Atlanta goalie Situation

[Viperar 16]

Is this a good idea, they have confirmed that they are going back to lehtonen after sitting him for game 2. Switching goalies like this in the playoffs a good choice? I personally dont think so

[theman19 47]

the took a gamble that putting in there back up would spark the team. Unfortunatly they lost that game on a very flukie goal

[FinRedWing 172]

You're right,no it sure isn't.

Don't get me wrong,Hedberg was solid in their last game but I think Hartley shouldn't have changed the goalie after just one loss.

Lehtonen is relatively young,he's their #1 for years to come and these kind of stunts by Hartley could affect his confidence.

Therrien seems to know better how to work with a young starter in his first playoffs...

[Kp-Wings 3]

Neither goalie is all that great. Hedberg has been a starter before, many moons ago in Pittsburgh. But since then he's been primaraly a backup. Lehtonen is really young, and last year his development was slowed because of a groin injury. He'll probably be a really good goalie in a couple of years.

[OsGOD 3]

Perhaps if you have been successful at it all season and perhaps if one goalie is better at home and the other away from home... Then by all means Go for it!

However, being down on NYR proves otherwise so.... See ya next fall!

[shadow47 1]

Hartley made a good move switching to Hedberg; Lehtonen was lousy in Game 1 a la Fleury in Pitt (although he's played slightly better since). A lot of pressure for the first-timers, so it doesn't hurt to go to a veteran who has won in the playoffs before.

The fluke goal on Hedberg was the first goal, not the winner, so effectively they didn't "lose on a fluke goal"...BTW is that fluke goal Hedberg's fault? So fluke goal aside you've got a goalie giving up one goal on 38 shots and you're putting the guy who lost you Game 1 back in? Makes no sense, JH played well enough to get a win and Atlanta should have the goalie who has the most chance of winning in there for Game 3. Someone mentioned Lehtonen's confidence and maturation, this will certainly help both since it is basically a throwaway game now taking Hedberg out.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Benching Lehtonen after game 1 was a no-no if you ask me. If he had played game 2 and sucked it up, then maybe.

Hartley made a good move switching to Hedberg; Lehtonen was lousy in Game 1 a la Fleury in Pitt (although he's played slightly better since). A lot of pressure for the first-timers, so it doesn't hurt to go to a veteran who has won in the playoffs before.

The fluke goal on Hedberg was the first goal, not the winner, so effectively they didn't "lose on a fluke goal"...BTW is that fluke goal Hedberg's fault? So fluke goal aside you've got a goalie giving up one goal on 38 shots and you're putting the guy who lost you Game 1 back in? Makes no sense, JH played well enough to get a win and Atlanta should have the goalie who has the most chance of winning in there for Game 3. Someone mentioned Lehtonen's confidence and maturation, this will certainly help both since it is basically a throwaway game now taking Hedberg out.

And Fleury won game 2.

[C-TownWing 0]

The switch to Hedberg I'm ok with. Honestly, I probably wouldn't have done it, but I at least see the reasoning. Game 1 was n't entirely on Lehtonen (4 goals/38 shots), but much like us benching Legace in 2004, the team needed a spark.

So game 2 gives us Hedberg: 2 goals, 39 shots. One goal was a fluke, and on the other, Shanny could've eaten lunch in the slot, and Avery made a nice pass.

The rationale I heard for going back to Lehtonen was something along the lines of "he plays well in MSG." Nice logic. The ice is still 200x85 and the same two teams are skating on it. My thought is that if Lehtonen's psychology is messed up by one switch that was made along the lines of long-accepted strategy, he probably doesn't have it upstairs to be the big-time goalie that everyone expects him to be. But the unexpected 2nd switch might mess with BOTH goalies' heads. The leash doesn't get any shorter than the one Hedberg was on.

Bottom line though, the Thrashers are meat whether their goalie is Lehtonen, Hedberg, me, Sawchuk, Hasek or Bernie (the bird, not Parent).

[shadow47 1]

Benching Lehtonen after game 1 was a no-no if you ask me. If he had played game 2 and sucked it up, then maybe.

And Fleury won game 2.

Winning is not the issue...it's what matters, but we are talking about the goaltending, not the result. In Game 2's, Hedberg lost 2-1 and Fleury won 4-3. Both goalies showed up to play, the difference is Fleury's team came with him and Hedberg's didn't--could Lehtonen have played any better than that? Fleury stunk up the place in Game 3, 4 goals on 25 shots. The point is that Fleury's play has been out of control in the series, and inserting a vet like Thibault as early as Game 2 could've helped calm a green Penguins team. The fact that they rallied for a win does not erase the fact that series could be 3-0 if not for a third period comeback in Game 2, and goaltending has played a part because MAF has been worse in the playoffs than in his regular season. As for Atlanta, they are one of the oldest teams in the league and traded away a wealth of prospects to arm themselves for a long playoffs...Hartley took a chance sitting Lehtonen and it paid off with sparkling 'tending from Hedberg but the rest of the team couldn't make it happen. In the end, the Thrashers will win and lose as a team, whoever is in net. But suggesting it was mistake in using Hedberg is ignoring the fact that he played as well as you can hope a goalie to play.