Price isn't a top 3 goalie, he is very arguably a top 5 goalie and certainly a top 10 goalie.
Don't let you hate for the Habs blind you Price is a very good goalie and will continue to be for the next decade or so.
I dont hate the Habs, not at all. I followed the Habs closely during Subbans rookie season (because of Subban) and I dont understand the hype for Price at all. Sure I give you that Price is a good goalie, but good goalie is not top 3 materials or top 5 materials for that matter.
We're better off with Kane. The Hawks have already proven they don't need a stud goalie to win the Cup. Not to mention it's not like Crawford is chopped liver. Last season the goalies were dreadful, yes, but I believe in Crawford. I think he can return to form. Just like Kane. His down year will prove to be an aberration.
And Price is as overrated as Dubnyk is underrated.
We won the Cup without super strong netminding, however, Keith and Seabrook were playing at a higher level and the forward depth was better. If we had the same forward and defense group playing like 2010, this would not be a discussion.
We can't lose top-six talent as we currently stand. If they threw Plekanec in if we threw in some picks, I'd really consider it.
You can win with average goaltending if you have a top 5 offense and top 10 D or top 5 D and top 15 offense. We don't have average goaltending. We don't have a top 10 D. We don't have a top 5 D. We have a top 5 offense, top 15 D (not last year but hoping with Roszival) and brutal goaltending.
Almost any goalie in the NHL would have looked "brutal" behind the pile of crap playing in front of Crawford last year. There was no defensive chemistry between the defense and the forwards. On paper both groups are more than capable in their own zone, but it was not that way on the ice.
Crawford has a full season of average (honestly, above average) play to his name. It's not very fair to label him terrible because of one bad year. When the team D in front of him was adequate, so was Crawford. Not rocket science.
Crawford certainly deserves his own share of the blame too - it wasn't all the lack of defensive structure that caused the awful goaltending. But to put it all on him is completely unfair, and to knee-jerk and trade Patrick Kane for a goalie is a ridiculously over-the-top reaction.
only one goalie better than price, an thats quick. ill take the game changing goalie over the game changing forward 9/10.
to put it in to perspective, price put up good numbers on imo the worst team in the league last year.
i hate the habs but would give up anything on the sens asside from karlsson to get him. hes THAT good
I still support Crawford and think he has a good chance of bouncing back. However, Emery is a major problem because by bringing him back you are saying it is 100% certain Crawford will rebound to 2010-11 form. I'm hopeful but far from that convinced. A full season lockout would take care of that problem and at least Hutton is doing well but watch Bowman resign Emery after the lockout.
Like who? Which goalies nominated for the Vezina since the lockout have been products of their system and not extremely talented?
First, I said Vezina-worthy. Second, Ilya Bryzgalov and Mike Smith. Third, Tim Thomas, Pekka Rinne and Jonathan Quick, all outstanding goatlenders in their own rights, benefit greatly from playing behind defensive-minded teams. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
Not to mention, the last two Cup winners (Boston and LA), where the goaltenders for each team won the Conn Smythe, both had/have outstanding depth and above-average top-end talent, both on defense and at forward.
I can't remember a team, since the lockout, that was carried by their goaltender on route to winning the Cup. Cam Ward maybe? But that's about it. In 2011, Boston very easily could have lost to Tampa Bay if not for Tyler Seguin's performance in the ECF and then in the Cup final, it was scoring that carried Boston past Vancouver, against a percieved "elite" goaltender in Luongo.
I mean, really, you need not look any further than Phoenix to understand how unimportant goaltending is. If you play a disciplined, defense-first system, any goaltender can be made to look Vezina-worthy.
Such malarky. Since 2000, five goalies have won the Conn Smythe and every one of them was hugely responsible for the team's success. If you think for a single moment that LA would have won the SC with Crawford in net, then you're simply delusional. Same with the previous year when Tim Thomas won the Conn Smythe for Bruins.
As for the original question and poll. Price has proven to me to be a top 5 goalie who doesn't fold under pressure. With Price on the Hawks, we instantly beome a SC contender, with or wthout Patrick Kane in the line-up.....and assuming Price remained healthy, Hawks would be serious contenders for years to come. It's a no-brainer, unfortunately Habs aren't letting him go anywhere.
First, I said Vezina-worthy. Second, Ilya Bryzgalov and Mike Smith. Third, Tim Thomas, Pekka Rinne and Jonathan Quick, all outstanding goatlenders in their own rights, benefit greatly from playing behind defensive-minded teams. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
You guys are completely downplaying the importance of goalies. The truth can work in the opposite way too, a great goalie can make an average defense look great, what outside Weber and Suter the Preds had an amazing D? The Kings after getting rig of Johnson have the best D in the league and Quick is just an average goalie who got lucky?
Even using Smith as an example is ridiculous. The Hawks outshot and out chanced the Yotes a ton in that series and should have won but Smith stood on his head night in and night out and won that series for them.
Yes a good defense can help a goalie but talent is talent and a good goalie is a good goalie.
Such malarky. Since 2000, five goalies have won the Conn Smythe and every one of them was hugely responsible for the team's success. If you think for a single moment that LA would have won the SC with Crawford in net, then you're simply delusional. Same with the previous year when Tim Thomas won the Conn Smythe for Bruins.
As for the original question and poll. Price has proven to me to be a top 5 goalie who doesn't fold under pressure. With Price on the Hawks, we instantly beome a SC contender, with or wthout Patrick Kane in the line-up.....and assuming Price remained healthy, Hawks would be serious contenders for years to come. It's a no-brainer, unfortunately Habs aren't letting him go anywhere.
That is only you theory... but the fact remain that Kane already helped your team in a BIG way getting the cup, I dont think you guys would won the cup if it was Price on your team in 2010 instead of Kane.
That is only you theory... but the fact remain that Kane already helped your team in a BIG way getting the cup, I dont think you guys would won the cup if it was Price on your team in 2010 instead of Kane.
That was a different team. The 2010 team was a freak team loaded with top 6 forward talent on the 3rd and 4th line that won't be rebuilt. Looking at the team now and in the future I want a goalie over a 75pt forward.
Fact is this Hawks team has lots of scoring now and lots of scoring in the future with a talented prospect pool of forwards. This team doesn't have a G and doesn't have a G prospect. This team lost in the play-offs last year as a result of horrible goaltending.
This team can lose some scoring if it gains the same lose in defense.
If we lose Kane we realistically lose .25 PPG, which still leaves the Hawks top 10 in scoring. If the Hawks improve .25 in GA they go from 22nd to 10th. I would rather the Hawks be top 10 in both scoring and GA then top 5 in scoring and bottom 20 in GA.
You guys are completely downplaying the importance of goalies.
Just like you overrate the importance they have.
It's in the middle. You need good goaltending to win. A goalie also needs a good (Team) D infront of him. A goalie alone will never win a game. Somebody has to score at some point to get the W.
Smith is a good example of being a good talented goalie. He underachieved in Tampa but he overachieved in the Yotes system.
It's in the middle. You need good goaltending to win. A goalie also needs a good (Team) D infront of him. A goalie alone will never win a game. Somebody has to score at some point to get the W.
Smith is a good example of being a good talented goalie. He underachieved in Tampa but he overachieved in the Yotes system.
I never said a goalie will win games alone. No not all goalies need good teams in front of them, do you remember some of the early Buffalo teams Hasek was one or some of the recent Ranger teams Lundqvist played behind? Vokoun put up great numbers a few years for the Panthers while being on one of the worst teams in the NHL. Yes a good D will help a goalie but a good goalie doesn't need a great D in front of him to play well.
But the way some of the people on here cast goalies aside as being overrated and useless after seeing what happened to the Hawks last year is laughable, the Hawks were beaten by a goalie and lost because of their goalie yet goaltending is meaningless?
I never said a goalie will win games alone. No not all goalies need good teams in front of them, do you remember some of the early Buffalo teams Hasek was one or some of the recent Ranger teams Lundqvist played behind? Vokoun put up great numbers a few years for the Panthers while being on one of the worst teams in the NHL. Yes a good D will help a goalie but a good goalie doesn't need a great D in front of him to play well.
But the way some of the people on here cast goalies aside as being overrated and useless after seeing what happened to the Hawks last year is laughable, the Hawks were beaten by a goalie and lost because of their goalie yet goaltending is meaningless?
and our D was bad...and sharp, kane, toews forgot to show up.
Such malarky. Since 2000, five goalies have won the Conn Smythe and every one of them was hugely responsible for the team's success. If you think for a single moment that LA would have won the SC with Crawford in net, then you're simply delusional. Same with the previous year when Tim Thomas won the Conn Smythe for Bruins.
As for the original question and poll. Price has proven to me to be a top 5 goalie who doesn't fold under pressure. With Price on the Hawks, we instantly beome a SC contender, with or wthout Patrick Kane in the line-up.....and assuming Price remained healthy, Hawks would be serious contenders for years to come. It's a no-brainer, unfortunately Habs aren't letting him go anywhere.
And I said those goaltenders weren't responsible, in part, for their teams success? No, they were, I don't deny that, but the truth is none of those goaltenders (who won a Cup) carried their team to the championship where you could say "without that player, they don't win the Cup", anymore than any other player on the team (again, with potential exception to Cam Ward).
And again, I don't think LA could have won the Cup with Crawford.. at least, with how he played last year.. but that's not my point, is it? You say that, and then I say there's no chance LA even gets out of the 1st round without Dustin Brown, who easily could have won the Conn Smythe himself, or Anze Kopitar.
Fact is the Chicago Blackhawks don't need a 6.5M goaltender. They simply don't.. and the fact taht some people think they do, and would sacrifice Kane to get said goaltender, speaks to the incompetence of the coaching staff in getting this team to play half-decent defense.
I never said a goalie will win games alone. No not all goalies need good teams in front of them, do you remember some of the early Buffalo teams Hasek was one or some of the recent Ranger teams Lundqvist played behind? Vokoun put up great numbers a few years for the Panthers while being on one of the worst teams in the NHL. Yes a good D will help a goalie but a good goalie doesn't need a great D in front of him to play well.
But the way some of the people on here cast goalies aside as being overrated and useless after seeing what happened to the Hawks last year is laughable, the Hawks were beaten by a goalie and lost because of their goalie yet goaltending is meaningless?
First, that's not what most people are saying - or at least, not what I'm saying, completely. Answer this: What was Mike Smith in Tampa? AHL-fodder. Then he goes to Phoenix and suddenly puts up numbers that would challenge the best goalies in the league. How is that? Simple: He's a product of a system, as alot of goalies throughout the league are.
You can't tell me that Crawford's numbers wouldn't have been significantly better in Phoenix. Where he could have just sat on the goalline (as Mike Smith does/did), take advantage of his frame and have his defense block shots, collapse around him and simply clear any and all lose pucks. Maybe Crawford doesn't put up a .930sv%, after all, Smith does have 2.5 inches on Crawford, but his numbers would have been far better than what he put up in Chicago, playing behind a team that looked, at the best of times, average in their own zone defensively, 5-on-5.. nevermind the PK..
/\ I can’t argue that Hawks were or are a sound team without the puck or a sound team across the board defensively. They aren’t. But that doesn’t mean Hawks couldn’t use an upgrade in goal. As far as I'm concerned it should be a number one priority. You bring up Price’s salary, well the reality is any top goalie is going to be paid upwards of $ 5 M plus in this league. Hawks need to wake up to the fact that winning a SC with average goaltending is an anomaly. Folks here who think it can happen again are dreaming.
As for your assessment of Smith in the playoffs. Did you watch the games? You’re way off. He was fantastic and who cares what he did in Tampa. We trade goalies in last year's playoffs, and we easily advance past the first round, and who knows what happens after that.
Crawford comes cheaply, but he is a decent back up goalie at best.
/\ I can’t argue that Hawks were or are a sound team without the puck or a sound team across the board defensively. They aren’t. But that doesn’t mean Hawks couldn’t use an upgrade in goal. As far as I'm concerned it should be a number one priority. You bring up Price’s salary, well the reality is any top goalie is going to be paid upwards of $ 5 M plus in this league. Hawks need to wake up to the fact that winning a SC with average goaltending is an anomaly. Folks here who think it can happen again are dreaming.
As for your assessment of Smith in the playoffs. Did you watch the games? You’re way off. He was fantastic and who cares what he did in Tampa. We trade goalies in last year's playoffs, and we easily advance past the first round, and who knows what happens after that.
Crawford comes cheaply, but he is a decent back up goalie at best.
I didn't say the Hawks shouldn't look for an upgrade in goal. I think Crawford can/will bounce back, but I didn't exclude the thought in my original post. I bring up Price's salary because Chicago isn't a team that needs to pay a goaltender that much. As I said before, Chicago doesn't need to pay a goaltender to steal games, they need to pay a goaltender to not lose them games.
The bolded is a joke and a prime example of how difficult it is to judge goaltenders ability/talent and how much their stats can be attributed to the team infront of them. Last year, you would have said the same of Mike Smith, if not worse and there would have been no chance you would have traded Corey Crawford for him.. a year later, not only is Mike Smith "fantastic", but if Chicago had him and not Corey Crawford, they would advanced past the 1st round... do ya see what I'm saying?
Goaltending is not a meaningless position. It does matter.. but it's not a coincidence that guys like Mike Smith and Brian Elliot go to defensive-minded teams like St.Louis and Phoenix and put up Vezina-worthy numbers, looking like sieve's the year prior and guys like Ilya Bryzgalov leave said defensive-minded teams and proceed to struggle. Most of the best goaltenders in the legaue, statiscally, play behind some of the most disciplined and structured defensive teams in the league. Pekka Rinne, Henrik Lundqvist, Mike Smith, Jonathan Quick; I'm not saying those goaltenders aren't talented (outside of Smith), because they are, but their numbers are without doubt inflated because of the system they play behind.
Mike Smith is as much a stud goaltender as Jonathan Cheechoo is a 50-goal scorer. The stats suggest that to be the case, but a deeper look shows something drastically different.
I didn't say the Hawks shouldn't look for an upgrade in goal. I think Crawford can/will bounce back, but I didn't exclude the thought in my original post. I bring up Price's salary because Chicago isn't a team that needs to pay a goaltender that much. As I said before, Chicago doesn't need to pay a goaltender to steal games, they need to pay a goaltender to not lose them games.
The bolded is a joke and a prime example of how difficult it is to judge goaltenders ability/talent and how much their stats can be attributed to the team infront of them. Last year, you would have said the same of Mike Smith, if not worse and there would have been no chance you would have traded Corey Crawford for him.. a year later, not only is Mike Smith "fantastic", but if Chicago had him and not Corey Crawford, they would advanced past the 1st round... do ya see what I'm saying?
Goaltending is not a meaningless position. It does matter.. but it's not a coincidence that guys like Mike Smith and Brian Elliot go to defensive-minded teams like St.Louis and Phoenix and put up Vezina-worthy numbers, looking like sieve's the year prior and guys like Ilya Bryzgalov leave said defensive-minded teams and proceed to struggle. Most of the best goaltenders in the legaue, statiscally, play behind some of the most disciplined and structured defensive teams in the league. Pekka Rinne, Henrik Lundqvist, Mike Smith, Jonathan Quick; I'm not saying those goaltenders aren't talented (outside of Smith), because they are, but their numbers are without doubt inflated because of the system they play behind.
Mike Smith is as much a stud goaltender as Jonathan Cheechoo is a 50-goal scorer. The stats suggest that to be the case, but a deeper look shows something drastically different.
The same thing can be said for any player on any team. How many people have been saying Keith needs Seabrook to be good. Imagine the numbers Malkin would put up playing on the 4th line in Columbus instead of playing with guys like Crosby and Neal.
Maybe, maybe the Hawks don't need a goalie to win them games, but why not have one. Why not have a goalie who you know that sometimes if your team isn't playing it's best can still win you a game and who in the play-offs might be able to win a series for you.
