Can't view these stats in a vacuum. Take either CC or Nemo - each in their relative level of experience - in each of the last 5 post seasons and put them on either the Sharks or the 'Hawks and you will see notably better performance for either guy on the 'Hawks. It's a system the 'Hawks employ that makes it easier to play the
- blackhawk24[goaltender] position.

If a goalie thinks that every SOG or in fact, every shot taken could be the make or break in a game or a series, he will not be playing his best game. Just like in baseball when you hear a hitter is squeezing the sawdust out of the bat or a pitcher trying to throw the ball through the catcher, when under pressure, so too will a goalie not play his position effectively. And that includes everything from crease positioning to playing the puck behind the net.

When the 'Hawks swept SJ in the 2010 WCF, I saw a comfortable and relaxed Nemo where-as Nabokov wasn't sure half the time. He wasn't comfortable in the crease for a good portion of the series. Ladd's goal was a testament to that.

\
Great. Post.

At the price Raanta will be fine. He was critical of his own play, and is happy not to be wallowing in the AHL. Maybe a new goalie coach helps his game.
- Cup-Bearer

I like his attitude as well. Seems to be a good kid. And happy to be in Chicago.

I will just say this, for all his technical flaws. He reminds me a bit of Halak AND Niemi, when he's down on his pads because he makes some pretty amazing athletic plays. And when he's facing a guy point blank . . . ice water.

The goalie switch team won and made the semifinals.
- stljam

Curious, what do you think about Elliott?

Curious, what do you think about Elliott?
- John Jaeckel

Great backup. Worried that he really is a starter. (Don't think he is) Allen could be, but unknown if he can handle NHL. Big questions in goal this year for the Blues. I am hoping that Allen can step up and take over the job by the end of the year, with both getting close to 40 games but Allen getting first crack at it in the playoffs. Just my personal preference.

Agreed.

Even as someone who believes he should have made the team in 2010, and as someone who believes he's as good or better than Nemo, I don't like that contract. Didn't understand the rush to make that deal either.
- Ogilthorpe2

I still think that the original cap that Bettman told teams they could spend to $71MM - had something to do with the $6MM settlement to Crawford.

What would they have gone to if they knew the cap would be $2MM less - maybe $5MM?

We'll never know, but I think the lowering of the dap affected a number of things the Hawks may have wanted to do (Kesler?).

And with a really good team defence in front, you don't need a perennial Vezina candidate.

Which leads me back a bit to CC's $6M cap hit for 6 years. Sure the backend of that deal will be fine w.r.t. the anticipated salary cap. But for 14-15 and to a lesser extent, 15-16, the $6M cap hit for a guy in the #11-#15 range, it's a touch-much.
- blackhawk24

I didn't get that contract at all. Timing, $$$, length.

Too much imo. Especially with the roster/cap situation.

At the price Raanta will be fine. He was critical of his own play, and is happy not to be wallowing in the AHL. Maybe a new goalie coach helps his game.
- Cup-Bearer

How much improvement can he make without playing - shouldn't he be getting two or three games each week in Screw City?

How much improvement can he make without playing - shouldn't he be getting two or three games each week in Screw City?
- StLBravesFan

I really think the 'Hawks should consider playing him 20+ games this season. Automatically on one of the back-to-back nights and then throw in a few more. CC isn't going whine and cry IMO about getting "only" 60-62 games.

20+ for Raanta should be enough to help him. Sending him to RFD for anything other than post-injury conditioning IMO would seem to be like mind-screwing him.

I really think the 'Hawks should consider playing him 20+ games this season. Automatically on one of the back-to-back nights and then throw in a few more. CC isn't going whine and cry IMO about getting "only" 60-62 games.

20+ for Raanta should be enough to help him. Sending him to RFD for anything other than post-injury conditioning IMO would seem to be like mind-screwing him.
- blackhawk24

He has so much to work on (IMO, of course) - losing his net, going side to side, compensating for high shots, when to come out to challenge a shooter - that I don't think he San work on it all in Chicago, with only maybe 20 games.

I thought he regressed last year - was much worse at the end of the year - thru mis-use and lack of goose time to work on his problem areas.

At this point, I have no idea how good he can be.

He has so much to work on (IMO, of course) - losing his net, going side to side, compensating for high shots, when to come out to challenge a shooter - that I don't think he San work on it all in Chicago, with only maybe 20 games.

I thought he regressed last year - was much worse at the end of the year - thru mis-use and lack of goose time to work on his problem areas.

At this point, I have no idea how good he can be.
- StLBravesFan

Well part of that is going to be addressed with Jimmy Waite now as the goalie coach. But if he needs work that cannot be done with the big team, what's the option? Sign another [veteran] guy? And what about the cap hit? Raanta's cap hit is considerably less than last seasons' $1.3M at only $750k. Bring up Carruth or Simpson? Yikes!

My initial guess is Raanta is going to be with the big club throughout the season - barring injury - and will improve under Waite's instruction. Time will tell.

Well part of that is going to be addressed with Jimmy Waite now as the goalie coach. But if he needs work that cannot be done with the big team, what's the option? Sign another
- blackhawk24[veteran] guy? And what about the cap hit? Raanta's cap hit is considerably less than last seasons' $1.3M at only $750k. Bring up Carruth or Simpson? Yikes!

My initial guess is Raanta is going to be with the big club throughout the season - barring injury - and will improve under Waite's instruction. Time will tell.

Wasn't LaBarbera at $1MM last year? Not very good, but maybe an experienced goalie who would be a better back-up then Raanta.

I'm sure there several $1MM Labarbara's out there - not much more than Raanta's cap hit.

Can't view these stats in a vacuum. Take either CC or Nemo - each in their relative level of experience - in each of the last 5 post seasons and put them on either the Sharks or the 'Hawks and you will see notably better performance for either guy on the 'Hawks. It's a system the 'Hawks employ that makes it easier to play the
- blackhawk24[goaltender] position.

If a goalie thinks that every SOG or in fact, every shot taken could be the make or break in a game or a series, he will not be playing his best game. Just like in baseball when you hear a hitter is squeezing the sawdust out of the bat or a pitcher trying to throw the ball through the catcher, when under pressure, so too will a goalie not play his position effectively. And that includes everything from crease positioning to playing the puck behind the net.

When the 'Hawks swept SJ in the 2010 WCF, I saw a comfortable and relaxed Nemo where-as Nabokov wasn't sure half the time. He wasn't comfortable in the crease for a good portion of the series. Ladd's goal was a testament to that.

As a goalie myself, I judge my performance on our result and factoring in what our expected result should have been.

For example, if we play poorly as a team and get outshot 50-3 and I play below average, my play had zero ability to change the outcome of the game. On the other hand, if we win 9-1, my play had zero ability to change the outcome so how well I played doesn't matter except for trends and habits. What matters is if I play so well that we win a game we shouldn't have won or if I play so poorly we lose a game we could have won.

For me, timely saves often make huge swings in games and I place more importance on those.

In a way it was JJ's vacuum, not mine. I just illustrated what I thought were more important stats within his "vacuum".

Curious, what do you think about Elliott?
- John Jaeckel

will answer late this afternoon...have to get a lot of work done in the next 6 hours.

I will quickly say that if you are judging him on his couple of bad SJ playoff games, you are being very unfair as he was playing with a significant undisclosed injury. His injury is one that I tried to play through for a playoff game and was unable to do so with even remote competence and I have played through a dislocated knee, torn labrum, broken nose, etc.

To give you a sense of relative competence or lack thereof, my GAA for that injured game was about 3 times my average and my save percentage was about 2/3 of my average. It was impossible to perform.

Elliott won't talk about it or use it as an excuse but there is no way he would have played in those games had Halak even been remotely healthy or if they had felt there was an even remotely capable other goalie to turn to.

I really think the 'Hawks should consider playing him 20+ games this season. Automatically on one of the back-to-back nights and then throw in a few more. CC isn't going whine and cry IMO about getting "only" 60-62 games.

20+ for Raanta should be enough to help him. Sending him to RFD for anything other than post-injury conditioning IMO would seem to be like mind-screwing him.
- blackhawk24

I believe he signed a one way so sending him down gives no cap relief. I think he signed acash poor contract to stay with the team. He appears to have the right attitude and 20+ games would be great relief for CC and should give Raanta a chance to show redemption/ improvement. In essence he is playing the next two years for a respectable contract in 2016.

I still think that the original cap that Bettman told teams they could spend to $71MM - had something to do with the $6MM settlement to Crawford.

What would they have gone to if they knew the cap would be $2MM less - maybe $5MM?

We'll never know, but I think the lowering of the dap affected a number of things the Hawks may have wanted to do (Kesler?).
- StLBravesFan

Agreed...

I like his attitude as well. Seems to be a good kid. And happy to be in Chicago.

I will just say this, for all his technical flaws. He reminds me a bit of Halak AND Niemi, when he's down on his pads because he makes some pretty amazing athletic plays. And when he's facing a guy point blank . . . ice water.
- John Jaeckel

I agree...and I think Raanta will make a fine backup for the next 2 seasons and maybe more afterwards (either here or elsewhere). It looks like Stan strives to keep players with a postive attitude, just look at Morin staying over Pirri and Hayes (I'm sure there were hockey reasons too). That's one of the benefits of bringing guys up through the farm system, they already know each other and have sense of being each other's teammates. There will always be exceptions, liek Raanta, who sign on with the team later, but that's where Stan seems to look for a positive attitude. Even look at the comments made my Regin, he said the wanted to be here, play any role and earn his playing time. Next thing we know he's re-signed for a very cap friendly deal.

I believe he signed a one way so sending him down gives no cap relief. I think he signed acash poor contract to stay with the team. He appears to have the right attitude and 20+ games would be great relief for CC and should give Raanta a chance to show redemption/ improvement. In essence he is playing the next two years for a respectable contract in 2016.
- Cup-Bearer

I think it does give cap relief, up to $900,000 - and he's signed for $750,000.

