Cam Talbot - Mod warning #251

Status
Not open for further replies.

GraveyTrain9

Registered User
Mar 13, 2008
3,544
0
New York
If you can get a first in this years draft for Cam you gotta deal him. Roll with Skapski as the backup. The kid looks like he can play, plus like you said the market will be flush with goalies this off season.

Tough to agree with this considering we've seen Skapski play 1 game (against the Sabres no less)
 

GAGLine

Registered User
Sep 17, 2007
24,054
20,698
What you say makes sense, but there is one little detail. Do you really believe that Hank can play till his is 40 and maintain the same level of play as he does now? Do you remember Marty in his late 30th?

Does he need to? Unless you think Hank is going to suddenly fall off a cliff next year, I don't see how his eventual decline has anything to do with Talbot. Talbot will be long gone by the time Hank needs to be replaced.

It's much more likely that one of Skapski, Halverson or Shesterkin become a quality backup for us and get the chance to step in when Hank is done. Even then, it could be 7 years from now. In 7 years, Skapski would be 27, which is what Talbot is now.
 

Cassano

Registered User
Aug 31, 2013
25,610
3,818
GTA
Why would you want to trade a very good goaltender? Im not even saying that you may need him in a few years, when Hank pass his prime. But you do need a good backup to play part of the season so Hank is not out of gas come playoff time.
:shakehead

Backups are a generally interchangeable position on a hockey.

Only room for one throne.
 

Raspewtin

Stay at home defenseman hater
May 30, 2013
43,486
19,568
In his past seven starts, Talbot is 5-1-1 with a 1.69GAA and .943 save percentage. (Rangers Game Notes)

I didn't think Talbot had to be good against Nashville but he was out-****ing-standing against Detroit and Chicago. These are no cupcake teams either.
 

pjr378

Registered User
Oct 12, 2014
2,545
0
Yonkers, New York
Talbot is someone we need to hold onto. He's exactly what you want from a backup G who goes long periods without playing. Quick adaptation and improvement over a short period.
 

GAGLine

Registered User
Sep 17, 2007
24,054
20,698
Talbot is someone we need to hold onto. He's exactly what you want from a backup G who goes long periods without playing. Quick adaptation and improvement over a short period.

Again, we have him for 1 more year at most.

These are our options with regards to Talbot:

  1. Let him walk at the end of the 2015-16 season
  2. Trade him this offseason
  3. Trade Lundqvist and re-sign Talbot long term

#3 isn't happening and #1 doesn't make much sense from an asset management standpoint. If Talbot is only going to be around for 1 more year at most, we are better off getting something for him and finding another backup through free agency.
 

free0717

Registered User
Apr 14, 2004
2,555
87
Old Bridge, NJ
Again, we have him for 1 more year at most.

These are our options with regards to Talbot:

  1. Let him walk at the end of the 2015-16 season
  2. Trade him this offseason
  3. Trade Lundqvist and re-sign Talbot long term

#3 isn't happening and #1 doesn't make much sense from an asset management standpoint. If Talbot is only going to be around for 1 more year at most, we are better off getting something for him and finding another backup through free agency.
#4 Trade him at the 2016 deadline to a team that is hurting for a goalie.(provided Hank is healthy)

I like #4 best
 

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
43,917
56,413
In High Altitoad
In his past seven starts, Talbot is 5-1-1 with a 1.69GAA and .943 save percentage. (Rangers Game Notes)

I didn't think Talbot had to be good against Nashville but he was out-****ing-standing against Detroit and Chicago. These are no cupcake teams either.

I don't think he had to be great yesterday either. He stopped everything he was supposed to stop and 1, maybe 2 shots that weren't gimmies.The Rangers weren't very sharp at all on offense but they played a pretty damn sterling game on D.
 

haveandare

Registered User
Jul 2, 2009
18,984
7,598
New York
#4 Trade him at the 2016 deadline to a team that is hurting for a goalie.(provided Hank is healthy)

I like #4 best

Me too. This team has already bought in to winning now. Why trade talbot for a slightly sweeter return this offseason and roll with a question mark next year when we can easily keep him for another whole year, perhaps bolster his stock even more, then trade him for a slightly smaller return.
 

OnlyTruth

Objectivity&Justice
Dec 2, 2013
1,206
1
Again, we have him for 1 more year at most.

These are our options with regards to Talbot:

  1. Let him walk at the end of the 2015-16 season
  2. Trade him this offseason
  3. Trade Lundqvist and re-sign Talbot long term

#3 isn't happening and #1 doesn't make much sense from an asset management standpoint. If Talbot is only going to be around for 1 more year at most, we are better off getting something for him and finding another backup through free agency.

# 3 is the best option, but I agree it will never happen. Thank you Sather.
 

bobbop

Henrik & Pop
Sponsor
May 27, 2004
14,514
21,028
Now, Suburban Phoenix. Then, Long Island
Why would you want to trade a very good goaltender? Im not even saying that you may need him in a few years, when Hank pass his prime. But you do need a good backup to play part of the season so Hank is not out of gas come playoff time.
:shakehead

Shesterkin, that's why. He is going to be a stud.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) we only have Cam under control for one more year. He is leaving then and you can't wait until the trade deadline to move him. It's cool...everybody wins in this deal.
 

offdacrossbar

misfit fanboy
Jun 25, 2006
15,907
3,455
da cuse
very solid last night. calm, focused and challenging shooters. he was in total control all night. whens he's on, he just looks like a legit 1 guy.

he's been much better of late. could be less nerves, could be the number of games he's had now, could be he's realized he's a very solid nhl goaltender playing behind a very good defense.

however, given that hanks going no where and will play most games, its not so much if we can get good value out of him, and i think we can as his value is at an all time high right now, the real issue is this.

does he want to stay ? doe he want to be a backup or does he want his own team. does want to make bank now ? i think he's proving to himself that he's ready to be a #1. whether we all agree or not, he's gonna want to be the guy. after this run, and the success he's had, going back to being hanks backup is gonna suck.

i think he's gonna want to move on. if so, you have that talk after the season and before the draft, and do whats best for him and the team.
 

Hire Sather

He Is Our Star
Oct 4, 2002
31,964
5,823
Connecticut
Really don't think theres any chance he can bring back a first rounder.

Would have to do it if he can, though.

These past 2 games though, wow. With the way the games were going if he allowed just one more goal in the DET game or one goal last night we probably don't get points. Just huge.
 

Draft Guru

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
8,121
1,775
Long Island
seems like he just needed a little bit of time to get going and get used to the regular grind. I'm sure he's also made some adjustments too. He's a good goalie, glad to see him silence the haters a little bit

Also think the passing of the trade deadline may have helped calm his nerves a bit. Management showed he was their guy.
 

Matt4776

Registered User
May 8, 2009
2,896
690
There were never any Talbot "haters" to begin with. The Talbot "haters" said Talbot is one of the best backups in the league.

The only reason the board has become so polarized on the issue is because one person had to say that Talbot is just as good as Hank, and that the Hank extension was a mistake because of how good Talbot was.

The Talbot "hate" is completely manufactured from the "Trade Hank" side of this board.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad