Twist it any way you want, you can't say much against this:
If he keeps this up, we have a $59 mio problem
Start Talbot on a consistent basis
- Thread starter Pavel Buchnevich
- Start date
If he keeps this up, we have a $59 mio problem
Machinehead
The Olli react should add points!
Honestly i hope Hank watches Talbot during the games. Talbots rebound control and his stick are pretty good. i feel part of Hank's problems is that he lets too many pucks loose in front of the net
Dagoon44
Registered User
Placid
Registered User
- Feb 17, 2010
- 5,906
- 339
My memory isnt the best, but i dont think that was a factor in a single one of the Pens goals yesterday (weird bounces and redirections galore in that game).
No matter how you look at it, the Rangers have been a different team in front of Talbot. And that is not because Talbot is a better goalie.
I dont think anyone, least of all the coaching staff, has any real clue as to why the Rangers looked "dead" yesterday, yet looked like they'd all snorted a kilo of meth today.
AlternateSideParking
Registered User
- Dec 11, 2005
- 21,592
- 5,487
There's a rumor floating around that Sather has Tortarella do a video teleconference with the team on days Talbot starts, while Vigneault runs the ship on days Henrik starts.
Vigneault is the reason Henrik is terrible this year. Vigneault has absolutely nothing to do with Talbot's success.
Vigneault is the reason Henrik is terrible this year. Vigneault has absolutely nothing to do with Talbot's success.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Talbot was always phenomenally talented, but he played behind some God-awful teams, making him look worse than what he was. All of his teammates in Alabama are out of hockey by now. They were on par with the guys you'd play at the Brooklyn Aviator or the Staten Island Pavilion with. Yet, he almost beat Miami-Ohio in the playoffs when they were the #1 ranked team. He did it almost all by himself, just shutting down star college players and they fired from every angle without much defense in their way.
In Hartford, it didn't get much better. Those who don't watch the AHL just don't understand how bad the defensive breakdowns were. There were 10-12 minute periods when the team would just quit on Talbot. Usually it would happen in the third period as they ran out of gas. He'd face one breakaway after another, which was the easy part. On top of that, they would pass perfectly on the opponent's stick who was standing all alone inside the hash marks. Oh and did I mention him playing like 30 games in a row because neither Miss nor Stajcer knows how to play hockey?
Had Talbot played on a better team, he'd have had just dominant stats. His .918 SV% in Hartford would've been .950% on a different team, but it's hard to have phenomenal stats when you are facing 6-8 shots every game from 2-5 feet away without anyone helping defend, and the rest of the game, it's one blunder after another.
Talbot has always been a very talented goalie, but he occasionally gave up WTF goals. I guess I now know why: it's not that easy to always stop perfectly concentrated when you are facing such a barrage of scoring chances. Eventually, you'll let something in and everyone will blame you for it.
But this year, I don't think he gave up a single WTF goal in either the AHL or the NHL.
Inferno
Registered User
Kakko
Formerly Chytil
You can say that, but that still doesn't make up the difference between .938 and .905
Again cant make excuses for Hank. He hasnt been sharp. he has only had a handful of really good games which isnt a good sign for a guy who is getting paid as a top goaltender in the nhl
Inferno
Registered User
Quality...it does make a difference. Talbot isnt seeing near the degree of difficulty as Henrik is.
Not that it helps with goalies numbers a whole lot, but offensive support helps too.
Im as big of Hank fan as you are but i have to be fair he hasnt looked good. He has had a few really good games but not nearly enough
KasparsHipCheck
Registered User
Considering this is the year of the "backup goalie", coupled with the fact that AV seems to like a 2 goalie system, I think it's in the Rangers best interest to keep going with their goalie shuffle. Hank hasn't been consistent this year, my theory since the beginning of the year is that he is still burned out from being overplayed last year in the sprint short season and exhausting playoffs. Even though the Rangers didn't make it past the B's, they didn't stop playing hockey until June, so the short summer hurt Hank.
Hanks game has been coming together lately if you exclude the Pens game, so I'd play him a game or two, then no matter what start Talbot. The team tightens up their loose and sloppy play with the kid in net.
With every other team seemingly playing 2 goalies due to injury or by design, it doesn't hurt the Rangers chances of making the playoffs in any way. I've been ticked that they are hovering around .500 all season, but in the Eastern Conference the teams that would be in the playoffs (if they started today) are only a few games above .500. The last spot in the Metro division and the wildcard spots aren't out of the question. At least the Rangers are one of the teams blessed with a good backup where they can play the goalie shuffle and still actually (miraculously) be in the playoff hunt.
Hanks game has been coming together lately if you exclude the Pens game, so I'd play him a game or two, then no matter what start Talbot. The team tightens up their loose and sloppy play with the kid in net.
With every other team seemingly playing 2 goalies due to injury or by design, it doesn't hurt the Rangers chances of making the playoffs in any way. I've been ticked that they are hovering around .500 all season, but in the Eastern Conference the teams that would be in the playoffs (if they started today) are only a few games above .500. The last spot in the Metro division and the wildcard spots aren't out of the question. At least the Rangers are one of the teams blessed with a good backup where they can play the goalie shuffle and still actually (miraculously) be in the playoff hunt.
If Talbot is outplaying Hank his trade value should be that of a lowpriced commodity being a stellar product for 8 years.
And if Hank get 8.5 million a year his downside is 6.
6 < HxAxNxK < 10
My theory is the Rangers defense takes into account Talbot is a AHL goalie.
PS. When Rangers sucked Lundqvist was on par with Ryan Miller's save %, 0.920. Talbot has a long way ahead of him to become the new Craig Andersson.
And if Hank get 8.5 million a year his downside is 6.
6 < HxAxNxK < 10
My theory is the Rangers defense takes into account Talbot is a AHL goalie.
PS. When Rangers sucked Lundqvist was on par with Ryan Miller's save %, 0.920. Talbot has a long way ahead of him to become the new Craig Andersson.
They play man in front of both, but the wrinkle is the man D is fronting the opposing forwards with Hank, that would allow a quicker breakouts.
With Talbot it's man D but the D is behind the forwards to clear the crease and allow Talbot to track the puck better.
This is taking nothing away from Talbot who has played well.
Twist it any way you want, you can't say much against this:
1.66gaa, 6 games over .500 for a team thats 1game over, pretty impressive, at this point where would we be w/o him
Still think Talbot is a bit of a sugar high for this team. But hey, they play better when hes starting, might as well ride that out as long as you can. Unfortunately, I think that'll regress at some point.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
I'd like to think you're smarter than that. Let me know the last time they scored 7 goals for Lundqvist.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
Prospect Info: InYourHumbleOpinion who is TORONTO's top 10 prospects? (3 Viewers)- Latest: Anthrax442
-
-
-
-
Salary Cap: 24-25 Salary Thread Crosbicles Volume MXIIX: Rust out, Marner in, all part of the plan! (18 Viewers)- Latest: Jag68Sid87