Once again you fail to understand the argument many of us are making.
We need very good goaltending to win games.
We don't get that with Clemmer. We could potentially have that with Markstrom. That's the point we're trying to make.
I think everyone is in agreement that Clemmer is "all right", but that's not what this team needs. Do you get it yet?
Clemmer got us points in 20 of 26 games so we know we can and have won and earned points with him. Do you understand that? Because if you did, you wouldn't make pointless arguments.
Clemmer got us points in 20 of 26 games so we know we can and have won and earned points with him. Do you understand that? Because if you did, you wouldn't make pointless arguments.
that was last year, with a different team, stop just pulling out stats without any context.
i give him credit for playing well at times last year, but markstrom gives us a better chance.
whatever, there's no point in this debate anymore. i'm done.
that was last year, with a different team, stop just pulling out stats without any context.
LOL what context do you need? Are facts too complicated. These are very straight forwad. He went 14-6-6. That's a very good record. Do I need to break down each and every game, making you only happen when Clemmer earned the victory the way Theo did tonight? The sample size is large enough to reasonably believe Clemmer is a goalie that can earn this team points. And yes, this team is different. The forwards are better, and the D is arguably the same. So what exactly is your point besides some vague notion of "context?"
LOL what context do you need? Are facts too complicated. These are very straight forwad. He went 14-6-6. That's a very good record. Do I need to break down each and every game, making you only happen when Clemmer earned the victory the way Theo did tonight? The sample size is large enough to reasonably believe Clemmer is a goalie that can earn this team points. And yes, this team is different. The forwards are better, and the D is arguably the same. So what exactly is your point besides some vague notion of "context?"
This team is probably worse defensively than last year's. I don't think it's a huge difference that's going to cause Clemmer to have a terrible year, but I don't think our D is "arguably the same" unless guys like Kulkov and Gudbranson develop to another level this year.
This team is probably worse defensively than last year's. I don't think it's a huge difference that's going to cause Clemmer to have a terrible year, but I don't think our D is "arguably the same" unless guys like Kulkov and Gudbranson develop to another level this year.
The D isn't playing well right now but on paper, with an older Guds and Kulikov it is "arguably the same," imo. I think Adam Graves agreed with me earlier in this thread on this point.
yes please. Look how great Shore & Huber look! Why not bring Marks up too. He needs some playing time with big club this year if he is to be the fulltime backup next season tbh!
yes please. Look how great Shore & Huber look! Why not bring Marks up too. He needs some playing time with big club this year if he is to be the fulltime backup next season tbh!
And he has the best chance to be a serviceable backup in a shortened season as he would play in way more games because of the compressed schedule
This team is probably worse defensively than last year's. I don't think it's a huge difference that's going to cause Clemmer to have a terrible year, but I don't think our D is "arguably the same" unless guys like Kulkov and Gudbranson develop to another level this year.
I think our d will improve with each game...
The point is simply Marky gives us a better chance any and every game he'd play over clemmer, and no one, no one, can dispute that. We are in a playoff sprint where every point is gold.
The point is simply Marky gives us a better chance any and every game he'd play over clemmer, and no one, no one, can dispute that. We are in a playoff sprint where every point is gold.
Bring up the alien.
Thats an opinion, not fact, so yes it can be disputed
Why not bring up DGM who has been just as good as Markstrom this season?
Because Markstrom is the Golden Boy Nate!!! If he plays, the Panthers will get a shoutout every game!! Didn't you know this??? If Markstrom plays, we can't possibly lose because he is just invincible!!!
Obviously I dont think this is the case. Of course I cant wait to see Jake play and hopefully dominate but many dont understand that the difference between quality of skaters is much larger to the quality of goalies. As good as Jake may be, he isnt the savior of this franchise. A key piece, yes. But the be all and end all, no.
Honestly if Clemm, DGM or Jake were the backup goalie, it wouldnt make much difference to the season.
Last edited by jakethesnake23: 02-08-2013 at 11:06 AM.
Why not bring up DGM who has been just as good as Markstrom this season?
Because Markstrom is our future. And if he comes up and stumbles, I won't care. As a vested season ticket holder I dont mind paying to watch huby, shore et al even with some growing pains. As I will Markstrom. Certainly more so than a career backup on his decline.
And he has the best chance to be a serviceable backup in a shortened season as he would play in way more games because of the compressed schedule
I think this is a fallacy as well that people keep saying (not just you). So far in the first 10 games, Clemmer has only gotten 2 chances to start (appeared in a 3rd game, which wasnt completely Theo's fault on why he got pulled) so why wouldn't Dineen play his current backup more then in this condensed schedule? And dont give me the excuse that he doesnt trust Clemmer because he obviously does with his statements post-game. Markstrom wouldnt get any more chances to play than Clemmer regardless of whats happening this season.
Yeah, Markstrom wouldn't get much playing time right now.
It seems like we haven't played many back to backs even with the 48-game schedule.
Our next B2B is two weeks from now. Another at the beginning of March (2-3). The next one at the beginning of April (6-7). And that's it.
We have 3 B2B's the rest of the year. Clemmer might not even play in 10 games this year. If Theo is consistent as he was last year, there's no real reason that he can't carry most of the workload this year.
Yeah, I doubt Theodore is going to be outplayed by anybody in our system right now. He'll get the vast majority of starts and he should with the way he is playing right now. Bringing Markstrom up to play a handful of games this season isn't how we should be developing him.
Anybody that thinks Clem will get demoted anytime soon is kidding themselves. We just traded a former top ten pick for peanuts to shed salary because we are paying Santorelli a NHL salary to play in the AHL. Markstrom's two-way contract is what's keeping him in SA. Not how he is playing.
Anybody that thinks Clem will get demoted anytime soon is kidding themselves. We just traded a former top ten pick for peanuts to shed salary because we are paying Santorelli a NHL salary to play in the AHL. Markstrom's two-way contract is what's keeping him in SA. Not how he is playing.
I don't think they think Markstrom is ready for the NHL.
They might not think that Markstrom should be here now because of the way the schedule is setup. He's not going to outplay Theodore so there's no point in having him sit on the bench and be a backup (again, only 3 B2B's the rest of the year).
If they felt it was best for Markstrom to be here, they would've saved some money and not signed Clemmensen at all last offseason, to begin with.
Yeah, Markstrom wouldn't get much playing time right now.
It seems like we haven't played many back to backs even with the 48-game schedule.
Our next B2B is two weeks from now. Another at the beginning of March (2-3). The next one at the beginning of April (6-7). And that's it.
We have 3 B2B's the rest of the year. Clemmer might not even play in 10 games this year. If Theo is consistent as he was last year, there's no real reason that he can't carry most of the workload this year.
