Combined Goalie Discussion thread

[kb]

 

[Mess]

Do you remember when Anton Forsberg made the waiver circuit between claims by Winnipeg, Edmonton, Carolina? It's incredible to me that such an available and competent goalie could be overlooked on so many occasions in a league that's always desperate for goaltending. Seems like if you see a 6'3" guy with athleticism on waivers, just claim him.

Just look at Leafs organizational goalie depth and annual goalie carousel for confirmation of your solid point.

Just think if the Hutchenson, Mrazek and David Rittich era's never needed to happen in TO.

 

[kb]

Out of the whole Marleau wreckage (and in hindsight), it's interesting to point out that keeping Marleau for 1x year and moving on from Johnsson and Kapanen (which they did one year later anyway) would have been the best play.

There is no way you can say that. Unsigned RFA's have little value because they could have been had for a 2nd in an offer sheet situation.

It was the only thing you could do with Marleau.

 

[Stephen]

There is no way you can say that. Unsigned RFA's have little value because they could have been had for a 2nd in an offer sheet situation.

It was the only thing you could do with Marleau.

I'm saying in hindsight because we ended up dumping Johnsson and Kapanen 1 year later and they've never been good or worth their contracts, and the best piece that was lost in that whole sequence was the Seth Jarvis pick.

 

[kb]

Just look at Leafs organizational goalie depth and annual goalie carousel for confirmation of your solid point.

Just think if the Hutchenson, Mrazek and David Rittich era's never needed to happen in TO.

Well at least HE has had a solid point somewhere in his posting history, if not this one.

I'm saying in hindsight because we ended up dumping Johnsson and Kapanen 1 year later and they've never been good or worth their contracts, and the best piece that was lost in that whole sequence was the Seth Jarvis pick.

We don't know that either.

 

[Stephen]

Well at least HE has had a solid point in his posting history.

We don't know that either.

He outscored both Johnnson and Kapanen last year at 20 years old.

 

[notbias]

I'm saying in hindsight because we ended up dumping Johnsson and Kapanen 1 year later and they've never been good or worth their contracts, and the best piece that was lost in that whole sequence was the Seth Jarvis pick.

I am still not convinced Amirov is not going to be better. Disclaimer: I am super high on Amirov.

 

[DarkKnight]

InGoal Radio was talking about Samsonov. There's been this line of thinking that he has all the tools to be a Vasilevskiy but there are quirks in his game like his low crouch and deep stance that are less than efficient. They also mentioned he isn't quite the wide body Vasi is, but otherwise his athleticism "pops" and you can see the high end potential. He also came into the league as a very successful Russian goalie, so he was resistant to adjustments as a younger goalie (why fix it if it ain't broke?) But as we've seen, he hasn't quite lived up to expectations and he's amenable to coaching and making adjustments.

Anyway, flaws and all, he's an exciting young goalie and I'm looking forward to seeing his runway with Murray out.

The one bonus to Murray going down, we get to see this guy handle the load and see if he can handle it. It’s not a bad option to explore early in a season, I mean he is an NHL goalie.

 

[Stephen]

I am still not convinced Amirov is not going to be better. Disclaimer: I am super high on Amirov.

Hypotheticals getting complicated but keeping the Marleau disposal pick (Jarvis) and trading Kapanen a year earlier could have still brought in the Amirov pick, there's no either or restriction there. But yeah, hopefully Amirov can be better than Jarvis one day.

 

[kb]

He outscored both Johnnson and Kapanen last year at 20 years old.

What does that have to do with anything?

You are assuming nothing about that entire season changes except for those players, which is a logical fallacy. We don't know if that pick would have been traded to shore up the extremely weak forwards as Marleau was a barely a 4th liner and you have kept him in the lineup and taken 2 middle sixers out of the lineup.


I thought that wouldn't have to be explained yet again for the 78700000000 time.

 

[Stephen]

The one bonus to Murray going down, we get to see this guy handle the load and see if he can handle it. It’s not a bad option to explore early in a season, I mean he is an NHL goalie.

Oh yeah. Lost in the shuffle is the fact that Samsonov is a legit NHL goalie. Just how good, or reliable remains to be seen. Washington's hasty decision to walk away from him have obscured that.

 

[notbias]

Hypotheticals getting complicated but keeping the Marleau disposal pick (Jarvis) and trading Kapanen a year earlier could have still brought in the Amirov pick, there's no either or restriction there. But yeah, hopefully Amirov can be better than Jarvis one day.

Not sure Kap was worth a 15th overall pick at that point. Anyway, irrelevant, it is easy to look back on things in hindsight. If we made good progress that year because we kept Johnsson/Kap for that year, we'd all be saying it was a great trade, because with Marleau that is 6 mil in cap on a 4th liner.

 

[Stephen]

What does that have to do with anything?

You are assuming nothing about the entire season changes except for those players. We don't know if that pick would have been used to shore up the forwards as Marleau was a barely a 4th liner and you have kept him in the lineup and taken 2 middle sixers out of the lineup.


I thought that wouldn't have to be explained yet again for the 78700000000 time.

I think we're getting too side tracked on Kapanen and Johnsson digression in a goalie thread, but my concluding thought on those two is they ended up being nothing special and we could have dumped them earlier than we did, and Dubas' trading of them closed the entire loop on that.

 

[hockeywiz542]

 

[Mitchy]

Leafs went after the wrong Sens goalie and should have gone after Anton Forsberg instead. Murray's injury history and poor play in the past years both well known to everyone.

If Murray didn't play in the Soo would the Leafs even be in this situation now?

Yeah, the Leafs should have gone after a goalie that was never available lmao

 

[Stephen]

Thanks, McComments.

 

[Menzinger]

With Arbitration rights, and that is why in part he took a 1 year deal to bet on himself, when it was rumoured there were deals with more $$$ or more term out there for him.

A 1 year Arbitration reward will see him be age 27 and a free agent again at its completion. RFA status is not as important as Arbitration eligible status. IMO

The Murray injury will allow him to play more games and as a result more wins and stats means more potential $$$ on his next deal. Murray is signed for next year as well complicating things further on any re-signing of Samsonov when dealing with the salary cap space. A stating goalies salary > backup goalies salary.

Sure. But arbitration doesn't preclude them from signing a longer term extension if both sides want that.

One way or the other he's still Leafs property (for at least another season beyond this) unless they want him gone.

 

[kb]

Sure. But arbitration doesn't preclude them from signing a longer term extension if both sides want that.

One way or the other he's still Leafs property (for at least another season beyond this) unless they want him gone.

Exactly.

Odd that someone can only see any issue as negative, and then try to push the most negative aspect possible of the negatives. Every single time.

Because every post is about the GM, or is trying to lead the conversation back there. It's old and tired.

 

[deprw]

I think we're getting too side tracked on Kapanen and Johnsson digression in a goalie thread, but my concluding thought on those two is they ended up being nothing special and we could have dumped them earlier than we did, and Dubas' trading of them closed the entire loop on that.

I think in hindsight it's really hard to calculate, what would have happened with that first rounder. We would have lost two young players. Kept over the hill Marleau and there would have been tens of possible outcomes and only one was drafting Seth Jarvis with our pick.

I hate to think about backwards since it is water under the bridge, but that spring before Marleau was traded I was pretty sure that would have been wasted season with Marleau on roster. There was no options to fix defense with him on lineup. At least one I could have think of.

It's gone and that season didn't end any better than one before it or two after it. Could have kept Marleau, but we didn't know that back then.

 

[darrylsittler27]

Not sure I'd agree with that. Hell only have 1 year of term left.

It cost moving back in the draft 13 spots to dump multiple years of Mrazek - and Murray himself cost a 3rd to take kn the 1st place with two years of term remaining.

If Murray flops this season and needs a trade, itll be the cost of around a mid round pick or equivalent asset. Which obviously isn't good, but also isn't an arm and a leg either

Oh that was sarcasm. I look at our prospect pool and outside the top 5 I see add ons. 3rd and 4th liners and number 6 and 7 D. We have some potential talent in goal but we have lost too many firsts and own rentals. We used to add picks and it paid off now we dump and it doesn't. I disagree with some of Dubas' decisions and one is his continual dumping of high picks.

 

[darrylsittler27]

Imagine thinking a Campbell/Mrazek tandem is a good idea.

Or losing them both and a first rounder for zip?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Out of the whole Marleau wreckage (and in hindsight), it's interesting to point out that keeping Marleau for 1x year and moving on from Johnsson and Kapanen (which they did one year later anyway) would have been the best play.

No, the best play was not keeping Marleau. Just because you know with hindsight that we didn't end up winning the cup, that doesn't mean it's okay to randomly throw away contention years.

Marleau was a garbage player by that point that would have not only actively hurt our team, but necessitated moving other pieces to hurt our team even more. They only moved Kapanen/Johnsson the next year because a global pandemic hit and unexpectedly stagnated the cap. You have no idea what returns were available for them the previous year. The 1st also would have been far more inconsequential if the global pandemic didn't change the terms of the deal post-trade and result in a higher draft pick than it ever would have been under normal circumstances. You also don't know who we even would have drafted if we kept the 1st.

Do you remember when Anton Forsberg made the waiver circuit between claims by Winnipeg, Edmonton, Carolina? It's incredible to me that such an available and competent goalie could be overlooked on so many occasions in a league that's always desperate for goaltending.

He went through the waiver circuit because he wasn't competent. Last season was the first time in his career that he did anything of note. Now we have people on here fawning over him for performing at a similar level last year as a goalie they simultaneously have spent the summer hating.

 

[Dekes For Days]

It's interesting to note that a lot of the alternative names thrown around last offseason are not off to the greatest starts.

GSAx:

Kuemper: -0.6
Gibson: -1.2
Blackwood: -1.5
Campbell: -2.4
Vanacek: -3.4
Fleury: -6.4 (worst in the NHL so far)
Talbot: Injured 5-7 weeks

 

[Nineteen67]

Don’t be so unrealistic. It’s only year five, you can’t expect them to go into a season without questions around goaltending, defence and the forward combinations, especially when they’ve been so successful.

 

[Stephen]

No, the best play was not keeping Marleau. Just because you know with hindsight that we didn't end up winning the cup, that doesn't mean it's okay to randomly throw away contention years.

Marleau was a garbage player by that point that would have not only actively hurt our team, but necessitated moving other pieces to hurt our team even more. They only moved Kapanen/Johnsson the next year because a global pandemic hit and unexpectedly stagnated the cap. You have no idea what returns were available for them the previous year. The 1st also would have been far more inconsequential if the global pandemic didn't change the terms of the deal post-trade and result in a higher draft pick than it ever would have been under normal circumstances. You also don't know who we even would have drafted if we kept the 1st.

He went through the waiver circuit because he wasn't competent. Last season was the first time in his career that he did anything of note. Now we have people on here fawning over him for performing at a similar level last year as a goalie they simultaneously have spent the summer hating.

So in summary, everything worked out absolutely perfectly, as designed. Would not, could not change a thing.