• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Core 4 No More: The Motherfucking Off-Season Thread

Wayward DP said:
eh I suspect less than most of us think
Click to expand...
I mean Ullmark will make $5M this year. If you want to re-sign him he'll want at least that much and likely more on a long-term deal. And Boston is not going to trade him to a division rival for peanuts. Probably a 1st and/or a couple of good prospects.

I do think he's the best option, but he certainly will not be the cheapest.
 
Preston said:
He basically met/outperformed Helly is most of his time there
Click to expand...

Eh, against worse teams, with significantly more rest. Dude didn't play 2 games in a row all season last year and of his 22 starts only 4 were against 100+ point teams. Super easy schedule against easy competition. That's not meeting or out performing Helly just because his SV% was a bit better.
 
The answer isn't to throw money and assets at goalies out of desperation. Or to act like spending money on goalies is safe and easy to get right. It isn't. So yes you can pay big assets for one year of Saros or Ullmark and yes, you can extend them at big bucks. But it's a bit naive to think there's no risk to that.

The safer, more proven method is to find value and load the rest of the roster with talent.
 
axlsalinger said:
With Woll and Hildeby, we don't necessarily need a "long-term" solution. Ullmark/Saros would be great, of course, but would also cost a lot of money and assets.
Click to expand...

Eh, goalie prospects are high rate busty. There are very few prospect situations you can be in where it doesn't make sense to add a legitimate top 5-7 1A/Starter and we sure as fuck aren't in it. The easiest thing in the world to trade away is a good 1A goalie if your prospects force him out. Worry about that when it's a problem, not when goaltending itself is a problem.

axlsalinger said:
I would put Stolarz & Brossoit in a very similar bucket, it's kind of disingenuous to argue one would be perfect and the other a non-starter. They both have good numbers.
Click to expand...

Never argued Stolarz would be perfect, so ummm, shut it.

I said Stolarz is the better gamble if you're going after someone you're hoping has untapped upside. They're both top backups but only top backups. All other things equal I'll take the one who hasn't failed in a bigger role (on an elite team), while being bigger, younger and fucked about by bad organizations along the way. That's it, that all.

axlsalinger said:
Not opposed to Talbot or even Markstrom, the idea is sound but Cam Talbot is going to turn 37 in July. He could just as easily lose his game or get hurt as any of these other guys, and is actually more likely to do so at that age.
Click to expand...

But, if he doesn't get old on you, you know he can play a 1A-1B workload of above average hockey because he's done it in 5 of the last 6 seasons. Like I said, if you're sold on Woll as the guy moving forward, he's the guy you want here not a 30-31 yr old backup trying to outcompete him for a chance at a late career pay cheque. If you're not and you're looking at taking a swing on a risky late career breakout type, Stolarz is the guy.
 
Preston said:
The answer isn't to throw money and assets at goalies out of desperation. Or to act like spending money on goalies is safe and easy to get right. It isn't. So yes you can pay big assets for one year of Saros or Ullmark and yes, you can extend them at big bucks. But it's a bit naive to think there's no risk to that.

The safer, more proven method is to find value and load the rest of the roster with talent.
Click to expand...
Presto’s 4th best post since 2021
 
Preston said:
The answer isn't to throw money and assets at goalies out of desperation.
Click to expand...

There's nothing desperate about it regardless of how you keep trying to reframe it. It's a completely rational and long overdue reaction to a clear and obvious weakness on the team.
Preston said:
Or to act like spending money on goalies is safe and easy to get right.
Click to expand...

Same can be said for a lot of adds. We've spent a bucket on defenders over this era and had as many hits as misses. Muzzin was great for a while and then not. Brodie was great for a while and then not, we spent on Zaitsev and that was ugly, we spent a lot of assets on McCabe and he's a fine #3-4 but not the answer at the top of the lineup. You bitch about Rielly a lot and that's a big spend. You keep acting like filling the rest of the lineup is some sort of exact fucking science and goaltending is completely unknowable. Nah, they're all fucking variable. There's an element to risk in all of them and like all risk there's way to mitigage your downside. In net....have more than one fucking goalie capable of playing extended periods of above average hockey. Just like the way to mitigate the risk of your top offensive players going quiet is to add more skill, play a style condusive to scoring goals, etc, etc.
Preston said:
The safer, more proven method is to find value and load the rest of the roster with talent.
Click to expand...

The answer is to find value everywhere and not treat any one of the 3 like it's as reliable as your fucking horoscope.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CH1
MindzEye said:
Yep, and we have to chew gum and walk at the same time here. We can improve the blueline and the goaltending situation at the same time.
Click to expand...

With shit management in charge - doesn’t really matter. The singular issue is who are making the decisions for the team right now.
 
Wait are pretending that goaltending doesn't have more variability and unpredictability than forwards or d? And zaitsev was the example used? Zaitsev's contract aged exactly how we all expected it to.

Coming from forumice, the kings of being wrong about goalies year after year, that is a fresh take.
 
It doesn’t matter about fixing two line up issues at once, if the people making these decisions are idiots.

See the blue jays as a nice example of idiots in charge. Can diagnose and solve issues, but if you keep making dump decisions on how to fix it - then you get no where with the issues and return to square one the next offseason.

We have had goalie, depth scoring, special team and defense issues for how many seasons now?

Answer is = we are fucked until we get smart people into the president and GM seats.
 
soco22 said:
It doesn’t matter about fixing two line up issues at once, if the people making these decisions are idiots.

See the blue jays as a nice example of idiots in charge. Can diagnose and solve issues, but if you keep making dump decisions on how to fix it - then you get no where with the issues and return to square one the next offseason.

We have had goalie, depth scoring, special team and defense issues for how many seasons now?

Answer is = we are fucked until we get smart people into the president and GM seats.
Click to expand...
I mean, I think you're totally bang on.

But it would get pretty boring just repeating that every day til then so people are still gonna talk about their ideal moves like we're not, in fact, totally fucked.
 
Preston said:
Wait are pretending that goaltending doesn't have more variability and unpredictability than forwards or d? And zaitsev was the example used? Zaitsev's contract aged exactly how we all expected it to.

Coming from forumice, the kings of being wrong about goalies year after year, that is fresh.
Click to expand...

It's all fucking variable. All of it. You keep speaking in fucking absolutes with everything else, but goaltending is unknowable. Bullshit.

Miss me with this wrong about goalies shit.
 
Getting a better goalie is one way to push the thought of needing so many cross checking stay-at-home guys to insulate your shitty goalie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top