FN Weekend Open Thread: The Flames Back-up conundrum

Kent Wilson
July 14 2012 10:49AM

 

 

Leland Irving remains unsigned and the whsipers here in Calgary are that the negotiations remain contentious. Rich Winter is Irving's agent - the same agent for Mark Giordano when he fled the Flames in the face of Sutter's insistence he accept a two-way deal. Winter also has a high regard for his client, so there's little doubt the Flames are dealing with a flight risk here.

Should Irving depart for greener pastures, the club will be facing by now what is a familiar issue: lack of a quality back-up goalie (although there is no guarantee Irving himself would have filled the role admirably either). It was clear by the end of the season that the Flames had little confidence in Henrik Karlsson, whom I expect will end up in Abbotsford or back in Europe for the final year of his deal.

The problem has haunted Calgary since Roman Turek took his ball and went home. It's becoming a much more pressing issue at this point, however: Kipper turn 36 in October and has just two seasons left on his deal. Meaning, at this point the team should be looking not just for a guy who can spell Kiprusoff off every five games or so, but also someone who can meaningfully audition for the starting position as the incumbent ages and reaches the end of what could be his retirement contract.

The list of UFA goalies this summer is, er, modest. If Irving leaves and the Flames don't trust Karlsson, their options are fairly limited - they could go with a mediocre, career back-up type like Ty Conklin or Brent Johnson, which would be a band-aid at best. Enticing Karri Ramo to break his KHL deal and come back to the NHL is starting to look like a last dtich option as well, although then you're depending on him to break a contract and probably take less money to be a 20-game goalie here in North America.

An Irving Replacement?
 

Calgary could also investigate a potential swap for Jonathan Bernier, who has asked for a trade this summer in the wake of Jonathan Quick's recent 10-year deal. Bernier hasn't done much at the NHL level yet, but is a former 11th overall pick who mostly tore up the AHL during his time there. In 2009-10, he finished with a .936 SV% and was named the AHL's outstanding goalie of the year.

JB was drafted the same year as Irving, is the same age, but has a better resume. He was previously considered the goalie of the future for the Kings organization but has since been rendered redundant thanks to Quick's unlikely emergence as an elite puck stopper. I'm not sure what LA would want in return for Bernier, because his pedigree is good but his accomplishments in the NHL are minimal -  doubt the asking price would be excssive, however.

If the Flames can't get Irving in the fold, they have a sudden, very real gap in their organization between the current starter and the rest of the organizational depth (Ortio, Brossoit, Gillies are many years away), the Ramo wild card notwithstanding. The acquisition of Bernier would replace the (potentially) departed Irving and give the club a young back-up would is a decent bet to develop into a capable starter in short order.

So what say you Flames fans? If Irving leaves, what should the Flames do about the back-up role?

39d8109299a9795cb3b41a4e9b49d501
Former Nations Overlord. Current Fn contributor and curmudgeon For questions, complaints, criticisms, etc contact Kent @ kent.wilson@gmail. Follow him on Twitter here.
Avatar
#1 kantsequentialist
July 14 2012, 07:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

First, my hope is that Irving resigns. However this thread seems to be what if he doesn't So....

Why is no one talking about Karlsson? I get that he hasn't been stelar, but he is gone after next season and Ramo can come over then (also, last season was riddled with injury. Karlsson is still a legitimate prospect). Trading away an asset to get Bernier just so you can have a log jam at back up tender next year seems foolish. This is the reason Irving won't resign in the first place. He doesn't want to be third fiddle. Ramo has already said he won't come to North American to play in the minors. Adding Bernier would almost guaruntee we went the same road with Ramo.

Also, is this good asset management? If it is a future asset LA wants, doesn't everyone want a rebuild? Should the Flames deplete an already thin crop of prospects to add a back up goalie when we have one under contract, and one a year out from being available? If it is a vet, shouldn't we spend that asset to get a center? Either way, back up keeper, with Karl under contract and Ramo a year out, just doesn't seem like it should be a priority. Consider this part of the rebuild. Rebuilds take patience people. Don't waste assets and cap space just to be in a hurry.

