San Jose Goalie Situation

[petegreg21]

Why exactly is my post "hilariously ignorant"?

My guess is because goaltending goes way past just statistics. If a goaltender has solid fundamentals and a good head on his shoulders, that can take him a long way. We don't know necessarily the type of system he was playing behind or the quality of team he was playing behind in those seasons. AHL numbers aren't always the be all and end all.

[havanablast21]

I think that list of potential controversies is a bit overblown to be honest.

TOR - just because Reimer wants a shot at No. 1 doesn't mean he has one
CGY - Haven't heard a definitive starter named going into camp. Either it's an open battle or Hiller's contract says it all
STL - seem pretty comfortable riding a tandem as per usual
ANH - again, clear tandem and healthy competition
MIN - Just a brash of injuries, its all about whoever is actually healthy
PIT - Greiss lol

To me a goalie controversy is a perennial starting goaltender who is right on the brink of losing their starting role. Pavelec FOR SURE! Niemi I can see it. Khudobin>Ward possibly. Thats about it at this point until guys start going on hot/cold streaks in October.

TOR - just because Reimer wants a shot at No. 1 doesn't mean he has one - TRUE...but would you not concede that there was one last year? Why would this year be any different following Reimer's extension. (merely potential)
CGY - Haven't heard a definitive starter named going into camp. Either it's an open battle or Hiller's contract says it all - But the fact that there IS NOT a definitive #1 plants seeds of potential controversy IMO (Merely Potential)
STL - seem pretty comfortable riding a tandem as per usual - True, but this is the first year that they have a Young Stud that they have been grooming for the role. Toronto ran the tandem last year and there was controversy. (merely potential)
ANH - again, clear tandem and healthy competition - True...and the fact that there isn't a true Vet who could lose the job to a young up and commer may extinguish any controversy... but much like STL and Allen, Gibson is the Golden boy (also not unlike Vancouver... where the crease was swimming in controversy). (Merely Potential - esp if Gibson takes starts away from Andersen who did nothing but earn the role last year )
MIN - Just a brash of injuries, its all about whoever is actually healthy - And if Backstrom/Hardin/DK are all healthy? Each has proven they can be a #1...albeit Backs is on the downward swing. Harding's condition alone breeds the seeds of controversy (Potential)
Pit - ok fine...

I guess it comes down to the understood definition of controversy. And the person trying to interpret that. Some people may have said that Bernier/Reimer where a healthy competition (I disagree... Toronto Brass have caused the controversy).

That's all.

Not over blown at all in my mind... simply sighting the POTENTIAL for controversy which was what I was asked earlier if I essentially was TOO BLIND to see the potential in San J

[2014olympicgold]

Neimi is #1, but I think he’ll lose starts to Stalock. Smart GM would avoid both, or obtain both. Handcuff SJ, don’t get handcuffed by SJ. Pitts and SJ have a similar situation over the last 3-4 yrs. Great regular season, then no one shows up to the playoffs and the goalie gets blamed (however the goalies should get some of the blame, just not the brunt). Until Stalock proves with an injury to Neimi that Stalock can hold the net, this is Neimi’s job.

As for the other goalies mentioned. Bernier #1, no way around it. Reimer was signed because for 2.3mill, that’s a pretty cheap backup who can step into a starting job just in case (and he can be traded pretty easily). Hillers job in Calgary sadly (I liked Ramo), It’s been said the #1 in Carolina is Ward (one can only think it’s his job to lose), Minny is Backstrom/whoever shows up (1a/1b), Pitts is Fleury, final yr of his contract and with multiple goalies still “available” they can just not resign him, trade for a goalie and sign a FA star come 2015.

2015 FA goalies:
Fleury, Neimi, Ramo, Hiller, Fasth, Anderson, Cam Talbot and Neurvirth.

[petegreg21]

TOR - just because Reimer wants a shot at No. 1 doesn't mean he has one - TRUE...but would you not concede that there was one last year? Why would this year be any different following Reimer's extension. (merely potential)
CGY - Haven't heard a definitive starter named going into camp. Either it's an open battle or Hiller's contract says it all - But the fact that there IS NOT a definitive #1 plants seeds of potential controversy IMO (Merely Potential)
STL - seem pretty comfortable riding a tandem as per usual - True, but this is the first year that they have a Young Stud that they have been grooming for the role. Toronto ran the tandem last year and there was controversy. (merely potential)
ANH - again, clear tandem and healthy competition - True...and the fact that there isn't a true Vet who could lose the job to a young up and commer may extinguish any controversy... but much like STL and Allen, Gibson is the Golden boy (also not unlike Vancouver... where the crease was swimming in controversy). (Merely Potential - esp if Gibson takes starts away from Andersen who did nothing but earn the role last year )
MIN - Just a brash of injuries, its all about whoever is actually healthy - And if Backstrom/Hardin/DK are all healthy? Each has proven they can be a #1...albeit Backs is on the downward swing. Harding's condition alone breeds the seeds of controversy (Potential)
Pit - ok fine...
I guess it comes down to the understood definition of controversy. And the person trying to interpret that. Some people may have said that Bernier/Reimer where a healthy competition (I disagree... Toronto Brass have caused the controversy).
That's all.
Not over blown at all in my mind... simply sighting the POTENTIAL for controversy which was what I was asked earlier if I essentially was TOO BLIND to see the potential in San J

I see where you're coming from. Like I said, my definition of a goalie controversy is a perennial starting goaltender who has a legitimate shot of losing his number one spot on his team. Carolina exemplifies that, and if a different backup is brought in then Winnipeg is on that list too.

STL and ANH for example, if the young guys don't steal all the starts right away, the team can simply say they're easing them into it. If they do steal the starts, Andersen is hardly solidified in Anaheim and Elliot is a perennial backup. No issue either way.

TOR - the reason I'd concede there was a controversy last year was because Bernier was a complete new comer to the team, brought in to compete for the number 1 job with a guy who had just taken the team to the playoffs. This year, all people remember is how awesome Bernier was and how much Reimer shat the bed down the stretch, almost got shipped out of town, but now he just reminds me of the song "The Cat Came Back" hahaha.

CGY - again, it's a fairly new player (Ramo) versus a totally new player (Hiller). the only way that becomes an issue is if they end up paying a back up goalie 4.75M

I think Minnesota just desperately wants stability and they don't care who it comes from. If all 3 are healthy simultaneously (i'd be surprised) then there's some discomfort for sure. They all wanna play.

[doulos]

My guess is because goaltending goes way past just statistics. If a goaltender has solid fundamentals and a good head on his shoulders, that can take him a long way. We don't know necessarily the type of system he was playing behind or the quality of team he was playing behind in those seasons. AHL numbers aren't always the be all and end all.

That's at least a bit more of an answer than an insult.

I was actually looking for some solid reasons why those stats are not helpful in determining Stalock's value. I actually like Stalock personally, but chuckcouple brings up an interesting piece of information with those numbers.

[Dakkster]

Why exactly is my post "hilariously ignorant"?

I was on my mobile phone, so I wasn't exactly in the mood of trying to write a detailed answer. So let's do that now.

Why does anyone think that Stalock could be an NHL starting goaltender:

CAREER STATS

Besides last season when he was the back up goaltender for the team that allowed the 5th fewest goals in the NHL, his stats have been mediocre at best.

Stats aren't everything. Martin Brodeur had below .890 save percentage and over 4.00 GAA in the AHL. Stat wankers would tell you that he would never be arguably the greatest goalie in the NHL. If you have watched Stalock play and read what several goalie scouts AND team reps AND Sharks fans have said or written about Stalock, it's that he's a very good goalie who is always the best when it counts. Look at Grant Fuhr. Sure, he let in a bunch of goals from time to time but you could always count on him hwen it mattered the most. Same with Stalock. Plus he is a very good goalie. Go back and read Justin Goldman's assessments of Stalock through the years and it's quite obvious where he stands. He was set back a bit with that horrible injury, but he is back on track to be an NHL goalie that matters. So you took one look at his stat line and passed judgment without delving into proper scouting reports. Ignorant judgment.

The LA Kings have Stalock to thank for winning the Stanley Cup. If Niemi gets the start for the Sharks in Game 6 of the first round, we have a different Stanley Cup winner this past season.

And here is the piece of your post that made me laugh. It's wrong in so many ways. If you actually followed the series, you would know that it was a question mark if Niemi would even start in the playoffs, just because he had been so piss poor mediocre for a pretty long time leading up to the playoffs, while Stalock had played very well. Then the Sharks won three games, pretty much in spite of Niemi's performance. He was noticebly shaky and it was obvious to everyone that the team didn't have a lot of confidence in front of him. So no, he was not some sort of pillar of security the first three games. Then in game four and five he is so bad that he gets pulled for Stalock in both games and Stalock doesn't let in a single goal in that time. He looks solid, just like he did during the regular season.

Ask yourself this: If Niemi was so good, why did McLellan start Stalock in game six? The talk among Sharks fans was that most were surprised Niemi started in game five, expecting Stalock. Stalock came in with a ton of pressure in game six and the Sharks were fairly aenemic offensively. At least two of the goals he let in happened because of Sharks D breakdowns. That loss was not Stalock's fault. The question going in to game seven was basically "do we throw Stalock to the wolves and risk ruining his confidence or do we let Niemi get one last chance?". They went with Niemi and lost after another shaky performance. Basically, trying to pin the Sharks' series loss on Stalock is so silly and ignorant that I can just laugh.

Also, it's not like the rest of the playoffs was some kind of cakewalk for the Kings. The Sharks weren't their toughest opponent. Your point that it was all Stalock's fault is even more asinine when you consider that.[/quote]

Niemi is the #1 goaltender for the San Jose Sharks until further notice.

Yes, because of his contract. However, if you have read or watched interviews with GM Doug Wilson or coach McLellan, it's obvious that Niemi is on thin ice and does not have the confidence of management and I highly doubt he has the confidence of the team after last season.

[chuckcouples]

Thank you for the explanation. I understand where you are coming from but I will stand by my point that I do not think Stalock has the make up to become an NHL starting goaltender for a quality team. I also believe that the media completely fabricated the whole which goaltender is going to start game 1 of the playoffs. Stalock had started 4 of the Sharks final 19 games with all of his starts being the first night of back to back games. The Sharks were in a tight battle for home ice in the first round. If McLellan actually believed that Stalock was the better goaltender, he would have been getting way more of these starts. There is a reason that Antti Niemi led the NHL in games started last season and it's not because Niemi was the best goalie in the league last year. According to everyone, Antti Niemi had a terrible year and yet he still finished 2nd in the NHL in wins. This is his way of following up a season in which he was arguably the best goalie in the NHL.

I truly believe that if Niemi had started game 6, the Sharks would have prevailed in the series. I did not say that the loss was all Stalock's fault. There is no way to know whether I am right or I am wrong with this belief.

[Dakkster]

Way to go sticking your head in the sand, ignoring all the facts. Hope that works out for you.

[loco man]

However, if you have read or watched interviews with GM Doug Wilson or coach McLellan, it's obvious that Niemi is on thin ice and does not have the confidence of management and I highly doubt he has the confidence of the team after last season.

This

Seriously, watch the interview. There is a big difference between "Niemi is our guy. He had a rough go last year and he will need to step up his game this year, but he is our starter and needs to show it" and "we will need to see who is on our roster first and make some decisions - net being one of them. Lets say this - it is an open competition in net". (paraphrased but thats basically what they said).

One is motivational and the other reeks of lack of confidence. Watch it and decide for yourself how Niemi is viewed by his coach and GM

[havanablast21]

For what it is worth, here is where I got the info that I am basing most of my take on.

Watch the interview with Wilson and Richards if you have a few minutes. Straight from the horses mouth re the tender situation

http://www.csnbayarea.com/sharks/sha...-what-do-niemi


this is semi interesting too:

http://www.examiner.com/review/alex-...an-jose-sharks

Regarding the interview with Wilson and Richards (finally had a chance to watch it).

Here's what I took from it.

"I think Antti had a down year...compared to his Vezina nomination performance the year before" - Yeah...clearly...but a down year from a Vezina nomination year is still a pretty decent year. (again 1 year removed)
"We also think he has the potential to recover" - Clearly...that's why he's still there and wasn't moved. Suggests confidence in Niemi by head coach
"We believe in him" - Reaffirming the point above
"We do believe he has to elevate his game" - Totally fair statement to make. They want him to elevate his game to his Vezina calibre performance... doesn't sound like a guy who's job loss in imminent (again 1 year removed)
when asked ifhe expected it to be an open competition in training camp? "I think it always has been" - Well...if that's not a classic sit on the fence, non-commital answer from a head coach who wants to avoid controversy by maintaining the trust of his #1 while encouraging the young up and comer, I don't konw what is. Smart Answer Mr. Head Coach.

In the end... I fully expected to get some perverbial slap in the face from the suggestion to "HEAR IT DIRECT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH". Well, I heard it and all in all... it just reaffirms my belief that this job is Niemi's to lose. If he starts the season well...we won't even be hearing or talking about BACK UP GOALTENDER Stalock by mid year IMO.

I didn't review the 2nd link that was "Semi-interesting"... so unless there's something earth shattering there... ???

[vitun-tyhmä]

If you don't already have a vested interest in the SJ goalies, I'd just continue to steer clear unless you got both of them. It'll likely be a big headache for everyone involved from training camp up until the last game of the season.

yes, big headache, roll the dice on the goaltending by committee

[Savvy1982]

Regarding the interview with Wilson and Richards (finally had a chance to watch it).

Here's what I took from it.

"I think Antti had a down year...compared to his Vezina nomination performance the year before" - Yeah...clearly...but a down year from a Vezina nomination year is still a pretty decent year. (again 1 year removed)
"We also think he has the potential to recover" - Clearly...that's why he's still there and wasn't moved. Suggests confidence in Niemi by head coach
"We believe in him" - Reaffirming the point above
"We do believe he has to elevate his game" - Totally fair statement to make. They want him to elevate his game to his Vezina calibre performance... doesn't sound like a guy who's job loss in imminent (again 1 year removed)
when asked ifhe expected it to be an open competition in training camp? "I think it always has been" - Well...if that's not a classic sit on the fence, non-commital answer from a head coach who wants to avoid controversy by maintaining the trust of his #1 while encouraging the young up and comer, I don't konw what is. Smart Answer Mr. Head Coach.

In the end... I fully expected to get some perverbial slap in the face from the suggestion to "HEAR IT DIRECT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH". Well, I heard it and all in all... it just reaffirms my belief that this job is Niemi's to lose. If he starts the season well...we won't even be hearing or talking about BACK UP GOALTENDER Stalock by mid year IMO.

I didn't review the 2nd link that was "Semi-interesting"... so unless there's something earth shattering there... ???

It is worth noting that the Sharks got off to BLAZING hot starts the past two years - if this trend follows, and Niemi is solid, that will help his chances.

[Coyote]

I think Neimi keeps the job for most of this year, after that? Who knows? I didn't think he was going to re-sign in SJ last time so what do I know?

[petegreg21]

It is worth noting that the Sharks got off to BLAZING hot starts the past two years - if this trend follows, and Niemi is solid, that will help his chances.

9 out of their first 12 games are on the road so I wouldn't bank on a hot start.