Player Discussion Cam Talbot (G)

[Sens of Anarchy]

I think we should bring back Pierre Groulx

 

[Ice-Tray]

He was in the bottom half of the league in s% among starters. Yes, he was one of 8 goalies at the all star game, but if you don't see how calling him an all star is loaded language, that's not on me.

Does it it? Was he actually better than Kaprizov, Fiala, or Zuccarello? How about Brodin or Spurgeon? Idk, what I do know is only 9 skaters and Two goalies could be representated from the central division, so building the roster wasn't just about picking the best players at their position, or even the best players from each team.

No, it's a label that invokes a perception of a player rather than show why he's a solid vet, an argument that he's a solid vet would be detailing examples of his performance relative to his peers. That's the whole point about it being misleading, it's not that you were trying to pull the wool over people's eyes by using it, it's that it it's not actually evidence of the perception it involes


Again, the problem isn't what you intent it to represent, it's what the average person would assume having no other information available to them if you told them he was an all star.

saying someone is an all star suggests they were one of the better goalies that year, but he was bottom half of the league in sv% among starters.


You used all star participation as evidence he was having a good season, you said so yourself, my point was he wasn't really having a good season. Average at best, hence why it's misleading, the tag all star inherently suggests more than it actually means thanks to how the all star rosters are built.

Honestly you have to be pretty stubborn to argue that his all star selection was NOT evidence of him having a good season. You choose to die on the most ridiculous hills sometimes… lol

The irony of your argument is that you talk of nuance and then use box scores of all things as proof.

All I will add is that you’re guilty of stat watching as you judge his all star selection. If you feel like it you can go back and read why he was selected. Read past NHL stats, and perhaps you’ll be able to understand why it’s a little more meaningful than you’re giving him credit for.

In the end never claimed it to be the be all end all, but you’ve dug yourself a pit where your argument is how little it means in the context of a goalie having a good season.

That’s your thing, mine was a reasonable rebuttal with another poster about it being a trade that was evaluated and him chosen based on his play.

Feel free to die alone on your hill now, it’s all yours, always has been.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

Cam Talbot had a goals saved above expected of -7.2 5on5 last year. -5.8 in all situations.

 

[bicboi64]

Honestly you have to be pretty stubborn to argue that his all star selection was NOT evidence of him having a good season. You choose to die on the most ridiculous hills sometimes… lol

The irony of your argument is that you talk of nuance and then use box scores of all things as proof.

All I will add is that you’re guilty of stat watching as you judge his all star selection. If you feel like it you can go back and read why he was selected. Read past NHL stats, and perhaps you’ll be able to understand why it’s a little more meaningful than you’re giving him credit for.

In the end never claimed it to be the be all end all, but you’ve dug yourself a pit where your argument is how little it means in the context of a goalie having a good season.

That’s your thing, mine was a reasonable rebuttal with another poster about it being a trade that was evaluated and him chosen based on his play.

Feel free to die alone on your hill now, it’s all yours, always has been.

This is such a defensive response to someone pointing out, that statistically Talbot wasn't all that great last year.

10th in wins, 17th in save percentage, 21st in GAA, and not a single vote for the Vezina, all pretty average numbers for a goalie, but hey, he was selected for an All Star last year, so therefore he's automatically good.

 

[Micklebot]

Honestly you have to be pretty stubborn to argue that his all star selection was NOT evidence of him having a good season. You choose to die on the most ridiculous hills sometimes… lol

The irony of your argument is that you talk of nuance and then use box scores of all things as proof.

All I will add is that you’re guilty of stat watching as you judge his all star selection. If you feel like it you can go back and read why he was selected. Read past NHL stats, and perhaps you’ll be able to understand why it’s a little more meaningful than you’re giving him credit for.

In the end never claimed it to be the be all end all, but you’ve dug yourself a pit where your argument is how little it means in the context of a goalie having a good season.

That’s your thing, mine was a reasonable rebuttal with another poster about it being a trade that was evaluated and him chosen based on his play.

Feel free to die alone on your hill now, it’s all yours, always has been.

Lol, ok then

Talbot wasn't great last year, he just wasn't. Why do you think Guerin traded for then extended Fleury? He played behind a top end defensive group and had below league average stats, whether it be advanced stats, quality start ratios or box scores, everything pointed to him having a pretty pedestrian season, you haven't presented any evidence otherwise... just saying he had a good season doesn't make it so.

I'm not saying he was horrible, he just wasn't a top goalie that year, which is why referring to him as an all star despite being technically true paints a misleading picture

 

[Ice-Tray]

This is such a defensive response to someone pointing out, that statistically Talbot wasn't all that great last year.

10th in wins, 17th in save percentage, 21st in GAA, and not a single vote for the Vezina, all pretty average numbers for a goalie, but hey, he was selected for an All Star last year, so therefore he's automatically good.

But he WAS good, he was good for the Wild. That’s all I have said.

You argued that it was not evaluated and a knee jerk trade.

I pointed out that they were looking for a vet goalie to platoon with Forsberg, and Talbot had just had a solid year with the wild, including an all star selection after his excellent start where he was 18-8. Refitting your original point, not claiming he was a vezina guy, or that the all star selection was the next coming of Christ.

I’m not defensive, I’m annoyed. A simple point and counter point has blossomed into yet another series of moved goal posts and obfuscation.

Anyways, as usual there is no point in continuing with you.

 

[aragorn]

Lol, ok then

Talbot wasn't great last year, he just wasn't. Why do you think Guerin traded for then extended Fleury? He played behind a top end defensive group and had below league average stats, whether it be advanced stats, quality start ratios or box scores, everything pointed to him having a pretty pedestrian season, you haven't presented any evidence otherwise... just saying he had a good season doesn't make it so.

I'm not saying he was horrible, he just wasn't a top goalie that year, which is why referring to him as an all star despite being technically true paints a misleading picture

Who else was available that would come here who was better at a price we could afford? Maybe he was the best they could get that was available that would come here that they could afford. And along with Forsberg on paper looked like a pretty decent tandem. But just like the yr before with Murray it just hasn't worked out in net again for Ottawa this yr mostly because of the injuries to so many goaltenders in their system & it doesn't seem to have worked out for Murray in Toronto either. That's pretty amazing really, to go through 7 goalies in Ottawa & 10 goalies in Belleville.

On a positive note I thought the tandem of JBD & Kleven have been good together, Kleven hasn't really looked out of place, he made a whiff or two, but other than that it never cost him, could be seeing the future.

 

[bicboi64]

But he WAS good, he was good for the Wild. That’s all I have said.

You argued that it was not evaluated and a knee jerk trade.

I pointed out that they were looking for a vet goalie to platoon with Forsberg, and Talbot had just had a solid year with the wild, including an all star selection after his excellent start where he was 18-8. Refitting your original point, not claiming he was a vezina guy, or that the all star selection was the next coming of Christ.

I’m not defensive, I’m annoyed. A simple point and counter point has blossomed into yet another series of moved goal posts and obfuscation.

Anyways, as usual there is no point in continuing with you.

So good for the Wild that they felt they needed to get Fleury. I argued it was knee jerk AND poor evaluation, maybe try including all of my argument.

I guess we have very different standards as to what constitutes as solid. If you think average=solid, sure keep on defending incompetent management because hey, positivity and the future is bright.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Lol, ok then

Talbot wasn't great last year, he just wasn't. Why do you think Guerin traded for then extended Fleury? He played behind a top end defensive group and had below league average stats, whether it be advanced stats, quality start ratios or box scores, everything pointed to him having a pretty pedestrian season, you haven't presented any evidence otherwise... just saying he had a good season doesn't make it so.

I'm not saying he was horrible, he just wasn't a top goalie that year, which is why referring to him as an all star despite being technically true paints a misleading picture

Lol, misleading picture.

He was selected based on his great start with the team, yes that happened, and the selection did mean something.

We didn’t trade for a star goalie, we didn’t trade for a vezina guy, we traded for a solid vet who had a good season with the wild.

We thought he’d be good in that role based on his previous season. It was neither knee jerk, nor was it a trade that wasn’t evaluated by management before making it.

Argue amongts yourselves, I’ve made my point over and over again, you guys can be pedantic about the various values of all star selection In your personal opinions.

So good for the Wild that they felt they needed to get Fleury. I argued it was knee jerk AND poor evaluation, maybe try including all of my argument.

I guess we have very different standards as to what constitutes as solid. If you think average=solid, sure keep on defending incompetent management because hey, positivity and the future is bright.

Forsberg was good for us last year and yet we felt we needed to go out and get support. The difference is that they brought in a HOF goalie who is clutch in the playoffs. Poor argument.

I have mentioned knee jerk and no evaluation in every single post, try reading again.

Yes, you hate the management and coach, and I don’t. It’s really that simple.

 

[bicboi64]

Who else was available that would come here who was better at a price we could afford? Maybe he was the best they could get that was available that would come here that they could afford. And along with Forsberg on paper looked like a pretty decent tandem. But just like the yr before with Murray it just hasn't worked out in net again for Ottawa this yr mostly because of the injuries to so many goaltenders in their system & it doesn't seem to have worked out for Murray in Toronto either. That's pretty amazing really, to go through 7 goalies in Ottawa & 10 goalies in Belleville.

