Jump to content

Next Years Starting Goaltender - 2015 Ed.


LGR4GM

Recommended Posts

I'd say Neuvirth or Lindback as the starter.  Chad Johnson as the backup.

 

Why? This team is going through a lot of changes.  That fine, but you aren't winning the cup next year (I really don't think so) so play with a goalie who was well liked by his teamates.  From what we have heard from the media, both Neuvirth and Lindback were well liked by their teammates.  If after a year of them, they aren't good enough make another decision.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Taro's right. I didn't include backups on the list. Completely missed Tim Thomas.

 

 

 

No, for once, ONCE, he's wrong!  He's never wrong except NOW.  The Leaves traded Rask for Raycroft.  I remember this like it was yesterday.  Check me if I'm wrong.

I expect TM to bring in 2 new goalies.

 

So do I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, for once, ONCE, he's wrong! He's never wrong except NOW. The Leaves traded Rask for Raycroft. I ###### remember this like it was yesterday. Check me if I'm wrong.

No, you're right. But that wasn't Taro's point. Rask was a backup. His point wasn't that he was always a Bruin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But he was a Leaf before that.

True, but what one of these things is not like the others?

 

Hasek

Giguere

Rask

Khabibulin

Roy

 

(Hint: though they ALL have been Stanley Cup champs after being TRADED, ONE hasn't been a starter in the Finals on a Stanley Cup winning team.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think New York pursuing O'Connor so strongly makes it pretty clear they're planning to cash in on Talbot's streak. I'm definitely interested. He would be the immediate starter. He's only signed for one more year under $2M so he doesn't take away any flexibility.

 

If we could acquire him using 31 and a mid-level prospect like Carrier then I would do it. The Rangers do not have a first this year, so 31 would be appealing to get them right at the front of the second. Wouldn't be hard to trade up from there if they want into the first.

 

I'm not trading a first for a guy that's only locked up for one year and would be relying on one stretch of games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think New York pursuing O'Connor so strongly makes it pretty clear they're planning to cash in on Talbot's streak. I'm definitely interested. He would be the immediate starter. He's only signed for one more year under $2M so he doesn't take away any flexibility.

If we could acquire him using 31 and a mid-level prospect like Carrier then I would do it. The Rangers do not have a first this year, so 31 would be appealing to get them right at the front of the second. Wouldn't be hard to trade up from there if they want into the first.

I'm not trading a first for a guy that's only locked up for one year and would be relying on one stretch of games.

Hockey Central guys commented on this today and they made it seem like just a second would get this done. So I say drop Carrier and offer the 48 or whatever it's going to be pick. If it does take the 31 pick then I'm fine with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think New York pursuing O'Connor so strongly makes it pretty clear they're planning to cash in on Talbot's streak. I'm definitely interested. He would be the immediate starter. He's only signed for one more year under $2M so he doesn't take away any flexibility.

 

If we could acquire him using 31 and a mid-level prospect like Carrier then I would do it. The Rangers do not have a first this year, so 31 would be appealing to get them right at the front of the second. Wouldn't be hard to trade up from there if they want into the first.

 

I'm not trading a first for a guy that's only locked up for one year and would be relying on one stretch of games.

Hockey Central guys commented on this today and they made it seem like just a second would get this done. So I say drop Carrier and offer the 48 or whatever it's going to be pick. If it does take the 31 pick then I'm fine with that.

Agreed, a 1st is too pricey for me. I'll take a flier on him for a 2nd or even some package of later picks though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Wondering what others think of possibly moving a pick to Vancouver in exchange for Eddie Lack? The kid is an amazing person, first off, and secondly he's a good young goalie who should get better. With Miller signed 2 more years and Jakob Markstrom lighting it up in the AHL, the Canucks need to move either Lack or Markstrom. 

 

I think Lack would be a good pick up for the Sabres, along with another tender who can play 25-30 games. 

I'd guess the Canucks would want a 2nd round pick for Lack. 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been discussed quite a bit here: http://forums.sabrespace.com/topic/23201-2015-2016-line-up/ and here: http://forums.sabrespace.com/topic/23299-next-years-starting-goaltender-2015-ed/  if you want more info on what some people think.

 

I think there should be more discussion than there already is on this because it's the most interesting situation going into the offseason. Lehner is somebody most have talked about. I would rather have Lack.

 

The rumor is they want a 2nd for Lack. I would give them 51 for Lack if they'll take it. I would even be willing to throw in somebody like Dan Catenacci or Chad Ruhwedel (that probably doesn't have an NHL future but could maybe get a shot elsewhere).

Edited by Hoss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Eddie. He's a decent goalie and seems like a very likeable human being. (It's no surprise Canuck fans like him over the angsty Mr. Miller) 

But for the same pick, I'd rather have Lehner, or another younger goalie with more upside.

I think Eddie is at a similar level to Neuvirth and I'd rather sign Neuvirth and use 51 to pick another player.

 

It's definitely a buyers' market on the goalie front. Lots of choices out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Eddie. He's a decent goalie and seems like a very likeable human being. (It's no surprise Canuck fans like him over the angsty Mr. Miller) 

But for the same pick, I'd rather have Lehner, or another younger goalie with more upside.

I think Eddie is at a similar level to Neuvirth and I'd rather sign Neuvirth and use 51 to pick another player.

 

It's definitely a buyers' market on the goalie front. Lots of choices out there.

 

Nah, I'd go for lack , Lehner has been out with concussions two times already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with Murray stating they are picking a goalie fairly early in this draft, I would guess they look for a 3 year stop gap type of player. Someone solid for at least this year who can be edged into the backup role if one of the kids is good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with Murray stating they are picking a goalie fairly early in this draft, I would guess they look for a 3 year stop gap type of player. Someone solid for at least this year who can be edged into the backup role if one of the kids is good. 

 

Where'd he say that? I must have missed it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...