Avatar
#2 RexLibris
July 14 2012, 10:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

The attraction of Bernier isn't limited to upgrading the backup goaltender position. It is in acquiring a potential replacement to Kiprusoff. The Flames starting goaltender is on the back nine of his career and the Flames are in a critical stage where a clear succession plan needs to be put into place.

Acquiring a goaltender right now, in a year where the price is relatively low and the team selling is somewhat distracted by their recent championship would probably be a good move.

With Luongo still on the market, Bernier would best be had before that trade, rather than after when his price will likely only rise.

I agree that the Flames need a center, but the price for that is going to be a whole heck of a lot more than a backup goaltender.

Feaster is not going to pay the cost of acquiring Bobby Ryan because it will involve a first round pick, and a very good prospect and a roster player or two. The Flames simply do not have the depth to accommodate that extensive a depletion. Stajan, a 2nd round pick and Iriving isn't going to cut it.

The best place for the Flames to look at acquiring a center is either at the draft or to trade a 2013 1st round pick, a good prospect like Max Reinhart or Jon Gaudreau and a roster player like Giordano for Ryan Getzlaf signed to a five-year extension.

I like Bergeron, a lot, but he isn't the center the Flames need.

If Feaster really wanted to do the Flames a favour he might try pitching Kiprusoff, Gaudreau or Reinhart, and a 2013 first round pick to Boston for Tyler Seguin and the rights to Tim Thomas. I doubt Chiarelli goes for it, but it might be a good place to start and it would be targeting the kind of player and position the Flames are going to need.

Avatar
#3 Mark
July 14 2012, 11:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

I would really like Bernier as I think he is a legitimate replacement to kipper. But I believe Flames don't have the expendable assets to pitch for him. With all our goalie prospects impressing at their respective levels (Ramo, Broissot) I think we should stay the course and forget about Bernier untill he is a FA. No doubt in my mind Toronto has been looking into Bernier and if Burke hasn't pulled the trigger on a legitimate deal then I think the Flames should be cautious of the asking price. I would write this one up as more of wishful thinking than realistic.

Avatar
#4 Frank Miron
July 14 2012, 11:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

What are they waiting for ??? Karri Ramo will have a great future in Calgary... With Montreal he had no chance behind Carey Price. I say give him his chance as backup of Kipper right this year... and then next year trade Kipper for a great young prospect and put Ramo in a battle for the no. 1 spot !!!

Avatar
#5 Ryan Pike
July 14 2012, 12:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

My guess is that there's a lot of brinksmanship going on here.

Irving's side likely [a] figures that the Flames aren't all that happy with Karlsson as back-up and [b] thinks that Irving proved that he can be an NHL back-up next season.

The fact is that while Irving probably has SOME leverage, the Flames are already over-loaded with one-way contracts and probably aren't looking to add any deals that don't suit their needs.

European training camps begin in mid-August, so expect SOMETHING to happen soon.

Avatar
#6 Austin
July 14 2012, 12:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

1. Sign Irving 2. If not, get Karri Ramo over to the NHL 3. If he won't break his contract, then we pursue the option of Bernier. 4. If we can't make a trade, we sign Ty Conklin to a 1 year deal.

By the way, isn't Ramo some sort of owner of the team he plays for in the KHL or something like that?

Avatar
#7 Mangotanker
July 14 2012, 12:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'd resign Irving. Just give him a 1 way deal if that's the sticking point and get it done. If he plays well and gets some wins during his stint as the backup he could be a capable starter. At the very least the Flames could trade him for a mid round draft pick.

I think the Flames should stay away from trading for Bernier because they'll have to give up something to get him. I would have to think LA would want at least a 1st round pick for Bernier despite his NHL troubles, and the Flames can't afford to trade their draft picks. Bernier is a more established goalie than Irving right now, but if the Flames don't deal Kipper this season then Kipper's likely to play 65+ games no matter who his backup is. The Flames should just resign Irving, play him this year, and try to get Karri Ramo to come over next season.

