If it's not Jack Campbell who should be the Leafs new #1 goalie?

[Leaf Fans]

"if you have time, use it."

Of course, why wouldn't you? You do have to have to actually have the time, but the condition is that you have the time.

 

[DarkKnight]

If we do get Murray, just please don’t tell me this was the “plan”, because this is scramble mode to fill a crease cheap and hope he’s the guy. I mean, let’s keep it real.

 

[rocketman588]

All these posters whining and complaining about the goaltenders.....and yet when you ask them repeatedly who they should have got, the only answer is silence.

All you top rate GM's, give me your picks so I can tear them apart.

There are literally threads full of goalie suggestions/it has been the most talked about thing on every Media outlet the list of options are pretty appearent

 

[ShaneFalco]

If we do get Murray, just please don’t tell me this was the “plan”, because this is scramble mode to fill a crease cheap and hope he’s the guy. I mean, let’s keep it real.

Apparently goaltending doesn't matter

 

[Sypher04]

Pull the trigger on a Murray deal that nets him at 50% or less along with a strong sweetener. Trade for James Reimer. Run a tandem. The more I think about this, the more sense it makes to me. I think ultimately, your outlook on this direction is going to largely boil down to how legitimate you consider guys like Campbell and Kuemper to be. I see big commitments tied to big question marks

 

[Gary Nylund]

I believe in the end that Dubas and his data obsessed acolytes don't respect the role goalies play in championship teams' success. They see them as replaceable cogs and unstable units they're unable to perform deep analysis on. How often have I've seen the post that goalies are "voodoo" which is code for "we're smart but we don't know how to predict the performance of a goalie."

Predicting a goalies performance has been all but impossible in recent years, that's just a simple fact and nothing to get angry about.

 

[A1LeafNation]

If we do get Murray, just please don’t tell me this was the “plan”, because this is scramble mode to fill a crease cheap and hope he’s the guy. I mean, let’s keep it real.

This is probably part their plan D and they are doing due dilligence by covering all bases.

Plan A: Good offer for Keumper but don't over pay.
Plan B: Good offer for Campbell but don't over pay.
Plan C: Trade for Gibson without giving up a core piece.
Plan D: Trade for Blackwood/Murray/Talbot on value deals.

If we were the Leafs management, isnt this exactly how we would play things?

 

[ITM]

Repeating myself, but I think we should take a crack at Kevin Lankinen, then trade for a Charlie Lindgren type. It's a modest improvement over Woll and Kjallgren, but it's also modest outlay.

In the regular season when Campbell cratered, the team still finished with a record regular season points total. The obvious inference is, during the regular season our club can win with very modest goaltending.

There are two trade windows: Now and at the trade deadline. We should be looking to the next trade window when there will be more options. Dubas has typically started his trade activity a month before. In the event the club couldn't offset modest patchwork goaltending, we could address a trade earlier.

But closing in on Murray gives me the shivers. If we're not being heavily compensated and if his contract is not heavily reduced and if he's not completely healthy, and if our outlay is absolutely minimal, then it is crazier than going after Gibson by a fair margin.

There's a lot of scorn at Sakic's move to get Georgiev. Just you watch this guy thrive. Certainly enough to spell the team for whatever, however long is needed. Not to say we should have done the same thing, but to note that there are likely truly untapped options left (ie Kevin Lankinen) that we should explore and chance before bringing in high cost, big contract goalies with established track records of decline and injury.

 

[DarkKnight]

This is probably part their plan D and they are doing due dilligence by covering all bases.

Plan A: Good offer for Keumper but don't over pay.
Plan B: Good offer for Campbell but don't over pay.
Plan C: Trade for Gibson without giving up a core piece.
Plan D: Trade for Blackwood/Murray/Talbot on value deals.

If we were the Leafs management, isnt this exactly how we would play things?

Let’s say that’s true, then really Plan D is just a contingency when nothing else pans out. I mean, of course there are always options. Essentially Plan D is scramble to get someone serviceable, okay.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Let’s say that’s true, then really Plan D is just a contingency when nothing else pans out. I mean, of course there are always options. Essentially Plan D is scramble to get someone serviceable, okay.

..and that's what I think is happening.

I don't see any evidence to say that the other avenues aren't being pursued, we just aren't hearing about them publicly.

 

[ToneDog]

Repeating myself, but I think we should take a crack at Kevin Lankinen, then trade for a Charlie Lindgren type. It's a modest improvement over Woll and Kjallgren, but it's also modest outlay.

In the regular season when Campbell cratered, the team still finished with a record regular season points total. The obvious inference is, during the regular season our club can win with very modest goaltending.

There are two trade windows: Now and at the trade deadline. We should be looking to the next trade window when there will be more options. Dubas has typically started his trade activity a month before. In the event the club couldn't offset modest patchwork goaltending, we could address a trade earlier.

But closing in on Murray gives me the shivers. If we're not being heavily compensated and if his contract is not heavily reduced and if he's not completely healthy, and if our outlay is absolutely minimal, then it is crazier than going after Gibson by a fair margin.

There's a lot of scorn at Sakic's move to get Georgiev. Just you watch this guy thrive. Certainly enough to spell the team for whatever, however long is needed. Not to say we should have done the same thing, but to note that there are likely truly untapped options left (ie Kevin Lankinen) that we should explore and chance before bringing in high cost, big contract goalies with established track records of decline and injury.

Charlie Lindgren is probably the backup in St. Louis now that Husso is a Red Wing.

 

[justashadowof]

Predicting a goalies performance has been all but impossible in recent years, that's just a simple fact and nothing to get angry about.

"Whoa, Leo... no need to get angry... calm down."
"I'm not liking that tone, Leo."

 

[rocketman588]

Repeating myself, but I think we should take a crack at Kevin Lankinen, then trade for a Charlie Lindgren type. It's a modest improvement over Woll and Kjallgren, but it's also modest outlay.

In the regular season when Campbell cratered, the team still finished with a record regular season points total. The obvious inference is, during the regular season our club can win with very modest goaltending.

There are two trade windows: Now and at the trade deadline. We should be looking to the next trade window when there will be more options. Dubas has typically started his trade activity a month before. In the event the club couldn't offset modest patchwork goaltending, we could address a trade earlier.

But closing in on Murray gives me the shivers. If we're not being heavily compensated and if his contract is not heavily reduced and if he's not completely healthy, and if our outlay is absolutely minimal, then it is crazier than going after Gibson by a fair margin.

There's a lot of scorn at Sakic's move to get Georgiev. Just you watch this guy thrive. Certainly enough to spell the team for whatever, however long is needed. Not to say we should have done the same thing, but to note that there are likely truly untapped options left (ie Kevin Lankinen) that we should explore and chance before bringing in high cost, big contract goalies with established track records of decline and injury.

If we wanted lankenin I assume we can get him for basically nothing considering they're trying to get rid of their entire team

 

[DarkKnight]

The only other optical thing with Murray, the Sens are trying to get rid of him like we were other Mrazek.

 

[Nineteen67]

I believe in the end that Dubas and his data obsessed acolytes don't respect the role goalies play in championship teams' success. They see them as replaceable cogs and unstable units they're unable to perform deep analysis on. How often have I've seen the post that goalies are "voodoo" which is code for "we're smart but we don't know how to predict the performance of a goalie."

There are some analytical guys that can predict if a goalie will fit in a team‘s defensive system. I can’t think of the chap‘s name that was explaining it last off season, but he looks at several data points and maps out a goalie’s tendency and deciphers whether he’d fit.



I’ll have to go through my twitter and find the guy’s name

 

[justashadowof]

If we wanted lankenin I assume we can get him for basically nothing considering they're trying to get rid of their entire team

I believe he's a UFA.

 

[Stephen]

Repeating myself, but I think we should take a crack at Kevin Lankinen, then trade for a Charlie Lindgren type. It's a modest improvement over Woll and Kjallgren, but it's also modest outlay.

In the regular season when Campbell cratered, the team still finished with a record regular season points total. The obvious inference is, during the regular season our club can win with very modest goaltending.

There are two trade windows: Now and at the trade deadline. We should be looking to the next trade window when there will be more options. Dubas has typically started his trade activity a month before. In the event the club couldn't offset modest patchwork goaltending, we could address a trade earlier.

But closing in on Murray gives me the shivers. If we're not being heavily compensated and if his contract is not heavily reduced and if he's not completely healthy, and if our outlay is absolutely minimal, then it is crazier than going after Gibson by a fair margin.

There's a lot of scorn at Sakic's move to get Georgiev. Just you watch this guy thrive. Certainly enough to spell the team for whatever, however long is needed. Not to say we should have done the same thing, but to note that there are likely truly untapped options left (ie Kevin Lankinen) that we should explore and chance before bringing in high cost, big contract goalies with established track records of decline and injury.

Honestly, Lankinen could be an okay 1B move with some upside. He would fit the profile of an average goalie more than one with a lot of dramatic ups and downs.

 

[rocketman588]

I believe he's a UFA.

Even cheaper lol

 

[Dekes For Days]

There are some analytical guys that can predict if a goalie will fit in a team‘s defensive system. I can’t think of the chap‘s name that was explaining it last off season, but he looks at several data points and maps out a goalie’s tendency and deciphers whether he’d fit.

You mean the guy that said Mrazek would flourish in our defensive system?

I'm sure he's never wrong.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Honestly, Lankinen could be an okay 1B move with some upside. He would fit the profile of an average goalie more than one with a lot of dramatic ups and downs.

He's a good goalie, but he's essentially a cheaper version of Mrazek.

 

[justashadowof]

There are some analytical guys that can predict if a goalie will fit in a team‘s defensive system. I can’t think of the chap‘s name that was explaining it last off season, but he looks at several data points and maps out a goalie’s tendency and deciphers whether he’d fit.



I’ll have to go through my twitter and find the guy’s name

A serious question: did this guy predict how ill-suited Mrazek would be for the Leafs? I mean he's the type of goalie who charges far out of the crease to challenge shooters then plays super deep in the net at other times. That did not mesh well at all with the Leafs' system.

 

[Stephen]

Ok but which team will take on Tavares at 10M and same with muzzin without any cap going back?
I’ll wait

I doubt the Leafs could expect 0 cap dollars coming back in either of those hypotheticals but I would be confident you could get clear of both and receive value back at a modest to decent price. Muzzin would be a McDonagh type player on a shorter deal but more injury questions. Tavares’ main problem is he doesn’t bring enough value and blocks us from finishing the puzzle. But for many teams there will be value there.

 

[Nineteen67]

All these posters whining and complaining about the goaltenders.....and yet when you ask them repeatedly who they should have got, the only answer is silence.

All you top rate GM's, give me your picks so I can tear them apart.

Pay me a couple of million per year and give me 4 yrs on the job training and I’ll give you first hand scoops of move I make.

 

[LeafEgo]

But closing in on Murray gives me the shivers. If we're not being heavily compensated and if his contract is not heavily reduced and if he's not completely healthy, and if our outlay is absolutely minimal, then it is crazier than going after Gibson by a fair margin.

I think ticking these boxes is the play right now and they are basically following your proposed strategy.

Priorities have shifted to:
1. Short term
2. Low AAV
3. Reliable goaltending

Lankinen is perfect for the Hawks right now so not sure they would give him up for fair value, but who knows with the Hawks these days.

 

[Stephen]

He's a good goalie, but he's essentially a cheaper version of Mrazek.

Maybe. Can’t say I’ve tuned into too many Chicago games over the years but he doesn’t look that busy and awful that I’d call him a Mrazek.