Report: Blackhawks close to acquiring Marc Andre Fleury

Granada

Well-known member
10,339
1,624
75
I'd give Lanks this year and next... especially if he plays 2nd banana to MAF. He's got to be fugured out by the entirety of the league, and we have to then see how he adjusts. Just this year might not be enough to properly gauge him.
That's fair.
 

hawkinmontreal

Well-known member
10,327
1,427
75
My favorite teams
  1. Oakland Athletics
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Duke Blue Devils
I'd give Lanks this year and next... especially if he plays 2nd banana to MAF. He's got to be fugured out by the entirety of the league, and we have to then see how he adjusts. Just this year might not be enough to properly gauge him.
Agreed, as soon as the league figures out his tendencies we will find out if he is the real deal or not.
 

HSBOB

Well-known member
2,121
2,227
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Before last season started not may people even knew who Lankinen was....now he's suddenly the goalie of the future? Plus you invest millions in a tutor for him? Please. You talk risk...there's your risk. The cold hard facts whether anyone here wants to believe it or not is that Bowman wasn't thinking of Lankenin, he was thinking of Bowman. He was thinking on how he can keep his two stars happy so they can keep him employed for another year. MAF will play probably 60-65 games while the "goalie of the future" rides the pines. And, if you are counting on Bowman playing the flip game just bear in mind that his last venture in flipping a goalie netted the Hawks Suppan.
I've been toutin' Kevin Lankinen ever since he stoned the world in the WC's a few summers ago but I agree,the FO and the staff clearly saw Lankinen as their third best tender to start last year after burying him in a four goaltender carousel in Rockford the year before. If Delia and Subban don't shit the bed right off the start,God knows when we woulda seen Lankinnen.
 

HSBOB

Well-known member
2,121
2,227
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
If he wanted to keep his "two stars" happy, he wouldn't have constantly pissed them off by trading away Panarin (who Kane loved playing with) and selling the past two deadlines. That's a silly narrative.

Lankinen is indeed the best goalie prospect in our system, like it or not. This year is make-or-break for him, and he deserves it, considering he did look like the real deal (with a shit defense) for a solid stretch last year. Give him a good mentor for a year and see if he is in fact the real deal. You would have been investing millions no matter what "tutor" you would have brought in anyways -- might as well give him the best one out there and not sign a FA because FA's would want term -- I don't know why people don't understand this. We've seen what guys like Cam Ward and Marty Turco at 3-4 million do. Nothing.

Lehner also fetched a second-round pick and a prospect. So yeah, I'd gladly play the flip game with Fleury again.
MAF already has a M-NTC and rumors are he wanted assurance he wouldn't be traded again after moving his family here before agreeing to show up so I wouldn't count on a TDL return. We shouldn't be sellers anyway with all the expensive guys we added.
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
16,575
1,873
85
MAF already has a M-NTC and rumors are he wanted assurance he wouldn't be traded again after moving his family here before agreeing to show up so I wouldn't count on a TDL return. We shouldn't be sellers anyway with all the expensive guys we added.
I wouldn't count on it either, but any team that has a starting goalie go down and we're gold jerrry... GOLD.
 

LordKOTL

Scratched for Vorobiev
7,943
2,418
70
My favorite teams
  1. Portland Timbers
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
That's fair.
VVV
Agreed, as soon as the league figures out his tendencies we will find out if he is the real deal or not.
Exactly. I don't think you can sell goalies too quickly. Some of them tend to look really good when no one knows their tendencies, then they look bad as they're figured out, and then they become good again. It takes some time, specifically at the NHL level.

Given that Lanks is riding a .909 for the career after a single season, and he'll likely play 2nd banana to MaF this season (but hopefully we don't Kiprusoff MaF), I really don't see us extending him for a *major sum*. He's making 800k now. I think the max his extension would possibly be would be equivalent to what Crawford signed for 2012: which in today's cap dollars would be around 3.42M. By the time Crawford's 2012 deal kicked in he had posted a .917 *and* de facto taken over the starter slot.

