Rick DiPietro (2000)
Brent Krahn (2000)
Pascal Leclaire (2001)
Dan Blackburn (2001)
Jason Bacashihua (2001)
Kari Lehtonen (2002)
Cam Ward (2002)
Hannu Toivonen (2002)
Marc-Andre Fleury (2003)
Al Montoya (2004)
Devan Dubnyk (2004)
Marek Schwarz (2004)
Cory Schneider (2004)
Carey Price (2005)
Tuukka Rask (2005)
Jonathan Bernier (2006)
Riku Helenius (2006)
Semyon Varlamov (2006)
Leland Irving (2006)
Chet Pickard (2008)
Thomas McCollum (2008)
Jack Campbell (2010)
Mark Visentin (2010)
Andrey Vasilevskiy (2012)
Malcolm Subban (2012)
Ilya Samsonov (2015)
Jake Oettinger (2017)
Spencer Knight (2019)
Iaroslav Askarov (2020)

That's every goalie taken in the 1st-round since 2000.

There are a few really good ones there, but when you miss on a goalie, you tend to not even get an NHL player out of it.

You can say "pick the right one", but dudes like Visentin, Helenius and Campbell looked like can't miss on draft day, but continually poop the bed thereafter. Campbell's had a nice little run this season, but he was struggling in the AHL not too long ago.

Only a handful of goalies have gone in the 1st-round over the past decade. Teams have wised up to the probabilities. If I were the Flyers, I would steer clear. Especially given their track record when it comes to taking goalies higher.
- Tomahawk

The theory is almost no one takes goalies in round 1 anymore. In order to to even be considered for the pick were not talking the Chet picards of the world. Those type should’ve never been drafted in round 1 yes indeed you steer clear of those. Even hart was iffy 1st round considered and went round 2. But he’s have been fine being drafted round 1

Bill has officially gone off the rails. Take a goalie at 13? Too many good players at 13.
- Im back

1) What part of almost every credible draft projection having Wallstedt as a top half of the first round lock makes it "off the rails" to say he'd be viable at 13th? What you mean is that YOU don't want a goalie in the first round. Not the same thing.

2) This is pretty meh draft in general. Not a lot of sure things.

[quote=bmeltzer]
No I was teasing. I agree with taking wallstedt. Absolutely fits my theory on drafting top goalie prospects in round 1

Dominik Hasek - 10th round pick
Patrick Roy - 3rd round pick
Marty Brodeur - late 1st round pick
Ken Dryden - 3rd round pick
Bernie Parent - never drafted
Billy Smith - 5th round pick
Tony Esposito - never drafted
Ed Belfour - never drafted
Curtis Joseph - never drafted
Ron Hextall - 6th round pick

-------------------------------------------

Mark Andre-Fleury - 1st overall
Grant Fuhr - 8th overall
Carey Price - 5th overall
- DraftandDestroy

"Sunshine" Ericsson 7th round

Under this theory and as I used price as example
So you take price and he’s good. In 5-6 years you are targeting the g top very few prospects even worthy of 1st round pick at g position. So say in price theory you decide on either campbell’10 or gibson’11 and you draft them and develop them and it’s time for them to play at nhl level. Price in theory would be entering bridge deal. So the new back up you drafted and developed you miss on. They are a complete bust. They flat out suck.... simply do not trade price.. you still have the goalie but you now pay the bigger contract and start over with the process. So Campbell or Gibson (examples used) suck in 2015 you draft again in round 1. Who was drafted in 2015? That’s the next cycle year. That was samsonov. So by roughly 2020 he’s ready to go. Is exactly what happened. Obviously the key is never give a goalie the contract price got( which no sane team does) even if you miss on 2 cycles in examples ... both the picks in either 2011/2012(whichever one you choose) and in cycle 2015 you still have options around 2020. Price would be near end of contract and career after 15 years. Which is true now in real life. So you stick to process in 2020 and draft askarov. Who should be ready to play by 2025. So you have a few years to use fa or whatever. Chances of missing on 3 straight cycles on top g prospect very small
- Im back

Price drafted in 2005: takes 5 years to know if goalie is a stud or not. So, in 2010, you know he is a stud. Then you take Campbell/Gibson in 10-11. But it takes 5 years for you to know if Campbell/Gibson picks are studs or not. So, earliest you know if you have a stud to replace Price is 2015/16. That's 10-11 years after Price was drafted.

You gonna keep bridging Price till then? Why should he keep taking those deals?

In reality, Price got a big money contract 6 year deal in 2012 of 6.5 m, which is about 7.5 mil in today's salary cap.

Rick DiPietro (2000)
Brent Krahn (2000)
Pascal Leclaire (2001)
Dan Blackburn (2001)
Jason Bacashihua (2001)
Kari Lehtonen (2002)
Cam Ward (2002)
Hannu Toivonen (2002)
Marc-Andre Fleury (2003)
Al Montoya (2004)
Devan Dubnyk (2004)
Marek Schwarz (2004)
Cory Schneider (2004)
Carey Price (2005)
Tuukka Rask (2005)
Jonathan Bernier (2006)
Riku Helenius (2006)
Semyon Varlamov (2006)
Leland Irving (2006)
Chet Pickard (2008)
Thomas McCollum (2008)
Jack Campbell (2010)
Mark Visentin (2010)
Andrey Vasilevskiy (2012)
Malcolm Subban (2012)
Ilya Samsonov (2015)
Jake Oettinger (2017)
Spencer Knight (2019)
Iaroslav Askarov (2020)

That's every goalie taken in the 1st-round since 2000.

There are a few really good ones there, but when you miss on a goalie, you tend to not even get an NHL player out of it.

You can say "pick the right one", but dudes like Visentin, Helenius and Campbell looked like can't miss on draft day, but continually poop the bed thereafter. Campbell's had a nice little run this season, but he was struggling in the AHL not too long ago.

Only a handful of goalies have gone in the 1st-round over the past decade. Teams have wised up to the probabilities. If I were the Flyers, I would steer clear. Especially given their track record when it comes to taking goalies higher.
- Tomahawk

I wonder if team's end up banking on this conclusion in their draft strategy. Lets say your highest rated player is a goalie. But, you are pretty sure he will be there the next time you pick. So, you take the guy you think may not be there, even though he is not your BPA.

Was Hart really ranked lower than Rubstov in Flyers draft board?

[quote=bmeltzer]
we need scoring and defense a goalie isn't going to help anything

The Lightning don't even play the same sport as the Flyers.
Watching the grand canyon sized gap in talent is sobering.

The Lightning don't even play the same sport as the Flyers.
Watching the grand canyon sized gap in talent is sobering.
- PLindbergh31

The most commonly accepted origin for the High Five gesture was during an MLB game between the LA Dodgers and Houston Astros* on October 2nd 1977 (Glenn Burke and Dusty Baker)

When was the last time the flyers won a cup?

[quote=bmeltzer]


Who cares about mocks. At 13 don’t take “best available”. Draft for need. Goaltending is not high up on the needs list.

Price drafted in 2005: takes 5 years to know if goalie is a stud or not. So, in 2010, you know he is a stud. Then you take Campbell/Gibson in 10-11. But it takes 5 years for you to know if Campbell/Gibson picks are studs or not. So, earliest you know if you have a stud to replace Price is 2015/16. That's 10-11 years after Price was drafted.

You gonna keep bridging Price till then? Why should he keep taking those deals?

In reality, Price got a big money contract 6 year deal in 2012 of 6.5 m, which is about 7.5 mil in today's salary cap.
- PT21

Yes your right. It took 5 years to prove price was really good. He wasn’t making any real $ like you said his bridge deal in 2012(7years after drafted) in theory your new goalie drafted in ‘10or’11 is developing while price is on bridge deal. And price was overpaid on his bridge deal. Most goalies are around 3-4 years less money but even still he’s very traceable at 6times 6.5 for team that needs goalie. His contract now forget it lol. Fits perfectly in ideal world you have constant flow of good goalies and don’t have to pay more than bridge deal. Never pay the huge contract... never have to go looking for bob style deal or sign bryz type deal. Again even if you miss a cycle or 2 there’s options. Even if you somehow miss 3 cycles you still have a good goalie you just have to pay big contract at end

Price drafted in 2005: takes 5 years to know if goalie is a stud or not. So, in 2010, you know he is a stud. Then you take Campbell/Gibson in 10-11. But it takes 5 years for you to know if Campbell/Gibson picks are studs or not. So, earliest you know if you have a stud to replace Price is 2015/16. That's 10-11 years after Price was drafted.

You gonna keep bridging Price till then? Why should he keep taking those deals?

In reality, Price got a big money contract 6 year deal in 2012 of 6.5 m, which is about 7.5 mil in today's salary cap.
- PT21

And generally you don’t know 5 years after drafting goalie he’s a stud( he’s be 23.) if you remember there was debate whether to keep halak or trade price? That’s why they are bridge dealed.

I wonder if team's end up banking on this conclusion in their draft strategy. Lets say your highest rated player is a goalie. But, you are pretty sure he will be there the next time you pick. So, you take the guy you think may not be there, even though he is not your BPA.

Was Hart really ranked lower than Rubstov in Flyers draft board?
- PT21

They absolutely do that when taking goalies. That’s why I put that into my theory. Because with the top 1 or 2 goalies it doesn’t really make sense. Taking the chance hart would be there with 2nd round pick and taking ruby in round 1 is dumb if you think about it. Hart was definitely top 2 goalie prospect that year. That’s why when you look at drafts you’ll often find a goalie or 2 every year that should’ve gone round 1. Obviously not always are they the expected ones but a lot of time it is. Rask went round 2. Perfect example

They absolutely do that when taking goalies. That’s why I put that into my theory. Because with the top 1 or 2 goalies it doesn’t really make sense. Taking the chance hart would be there with 2nd round pick and taking ruby in round 1 is dumb if you think about it. Hart was definitely top 2 goalie prospect that year. That’s why when you look at drafts you’ll often find a goalie or 2 every year that should’ve gone round 1. Obviously not always are they the expected ones but a lot of time it is. Rask went round 2. Perfect example
- Im back

To be absolutely clear this only would ever apply to the goalie position. Never any other position

[quote=Fopa21]
Can’t draft for need because players don’t play right away. Generally. In 2-3-4 years from draft the need probably changes due to trades free agency retirements injuries etc. the 1 constant easiest to control is goalie. It’s only 1 spot to fill (above average starter) and only one. Not like 6 d 12 f

The more you think about it it’s really pathetic and near impossible to have such long history of crap goaltending. It’s a failure of team to recognize you need good goaltending to win. The absolute thing I’ll never understand is Clarke played with Bernie and saw first hand what goaltending does.. I mean does anyone think they win those cups without Bernie? Makes zero sense the lazy attitude for decades that can win with average goalies. Not to mention bad luck (pelle) I mean does anyone think we don’t win cup with pelle? Or if Clarke would’ve gotten cujo instead of beezer? You build from the net out. When you have an “if” in net you’re toast.

Serious question since I’m too lazy to look it up. Has there ever been a Final Four where 3 of those 4 goalies were up for the Vezina? (Or top 3 in voting?)

Edit: off the top of my head, without looking it up and before anyone answers, was there a year where Hasek, Bordeur, Roy, Belfour, Joseph were in a final four together?

Edit Edit: obviously not all 5 in a final four lol

Edit Edit Edit: I’m sure it’s an easy look-up...but I’m more impressed with my question/thought than the answer. It’s like admiring your pass...

Edit Edit Edit Edit: and then WHAAM!

I could understand the reasoning of taking a goalie, but I’d still love Mctavish and to a lesser extent, Sillinger first. I’d even be willing a small trade-up to get either one.

They absolutely do that when taking goalies. That’s why I put that into my theory. Because with the top 1 or 2 goalies it doesn’t really make sense. Taking the chance hart would be there with 2nd round pick and taking ruby in round 1 is dumb if you think about it. Hart was definitely top 2 goalie prospect that year. That’s why when you look at drafts you’ll often find a goalie or 2 every year that should’ve gone round 1. Obviously not always are they the expected ones but a lot of time it is. Rask went round 2. Perfect example
- Im back

Rask went in first round. A little after Ryan Parent and a bunch of folks who made no impact (along with Kopitar)

Rask went in first round. A little after Ryan Parent and a bunch of folks who made no impact (along with Kopitar at all)
- therabbi

That’s right. My bad. Everyone gets the point tho

I could understand the reasoning of taking a goalie, but I’d still love Mctavish and to a lesser extent, Sillinger first. I’d even be willing a small trade-up to get either one.
- Sublime55

Yeah I totally get it. Under my theory that would happen about every 5 years. Lol. Always gonna be players we’d want or have to pass up on. Like I said goalie position just too costly and important to chance.

Yeah I totally get it. Under my theory that would happen about every 5 years. Lol. Always gonna be players we’d want or have to pass up on. Like I said goalie position just too costly and important to chance.
- Im back

Think of it this way. Under my theory you’re not drafting in a 5 year period all these goalies. Surely some here and there but not nearly as much so those picks can be used on other positions.

Bill...with so little hockey played in the junior ranks or in college last year just about any pick below Powers can be considered risky...I've said it before, if there is any year to take a goalie in the 1st its this year. This team hasn't exactly had a plethora of goaltender talent over the last few decades. I surely wouldn't complain.

Think of it this way. Under my theory you’re not drafting in a 5 year period all these goalies. Surely some here and there but not nearly as much so those picks can be used on other positions.
- Im back

My theory is your theory is nonsense.

Isles bruins heating up.