HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   Should we consider Quick/Bernier as a long term 1A/1B solution? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1363449)

CowMix 03-01-2013 02:45 AM

Should we consider Quick/Bernier as a long term 1A/1B solution?
 
There has been a lot of talk about using Bernier as a key piece in acquiring another key piece (like an elite lw), but what if we kept him and included a 1A/1B goalie rotation into our core? This would allow us to stay competitive if (god forbid) one of our goalies ever got injured, prevent a goalie from getting overplayed during the regular season and promote a friendly competition between our goaltenders. Is Bernier's rising trade value and our hole at lw too problematic to consider this option?

kingsholygrail 03-01-2013 02:50 AM

If by long term, I assume you mean after this season. I project Bernier being moved, I just don't see it happening this season for obvious reasons unless Deano is given an offer he can't refuse.

123slam 03-01-2013 04:07 AM

Without a salary cap, sure.

nki 03-01-2013 04:15 AM

I doubt either Quick or Bernier want to play in a rotation, both of them want to be #1 as they should.

tattooedsean 03-01-2013 06:07 AM

I definitely see one of them leaving most likely Bernier after the season is over. For this season, I like that they are both getting their matches as competition is a good thing..

Monarchist 03-01-2013 07:26 AM

Vancouver?

tigermask48 03-01-2013 08:00 AM

Ride 1A/1B til the wheels fall off...

TwzKing 03-01-2013 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigermask48 (Post 60725707)
Ride 1A/1B til the wheels fall off...

I agree... plus it wont hurt the return we would get.

Whiskeypete 03-01-2013 08:41 AM

i voted roll it long term for a few reasons and under a few conditions.

unless DL gets the Godfather deal. you know "make them an offer they can't refuse", then there is no reason to move JB right now. unless someone like TB offers up Stamkos for him there isn't enough reason to move Bernier.

shortened season, compressed schedule, back to back's, 3 games in 4 nights are going to put extra pressure and physical strain on everyone. let's not forget that JQ just had back surgery over the summer, so call it having some insurance.

next let's look at Quick long-term. why drive him now until the wheels fall off? the guy signed a 10-year deal so why not reduce the mileage up front why it's possible. i would rather see him still playing and performing to his level in 2020 and beyond, than to burn him out early. also let's not forget the back surgery and that possibly adding years on to his career, without actually playing them.

and last. if JB & JQ, the team and the coaches don't have an issue with going with a rotation - then GO WITH IT. the competition between the two is working and paying off for them and the team. im sure there are some steak dinners on the line between the two of them. let them run with it and enjoy it if they like the 1 on 1 competition between them. the other thing it does for the team is it changes up what the opponents see. they play different styles and excel in different ways, so use that to the Kings advantage.

the day it becomes a distraction, or one of them wants to leave is when you part ways. publicly its been stated that JB has pulled back from his trade statements, so it doesn't sound as if hes pressing. ive never heard JQ ***** and moan about losing starts to Bernier. the other day JB said flat out that JQ is "our guy" so then run with this

Telos 03-01-2013 08:58 AM

Bernier would have to agree to be here long term, which is unlikely to happen. This isn't a St. Louis situation, Quick is our undisputed #1. It is nice to have them both now, but it won't last beyond this season. Our best bet is to trade Bernier either at the deadline or in the offseason, when his value is the highest, and sign a veteran backup, or promote Jones. Our current situation is unsustainable.

SuperAlmeida 03-01-2013 09:03 AM

If we wait until draftday what type of return could we get?

MSRinkRat 03-01-2013 09:15 AM

I'm so torn on this right now.

I use to think of trading Bernier, but after taking a good look at him, I think he'll be a better goalie long term. He's just so good at where he needs to be position wise, and less in need for defense in front of him. Lately it's made a VERY good point to not trade him. Instead go to a system that seems to be working around the league. 1A and 1B goalies or in this case, 1A 1A goalies. The other point I make here, Quick's style dictates injury will fall on him eventually. Where would we be if that happens without Bernier in LA? Longevity to Bernier.

It's obviously not what will happen, Bernier wants to be where he should be, number one on a team. Kings need to be careful what team he goes to tho, If he goes to the west, it will haunt us. I don't see getting to much for him tho, maybe thats why he's being played more often now, for other gm's to see how well this kid plays. Maybe Bernier and that conditional 4th round pick goes to much needed defense.

Personally I'd like to see Bernier go 10 games in a row to see how he handles the grind. If he's good, then maybe (I can't believe I'm saying this) trade Quick for better considerations and sign Bernier long term. I just can't see Quick's carrier lasting as long as Bernier's would. But I love Quick, and Love what he brought us last year, so I will remain a Quickie supporter till the end. So I voted to trade Bernier even tho logic is starting to tell me he's the better long term goalie.

I feel this time last year this was a silly question. Now tho, it's not so silly and needs a good long hard look at.

Let the Flack FLy!

kingsfan 03-01-2013 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 123slam (Post 60723393)
Without a salary cap, sure.

This. Bernier's made it pretty clear he wants to be an NHL starter, I can't imagine how much money he'd want to give up on that to be a long-term backup/co-number one, which is pretty much set since Quick is signed for another decade and isn't going anywhere for a while after becoming a local icon in the playoffs.

Bernier's gone by the draft IMO.

kingsfan 03-01-2013 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSRinkRat (Post 60727925)
The other point I make here, Quick's style dictates injury will fall on him eventually.

How?

kingsfan 03-01-2013 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperAlmeida (Post 60727511)
If we wait until draftday what type of return could we get?

I assume you are referring to draft picks. Barring Quick getting hurt, Bernier will likely not get much more than another 5-10 games this season (starts anyways). He'll have a limited viewing based on games played alone.

As such, I see his value similar to what Anders Lindback fetched for Nashville, a high 2nd, a mid-round 2nd, and a 3rd.

I'd rather move him for a player that can help us now, or a prospect who has been drafted a few years earlier and is close to being NHL ready. Granted, the way DL and Co. have drafted in the 2nd round, they could be good picks, I just think we are in cup mode, so getting more immediate help seems to fit that goal better.

KopitarFAN 03-01-2013 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingsfan (Post 60728573)
This. Bernier's made it pretty clear he wants to be an NHL starter, I can't imagine how much money he'd want to give up on that to be a long-term backup/co-number one, which is pretty much set since Quick is signed for another decade and isn't going anywhere for a while after becoming a local icon in the playoffs.

Bernier's gone by the draft IMO.

I agree.

Especially when you look at how thin the free agent goaltending class is, I imagine Jimmy Howard will re-sign with the Wings and after him, the best is Mike Smith who has been marginal at best.

Raccoon Jesus 03-01-2013 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 123slam (Post 60723393)
Without a salary cap, sure.

Agreed. I don't think a true 1A/1B situation is possible long-term in a salary cap world without tying up unrealistic amounts of money at the goaltending position, as much as I'd love it.

Telos 03-01-2013 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSRinkRat (Post 60727925)
I'm so torn on this right now.

I use to think of trading Bernier, but after taking a good look at him, I think he'll be a better goalie long term. He's just so good at where he needs to be position wise, and less in need for defense in front of him. Lately it's made a VERY good point to not trade him. Instead go to a system that seems to be working around the league. 1A and 1B goalies or in this case, 1A 1A goalies. The other point I make here, Quick's style dictates injury will fall on him eventually. Where would we be if that happens without Bernier in LA? Longevity to Bernier.

It's obviously not what will happen, Bernier wants to be where he should be, number one on a team. Kings need to be careful what team he goes to tho, If he goes to the west, it will haunt us. I don't see getting to much for him tho, maybe thats why he's being played more often now, for other gm's to see how well this kid plays. Maybe Bernier and that conditional 4th round pick goes to much needed defense.

Personally I'd like to see Bernier go 10 games in a row to see how he handles the grind. If he's good, then maybe (I can't believe I'm saying this) trade Quick for better considerations and sign Bernier long term. I just can't see Quick's carrier lasting as long as Bernier's would. But I love Quick, and Love what he brought us last year, so I will remain a Quickie supporter till the end. So I voted to trade Bernier even tho logic is starting to tell me he's the better long term goalie.

I feel this time last year this was a silly question. Now tho, it's not so silly and needs a good long hard look at.

Let the Flack FLy!

I've always been a Bernier supporter, and have said that he will likely end up the better goaltender, but it doesn't matter now. Come playoff time, we are going to put Quick in the net regardless. And that is the right call, he led us to the promised land last season and is a young Conn Smythe winning goaltender.

This is almost the exact same scenario Lombardi faced in San Jose when he had Kiprusoff and Nabokov, as well as Toskala down in the minors. Though the results are going to be reversed this time around. He is going to keep the acrobatic goaltender (Quick, Kiprusoff) over the positionally sound goaltender (Nabokov, Bernier).

They both get the job done. Quick has been much better as of late and seems to be fully recovered from his surgery. Obviously his style does have a higher risk of injury, but so did Hasek's, so goaltenders of that type can have long careers too. He's been in the pressure situations Bernier has not, and the job is his. Hopefully we can get a good price for Bernier when he is dealt.

MSRinkRat 03-01-2013 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingsfan (Post 60728633)
How?

Karma Karma Karma, He drops way to many F bombs! :sarcasm:

kingsfan 03-01-2013 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Telos (Post 60729265)
Obviously his style does have a higher risk of injury, but so did Hasek's, so goaltenders of that type can have long careers too. He's been in the pressure situations Bernier has not, and the job is his. Hopefully we can get a good price for Bernier when he is dealt.

I'm curious why this is being said in this thread. He plays a different style, but a different style does not mean a greater chance of injury.

ShowtimeDynasty 03-01-2013 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingsfan (Post 60730447)
I'm curious why this is being said in this thread. He plays a different style, but a different style does not mean a greater chance of injury.

Quick has a style dependent on athleticism and flexibility.

Bernier has a style dependent on positioning and form.

Common sense tells you that physically, it is more likely to sustain consistent performance through your 30's, if your style if play is not reliant on elite athleticism. Of course, our athletes in this day & age tend to defy common sense when it comes to aging; Which is what makes this an interesting discussion IMO.

Reclamation Project 03-01-2013 10:54 AM

I'm extremely excited to have this tandem this season. That being said, he's gone by the draft.

kingsfan 03-01-2013 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShowtimeDynasty (Post 60732383)
Quick has a style dependent on athleticism and flexibility.

Bernier has a style dependent on positioning and form.

Common sense tells you that physically, it is more likely to sustain consistent performance through your 30's, if your style if play is not reliant on elite athleticism. Of course, our athletes in this day & age tend to defy common sense when it comes to aging; Which is what makes this an interesting discussion IMO.

Maintaining consistent perfromance is not the same as sustaining injuries. A decline in talent can come with age, agreed, but that's seperate from injuries.

tigermask48 03-01-2013 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShowtimeDynasty (Post 60732383)
Quick has a style dependent on athleticism and flexibility.

Bernier has a style dependent on positioning and form.

Common sense tells you that physically, it is more likely to sustain consistent performance through your 30's, if your style if play is not reliant on elite athleticism. Of course, our athletes in this day & age tend to defy common sense when it comes to aging; Which is what makes this an interesting discussion IMO.

I take it Hasek is the exception to the rule then? Or do his nagging groin issues later in his career count?

Raccoon Jesus 03-01-2013 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingsfan (Post 60730447)
I'm curious why this is being said in this thread. He plays a different style, but a different style does not mean a greater chance of injury.

Even if it did, ever seen what happens to an aging butterfly goalie when they've had a hip flexor/groin injury? They're not in any better position than an 'athletic' goalie...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.