Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
S
Tre chased a #1 goalie and made a big commitment and the cost, which he accepted, was extra dollars and both players.
There are cases to be made both ways on Markstrom.
It is kind of like the Peters decision, in the sense that he wasn’t necessarily proven as a top goalie year in and out, he was a positive contributor on an otherwise unsuccessful team. We do know he for sure was Tre’s guy.
We also do know that
- Talbot signed for 3 yrs at 3.67 M, Markstrom 6x6
- Talbot career stats 341 GP, 167-128-28 2.58, .916
- Markstrom 307 GP 127-135-34, 2.80, .910
How do we know Markstrom is worth an extra 2.3 million a year?
You can make the case that stats aren’t everything and Markstrom is a “top goalie”.
|
I ultimately have no problem with Markstrom, but the whole Talbot tenure just bothers me. Treliving clearly coveted Talbot from the time he was a Ranger, Tried to get him but didn't have the assets and Edmonton signed him.
Finally gets him and the guy is given a shorter than expected leash until he finally clicks and goes on a run. Then, after a wonky final game against Dallas where the coach yanked him in a questionable call they don't bother re-signing Talbot and double down on the coach that messed up the relationship and then fire that coach anyway.
I just don't get the long term vision or planning there.