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

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Talbot is intriguing... but how does having him here impact Rittich's growth?

I can't see Talbot signing for a "redemption year" unless the team commits to playing him as the starter. I also think Rittich needs to be given the ball as the starter in order to progress further.

- Rittich is too good to be a backup
- Talbot can't prove he's still a starter unless he succeeds as a starter.

So the question becomes do the Flames believe Rittich is a starting goalie?

My guess is that between Tablot and Rittich they expect that at least one of them is a "starting goalie." But the League is changing to the point where more and more goalies are splitting games and teams are finding more success within this new model.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I will go back and review my posts where I discussed Flames not qualifying Rittich.

Let me help you:

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Two slots open in the NHL. Flames have no NHL goalies signed and while it seems entirely likely they will re-sign Rittich, they haven’t yet. If it wasn’t for the cap constraints the team is dealing with, I would not have been shocked by a true #1 with a discount backup. The fact that no salary has been moved out to date makes this scenario entirely unlikely now though.

The ONLY scenario in which the Flames do not actually sign Rittich is the one in which they do not qualify him. The ONLY reason he has not yet been qualified is because the deadline is still two hours away.

I mean, it seems entirely likely that [INSERT NHL TEAM] will re-sign [INSERT RFA], but they haven't yet.

[bax]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Talbot is intriguing... but how does having him here impact Rittich's growth?

I can't see Talbot signing for a "redemption year" unless the team commits to playing him as the starter. I also think Rittich needs to be given the ball as the starter in order to progress further.

- Rittich is too good to be a backup
- Talbot can't prove he's still a starter unless he succeeds as a starter.

So the question becomes do the Flames believe Rittich is a starting goalie?

I don't think it impacts Rittich's growth at all. Rittich will play at least half of the games which is perfect for a 26 year old goalie in his second NHL season.

How many team's are looking for strictly a starting goalie? All of the open positions are for tandems. Flames can offer as good as an opportunity for Talbot as anybody.

It's not about a starter and a back up anymore. Look at all the tandems across the league.

Lehner and Greiss
Varlamov and Grubauer
Rask and Halak
Raanta and Kuemper
Kinkaid and Schneider
Rittich and Smith
Koskinen and Talbot
Mrazek and Mcelhinney
Luongo and Reimer
Murray and DeSmith
Lundqvist and Georgiev
Bernier and Howard
Hutton and Ullmark


Only 6 goalies played more than 60 games last season. The goalies in the conference finals each played 46, 40, 32, and 62 games respectively. There is something to be said about having a fresh goalie come playoff time. Heck, even Smith played outstanding in his 5 games.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Talbot is intriguing... but how does having him here impact Rittich's growth?

I can't see Talbot signing for a "redemption year" unless the team commits to playing him as the starter. I also think Rittich needs to be given the ball as the starter in order to progress further.

- Rittich is too good to be a backup
- Talbot can't prove he's still a starter unless he succeeds as a starter.

So the question becomes do the Flames believe Rittich is a starting goalie?

realistically, there are only 45-50 goalie spots in the league where 35+ starts are available, and the vast majority of them are already full.

Talbot after the year he had is a beggar, not a chooser, and he'll sign anywhere there is any uncertainty.

He makes a lot of sense for us because

1) He knows if he plays to his 2015-17 level we will give him more starts
2) We know that he'll be cheap and could duke it out against Gillies (1 way contract) without being a total fail.

Originally Posted by bax

. Heck, even Smith played outstanding in his 5 games.

I thought Smith was poor in game 5. The every-other-day playoff schedule caught up to him.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Let me help you:

The ONLY scenario in which the Flames do not actually sign Rittich is the one in which they do not qualify him. The ONLY reason he has not yet been qualified is because the deadline is still two hours away.

I mean, it seems entirely likely that [INSERT NHL TEAM] will sign [INSERT RFA], but they haven't yet.

A qualifying offer simply retains his rights unless for some reason Rittich signs that offer which is entirely unlikely. His rights can be dealt, he can be signed and dealt.

As I have said, it is obviously likely that Rittich returns but not impossible to imagine scenarios where he doesn’t.

Thanks for offering to help me though.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

A qualifying offer simply retains his rights unless for some reason Rittich signs that offer which is entirely unlikely. His rights can be dealt, he can be signed and dealt.

As I have said, it is obviously likely that Rittich returns but not impossible to imagine scenarios where he doesn’t.

These strike me as extremely remote—practically impossible.

The likelihood that the Flames would opt for a completely new goalie tandem after the type of season Rittich just had is not a realistic outcome. For perspective, Rittich won the same number of games last year than both Tuuku Rask and Ben Bishop, and with fewer starts. It would be astonishing to see the Flames move on from the best goalie they have developed in more than a decade, especially since he is not likely to get a huge raise.

[GioforPM]

Talbot can give the Flames at least the quality of goaltending Smith did in the first 3/4 of the year, or better. And with that level of goaltending the Flames finished first.

And there is a better possibility of improved goaltending with Talbot than with Smith back or Gillies elevated IMO. Really, assessing players who are on the Oilers is almost impossible. I'd also consider Reider for that reason.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

These strike me as extremely remote—practically impossible.

The likelihood that the Flames would opt for a completely new goalie tandem after the type of season Rittich just had is not a realistic outcome. For perspective, Rittich won the same number of games last year than both Tuuku Rask and Ben Bishop, and with fewer starts. It would be astonishing to see the Flames move on from the best goalie they have developed in more than a decade, especially since he is not likely to get a huge raise.

I agree, from the Flames side, it's very unlikely they'll want to move on. But there are still potential complications...

What if Rittich feels he proved himself and uses Koskinen's as a comparable (citing the same reasons you mention)? Or what if he's disgruntled he didn't get a chance to play in the playoffs and it gets worse if we bring in a 1A goalie like Talbot or Mrazek? If Rittich plays hardball, it might force BT's hand to an undesirable outcome. They were already close to going to arbitration last year...

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

I agree, from the Flames side, it's very unlikely they'll want to move on. But there are still potential complications...

What if Rittich feels he proved himself and uses Koskinen's as a comparable (citing the same reasons you mention)? Or what if he's disgruntled he didn't get a chance to play in the playoffs and it gets worse if we bring in a 1A goalie like Talbot or Mrazek? If Rittich plays hardball, it might force BT's hand to an undesirable outcome. They were already close to going to arbitration last year...

I just don't see this as likely. If the rumours that the Flames will sign Talbot are true it is because he is signing for cheap, and I don't think the Flames are interested in paying what Mrazek is worth. To me, that suggests that they are highly motivated to re-sign Rittich.

Koskinen's deal cannot be used for comparison purposes in RFA arbitration because he was signed as a pending UFA. I expect the closest comparable is Casey DeSmith, who signed a three-year deal at a very reasonable $1.25 m cap-hit. Rittich will get more than that, but not so much that it will create problems for the Flames to re-sign him. He's coming off of an $800,000 deal; I don't see that he will get anything more than $2.5 m.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I just don't see this as likely. If the rumours that the Flames will sign Talbot are true it is because he is signing for cheap, and I don't think the Flames are interested in paying what Mrazek is worth. To me, that suggests that they are highly motivated to re-sign Rittich.

Koskinen's deal cannot be used for comparison purposes in RFA arbitration because he was signed as a pending UFA. I expect the closest comparable is Casey DeSmith, who signed a three-year deal at a very reasonable $1.25 m cap-hit. Rittich will get more than that, but not so much that it will create problems for the Flames to re-sign him. He's coming off of an $800,000 deal; I don't see that he will get anything more than $2.5 m.

Very true - and arbitration is likely a good thing for the Flames as it guarantees he'll be back at a reasonable rate. The Koskinen comparable is more a concern if this doesn't go to arbitration and his agent insists on a similar deal.

[Huntingwhale]

I have no issue with Talbot coming on board here. Many an Oiler has gone on to have good careers after they've left Edmonton. Talbot seems primed for a bounce-back season. If he doesn't do it here, he'll likely do it elsewhere.

