Patzold re-signed (officially)

http://sharks.nhl.com/team/app?articleid=335907&page=NewsPage&service=page

Welcome to the big show, Tree.

that's comcastic...

He's ready for the show...the club showed a lot of confidence in him with the one year deal...

that save percentage shows it baby...he's definately not an ECHL goalie anymore...he's ready for a higher level of competition...this ain't Nolan Scharfenbergerson or the saviour or whatever his name was were dealing with...

So a downgrade in Goaltending + no replacement on defense for Scott Hannan = If the offense can't break out to expectations and carry this team, I could see them missing the playoffs.

sharks play best as underdogs anyway.

So a downgrade in Goaltending + no replacement on defense for Scott Hannan = If the offense can't break out to expectations and carry this team, I could see them missing the playoffs.


Yes chicken little, the sky is falling. Camp hasn't started yet, much less the season, but by all means, bring out the dreary and pessimistic.

that's comcastic...

He's ready for the show...the club showed a lot of confidence in him with the one year deal...

that save percentage shows it baby...he's definately not an ECHL goalie anymore...he's ready for a higher level of competition...this ain't Nolan Scharfenbergerson or the saviour or whatever his name was were dealing with...

Unfunny "rapier wit" coupled with not really saying much other than complaining sardonically, you sir, are victorious!

Who knows, perhaps Patzold will surprise everyone with the way that he sits in his chair wearing his hat and handing out water bottles and towels, equipment manager anyone?

The offense will be fine.

Things will become more interesting as the playoffs near and the question will be whether or not the team is mentally prepared for... anything of substance.

Patzy in the net. Patzy and Nabby. :D

Crystal Ball Says: Kamenogorsk will shield San Jose from attack.

In seriousness, though, give Patzold a chance. All he wanted two years ago was the same chance that his teammate, Nolan Schaefer, got. He said he was very encouraged by how Schaefer performed and thought he could meet that challenge.

Now, whether Patzold is as good as Schaefer was, or is, is debatable. I'd currently say Schaefer. However, Patzold has not played with an NHL blue line in front of him.

Goalies who have played in all of the ECHL, AHL, and NHL, will tell you that you'll face more dangerous shots in an ECHL game than an AHL, game, and so forth. The shots may not be quite as hard, but it's typically a matter of positioning for the goalies. I'm not saying Patzold's save percentage will magically be above .900 in the NHL, consistently (which is where Patzold struggles in the AHL), but let's not count him out yet. Remember, Schaefer's AHL stats were not booming when he came to San Jose. Schaefer, too, started in the ECHL. Plus, he came after four years at Providence College, giving him more maturity coming into the AHL than Patzold. Granted, Patzold had played in the DEL, but he was still a young pup as goalies go when he first played in the AHL. Plus, he had to adjust to living in North America. As his career gone how most of us Sharks fans would like? No, not yet. But he's not a total disaster whose father the Sharks owe a favor to.

I do expect Greiss to surpass him in sooner rather than later, but I look forward to seeing what Patzold can do in a full season of NHL work as a backup. If he knows he's earmarked for the NHL, his confidence will go through the roof. I'm not opposed to San Jose going with Patzold as the back-up and sending Greiss to the AHL to start 50+ games during the regular season. I'd prefer to see Dakers getting that sort of action in the ECHL, but maybe the Sharks only have four goalies under NHL contract this year and Dakers is Greiss' back-up. After all, Dakers has had it worse in the past as Jeff Glass' backup in Kootenay.

Patzy in the net. Patzy and Nabby. :D

I hear they call him Tree... Hopefully he play's like a Sequoia. Not sure I'd like him playing like a patsy :)

I hear they call him Tree... Hopefully he play's like a Sequoia. Not sure I'd like him playing like a patsy :)
A tree, oh no. Hopefully a tree with many branches that sway a lot to block some shots. :biglaugh:

Oh great, now the Borat-loving Ron Wilson will never shut up about the fact that he has the #1 and #2 goaltenders in all of Kazakhstan. Niiiice.

this ain't Nolan Scharfenbergerson or the saviour or whatever his name was were dealing with...