Avatar
#8 RexLibris
July 14 2012, 01:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jonathan Willis believes that it would take a 1st round pick to get Bernier.

That being said, if the Flames were to acquire Bernier for a 1st and a mid-level prospect, and then trade away Irving and Ramo for picks, that would probably be a fairly good bet.

Adding Bernier would present a fairly clear plan of succession for Kiprusoff and be less of a gamble than going into the season with an NHL-untested 27-year old center from the KHL.

If Feaster believes that this team, as it stands today, is at or near the playoff cutline then I think risking that pick for a potential starter like Bernier is a fair gamble. It would also be, in my opinion, a significant upgrade at that position from any of Karlsson, Irving and Ramo.

Avatar
#9 SmellOfVictory
July 14 2012, 01:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I wonder if Irving/Bernier would be happy with swapping places. Irving could be guaranteed NHL playing time, and Bernier would be guaranteed a shot at the starter's position sooner rather than later. Add in a pick or something from Calgary's side, and Bob's your uncle?

Avatar
#10 Baalzamon
July 14 2012, 01:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Bernier for a 1st... well, there are worse things to spend a 1st round pick on than a talented young goalie with pro experience and great AHL numbers (such as Brendan Gaunce).

If the Flames do somehow convince Ramo to come to NA early, Omsk needs to be compensated somehow (and all three parties need to be involved in the discussion). The compensation likely won't be inconsiderable either, considering that the Flames just poached their top forward and starting goalie in 1 fell swoop.

Obviously, it makes the most sense to give Irving the 1 way and have done. They could even buy out Karlsson as a sign of good faith.

if they lose either one, they should sign Jared Coreau and get Ortio back from TPS for the Heat.

Avatar
#11 Baalzamon
July 14 2012, 01:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Austin

"By the way, isn't Ramo some sort of owner of the team he plays for in the KHL or something like that?"

Ramo is the GM for Peliitat of the Mestis (Finnish equivalent of Allsvenskan)

Avatar
#12 Sincity1976
July 14 2012, 01:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Why would LA want another rookie goalie with ambitions of being a starter? Especially when that goalie is unproven at the NHL level? Better to tell Bernier to suck it up and trade his rights next season.

If the issue with Irving is a 1-way contract the Flames should just give him the contract. Better then trading him and assets for a (maybe) slight upgrade.

Avatar
#13 RKD
July 14 2012, 01:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I would try to resign Irving first, then if not try to bring Bernier as a backup. Both of these goalies are better options than Karlsson.

Ramo can come over next season, if Bernier or Irving don't pan out.

Avatar
#14 Kevin R
July 14 2012, 02:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Sign Irv to a 1 year 1 way deal & call it a day. If not, see if Ramo can get to NA, otherwise then play Karlsson who is already under contract next year & then package Irv in a deal with JBO for something useful. If Kipper stays & we all know he will, give Karlsson the 13 games & hope he plays like he did the year before that got him his 2 year deal to begin with. Gave the kid the 2 years to prove himself, now let him play it.

Avatar
#15 SmellOfVictory
July 14 2012, 02:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Sincity1976 wrote:

Why would LA want another rookie goalie with ambitions of being a starter? Especially when that goalie is unproven at the NHL level? Better to tell Bernier to suck it up and trade his rights next season.

If the issue with Irving is a 1-way contract the Flames should just give him the contract. Better then trading him and assets for a (maybe) slight upgrade.

Most younger tenders have ambitions of being a starter. I don't think Irving is as set on it as Bernier is, though. The lack of a contract with Calgary seems more to me like they want him on a 2-way and he wants to be on a 1-way.

Avatar
#16 Colin
July 14 2012, 03:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I don't get what is so hard about this deal, If you don't want Karlson, get rid of him, buy him out, trade him, send him packing to Europe. Sign Irving to a 1 year 1 way deal for league minimum(on the cheap in exchange for a 1 way deal). Start him early in the season for a few starts, if he can't hack it, waiver him to the minors and if no one picks him up, he plays out the remainder of his time in Calgarys org with the heat. And just maybe next year he can find a way to have a longer career than Curtis is having. There's always a veteran backup who isn't signed by seasons start even a month or two into the season, or a backup who is available on the cheap, so there is always options.

