Talbot Appreciation Thread

[PIM]

Yes there is, and that something is called consistency. Hank has that in spades, as he has proven throughout the years. With him, you know what you get.

Except during the playoffs. Wrist shots from the circle anyone?

All props to Talbot this far, by all means, he has been absolutely stellar (in my opinion).

The trading deadline is early March just after the Olympics, so in three and a half months, one and a half months before the playoffs. Say Talbot gets another 10 - 15 games during that stretch.

To promote him to starting goalie after 15 - 20 or so games is almost beyond crazy as i see it

If management was smart, they'd keep the hot goalie in net. I feel like Cam deserves a chance to ride it out after being a road warrior, and having the best goalie stats on the team. If he stays hot I feel good, but he's earned a shot to ride his own momentum imo. Not that he'll likely get it, because hAnK is teH KiNg~~ and all that, but in a reasonable world.

 

[Placid]

Except during the playoffs. Wrist shots from the circle anyone?

I'll give you that, hehe

If management was smart, they'd keep the hot goalie in net. I feel like Cam deserves a chance to ride it out after being a road warrior, and having the best goalie stats on the team. If he stays hot I feel good, but he's earned a shot to ride his own momentum imo. Not that he'll likely get it, because hAnK is teH KiNg~~ and all that, but in a reasonable world.

ok.. say in your scenario, deadline arrives, Talbot has been playing fantastic, we trade Hank for whoever.

Then we near the playoffs, Talbot's game is dropping off sharply (or god forbid, he gets injured), and now we do what exactly ? Play the backup ? Talbot *was* the backup, who is he going to have backing him up ? An EHCL goalie ? So we end up in a mad scramble to get a goalie replacement, which :

A. Is not likely to be as good as Hank.
B. Is very likely to cost an arm and a leg.

Leaving us with the net result of starting a worse goalie than we used to have, having a team that because of the cap will have to be adjusted left and right to fit it properly, and so on.

Sure, thats a worst possible scenario, but hey, this is the Rangers

 

[PIM]

I'll give you that, hehe


ok.. say in your scenario, deadline arrives, Talbot has been playing fantastic, we trade Hank for whoever.

Then we near the playoffs, Talbot's game is dropping off sharply (or god forbid, he gets injured), and now we do what exactly ? Play the backup ? Talbot *was* the backup, who is he going to have backing him up ? An EHCL goalie ? So we end up in a mad scramble to get a goalie replacement, which :

A. Is not likely to be as good as Hank.
B. Is very likely to cost an arm and a leg.

Leaving us with the net result of starting a worse goalie than we used to have, having a team that because of the cap will have to be adjusted left and right to fit it properly, and so on.

Sure, thats a worst possible scenario, but hey, this is the Rangers

You don't build your team around potential injuries or drop offs in performance. I give you last year as an example- what do you do when Brad Richards, multi-million dollar center extraordinaire, plays like ****? You do nothing. You barely make it into the playoffs and you get demolished by the Bruins in five games. And then you go home.

You don't win the cup with a prototypical backup anyways. If Niemi or Quick get hurt during the playoffs, do you honestly think the Sharks or Kings can win the cup? I sure don't. If winning the cup is the goal, there isn't much point in anything else. If we move Hank after letting Talbot prove himself, we're closer to a cup- even as a rental, we can get an elite player of the Evander Kane variety in a package for Hank no question. If we're not going to win the cup anyways and that's apparent, we move whatever we can for 2015 first rounders to try and win the McDavid lottery and take the Pens route. At this point you either win the cup or you win that draft lottery, anything in between is a failure.

 

[Placid]

You don't build your team around potential injuries or drop offs in performance. I give you last year as an example- what do you do when Brad Richards, multi-million dollar center extraordinaire, plays like ****? You do nothing. You barely make it into the playoffs and you get demolished by the Bruins in five games. And then you go home.

You don't win the cup with a prototypical backup anyways. If Niemi or Quick get hurt during the playoffs, do you honestly think the Sharks or Kings can win the cup? I sure don't. If winning the cup is the goal, there isn't much point in anything else. If we move Hank after letting Talbot prove himself, we're closer to a cup- even as a rental, we can get an elite player of the Evander Kane variety in a package for Hank no question. If we're not going to win the cup anyways and that's apparent, we move whatever we can for 2015 first rounders to try and win the McDavid lottery and take the Pens route. At this point you either win the cup or you win that draft lottery, anything in between is a failure.

I think you completely missed my point

As things are right now, we have Hank as our number one, with Talbot as an extremely capable backup (with potential to become a starter).

But if we then follow your suggestion of trading away Hank.. we are left with Talbot, who still is a very capable goalie, but which has a small sample size, and therefore we cannot say anything about his consistency.

If in your scenario when we traded away Hank, if Talbots game declines, what exactly do we do then ? Who cares if we have Kane on the team, unless you want to put him in goal ?

To your "either win the cup or the lottery" comment.. there are 30 teams in the league. One of them will win the cup, one of them will win the lottery. The other 28 cant do either

 

[PIM]

I think you completely missed my point

As things are right now, we have Hank as our number one, with Talbot as an extremely capable backup (with potential to become a starter).

But if we then follow your suggestion of trading away Hank.. we are left with Talbot, who still is a very capable goalie, but which has a small sample size, and therefore we cannot say anything about his consistency.

Right, and I agree with you up to this point- which is why I say let Talbot ride the wave and stay in net going forward, as of now, until he proves he doesn't deserve to be there. If that doesn't happen by the deadline, time to take a gamble and move Hank while we can still get something aside from a massive cap hit out of him.

If in your scenario when we traded away Hank, if Talbots game declines, what exactly do we do then ? Who cares if we have Kane on the team, unless you want to put him in goal ?

The Hawks won the cup with Corey Crawford. Not exactly Rinne to say the least- there's a lot to be said for what a tandem of elite players can do for a team's puck possession and subsequent inflation of goalie stats.

To your "either win the cup or the lottery" comment.. there are 30 teams in the league. One of them will win the cup, one of them will win the lottery. The other 28 cant do either

Which is why we need to make up our minds and do one or the other. As it stands now, we're not tanking and we're not a contender- we're firmly mediocre, and I see no decisive action being taken by management to move in either direction.

 

[Cake or Death]

Right, and I agree with you up to this point- which is why I say let Talbot ride the wave and stay in net going forward, as of now, until he proves he doesn't deserve to be there. If that doesn't happen by the deadline, time to take a gamble and move Hank while we can still get something aside from a massive cap hit out of him.

The Hawks won the cup with Corey Crawford. Not exactly Rinne to say the least- there's a lot to be said for what a tandem of elite players can do for a team's puck possession and subsequent inflation of goalie stats.

Which is why we need to make up our minds and do one or the other. As it stands now, we're not tanking and we're not a contender- we're firmly mediocre, and I see no decisive action being taken by management to move in either direction.

Firmly mediocre? They started like ****, but they're 7-2 in their last 9, outscoring opponents 27-14 (3.00 GPG to 1.56 GAPG) in those 9 games. Not gonna say we're a Cup favorite, but they certainly don't look close to mediocre either. I don't think the team is in any position where they should toss their extremely proven goalie for a guy who's played 5 lousy games and is utterly unproven over any worthwhile length of time in the NHL.

You have a proven entity - a guy who has multiple Vezina final three voting finishes, a Vezina win; has the most wins, lowest GAA, and is second in shutouts and save pct since he entered the league; is on his way this season to becoming the all time leader in the team's history in wins and shutouts; won a championship in SEL and a Gold Medal, proving he can win with a solid team; still has a lot of years left on him and already voted 38th best goalie all time by the folks over at the History of Hockey end of these boards; has stolen more wins for this team than any player I've seen since I started watching the Rangers in the mid-70s; and is probably the first NYR goalie who will get into the Hall since Eddie G. I don't quit on that guy 1/4 of the way into a season for a guy who has played 5 games. That concept doesn't even register in my head.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Guy's been solid and poised, albeit through a very meager amount of games. That said, I'm not sure how people are advocating even the idea of getting rid of Lundqvist in favor of a guy with such an utterly tiny sample size.

It's the video game people, what they see is: "look at his stats and how good he has been, he must be like 95 in skill, he's awesome!"

Talbot has indeed been very, very impressive. Great poise, well positioned, good patience, Allaire has done a great job with him. But: The real test for Talbot will come when he faces adversity, which holds especially true for goalies, which is truly a position of inches. When he has those couple of bad games in a row, where he is really challenged mentally. It's not hard to play well when you're in great shape and play with confidence, it's a whole other thing to play when your confidence is not great and the team in front is playing like crap.

That is when you will know how good Talbot really is, when you've seen both sides of the coin. Granted, he has proven himself in Hartford in front of a supposedly bad team, so it's not like adversity is new to him. Still, he has to do it on the big stage as well, where he faces the best shooters in the world.

5 games does not equal 8 seasons, don't turn this into another Montoya "we can trade Lundqvist now" debacle, even if we can hold a positive attitude. Talbot does look like the real deal and I'm as thrilled as anyone, but let's hold the horses.

 

[eco's bones]

Rangers are not trading Henrik Lundqvist. He is the face of the franchise. If they were to make a trade involving Henrik Lundqvist they'd get a lot more back for him than Evander Kane.

Talbot has passed all his tests so far as a backup NHL goalie but he's still new. You don't hand a starting position to a guy after 5 NHL games. Talbot's provided the breathing space so far where we can be comfortable give Henrik rest over the course of the season. We need two good goalies at the NHL level.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

If Cam can take on an increasing workload this year, up until the trade deadline, and keep his performance at this caliber.... Is there any reason NOT to move Hank for a king's ransom at the deadline? Less than a third of the cap hit, and it's not like he's a kid- 27 years old, mature, dependable. Gets it done humbly and isn't a narcissist. Sounds good to me. Hank for Evander Kane. Leggo.

Talbot will have about 15-20 career starts by that time. That would be an incredibly questionable gamble.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

You don't build your team around potential injuries or drop offs in performance. I give you last year as an example- what do you do when Brad Richards, multi-million dollar center extraordinaire, plays like ****? You do nothing. You barely make it into the playoffs and you get demolished by the Bruins in five games. And then you go home.

You don't win the cup with a prototypical backup anyways. If Niemi or Quick get hurt during the playoffs, do you honestly think the Sharks or Kings can win the cup? I sure don't. If winning the cup is the goal, there isn't much point in anything else. If we move Hank after letting Talbot prove himself, we're closer to a cup- even as a rental, we can get an elite player of the Evander Kane variety in a package for Hank no question. If we're not going to win the cup anyways and that's apparent, we move whatever we can for 2015 first rounders to try and win the McDavid lottery and take the Pens route. At this point you either win the cup or you win that draft lottery, anything in between is a failure.

Your definition for Talbot "proving himself" is awfully shoddy. Hes making you feel all tingly inside after 5 games. 5 games.

5 games. 5.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Rangers are not trading Henrik Lundqvist. He is the face of the franchise. If they were to make a trade involving Henrik Lundqvist they'd get a lot more back for him than Evander Kane.

Talbot has passed all his tests so far as a backup NHL goalie but he's still new. You don't hand a starting position to a guy after 5 NHL games. Talbot's provided the breathing space so far where we can be comfortable give Henrik rest over the course of the season. We need two good goalies at the NHL level.

I dont think thats particularly true. Take a look at trades involving goaltenders historically. The value just isnt there. They'd be lucky to get Kane, especially since Hank is an pending UFA.

 

[BlueshirtBlitz]

Remember -insert any number of players, chosen from a plethora of NHLers past, present, and future, who had great five game stretches, only to invariably come back down to earth-?

 

[roseyrangers]

Too early to do that. Let's re-sign Hank, reevaluate things in 2 years.

Keep in mind that Talbot has a tendency to give up WTF goals. He hasn't done it yet, but it's coming. He cut down on those every year since he made the pros, but he's keeping his concentration levels at 100% right now because he's just starting. Let's see if he can continue to do that and not give up any WTF goals like he did in Hartford.

It's not like Henrik doesn't give those up too.

 

[Crease]

The "king dethroned" talk is wayyyyyy premature. If Cam had been doing this for a couple years now, then you might entertain the idea of trading Hank and only if it was clear Hank isn't taking a hometown discount.

I'm firmly in the camp that believes you shouldn't commit a lot of cap space to a goalie, especially ones on the backside of their careers, but Cam is still very much a question mark. Love what I'm seeing from him though.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

It's not like Henrik doesn't give those up too.

Name one goalie in the history of the world who doesnt.

 

[Fitzy]

Talbot fit the mold, as we hoped he would, of a new-age NHL goaltender.

Quick legs, good positioning, and mobility. He's not a great puckhandler, but certainly better than Henrik.

I think he's close to the level Henrik was at when he came in at 23. But he still has some holes in his game. We should be thankful for the wins he has got us, but he's due for a bad game or two. He isn't going to be a .944 goaltender all season.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Talbot fit the mold, as we hoped he would, of a new-age NHL goaltender.

Quick legs, good positioning, and mobility. He's not a great puckhandler, but certainly better than Henrik.

I think he's close to the level Henrik was at when he came in at 23. But he still has some holes in his game. We should be thankful for the wins he has got us, but he's due for a bad game or two. He isn't going to be a .944 goaltender all season.

How? How can you make that determination after 5 games? Sure, hes been great so far, but any prognosticating at this point is just pure BS. Talk to me at the end of the season.

 

[Fitzy]

How? How can you make that determination after 5 games? Sure, hes been great so far, but any prognosticating at this point is just pure BS. Talk to me at the end of the season.

Well, I'm speaking more in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of his game. Now, Henrik came in and won a gold medal for Sweden, and was a Vezina finalist his rookie year. So perhaps I worded it improperly. But I certainly think they are in the same mold as a goaltender and this might have a lot to do with Allaire's goalie coaching.

 

[Idlerlee]

How long can we realisticly expect to keep Talbot, if his continued standard of play, is going to be what he's shown so far in his NHL career

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Did I read correctly? PIM not only wants to trade the best goalie since the lockout in the NHL and potential HOFer in his prime (which I can SOMEWHAT understand the logic behind), but wants to do it for a good but not great winger in Evander Kane? Is this the real life?

 

[n8]

i love that he's doing so well. this gives us goalie insurance as well as AV the option to not play Henke as much (especially so in an olympic year)

 

[LORDE]

Why!?!

Why must we turn an appreciation thread for a guy who's played a handful of NHL games, into yet another AWFUL trade proposal thread?

Christ.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Why!?!

Why must we turn an appreciation thread for a guy who's played a handful of NHL games, into yet another AWFUL trade proposal thread?

Christ.

Eh, sometimes its better than having these folks attempt to analyze a game.

 

[LittleKev6D9]

Can we have a thread dedicated to appreciate his masks?

FIRE!!

 

[bernmeister]

Welcome CT.

I was high on your chances the Traverse prior to last, when you already showed NHL calibre lightning fast glove. Advocated if return good enough, move Biron, get something + promote. While we didn't score that extra trade swag, I'm happy you worked hard at the rest of your game.

And now you're here. Welcome to NHL/NYR.

Thanks for making me look good.

After all, for every Chris Kredier, JT MIller and Cam Talbot, I'll always have Tysen Dowzak to keep me humble.