I think Talbot is a good gamble. The BOA will be a little weird with the tender bender that's gone on, so I think it's definitely a positive that both guys will have a bit of hunger to succeed right off the bat.
For those that think Treliving didn't both to address goaltending, Treliving was in on the following goalies:
Murray: Pittsburgh wanted to see how Murray would do in the NHL before trading him. Rest is history.
Bishop #1: Tampa wanted a price that was too high. King was also rumored to have vetoed a 7x7.
Bishop #2: Couldn't get King on the phone to reply in time. So he was traded to the Kings for cheap.
Bishop #3: Supposedly the flames offered just shy of 6x6, but because of how many times a trade had been nixed in the past, he decided to go to Dallas.
Talbot: Sather supposedly just wanted to do the Oilers a solid.
Raanta: Price from NYR to Arizona was ridiculous
Grubauer: came with a significant salary anchor. We couldn't afford the cost to buy out Orpik.
Andersen: Ducks wanted a premium from us. If we had received the 1st from the Russell trade (missed by 1 game I think), then Andersen might have been a Flame as the Flames would have been able to offer a better package (plus inter-conference premium) than Toronto.
Bobrovsky: Likely can't fit the cap anyways and it seemed like he was dead set on someplace temperate like Florida.
Varlamov: Could be for reasons of cap we couldn't get him.
Lehner: I wonder and think that at the time, we weren't well developed yet in terms of addressing mental illness even though we were developing a program for substance abuse. I believe Lehner said in an article that NYI being willing to help him address his mental illness was a part of why he chose to sign with them. I also think he probably wanted to stay relatively close to "home" by sticking with a team out East after playing in Ottawa and Buffalo.
MAF: I believe Pittsburgh wanted our 1st that year. Treliving didn't want to pay it, so MAF was offered in the expansion draft with a pick I believe to Vegas
Kuemper: This might be the only legitimate flub. But who knows.
Mrazek: Treliving doesn't like players with attitude problems. Might be why he passed on Mrazek.
and then there's a litany of young guys that might have been good gambles at the times, but in hindsight, it's a good thing we didn't get them.
- Pickard
- Darling
- Forsberg
Yeah, sure. If it's about the bottom line, Treliving has not yet addressed the goal tending in a passable manner. But he hasn't put us in a situation where we are anchored with a bad contract like Reimer or Darling which is also a positive. He definitely isn't an idiot who thinks there's no issues with goal tending, so it shows he isn't clueless in evaluating the roster he has. The guy is trying, that's all we can really ask at this point. In general, he is always taking small steps to improve the roster (not just goal tending) of which some work great and some... not so much. If you look at a few teams out there, we haven't stepped forward as much as some teams, but we haven't stepped back as badly as some teams either.
I trust in Treliving. Not blindly. But because his methodology and approach is one I agree with. I also like how he doesn't do panic moves. I think sooner or later we will get the goalie of our future, but for now, it doesn't seem like he ran into any scenarios for a goalie that wouldn't have blown a significant hole into the roster elsewhere.
|