A one-way means he gets the $750,000 whether he's in Chicago or Rockford.

I think.

He has so much to work on (IMO, of course) - losing his net, going side to side, compensating for high shots, when to come out to challenge a shooter - that I don't think he San work on it all in Chicago, with only maybe 20 games.

I thought he regressed last year - was much worse at the end of the year - thru mis-use and lack of goose time to work on his problem areas.

At this point, I have no idea how good he can be.
- StLBravesFan

Right on, he has talent and could be Halak-like as JJ points out. He has flaws but might be the future. CC is an above average goalie in todays game. If Raanta improves on the weaknesses you commented on, then CC's contract is tradable. CC is not untouchable when T&K superbucks hit the cap and could give some relief. Brodure shows there will in all likelyhood be vet goalies available

Elbows, I'll just say. You do like to repeat your mantra. CC is better, CC is better, CC is better.

I'll just leave you with this on this whole Niemi/CC debate:

This past year's numbers:

Niemi

39-17-7
.913 SV%
2.37 GAA
4 shutouts

Crawford

32-16-10
.917
2.50
2 shutouts


And we both know who has the slightly better team and the better defense in front of them. Further, Crawford saw about a shot per game less, and probably a lesser quality of shots because of the D in front of him.

So, I'll just say, the straight up numbers make for a compelling argument. And if you change their sweaters? I like the Niemi argument.
- John Jaeckel

I will just say. I like Crawford and will take him over Niemi every day of the week because to me Crawford is better. I get it. You like Niemi. That is your opinion.

I will just say. I like Crawford and will take him over Niemi every day of the week because to me Crawford is better. I get it. You like Niemi. That is your opinion.
- Elbows15

I concur, plus I think Crawford will still get better than he is today. I like Niemi and wouldn't complain if he was our #1, but I'm a big #50 supporter.

I concur, plus I think Crawford will still get better than he is today. I like Niemi and wouldn't complain if he was our #1, but I'm a big #50 supporter.
- DarthKane

I agree DK.

How much improvement can he make without playing - shouldn't he be getting two or three games each week in Screw City?
- StLBravesFan

The time to do that was last season. This season, with his one-way contract (which means he can be exposed to waivers), and the lack of talent or rediness of the three guys in the mix for the two jobs in Rockford (Simpson, Carruth, and Darling) it would seem to me that the organization is ready to ride him as the the back-up, whether or not Raanta is ready to do the job.

Hopefully Raanta won't be as shaky as he was last season when getting game action every couple of weeks.

The time to do that was last season. This season, with his one-way contract (which means he can be exposed to waivers), and the lack of talent or rediness of the three guys in the mix for the two jobs in Rockford (Simpson, Carruth, and Darling) it would seem to me that the organization is ready to ride him as the the back-up, whether or not Raanta is ready to do the job.

Hopefully Raanta won't be as shaky as he was last season when getting game action every couple of weeks.
- EKolb13

Raanta is probably fine as the backup. I guess there is SOME risk that Crawford takes an injury after 3/1, and you really have to ride him throughout the rest of the regular and/or the playoffs. And it is fairly safe to assume he will progress this year anyway.

I also wouldn't be too surprised to see a LaBarbera type move at some point, where they stash a vet in Rockford as some extra insurance.

Raanta is probably fine as the backup. I guess there is SOME risk that Crawford takes an injury after 3/1, and you really have to ride him throughout the rest of the regular and/or the playoffs. And it is fairly safe to assume he will progress this year anyway.

I also wouldn't be too surprised to see a LaBarbera type move at some point, where they stash a vet in Rockford as some extra insurance.
- John Jaeckel

I would expect a older veteran goalie to be signed too. Even if Crawford gets hurt and Raanta is ok as the temporary #1 we'll still need a back-up. Unfortunately there isn't a lot to choose from in the UFA market.

Raanta is probably fine as the backup. I guess there is SOME risk that Crawford takes an injury after 3/1, and you really have to ride him throughout the rest of the regular and/or the playoffs. And it is fairly safe to assume he will progress this year anyway.

I also wouldn't be too surprised to see a LaBarbera type move at some point, where they stash a vet in Rockford as some extra insurance.
- John Jaeckel

I thought Raanta did a fairly good job when Crawford was down with an injury. He just looked shaky after Crawford came back from injury getting spotty playing time here and there. I think Raanta would have benefited more by being sent down to Rockford after Crawford came back from injury and finished the season in the "A."

I do agree, I believe he will progress this season. That's what I hope, anyways.

As for another veteran goalie in Rockford, I would have hoped that Bowman would have brought one in this summer, instead of Scott Darling.

Darling wasn't too bad in the couple of starts I saw him play in Milwaukee. He looks to be another big-bodied goalie who helped carried the load when Rinne was out and Milwaukee's regulars were re-called to Nashville. He looks like he could be one of those low-risk/high-reward signings, provided he pans out. I know Simpson was not one of Dent's favorites, and I haven't seen enough of Carruth to really say anything.