That seriously had me laughing for about 3 minutes straight.

The nice thing for the Sharks is that if Patzold and Greiss really stink in camp, at least CuJo will be available...

One year will give him a chance to prove his worth at the NHL level as a backup. He'll get 15 games minimum to show everyone what he's got. If he performs well, he'll likely get a two year deal that will allow him to back up Nabokov until Nabby is a free agent which is about the time that most folks will be ready to let Greiss take over at the tender age of 24.

I like how we make fun of the sensible move.

that's comcastic...

He's ready for the show...the club showed a lot of confidence in him with the one year deal...

that save percentage shows it baby...he's definately not an ECHL goalie anymore...he's ready for a higher level of competition...this ain't Nolan Scharfenbergerson or the saviour or whatever his name was were dealing with...
Write more on these boards, me likes. And yeah, you can determine a lot by looking at just the save percentage. Keep it up, master.

The nice thing for the Sharks is that if Patzold and Greiss really stink in camp, at least CuJo will be available...
Very true, and let's not forget those good old injuries...

Write more on these boards, me likes. And yeah, you can determine a lot by looking at just the save percentage. Keep it up, master.

are you kidding me?

are you kidding me?
No, everybody, master, always.

He is only keeping this spot warm until next season when we bring up Greiss. That kid is gonna be a stud

Our team goalie depth has become thin with no one realy ready to play for the big team today. This is a page out of the 'more is better' book. Management isn't sure who the backup is so will have several to pick from in camp and most important to management, they will all be cheap. If the team thought he was the best answer and believed he would be on the pro team with up-side, they would have signed him to a deal that was for more years to protect his trade value. Heal get a shot, but if him or the other backups don't show they can play in the NHL in camp, thy're lots of backup options still (Aubin, Esche, Joseph, Dunham, and McLennan to name several). The signing really means nothing. There are plenty of goalies just like him in the minors so there is no need to sign him for more than a year.

And why would they do that?

One year is perfectly fine both for him and the team. The team can find out whether he is good enough to play in the NHL. If he isn't, there is no reason to keep his rights anymore, so adding a second year would be stupid. It's not like he would get a 200% raise should he prove to be good enough.

For him the contract length is an advantage as well. If he is good enough, he will get a new contract anyway, if he isn't then he can go wherever he wants to. In that case, a second year would be bad for both.

And why would they do that?

One year is perfectly fine both for him and the team. The team can find out whether he is good enough to play in the NHL. If he isn't, there is no reason to keep his rights anymore, so adding a second year would be stupid. It's not like he would get a 200% raise should he prove to be good enough.

For him the contract length is an advantage as well. If he is good enough, he will get a new contract anyway, if he isn't then he can go wherever he wants to. In that case, a second year would be bad for both.

Quite right. This move makes a lot of sense to me - it's another option for the Sharks.

He's a UFA next summer.

He's a UFA next summer.
He COULD be a Group VI UFA after this season - unless he plays 28 or more games (regular season or playoff, min 30 minutes).

Is it Pats-old, Pat-zold, or Pazz-old?

Merci

Is it Pats-old, Pat-zold, or Pazz-old?

Merci

I've heard Jamie Smock pronounce it like PAHTS-zold.

In German, w umlaut over the "a" (Pätzold), it would end up sound similar to PET-zold. In normal translation of German, it would end up Paetzold. Just like Müller would become Mueller.

Anyway, LadyStanley is correct in how Smock pronounces it, and I'm sure Dimitri would have corrected this over the course of three years if it bothered him.

Even if he could be an UFA, it's not like he will have a season that will lead other teams to throw money at him. I don't think that the Sharks would have any problems in re-signing him, if they want to.

I don't think that the players care all that much about being pronounced correctly, as long as their name is not completely butchered. I haven't heard Marco Sturm or Jochen Hecht complain about it, and so far I have yet to hear anyone pronounce them correctly. It's always Hesht or Heckt and neither is particularly close to being right ;)

Even if he could be an UFA, it's not like he will have a season that will lead other teams to throw money at him. I don't think that the Sharks would have any problems in re-signing him, if they want to.

