[Rumour] UPD: Flames sign Cam Talbot (1yr, $2.75mil)

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Brick

There is a reason Talbot will be cheap compared to league average. Talbot hasn't even been an average goaltender for the last 3 years. Cheap isn't necessarily the best way to go when it comes to goaltenders.

Talbot’s last 3 seasons:

.919 (73 games)
.908 (67 games)

followed by

.893 with Edmonton (31 games)
.881 with Philly (4 games)

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It’s basically like saying, I can’t afford a cup, but there is a cheap knife for sale. If I stick the knife down my pants at just the right angle, it might protect my junk. It could work, but it is risky and could be a disaster

Your analogy of signing a backup goalie is that it's like sticking a knife down your pants and hoping it protects your junk?

Do you read your own posts?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

He absolutely did.



However I suspect he's a goalie who only thrives with a lot of shots (i.e. 2015-17) and when the team in front allows fewer shots it manifests poorly. I'm hoping he fits, but we can't recreate the conditions he thrived in when he was considered a good goalie.

Talbot was excellent in NYR behind a team that allowed far fewer shots than the listless Oilers. I think the biggest issue for Talbot in Edmonton was the astonishingly heavy workload he was tasked to carry. The Oilers ran him into the ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It’s basically like saying, I can’t afford a cup, but there is a cheap knife for sale. If I stick the knife down my pants at just the right angle, it might protect my junk. It could work, but it is risky and could be a disaster

What in the hell are you going on about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Strange Brew]

Talbot is a big risk. No real arguing that, he was terrible last year.

Signing a big name goalie to a big contract is a risk too, one that's not really an option for the Flames.

All things considered, this seems like a reasonable choice given the current situation. Another spin of the goalie wheel of fortune.

[Brick]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Talbot’s last 3 seasons:

.919 (73 games)
.908 (67 games)

followed by

.893 with Edmonton (31 games)
.881 with Philly (4 games)

I thought the last two (above) were separate seasons but he is actually two years removed from an above average season:
2016-17 .919 17th out of 64 goalies
2017-18 .908 48th out of 74 goalies
2018-19 .892 65th out of 73 goalies

I would much rather see a goalie with above average stats in recent seasons to play in tandem with David Rittich. Yes, there are cap issues but who's fault is that? There should have always been a higher priority placed on goaltending. You make the cap room to get a good goalie.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Which goalies do you think they should be targeting instead?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Which goalies do you think they should be targeting instead?

Appreciating that luck is a factor, it would have been nice if Treliving had said yes when he got the call on Binnington.

Surely if we take enough spins on the wheel of goalies one should come up a winner?

[Brick]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Gotta consider the type of defending he’s been put behind.

Saving money at one position allows you to spend more in others.

Talbot is a nice insurance policy in case Rittich falters but I think Big Save Dave is our likely #1. Talbot is a solid gamble in my mind. Rittich has show a lot of signs he can be our #1, seems like some here may be underrating him.

I don't underrate David Rittich. There will be a lot of extra pressure on him if Talbot doesn't improve though.

[Brick]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Which goalies do you think they should be targeting instead?

Lehner, McElhinney, Varlamov...

[topfiverecords]

Lehner wants too much term, McElhinney is 36 and Varlamov wants too much money and hasn’t been good in 5 years.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Which assumes any of those have interest and that the Flames didn’t explore them
Apparently mcHardToSpell has no interest in returning. The other two are probably looking for a situation that isn’t a platoon
So I guess depends if folks want to move on from bsd

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Appreciating that luck is a factor, it would have been nice if Treliving had said yes when he got the call on Binnington.

Surely if we take enough spins on the wheel of goalies one should come up a winner?

Binnington was not a trade offer, it was to have a place for him to play on loan.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

You have to grow them, you can't buy them. Well, by that I mean that, while you can buy them, it'll destroy your cap. So you can't buy them.

They need one of Rittich, Gillies or Parsons to develop into a #1. In the meantime, Talbot can be extremely useful if he can return to form.

I don't see any better options out there. Especially on a dollar cost weighted basis.

You are absolutely correct.

Since the lockout, only 'homegrown' goalies have hoisted the Stanley Cup (JS Giguere and Chris Osgood could be considered exceptions, but also fit the idea loosely).

Before that, Khabibulin, Hasek, Belfour, Roy*, Vernon*, Barrasso, and Gump Worsley are the only veteran goalie acquisitions to have won a cup since expansion (Billy Smith, Bill Ranford, Gerry Cheevers, and Bernie Parent also had cups of coffee with other franchises, but would fit the 'homegrown' concept like Osgood and JSG).


Binnington, Holtby, Murray, Fleury, Crawford, Quick, Thomas, Niemi, Ward, Brodeur, Osgood, Richter, Roy, Vernon, Fuhr, Dryden, Vachon, Giguere, Smith, Ranford, Cheevers, Parent.


Rittich might be a Ward/Niemi/Crawford, but I'm pretty sure Talbot won't join the list of bolded guys above. That said, I think he's the perfect platoon with Rittich, and I think spending anything more on another goalie would be a waste. These Flames are BSD or bust.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Lehner wants too much term, McElhinney is 36 and Varlamov wants too much money and hasn’t been good in 5 years.

Lehner is 27. How much term is he looking for because that is usually the age players look for a LT contract?

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Lehner is 27. How much term is he looking for because that is usually the age players look for a LT contract?

We’ll find out tomorrow.

[Toonage]

At the rate agents talk we'll find out tonight

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ I always get a kick out of ‘winning the cup’ as some sort of meaningful data point. Most goalies with a decent career play, what, 10 years?

Last year, 70 goalies saw 10 games. 97 percent of them didn’t win the cup. 1.5 percent of them really won the cup.

The team has to be good enough to win in order for the goalie to even have a chance, something out of his control. He can help, and must do so.

Basically any GM making a move for a goalie, if the cup is the goal, is statistically overwhelmingly likely to be unsuccessful.

[Brick]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Lehner wants too much term, McElhinney is 36 and Varlamov wants too much money and hasn’t been good in 5 years.

Lehner is 27 years old and would fit well on this team for years to come...McElhinney would be okay short term with recent outstanding play and would be coming home...Varlamov would be good in a backup role to David Rittich and is still an average to above average goalie.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Varlamov likely has no interest in being a back up