Moog-Type-S

I never felt Vokoun and Bryzgalov were top tier goaltenders.

However, again, I feel your team would be vastly improved, dare I say Cup Contender, with a goal tender like Lundqvist, Thomas, Quick....versus Crawford.

....and I bet most people would think so too.

Yumcha

Your point about Lundqvist, Thomas, et al is valid. That goes for ANY team.

However, let's visit the history of this argument okay? You and dom jumped all over my back in 2009-2010 because I maintained they were good enough without trading for VOKOUN (and I recall, Roloson) who was potentially available at the trade deadline that year. Vokoun.

So, hence this "name-brand" goalie thing started. Getting the goalies you are NOW saying: Thomas, Lundqvist, Rinne...sure. Just tell me where and when. But, if you are Chicago and the trading partner, who do you give up (or want) to get this sort of goalie?

Let's make it fair then: Toews for Lundqvist. Does that make Chicago better? Nope. Now, their forward and 2-way play is gone. So, how do you get better? Put it this way, the goalies you are now talking about? Rarely get traded.

I'm playing realist because Chicago trading for an upgrade in goalie with the TYPE of goalie you're suggesting (i.e. Thomas, Lundqvist) is impossible. They don't grow on trees...so, again, I don't see where you are going with this argument. Given getting that type of goalie is impossible, improve the D and go with Crawford/Emery. And improving the D also means the forwards needs to be involved in the backcheck too.

My .

Moog-Type-S

Are we really heading down this road again?!?!?

Who opened the door again to this argument?!?!


edit:

damn you dom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jupitersolo

Valid as far as players, but getting them from their current teams. No ephen way!

SHYUperman

iTrader: (1)

GMGM didn't make any moves today... hope it plays out and Nicky comes back if we even make the playoffs.

black label

I'm happy with the B's moves. They didn't mortgage the future to get what they wanted and I think they additions will fit it well.

dom

I don't think me or Moog suggested they could have had a top tier goalie at the deadline, obviously there wasn't much available. But, its a simple point really, if Chicago or Toronto for that matter had better goalies, they would be a better team with a better record than what they have today. Even if the team and its play didn't change one bit. Not sure how you can disagree with that? Crawford isn't getting the job done, end of story.

What is debatable is whether they can win the Cup with Crawford.....I guess they can IF the team play improves immensely. But again, a better goalie makes it easier on everyone. That point cannot be argued, sorry.

dom

Never said there was a Roy ....the point about Patrick Roy et al is perfectly valid because it demonstrates what a goalie can bring to a team and how far ha can carry them almost on his own. Times haven't changed that much.

I think where we're getting confused is on your opinion that you only need someone serviceable. While I can't disagree because its been done in the past we continually point to history and show how its typically a Veniza caliber goalie that gets you there.

I think a good comparison here is a QB in the NFL. List all the "no-name" QB's who have won a SB vs the big names? How often does it happen?

jupitersolo

Heard him say that with the way they played the last two games, he was happy with what he saw, knowing there's a good team on the hockey right now. He also said he wasn't breaking up the team to get just one guy.

Moog-Type-S

Kings look like their old selves once again. No offense. 1 goal.

Rinne stops 30 of 31 shots.

Night and day from when they played the Hawks and Crawford was in goal dropping 4 goals on 10 shots.

Thanks Crawford, for making the Kings look like they have some sort of offense.....almost gave me hope the Kings could come out of their offensive slump.

...but no.

Turns out our system is still the place where offense comes to die.
Welcome Jeff Carter! Hope you can pot 1 goal by the end of the season.

Moog-Type-S

uper Bowl 1. Bart Starr (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 2. Bart Starr (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 3. Joe Namath (MVP), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 4. Len Dawson (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 5. John Unitas (Chuck Howley), 1 TD
Super Bowl 6. Roger Staubach (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 7. Bob Griese (Jake Scott), 1 TD
Super Bowl 8. Bob Griese (Larry Csonka), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 9. Terry Bradshaw (Franco Harris), 1 TD
Super Bowl 10. Terry Bradshaw (Lynn Swann), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 11. Ken Stabler (Fred Biletnikoff), 1 TD
Super Bowl 12. Roger Staubach (Harvey Martin & Randy White), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 13. Terry Bradshaw (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 14. Terry Bradshaw (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 15. Jim Plunkett (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 16. Joe Montana (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 17. Joe Theismann (John Riggins), 2 TDs,
Super Bowl 18. Jim Plunkett (Marcus Allen), 1 TD
Super Bowl 19. Joe Montana (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 20. Jim McMahon (Richard Dent), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 21. Phil Simms (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 22. Doug Williams (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 23. Joe Montana (Jerry Rice), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 24. Joe Montana (MVP), 5 TDs
Super Bowl 25. Jeff Hostetler (Ottis Anderson), 1 TD
Super Bowl 26. Mark Rypien (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman (Emmitt Smith), O TDs
Super Bowl 29. Steve Young (MVP), 6 TDs
Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman (Larry Brown), 1 TD
Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre (Desmond Howard), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 32. John Elway (Terrell Davis), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 33. John Elway (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rodgers (MVP)
Super Bowl 46: Eli Manning (MVP)

Same for net minders....same for QB's.

Sure there are a few double zeros in this roulette wheel too, but just go with the historical odds. They don't lie.

dom

Seems to be even more of a rarity with QB's. Not even certain those first few I highlighted are no-names but I never heard of them.