I don't think that the players care all that much about being pronounced correctly, as long as their name is not completely butchered. I haven't heard Marco Sturm or Jochen Hecht complain about it, and so far I have yet to hear anyone pronounce them correctly. It's always Hesht or Heckt and neither is particularly close to being right ;)Yes, but if I know how to properly pronouce his name then I can laugh at all the dummies who don't. This of course will be invaluable when Patzold supplants Nabby in net and improbably wins the Calder, Vezina and Conn Smythe trophies in 2007.

Thank you LS and Kevin.

Patzold and Davidson only signing 1 year contracts makes me think this will be the last year for each of them. The Sharks know that next year they will have replacements from within the organization. IMO

Smock pronounced it PAHTS-zold a couple times while interviewing him and Patzy didn't correct him so I'm pretty sure that is correct. :)

Anyone know if Patzy would have to clear waivers if he were moved off and on the roster?

Anyone know if Patzy would have to clear waivers if he were moved off and on the roster?

Yes, Patzold would have to clear waivers to play in Worcester.

(He was called up at the end of the season for the playoff run, so does not have that loophole.)

The real question is who is the backup. Outside of Joseph and Esche, there aren't any reasonable UFA options remaining (and I don't know about Joseph as a reasonble option, but Esche is a good option as a bridge to the next youngster to replace Nabby in a couple years.)

Patzold brings uninpressive stats but he may be the guy this year. If the Sharks braintrust felt he was the bridge to Dakers or another in the queue, they would have not wanted to see him get to UFA status, and would have signed him for an additional year(s). Truth is, he is a placeholder at this point, and nothing more. I expect him to get an opportunity at camp, but I will be surprised if the team has settled on him. I expect management to bring in others to compete for the backup job this year. This is his opportunity though.

It's amazing how in little more than a season the Sharks went from a surplus of goalies (Nabokov, Toskala, Schaefer, Patzold, Greiss, Dakers, Ehelechner), experienced and inexperienced, to banking on a 24 year old, without a single minute of NHL ice time, backing up goalie recently bugged by injuries.

Assuming Patzold walks or isn't resigned, what does the goalie situation look like for 2008-2009? Nabby + Greiss/Dakers in SJ with Greiss/Dakers + Whodhat in Worcester?

Patzold brings uninpressive stats but he may be the guy this year. If the Sharks braintrust felt he was the bridge to Dakers or another in the queue, they would have not wanted to see him get to UFA status, and would have signed him for an additional year(s). Truth is, he is a placeholder at this point, and nothing more. I expect him to get an opportunity at camp, but I will be surprised if the team has settled on him. I expect management to bring in others to compete for the backup job this year. This is his opportunity though.

I agree with him being only a bridge till Greiss or someone else is ready, but I disagree completely when it comes to the contract. Anything but a Vezina-like season and the Sharks would have no trouble in re-signing Pätzold to a cheap contract. His possible UFA-status doesn't change that one bit.

Yes, Patzold would have to clear waivers to play in Worcester.

(He was called up at the end of the season for the playoff run, so does not have that loophole.)

Thanks LS, I knew I could count on you. I tried to decipher the CBA waiver clauses, but after reading a few paragraphs my eyes started to pop out of my skull :amazed: and I had to stop.

I've heard Jamie Smock pronounce it like PAHTS-zold.

When he introduced himself to me at a gathering he pronounced it exactly that way: PAHTS-zold

I agree with him being only a bridge till Greiss or someone else is ready, but I disagree completely when it comes to the contract. Anything but a Vezina-like season and the Sharks would have no trouble in re-signing Pätzold to a cheap contract. His possible UFA-status doesn't change that one bit.

I think we are in agreement. You are saying that he isn't a great goalie and outside of a stunning season, can easily be re-signed. I was saying management's evaluation of his abilities make them fine with exposing him to other teams after the season. There is no reason to extend a second year. Management too believes that Patzold is not worth a 2 year contract because he is just a placeholder at this point.

