Why keep a goalie?

[islefan31]

10 teams/1 goalie keeper max league, teams do not need to keep a goalie. If 9 of the 10 teams keep a goalie, the following goalies SHOULD be available for redraft, including my 3. If that's the case, most teams won't draft a goalie in the 1st round and as of now I have picks 9 and 10 in the 1st. Now, there are always 1 or 2 GM's that can't make the live draft and auto-draft, which makes drafting late in the rounds tricky. Sometimes you need to reach or risk missing out. As of now Sid, Giroux and Karlsson are locks. I'll get hate mail for this but I'm actually thinking of keeping a VERY underrated Pavelski (not MacK) as my 4th. Then I will draft my 1st goalie and best available forward in the 1st. Keeping a tender is always a risky thing anyway...here's a list of some top goalies who SHOULD be available.

Edit; I should add he's been C/L/R in Yahoo two years in a row, which is huge for daily lineup changes. No guarantees but that would be a huge plus.

Rinne, Dubnyk, Luongo
MAF or Andersen(Ana)
Quick or Holtby
Schneider
Talbot
Bishop Varlamov
Howard

[Pengwin7]

You are going to keep Joe Pavelski... and not a goalie?!
This is pure lunacy!

j/k.
I agree with your logic.
Thumbs up from me.

[LawMan]

I don't think your logic is lunacy at all. Pavelski does very well with those categories, as does Rinne, I think it's down to those 2 for me over MacKinnon.

There's 40 players kept; broken down that's 31 skaters and 9 goalies if all other teams keep a goalie. I'd put Pavelski in the top 31 skaters and Rinne in the top-10 goalies in that format. In a head-to-head league I'd rather have the better skater than better goalie so I'd likely keep Pavelski over Rinne. Also, if we consider how the draft is going to shake out it sounds like you have a very good chance of re-drafting Rinne at 9 but probably not a great chance of getting Pavelski again at 9. Again this signals you should keep Pavelski.

[The Good Sir]

With only a max of 9 goalies kept heading into the draft, I think you can easily pass on keeping a goalie and re-draft one.

[YzermansLegacy]

In essence, Karlsson acts as your goalie keep and truth be told, he's exactly the one guy I'd want as my 1D or 1G keeper. Fully agree that there isn't a "need" to keep a goalie in your position - as long as you have the draft picks to accommodate AND you don't mind being a bit "pre-set" during the draft (I personally really like to have a ton of flexibility in order to react and adapt - but only if it makes sense with my keepers of course).

As for Pavs over Mack - I personally wouldn't make that choice (despite Pavs' triple-eligibility) as there are a number of lesser triple-elig guys I can spot fill on my roster in order to achieve that kind of flexibility (and of course, it's not guaranteed).

While there's no question Pavs is more likely to outscore Mack this year, in a 10-team keep 4, he's not "elite-enough" for me to want to have as my core. I'll be the first to admit though that this his scoring the past 2 years fully surprised me, so I'm adding to that VERY underrated narrative, but here's how I look at it:

If Pavs scores another 40g (and say 35a), would his value chance much? To me, it would stay about the same. Now imagine Mack goes 40/35 or even 38/33 - in my eyes his value jumps to almost "untouchable" again (in a keep 4). Obviously you're banking on potential here - but I guess I just believe Mack hits that potential very soon.

Pavelski is the guy I want to trade for (at the start of the year) or draft early - because he is really underrated. But he's not the guy I want as one of the 4 in my keep 4 10-team. Is he a top-40 producer? I definitely think he is. But by the end of this year, I think Mack will be too. And at that point, the guy I want on my keeper squad is MacKinnon.

Just my 2c

[islefan31]

In essence, Karlsson acts as your goalie keep and truth be told, he's exactly the one guy I'd want as my 1D or 1G keeper. Fully agree that there isn't a "need" to keep a goalie in your position - as long as you have the draft picks to accommodate AND you don't mind being a bit "pre-set" during the draft (I personally really like to have a ton of flexibility in order to react and adapt - but only if it makes sense with my keepers of course).

As for Pavs over Mack - I personally wouldn't make that choice (despite Pavs' triple-eligibility) as there are a number of lesser triple-elig guys I can spot fill on my roster in order to achieve that kind of flexibility (and of course, it's not guaranteed).

While there's no question Pavs is more likely to outscore Mack this year, in a 10-team keep 4, he's not "elite-enough" for me to want to have as my core. I'll be the first to admit though that this his scoring the past 2 years fully surprised me, so I'm adding to that VERY underrated narrative, but here's how I look at it:

If Pavs scores another 40g (and say 35a), would his value chance much? To me, it would stay about the same. Now imagine Mack goes 40/35 or even 38/33 - in my eyes his value jumps to almost "untouchable" again (in a keep 4). Obviously you're banking on potential here - but I guess I just believe Mack hits that potential very soon.

Pavelski is the guy I want to trade for (at the start of the year) or draft early - because he is really underrated. But he's not the guy I want as one of the 4 in my keep 4 10-team. Is he a top-40 producer? I definitely think he is. But by the end of this year, I think Mack will be too. And at that point, the guy I want on my keeper squad is MacKinnon.

Just my 2c

I totally agree, but I think I have a much better chance of drafting MacK, especially how Yahoo will rank him compared to Pavs. Pavelski will be ranked very high as I believe he was top 10 overall in consecutive years on Yahoo.

[YzermansLegacy]

Then absolutely there's your answer. You know your league better than any of us, and if your league mates are higher on rankings than on their own hunches, you're playing the right card by keeping Pavs. (And it's not like he's a huge gamble - he's a VERY legit keeper.) No need to second guess - you've got the reasoning down for this to make sense.

[islefan31]

Thanks guys, I feel comfortable going with my gut now. Cheers!