R_Dudley Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 The way I look at it. A great goaltender is on the ice 60+ minutes. Even the best skater gives you about 25 minutes. But the choice on this board seems to be framed as either/or... While Vancouver has the Sedins and Luongo (3) Pittsburgh has Fluery Crosby and Malkin (3) Buffalo has Miller, Vanek and ......(2) I don't think they need to sacrifice Miller to get the 3rd of their big 3. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnRobertEichel Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Hmmm... Don't think they'll be here to respond until we lose. :ph34r: It's just that some of us haven't already forgotten last year's Boston series, or all of the regular season for that matter. Miller had an outstanding game last night. Miller is probably an above average goalie. But "elite" goaltender worthy of $6+ million/year? I'm not so sure without seeing more evidence in this particular playoff run, and I'm also not so sure if the Sabres are better off long-term with just Miller or with Enroth + star center + top defenseman opposite Myers (which is what I think a sly Regier could pull off in a blockbuster trade of Miller). Enroth is very talented himself, and he might even eventually develop to be a much better goalie than Miller...which would make such a trade a potentially epic coup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 The way I look at it. A great goaltender is on the ice 60+ minutes. Even the best skater gives you about 25 minutes. But the choice on this board seems to be framed as either/or... While Vancouver has the Sedins and Luongo (3) Pittsburgh has Fluery Crosby and Malkin (3) Buffalo has Miller, Vanek and ......(2) I don't think they need to sacrifice Miller to get the 3rd of their big 3. Especially since Myers is going to be the third of the big three and he's already on the team. :thumbsup: The rest of it is how much does a $6M goalie give you that a $3M or $2M can't? If we could trade Miller for a forward equivalent to Vanek, and then make Enroth our no.1, would we be in a better or worse position to win the Stanley Cup? I think you could make a case either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 The way I look at it. A great goaltender is on the ice 60+ minutes. Even the best skater gives you about 25 minutes. But the choice on this board seems to be framed as either/or... While Vancouver has the Sedins and Luongo (3) Pittsburgh has Fluery Crosby and Malkin (3) Buffalo has Miller, Vanek and ......(2) I don't think they need to sacrifice Miller to get the 3rd of their big 3. Especially since Myers is going to be the third of the big three and he's already on the team. :thumbsup: The rest of it is how much does a $6M goalie give you that a $3M or $2M can't? If we could trade Miller for a forward equivalent to Vanek, and then make Enroth our no.1, would we be in a better or worse position to win the Stanley Cup? I think you could make a case either way. Myers and Vanek should be the rest of the big 3 for the Sabres, but Myers isn't there yet and Vanek may never get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Myers and Vanek should be the rest of the big 3 for the Sabres, but Myers isn't there yet and Vanek may never get there. I think Myers will be there soon. I really don't think he's that too far off. All he needs to do is get rid of some stupid turnovers, and he'd be golden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 The way I look at it. A great goaltender is on the ice 60+ minutes. Even the best skater gives you about 25 minutes. But the choice on this board seems to be framed as either/or... While Vancouver has the Sedins and Luongo (3) Pittsburgh has Fluery Crosby and Malkin (3) Buffalo has Miller, Vanek and ......(2) I don't think they need to sacrifice Miller to get the 3rd of their big 3. Myers and Vanek should be the rest of the big 3 for the Sabres, but Myers isn't there yet and Vanek may never get there. My issue with XB's point is that while Miller may be one of the big three , Vanek isn't an elite player and the window for him to become elite may be closing, and Myers isn't there yet. So we have one of the big three, another that still needs to get there, and a third that might be past ever getting there. And that is where SilverNRed's point comes into play. Maybe you need to give up your one leg of the triangle in order to aqcuire the other two. Of course, this means you are now expecting Enroth to take over for Miller and become that 3rd piece. It is a gamble. But I don't think it is a long odds gamble at this point. Of course it seems a touch silly maybe to be discussing an option like this after a 1-0 playoff shutout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 My issue with XB's point is that while Miller may be one of the big three , Vanek isn't an elite player and the window for him to become elite may be closing, and Myers isn't there yet. So we have one of the big three, another that still needs to get there, and a third that might be past ever getting there. And that is where SilverNRed's point comes into play. Maybe you need to give up your one leg of the triangle in order to aqcuire the other two. Of course, this means you are now expecting Enroth to take over for Miller and become that 3rd piece. It is a gamble. But I don't think it is a long odds gamble at this point. Of course it seems a touch