I think that is why Howson grabbed Dex. He probably felt he had been developed in the Nashville organization. Who knew that he would have his entire season derailed by injuries. He could still be a viable option assuming his ankle surgery solves the injury problem.
I would not pencil him in as the starter, but keep him in the organization, and go from there.
That's why I have to shake my head over the Ben Bishop hype-train a couple months ago. Bishop in January 2012 and Dekanich in July 2011 were pretty much in the same situation.
Dekanich had just turned 25 and had one brief stint in the NHL, impressing not a bit. He'd developed into a dominant AHL goalie, and was believed to be NHL-ready on that basis.
Bishop had just turned 25 and had two separate brief stints in the NHL, impressing not a bit. He'd developed into a dominant AHL goalie, and was believed to be NHL-ready on that basis.
This summer will have Cedrick Desjardins, who's turned 26 recently. He has one brief stint in the NHL and looked good, but it was only two games and that was last year. He's developed into a dominant AHL goalie, and is believed to be NHL-ready on that basis.
(Dekanich, by the way, actually had more playing time than Bishop in each of the prior three seasons. Just a note for those who say that his injuries should have been predicted.)
What if instead of looking for a handful of good pieces, including some potentials, you looked at something like Nash to Buffalo for Miller and Stafford (piecy-parts going either/both ways)? Just spitballing.
You won't get Miller out of Buffalo, especially not for Nash.
But I proposed Nash to Colorado for Stastny a while back and I still think it makes sense. Colorado has Duchene and O'Reilly as top 6 C, but only Landeskog as top 6 LW.
For Columbus, Stastny is a #1 C, and he's as close to equally talented to Nash as you could hope for when dealing with a player's trade request.
What if instead of looking for a handful of good pieces, including some potentials, you looked at something like Nash to Buffalo for Miller and Stafford (piecy-parts going either/both ways)? Just spitballing.
I missed this... Giving the post some respect, I doubt the Sabres would ever want Nash nor will they trade Miller any time soon ... that said, if the Jackets could get Stafford out side of a Nash trade I'd say get that guy.. he's under rated.
I missed this... Giving the post some respect, I doubt the Sabres would ever want Nash nor will they trade Miller any time soon ... that said, if the Jackets could get Stafford out side of a Nash trade I'd say get that guy.. he's under rated.
Your hit on Stafford was a good one.
1)I agree, I can't see them wanting Nash, especially with them having Vanek and his big contract.
2)Even if they were to trade Miller, he has some sort of NTC.
3)On top of Sanford, any interest in Enroth? Another young goalie with little experience. Has potential but when I saw him play against Columbus, he was horrible. Although 1 game doesn't show what he's capable of.
How the hell can the CBJ even CONSIDER not signing goaltender Mathieu Corbeil?!?
There's still six weeks to go until that deadline.
There's actually a thread going on the history of hockey board about can't-miss goalie prospects who missed. A common theme is that a lot of them played on pretty good junior teams, which either masked the flaws in their game or meant that they weren't facing the quality and variety of shots that a goalie on a lesser team might face. In Corbeil's case, his save percentage went from .867 with Halifax to .908 in Saint John last year, with his GAA going from 3.76 to 2.17. The goalie that he was traded for (Frederic Piche) went from .910 to .888, and from 2.56 to 3.13. Now, that's not to say that Corbeil and Piche are the same player or same type of player, but it's an example of the wild swings that exist in junior hockey when looking at stats.
There's still six weeks to go until that deadline.
There's actually a thread going on the history of hockey board about can't-miss goalie prospects who missed. A common theme is that a lot of them played on pretty good junior teams, which either masked the flaws in their game or meant that they weren't facing the quality and variety of shots that a goalie on a lesser team might face. In Corbeil's case, his save percentage went from .867 with Halifax to .908 in Saint John last year, with his GAA going from 3.76 to 2.17. The goalie that he was traded for (Frederic Piche) went from .910 to .888, and from 2.56 to 3.13. Now, that's not to say that Corbeil and Piche are the same player or same type of player, but it's an example of the wild swings that exist in junior hockey when looking at stats.
I get what you're saying, but it could also be those goaltenders aren't the same goaltenders they were last year. My point is that we're not exactly flush with good goaltending prospects. If there's a decent chance he could be a keeper, keep him!
I get what you're saying, but it could also be those goaltenders aren't the same goaltenders they were last year. My point is that we're not exactly flush with good goaltending prospects. If there's a decent chance he could be a keeper, keep him!
Of course, and I'm a believer that even if a pattern can be found, it doesn't mean it should be applied. But this pattern is tough to ignore.
In football, I've fallen into this very trap before. If there's little to no familiarity with a certain player, it's easy to see limited action and start reading into it way too much. I know that I've been a part of accounting for an all-state caliber player, then discovering that he'd just had a big couple of games before playing us and that he's really nothing special. I'd have to imagine that in hockey, with so many levels and so many players and so little time, it may be possible to do the same.