However if you can get Bernier for a swap with Irving + picks, I think you seriously look at it, NOT, I repeat NOT for a 1st round pick though. If you can do a Irving + Prospect and maybe a 3rd for bernier I think we do that.

Avatar
#17 RexLibris
July 14 2012, 04:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@SmellOfVictory

"Bob's your uncle"

Ha. We need more of this. ;-)

Avatar
#18 RexLibris
July 14 2012, 04:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I don't think Lombardi lets Bernier go for less than a 1st round pick. He has the leverage and there may well be teams willing to meet that demand (Toronto, perhaps?).

I don't think it would be the worst move for Feaster. If he still had his 2nd round pick then perhaps he could package it and a decent prospect. However...

Would Flames fans feel better if it were a conditional 1st round pick, at the Flames discretion? Mitigate some risk.

@Colin

I agree, if they don't want Karlsson and aren't sold on Irving there are a lot of ways of simply making the players go away. Karlsson's contract isn't so bad that burying it in the minors is a huge imposition to the bottom line. And if Irving is picked up on waivers, as long as the Flames have a backup, oh well. It happens. If he does improve after that the Flames would have first shot at claiming him back, but right now holding on to him isn't helping anyone.

And the fewer players on their roster represented by Mr. Winter, the better.

Avatar
#19 Colin
July 14 2012, 05:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Rex

Even a conditional pick isn't the best of ideas for a Bernier trade. I think the old adage is that you don't draft a goalie in the first couple rounds. I think using a first to trade for a goalie should probably fall in there somewhere. Colorado shipped out a first and they were probably lucky that it wasn't a lottery pick. Varlomov was pretty well pedestrian by the looks of things, they can always hope he gets better, but if he doesn't that doesn't look like the best use of a first rounder, especially when you can pick up guys like Thoedore or other for less than that and get similar results.

If Lombardi wanted to swap goalies and take a 2nd round pick or maybe a prospect and a third, that is a very livable deal, but a first should NOT be going the other way. Not for a guy that has proved nothing at the NHL level. I mean a very talented back up in Nashville who may become a good starter garnered a handful of picks, but no First rounder going the other way.

Avatar
#20 RexLibris
July 14 2012, 05:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Colin

I tend to agree that, barring phenomenal talents, using a 1st round pick, except a late 1st perhaps, on a goaltender is a bit of a risk. They may not be a bust, but the return on a goalie drafted in a mid round can often be about the same. There is more value in drafting skaters over goaltenders in the first round.

Lindback got a couple of picks, but I think Bernier is considered to have a higher value around the league, justified or not, because of his time with Hockey Canada.

Here is the link to the Willis article: http://oilersnation.com/2012/7/13/should-the-edmonton-oilers-be-interested-in-jonathan-bernier

He goes through the trades and relative values. A pretty good read.

Avatar
#21 Baalzamon
July 14 2012, 08:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@kantsequentialist

"Karlsson is still a legitimate prospect"

not... really.

He was born in the same year as Matt Stajan, Mark Giordano, Jay Bouwmeester, Dennis Wideman, and Lee Stempniak.

and also Clay Wilson..

Avatar
#22 kantsequentialist
July 14 2012, 09:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Baalzamon

hmmm good point. A goalie is developing slower than skaters... Thanks. After quickly browsing 2002 entry draft (the year stajan was drafted), I would compare Karlsson to Josh Harding. I get it, he's not a starter either. Other than Ward and Lethonen, basically no goalies from this draft are anywhere near the NHL. I just don't think a 28 yr old back up with 1 yr left is an area of concern. I like how you took one sentence from the whole paragraph, but the main point is that Karlsson still has the ability to get better. He is not in the decline of his career. Again, given the context of a rebuild/retool this is not the area that needs the most attention. Any assets given to this would be better served strengthing a deal for a Center. Add the 2nd rnd. pick to a pitch for Bobby Ryan, Martin Hanzel, Patrice Bergeron, whoever. We need a center more than we need a better back up goalie.

Avatar
#23 Colin.S
July 14 2012, 11:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

The only people picking up Tim Thomas' contract are floor teams, 7th round pick for 5 million in cap space and then you can suspend him the whole year and not have to pay him but his salary still brings you to the floor.

Like I said, I'd go as high as a 2nd for Bernier and another prospect, not Reinhart, Baertschi, Gaudreau or Jankowski obviously.

Avatar
#24 MC Hockey
July 15 2012, 12:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Like others, I think Bernier could be the replacement for Kipper some day so perhaps he would want to come here.

We could give up Irving and something else like a good prospect or two as we do have a lot of different players signed under the 50-contract limit and may want to reduce that. Meanwhile, per capgeek.com, L.A. only has 40 guys signed so may take back more players - it could happen perhaps.

But I also suspect the asking price is high like a 1st or a 2nd plus a top-notch prospect so the Flames would rather sign Irving, even to a 1-way contract, and let him and Karlsson battle for #2 job. The loser has to clear waivers likely to go to AHL but nobody may claim either one going down and if they do, perhaps a favor for Flames.

Avatar
#25 I'm Just Sayin'
July 15 2012, 02:50AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I am not in favour of trading picks or prospects for a goalie. We have several in the system that can play (including Leland). If he refuses to sign here then trade his rights for a similar quality goalie if necessary.

Personally, I would like to see him stay on after the investment the team has in him already. Karlsson is not great, but he also battled injury and when you aren't getting ice you cannot hope to improve.

If something happens to Mikka we're screwed any way you look at it. Maybe somebody will rise to the occasion (Ortio?) in camp. There are quality goalies coming through the system now and hopefully it is the push Leland needs to bring his game to the next level, if not, it's not the end of the world, or the playoffs if he doesn't re-sign.

Avatar
#26 Kenta
July 15 2012, 05:18AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

The Bernier trade talk is a red herring. The Flames have been reloading at the goalie position since Feaster took charge (Ramo, drafting goalies last year and this year). We do have a short term issue for a back up goalie this year which we will be able to sort out with or without Irving. Rich Winter is doing his job for Irving and Feaster likewise. Irving does not have allot of leverage and he doesn't strike me as being a KHL flight risk. In my view we will find someone suitable if Irving leaves and don't need to turn ourselves inside out over this short term problem.

Avatar
#27 meat1
July 15 2012, 09:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I think the first thing management needs to do is discuss where they see Kipper in the next three years. If they plan on moving him sooner than later, then by all means we will require a goalie different than anyone in the organization right now. I do not see an NHL-ready capable #1 goalie in our system. However, if the plan is to re-sign him and have him around for another three years, I see no reason to invest a high pick or any of the prospects mentioned to acquire a goalie that barring injury, will only see the ice a handful of times each year. I realize Kipper turns 36 soon, but that said, it is only 36. Brodeur, Thomas, Roloson, Eddie Belfour, etc have excelled at that point in time. Irving or even Karlsson would fill the bill.

As for Irving, I would like him signed to be the back-up. However, if his camp thinks he is the second coming, or that they have the Flames over a barrel, let him go. He, in my mind, isn't the second coming. And I don't believe in letting the tail wag the dog.

Avatar
#28 Sincity1976
July 15 2012, 11:38AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
SmellOfVictory wrote:

Most younger tenders have ambitions of being a starter. I don't think Irving is as set on it as Bernier is, though. The lack of a contract with Calgary seems more to me like they want him on a 2-way and he wants to be on a 1-way.

That is the point though. Irving is unproven. And is thus a poor option as a back-up. When he becomes proven he will be requesting a trade as well. No proven young tender wants to be stuck behind a guy with a 10-year contract.

Why would LA invest the time and losses into developing Irving so they can hand him over to another club? Either he turns out, in which case they have to move him. Or he doesn't, in which case they waisted their time and lost Bernier for nothing.

LA will be much better off with a veteran back-up. Keep Bernier for season until the vet you want becomes available.

I can see why Calgary does the deal. Though only if the cost is right or they are going to lose Irving to Europe. I think Bernier and Irving have similar ceilings. Bernier is just further along.

But I don't see why LA does the deal. Not unless they are really worried Bernier is going to disrupt their locker room and a better option at back-up is truly not available.

Avatar
#29 Ken V.
July 15 2012, 01:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Why wouldn't we go for Bernier? When is the last time we had a back up that was a difference maker? I'm sure Bernier could wait 2 yrs to take the reigns from Kipper opposed to the 10 he'd have to with Quick. I concede though that a first round pick is too steep, Irving + 3rd maybe?

Avatar
#30 KleptoKlown
July 15 2012, 02:43PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Baalzamon A cheap shot at Brendan Gaunce? The kid hasn't even been to 1 NHL training camp. He was drafted less than a month ago. Little early to be calling him a waste of a 1st rounder. A very late first rounder at that.

Is it because it was the Canucks who drafted him?

When it comes to the draft, Flames should be hiding in a dark corner waving a white flag.

Look at your last 10 years of drafting, and you'll realize why the Flames are a 17th-20th place team year after year. Prust and Phaneuf are the most notable. Obviously neither is with the team anymore, and instead of Phaneuf with the 9th overall pick, you could have had Bobby Ryan, Dustin Brown, Mike Richards, Ryan Kesler, Ryan Getzlaf, Zach Parise, Brent Seabrook...etc etc etc.

A Flames fan mocking another teams selection makes you look beyond ridiculous .

Avatar
#31 KleptoKlown
July 15 2012, 02:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

For all the chatter about Irving + not a 1st rounder for Bernier, try and look at it from the Kings perspective.

Irving is a lesser version of Bernier. Irving is young, and is going to want a chance at being a #1. There is no chance of that happening in LA, so why would the Kings trade for him?

As it has been stated on here, there are always veteran backups available. No guarantee the Kings even want another goalie in return for Bernier. They can sign a veteran backup just as easily as any other team.

Dean Lombardi is in no rush to trade Bernier. Bernier may be in a rush to leave LA, but he has another year on his contract. The ball is in Lombardi's court. If he doesn't get an offer he likes, he doesn't make the trade.

It's a sellers market. Your nickle and dime offers won't cut it.

Avatar
#32 Kevin R
July 15 2012, 04:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kleptoklown: Now take a deep breath, exhale & pushe real hard & get that turd out & you'll feel much better. A little sensitive on your guys pick, hey we get it from many on ours. Especially our 1st rounder this year. I agree with pretty well most of what you said, no one here says we are rocket scientists at drafting, in fact we have sucked for some time. You just seem to take a comment on a Flames site a little too personal. If you are going to be like that I suggest you keep to sticking to the Canucks sites & you can be happy again. Yes you are right. Irving doesnt have a lot of value & wont have until we actually let him play games & establish his own market value. I really havent agreed how we have handled this kid but the problem seems we are so desperate to win games every year from being a bubble team, we wind up playing Kipper way too much. Its a real catch 22 scenario. Flip side is, you pay a goalie some outlandish contract & you lose faith in him, play another guy enough to establish himself & create huge value to the point you dont want to trade him. You then try to trade a goalie you lost faith in & nobody wants the contract. Seeing you have some pretty good experience with that scenario, which problem would you prefer, the Flames or the latter?

Avatar
#33 Captain Ron
July 15 2012, 08:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kevin R

That was real funny stuff

Avatar
#34 KleptoKlown
July 15 2012, 10:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Kevin R

I am sorry if you consider a barrage of facts in the same context as a difficult bowl movement.

I do however understand you equating the Flames and turds.

Am I sensitive? Do I take this personally? No.