The more interesting questions are surrounding who is really going to be the backup this year, not Patzold's re-signing. As Artful Dodger noted, "It's amazing how in little more than a season the Sharks went from a surplus of goalies ....... to banking on a 24 year old, without a single minute of NHL ice time." I don't think management is actually inking in Patzold into the backup slot just yet, but without a signing or trade, will be depending on a goalie with no NHL experience either way.

I still believe its a mistake to go with any of our in-house options this year, and would rather we sign Esche who I can argue would be a great backup to bridge to youth that will be ready soon. Absent that, I hope management makes this a good competition in camp by giving several of the youngsters shots at backing-up.

I think we are in agreement. You are saying that he isn't a great goalie and outside of a stunning season, can easily be re-signed. I was saying management's evaluation of his abilities make them fine with exposing him to other teams after the season. There is no reason to extend a second year. Management too believes that Patzold is not worth a 2 year contract because he is just a placeholder at this point.

The more interesting questions are surrounding who is really going to be the backup this year, not Patzold's re-signing. As Artful Dodger noted, "It's amazing how in little more than a season the Sharks went from a surplus of goalies ....... to banking on a 24 year old, without a single minute of NHL ice time." I don't think management is actually inking in Patzold into the backup slot just yet, but without a signing or trade, will be depending on a goalie with no NHL experience either way.

I still believe its a mistake to go with any of our in-house options this year, and would rather we sign Esche who I can argue would be a great backup to bridge to youth that will be ready soon. Absent that, I hope management makes this a good competition in camp by giving several of the youngsters shots at backing-up.


Do you think Patzold would have signed without being promised the backup job?
And as I said previously DW does not renege on promises to players (fans are a different story).

Do you think Patzold would have signed without being promised the backup job?
And as I said previously DW does not renege on promises to players (fans are a different story).
Doug would be stupid to make that promise. Patzold will have a chance at the job, but he has to win it in camp. If both Greiss and Patzold are unimpressive in camp, I think Doug will go the UFA/trade route for an experienced backup.

Do you think Patzold would have signed without being promised the backup job?
And as I said previously DW does not renege on promises to players (fans are a different story).

I also doubt Doug would make any sort of promises.. That is usually a coaches decision anyway...

It's amazing how in little more than a season the Sharks went from a surplus of goalies (Nabokov, Toskala, Schaefer, Patzold, Greiss, Dakers, Ehelechner), experienced and inexperienced, to banking on a 24 year old, without a single minute of NHL ice time, backing up goalie recently bugged by injuries.

Assuming Patzold walks or isn't resigned, what does the goalie situation look like for 2008-2009? Nabby + Greiss/Dakers in SJ with Greiss/Dakers + Whodhat in Worcester?

Not really, when we have had threads on the "goalie surplus" .. I have always commented that SJ has a "hole" in their development pipeline --(succession planning) ..
it went from Nabby(31) , Toskala and Schaefer at 29-30 yrs old down to Greiss, Dakers and Stalock at 21--19 yrs old..
8 -9 years is a big gap.. Patzold was never really a strong potential #1 B or 2.. .I have hoped SJ would have grabbed a goalie in the 24-25 range with at least strong backup potential. I think both PI and i last year were on the side of possible getting LeNeveu with that hope .. I still think if a goalie with a solid #1b/2 in that range became a vailable SJ should trade for him..

Assuming Patzold walks or isn't resigned, what does the goalie situation look like for 2008-2009? Nabby + Greiss/Dakers in SJ with Greiss/Dakers + Whodhat in Worcester?

Derek MacIntyre - graduating in the spring. Stalock will have completed his sophomore year.

Pielmeier, Sexsmith could be available at 19, but only in the NHL.

Do you think Patzold would have signed without being promised the backup job?
And as I said previously DW does not renege on promises to players (fans are a different story).

I am guessing that he was pointed to the opportunity to win a job in camp, but given his work history, can't believe DW actually has inked him into the backup slot with a promise. I don't think he has earned it and DW always talks about players earning their positions in camp.

I suspect he was told he will have the opportunity to win a postion based on performance in camp. I do expect there to be other candidates in camp though to compete for the back-up role beyond just Patzold.

As I said, the signing of this specific player is really a non-event. The more interesting question is what is management going to do to better the team if Nabby goes down? That is a question to solve now rather than being in the place LA was last year when they were forced to pull Burke out of the announcing booth due to lack of good options. Patzold may be the guy, but a FA, a trade close to the opener, or even some of the younger goalie options (Greiss?) may be solutions as well.

Not really, when we have had threads on the "goalie surplus" .. I have always commented that SJ has a "hole" in their development pipeline --(succession planning) ..
it went from Nabby(31) , Toskala and Schaefer at 29-30 yrs old down to Greiss, Dakers and Stalock at 21--19 yrs old..
8 -9 years is a big gap.. Patzold was never really a strong potential #1 B or 2.. .I have hoped SJ would have grabbed a goalie in the 24-25 range with at least strong backup potential. I think both PI and i last year were on the side of possible getting LeNeveu with that hope .. I still think if a goalie with a solid #1b/2 in that range became a vailable SJ should trade for him..What about Schaefer? Isn't he 27?

It's not like we need a new goalie every three years.

Derek MacIntyre - graduating in the spring. Stalock will have completed his sophomore year.

Pielmeier, Sexsmith could be available at 19, but only in the NHL.

Pielmeier would also be available to Worcester since he was drafted out of Germany and not the junior leagues. Similar to Kaspar, he could play one year of junior hockey and then play for the Baby Sharks.

sign bryzgalov, hossa, and markov

Yes, Patzold would have to clear waivers to play in Worcester.

(He was called up at the end of the season for the playoff run, so does not have that loophole.)

Isn't waivers different with goalies? There was a lot of discussion about this last season. Many said that Schaefer would have had to have cleared waivers and that was not so. It was clarified that goalies had to have played a certain amount of games in the NHL to have to clear waivers. Can anyone else chime in?

Isn't waivers different with goalies? There was a lot of discussion about this last season. Many said that Schaefer would have had to have cleared waivers and that was not so. It was clarified that goalies had to have played a certain amount of games in the NHL to have to clear waivers. Can anyone else chime in?

Schaefer ended up not having to clear waivers (for the Sharks) last season as he ended the season on the AHL roster (so was kinda "already" there).

When he was called up, it was for less than 10 games (and whatever the # of days were), so he was not subject to recall waivers or have to clear them to return. When Darche got called up last season, he too was within the 10 games so not subject to waivers.

Edit: Either it's too early in the morning, no breakfast or something. ;) (No time to re-check as I need to have the car at the shop in a few minutes.) Schaefer may have cleared waivers at the start of the season.

Shaefer did clear. Its was on the news thread on SJ Sharks.com at one point so is probably still there in the archives.

The depth of goaltending today is quite deep. Most NHL teams will not need to poach a goalie the caliber of Dimitri Patzold, or even Nolan Schaefer, off of waivers unless they are in some sort of emergency situation. Then, when their emergency is done, they'd send him down and he'd be on waivers again and become the goaltending version of Jarrod Skalde.

I don't think we really need to worry too much about Patzold being put on waivers. It's not as if he's an established NHL backup where GM's will read the transaction wire and spit out their beverage after seeing the news. There'd be a lot more interesting if the Islanders sent down Wade Dubielewicz than if the Sharks send down Patzold. And if you aren't really familiar with Dubielewicz, that makes my point even more.

Shaefer did clear. Its was on the news thread on SJ Sharks.com at one point so is probably still there in the archives.

You are correct, he did clear.

At the beginning of each season any player that needs to clear waivers has to do so to be assigned to the AHL no matter where he finished the previous season.

I don't think we really need to worry too much about Patzold being put on waivers.

Me neither...he easily sails through.

There is a concern that he may want to head to Europe rather than Worcester if he does not "earn" the NHL backup slot. :sarcasm:

There is a concern that he may want to head to Europe rather than Worcester if he does not "earn" the NHL backup slot. :sarcasm:

I think that concern is well founded...