Toggle sidebar

All-Inclusive Goalie Discussion--Jones and Scrivens and Bears, Oh My!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Captain Mittens*
  • Start date Start date
  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
dman3474 said:
Lets say Quick comes back and Scrivens gets traded. Go with Quick-Jones

Quick re-aggravates his groin. Berube gets called up. Jones-Berube

Jones gets ran into and hurts something. Berube is now your starter and we have to find out what Fukufuji is up to these days to play backup. Berube-Fuji

How about we just keep both for a little while?
Click to expand...

Yeah but what if then Berube is run over, so we fly in a random Swedish goalie and he becomes the next Fasth?
 
I'd gamble and trade Scrivens for a 2nd at the deadline. Roll with Quick and Jones.


Making it Bernier for two 2nds+Failttin+500k. I can live with that.
 
Johnny Utah said:
Kings should re-sign Scrivens and deal him. There are no goalies in the market. Look at what the Oilers had to do.

If we let him walk all we got for Bernier was a 2nd, some cash and Frattin? Ugh.

Kings are solid at developing goalies....Bernier, Quick, and Jones! Let's not mention Garon and Labarbera....though both were excellent in the AHL.
Click to expand...

The Oilers did what they did because they're too stupid to realize they need a quality goaltender, not because there weren't options.
 
bral said:
I'd gamble and trade Scrivens for a 2nd at the deadline. Roll with Quick and Jones.


Making it Bernier for two 2nds+Failttin+500k. I can live with that.
Click to expand...

That would be shortsighted imo. With Quick coming off a serious groin injury, I'd take precaution and keep both Scrivens and Jones around just in case.

To me, giving us a better chance of winning the cup is much more important than obtaining a 2nd pick for Scrivens.
 
CTKingsFan said:
I believe Jones WILL have to clear waivers in order to return to Manchester. Please correct if I'm wrong. He is no longer on his ELC. Remember he was a little bit of a hold out this off-season. Finally singing a few days after training camp started.

http://lakingsinsider.com/2013/09/10/martin-jones-signs-two-year-contract/
Click to expand...

Not true. While a easy rule of thumb is that players not on ELC's need to clear waivers, it is not how the rule actually reads. And for goalies it's a completely different ballgame all together. For goalies the rule of thumb would be that they get 1 additional year on top of ELC. Again that's not the rule, but it works most of the time. In this case, Jones does fall into the category. He does not need waivers this year, although he will next year.

CTKingsFan said:
Claiming goalies on waivers is a little tricky since you have to keep him on your NHL roster for 30 days. So, essentially a team would have to chose Jones over one of their current goalies. With the way Jones is playing and the reputation of being a goaltending factory that the Kings are starting to get. Putting him on waivers is gonna be risky!
Click to expand...

This is not true in any sense. I am honestly not entirely sure where this myth comes from, but a player claimed off waivers MAY be placed back on waivers the very next day if the team so chooses. They are not under any obligation to keep the player on the NHL roster for 30 days. However the claiming team may not send the player down without clearing waivers. The original team may then reclaim the player and send him to the minors without waivers (assuming the original team was the only claimant on the 2nd waive). That's designed to stop a (for example) Buffalo from claiming Kozun at the start of the year as a free prospect then stashing him in AHL to let him develop, much like the Kings are doing. Waivers are about giving chances to players to play if their current team doesn't want them. So yes a claiming team would have to want the player on the NHL roster.

It MAY come from the fact if a player does clear waivers, they can go up and down from minors and back without having to deal with waivers again until they hit the 30 days on NHL roster or 10 NHL games played criteria. This is also a thing to remember. Kings called up Jones on November 13th. Let's say for example Jones did need waivers this year, he would have already cleared them back in September upon heading down the first time. He would actually not need to clear waivers again unless he was up past December 13th, since that would be 30 days.
 
Last edited:
Holden Caulfield said:
This is not true in any sense. I am honestly not entirely sure where this myth comes from, but a player claimed off waivers MAY be placed back on waivers the very next day if the team so chooses. They are not under any obligation to keep the player on the NHL roster for 30 days. However the claiming team may not send the player down without clearing waivers. The original team may then reclaim the player and send him to the minors without waivers (assuming the original team was the only claimant on the 2nd waive). That's designed to stop a (for example) Buffalo from claiming Kozun at the start of the year as a free prospect then stashing him in AHL to let him develop, much like the Kings are doing. Waivers are about giving chances to players to play if their current team doesn't want them. So yes a claiming team would have to want the player on the NHL roster.

It MAY come from the fact if a player does clear waivers, they can go up and down from minors and back without having to deal with waivers again until they hit the 30 days on NHL roster or 10 NHL games played criteria. This is also a thing to remember. Kings called up Jones on November 13th. Let's say for example Jones did need waivers this year, he would have already cleared them back in September upon heading down the first time. He would actually not need to clear waivers again unless he was up past December 13th, since that would be 30 days.
Click to expand...

isnt that player that gets waived and is picked by one team.. if he is waived again, the original team with last pick have option to pick him up and send directly to minor league?
 
CTKingsFan said:
I believe Jones WILL have to clear waivers in order to return to Manchester. Please correct if I'm wrong. He is no longer on his ELC. Remember he was a little bit of a hold out this off-season. Finally singing a few days after training camp started.

http://lakingsinsider.com/2013/09/10/martin-jones-signs-two-year-contract/


Claiming goalies on waivers is a little tricky since you have to keep him on your NHL roster for 30 days. So, essentially a team would have to chose Jones over one of their current goalies. With the way Jones is playing and the reputation of being a goaltending factory that the Kings are starting to get. Putting him on waivers is gonna be risky!

