I disagree with this theory of getting by with mediocre goaltending. I get he has to be locked up to a level below a Carey Price contract but you have to pay more for elite talent. There’s not a better place to do that then in net imo. Both him and his agent have to understand that there’s a limit that any team can spend in net on top of for as good as he is he hasn’t won anything yet.

I think he comes in under 9 million and if he keeps playing at this level I’m fine with that. The real problem is the same problem we’ve always had and that is way too much money invested in players that don’t consistently perform. You have too pay for the ones that do.
- Cptmjl

I never mentioned mediocre goaltending. If Sorokin wants to break the Bank that would be an issue. Hopefully a good deal can be worked out and the Islanders have the Cap room to fix other areas.

I never mentioned mediocre goaltending. If Sorokin wants to break the Bank that would be an issue. Hopefully a good deal can be worked out and the Islanders have the Cap room to fix other areas.
- ses111

It was mentioned by other posters using current playoff teams as a reference.

It was mentioned by other posters using current playoff teams as a reference.
- Cptmjl

If Sorokin really loves chief, he will take 6 mill and like it.

It was mentioned by other posters using current playoff teams as a reference.
- Cptmjl

"Competent" and "solid" are the terms I used. Not mediocre

"Competent" and "solid" are the terms I used. Not mediocre
- UIF

You know in your heart you meant mediocre liar. I’m very intuitive.

You know in your heart you meant mediocre liar. I’m very intuitive.
- Cptmjl

I will disagree with you on goaltending being the area to spend for elite. I don't even know if I disagree necessarily...I'm just not certain about it. At one time, I think it was unquestionably the most important place to spend money. Today, I feel like there are a lot of goalies who are good enough to give you a chance to win on most nights without having to spend a fortune on them.

I guess I'm struggling figuring out how much better "elite" is than "good" in terms of how it translates to team success, what's the price tag you put on that difference, and how much you sacrifice in other areas to get it. I think an elite goalie can certainly carry a team. But if you have a team that can protect the front of the net and play some competent defense, then there are probably quite a few goalies below "elite" that can do a good job for you in that environment.

I will disagree with you on goaltending being the area to spend for elite. I don't even know if I disagree necessarily...I'm just not certain about it. At one time, I think it was unquestionably the most important place to spend money. Today, I feel like there are a lot of goalies who are good enough to give you a chance to win on most nights without having to spend a fortune on them.

I guess I'm struggling figuring out how much better "elite" is than "good" in terms of how it translates to team success, what's the price tag you put on that difference, and how much you sacrifice in other areas to get it. I think an elite goalie can certainly carry a team. But if you have a team that can protect the front of the net and play some competent defense, then there are probably quite a few goalies below "elite" that can do a good job for you in that environment.
- UIF

I think a lot of factors go into what kind of goaltender your team needs. I think teams like Toronto and Edmonton would need better goaltending more than teams like Carolina or the Isles would. Toronto and Edmonton rely on their offense to carry them, but when their defensive game falls apart they have nobody to pick up the slack. Carolina plays such a sound system with strong possession that can help to mask issues between the pipes.

I will disagree with you on goaltending being the area to spend for elite. I don't even know if I disagree necessarily...I'm just not certain about it. At one time, I think it was unquestionably the most important place to spend money. Today, I feel like there are a lot of goalies who are good enough to give you a chance to win on most nights without having to spend a fortune on them.

I guess I'm struggling figuring out how much better "elite" is than "good" in terms of how it translates to team success, what's the price tag you put on that difference, and how much you sacrifice in other areas to get it. I think an elite goalie can certainly carry a team. But if you have a team that can protect the front of the net and play some competent defense, then there are probably quite a few goalies below "elite" that can do a good job for you in that environment.
- UIF

We’re going to have a team that will be more then likely wallowing in mediocrity for some time. We have no picks, prospects, or any realistic options of improving the team for the foreseeable future save for Wahlstrom seeing the light or Holmstrom transforming into an productive winger. That’s all we got unless something none of us are seeing materializes.

I couldn’t imagine not paying Sorokin and then continuing to do what we’re doing. It would be even more ridiculous then our current situation.

I think a lot of factors go into what kind of goaltender your team needs. I think teams like Toronto and Edmonton would need better goaltending more than teams like Carolina or the Isles would. Toronto and Edmonton rely on their offense to carry them, but when their defensive game falls apart they have nobody to pick up the slack. Carolina plays such a sound system with strong possession that can help to mask issues between the pipes.
- eichiefs9

Yeah, that makes sense to me. I guess the Isles would then really have to weigh whether they are the team that got Lehner/Greiss a Jennings Trophy or the one that couldn't even make the playoffs without Sorokin...

Yeah, that makes sense to me. I guess the Isles would then really have to weigh whether they are the team that got Lehner/Greiss a Jennings Trophy or the one that couldn't even make the playoffs without Sorokin...
- UIF

Well do we make the playoffs without Sorokin this past season?

Well do we make the playoffs without Sorokin this past season?
- Cptmjl

Definitely not. But if they were capable of scoring and got solid, but not Sorokin, goaltending...I wonder if they would have made it

We’re going to have a team that will be more then likely wallowing in mediocrity for some time. We have no picks, prospects, or any realistic options of improving the team for the foreseeable future save for Wahlstrom seeing the light or Holmstrom transforming into an productive winger. That’s all we got unless something none of us are seeing materializes.

I couldn’t imagine not paying Sorokin and then continuing to do what we’re doing. It would be even more ridiculous then our current situation.
- Cptmjl

I get what you're saying. But...if the team is that bad, what's the point of having an elite goalie maybe just barely sneak it into the playoffs? That might make sense if they could build around the goaltending and improve going forward, but locking in Sorokin on an expensive, lengthy contract takes that option off the table. Even as other contracts come off the books, the money is put into his contract. They'd be stuck as the same wallowing team you're talking about.

Or, they could sell really high on Sorokin now and get a good return, plus save money on whatever contract he'd get for next season and use that to improve other struggling areas. In the worst case, next season becomes a complete disaster and speeds along the rebuild everyone wants to begin anyway. In the best scenario, they sign a capable goalie for cheap, Sorokin brings back some scoring help (or assets that could be flipped for help), and there's a little flexibility going forward as even more contracts come off the books.

Definitely not. But if they were capable of scoring and got solid, but not Sorokin, goaltending...I wonder if they would have made it
- eichiefs9

Our top 6 would need a complete overhaul to get that kind of scoring imo. That’s unless they do a 180 and start playing to a level, all at the same time, that we’ve never seen before. It’s hockey. Anything can happen but I’m not betting on it.

I get what you're saying. But...if the team is that bad, what's the point of having an elite goalie maybe just barely sneak it into the playoffs? That might make sense if they could build around the goaltending and improve going forward, but locking in Sorokin on an expensive, lengthy contract takes that option off the table. Even as other contracts come off the books, the money is put into his contract. They'd be stuck as the same wallowing team you're talking about.

Or, they could sell really high on Sorokin now and get a good return, plus save money on whatever contract he'd get for next season and use that to improve other struggling areas. In the worst case, next season becomes a complete disaster and speeds along the rebuild everyone wants to begin anyway. In the best scenario, they sign a capable goalie for cheap, Sorokin brings back some scoring help (or assets that could be flipped for help), and there's a little flexibility going forward as even more contracts come off the books.
- UIF

I have no idea but that’s what we’re doing.

Aren’t we all still going with the, “anything can happen if we get in” mentality?

Also, “capable cheap” goalies don’t come around very often. There are a number of teams that have been looking for exactly that for years. I get what you’re saying I just don’t agree BUT I’m certainly not saying sign him at Price money either. That’s exactly why this needs to be figured out asap. If it’s around 8 million do it. If we would just stop signing bottom 6’ers to way too much money and term it would solve much of our problems.

The other problem is we have zero, cheap, young, talent to contribute without much cost. Solving our lack of talent problem by trading away our most talented player to me makes little sense.

I have no idea but that’s what we’re doing.

Aren’t we all still going with the, “anything can happen if we get in” mentality?

Also, “capable cheap” goalies don’t come around very often. There are a number of teams that have been looking for exactly that for years. I get what you’re saying I just don’t agree BUT I’m certainly not saying sign him at Price money either. That’s exactly why this needs to be figured out asap. If it’s around 8 million do it. If we would just stop signing bottom 6’ers to way too much money and term it would solve much of our problems.

The other problem is we have zero, cheap, young, talent to contribute without much cost. Solving our lack of talent problem by trading away our most talented player to me makes little sense.
- Cptmjl

Flyers have looking for a quality starter for decades.

I have no idea but that’s what we’re doing.

Aren’t we all still going with the, “anything can happen if we get in” mentality?

Also, “capable cheap” goalies don’t come around very often. There are a number of teams that have been looking for exactly that for years. I get what you’re saying I just don’t agree BUT I’m certainly not saying sign him at Price money either. That’s exactly why this needs to be figured out asap. If it’s around 8 million do it. If we would just stop signing bottom 6’ers to way too much money and term it would solve much of our problems.

The other problem is we have zero, cheap, young, talent to contribute without much cost. Solving our lack of talent problem by trading away our most talented player to me makes little sense.
- Cptmjl

I don't know how "cheap" he'll be but we have a capable goalie, when healthy, in Varlamov.

I get what you're saying. But...if the team is that bad, what's the point of having an elite goalie maybe just barely sneak it into the playoffs? That might make sense if they could build around the goaltending and improve going forward, but locking in Sorokin on an expensive, lengthy contract takes that option off the table. Even as other contracts come off the books, the money is put into his contract. They'd be stuck as the same wallowing team you're talking about.

Or, they could sell really high on Sorokin now and get a good return, plus save money on whatever contract he'd get for next season and use that to improve other struggling areas. In the worst case, next season becomes a complete disaster and speeds along the rebuild everyone wants to begin anyway. In the best scenario, they sign a capable goalie for cheap, Sorokin brings back some scoring help (or assets that could be flipped for help), and there's a little flexibility going forward as even more contracts come off the books.
- UIF

Would love to know at least what Sorokin could bring back in a deal? It's a very difficult situation and the Islanders made it more difficult with some of the bad contracts given out.

I don't know how "cheap" he'll be but we have a capable goalie, when healthy, in Varlamov.
- streaks

I like varlamov. He’s a perfect back up at his age. I believe that’s why he’s fine being one. He’s aware.

This team has been blessed with some pretty good goaltending since we got Greiss. How soon we forget.

Flyers have looking for a quality starter for decades.

- Mancalledsting

Toronto, Buffalo, Christ half the NHL has. (frank) it let’s just trade Sorokin so we can be real bad quicker. I give up.

Toronto, Buffalo, Christ half the NHL has. (frank) it let’s just trade Sorokin so we can be real bad quicker. I give up.
- Cptmjl

Toronto's old goalie is going to the conference finals. Buffalo's old goalie is winning the Vezina this year. Maybe their problems go beyond who they've had in net?

Another thing they have in common is neither is being paid $8m/yr.

Our top 6 would need a complete overhaul to get that kind of scoring imo. That’s unless they do a 180 and start playing to a level, all at the same time, that we’ve never seen before. It’s hockey. Anything can happen but I’m not betting on it.
- Cptmjl

That was more of a conceptual comment, not an actual suggestion

I enjoy having an amazing goaltender for the first time in my life, I'm not itching to change that

Toronto's old goalie is going to the conference finals. Buffalo's old goalie is winning the Vezina this year. Maybe their problems go beyond who they've had in net?
- UIF

Yeah there are a ton of factors. Timing probably being the biggest one contributor. Maturation probably in Ullmark’s case along with a team playing incredible. Team playing well in front of them in Andersen’s case to an elite level defense wise. My point is, will trading Sorokin really bring us the return that we will then have a good team that would make Freddie Andersen go deep in the playoffs? Will it open up enough cap space, give us the assets, the players, or whatever it is we need to be a complete team? I don’t think so. That’s hitting the lottery on the return imo. Also, then we have too find another goalie. Again, I see your point. Have from the beginning. I don’t agree with it but I see it.

That was more of a conceptual comment, not an actual suggestion

I enjoy having an amazing goaltender for the first time in my life, I'm not itching to change that
- eichiefs9

Now you say that after you convinced me to trade Sorokin.

Now you say that after you convinced me to trade Sorokin.
- Cptmjl

Flagged this by accident

I mean if he wants $10M+ per year...that's a real tough ask. I don't really know where my comfort zone lies with him.

History kinda shows that paying a goaltender major money like that rarely works out. Tampa did it but they a) have the benefit of no state tax and b) used the (frank) out of the LTIR loophole. And they also had some elite offensive and defensive talent that they were able to sign to, for the most part, below-market deals