Blomqvist has zero NHL experience. The GM saying they expect him to push for a job next year is exactly what previous regimes have said about the likes of Eric Tangradi and Derrick Pouliot.If they can't trade Jarry for value, I think it was pretty god damn dumb to re-sign Nedjelkovic in the first place. It's not even just from the money spent on the position, but you could just run with Jarry-Blomqvist for a few years and eventually let Blomqvist take over the starter's role.
The Nedjelkovic deal only makes sense in the context of trading Jarry as well. If they can't trade him, they shouldn't have kept Nedjelkovic and should have just run with Jarry-Blomqvist.
Both CJ and Friedman have said they’re trying to trade him, I wouldn’t worry about not being able to move him yet.
Blomqvist has zero NHL experience. The GM saying they expect him to push for a job next year is exactly what previous regimes have said about the likes of Eric Tangradi and Derrick Pouliot.
They signed a career backup to a very short and relatively cheap contract. Ned is easily moved if Blomqvist is clearly a better option. It's not like they gave him 6 years or a NMC.Okay? You can have a backup with zero NHL experience to start a year.
It's funny that people here scream about this team not giving young players a chance, but then freak out about giving a young player a chance in a backup goalie role because "he has zero NHL experience".
Blomqvist has zero NHL experience. The GM saying they expect him to push for a job next year is exactly what previous regimes have said about the likes of Eric Tangradi and Derrick Pouliot.
They signed a career backup to a very short and relatively cheap contract. Ned is easily moved if Blomqvist is clearly a better option. It's not like they gave him 6 years or a NMC.
If Blomqvist sucks you are scrambling to find a Ned level guy in December after they have all found homes for the season.
If they weren't going to trade Jarry but were still uneasy about Blomqvist being the backup immediately, they should have brought in a 1 year stopgap that could be waived and stashed in WBS if Blomqvist outperforms him. They should have tried to find the 2023 version of Nedjelkovic, a guy who would take a 1 year, $1.5 million deal that you could throw aside if Blomqvist is better.
If they wanted to make sure they didn't rush Blomqvist, they should have signed someone like Martin Jones to a 1 year, low money deal. The Nedjelkovic deal in the context of keeping Jarry just shows a lack of planning from Dubas, if that is actually the case. I do think Dubas is actively trying to move him and probably does end up moving him, but he shouldn't have signed Nedjelkovic to a multi-year deal before having something lined up with trading Jarry.
Avs too but their cap situation is rough.The Wings and Oilers need to do something about their goaltending and Jarry is by far the best goalie available. There's bound to be a couple more goalie moves
You think it makes no sense to sign a proven backup goalie because he might block a higher potential unproven goalie.Or the more realistic outcome, they keep Blomqvist stashed in the AHL even if he's better than Jarry and/or Nedjelkovic.
You shouldn't be saying "they can move the deal if they need to" 5 days after signing the contract.
You think it makes no sense to sign a proven backup goalie because he might block a higher potential unproven goalie.
Maybe Gurgs is right and Jarry is immovable without attaching a massive sweetener. Ned's contact is obviously easy to move; Blomqvist is not blocked.
No, I think it makes no sense to sign a proven backup goalie to a multi year deal because he will block a higher potential, near NHL ready goalie. They shouldn't have given term to a backup goalie when they have a very good goalie prospect that dominated the AHL last year.
Had the Penguins done the same thing in the 2015 off-season by re-signing Greiss to a 2 year deal, they never would have gotten to Murray in the playoffs in 2016 and almost definitely wouldn't have won the cup that year.
Based on what? If Nedjelkovic goes back to Detroit performance days, his contract is absolutely not easily moved. Especially with the extra year on it.
Worst case you send him the the AHL. The cap relief is $1,150,000. So you're out all of $1.35MM.No, I think it makes no sense to sign a proven backup goalie to a multi year deal because he will block a higher potential, near NHL ready goalie. They shouldn't have given term to a backup goalie when they have a very good goalie prospect that dominated the AHL last year.
Based on what? If Nedjelkovic goes back to Detroit performance days, his contract is absolutely not easily moved. Especially with the extra year on it.
I mean we did sign Zatkoff.
Let's go back to 2015 for a second. The Penguins had a goalie tandem in 2014-2015 of Fleury-Greiss, who both had fairly good seasons. Greiss was very comparable to Nedjelkovic, he was signed to a pretty cheap 1 year contract to be Fleury's backup. He was not re-signed after that year, which opened up an avenue for Murray to be the Penguins "#2 goalie" (not "backup" since Zatkoff was the backup, but the goalie that would replace Fleury if Fleury got hurt). The Penguins won the cup in huge part due to Murray being used in that "#2 goalie" role.
If JR would have given Greiss the same deal Dubas gave Nedjelkovic, it would instead by Greiss in that #2 goalie role. He would have both been the backup and the injury replacement for Fleury, which would have put another roadblock for Jarry playing. I don't think it's a stretch to say that decision alone would have cost the Penguins the cup in 2016.
Zatkoff was the "backup" but Murray was the true "#2 goalie". Zatkoff sat behind Fleury while Fleury played in a ton of games, but when Fleury got hurt, Murray was the actual new "starter".
Which is the exact role I think they should have gone with if they were going to keep Jarry. This is all a moot point if they trade Jarry, but if they don't trade him, they should have gone with a 1 year cheap guy like Martin Jones as the backup and planned on Blomqvist taking over a significant role by the end of the season.
True, but it's 10 games. 6 of them playing while hurt.Except he's absolute ass in the playoffs. Not a single year he's posted above 900sv%.
My feeling is that he'll either be traded during the draft this weekend, or not at all.He'll need to be traded within the next 6 days then.
My feeling is that he'll either be traded during the draft this weekend, or not at all.
There's a chance that another team could circle back to Jarry if they miss out on UFA goalies on July 1st, but I don't find that possibility very likely, given Jarry's contract. If a team likes him, they'll want to be able to sign UFAs based on having Jarry's cap hit already. And if his cap hit is unpalatable before July 1st, it will be even moreso afterwards.
You're probably right. If he's here at noon on July 1st, best bet is probably waiting for his annual November-December hot streak and hoping someone that runs into goalie trouble sees him as the way to save their season.Agreed. He's going prior to July 1st or we are stuck with him.
I hope Dubas has a trick up his sleeve that doesn't end with us paying assets or getting stuck with a horrible deal.