Rumor: Rumors and Proposals Thread | Rishaug: Expect Swedish FA Theodor Lennstrom Signing

[Mr Positive]

I like the idea of trading for Georgiev. I suggested in that other thread that a JP-Georgiev trade might work, but if the value isn't there, fine. Or, add to the trade to balance it out.

In principle, goalie is a position our organization has neglected, and it is even worse with Starett's injury problems.

The value of Georgiev is a bit in the air, but I doubt that the Rangers are interested in moving him if they don't have to. It is looking like they will attempt to move out Lundqvist instead. But, an interesting trade would change things.

Ultimately, Georgiev just turned 24. For a goalie, that is the time they are just starting to show what they really are. Any imperfections in his game are concerning, but also expected. He's exactly the type of young goalie you want to get on your team and develop, since the developmental time would be minimal.

 

[belair]

I like the idea of trading for Georgiev. I suggested in that other thread that a JP-Georgiev trade might work, but if the value isn't there, fine. Or, add to the trade to balance it out.

In principle, goalie is a position our organization has neglected, and it is even worse with Starett's injury problems.

The value of Georgiev is a bit in the air, but I doubt that the Rangers are interested in moving him if they don't have to. It is looking like they will attempt to move out Lundqvist instead. But, an interesting trade would change things.

Ultimately, Georgiev just turned 24. For a goalie, that is the time they are just starting to show what they really are. Any imperfections in his game are concerning, but also expected. He's exactly the type of young goalie you want to get on your team and develop, since the developmental time would be minimal.

Georgiev's age is redundant. There's no developing him. He's a waiver-eligible NHL goaltender.

 

[Mr Positive]

Georgiev's age is redundant. There's no developing him. He's a waiver-eligible NHL goaltender.

Yes, develop in the NHL, just like he is currently doing for the Rangers. His age is not redundant, it's important. It means he's in a sweet spot in that he's under developed enough to be affordable, but developed enough that his veteran self will show itself right away, and wouldn't need to be sent down.

It is likely time to move on from Smith after these playoffs. We could sign a random backup, or even Smith again, but why not at least try to go with someone who could be our future starter? Now is the perfect time. If not Georgiev, someone like him.

 

[belair]

Yes, develop in the NHL, just like he is currently doing for the Rangers. His age is not redundant, it's important. It means he's in a sweet spot in that he's under developed enough to be affordable, but developed enough that his veteran self will show itself right away, and wouldn't need to be sent down.

It is likely time to move on from Smith after these playoffs. We could sign a random backup, or even Smith again, but why not at least try to go with someone who could be our future starter? Now is the perfect time. If not Georgiev, someone like him.

So the Brossoit method? If the team struggles next season, the asset is lost.

When you weight Georgiev versus what's available on the UFA market to fill the role of a 40-start goaltender, the difference isn't a Puljujarvi-level asset. I'm not convinced the Georgiev would even be one of the better options.

The only thing that make Georgiev enticing is the uncertainty due to his age. He has an upward trajectory. The problem is that you can't do anything if he struggles. The NHL is not a developmental league.

 

[GhostfaceWu]

Georgiev is another Talbot/Koskinen anyway why would we trade Jesse for him when the organization could have got that sort of value 12+ months ago?

 

[Mr Positive]

So the Brossoit method? If the team struggles next season, the asset is lost.

When you weight Georgiev versus what's available on the UFA market to fill the role of a 40-start goaltender, the difference isn't a Puljujarvi-level asset. I'm not convinced the Georgiev would even be one of the better options.

The only thing that make Georgiev enticing is the uncertainty due to his age. He has an upward trajectory. The problem is that you can't do anything if he struggles. The NHL is not a developmental league.

It doesn't have to be JP For Georgiev. I'm mostly talking about Georgiev. Another trade? Sure.

Yes, you can do a lot if he struggles btw. You can have him attend our practices, and you could give him softer starts and build his confidence. It's not asking a lot because he already has a good amount of NHL starts. It's a gamble that could also pay off big.

We could also have a little faith in our D. It is deep, and there are some good two-way types that will do a great job at supporting the goalie, so it is a perfect time to put in a young asset between the pipes and develop them.

The phrase "NHL is not a developmental league" does not apply to Georgiev. All that phrase is saying is that you don't put a 21 year old Georgiev into the fire. It's time for Georgiev to be in the big show. And yes, he will develop in the NHL. Just like Caleb Jones is doing now. Just like Makar is in Colorado. As long as they can put up good performance and also develop, it's okay, and that's Georgiev.

And btw, Puljujarvi is in the same boat as Georgiev. Can't get sent down either. So it seems like a sideways move, and one that makes sense since we have wingers now, but our system is weak in goalies.

 

[McTonyBrar]

Georgiev is another Talbot/Koskinen anyway why would we trade Jesse for him when the organization could have got that sort of value 12+ months ago?

Georgiev is not either of those two LOL.

 

[belair]

Georgiev is not either of those two LOL.

Talbot had far better numbers.

 

[belair]

It doesn't have to be JP For Georgiev. I'm mostly talking about Georgiev. Another trade? Sure.

