| 0 |
Subject: Avs pick up Tommy Salo
Posted by: bookie
- [2136257] Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 09:03
Next >>
Tommy Salo - Goalie - Avalanche Mar. 9 - 8:46 am et
Sportsnet is reporting that the Avalanche have acquired Tommy Salo from the Oilers for defenseman prospect Tom Glibert.
Salo will be a reliable backup for starter David Aebischer, as the Avs had seen enough from Philippe Sauve Sunday, in the 7-1 loss to Calgary. The former Olier starter will likely play one in four games down the stretch, and is not a fantasy option any longer. Gilbert is a 20-year-old puck-moving rearguard out of the University of Wisconsin, who needs to add muscle to his frame before becoming a factor in the NHL. Colorado also receives Edmonton's sixth round pick in next year's amateur draft.
|
| 1 | smallwhirled
ID: 26229421
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 09:53
|
I'm wondering if Salo will have the same role that Suave did, or if it'll be a true rotation.
|
| 2 | walk
Leader
ID: 32928238
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 10:01
|
Same here, SW. Aebischer is no "stud." If Salo pitches a shut-out (or has some kinda strong outting) early on in his tenure, I bet they rotate. When Salo is hot, he is one of the best. He's also a veteran. To me, if I had Aebischer now, I would trade him ASAP.
- walk
|
| 3 | KrazyKoalaBears
Leader
ID: 517553018
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 10:24
|
Aebischer is no stud? Geez, then what's the definition of stud? 28-15-9, 2.07 GAA, .925 Sv%, 4 SO Salo, by comparison...
17-18-6, 2.58 GAA, .896 Sv%, 3 SO There's no question, in my mind, who the starter should be. Compare Aebischer to someone like a 2003 Turco or a 2000 Hasek... Turco: 32-19-11, 2.00 GAA, .912 Sv%, 7 SO
Hasek: 37-24-4, 2.11 GAA, .921 Sv%, 11 SO Saying Aebischer is not a stud, especially considering this is his first year as an NHL starter, is laughable. And don't let that 5 goal game against VAN fool you. He's still 2-1-1, 2.46 GAA, .898 Sv%, 0 SO in March and coming of 4-4-1, 1.83 GAA, .931 Sv%, 1 SO in February. Lastly, Salo may be good, but he's never had a Sv% over .914 and never had a GAA under 2.22. His career averages of .905 Sv% and 2.55 GAA don't quite stack up against Aebischer's .921 Sv% and 2.13 GAA. Personally, I think Salo may get some playing time, but only to rest Aebischer for the playoffs. If COL puts on a MIN-style rotation, they're stupid, IMHO, because while Salo is playing, their best goalie will be on the bench.
|
| 4 | smallwhirled
ID: 26229421
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 10:37
|
Aebisher is the better goalie, I think all of us agree there. But facts are facts, and Colorado wants to win now, as always. They are scared that Aebisher may not have enough experience to win a Stanley Cup. The rumors to get another goalie have been there all season long.
I feel bad for Aebisher, and I hope Salo takes a Suave like role, but to me the quote is BS. They wouldn't have brought him in unless they are going to at least try him out.
|
| 5 | walk
Leader
ID: 32928238
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 11:19
|
KKB, who ya kiddin'? Aebischer is no stud, I don't care about your litany of stats. When it comes to end of season playoff positioning and then action IN the playoffs, those stats become less and less pertinent. And I think you know this.
Coaches tend to go with the hot hand and experience. While this does not mean that Aebischer loses his job or that all of a sudden he splits time with Salo, I think it's not at all unlikely that either of the two happen if Salo gets hot. I am not arguing that Aebischer does not have strong stats (I really don't care about his stats as much as you do, but I do love your site and will continue to reinforce you by saying that it is invaluable to use smallworld players :-) ), but I am arguing that it does not matter as much as you think it will when it comes to P-T in the future of 2004. We'll have to wait and see how it pans out.
So, please do not laugh at my post; it's not laughable, really. Were you laughing? I bet you were not. Tee hee.
cheers, - walk
|
| 6 | Silentz
ID: 479231410
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 14:09
|
Walk, then how DO you determine what a stud is? A stud winger scores lots of goals. What does a stud goalie need to do? Abby has been the most consistent player all season for the AVs, keeping them in a bunch of games they shouldn't have had a chance to win. His teammates have said as much.