Given Lanks current situation: .909 on the career and seeing about 32.5 shots/game with a 3.01 GAA (not all his fault), he would need about 15 games or so giving up no more than 2 goals in each to hit Crawford's .917 which would command him that ~3.5M salary. That would also be a meteoric increase in play as well, and I'd be okay with paying that. If he would average ~.920 he would probably hit ~.915 by season's end this year if he gets a decent amount of games.

I think likely he might be getting somewhere between 1.5 and 3M in an extension depending on his play and duration assuming his numbers are decent. If not I think ~900k-1.5M in a "show me" deal where he could lose the net. Either way those aren't back-breaking cap numbers especially if he hits starter-average.

Now that he's playing, other than the cap consequences for both Hawks and Vegas, I can't be mad at getting MAF for essentially a bag of pucks.
I don't think anyone is angry at the player we got or the cost (especially because Vegas got the same for Lehner), I'm just worried that Stan is in Go For It mode and MaF will be Kiprusoffed; and the way the team is constructed right now he might be. With half a decent-or-better set of forwards and half a decent-or-better set of D (with the rest either not up to par or unproven), that is a situation ripe for overusing MaF...which unfortunately means Lanks may not get icetime unless MaF falters. I could be wrong there, but it wouldn't surprise me if that happened.
 

Tater

CCS Donator
Donator
13,094
5,284
75
I wouldn't count on it either, but any team that has a starting goalie go down and we're gold jerrry... GOLD.

Thats-Gold-Jerry-Gold-Kenny-Bania-Seinfeld-Quote.gif
 

Granada

Well-known member
10,339
1,624
75
MAF already has a M-NTC and rumors are he wanted assurance he wouldn't be traded again after moving his family here before agreeing to show up so I wouldn't count on a TDL return. We shouldn't be sellers anyway with all the expensive guys we added.
Hmm, this isn't directed at you, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. Unless he's going to settle in Chicago after he retires, and why would he do that? It's not like he has ties here or a reason to stay after his contract is up.

I don't really know how this team is going to go. I like the additions, but not necessarily in the short-term. I think depth is still an issue. Our blue-line is improved, but it will hinge on the health of Murphy and de Haan -- I'm not the biggest fan of either, but if one or both go down for long stretches, we'll probably have problems. I guess my point is, even with these additions, this team can still miss the playoffs, you just never know. We certainly improved out team player-wise, but we still have Colliton and even worse Brookbank as defensive coach, so nothing is a given here.
 

HSBOB

Well-known member
2,121
2,227
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Hmm, this isn't directed at you, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. Unless he's going to settle in Chicago after he retires, and why would he do that? It's not like he has ties here or a reason to stay after his contract is up.

I don't really know how this team is going to go. I like the additions, but not necessarily in the short-term. I think depth is still an issue. Our blue-line is improved, but it will hinge on the health of Murphy and de Haan -- I'm not the biggest fan of either, but if one or both go down for long stretches, we'll probably have problems. I guess my point is, even with these additions, this team can still miss the playoffs, you just never know. We certainly improved out team player-wise, but we still have Colliton and even worse Brookbank as defensive coach, so nothing is a given here.
It is speculation and rumor but he didn't even want to report here at first,I have to think he'd have to be on board with a trade at least. He does have a M-NTC but that's only ten teams he won't go to........just speculation.
 

Granada

Well-known member
10,339
1,624
75
It is speculation and rumor but he didn't even want to report here at first,I have to think he'd have to be on board with a trade at least. He does have a M-NTC but that's only ten teams he won't go to........just speculation.