Yes, you can do a lot if he struggles btw. You can have him attend our practices, and you could give him softer starts and build his confidence. It's not asking a lot because he already has a good amount of NHL starts. It's a gamble that could also pay off big.

We could also have a little faith in our D. It is deep, and there are some good two-way types that will do a great job at supporting the goalie, so it is a perfect time to put in a young asset between the pipes and develop them.

The phrase "NHL is not a developmental league" does not apply to Georgiev. All that phrase is saying is that you don't put a 21 year old Georgiev into the fire. It's time for Georgiev to be in the big show. And yes, he will develop in the NHL. Just like Caleb Jones is doing now. Just like Makar is in Colorado. As long as they can put up good performance and also develop, it's okay, and that's Georgiev.

And btw, Puljujarvi is in the same boat as Georgiev. Can't get sent down either. So it seems like a sideways move, and one that makes sense since we have wingers now, but our system is weak in goalies.

It isn't the same. You can shelter wingers, you can shelter defensemen. You cannot shelter goalies. Especially when your other option is Mikko Koskinen, who has shown a tendency to run hot and cold.

It's not a sideways move when you're giving up a significant asset for a need that can simply be addressed via a UFA market. It's unnecessary spending.

 

[MessierII]

It isn't the same. You can shelter wingers, you can shelter defensemen. You cannot shelter goalies. Especially when your other option is Mikko Koskinen, who has shown a tendency to run hot and cold.

It's not a sideways move when you're giving up a significant asset for a need that can simply be addressed via a UFA market. It's unnecessary spending.

Jesse P isnt a significant asset. Your going to get another borderline bust prospect for him.

 

[LTIR]

Georgiev is not either of those two LOL.

Talbot for when we acquired him from Rangers >> Georgiev

With expansion draft a shortened year away, do we really want to trade Puljujarvi for a goalie?

We can only protect one

 

[LTIR]

Jesse P isnt a significant asset. Your going to get another borderline bust prospect for him.

Would have happened already if you are thinking Lias Andersson type propspect

 

[MessierII]

Would have happened already if you are thinking Lias Andersson type propspect

I don’t think Holland likes Lias Andersson but someone in that kind of situation is what we’re looking at. If you trade for a pick you might get a mid to late 2nd. Not a significant asset either way.

 

[LTIR]

I don’t think Holland likes Lias Andersson but someone in that kind of situation is what we’re looking at. If you trade for a pick you might get a mid to late 2nd. Not a significant asset either way.

Mike McLeod was mentioned on main boards. He could be our 3C answer long term with his brother at one wing. Hopefully we can get him for cheaper than Puljujarvi. (Ideally off waivers)

 

[Old Boys Club]

Wonder if Patrik Berglund would come back to the NHL. would be a good 3C

 

[MessierII]

Mike McLeod was mentioned on main boards. He could be our 3C answer long term with his brother at one wing. Hopefully we can get him for cheaper than Puljujarvi. (Ideally off waivers)

Wouldn’t be the worst option. Personally I think the brother we have ends up the better player. The brother they have has some upside though. Skates well, right shot.

 

[CupofOil]

I like the idea of trading for Georgiev. I suggested in that other thread that a JP-Georgiev trade might work, but if the value isn't there, fine. Or, add to the trade to balance it out.

In principle, goalie is a position our organization has neglected, and it is even worse with Starett's injury problems.

The value of Georgiev is a bit in the air, but I doubt that the Rangers are interested in moving him if they don't have to. It is looking like they will attempt to move out Lundqvist instead. But, an interesting trade would change things.

Ultimately, Georgiev just turned 24. For a goalie, that is the time they are just starting to show what they really are. Any imperfections in his game are concerning, but also expected. He's exactly the type of young goalie you want to get on your team and develop, since the developmental time would be minimal.

Not true at all. They took a goalie with a 3rd last draft (Konovalov), a 2nd the draft before (in a trade up I believe to get Rodrigue) and the 3rd the season before (Skinner), Wells the year before that with a 5th. If anything, their drafting of goalies that early has been a bit of overkill especially with such shallow forward depth in the system. They've failed to develop goalies for lord knows how long but recently they've been loading up with young goalies.

I'd be "ok" with Georgiev for Puljujarvi because they're going to need to find a young goalie who can step in sooner than later but I just have a feeling that's a trade that has a real chance to backfire just because goalies are so fickle.

 

[Mr Positive]

Not true at all. They took a goalie with a 3rd last draft (Konovalov), a 2nd the draft before (in a trade up I believe to get Rodrigue) and the 3rd the season before (Skinner), Wells the year before that with a 5th. If anything, their drafting of goalies that early has been a bit of overkill especially with such shallow forward depth in the system. They've failed to develop goalies for lord knows how long but recently they've been loading up with young goalies.

I'd be "ok" with Georgiev for Puljujarvi because they're going to need to find a young goalie who can step in sooner than later but I just have a feeling that's a trade that has a real chance to backfire just because goalies are so fickle.

we took goalies lately, but they take a while to develop, and so the exact asset we are missing are NHL ready goalies, and so the neglect I was talking about was from the years just before. But I suppose you are correct. I like our young goalies. We need one now though.

 

[CupofOil]

we took goalies lately, but they take a while to develop, and so the exact asset we are missing are NHL ready goalies, and so the neglect I was talking about was from the years just before. But I suppose you are correct. I like our young goalies. We need one now though.

Can't argue with any of that.
I think a Georgiev for Puljujarvi proposal is interesting but not something I'm all in on. I'd rather target a forward prospect for Pulju if possible or in a bigger package for a #3C (Zacha?).

 

[Mr Positive]

It isn't the same. You can shelter wingers, you can shelter defensemen. You cannot shelter goalies. Especially when your other option is Mikko Koskinen, who has shown a tendency to run hot and cold.

It's not a sideways move when you're giving up a significant asset for a need that can simply be addressed via a UFA market. It's unnecessary spending.

teams shelter goalies all the time and it's not that hard. Besides, we don't need to shelter Georgiev that much. He's very NHL ready.

The point about Koskinen makes some sense, but also backfires on you. You are saying that Koskinen is not consistent, so don't we need to think about replacing him with a potential real solution and not some cheap back up? Georgiev (or a goalie like him) is the right answer for an organization that is running itself properly. He's a young-ish goalie who's major warts are done with and can handle regular NHL duty. His ceiling is unknown, and floor is still in the average range. He would not need much sheltering with the two-way talent on our defense. And, Koskinen is good enough to be a steadying presence as the main starter, but not so good that he will take valuable playing time away from Georgiev.

It's just simply the perfect time to move on from Smith and go to a young goalie. But I will add that we will see what Smith can do in the playoffs. I'm just looking at it coldly.

 

[belair]

teams shelter goalies all the time and it's not that hard. Besides, we don't need to shelter Georgiev that much. He's very NHL ready.

The point about Koskinen makes some sense, but also backfires on you. You are saying that Koskinen is not consistent, so don't we need to think about replacing him with a potential real solution and not some cheap back up? Georgiev (or a goalie like him) is the right answer for an organization that is running itself properly. He's a young-ish goalie who's major warts are done with and can handle regular NHL duty. His ceiling is unknown, and floor is still in the average range. He would not need much sheltering with the two-way talent on our defense. And, Koskinen is good enough to be a steadying presence as the main starter, but not so good that he will take valuable playing time away from Georgiev.

It's just simply the perfect time to move on from Smith and go to a young goalie. But I will add that we will see what Smith can do in the playoffs. I'm just looking at it coldly.

I didn't say anything about a cheaper backup. I'm suggesting a better backup. The only thing Georgiev's youth provides to us is inexperience.

 

[Mr Positive]

I didn't say anything about a cheaper backup. I'm suggesting a better backup. The only thing Georgiev's youth provides to us is inexperience.

inexperience is a two way street. If you are experienced you prove what you can do, but also what you can't do. We don't know Georgiev's ceiling. He's a potential starter, maybe a great one, and that's what we need.

 

[belair]

inexperience is a two way street. If you are experienced you prove what you can do, but also what you can't do. We don't know Georgiev's ceiling. He's a potential starter, maybe a great one, and that's what we need.

We need a great starter so let's trade for this undrafted backup with modest stats because there's a miniscule chance he becomes something no scout has ever suggested he'd become? This isn't very sound logic.

 

[bellagiobob]

So the Brossoit method? If the team struggles next season, the asset is lost.

When you weight Georgiev versus what's available on the UFA market to fill the role of a 40-start goaltender, the difference isn't a Puljujarvi-level asset. I'm not convinced the Georgiev would even be one of the better options.

The only thing that make Georgiev enticing is the uncertainty due to his age. He has an upward trajectory. The problem is that you can't do anything if he struggles. The NHL is not a developmental league.

I didn't see a lot of UFA's in the 40 start range that would likely fit our price range. Khudobin would be ideal, but doubtful he leaves Dallas.

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/free-agents/2021/caphit/all/goalies

 

[Tobias Kahun]

It doesn't have to be JP For Georgiev. I'm mostly talking about Georgiev. Another trade? Sure.

Yes, you can do a lot if he struggles btw. You can have him attend our practices, and you could give him softer starts and build his confidence. It's not asking a lot because he already has a good amount of NHL starts. It's a gamble that could also pay off big.

We could also have a little faith in our D. It is deep, and there are some good two-way types that will do a great job at supporting the goalie, so it is a perfect time to put in a young asset between the pipes and develop them.

The phrase "NHL is not a developmental league" does not apply to Georgiev. All that phrase is saying is that you don't put a 21 year old Georgiev into the fire. It's time for Georgiev to be in the big show. And yes, he will develop in the NHL. Just like Caleb Jones is doing now. Just like Makar is in Colorado. As long as they can put up good performance and also develop, it's okay, and that's Georgiev.

And btw, Puljujarvi is in the same boat as Georgiev. Can't get sent down either. So it seems like a sideways move, and one that makes sense since we have wingers now, but our system is weak in goalies.

Shouldn’t our goalies be attending practice anyways?