silly maybe to be discussing an option like this after a 1-0 playoff shutout. I'm saying your triangle may not need to include a goalie. Why can't it be two star forwards and a defenseman? Or two star defensemen and one star forward? I don't think your goalie needs to be one of the three best players on the team to win the Cup. There's evidence to back that up. Now, could you do it with a mediocre goalie? Probably not. Your goalie would need to be at least "good". I don't think it's weird to be talking about this after our first playoff game either. Nothing we talk about actually affects what happens in the games so anything interesting should be fair game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 I'm saying your triangle may not need to include a goalie. Why can't it be two star forwards and a defenseman? Or two star defensemen and one star forward? I don't think your goalie needs to be one of the three best players on the team to win the Cup. There's evidence to back that up. Now, could you do it with a mediocre goalie? Probably not. Your goalie would need to be at least "good". I don't think it's weird to be talking about this after our first playoff game either. Nothing we talk about actually affects what happens in the games so anything interesting should be fair game. Theoretically, you are certainly right that a goalie doesn't need to be one of the big 3. In practice, though, it's pretty GD hard to find any player good enough to be in the big 3. The Sabres found one in Miller, and perhaps another one in Myers. If they could trade Miller for Stamkos? Fine. But we all (or most of us, anyway) know that isn't going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Theoretically, you are certainly right that a goalie doesn't need to be one of the big 3. In practice, though, it's pretty GD hard to find any player good enough to be in the big 3. The Sabres found one in Miller, and perhaps another one in Myers. If they could trade Miller for Stamkos? Fine. But we all (or most of us, anyway) know that isn't going to happen. Not that it matters a lot but Stamkos was a -1 for his first playoffs game and had 1sog. So that demonstrates the issues we are all having with this argument. Miller will effect the game no matter what and a top forward just might not. Its an opinion call these days about having a top 10ish gt to win the cup. Although you need a really solid team in front of a eh gt to win the cup... its 6 to 1 or half a dozen to the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 I can't blame Miller for a shutout though! How gregarious of you, lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Theoretically, you are certainly right that a goalie doesn't need to be one of the big 3. In practice, though, it's pretty GD hard to find any player good enough to be in the big 3. The Sabres found one in Miller, and perhaps another one in Myers. If they could trade Miller for Stamkos? Fine. But we all (or most of us, anyway) know that isn't going to happen. Obviously any talk about trading Miller for a star forward would depend on a star forward actually being available and his team actually being open to that trade. But why worry about that when we're just shooting the S on a message board? I don't think it's crazy to think we could trade Miller for a star forward if we wanted to though. For starters, he's probably the most famous American hockey player right now. So if a team wanted a marque player for their fan base, he'd be a "name" for that. Next, I'm sure a lot of GM's subscribe to the conventional hockey wisdom that you need a great goalie to win. A lot of people on this board seem to think that as well. So Miller's value is probably higher than we think. Lastly, lopsided trades happen every year in every sport. So it's not impossible to fleece someone. One last thing about this Triangle/Top Three thing: Why is everyone saying Miller is definitely a guy for this but they don't know if Vanek is? Aren't they similar? Miller's career stats outside of last year aren't amazing; they're just good. Vanek similarly had one amazing season where he scored over 40 goals and led the league in +/-, and a bunch of seasons that were just "good." Miller was outplayed in the playoffs last year, but Buffalo was dominated Boston for a game and a half before Vanek got hurt. Miller stole one for us last night but I basically think the two guys are equally good at their jobs overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 One last thing about this Triangle/Top Three thing: Why is everyone saying Miller is definitely a guy for this but they don't know if Vanek is? Aren't they similar? Miller's career stats outside of last year aren't amazing; they're just good. Vanek similarly had one amazing season where he scored over 40 goals and led the league in +/-, and a bunch of seasons that were just "good." Miller was outplayed in the playoffs last year, but Buffalo was dominated Boston for a game and a half before Vanek got hurt. Miller stole one for us last night but I basically think the two guys are equally good at their jobs overall. I think you make a reasonable case here. But it is sure to get you flamed on this site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Miller made some good saves, but the difference was that there was SO MUCH traffic in front of the net that he got away being caught on the wrong side a few times. It was there. One time he didn't even get to his feet because he was out so bad. It just worked out that pucks didn't go in. I'm not saying he played bad. The defense and backcheck clogged the lanes. I'd give more props to them. I can't blame Miller for a shutout though! I've avoided discussing Miller last night. But I'm in now. I agree 98.4653% with this. There were three different occasions when the puck was there and he wasn't. Then add the JVR puck that posted behind him. He certainly should get credit for posting a zero GAA last night, but I think we should all recognize that the Flyers were very unlucky last night. They were one step behind a free puck all night. Miller got a lot of clear looks last night and to his credit, none of those made it past him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Interesting stat. 4 shutouts in the opening game of each series. 3 of the 4 goalies that had shutouts have cap hits of at least $5MM. The other one has a cap hit of $2.75MM. In the Sabres-Phlyers game, the $1.8MM goalie gave up one heck of a rebound to Kaleta. Talk amongst yourselves, I'm getting verklempt. ;) Until a big ticket goalie wins the Stanley Cup nothing changes. Miller has had many great performances in the past. He needs to break through and not be on the losing end of the defining moment like he was in the Winter Classic and the Olympics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Until a big ticket goalie wins the Stanley Cup nothing changes. What do you mean by this? Plenty of big ticket goalies have won the cup, do you mean recently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Until a big ticket goalie wins the Stanley Cup nothing changes. Miller has had many great performances in the past. He needs to break through and not be on the losing end of the defining moment like he was in the Winter Classic and the Olympics. Fleury, Marc-Andre Brodeur, Martin Ward, Cam Giguere, Jean-Sebastien Take your pick. All $+5 mil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 15, 2011 Report Share Posted April 15, 2011 Niemi and Osgood are the only non top of the line goalies to win cups and Niemi is proving himself again this year as a budding top goaltender so unless you find a guy on his way up or a veteran with just a little gas left in the tank you seem to need a 5mil+ goalie to win... IDK its still a tough call either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Fleury, Marc-Andre Brodeur, Martin Ward, Cam Giguere, Jean-Sebastien Take your pick. All $+5 mil. Brodeur won his 8 years ago and maybe the last "Great" goalie to win a Cup. I don't think Fleury and Ward were making $5mil when they won their Cups. Not sure what Giguere was making when he won his Cup. They may not have been been making $5 mil a year when they won, it sure seems a Cup can get you the big contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Brodeur won his 8 years ago and maybe the last "Great" goalie to win a Cup. I don't think Fleury and Ward were making $5mil when they won their Cups. Not sure what Giguere was making when he won his Cup. They may not have been been making $5 mil a year when they won, it sure seems a Cup can get you the big contract. Fleury was a very high draft choice, pretty sure he was making around 5 million a year when he won the cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 I checked his salary in the cup year and it was 3.5 million. He is making over 5 million this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 I checked his salary in the cup year and it was 3.5 million. He is making over 5 million this year. Was that the same contract or an extension? Fleury is an interesting case in this conversation. When I think big-time goalies I never consider him. High pick and a Cup winner, he has the pedigree. Maybe it is the shadow of Crosby? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR HOLLIDAY Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Was that the same contract or an extension? Fleury is an interesting case in this conversation. When I think big-time goalies I never consider him. High pick and a Cup winner, he has the pedigree. Maybe it is the shadow of Crosby? Yeah he does have a lot of competition for the spot light in Pittsburg, but I still remember of him diving face first to stop the puck in the last seconds to win the cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 16, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 And Neuvirth adds to the SO list. (Of course the Strangers are minus Callahan and kept the Avery line out every other shift in the 3rd, so it's not quite as impressive as it might sound. ;) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsrcursed Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Was that the same contract or an extension? Fleury is an interesting case in this conversation. When I think big-time goalies I never consider him. High pick and a Cup winner, he has the pedigree. Maybe it is the shadow of Crosby? Perhaps, but he has to be a part of any top 5 conversation presently. He's that good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 Perhaps, but he has to be a part of any top 5 conversation presently. He's that good. I don't know if that is true. I said he has the pedigree. It's just I don't hear his name when people talk about top goaltenders. Not saying you are wrong, I just don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.