Do I have a low tolerance for B.S? Yes. People like @Baalzamon who make unfounded statements like that tend to get called out on there B.S

Stick to Canuck sites? We haven't won since there was no NHL and the team was called the Millionaires. That's approching 100 years...despite our optimism, there is no happiness in Canucksville...although to me, a 23 year drought isn't exactly a "bragging right". 23 years ago the New Kids on the Block had a #1 hit(yeah I googled it) Now on to your flip side...No one (with a clear mind) has really lost faith in Luongo here in Canucksville. If the Canucks backups the last 2 years were Irving and Karlsson, Luongo would be the #1 and no trade offers would be considered.

Cory Schneider has played better than expected. When Luongo signed that "outlandish" contract (which no less than 3 teams publicly declared interest in acquiring...) it was assumed that he would be a Canuck until the end of his career. Cory Schneider would be showcased and traded for the best possible deal. Then, the unexpected happened. Schneider outplayed Luongo.

No doubt Lu won't be traded for his full value (same as Kipper when he is eventually traded...) because other teams know there is no more room for a top 10(at worst) NHL goalie within the Canucks roster...

Yeah, Canucks have a top 10 goalie that just doesn't fit...it sure is difficult being a fan these days...

So you asked, the Flames or the latter? The Flames or the Canucks.

Well the present is obviously in the Canucks favour, by at least 20 points in the overall standing. The future may have a few questionmarks for the Canucks, but for the Flames? Pretty clear it's par for the course.

Avatar
#35 Franko J
July 15 2012, 11:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I know it is premature to speculate about the upcoming season, but IMO Flames should let Ramo complete his contract and let Irving go to Europe because with another impending strike imminent by the NHL and the players there might be other opportunities available next summer.

In the meantime, it seems that Flames management again lack a viable contingency plan in place when it comes to the team. In hindsight, the management knew that Karlssen was no longer an option, and Irving was going to be an RFA, although they have drafted goalies in past 2 years, none are ready to step in and the farm doesn't leave any options either. This is why this team is in a condumdrum they are in. Can't wait for the Iginla chronicles to begin. Let see what spin Feaster gives the media and fans now.

Avatar
#36 Baalzamon
July 15 2012, 11:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@KleptoKlown

"...who make unfounded statements like that tend to get called out on there B.S..."

I wasn't going to say anything to you, but this statement made me laugh. It's funny you should talk about unfounded statements when you yourself assumed I didn't like Brendan Gaunce simply because he was drafted by the Canucks.

FYI, I was simply poking a little (a VERY little, mind) fun at a prospect who I happen to think is overrated. Is it BS to say it's better to spend a 1st round pick on a potential starting goalie who already has several years of pro experience in NA than on a potential 3rd line center? (Okay, I'll be judicious and say 2nd line center).

moreover, I don't recall Kevin R mentioning anything at all about the Stanley Cup, or the Canucks not having one. Not a thing. Maybe you should try reading too.. I hear it's helpful.

Avatar
#37 Franko J
July 15 2012, 11:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I think trading a goalie is more complicated than a forward or defenseman. To many GM's even ones who are former goalies, there is plenty of unpredictability when it comes to goaltenders. Unlike forwards and defensemen, goalies often take longer to develop and mostly have a different timetable to mature from a prospect to a bonafide NHLer. Most of the time I find a goalie has a shorter window of opportunity to be successful and shine, because of the develop curve. When you have goalies who win the cup like Quick and Fleury have before the age of 30, it changes the mindset of most GM's. Since the last lockout IMO I find more GM's value youth over experience.

For instance, if Luongo had only 2 years instead of 10 years left on his contract there would be more teams interested and involved. When you have two goalies such as the case with the Canucks who have two good goalies, I think Mike Gillis probably is fielding more calls on Schneider rather than Luongo. Not just because of contract, but it is the argument of youth versus experience.

Avatar
#38 Artax
July 16 2012, 07:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I would not trade any first round pick for Bernier. You keep the picks, and keep building the team from the draft. Hopefully next year Ramo can be had, but if not, maybe Karlsson will step up and play better. I'm not sold on Irvings AHL #'s so I don't care what happens to him. I'd sooner run with Ortio in behind Kipper and in two years he or the goalie we drafted this year may be ready...or Broissois.

Comments are closed for this article.