I'd would also be cool with Bob signing here if someway, somehow he took a discount. Although if that did happen, that likely spells the end for Rittich (who I think has a much higher ceiling than just a backup). Ideally I'd like to see Rittich be given a long leash like Smith got. I know Rittich slumped for parts of the season. But I attribute that more to Smith being given extra rope then Rittich being tired. Seems that every time Rittich got into a good rhythm and then lost a game, Smith was tossed back in and given multiple games even though he lost a bunch. Although Rittich played 45 games last season, I never really felt he got into a true groove. Seemed like his starts were all over the place. I'd like to see him get a chance to get in a true rhythm and have it be made public that he's the go-to guy.

I sure don't want Smith back though. I know he was a hero in the playoffs and I like the guy. But all anyone who supports having him come back has to do is read some of the PGTs for the first 3/4 of the season and you'll easily see why he shouldn't be back. For me it was way too little, too late.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

...Ideally I'd like to see Rittich be given a long leash like Smith got. I know Rittich slumped for parts of the season. But I attribute that more to Smith being given extra rope then Rittich being tired. Seems that every time Rittich got into a good rhythm and then lost a game, Smith was tossed back in and given multiple games even though he lost a bunch. Although Rittich played 45 games last season, I never really felt he got into a true groove. Seemed like his starts were all over the place. I'd like to see him get a chance to get in a true rhythm and have it be made public that he's the go-to guy...

Mike Smith's game starts after a loss in the regular season:

Oct: 2
Nov: 1
Dec: 0
Jan: 0
Feb: 1
Mar: 0
Apr: 0

Consecutive games played by Smith and Rittich:

Oct: 9–2
Nov: 2–4
Dec: 5–6
Jan: 2–6
Feb: 5–5
Mar: 5–5
Apr: 0–2

The only month that Smith started more consecutive games than Rittich was in October. From November to January Rittich started more consecutively than Smith, in February and March they were even and in April Rittich started 2/3 remaining games.

The Flames handled the workload distribution between both goalies just about perfectly.

[cannon7]

If Talbot isn't signing a redemption contract then he isn't getting signed, IMO.

Hutchinson may be a affordable backup/tandem option for Rittich.

[bax]

Originally Posted by cannon7

If Talbot isn't signing a redemption contract then he isn't getting signed, IMO.

Hutchinson may be a affordable backup/tandem option for Rittich.

Hutchinson hasn't been a full time NHL player since 2016-17 when he finished with a .903 save percentage in 28 games. I don't think any GM would be interested in signing him to be a backup, let along part of an equal tandem. He is a third string guy at best.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Mike Smith's game starts after a loss in the regular season:

Oct: 2
Nov: 1
Dec: 0
Jan: 0
Feb: 1
Mar: 0
Apr: 0

Consecutive games played by Smith and Rittich:

Oct: 9–2
Nov: 2–4
Dec: 5–6
Jan: 2–6
Feb: 5–5
Mar: 5–5
Apr: 0–2

The only month that Smith started more consecutive games than Rittich was in October. From November to January Rittich started more consecutively than Smith, in February and March they were even and in April Rittich started 2/3 remaining games.

The Flames handled the workload distribution between both goalies just about perfectly.

Quit confusing the issue with facts.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Quit confusing the issue with facts.

...but I like facts.

[Lanny_McDonald]

I'd welcome Talbot here. I think that once the Oiler stink wears off he returns to form.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by New Era

I'd welcome Talbot here. I think that once the Oiler stink wears off he returns to form.

Me too, and lest anyone forget, Dubnyk had bad stats after being traded from Edmonton to Nashville, and it took to the next season to get the stink off. So I discount Talbot's Philly stats.

[Mass_nerder]

It's funny, I was confused why he hadn't signed yet if the smart money was on it...
Forgot about that whole July 1st thing...

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

Very true - and arbitration is likely a good thing for the Flames as it guarantees he'll be back at a reasonable rate. The Koskinen comparable is more a concern if this doesn't go to arbitration and his agent insists on a similar deal.

If it’s not arbitration, his agent can bring it up but Brad doesn’t have to listen. If there’s anything I’m confident in, is that BT wont be giving out a Koskinen-like deal to an RFA like Rittich.. Arbitrators have to listen to comparable evidence.