On a positive note I thought the tandem of JBD & Kleven have been good together, Kleven hasn't really looked out of place, he made a whiff or two, but other than that it never cost him, could be seeing the future.

Maybe keep a Forsberg and Gus tandem? No one pointed a gun to Dorion's head and forced him to acquire a goalie. Investing the $3.66 million on D would've better provided an environment for Forsberg to continue his play from last season, and put Gus in a position to succeed.

Also here are some goalies who would have been viable options as well: If he wanted to go after someone younger that could grow with the team, Vanecek and Hill were options. If he wanted to sign a vet that could back up Forsberg and Gus in case of injury, there's loads of one year signings for journeymen.

 

[bicboi64]

Forsberg was good for us last year and yet we felt we needed to go out and get support. The difference is that they brought in a HOF goalie who is clutch in the playoffs. Poor argument.

I have mentioned knee jerk and no evaluation in every single post, try reading again.

Yes, you hate the management and coach, and I don’t. It’s really that simple.

The bolded is my whole point, what management acted on was poor evaluation. I never said Dorion didn't wake up and not evaluated his moves, his evaluation just sucks and he made a short sighted move. Poor evaluation isn't no no evaluation lol.

Fleury is a HoF goalie, and 38, the fact that they were willing to gamble on him despite Fleury having a meh playoffs shows how much faith they had in Talbot. Heck they were willing to gamble on a goalie with <30 games experience over Talbot, tells a lot about Guerin's evaluation skills compared to Dorion.

 

[Ice-Tray]

The bolded is my whole point, what management acted on was poor evaluation. I never said Dorion didn't wake up and not evaluated his moves, his evaluation just sucks and he made a short sighted move. Poor evaluation isn't no no evaluation lol.

Fleury is a HoF goalie, and 38, the fact that they were willing to gamble on him despite Fleury having a meh playoffs shows how much faith they had in Talbot. Heck they were willing to gamble on a goalie with <30 games experience over Talbot, tells a lot about Guerin's evaluation skills compared to Dorion.

No you’re using 20/20 hindsight to retroactively bash management.

Peace dude.

 

[bicboi64]

No you’re using 20/20 hindsight to retroactively bash management.

Peace dude.

I actively bash management as well, whenever they make moves I don't disagree with I say them then and there. Nothing retroactive about me saying Dorion has poor pro evaluation.

 

[Adrianopolous]

He's still better than Soogard

 

[boxbox]

This is an odd conclusion, the PK has the 10th highest xGA/60 in the league suggesting that Ottawa is not really keeping quality chances down.

The Sens being one of the more penalized teams have an direct effect on that number ? as in they spend more time on the PK then the average team therefor would have a higher GA/60 even if the PK is good ?

Meanwhile, Talbot has the 12 best PK sv% in the league among the 55 goalies with 100+ PK mins, Forsberg is 33rd. So while you don't feel the PK is successful due to him, the seats seem to tell a different story.

His PK sv% is good because the Sens have the 2nd highest amount of low danger shots against, and indeed they give up a high number of high danger chances but on the PK thats somewhat expected. The sens for being the 2nd most penalized team they barely turn the puck over , having a near top 5 lowest turnover ratios on the PK so that suggest the high scoring chances he faces aren't of turnovers and having one of the higher totals of rebounds given out on PK they could be very much his own doing. So I do think the players are more behind the success of the PK and with a more consistent goalie would be even better. All that being said this is all just my take on the whole situation and I by no mean feel its the correct analysis or that I am right and everyone else is wrong.

One difference is that our biggest issue defensively at 5v5 is our zone exits, we have one of the worst dz turnover rates in the league, but on the PK you aren't trying to make a pass to start a break out, you just ice it at the first opportunity so that weakness is gone.

I have honestly seen only a few games so I can't say much in regards to that. I do how ever believe the players simply force plays that lead to turnovers because they don't have a lot of confidence in their goalie. I just find it hard to believe that a D group with that much skill would have problems with zone exits. Having shaky goal-tending as the Sens had so far this season it the worst possible scenario when the teams Dman are still very young and learning. Good goaltending can make a day and night difference in how much better the team executes plays and plays in general and bad goaltending the total opposite

 

[boxbox]

Dorion literally acquired two of the biggest names in trade rumours in the last calendar year. The core issue is who the team is targeting.

Thinking Talbot is good enough to repeat his success in Minnesota despite playing behind an inferior blueline is the issue. Taking a chance on a player who is aging and playing behind a good D just because you fear we can't get anyone better isn't a sustainable recipe for success. In that spot, don't make the move and invest in your player development.

Giroux chances of signing with Ottawa would for sure take a hit had he not grew up and play his junior years in the region. I believe his wife is also from around Ottawa. He is also on the back end of his career, he was great this season but I find it hard to believe he would be signing with Ottawa in his prime years.

Everyone else was accuried via trade no ? or you have Talbot on that list ?

 

[Micklebot]

The Sens being one of the more penalized teams have an direct effect on that number ? as in they spend more time on the PK then the average team therefor would have a higher GA/60 even if the PK is good ?

No, the whole point of per 60 is to account for the difference between teams time on the PK.

His PK sv% is good because the Sens have the 2nd highest amount of low danger shots against, and indeed they give up a high number of high danger chances but on the PK thats somewhat expected. The sens for being the 2nd most penalized team they barely turn the puck over , having a near top 5 lowest turnover ratios on the PK so that suggest the high scoring chances he faces aren't of turnovers and having one of the higher totals of rebounds given out on PK they could be very much his own doing. So I do think the players are more behind the success of the PK and with a more consistent goalie would be even better. All that being said this is all just my take on the whole situation and I by no mean feel its the correct analysis or that I am right and everyone else is wrong.

It would help if I knew exactly what stats you are using and where you're pulling them from because I'm not seeing the same thing as you, based on the previous comment though, I suspect you aren't using per 60 which makes it pointless to look at the rankings since being a highly penalized team means we seeore of all types of shots.

In this case, it's the ratio that matters, having the most Low danger shots doesn't mean much if you also have the most medium and high.

On NaturalStatrick on pk, We have the:
16th most HDCA/60
5th most MDSCA/60 and
24th most LDCA/60

So chances skew towards higher quality, not the other way around.

I have honestly seen only a few games so I can't say much in regards to that. I do how ever believe the players simply force plays that lead to turnovers because they don't have a lot of confidence in their goalie. I just find it hard to believe that a D group with that much skill would have problems with zone exits. Having shaky goal-tending as the Sens had so far this season it the worst possible scenario when the teams Dman are still very young and learning. Good goaltending can make a day and night difference in how much better the team executes plays and plays in general and bad goaltending the total opposite

Much of the year we had guys like Zaitsev, Hamonic and Holden on the blue line, Chabot has missed about a dozen, Chychrun has only been here a dozen and he was probably still learning the system and gaining chemistry for much of that, in terms of actual games played by our D this hasn't been a particularly skilled group on the backend. Maybe we will be next year, but not this year.

Not sure I buy your argument that we force plays in the DZ because don't trust our goalies, if anything I'd expect the opposite, especially in the DZ.

Most of our DZ turnovers have come from two players, Hamonic, and Chabot. Hamonic isn't skilled so no surprise there, Chabot has looked off most of the year. Both are in the top 20 league wide in 5v5 for D.

 

[Silencio]

Talbot is Martin Gerber 2.0

 

[boxbox]

No, the whole point of per 60 is to account for the difference between teams time on the PK.

It would help if I knew exactly what stats you are using and where you're pulling them from because I'm not seeing the same thing as you, based on the previous comment though, I suspect you aren't using per 60 which makes it pointless to look at the rankings since being a highly penalized team means we seeore of all types of shots.

In this case, it's the ratio that matters, having the most Low danger shots doesn't mean much if you also have the most medium and high.

On NaturalStatrick on pk, We have the:
16th most HDCA/60
5th most MDSCA/60 and
24th most LDCA/60

So chances skew towards higher quality, not the other way around.

I use MoneyPuck.com -NHL Analytics, Playoff Odds, Power Rankings, Player Stats as my go to for stats ....I believe I was using the numbers for the counts instead of the rates. I see the difference now between the two and unfortunately even more clearly now that the PK s good performance this year was not because of Talbot.

Simply put being the 2nd most penalized team you'd expect Talbots numbers to be much better. Take for example the medium danger scoring chances against on the PK,
Sens:
- face the 4th highest medium danger chances rate /60
- face the 5th highest medium danger shot rate/60
- the rates of specific chances this team faces should not come as surprise if ranked near the top as the Sens have the 2nd highest PIM total
- allow the 18th fewest amount of shots /60
- have the 16 lowest medium danger goal against rate/60 (15 teams lower then us)
- have the 10th highest SV% for that category

the numbers goalies can direcrtly influence are average at best....SV% is decent but not something that screams at you that hes holding it down , GAA for this subsection (biggest in sample size) is right in the middle....nothing is indicative of the team getting peppered with shots on the PK, majority of the shots on the PK the goalies on the sens face are ranked as a medium danger level threat, at the highest danger level the goalie stats remain in my opinion just OK.

 

[Micklebot]

I use MoneyPuck.com -NHL Analytics, Playoff Odds, Power Rankings, Player Stats as my go to for stats ....I believe I was using the numbers for the counts instead of the rates. I see the difference now between the two and unfortunately even more clearly now that the PK s good performance this year was not because of Talbot.

Simply put being the 2nd most penalized team you'd expect Talbots numbers to be much better. Take for example the medium danger scoring chances against on the PK,
Sens:
- face the 4th highest medium danger chances rate /60
- face the 5th highest medium danger shot rate/60
- the rates of specific chances this team faces should not come as surprise if ranked near the top as the Sens have the 2nd highest PIM total
- allow the 18th fewest amount of shots /60
- have the 16 lowest medium danger goal against rate/60 (15 teams lower then us)
- have the 10th highest SV% for that category

So, there seems to be misunderstanding of the stat here.

The per 60 stat is per 60 mins on the PK, so if you've take one penalty 10 penalties or 100, you can still use it to see the average shots you allow in a single penalty by dividing by thirty. Being a team that takes more or less penalties doesn't affect per 60 stats, that's the point, it allows you to directly compare two teams numbers.

the numbers goalies can direcrtly influence are average at best....SV% is decent but not something that screams at you that hes holding it down , GAA for this subsection (biggest in sample size) is right in the middle....nothing is indicative of the team getting peppered with shots on the PK, majority of the shots on the PK the goalies on the sens face are ranked as a medium danger level threat, at the highest danger level the goalie stats remain in my opinion just OK.

Looking at goalies with 30+ games, Talbot has the 9th best sv% out of 41 goalies, that's not decent, it's very good. He has the 2nd best GAA better than expected, that's his actual xGAA minus actual GAA, and it essentially does the work for you and takes into account shot quality.

 

[aragorn]

Top 15 Players:
Stutzle - turning into an eltie superstar before our eyes
Tkachuk - turning into the premier powerforward in the league
Giroux - just had one of the best seasons of his career on a rebuilding team of young players & showed great leadership
Norris - although his season was cut short early this guy has 60 pt 40 goal potential & he's a good two way centre
DBC - as the team gets better so will DBCs production, he's a good goal scorer, playmaker & line driver
Batherson - had over 60 pts this yr where his plus/minus sucked, when healthy he is another good goal scorer & playmaker
Chabot - like Batherson had a down yr but when healthy is one of the best offensive D-men in the league & a great skater
Sanderson - already looks like a top pairing D who is equally good in all zones, his offence should only get better
Chychrun - they wanted a top 4 D & traded for Chychrun who ended up just behind Chabot in pts this yr
Pinto - had his ups & downs but overall a great season after missing all of last yr, shoud only get better
Zub - another guy who had a tough yr mostly due to injuries, but we know he can be so much better when healthy
Brannstrom - took a big step forward this yr, should be interesting what his future holds
Hamonic - played his role well, was a very good mentor, had a 21 pt season for a defensive D
Kastelic - had a good yr, is good on faceoffs, hits, fights & is good on the forecheck & PK & can score sometimes
Brassard - had a good season at 35 yrs old, unfortunately due to injury could be done, Greig should replace his production

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

Say it ain’t so, cammy tee

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

I think we should bring back Pierre Groulx

We should just bring everyone back from the past….

Stone
De Melo
Karlsson
Mann
Gudbranson
Corvo
Paul
Mete
PD’s brother
The tea lady from the back office

 

[bicboi64]

We should just bring everyone back from the past….

Stone
De Melo
Karlsson
Mann
Gudbranson
Corvo
Paul
Mete
PD’s brother
The tea lady from the back office

Don't forget MacLean's doppelganger along with the Fat Spartan

 

[Good in Osgoode]

I don't mind if we were to go with a Forsberg/Sogaard combo next year.
The real concern there is if one (or both) go down with a significant injury, which is all too likely based on past history. If that should happen (again), your back to hoping that Mando or Meri or someone off waivers works out. Not ideal.

I am thinking we should be keeping an eye on the goaltending situation in Carolina this offseason.
They have what appears to be 3 solid netminders:

Kochetkov is signed at $2m for the next 4 years. The other 2 are UFA at the end of this season.

Both Raanta and Andersen had a solid year.
I would think that they will only bring back one of them to go with Kochetkov.

They are both 33 and could be solid options on a 1-year deal and gives Ottawa depth in the net and lets Sogaard get more experience in Belleville.