29LikesTaco Bell?Originally Posted by Ice24
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
I like this idea but isn't known around the league not to mess with Deano's RFAs?
I remember something a while back that he would go after a teams best RFA if they tried to take one of ours. And at that time kings had the cap to do it.....
Of course he could Hint out that he is available as a rfa
That is a good idea for the situation we are in with Bernier but with Deano openly admitting that he would offer sheet any player of a GM that offer sheets his RFA's may prevent a lot of GMs from doing such. Dean is on the side of the fence with the GMs that find offer sheeting a cowardly thing to do as a GM.
It's hard to keep one of the goalies when one of them has openly requested to be traded.
Well you'd better lower your expectations. What team is going to dish a young superstar for an unproven backup goaltender with barely any play? No one is doubting Bernier's pedigree or potential, but that is what a team that trades for him would be trading for; a POTENTIALLY great NHL starter. So why would they have to give up a proven young superstar to get it? Especially when they know the Kings' situation? I think Dean is right there with you that he doesn't want to get a lousy return or a rental for the kid, but eventually we're going to have to let go... we can't hold on to him forever. Wouldn't him walking for nothing as a UFA be a lousier return than a package of picks/prospects?
I just don't think anyone is going to try and pouch an unproven backup goaltender as an RFA, even if he is going to garner some interest around the league. I do think a sign-and-trade is a very viable option though (for around the same compensation that the RFA rules would yield, around a 1st and a 3rd for a 3.1-4.5/year contract), but we may end up just re-signing him for another year until his UFA kicks in and be forced to trade him this offseason or at the next deadline if we want any kind of return.
The two-goalie system just doesn't work in the NHL. It doesn't make sense financially or for the mentality of the goaltenders. I don't think anyone here really WANTS to trade Bernier or see him go, but this isn't a video game; he's a human being with his own goals and aspirations, and being a backup for the next 10 years isn't a part of his plans.
I like Quick and predict that over the next 5 years if people were to compare him and Bernier directly, most would pick Quick as the better goaltender. I have a big problem with Quick's 10 year contract though and do not believe that his athletic style will keep him healthy enough to play out that full contract. I think Bernier's style is much more suited for that contract length.
I have observed key differences between the two goaltenders methods, I am not referring to just their style but moreover their impact on their teammates.
A) Quick will always face more shots against and typically have a greater save % because he allows the short 1-2 ft rebounds. He is typically in a paddle down or splits position to takes away the shot along the ice and gets his leg pads on the shot, but is not typically positioned upright to quickly smother a puck. Opponents get second and third opportunities, but they are basically very low percentage "putback shots" that just get smashed right back against his pad. Bernier stays upright and angles his heels backwards into the net a bit more. This exposes the very bottom corners of the net slightly, but on most shots it puts Bernier in a better position to angle his shots into the corners instead of the puck hitting his pad and dying in front of the crease. This allows the Kings not to have to play positionally directly in front of the net and allows better spacing on defense for them to transition and breakout of the zone.
B) Quick does have the advantage on breakaways and recovery. A key asset on Penalty Kills. His athleticism allows him to individually match up against shooters and to get cross-ice faster. In my opinion it also promotes the Kings to take more chances on defense and to be a little less responsible in their coverage. I believe that style to be more suited for run & gun teams like Edmonton.
C) I give the advantage to Bernier on screen shots. Quick is better at fighting to see the puck, but tends to make himself small trying to look around defenders. Bernier just stays big and trusts that the puck will hit him due to his positioning. The downside is that when Bernier does get beat, he looks completely lost, because in most cases he never saw the puck.
As an accountant now, I am all about fiscal responsibility. As in all salary cap sports, the key to long-term success is keeping the best players possible at the lowest price possible. Quick's 10 year contract is an albatross. He will most likely be the better of the 2 goaltenders over the next 5 years, but I think Bernier will have the more successful long-term career. If you look at the 2 netminders strictly as assets, I am of the opinion that maybe you do sacrifice a little in short-term quality now if you choose to keep Bernier, but Quick has far more value as an asset to other teams. Especially if you are like me and don't believe his style will permit him to play at an elite level in years 6-10.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote