I'd take Niemi in a heartbeat, especially if he's willing to eat his lunch on a one-year deal just so that he can stay in the NHL, and not have to go looking for playing time in Russia.
No, because the Sharks just signed him as a free agent (they wanted Leighton), and Greiss is a young goalie who they think can play). The Flyers aren't in the same situation where Boucher is more expendable.
But the pain in his voice was obvious when he discussed the speed with which the Hawks moved on after an arbitrator awarded Niemi a $2.75 million salary the team chose not to pay.
Paying Niemi at that price would have required the Hawks to shed even more salary and get rid of players they valued more. So they wasted no time turning to Turco, a cheaper, older option with an impressive resume.
Or look at the cap hits that goalies 20x better than Leighton got this offseason.
Who were those goalies that had better cap hits? This is what I don't get. I hear people talk about goalies who were better with lower cap hits, but the only goaltender who signed for a lower number than Leighton was Turco. Mason signed for more, Dan Ellis got the same money that Leighton got, Niittymaki signed for more money. The only one who took less was Marty Biron, but is he that much of an upgrade over Leighton?
I don't like Leighton as much as the next person and I think it's a big mistake that the Flyers are putting all their eggs in the basket of a waiver wire acquisition. With that being said, it's not as if the goaltender market this summer was loaded with great goaltenders. It really wasn't and fact is, Leighton signed a reasonable deal. I know this much - I feel more comfortable with him in the nets than I do with Boucher.
Who were those goalies that had better cap hits? This is what I don't get. I hear people talk about goalies who were better with lower cap hits, but the only goaltender who signed for a lower number than Leighton was Turco. Mason signed for more, Dan Ellis got the same money that Leighton got, Niittymaki signed for more money. The only one who took less was Marty Biron, but is he that much of an upgrade over Leighton?
I don't like Leighton as much as the next person and I think it's a big mistake that the Flyers are putting all their eggs in the basket of a waiver wire acquisition. With that being said, it's not as if the goaltender market this summer was loaded with great goaltenders. It really wasn't and fact is, Leighton signed a reasonable deal. I know this much - I feel more comfortable with him in the nets than I do with Boucher.
Pretty much every single NHL goalie available this summer was or is a better choice then Leighton.
Ellis- Signed for 50k less.
Mason- Only 200k more. If you're nitpicking over 200k then you're just missing the point here.
Halak- Traded for a good prospect.
Nabokov- Went to KHL.
Turco- Signed for 250k less.
Niemi- Unsigned. Likely to either go for peanuts or not even get a job.
Theodore- Unsigned. Likely to either go for peanuts or not even get a job.
Niitty- Signed for 450k more.
Biron- Signed for 675 less.
So, three of those guys signed for less, one signed for slightly more, one was traded for a good prospect, one went to the KHL because he couldn't find a team, and two don't even have a job still.
You can't sit there with a straight face and tell me that Homer couldn't have gotten a goalie or that those guys aren't better then Leighton.
**** biron. that no tallent ass clown can **** off. 5m a year, he can kiss it. he had it good, but gave it up.
I'd rather take back niitty than biron.
We have who we have. stop *****ing about leighton. lets see how it is 25 or so games into the season and then decide if he's THAT bad. How would he be in the NHL if he really was a bad goalie anyway.
**** biron. that no tallent ass clown can **** off. 5m a year, he can kiss it. he had it good, but gave it up.
You mean Leighton?
Yeah, **** Biron for wanting to get paid, having a crappy agent, and for the Flyers having a crappy GM that can't manage a salary cap.
Quote:
We have who we have. stop *****ing about leighton. lets see how it is 25 or so games into the season and then decide if he's THAT bad. How would he be in the NHL if he really was a bad goalie anyway.
Under that logic, no team should ever make changes in the off-season until 25 or so games into the season so that they know how good or bad they are and whether or not they should improve.
Leighton likely wouldn't be in the NHL or would at least be Carolina's wavier-wire fodder if we didn't pick him up. It's not like crappy players don't play in the NHL. Riley Cote, Raitis Ivanens, Andrew Peters, Jon Sim, etc. keep getting jobs somehow.
**** biron. that no tallent ass clown can **** off. 5m a year, he can kiss it. he had it good, but gave it up.
I'd rather take back niitty than biron.
We have who we have. stop *****ing about leighton. lets see how it is 25 or so games into the season and then decide if he's THAT bad. How would he be in the NHL if he really was a bad goalie anyway.
That's actually not OK. You have to get off to a good start because you don't want to be fighting tooth and nail to get back into it. Just ask...the Flyers. Waiting 25 games last year (it was exactly 25 when Stevens got fired), and they didn't look good for the 2 weeks following it. Waiting damn near cost us the playoffs, and we're talking about a whole different situation. We're probably talking about a whole different regime. Moreover, teams aren't readily willing to trade you #1 goaltenders 2 months into the season.
No, because the Sharks just signed him as a free agent (they wanted Leighton), and Greiss is a young goalie who they think can play). The Flyers aren't in the same situation where Boucher is more expendable.
After signing Niitty, Wilson (our GM) said that Niittymaki was the guy he wanted all along, and that the reason that he told Nabby he wasn't going to re-sign him, was to give Niitty interest in SJ and hit the open market.
So in short, Doug Wilson has basically said that's not true...
"We've liked him from that point. We think there will be a supply of goalies in this market, but we wanted to go get the guy we wanted and we were proactive in getting him."
Wilson's biggest concern was not that Niittymaki would sign with another NHL team. The worry was that he might re-up with Tampa Bay under the team's charismatic new general manager, Steve Yzerman.
In fact, if you were wondering why Wilson announced early last week that Nabokov would not be offered a new deal by the Sharks, there's your answer. Yes, the move was a considerate one in terms of allowing Nabokov to plan his own future. But it also sent out a message to any potential free-agent goalies that there was an opening in San Jose and so they might want to hang in there until July 1.
Last edited by JPavs8Clutchy*: 08-18-2010 at 01:58 AM.
How would he be in the NHL if he really was a bad goalie anyway.
Because we picked him up off the waiver wire and KEPT him in the NHL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16
Who were those goalies that had better cap hits? This is what I don't get. I hear people talk about goalies who were better with lower cap hits, but the only goaltender who signed for a lower number than Leighton was Turco. Mason signed for more, Dan Ellis got the same money that Leighton got, Niittymaki signed for more money. The only one who took less was Marty Biron, but is he that much of an upgrade over Leighton?
I didn't say they made less, but if you are arguing that their cap hits vs. their skill level isn't tremendously disproportionate than what Leighton got vs. his skill level then I do believe this conversation will be going nowhere fast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPavs8Cluthcy
So in short, Doug Wilson has basically said that's not true...
Not that I really believe that SJ was interested in Leighton, but.... GMs are notorious liars, so I wouldn't use quotes from AFTER he signs someone to dictate the "truth".
What is he going to say?
"Well, we were going to sign Leighton, but the Flyers gave him double what we were going to offer the day before FA started so we said 'Oh, ****!', threw some darts at a wall full of pictures of FA goalies and the only one we hit was Nitty, so we signed him. He doesn't have any hip problems... does he?"
After signing Niitty, Wilson (our GM) said that Niittymaki was the guy he wanted all along, and that the reason that he told Nabby he wasn't going to re-sign him, was to give Niitty interest in SJ and hit the open market.
So in short, Doug Wilson has basically said that's not true...
My problem isnt the fact that they signed Leighton over other goalies more so than they signed Leighton and kept Boucher. They should have signed two of these cheap guys and waived boosh, or better yet sign Niemi right now, waive boosh and waive that waste of space 1.7 mil 7th dman Matt Walker and we are set for the season. We couldnt have gotten Halak, they wanted Giroux from us, it would have taken more than a scrubby prospect in Eller and a 3rd rounder to land Halak from an eastern conference Rival, they sent him west so they dont have to see him ever. We arent winning anything with this tandem this year, we need to sign a better 1 A option and lose Boosh.
I recall reading in the Sharks magazine that Niittymaki was the guy they wanted.
I don't think DW was interested in Leighton. And if he was, I'd be calling for him to be fired.
No he was def. interested this was reported when we traded for the rights for Nabokov if he became a UFA he was going to pursue Leighton but we signed him before he could test the market.