I agree that come playoff time, it's a whole different game, but Abby has shown he can keep focused. Look at last night. Hedberg tried to draw him into a fight, and Abby knew it was pointless to do so, so he stayed in his crease. Composure. I've got faith in him. I don't agree with the sentiment that a goalie has to lose a few playoff series before he's qualified to win one.
Abby's been in the playoff situation before. He may not have played in any games, but he's been on the bench and in the lockerrooms. He knows what it feels like.
|
| 7 | walk
Leader
ID: 32928238
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 14:35
|
"Abby's been in a playoff situation before, but he may not have played in any games." I don't think that qualifies as substantial, or even limited, playoff experience.
I define a stud player as someone who has consistently produced over a sustained period of time, say 3+ years. Abby has not done this, not even close.
This is clearly MY own subjective definition of what a stud performer is. It may not be shared with others here, and if that is the case, then the discussion is somewhat moot. What else can I say?
Currently, to me, there are very few stud goalies in the league right now. Brodeur, Belfour, maybe Theodore, Khabibulin, Nabokov. There used to be more (Hasek, Roy). When I say "stud," synonyms would be: "elite," and "star." I dunno if Aebischer was even an all-star this year, his supposed great year according to you and KKB.
Stud wingers: Naslund, Forsberg, Guerin, Murray, Jagr, blah blah blah
Stud centers: Sakic, Sundin, Thornton, and a few others. Doan, for example, in my subjective book, is not a stud center. Not yet anyway.
It's really just "me" and my personal definition. I am sorry if it's causing confusion. Nothing against anyone else.
- walk
|
| 8 | Filthy Rich
ID: 39246512
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 15:14
|
I can't stand anything to do with the Av's but the only goalies currently better than Aebischer in my opinion are Brodeur, Turco, Luongo and Theodore. Regular season stats are a good enough determination of how good Aebischer is right now because they haven't given him a chance to shine in the playoffs yet. This year is the chance for Aebischer to become a "stud". Salo is not the answer, how many playoff series has he lost? Smart move would be to find out if Aebischer can be the answer at least. Look at Giguere last year, he had no playoff experience and he almost singlehandedly won the Cup.
|
| 9 | R9
Leader
ID: 2624472
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 15:31
|
I think goalie stats, especially in a league with teams that play the trap and others that are as stacked as Colorado, are partially overrated. Also, when you have as high powered and expensive an offense as Colorado does, especially one that WILL be less powerful within a few years, you want to be SURE that your goalie won't meltdown in the 1st round. Just bringing in Salo tells Aebischer that he can't just cruise in, that he has to keep playing hard. I mean, with Phillipe Sauve as your main competition, just how hard are you trying?
Too, what if Aeb gets hurt? Do you really want to go into the playoffs with Sauve if your Colorado? Course not. So really, its just a depth and 'kick in the ass' trade. But I have no doubts that Aeb is their guy. There's nothing to be gained by sitting him, ruining your goalie for the next decade or so, just to play a goalie who isn't even as good anyway. If I had Aeb, I wouldn't be concerned about his PT. That being said, I still moved him for Turco today. ;)
|
| 10 | walk
Leader
ID: 32928238
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 16:22
|
Funny conclusion to your post, R9. Yeah, clearly, Abby has had one of the better seasons of all the goalies in the NHL. I just don't see him as the guy who is going to deliver the cup to Colorado. Nor do I see Salo, but I have seen Salo's streaks before, both hot and cold, and he can stand on his head at times.
As Filthy Rich indicates, it is often the hot goalie who leads a team to the finals. Giguere being a great example last year. Is Giguere a stud? No. Was he a stud last year? I guess if the definition is current year's performance, then "yes." For me, it's mostly about "being proven." Abby, to me, is not proven to be considered a stud.
Is Abby still the primary choice of goaltender in Colorado? Yes. However, I would not be too surprised if Salo got more than just 1 in 4 P-T -- should he get hot.
I also agree with R9 that Colorado has to have a better back-up than Sauve should Aebischer get cold, nervous in crunch time (that sentence about him having "playoff experience, but not have played any games," continues to make me laugh...to borrow from KKB), or injured.
- walk
|
| 11 | Ira
ID: 1128615
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 21:42
|
Ding Dong the goalie's gone! The crappy Salo? The horrible Salo!
