- yes, i'm using bob as an example. he is an above average goalie on a big ass contract, the kind of contract that i imagine keeps you up at night. if florida lifts the cup, and i hope they do because f*** canada, you can ask florida fans if it was worth giving him $10m a year, let me know what they say.
- you are just imagining scenarios at this point and then arguing against them. don't say "we're discussing the same goalies"- i didn't mention saros, i didn't mention ullmark, nor did i say we would or should be signing them to 8 year deals worth $9 million. you're having the argument you want at this point, without reading or understanding what i'm saying.
-i'm sure every guy slated to go in the first round has a lot of potential, that's great. but there's absolutely no guarantees, i would hope that even you would acknowledge that. bringing in a proven goalie is way more of a guarantee.
-"if prospect will be good, we will have first line talent, cost controlled, for 7-11 years". hmmm ok. "if goalie will be good, we will have 3 stanley cups over next 7 years". i can make wild hypotheticals too, it holds absolutely no weight. what do you imagine contributes to our next cup win more? a goalie who can stop 9 out of 10 shots? or some teenager we draft this summer?
-according to your logic, we could win a cup with or without stellar goaltending; therefore, we should not bother with a goalie because it's a coin toss. what if we acquire depth through FA like a normal team AND bring in a reliable goalie? is that allowed? putting ourselves in the best possible position to be successful? for the third (although i fear not the last) time, it doesn't have to be one or the other.
- "teams like colorado and carolina did pretty okay with georgiev and anderson"...so that's good, yet you also say the rangers f***ed it all up (even though they went further than colorado or carolina) with igor because of a lack of depth. so once again, by your logic, the rangers should sell off igor and spend the $8-$9 million he'll command on depth and acquire a jake allen type goalie. surely, that will end their draught. give me a break. the rangers spend most of their money on soft, perimeter, one dimensional guys who disappear in the playoffs. that's where they're wasting their money, not on igor.
- you might have missed this, but nemec played quite a few games last year and did not look out of place for the most part. he is not a mystery box, i'm quite confident he will be a top pairing defenseman soon enough. there's no way i'd trade him for any goalie you've mentioned. now, if nashville wanted him straight up for askarov? that's something to consider. apples and oranges, just a very dumb situation that isn't analogous at all.
- you're fine signing saros in FA? wow, what a visionary you are. of course you would be, anyone here would. staying on the theme of 'things i already said but have to say again', when do goalies of that caliber get signed in FA? the irony of you saying i know nothing while spouting off about scenarios that rarely (if ever) happen is incredible.
- what "b level goalie" are you talking about signing?
- johnston was drafted at #23, stankoven at #47 and lundell at #12. any other idiotic examples that actually disprove your point you'd like to throw out there?
- despite my immaturity, i am way older than you apparently imagine i am. another swing and a miss.
Ĺ i do not want a goalie "no matter what". if there's a deal fitz feels makes sense, and the ask (or part of the ask) is #10, i want him to pull the trigger. again- try reading what i'm saying before you publish your next hf novel in response.