I still remember bidding on a Czech auction for a jersey of a goalie who had a couple of huge international tournaments, and figuring I could make a tidy profit when he became an NHL star. Turns out that I was outbid, and someone else was stuck with an albatross of a Marek Schwarz jersey.
Of course, and I'm a believer that even if a pattern can be found, it doesn't mean it should be applied. But this pattern is tough to ignore.
In football, I've fallen into this very trap before. If there's little to no familiarity with a certain player, it's easy to see limited action and start reading into it way too much. I know that I've been a part of accounting for an all-state caliber player, then discovering that he'd just had a big couple of games before playing us and that he's really nothing special. I'd have to imagine that in hockey, with so many levels and so many players and so little time, it may be possible to do the same.
I still remember bidding on a Czech auction for a jersey of a goalie who had a couple of huge international tournaments, and figuring I could make a tidy profit when he became an NHL star. Turns out that I was outbid, and someone else was stuck with an albatross of a Marek Schwarz jersey.
No disrespect intended, but these analogies make for an incredibly weak defense.
The Blue Jackets’ apparent quandary over whether to sign Saint John goaltender Mathieu Corbeil, a fourth-round pick in the 2010 draft, by June 1 or allow him to go back into the draft pool is a bit of a head-scratcher given the franchise’s history of making bad personnel decisions.
Corbeil won the Jacques Plante Trophy as the top goaltender in the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League. He was 37-10-0-1 with a league-best 2.38 goals-against average and .911 save percentage, and he led the league with six shutouts. But he is also playing on a powerhouse club, one coached by former Blue Jackets coach Gerard Gallant, so the Jackets are thinking that he might not be as good as advertised.
Even if the Jackets suspect that he might not be that good, can they really afford to take a chance on having him sign with another team?
No disrespect intended, but these analogies make for an incredibly weak defense.
I'm not defending anything, merely offering the other side of the spectrum. If it were me, I'd sign him since there are six goalie contracts in the system and only two that extend beyond June 30 (Mason and York). Dekanich, Hunwick, McElhinney, and Sanford are all expiring.
And if I weren't going to sign him, I'd find someone who is interested and trade his rights for something. But there's still six weeks to decide.
I'm not defending anything, merely offering the other side of the spectrum. If it were me, I'd sign him since there are six goalie contracts in the system and only two that extend beyond June 30 (Mason and York). Dekanich, Hunwick, McElhinney, and Sanford are all expiring.
And if I weren't going to sign him, I'd find someone who is interested and trade his rights for something. But there's still six weeks to decide.
The Blue Jackets’ apparent quandary over whether to sign Saint John goaltender Mathieu Corbeil, a fourth-round pick in the 2010 draft, by June 1 or allow him to go back into the draft pool is a bit of a head-scratcher given the franchise’s history of making bad personnel decisions.
The Dispatch doesn't have its tired old narrative down right with this one. If we're to assume that not signing Corbeil would be a bad personnel decision, how is this a head-scratcher? Wouldn't it be SOP? Hahaha. See that? Now you're really making a good point. Jackets management is teh suck, you guyz.
Come on, Dispatch. We expect better of you. Hell, read pretty much any thread on here and just mimic the tired narrative, for crying out loud. For example:
The Dispatch's poor wording in a piece about junior goalie Mathieu Corbeil is a bit of a head-scratcher, given the paper's history of quality, tired-narrative-free reporting on the CBJ.
__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
The Dispatch doesn't have its tired old narrative down right with this one. If we're to assume that not signing Corbeil would be a bad personnel decision, how is this a head-scratcher? Wouldn't it be SOP? Hahaha. See that? Now you're really making a good point. Jackets management is teh suck, you guyz.
Come on, Dispatch. We expect better of you. Hell, read pretty much any thread on here and just mimic the tired narrative, for crying out loud. For example:
The Dispatch's poor wording in a piece about junior goalie Mathieu Corbeil is a bit of a head-scratcher, given the paper's history of quality, tired-narrative-free reporting on the CBJ.
Bob Hunter may be shocked by this, but we're not and neither are the hockey beat writers. Given this organization's utter incompetence when it comes to player development, we should only be surprised by brilliant decisions involving prospects.
I think the point is that signing Corbeil is low-risk and high-reward and when you have a dearth of talent at the position...can the team really afford to not sign him and give him a chance to develop?
I'm going to be curious to see how much management is willing to spend on payroll next season. I have a feeling it could be a good $10 million less than this year. With Nash(assuming he's traded), Juice and Martinek alone we are shedding over $14 million in salary. I realize we'll be getting plenty of salary back in the Nash deal as well as any re-signings (Dorse, etc.), but I could envision the Jackets being bottom 5 in payroll. I no longer believe in any correlation between salary and results after this past Jackets season (see also, Sabres and Leafs), so just give me some guys that will bust their ass and bring it every night (Nashville shows how far that can get you).
