Please explain? WTF is funny with what I said?
- Aussiepenguin

that last part... "At the end of the day it's the man in goal that either wins or loses you the game - no matter how the rest are playing!" if a goalie has a bad game you expect your offense to win you the game. no goalie and I mean NOONE plays great every game and it is up to the other players to win them the game. to put it bluntly "Offense makes sure you win the game. Goalies make sure you don't lose the game"

So, the chase for Matthews is on. JVR is out for the year in Toronto. Toronto has done everything to tank this year starting with the trade of Kessel. Yet, Edmonton is tied with them. Wonder what Edmonton does to counter Toronto saying JVR is out. Trade RNH?

Maatta did have a worse game than DP. Maatta sucked. But Maatta has proven that he can be very good. He's had an offseason, but I still see rookie Maatta every now and then. DP, on the other hand, hasn't shown anything beyond third pairing offensive specialist. Considering where he was drafted and who he was drafted over, that's unacceptable.

As far as the goals, there were other things at work that weren't DP's fault, but he did (frank) all to help recover for his team. The first goal was an offside. Still, DP got into position at first as the last man back, but then lost Posternak and let him get behind him for a break away. Then he made the feeblest of all slash attempts to try and prevent the goal. Same concept as basketball. If you're gonna fowl a guy going up for an easy layup, take him the (frank) out to ensure he doesn't score. DP's slashes had zero bearing on weather or not Posternak's goal was going to go in and all it did was give him a free PS.

On the second one, Letang left him out to dry, and he had the correct idea of laying down to take away the passing lane, but (frank)ed it up royally. I need DP to start proving that he wasn't a (frank)ing reach.
- Victoro311

I think DP has been playing extremely well since being called up. I think in the 13 game sample size, he's been steadier than Maatta in the last 13 games. Pointer per 60 at .99 which is second behind Letang on D, Corsi of 57% so he's doing well at driving possession, I think his mishaps are greatly over exaggerated. And yeah, it's a small sample size, but I still think his play has been pretty damn good.

This is what I have been saying. He can be the best goalie in the NHL & then let an easy goal in - he is just too inconsistent to be 'that' goalie! 'That' being the wall of confidence that can be depended on 97/98% of the time (no goalie is perfect ).

Murray needs to play half of the remaining games as long as he can show in his first game that he can hold his own as I believe he did in his brief stint previously.

At the end of the day it's the man in goal that either wins or loses you the game - no matter how the rest are playing!
- Aussiepenguin

You should watch the games before passing judgment on MAF. Also, hockey games aren't won and lost by goalies most of the time. Teams win the cup with average goaltending frequently.

And the bottom line is all of these players have yet to prove themselves or fully prove themselves at the NHL level.

Sadly my opinion of Maatta is falling. I just don't remember him being this slow. That's got to improve right? I think Sprong however is a legit top 6 wing however.
- madmike71

I'm with you and I was a big Maatta fan, in my opinion, DP's stock is going up, and Maatta's down.

that last part... "At the end of the day it's the man in goal that either wins or loses you the game - no matter how the rest are playing!" if a goalie has a bad game you expect your offense to win you the game. no goalie and I mean NOONE plays great every game and it is up to the other players to win them the game. to put it bluntly "Offense makes sure you win the game. Goalies make sure you don't lose the game"
- martox

You can win 1-0. 1 goal isn't a great explosion of offence & having a shutout means your goalie probably had a great game - who won the game the offence or the goalie??

Have the Habs suddenly found a top 5 offensive unit to beat the cAps or did the caps goalie have a bad game? Did the Habs offence win or did the Caps goalies lose the game?

There is 1 guy that has the job to stop the puck. When he does & plays great very good chance his team wins if they can score at least 1 goal (which is no fantastic explosion of talent that everyone will say (frank) the offence won that game ), when he has a poop game everyone usually says the goalie poop the bed & lost that game - not (frank) what a great game by the opposition offence.

If your goalie plays great then you have a real good chance to win (even with 1 goal scored for you), if he plays bad there's a good chance you lose.

Exactly. He set Sid up with the perfect backdoor pass (after Sid was mauled) and he flubbed it. Then that sky pass looked pretty offside to me... so of course he was gonna get behind DP. Weak call on the penalty shot. Letang.. That was bad. Left DP out to dry and he tried blocking the pass but obviously didn't work. Maatta had the worst game out of all by far.
- Pens_Burgh

It would have been better if Pasternaks original shot when in on the breakaway then Sullivan could've challenged it. On the Hayes goal DP has got to lay down straight so he's blocking 6 feet of the passing lane. They angle he went down he only covered 4.5-5 feet.

You should watch the games before passing judgment on MAF. Also, hockey games aren't won and lost by goalies most of the time. Teams win the cup with average goaltending frequently.
- Victoro311

That's a very very 'general' statement.

If the Oil had Lundqvist in goal would they be stuck to the bottom of the league?

How are the Habs going without Price?

Holtby gets pulled - was he having a good game & Trotz wanted to rest him?

Your goalie is the most important player when it comes to winning & losing games in my opinion.

Why does everyone say when we come across a game & the opposition goalie plays on his head, "(frank), why does every goalie play on his head when we play them"? We have 2 of the best C in the game & an average D with a very good #1D, so with your logic why don't we win when we dominate games & games aren't won by goalies?

That's a very very 'general' statement.

If the Oil had Lundqvist in goal would they be stuck to the bottom of the league?

How are the Habs going without Price?

Holtby gets pulled - was he having a good game & Trotz wanted to rest him?

Your goalie is the most important player when it comes to winning & losing games in my opinion.

Why does everyone say when we come across a game & the opposition goalie plays on his head, "(frank), why does every goalie play on his head when we play them"? We have 2 of the best C in the game & an average D with a very good #1D, so with your logic why don't we win when we dominate games & games aren't won by goalies?
- Aussiepenguin

If the Oilers had Lundqvist they'd be leagues better but Lundqvist would be hung to dry regularly by that abysmal defense and they'd be a bubble team.

Habs are imploding without Price because they're pooptly constructed and the goalie is the only thing propping them up. Same with the rangers.

Goalies can rob games. They can also lose them. But most of the time, team play wins games. Why do we constantly loose games when we dictate game flow? Who the (frank) knows. This seams to be a problem thats unique to us. Could be a plethora of things. But if you saw the game last night, MAF robbed the Bruins far more than Tuuk robbed the Pens. Fluery was the one that stood on his head, and the three goals that he let up that actually mattered (the first three, after that the game was out of reach), came off of a penalty shot and two defensive break downs. Save for that bad stretch coming off the all star break, Flower has been one of the best players on this team. Scapegoating him is lazy.

If the Oilers had Lundqvist they'd be leagues better but Lundqvist would be hung to dry regularly by that abysmal defense and they'd be a bubble team.

Habs are imploding without Price because they're pooptly constructed and the goalie is the only thing propping them up. Same with the rangers.

Goalies can rob games. They can also lose them. But most of the time, team play wins games. Why do we constantly loose games when we dictate game flow? Who the (frank) knows. This seams to be a problem thats unique to us. Could be a plethora of things. But if you saw the game last night, MAF robbed the Bruins far more than Tuuk robbed the Pens. Fluery was the one that stood on his head, and the three goals that he let up that actually mattered (the first three, after that the game was out of reach), came off of a penalty shot and two defensive break downs. Save for that bad stretch coming off the all star break, Flower has been one of the best players on this team. Scapegoating him is lazy.
- Victoro311

I think people who don't watch the game looks at the score and comes to a conclusion. Allowing five goals sounds bad. Fact of the matter, even if he allows two, we lose. Fleury looked shaky with the puck early, but for the most part was hung out to dry by our defense.

I think people who don't watch the game looks at the score and comes to a conclusion. Allowing five goals sounds bad. Fact of the matter, even if he allows two, we lose. Fleury looked shaky with the puck early, but for the most part was hung out to dry by our defense.
- Oneonta Penguin

Fleury's always sucked with the puck though. That ain't his game.

So, I'm on team stingy than it comes to assets at the deadline this year, but idiot boy Tanner is under the impression the Yotes would be lucky to get a second back for Boedker. If that's true, then he's not going to command this 5.5 mil AAV figure people are penciling him in for. If the Boedker market is that lukewarm do you trade a 3rd and a C prospect for rental Boedker and try to work out an extension?

If the Oilers had Lundqvist they'd be leagues better but Lundqvist would be hung to dry regularly by that abysmal defense and they'd be a bubble team.

Habs are imploding without Price because they're pooptly constructed and the goalie is the only thing propping them up. Same with the rangers.

Goalies can rob games. They can also lose them. But most of the time, team play wins games. Why do we constantly loose games when we dictate game flow? Who the (frank) knows. This seams to be a problem thats unique to us. Could be a plethora of things. But if you saw the game last night, MAF robbed the Bruins far more than Tuuk robbed the Pens. Fluery was the one that stood on his head, and the three goals that he let up that actually mattered (the first three, after that the game was out of reach), came off of a penalty shot and two defensive break downs. Save for that bad stretch coming off the all star break, Flower has been one of the best players on this team. Scapegoating him is lazy.
- Victoro311

This is where we get into trouble you & I. I make a statement you refute it, then I substantiate my opinion & you change course.

If the Oil had Lundqvist they would be better - leagues better. OK, you agree the goalie can win games - has to to make your statement about the Oil true.

Habs struggle without Price - again, the goalie makes the difference between winning & losing other wise Habs would still be up there with an (as per your previously mentioned), average goalie. (& no not every team is constructed to win Stanley but the goalie is still winning them games by what you have just said).

So the above justifies my opinion in a very basic way? Yes or no?

If Flower makes a couple of saves in those 3 goals you speak of that matter, it changes the game. Were they goals that no goalie ever could stop? If the answer is no then Flower could have made the save - he didn't. He may have saved many others but what I'm saying is that elite goalies can make those saves & 'win games!'. They are the final barrier before goals are scored. They good = no goals, they not good = goals. More goals than opposition = WIN, less goals than opposition = NO WIN. If you play a team (no matter who the goalie is) & he is standing on his head - which has happened to us so many times, no matter what your offence does you still lose if your goalie lets a goal in.

How many times has Flower let in easy goals - no matter when whether we win or lose? It seems there's always times when someone is saying Flower 'should' of stopped that, or Flower 'didn't do very well there'. Granted other times he's elite, but it's not consistent elite when compared to other goalies. Can Murray win as many games as Flower - that's the question?? If he can (& doesn't matter how he does it), then Flower should be traded without a 2nd thought.

Too many on here last night criticised Flowers game, even this morning. You defend him that's fine, but don't say someone's opinion isn't right if you disagree with it & don't provide valid reasons.

Fleury's always sucked with the puck though. That ain't his game.

So, I'm on team stingy than it comes to assets at the deadline this year, but idiot boy Tanner is under the impression the Yotes would be lucky to get a second back for Boedker. If that's true, then he's not going to command this 5.5 mil AAV figure people are penciling him in for. If the Boedker market is that lukewarm do you trade a 3rd and a C prospect for rental Boedker and try to work out an extension?
- Victoro311

Vic I remember him saying Yandle will get Subban money easy!

So.............

Fleury's always sucked with the puck though. That ain't his game.

So, I'm on team stingy than it comes to assets at the deadline this year, but idiot boy Tanner is under the impression the Yotes would be lucky to get a second back for Boedker. If that's true, then he's not going to command this 5.5 mil AAV figure people are penciling him in for. If the Boedker market is that lukewarm do you trade a 3rd and a C prospect for rental Boedker and try to work out an extension?
- Victoro311

I disagree with Tanner. Boedker will get more. If its as simple as a 3rd and a C prospect, it might give me pause for a second. I still don't see how an extension can be hammered out, even for 4.2 (he will command more). There is virtually nothing coming off the books as far as UFAs and I don't see the cap going up much to allow us to sign him. Thank the value of the Canadian dollar.

I think people who don't watch the game looks at the score and comes to a conclusion. Allowing five goals sounds bad. Fact of the matter, even if he allows two, we lose. Fleury looked shaky with the puck early, but for the most part was hung out to dry by our defense.
- Oneonta Penguin

Since Sullivan took over the team is much more open and taking chances. More responsibility now falls on the D which they just aren't good enough to do. Under MJ everyone played D to help out how bad they were and MAF looked better as a result.

I disagree with Tanner. Boedker will get more. If its as simple as a 3rd and a C prospect, it might give me pause for a second. I still don't see how an extension can be hammered out, even for 4.2 (he will command more). There is virtually nothing coming off the books as far as UFAs and I don't see the cap going up much to allow us to sign him. Thank the value of the Canadian dollar.
- Oneonta Penguin

You can thank Saudi Arabia for not cutting back oil production and flooding the market leaving Canada and Shale markets out to dry. Canada did itself no favors by electing a hipster for prime minister that doesn't realize the Canadian economy is largely supported by oil.....

I think people who don't watch the game looks at the score and comes to a conclusion. Allowing five goals sounds bad. Fact of the matter, even if he allows two, we lose. Fleury looked shaky with the puck early, but for the most part was hung out to dry by our defense.
- Oneonta Penguin

Your talking last nights game, I'm making a general statement about goalies.

My view hasn't changed since Murray played a few games, win lose or shootout draw, my opinion is that if Murray can be as good as Flower then 'la fleur' should be traded without hesitation.

This is where we get into trouble you & I. I make a statement you refute it, then I substantiate my opinion & you change course.

If the Oil had Lundqvist they would be better - leagues better. OK, you agree the goalie can win games - has to to make your statement about the Oil true.

Habs struggle without Price - again, the goalie makes the difference between winning & losing other wise Habs would still be up there with an (as per your previously mentioned), average goalie. (& no not every team is constructed to win Stanley but the goalie is still winning them games by what you have just said).

So the above justifies my opinion in a very basic way? Yes or no?

If Flower makes a couple of saves in those 3 goals you speak of that matter, it changes the game. Were they goals that no goalie ever could stop? If the answer is no then Flower could have made the save - he didn't. He may have saved many others but what I'm saying is that elite goalies can make those saves & 'win games!'. They are the final barrier before goals are scored. They good = no goals, they not good = goals. More goals than opposition = WIN, less goals than opposition = NO WIN. If you play a team (no matter who the goalie is) & he is standing on his head - which has happened to us so many times, no matter what your offence does you still lose if your goalie lets a goal in.

How many times has Flower let in easy goals - no matter when whether we win or lose? It seems there's always times when someone is saying Flower 'should' of stopped that, or Flower 'didn't do very well there'. Granted other times he's elite, but it's not consistent elite when compared to other goalies. Can Murray win as many games as Flower - that's the question?? If he can (& doesn't matter how he does it), then Flower should be traded without a 2nd thought.

Too many on here last night criticised Flowers game, even this morning. You defend him that's fine, but don't say someone's opinion isn't right if you disagree with it & don't provide valid reasons.
- Aussiepenguin

Yes it does justify your opinion in a basic way. And you're definitely right about goalies blowing games. But what my point is that its an overly simplistic view to pin hockey games on a goalie's shoulders. Some times it does come down to the goalie, but a majority of the time its a team thing.

What I don't understand is your opinion that Flower is inconstant this year. In years past, yes absolutely I won't argue. But the past two years he's been solid and this year specifically he's been more than that. The people that were criticizing Flower last night (and the usual suspects that are always crying to trade fleury like Holeinone) can't understand for the life of them why Flower doesn't stonewall opponents the same way Lundqvist and Rask do. This stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the system. Teams who aren't constructed very well but have elite goalies build their systems around their goalies and play a passive style of hockey that collapses on the crease. The Rangers do this, so do the Devils, and so do the Habs. We did it under Sullivan as well. Fleury let up less goals but we lost more games because we couldn't score. Expecting Fleury to stonewall opponents with the system we currently have is unrealistic. Crawford, Holtby, and Luongo are examples of this. All really good to great goalies with great sv% this season, but you don't really think of their teams as the kind of teams that are impossible to score on the same way you think of the Rangers/Bruins. It's because they're well constructed teams that don't need to lean on their elite goaltender and build their system around the goalie. That's the model we're trying to emulate, but apparently we're just not well constructed enough to generate the offense those teams do.

Since Sullivan took over the team is much more open and taking chances. More responsibility now falls on the D which they just aren't good enough to do. Under MJ everyone played D to help out how bad they were and MAF looked better as a result.
- sammy87

Believe this or not Sammy, but there are those on here that will not agree with what you have written!

Plenty have said Flower has played elite to win us games even early on & thanks to him we won games or were very close to winning (which means we lost! ).

The D is the same & I have absolutely no time to verify this but I would make a can of Coke bet, that our GA isn't all that worse since Sully took over & the game plan has changed, which means nothing much has changed on D. I am probably wrong though as I think someone said Flowers save % has decreased a little? increasing GA so....

I disagree with Tanner. Boedker will get more. If its as simple as a 3rd and a C prospect, it might give me pause for a second. I still don't see how an extension can be hammered out, even for 4.2 (he will command more). There is virtually nothing coming off the books as far as UFAs and I don't see the cap going up much to allow us to sign him. Thank the value of the Canadian dollar.
- Oneonta Penguin

I'm with you, but if it's a blue moon on Monday and Tanner's right, and if we're being honest with ourselves and stick by our guns and we've both said we'd move a 4th for Grabner, I can't see how we wouldn't do that trade. And say it's ~4 for Boedker. The cap is definitely not shrinking (there's guards against that) and may even raise. If we trade Kunitz I think we can get it done, even with the Maatta extension.

Vic I remember him saying Yandle will get Subban money easy!

So.............
- Aussiepenguin

Yeah that guy's not very smart.

I'm with you, but if it's a blue moon on Monday and Tanner's right, and if we're being honest with ourselves and stick by our guns and we've both said we'd move a 4th for Grabner, I can't see how we wouldn't do that trade. And say it's ~4 for Boedker. The cap is definitely not shrinking (there's guards against that) and may even raise. If we trade Kunitz I think we can get it done, even with the Maatta extension.
- Victoro311

Not sure Grabner is only worth a 4th, Pens moved a 2nd for Winnik and he was trash.

Yes it does justify your opinion in a basic way. And you're definitely right about goalies blowing games. But what my point is that its an overly simplistic view to pin hockey games on a goalie's shoulders. Some times it does come down to the goalie, but a majority of the time its a team thing.

What I don't understand is your opinion that Flower is inconstant this year. In years past, yes absolutely I won't argue. But the past two years he's been solid and this year specifically he's been more than that. The people that were criticizing Flower last night (and the usual suspects that are always crying to trade fleury like Holeinone) can't understand for the life of them why Flower doesn't stonewall opponents the same way Lundqvist and Rask do. This stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the system. Teams who aren't constructed very well but have elite goalies build their systems around their goalies and play a passive style of hockey that collapses on the crease. The Rangers do this, so do the Devils, and so do the Habs. We did it under Sullivan as well. Fleury let up less goals but we lost more games because we couldn't score. Expecting Fleury to stonewall opponents with the system we currently have is unrealistic. Crawford, Holtby, and Luongo are examples of this. All really good to great goalies with great sv% this season, but you don't really think of their teams as the kind of teams that are impossible to score on the same way you think of the Rangers/Bruins. It's because they're well constructed teams that don't need to lean on their elite goaltender and build their system around the goalie. That's the model we're trying to emulate, but apparently we're just not well constructed enough to generate the offense those teams do.
- Victoro311

I have to get back to work, but I'll ask you this. Rebound control isn't D related, tracking the puck isn't D related unless you have Rob Scuderis arse in the way, so no matter what types of D systems are in place, the goalie has an individual skill that is to stop the puck & control the puck. Being scored on from 50" with no one around isn't an error from your D, but that has occurred with Flower. The D is there to limit or stop chances if they can, the goalie is there to finish the job.

So can Muarray do what Flower does? Can he win as many games as Flower?

I have to get back to work, but I'll ask you this. Rebound control isn't D related, tracking the puck isn't D related unless you have Rob Scuderis arse in the way, so no matter what types of D systems are in place, the goalie has an individual skill that is to stop the puck & control the puck. Being scored on from 50" with no one around isn't an error from your D, but that has occurred with Flower. The D is there to limit or stop chances if they can, the goalie is there to finish the job.

So can Muarray do what Flower does? Can he win as many games as Flower?
- Aussiepenguin

I don't think so. Flower's rebound control has been on point this season and he hasn't been sniped too often. Murray's biggest flaw while he was up was rebound control.

Sticks and stones. I know I'm better than all you.
- Grinder47

can I please see your justification for such a claim? preferably in bar graph or ven diagram form?