That's fine. I don't believe that rumor personally. I just think he was pissed about being traded (right after beating out Lehner and winning the Vezina on top of it) and nothing more. He basically built that franchise so I don't blame him.
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
16,575
1,873
85
If MAF is against being moved again as reported,does he even show up?
He's already there. Unless you mean the new team, and I think it's as simple as asking him. Hey do you want to take a run at another cup as a number one for the next 2-3 months, or just hang out and coach our backup while getting pelted in the mask with some big swinging dicks because i didn't give you and depth at defense.
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
16,575
1,873
85
Hmm, this isn't directed at you, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. Unless he's going to settle in Chicago after he retires, and why would he do that? It's not like he has ties here or a reason to stay after his contract is up.

I don't really know how this team is going to go. I like the additions, but not necessarily in the short-term. I think depth is still an issue. Our blue-line is improved, but it will hinge on the health of Murphy and de Haan -- I'm not the biggest fan of either, but if one or both go down for long stretches, we'll probably have problems. I guess my point is, even with these additions, this team can still miss the playoffs, you just never know. We certainly improved out team player-wise, but we still have Colliton and even worse Brookbank as defensive coach, so nothing is a given here.
Yeah, I think he's mixing up the rumors from Vegas, and the rumors from here. I don't see any reason for him to uproot the family from Vegas for one season here unless he plans to be here for the long haul.
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
16,575
1,873
85
VVV

Exactly. I don't think you can sell goalies too quickly. Some of them tend to look really good when no one knows their tendencies, then they look bad as they're figured out, and then they become good again. It takes some time, specifically at the NHL level.

Given that Lanks is riding a .909 for the career after a single season, and he'll likely play 2nd banana to MaF this season (but hopefully we don't Kiprusoff MaF), I really don't see us extending him for a *major sum*. He's making 800k now. I think the max his extension would possibly be would be equivalent to what Crawford signed for 2012: which in today's cap dollars would be around 3.42M. By the time Crawford's 2012 deal kicked in he had posted a .917 *and* de facto taken over the starter slot.

Given Lanks current situation: .909 on the career and seeing about 32.5 shots/game with a 3.01 GAA (not all his fault), he would need about 15 games or so giving up no more than 2 goals in each to hit Crawford's .917 which would command him that ~3.5M salary. That would also be a meteoric increase in play as well, and I'd be okay with paying that. If he would average ~.920 he would probably hit ~.915 by season's end this year if he gets a decent amount of games.

I think likely he might be getting somewhere between 1.5 and 3M in an extension depending on his play and duration assuming his numbers are decent. If not I think ~900k-1.5M in a "show me" deal where he could lose the net. Either way those aren't back-breaking cap numbers especially if he hits starter-average.


I don't think anyone is angry at the player we got or the cost (especially because Vegas got the same for Lehner), I'm just worried that Stan is in Go For It mode and MaF will be Kiprusoffed; and the way the team is constructed right now he might be. With half a decent-or-better set of forwards and half a decent-or-better set of D (with the rest either not up to par or unproven), that is a situation ripe for overusing MaF...which unfortunately means Lanks may not get icetime unless MaF falters. I could be wrong there, but it wouldn't surprise me if that happened.
I'm still not convinced he's all in the 'go for it mode' as much as he's in the 'ohh shit down look behind this door at the sexual abuse aligation look over here at these shiny players' mode. We'll see where we head. around christmas we'll know exactly what mode we're in.
 

Granada

Well-known member
10,339
1,624
75
I'm still not convinced he's all in the 'go for it mode' as much as he's in the 'ohh shit down look behind this door at the sexual abuse aligation look over here at these shiny players' mode. We'll see where we head. around christmas we'll know exactly what mode we're in.
Me neither. This team is still far from a Cup team, he knows it. These moves were made to rebuild the core, but he knows he still needs to build his depth and that his young guys (Dach, Hagel, etc.) still need to develop. It will be easier for them to gradually do so with solid vets like Jones, McCabe, etc. as opposed to having a team of all Rockford Icehogs.
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
16,575
1,873
85

Tater

CCS Donator
Donator
13,094
5,284
75

Good article. Thanks for posting it.
 

Top