:):):):):)
|
| 12 | KrazyKoalaBears
Leader
ID: 517553018
Tue, Mar 09, 2004, 22:03
|
walk, you've got to be joking?!?! Now Giguere isn't a stud? Even by your own definition ("someone who has consistently produced over a sustained period of time, say 3+ years") he's a stud. His only problem? He plays for ANA. Giguere's WORST Sv% in his career for a season of more than 15 games is .911. His career Sv% (.914) ranks up there with Brodeur (.914), Belfour (.907), Theodore (.915), Khabi (.911), and Nabokov (.915) Now, you may ask why I'm using Sv%. The reason is because it's the only stat a goalie has direct control over. He can't directly control his GAA (because it depends so much on how many shots he's faced, which is based on the defense in front of him) and he can't directly control his record (for obvious reasons). So how is Giguere now not a stud? If he was a stud for just last year, what was so different between 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003? Go look for yourself. The only real difference I see is number of wins. So if a goalie has a VERY similar GAA and VERY similar Sv% and a VASTLY different record, we blame/credit the goalie? Huh? Giguere was no more or less studly last year than he has been for his entire career with ANA. Giguere is a stud and if you fail to recognize that, then I can see how you fail to recognize that Aebischer is a stud. Sure, Abby doesn't have 3 years of "studliness" yet, but he will. Sv% is a huge indicator of goalie success and Aebischer certainly has the Sv% to rank among the elite goalies in the league. As for the playoffs, Abby is certainly unproven. However, so is Theodore, Khabi, Nabokov, Salo, and plenty of other goalies who really haven't done much in the playoffs. Sure, they have experience, but they don't have the cup, nor the "studly" stats. Salo's a whopping 5-16, 2.59 GAA, and .908 Sv% in the playoffs. Those numbers look suspiciously similar to his career numbers. In other words, this hot streak you're speaking of certainly has no time table for showing up. According to Salo's playoffs resume, Abby is just as likely to get hot as Salo is. And yes, I did laugh at your post. Seriously. However, I couldn't muster a laugh for the Giguere post because I was so shocked.
|
| 13 | walk
Leader
ID: 32928238
Wed, Mar 10, 2004, 08:05
|
Shock me baby! I love shocking you KKB. Face it, our boards have been boooooring for the entire season, and I enjoying stirring your pot. Sorry!
The stats are meaningless to me. Ultimately, I have a higher threshhold for determining a very subjetive label be ascribed to a player, namely, the label of "stud."
Stud = star, elite, whatever.
I think there are very few stud goalies right now. However, if one were to say, "no, it's who is doing RELATIVELY better than the others, then surely, those who rank higher in the pertinent stat categories would qualify. This is how I believe you are determining your studworthy players, based on relative performance. That's fine. There really is no right or wrong here...it's all opinion.
The interesting test of our competing theories will be to see what happens in goal in Colorado. No matter who the devils or canadians acquire, hypothetically, to back up their playoff bound goalies has a shot at getting serious P-T. However, I still maintain that Aebischer's status as the clear #1 with Colorado in the playoffs is uncertain. If Salo gets hot, I can easily see him getting starts.
Again, that's opinion, too, so we'll see. Otherwise, the stud debate...well, I'm getting redundant, and am not interested in comparing stats. That's your forte.
ciao for now,
- walk
|
| 14 | KrazyKoalaBears
Leader
ID: 517553018
Wed, Mar 10, 2004, 09:05
|
walk, but how do you determine a "stud?" Do you just look at him and say, "He's (not) a stud?" I guess I just don't understand how you get to that point of saying a guy is a "star" or "elite" or the other. All my life, those sort of labels have been applied to the guys with the best stats, so I'm just wondering how you apply those labels and what are the measured (stats or otherwise) qualities that you look at.
|
| 15 | walk
Leader
ID: 32928238
Wed, Mar 10, 2004, 12:13
|
Basically, consistency of high performance over time, at least 3 years. Of course I look at stats, and contrary to my tongue in cheek anti-stats replies to you, I love stats. However, I think you are overusing them to make your point, which is based on one season's performance. A stud to me is a player that consistently produces strong stats, is typically ranked toward the top at his position (gets to relative performance I mentioned above), and is usually making the all-star team (recognized by either peers, coaches or fans as being a top performer). Stuff like that.
I am very conservative in my granting someone a "stud" title. I think you are more "liberal." Dang, politics getting in the way again.
I will always avoid granting someone stud status as a result of a single break-out year. Of course, if you have a rookie who has a great first season, and also has a great sophomore season, then they could be studworthy, too.
It's not that big of a deal nor such a black and white thing with me. I have posted far more on this "stud" than is what is driving me in terms of intensity or passion. I will sleep well knowing that we disagree on studworthiness.
;-)
walk
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|