Moog-Type-S

He just threw a Chicago Bear under the bus!!!!

dom

Yumchah could have QB'ed that Bears defense to a SB win.

Yumcha

And D, that is all I'm saying. I never DID say NOT having a Vezina-caliber goalie was not going to help. Of course it will help. If Chicago had a Lundqvist in net, I'd be giddy.

All I ever said was that reality is, Chicago at the time and NOW cannot get that sort of goalie.

So, they need to make do with what they have. That is all. My only "yeah-but" is that given the Hawks' horrendous penalty-kill, inability to block shots at all, and inability to move people from the front of the net, ANY great goalie would be losing their mind after half a season.

Seriously, I hope this ends this debate because we're really going in circles.

Yumcha

And look, we're talking about systems here. You have: Richards, Kopitar, Doughty, Williams, Carter...and you have trouble scoring!??!??

It's the system. You have bonafide stars on the team.



I'm making the same argument that even with a bonafide STAR as a goalie, Chicago would still be in trouble because the SYSTEM is not working. When the SYSTEM works, a serviceable goalie is just fine. Notice how certain players are stars with certain teams and nothing on others? Because certain SYSTEMS play to their strengths.

How is it that you have issues getting this?

Yumcha

We all know that the QB is the MOST important position in all of sports.

While the importance of goalies cannot be discounted at all, I do not see them in the same level as QBs in terms of importance to a sports team.



Please tell me: why is it, that despite stinking it up all year early in St. Louis, they suddenly are so scary and winning with shutout after shutout when Hitch took over? Oh yes, Elliot and Halak...they are shoo-in HoFers. Yup. C'mon.

Hitch put in a very sound defensive scheme and blam! St. Louis goes on a roll. Huge roll.

Again, not discounting the need for good goalies. But, strong team play and strong systems with the RIGHT players caters to success.

dom

:gheyhug:

BTW - The Leafs have the 30th ranked penalty kill. Guess what they have in common with the Hawks.

Yumcha

Yup. I mean, I suppose the Hawks can still catch lightning in the bottle...but, this season has been a big-time disappointment. Bowman has failed to get another good center and the Hawks still have no crease-clearing D-men.

Free parking in front of Chicago's net!

97BlackAckCL

iTrader: (6)

Moog-Type-S

I'm just saying bad goal tenders make the anemic Kings offensive system (or lack thereof) look spectacular.

Yumcha

Sure. And I'm saying counter to that Crawford is not as terrible as you think he is based on a game you watched from him.

His stats are inflated due to many factors. Some are on him as it is fair to say he does have some sophomore jinxing on him...but, the other factors: poor PK and poor support from the D and forwards.


If Chicago can fix their overall play, and Crawford still stinks it up like this? You got me on your Crawford-sucks boat, okay? He was brilliant last year against the Canucks and even before that to help a gutted Chicago team through the season. I am not yet ready to declare him a failure or "bad" goaltender.

Moog-Type-S

^^ Add to that the Kings have been notorious for not putting guys in front of the net.
They have not done that much if not at all this season. No front of net presence.

I understand from what you are saying the Hawks have the escort service up and operating on defense. That allows for other teams to get in front of the net and score. Believe me I understand this, for years ago that was LA's defense: Escort the opposing team to the front of you net to have your way with the goaltender. However, with the escort service in full effect, it does not change the Kings game, for they never drive to the net and put a body in front.

Not even pancakes will get his fat @ss in front of the net.

Yumcha

So, you know my pain from watching the Hawks all season this year then.

It pains me to see a line-up with so many "stars" and yet, teams like Nashville, NYR, Boston, and St. Louis with less "stars" are getting the job done. Bettman and his goons may have tried to increase goal-scoring but the old tradition of grittiness, defense, and hard work to win are still the way to go...Nothing has changed except a few rules.

As a diehard fan of the Hawks, I hope a bulb switches on soon.


And oh, dom: No Toews, Hammer, Montador again tomorrow. Get ready to tee up and chalk up 2 points for your Leaves.

dom

You realize the Leaves have lost 8 of 9 and slid out of a playoff spot don't you. They even managed to lose at home no less to the pitiful Washington Capitals.

Moog-Type-S

Leafs in 10th
Kings in 10th
:gheyhug:

Yumcha

...and Hawks barely clinging onto 6th despite being 1st overall before January. A nice 4-12 streak would do that.

Fibonacci

CCColtsicehockey

Yumcha

Moog-Type-S

I'm guessing there are a few GM's out there kicking themselves for not picking up Bernier...after watching last night shut-out.

Never the less, they will get another chance for him in the off season.

Moog-Type-S

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...145414099.html

dom

He's having a rough year.

dom

but Holy Old Batman. Where did you pull that from?

dom

Yumchah I'd like to tell you to 'bring it' and stuff for tonight but I just don't care anymore. Enjoy the 2 points.

Yumcha

Nope...the Hawks are streak-killers. They gave Gagner 8 points. Brown a hat-trick. The Ducks a needed win so they won't be sellers.

Your Leaves are going to win tonight. Thank goodness I'm on a plane and not taking in the carnage.

Moog-Type-S

dom is probably the right, the Hawks will win.

Yumcha

How's that possible? No Toews, 1/3rd of the starting D is out...many rookies in the line-up.

Moog-Type-S

I know....I've been in dom's shoes.

Moog-Type-S

Interesting.