I heard that the-powers-that-be are making an assumption we're going to be losing either Matt or Mitch (who is ranked in some circles above Matt) and we want to have a second quality keeper.

I think it's a smart play.

I love Matty but I've heard the same thing about Mitch. It wouldn't really surprise me to see them make Sattler the starter and have Mitch as the young keeper in training behind him. But that's just my best guess. Nothing that I've heard or anything. Perhaps it's more on how I've seen teams handle these things in the past.

Satisfaction still works: "You can't beat nooo, Daryl Sattler"

YES!

If wikipedia is correct, then Sattler is 32, Van Oekel is 26 and Hildebrandt is 24. It makes me wonder if either a) Sattler doesn't expect to start every match at his age, or has at least accepted that it's possibly the case, or b) if he was given some assurances that one of the keepers that the Stars have under contract was moving on.

It still looks to me like Sattler is coming to MN very much without the assurance that he will be the #1 keeper. He must have known this when he signed here.

Is 32 really old for a keeper? If he were a midfielder I'd agree... but since when is 32 old for a goalie?

With Manny as coach I would also assume no one comes here assuming they will start... although that might be a big assumption

Can we chant "you're just our feeder club" at San Antonio?

I thought generally a keepers prime was expected to be something like 29-35, but much younger for other positions.

I've always thought keepers get a few more years more than say a striker. Oliver Kahn retired at 39 (tho he looked 50 when he did)can't say i know of too many field players to make it that long. (except giggs)

YES!