Also to keep in mind is Jones has 1 year left on his contract after this season. While Scrivens will be an UFA. So, we could lose Jones on waivers and lose Scrivens to free agency.... Which would really suck!


If I'm correct in that Jones does have to clear waivers. I wouldn't be shocked in Scrivens is traded in a couple weeks when Quick is back. Which is crazy considering all he's done. But, Jones in my opinion is the safer player to go with.

If Jones keep this play up. It's gonna be interesting to see what Lombardi does!
Click to expand...

I know it's already been pointed out about the wavers but that is where capgeek can really help with the waver calculator.
http://capgeek.com/waiver-calculato...mes=0&nineteen_games=0&NHL_games=3&Calculate=
 
Holden Caulfield said:
Not true. While a easy rule of thumb is that players not on ELC's need to clear waivers, it is not how the rule actually reads. And for goalies it's a completely different ballgame all together. For goalies the rule of thumb would be that they get 1 additional year on top of ELC. Again that's not the rule, but it works most of the time. In this case, Jones does fall into the category. He does not need waivers this year, although he will next year.



This is not true in any sense. I am honestly not entirely sure where this myth comes from, but a player claimed off waivers MAY be placed back on waivers the very next day if the team so chooses. They are not under any obligation to keep the player on the NHL roster for 30 days. However the claiming team may not send the player down without clearing waivers. The original team may then reclaim the player and send him to the minors without waivers (assuming the original team was the only claimant on the 2nd waive). That's designed to stop a (for example) Buffalo from claiming Kozun at the start of the year as a free prospect then stashing him in AHL to let him develop, much like the Kings are doing. Waivers are about giving chances to players to play if their current team doesn't want them. So yes a claiming team would have to want the player on the NHL roster.

It MAY come from the fact if a player does clear waivers, they can go up and down from minors and back without having to deal with waivers again until they hit the 30 days on NHL roster or 10 NHL games played criteria. This is also a thing to remember. Kings called up Jones on November 13th. Let's say for example Jones did need waivers this year, he would have already cleared them back in September upon heading down the first time. He would actually not need to clear waivers again unless he was up past December 13th, since that would be 30 days.
Click to expand...

Well that's great news then! Thanks for the clear up.
 
JureEe said:
isnt that player that gets waived and is picked by one team.. if he is waived again, the original team with last pick have option to pick him up and send directly to minor league?
Click to expand...

More or less yeah. I haven't reviewed this in a while (and I'm just headed out the door so no time to check), but basically that's the idea. Hasn't happened this year, but has happened in years past with guys like Taylor Chorney (EDM -> STL -> reclaimed back to Oklahoma City (EDM AHL) and Ben Maxwell (WPG -> ANA -> reclaimed back to St. John's (WPG AHL).

CTKingsFan said:
Well that's great news then! Thanks for the clear up.
Click to expand...

No worries.

One thing with Jones, goalies are very unpredicatable in short sample sizes. Anyone remember Nolan Schaefer's recall to San Jose in 2005-06?

2005-06 SHARKS 7 5 1 - 0 1 11 138 .920 1.88 352

Not saying that Jones = Schaefer, just that goalies can sometimes be unpredictable in short sample sizes. Jones will head back to minors when Quick returns and Kings will evaluate and make their decisions in the off-season. But picking up a goalie 1 year from UFA, re-signing Jones to a 2 year deal and Jones being waiver eligible next year does scream to me he will be on the bench behind Quick next year.
 
Can anyone tell me why Frattin has looked so bad in a kings uniform? He was great for us last year before he got injured (10 points in 10 games). He looked brutal after the injury though.
 
Diatomic said:
Can anyone tell me why Frattin has looked so bad in a kings uniform? He was great for us last year before he got injured (10 points in 10 games). He looked brutal after the injury though.
Click to expand...

Maybe he is still hurt
 
Question about your goalies

Hey guys bruins fan here coming in peace

Just looking to get a quick couple of questions answered

I noticed your coach said that he was unhappy with a few parts of scrivens' game which is why he's been starting jones. What exactly was he talking about and with the recent emergence of jones playing lights out are the Kings going to be going with him getting the majority of starts over Scrivens until Quick gets back? (I'm mostly curious about this for my fantasy team)
And also, is there a set time frame for when Quick will be back between the pipes ?
 
Sutter is pulling on the reporter's legs (or some other choice body parts).

Scrivens has been nothing short of fantastic in backing up Quick; he has not allowed more than two goals a game since starting in relief.

Jones is hotter than hell right now; that is why he is getting the experience and the nod.
 
No idea. Sutter said that but then later he said Scrivens was banged up?

I have no idea what Sutter plans to do. Probably easier to guess the lottery numbers than understand why he does what he does. It has worked though. Jones has been excellent.
 
He was probably talking about this game in jest:



From the sound of things, Scrivens has had a couple of day-to-day scrapes.
 
Ranford had some interesting quotes regarding Scrivens in practice not quite being where they want him to be and Jones has been the hot hand. Sutter goes with whoever seems to be both playing well and keeping strong during practices. They take practice very seriously, from what some of the players say about playing under Sutter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom