Player Discussion Joonas Korpisalo

[DominicT]

I think people are forgetting there is zero chance the Bruins wanted Korpisalo and were made to take him back, Now it's hope for the best, I'm not even sure he will beat Bussi out. I am sure either will be good with this structure and talent, seems sily to actively want a 3 million dollar backup, which obviously they did not.

I'm not sure I agree with the opening sentence and the last statement

 

[LouJersey]

I'm not sure I agree with the opening sentence and the last statement

If the bruins set out to acquire korpi or wanted him I think that is malfeasance. So much for having an advantage with a great goalie coach then imo. They had nowhere else to go and he was part of what they had to take back to get the 1 imo. If they had zero issue going into the season with minimum 10 mil slotted in for the goalies I have to question wtf were they thinking

 

[Dr Quincy]

Korpisalo is one year away from putting up a .914% over 39 games between Columbus and LA. The league average was .904 that year. If he can get back to those numbers he’s basically replacing what Ullmark gave you last season at a cheaper price. His playoff numbers are also substantially better than Ullmark’s.

Sure, if you ignore the last 6 games he played that year in the playoffs, when he had a sv% of .892, or if you ignore his most 55 games when he had a sv% of .890 or if you ignore the season before he one you are talking about when he had a sv% of .877 or the season before that when it was .894.

Yes, when you look at one stretch of 39 games, he can be a decent player. You just have to ignore the other 170.

 

[Dr Quincy]

If the bruins set out to acquire korpi or wanted him I think that is malfeasance. So much for having an advantage with a great goalie coach then imo. They had nowhere else to go and he was part of what they had to take back to get the 1 imo. If they had zero issue going into the season with minimum 10 mil slotted in for the goalies I have to question wtf were they thinking

I'm sure OTT wanted to send a goalie back. Why would the B's then ask for Korpisalo over Forsberg? Even with retention, Korpisalo costs more. Why not have Magic Bob fix Forsberg?

I think the answer is fairly clear: Because OTT was more interested in dumping Korpisalo than Forsberg. Neither are very good but they'd rather have 1 more year of Forsberg than 4 more years of Korpisalo.

Wouldn't BOS have wanted 1 year of Forsberg, at less money than 4 more years of Korpisalo too?

If Sweeney had his pick of the 2 goalies and he chose Korpisalo and his contract, that's crazy. Which is why I don't think it happened. Korpi's dump was the price for Letourneau.

 

[UncleRico]

Korpisalo will be playing against the bottom feeder teams and back-to-backs for the most part in his 25-27 games he will play.

With our defense and an easy schedule, I would sure hope he can at least put up a .910 sv%

His $3m bruins cap hit is 33rd in the league for goalies. Do we need to have one of the highest paid back up goalies?

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Korpisalo will be playing against the bottom feeder teams and back-to-backs for the most part in his 25-27 games he will play.

With our defense and an easy schedule, I would sure hope he can at least put up a .910 sv%

His $3m bruins cap hit is 33rd in the league for goalies. Do we need to have one of the highest paid back up goalies?

Bruins only have 7 back to backs. If you look at the schedule, he’ll probably have to play against some playoff teams too.

 

[NDiesel]

Korpisalo will be playing against the bottom feeder teams and back-to-backs for the most part in his 25-27 games he will play.

With our defense and an easy schedule, I would sure hope he can at least put up a .910 sv%

His $3m bruins cap hit is 33rd in the league for goalies. Do we need to have one of the highest paid back up goalies?

How would you (or anyone) feel if Swayman went down and our goalie tandem heading into the playoffs was Bussi/Dipietro vs Korpisalo/Bussi?

 

[CellyHard]

I looked at 5v5 CORSI% and did you guys know out of regulars on the Bruins, Pasta and H. Lindholm were the only regulars above 50%?

This puts us in company with teams like the Sharks, Canadiens, Red Wings, CBJ, Blackhawks. It's not good territory to be in.

Most cup contending teams have 12+ forwards and 6+ defenseman above 50% like the Panthers, Oilers, Stars, Avs. Even the Bruins 22-23 team was in this boat.

Unless there is some flaw in CORSI that I'm not seeing, the Bruins were simply a very poor 5v5 team last year. They relied massively on goaltending to win games.

I don't think the Bruins were as good last year as we think and I'm afraid E. Lindholm and Zadorov might not be enough to change it. Poitras and Lysell making an impact is absolutely critical. If not, they need a top six forward (and maybe two) to change this.

Lastly, double-downing on goaltending makes sense. If Bussi simply plays below average, they could actually not make the playoffs. They must have faith that Korpisalo will be a high quality back-up and steal us games.

Long story short, a high quality back-up goalie is worth a high investment because we rely on it so much. We need it significantly more than other teams do.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

I looked at 5v5 CORSI% and did you guys know out of regulars on the Bruins, Pasta and H. Lindholm were the only regulars above 50%?

This puts us in company with teams like the Sharks, Canadiens, Red Wings, CBJ, Blackhawks. It's not good territory to be in.

Most cup contending teams have 12+ forwards and 6+ defenseman above 50% like the Panthers, Oilers, Stars, Avs. Even the Bruins 22-23 team was in this boat.

Unless there is some flaw in CORSI that I'm not seeing, the Bruins were simply a very poor 5v5 team last year. They relied massively on goaltending to win games.

I don't think the Bruins were as good last year as we think and I'm afraid E. Lindholm and Zadorov might not be enough to change it. Poitras and Lysell making an impact is absolutely critical. If not, they need a top six forward (and maybe two) to change this.

Lastly, double-downing on goaltending makes sense. If Bussi simply plays below average, they could actually not make the playoffs. They must have faith that Korpisalo will be a high quality back-up and steal us games.

Long story short, a high quality back-up goalie is worth a high investment because we rely on it so much. We need it significantly more than other teams do.

Corsi is a pretty limited analytic. Look at xGF% because it takes into account shot quality - something Corsi eschews. For Corsi, an unscreened wrister from the blue line counts the same as a wide open shot from the slot, as an example.

 

[EverettMike]

Sure, if you ignore the last 6 games he played that year in the playoffs, when he had a sv% of .892, or if you ignore his most 55 games when he had a sv% of .890 or if you ignore the season before he one you are talking about when he had a sv% of .877 or the season before that when it was .894.

Yes, when you look at one stretch of 39 games, he can be a decent player. You just have to ignore the other 170.

LIKE

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

I'm not sure I agree with the opening sentence and the last statement

I definitely don’t.

I think the Bruins ONLY make the Ullmark deal if three things are all true:

1) They identified a player (or a few) that they valued VERY highly at where they were set to pick in the first round.

2) They saw Korpisalo as an asset - not a guy with negative value. They wanted him and liked his fit on the roster.

3) They are confident that there will be a contract with Swayman that both sides will be happy with.

 

[UncleRico]

How would you (or anyone) feel if Swayman went down and our goalie tandem heading into the playoffs was Bussi/Dipietro vs Korpisalo/Bussi?

I’d feel screwed either way

 

[Over the volcano]

Sure, if you ignore the last 6 games he played that year in the playoffs, when he had a sv% of .892, or if you ignore his most 55 games when he had a sv% of .890 or if you ignore the season before he one you are talking about when he had a sv% of .877 or the season before that when it was .894.

Yes, when you look at one stretch of 39 games, he can be a decent player. You just have to ignore the other 170.

Not worried about his playoff numbers because #1 he won't be in goal in the playoffs #2 his worst showing is pretty identical to Ullmarks average #3 he was amazing in 19-20 #4 his career playoff .922 save percentage matches Swayman.

IMO its a fair point to look back just one season to see a real solid performance and assume he could get back there - particularly when last year Ottawa was a total shit show in front of him and he played more games in a season there than at any point in his career.

20-21 and 21-22 were injury riddled years for him where he only saw 55 games across both seasons combined.

So he had a great year as a starter in 2022-23 sandwiched between injuries and Ottawa on either side.

 

[Over the volcano]

I'm sure OTT wanted to send a goalie back. Why would the B's then ask for Korpisalo over Forsberg? Even with retention, Korpisalo costs more. Why not have Magic Bob fix Forsberg?...

If Sweeney had his pick of the 2 goalies and he chose Korpisalo and his contract, that's crazy. Which is why I don't think it happened. Korpi's dump was the price for Letourneau.

It would explain the retention - Boston was asking for a goalie in return and Ottawa retained to make their contracts come in at essentially the same number. All things even I'd take the guy who's shown the better ceiling.

 

[NDiesel]

I’d feel screwed either way

Sure, maybe the options I've given are choosing between two shit sandwiches, but I'd guess most would feel better with the tandem where the one goalie has actual playoff experience rather than two guys with a handful of NHL games between them. They were always going to go grab a vet, IMO, and any quality backup gets 2 mil+ in UFA anyway. I think the money isn't really as big of an issue as the term.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Sure, maybe the options I've given are choosing between two shit sandwiches, but I'd guess most would feel better with the tandem where the one goalie has actual playoff experience rather than two guys with a handful of NHL games between them.

Swayman gets injured in November. Would you be happier with Korpi/Bussi or Ullmark/Bussi? All this goes into the factors of whether to make a deal and what deal to make. Insurance policy for injury is definitely a thing. But it wasn't the prime reason for this deal. The prime reason was- getting a 1st.

Because that was an option too. As was not getting a goalie back and signing one un UFA for 1/3 the cost of Korpisalo.

If it was the Bruins idea to target Korpisalo then it means they chose Korpisalo over what other assets OTT might have offered- another pick, a prospect, or some other roster player.

Would the B's have been better off with signing a DeSmith or Reimer for $1m, getting whatever other asset that OTT was offering (since in this theory, Korpisalo has real value and BOS targeted him specifically) and then using that extra $2m, not signed Max Jones ($1m) and used that $3m to sign another F... say Daniel Sprong or pick some other F- Anthony Beauvillier, Michael Amadio, Anthony Mantha, Ryan Lomberg, or Stefan Noesen?

I think having a different asset in the deal, having the extra 3m to spend in UFA would be the better choice- better and cheaper goalie and extra money AND whatever asset replaces Korpi.

But that's why I don't think it was a choice. I don't think there was another "asset" that OTT would include. I think the idea was to get PHI or some other team to take Korpisalo because OTT was desperate not to have him. That fell through, and thus Korpisalo was the cost for the 1st. It was an acceptable cost for the B's but I don't think they chose him over a 3rd rd pick or mid prospect.

 

[LouJersey]

I'm sure OTT wanted to send a goalie back. Why would the B's then ask for Korpisalo over Forsberg? Even with retention, Korpisalo costs more. Why not have Magic Bob fix Forsberg?

I think the answer is fairly clear: Because OTT was more interested in dumping Korpisalo than Forsberg. Neither are very good but they'd rather have 1 more year of Forsberg than 4 more years of Korpisalo.

Wouldn't BOS have wanted 1 year of Forsberg, at less money than 4 more years of Korpisalo too?

If Sweeney had his pick of the 2 goalies and he chose Korpisalo and his contract, that's crazy. Which is why I don't think it happened. Korpi's dump was the price for Letourneau.

100%

 

[NDiesel]

Swayman gets injured in November. Would you be happier with Korpi/Bussi or Ullmark/Bussi? All this goes into the factors of whether to make a deal and what deal to make. Insurance policy for injury is definitely a thing. But it wasn't the prime reason for this deal. The prime reason was- getting a 1st.

Because that was an option too. As was not getting a goalie back and signing one un UFA for 1/3 the cost of Korpisalo.

If it was the Bruins idea to target Korpisalo then it means they chose Korpisalo over what other assets OTT might have offered- another pick, a prospect, or some other roster player.

Would the B's have been better off with signing a DeSmith or Reimer for $1m, getting whatever other asset that OTT was offering (since in this theory, Korpisalo has real value and BOS targeted him specifically) and then using that extra $2m, not signed Max Jones ($1m) and used that $3m to sign another F... say Daniel Sprong or pick some other F- Anthony Beauvillier, Michael Amadio, Anthony Mantha, Ryan Lomberg, or Stefan Noesen?

I think having a different asset in the deal, having the extra 3m to spend in UFA would be the better choice- better and cheaper goalie and extra money AND whatever asset replaces Korpi.

But that's why I don't think it was a choice. I don't think there was another "asset" that OTT would include. I think the idea was to get PHI or some other team to take Korpisalo because OTT was desperate not to have him. That fell through, and thus Korpisalo was the cost for the 1st. It was an acceptable cost for the B's but I don't think they chose him over a 3rd rd pick or mid prospect.

Point taken, I'd feel more comfortable with Ullmark/Bussi obviously, but feel happier with the 1st round pick + Kastelic + Korpisalo rather than keeping Ullmark all year for insurance, just to leave for nothing at the end of it.

It all just comes down to preference I guess. I do agree I don't think Korpi was a choice as much as he was the cost of getting into the first round - but I do believe as well they likely took a look at the UFA options and decided they were comfortable with Korpisalo at his price/age/experience vs the guys available this year. Do I agree? Not really, but it is what it is.

Also they could have had a guy like Sprong + Korpisalo easily since he signed for less than a mil, but I think that Sweeney seems pretty set on letting some of the young guys have a shot vs signing a guy like Sprong to play above where he likely should be. Maybe that thought changes with an extra 2/3 mil in cap space.

I get why you might prefer that extra 2 or 3 mil as you suggested, but my guess is Sweeney would have spent at least part of that money on a vet backup even if Korpisalo didn't come back here, so with that money you're signing a guy who isn't making a significant difference in the lineup anyway.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Point taken, I'd feel more comfortable with Ullmark/Bussi obviously, but feel happier with the 1st round pick + Kastelic + Korpisalo rather than keeping Ullmark all year for insurance, just to leave for nothing at the end of it.

It all just comes down to preference I guess. I do agree I don't think Korpi was a choice as much as he was the cost of getting into the first round - but I do believe as well they likely took a look at the UFA options and decided they were comfortable with Korpisalo at his price/age/experience vs the guys available this year. Do I agree? Not really, but it is what it is.

Also they could have had a guy like Sprong + Korpisalo easily since he signed for less than a mil, but I think that Sweeney seems pretty set on letting some of the young guys have a shot vs signing a guy like Sprong to play above where he likely should be. Maybe that thought changes with an extra 2/3 mil in cap space.

I get why you might prefer that extra 2 or 3 mil as you suggested, but my guess is Sweeney would have spent at least part of that money on a vet backup even if Korpisalo didn't come back here, so with that money you're signing a guy who isn't making a significant difference in the lineup anyway.

They still could have had Sprong after the trade. He just replaces a minimum salary. But they obviously liked the options they brought in over him.

 

[DKH]

I found and joined this place in 1998 by accident to find info on Nick Boyton

I’ve met many great people and made life long friends

This is more important then sticking up or liking Korpisalo and even Don Sweeney

I am renouncing my support for Korpisalo and Don Sweeney wanted him~ and admitting it was his only option to get Letourney

I am now going terrible move and Donny Hockey, who was playing checkers while Pierre Dorian or whoever is the GM stole Ullmark.

 

[DaBroons]

I definitely don’t.

I think the Bruins ONLY make the Ullmark deal if three things are all true:

1) They identified a player (or a few) that they valued VERY highly at where they were set to pick in the first round.

2) They saw Korpisalo as an asset - not a guy with negative value. They wanted him and liked his fit on the roster.

3) They are confident that there will be a contract with Swayman that both sides will be happy with.

Agree with points 1and 3.

Regarding point 2, they either wanted Korpisalo, or Ottawa insisted that Boston take him in the trade, in order for them to include the first rounder. If Linus had agreed to an extension b/f the trade, then the return would have been higher.

 

[Pia8988]

I definitely don’t.

I think the Bruins ONLY make the Ullmark deal if three things are all true:

1) They identified a player (or a few) that they valued VERY highly at where they were set to pick in the first round.

2) They saw Korpisalo as an asset - not a guy with negative value. They wanted him and liked his fit on the roster.

3) They are confident that there will be a contract with Swayman that both sides will be happy with.

Sounds like a lot of justification to defend their actions.

I would bet heavily that Korpisalo was more from the Ottawa side. The 1st was their target.

"You can have a first, but we need you to take Korpisalo too"

 

[zenator]

I was sure Forsberg was going to Boston in an Ullmark trade. He played really well in 21-22 and 22-23. He played poorly last year coming off 2 knee sprains, but was coming around late in the year, and stood on his head in the final game in Boston, that the Sens won.

I guess Staios forced the B's to take Korpisalo, as the Sens were the only team not on Ullmark's no-trade list that was interested in him. Boston should have waited and tried again at the deadline. It's not like the 25th overall pick is likely to land a star player.

 

[JAD]

It is what it is. Let's see what Korpisalo does with a legitimate defense and team system in front of him before writing him off. We might be pleasantly surprised.

 

[CellyHard]

Cam Talbot had a .898 SV% in Ottawa two years ago and then went to the Kings and played to a .913

Korpisalo had a .890 SV% last in Ottawa and a .921 two years ago with the Kings

Ottawa is rough for goalies