Start Talbot on a consistent basis | Page 2 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Start Talbot on a consistent basis

Only one goalie has looked like an $8.5M player this year, and it obviously hasn't been Lundqvist. I couldn't care less what any player has done in the past. Contracts are supposed be given based on future performance alone, they're not a "thank you" for what they already did, in the case of Lundqvist he was compensated just fine for his previous play with almost a $7M AAV.

The timing of his contract extension with him playing his worst hockey ever, in conjunction with the grotesque AAV of his contract with a FULL NMC, made NO SENSE. Especially when you consider the rise of Talbot.

We all knew Lundqvist's demands were going to be steep, and you know what? Goalies don't deserve that kind of money. Give me an $8M+ Center of D-man ten times out of ten over a goalie getting that much. He should have been traded for a kings ransom (no pun intended). It would have put this team on the fast track to competing at the top of the standings. Sure Talbot would have some natural growing pains, but the good would have out weighed the bad. Now we're stuck with what is looking like an albatross. Way to go Sather. Employed for life... **** off.
 
Last edited:
I was the first person here (or anywhere) who gave Talbot any chance of playing in the NHL when everyone viewed him as an old non-prospect who'll be lucky to have an AHL career. That said, Talbot can't start over Lundqvist.

It's just different being a backup. First, since you aren't playing every game, you can go into each of your starts with the intensity of Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. Second, the team realizes that the backup is behind them, so they are more conscious of what they are doing and play harder.

It's kind of what happened with Miss/Talbot in Hartford. The team would suck in front of Talbot, but when Miss was in the net, things would actually look better. But as soon as Miss became the full time starter, the team just collapsed and Dov needed to be acquired because Miss can't handle starting duties.

Same here. Talbot might - MIGHT - become a starter some day, but the idea of making one right now is wrong-headed. He won't be playing as well and neither will the team if he's the official starter.

Plus, no need to mess with Hank and create a goalie controversy.
 
At this point we're 17-20. IMO we almost have to ride the hot hand for the sake of salvaging the season. With the positions this team is in, if Talbot continues to win, he continues to play. It's simple.
 
The team clearly plays better in front of him, that's not a knock on him or the team, it's a reason besides his very solid play to give him more games. 50/50? No. Just a good amount. Hank's here for a very long time, no reason to overplay him this year, of all years, when he is not even our best option at the moment.

However, creating a goalie controversy would be turning Cambot's rock solid performances into a negative. I guarantee you that in some absurd circumstance (other than injury) where Cambot is the starter, people will be calling for his his after ~10 games. Probably 5 games.
 
Beacon said:
I was the first person here (or anywhere) who gave Talbot any chance of playing in the NHL when everyone viewed him as an old non-prospect who'll be lucky to have an AHL career. That said, Talbot can't start over Lundqvist.

It's just different being a backup. First, since you aren't playing every game, you can go into each of your starts with the intensity of Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. Second, the team realizes that the backup is behind them, so they are more conscious of what they are doing and play harder.

It's kind of what happened with Miss/Talbot in Hartford. The team would suck in front of Talbot, but when Miss was in the net, things would actually look better. But as soon as Miss became the full time starter, the team just collapsed and Dov needed to be acquired because Miss can't handle starting duties.

Same here. Talbot might - MIGHT - become a starter some day, but the idea of making one right now is wrong-headed. He won't be playing as well and neither will the team if he's the official starter.

Plus, no need to mess with Hank and create a goalie controversy.
Click to expand...

You are one of the very, very few members here who get it. Kudos to a great post.
 
Beacon said:
I was the first person here (or anywhere) who gave Talbot any chance of playing in the NHL when everyone viewed him as an old non-prospect who'll be lucky to have an AHL career. That said, Talbot can't start over Lundqvist.

It's just different being a backup. First, since you aren't playing every game, you can go into each of your starts with the intensity of Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. Second, the team realizes that the backup is behind them, so they are more conscious of what they are doing and play harder.

It's kind of what happened with Miss/Talbot in Hartford. The team would suck in front of Talbot, but when Miss was in the net, things would actually look better. But as soon as Miss became the full time starter, the team just collapsed and Dov needed to be acquired because Miss can't handle starting duties.

Same here. Talbot might - MIGHT - become a starter some day, but the idea of making one right now is wrong-headed. He won't be playing as well and neither will the team if he's the official starter.

Plus, no need to mess with Hank and create a goalie controversy.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. Props.
 
simple

AV had the same situation with Luongo vs Schneider.

Schneider with better numbers and Luongo with long term NMC contract.
 
BlueShirts702 said:
You guys are hilarious. All of a sudden Hank is a bum and he's not worthy of the starting job? He's going through a rough patch. It happens to the best of players...it's a slump. I should expect Ranger fans to be fickle but it boggles my mind how quick people are to dismiss a guy with such a track record. To each their own I guess.
Click to expand...

The Rangers are in a slump too, a 74 year slump
 
Look I'm not one of these guys who's advocating omg Talbot's better nonsense. The reality is IMO, under this system Lundqvist has been exposed. Other teams are getting more and better chances on him so naturally his stats are going to go look worse. He was protected in a "6 goalie system" just accept the facts. Ryan Miller probably would have put up similar numbers.
 
AV needs to start talbot tonight. hank hasn't been hank all year and the team isn't playing with a great deal of confidence in front of him. let hank sit tonight, get a full week to collect himself here and have him raring to go this weekend.

he'll come out of it, but id still rather see talbot in net tonight.
 
Before anyone puts words in my mouth, I am not saying to get rid of Hank.

That said, we've been through this before with another "proven" goaltender that couldn't adjust to the game at the beginning of the Dead Puck Era in 1997-98. Nobody ever blamed Mike Richter for a thing because he was crowned the "Greatest American Goalie". That didn't matter when he was consistently losing 2-1 or 3-2, usually on some soft goal. But he was the greatest ever.

No replacement was ever groomed. It basically took the seven seasons of crap before the Rangers found a legitimate starting goaltender (and it was supposed to be Kevin Weekes).

I'm not saying Richter was the cause of the beginning of the seven years of hell, but some blame has to be thrown in his direction, especially during the 1997-98 season. This season is shaping up to be very similar to that one, where the team was adjusting to a new style, not only within the team, but within the league in general. Had Richter been able to adjust to the new game in the league, maybe the Rangers make the playoffs that season.

OR, if management and the fans realized that Richter was a much better goaltender in a more wide open game, Neil Smith would have done something about the position.

Just saying.
 
Beacon said:
I was the first person here (or anywhere) who gave Talbot any chance of playing in the NHL when everyone viewed him as an old non-prospect who'll be lucky to have an AHL career. That said, Talbot can't start over Lundqvist.

It's just different being a backup. First, since you aren't playing every game, you can go into each of your starts with the intensity of Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. Second, the team realizes that the backup is behind them, so they are more conscious of what they are doing and play harder.

It's kind of what happened with Miss/Talbot in Hartford. The team would suck in front of Talbot, but when Miss was in the net, things would actually look better. But as soon as Miss became the full time starter, the team just collapsed and Dov needed to be acquired because Miss can't handle starting duties.

Same here. Talbot might - MIGHT - become a starter some day, but the idea of making one right now is wrong-headed. He won't be playing as well and neither will the team if he's the official starter.

Plus, no need to mess with Hank and create a goalie controversy.
Click to expand...

You might have been the first person but I don't think you were the only one who thought Talbot might be a player. The last few years I regularly would start bringing him up as a candidate from around 10-15 in our prospect polls. Most others would be looking for more scoring and had hopes in other players. Over his last two AHL seasons Talbot became more and more important to the good fortune of the Whale and was pretty much their best player.

In any case for whatever reason Lundqvist has not played well this year. He signed a huge contract and despite start after start his play has not improved. We continued to lose and his goaltending very much factored into many of those losses. Talbot played solidly again last night. He deserves to play more--quite a bit more--maybe even carry the load for a while. That doesn't mean get rid of Lundqvist--it means he has to prove he's worthy of the contract he signed when he plays--something he hasn't been doing. I expect he will sooner or later get back to form but until then Talbot has proven to be a very capable goaltender and I'd go with him a lot more. I'll also say I found AV's remarks that he would keep giving Henrik starts until he got back into form kind of disappointing and this kind of stubbornness on his part IMO dug us deeper into a hole.
 
BlueShirts702 said:
You guys are hilarious. All of a sudden Hank is a bum and he's not worthy of the starting job? He's going through a rough patch. It happens to the best of players...it's a slump. I should expect Ranger fans to be fickle but it boggles my mind how quick people are to dismiss a guy with such a track record. To each their own I guess.
Click to expand...

I just wonder how many people have actually seen the goals he let in.

Do they know that they don't even slightly resemble that Kreider goal last night? Sounds like everything that goes in is a"soft goal" to too many folks. It's kinda sickening.

Hilarious is one non infraction worthy adjective for it.

If he was off his game, or non consistent, or "different" this year- the scores would read at least 6 on the other side almost every game.

:wake up, look at internets, see more than one goal on board, "we need a better goalie":

Man, Glenn Healy went undefeated that one January, guess by many posters logic he would've done better for the Stanley Cup. Give Hank even half the effort like they've given Talbot, except ironically-that his most recent loss, and he wins too. Give him the SAME effort they give Talbot, and he gets SOs.
 
I think the team is just playing harder in front of Cam knowing that he's a rookie. Maybe they are relying on Hank too much when he's in? Pinching when they shouldn't be and crap like that. Not saying Hank hasn't let in a bunch of crappy goals this year though.
 
eco's bones said:
You might have been the first person but I don't think you were the only one who thought Talbot might be a player. The last few years I regularly would start bringing him up as a candidate from around 10-15 in our prospect polls. Most others would be looking for more scoring and had hopes in other players. Over his last two AHL seasons Talbot became more and more important to the good fortune of the Whale and was pretty much their best player.

In any case for whatever reason Lundqvist has not played well this year. He signed a huge contract and despite start after start his play has not improved. We continued to lose and his goaltending very much factored into many of those losses. Talbot played solidly again last night. He deserves to play more--quite a bit more--maybe even carry the load for a while. That doesn't mean get rid of Lundqvist--it means he has to prove he's worthy of the contract he signed when he plays--something he hasn't been doing. I expect he will sooner or later get back to form but until then Talbot has proven to be a very capable goaltender and I'd go with him a lot more. I'll also say I found AV's remarks that he would keep giving Henrik starts until he got back into form kind of disappointing and this kind of stubbornness on his part IMO dug us deeper into a hole.
Click to expand...

There is no comparison between Talbot and Lundqvist right now or ever. That said, I say nothing about Talbot because one has really nothing to do with the outcome of the other, except that he's been the best backup we could've asked for.

I truly don't think Lundqvist is any different at all. Looking at his positioning and that of everyone on the ice during the goals he lets in, and gauging the saves he makes while also considering his team's positioning, he's the same best in the world and being extra hung to dry too many times.

Just as the Giants and Yankees on any given night, this team can beat anyone. However, this year worse than others, they just look like a bunch of hungover millionaires not taking the extra stride…and some people want to pick on the goaltender???

Blame Eli for the balls bouncing off receivers hands and often into the defenders this year? Many did.

Come on folks.
 
charlie460 said:
He has been better than Hank this season consistently and the stats back it up.
Click to expand...

For anyone who knows goaltending, or what it takes to be one, they would be aware that stats really mean very little on most occasion.

A goalie's best performances truly come when he's peppered.

To out myself as an example, I know when I substituted for one of the other school's goalie and I had the luxury of a team with a clue, I let in 3 goals in 7 games. Meanwhile I was pulling game stars facing 20 3 on 1s per game on my normal team. Parents after the game were raving, saying how I was the only one out there once again. The parents of the subbed-for team thanked me and said they we glad to find someone just as good as their normal goalie.

The newspaper said I let in 9 goals for my normal team(while the two skilled kids on my team usually got one or two on the board).

I wasn't any better on either team, I was just given a chance on the other one. But it sure looked like I was on paper.

What would Richter have done behind a D system containing the likes of Stevens, Niedermayer, Daneyko, Rafalski etc. instead of just Leetch and Beukeboomhis whole career? Yes, he had the one playoff year in 94, and look what happened.
 
The team plays better in front of Talbot. Hank deals with their **** night in and out. If they played the way they did vs Minnesota with Hank in nets more consistently, this would not be a conversation. Has Hank had some rough one's? Sure, but nothing to where the team is not to blame more than him. How about the Pens game robbing Crosby in OT and standing on his head. Still let in 3 from ****** play.
 
before we jump to conclusions about Talbot and his ability, lets let him play the season out and see if he can continue the solid play.

Personally, I don't think that Lundqvist contract is tradable right now as we would NEVER get back fair value for him.

Will be a top paid player at his position, not playing like a top 20 goalie? Never going to get the right return.

Talbot, RIGHT NOW, is a very solid back up and a solid steadying force.

Lundqvist even if he's not the top goalie, consistenttly will be a top 5-10 goalie oevr the next 5+ seasons
 
Right now, Hank isnt Hank. We need points, If Cam is going good, we gotta go with him.
Hank has been consistantly good every year. I am confident at some point he finds his game
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom