible and if necessary get a temporary stop-gap.

I don't think the Flames need an all-star goalie. They need an average to above average goalie that won't let in bad goals at terrible times. He doesn't have to necessary win them games but he just can't lose them. The timing could be good as this team looks like they could be contenders in a couple of seasons, all things being equal.

Hopefully Smith can hold the fort while the team's goaltending ladder shakes itself out and we find ourselves our own Murray.

I'm cautiously optimistic but certainly not over the top.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

oh, haha, it looks like i'm saying the flames will be a lottery team.

No, I'm inquiring about the perceived value of a 2nd round pick in next years draft.

Oh bahaha, sorry I thought you were making a myopic, whiny proclamation that were done as a team because of the signing. I thought, "Flash is usually pretty even keel and straight forward with hockey talk".

It seemed out of place, that's why I questioned you.

[Itse]

Lots of theoretically valid numbers thrown around, but goalie numbers are not that great at predicting how well goalies will do on a different team.

(Personal opinion of the trade: Seems like a lateral move, but I'm okay with that. We'll see how it goes )

[CaptainCrunch]

He's played behind a horrific team in Arizona and coached by a guy that has basically given up and spends his time behind the bench endorsing his paycheck and dreaming of coaching his sons high school team cause it will be better.

Even if he gives us more consistent goaltending then Elliot does its a win. With Arizona eating 25% of his salary it doesn't break the payroll structure. As well his ability to play the puck is a huge benefit, teams are going to have a lot more difficulty with dump ins.

I want to see how he does behind a much better team.

On top of it he's 35 and I'm like 49 so the age means nothing to me.

Am I upset about the loss of Hickey? the draft pick? Nope, I think we sometimes get too enamored with the magic box that is draft picks and prospects, and we super hype them up.

We have lots of defensive prospects, was Hickey a standout among that group?

Raanta would be nice, but if the Rangers wanted an arm and a leg for him, then not that nice.

Screw it, I like it, and I like that Mike Smith has some color to him, maybe he'll punch the wunderkid from up North in his lady bits and laugh in his face.

And that's good enough for me.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Oh bahaha, sorry I thought you were making a myopic, whiny proclamation that were done as a team because of the signing. I thought, "Flash is usually pretty even keel and straight forward with hockey talk".

It seemed out of place, that's why I questioned you.

I know you're a Flash Walken hater.

So anyway, is next years draft supposed to be good?

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

Smith
Gillies

Very little chance that Gillies is the backup. That's a disaster waiting to happen. Maybe Rittich, but he's a long shot as well. My guess is that you see a veteran backup for one more season.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I know you're a Flash Walken hater.

So anyway, is next years draft supposed to be good?

Why do you think that? I don't like some things you do, but that's generally more in the off topic forum and like you overall.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Fire

Very little chance that Gillies is the backup. That's a disaster waiting to happen. Maybe Rittich, but he's a long shot as well. My guess is that you see a veteran backup for one more season.

It's possible. I'm not sure what they're going to do. If they can get Johnson back for say > 2, than sure. Just have to wait and see.

Gillies is a viable option as the backup, if there are no other options available.