Confirmed with Link: Cam Talbot Signed To 3-Year Extension (AAV: $4.17M, Limited NMC)

[s7ark]

Wasn't it Chabot who changed everything, including how he held his glove, from what Ranford taught him in LA?

Partially. TO broke him or at least didn't fix him. Ranford in LA fixed him. He was still fixed when we first got him and got his contract. Then we let Chabot break him again.

 

[Evilsports]

Initially, I felt like something around 3.5 Million would be about right. When the contract was announced, there was a little sticker shock.

Then I did some research. Talbot will be the 7th lowest-paid starter in the league at 4.17M. Same range as Craig Anderson, Steve Mason, and Jonathan Bernier. That's a pretty wide range of success within that price range.

I don't see any scenario where he'd sign for less than those comparables. 12.5 Million is the cost of doing business. No starter is signing for less tan 4M, and if you find one who's willing, you probably don't want him. In reality, it's about a $600K gamble, and that's manageable, IMO.

I had a similar initial reaction so I also researched the actual value of NHL starting goalies. Once I did, I quickly had the same realization that you did. We're paying Talbot the amount of money that the 6th or 7th worst starter in the league should be getting. From a financial aspect this deal is solid until/unless Talbot plays worse than his pay rate allows.

Talbot will essentially have to be one of the 5 worst starters in the entire league for his contract to be an overpay.

 

[Jeff Lebowski]

I have full trust in Chiarelli on this signing and his ability to judge goalie talent.

 

[McGoMcD]

I have full trust in Chiarelli on this signing and his ability to judge goalie talent.

Ya, same here. Based on his recent numbers it is a solid risk. He seems too work very hard and has very sound fundamentals. Pretty much any goalie with a decent track record in the NHL is going to get at least 3 mill on the open market. It really is fair value for what he has accomplished.

 

[stratedge]

There are Chia bets and there are MacT bets. A MacT bet had about a 1 in 6 odds of turning out to be a useful player on a decent contract, he was a trainwreck of a GM. A Chia bet seems more like 2 in 3 right now of turning out good. That's how it works, not every move is perfect but you place a series of bets and over a longer sample size, a good GM comes out ahead. And don't forget that's with the Edmonton factor, which is the net effect of the previous 3 GMs having driven this franchise deep into the ground, dissuading players from coming here lest their only goal is being overpaid.

Just sit back and enjoy it and hope for the best. Whether or not this looks like a good move a year or two from now has much more to do with what Chia does with the defence going forward, rather than the merit of Talbot himself.

 

[McFlyingV]

I have full trust in Chiarelli on this signing and his ability to judge goalie talent.

Agreed. His track record with goalies in Boston was very good.

 

[Up the Irons]

decent/solid/good? How do you come away with that judgement after about 10 decent solid good games? He was trash to start the year. Remember when all of mact's signings were pricey but not crippling? Add up 4 or 5 of them and they are crippling.

Chia made the decision on this and it's one he has to get right. Talbot could very well be a bargain down the road but he is far from good soild decent slam dunk material.

But it's not an enormous gamble. If Talbot ends up being a decent starter wil anyone call Chia a genius? No. There is enough info already to make this a fairly safe bet. Not a slam dunk, true, but not a long shot either.

Like another poster has said, he has shown enough that he is getting at least this deal (or better), by some GM, come July 1.

Should Chia have "challenged" Talbot to prove his worth? We've seen how that can workout with a guy just months from FA. Wait 2 months and Talbot might just say 'I'm waiting till July 1'

We've got a GM that can make a decision. I'm ok with that.

 

[PBandJ]

Yeah, MacT found out what happens when you insult an impending UFA with a challenge contract, Talbot would have told Chia to shove it if he did the same thing.

 

[Zguy370]

And we don't know if this club has one now.

It wasn't that long ago than Nilsson was king around here.

This. Is it just me that still thinks that Nilsson can be our NO. 1

 

[Mr Positive]

This. Is it just me that still thinks that Nilsson can be our NO. 1

To me it is possible but it would take some time. Nilsson can play great but even when he does well he shows flaws. He's still very young for a starter. The tricky part is Brossoit.

I could see some scenario where we re-sign Nilsson if Talbot stumbles a bit or Brossoit shows that he could use more time in the AHL. Nilsson is an RFA though, so if we get him on a bridge deal it would be only about 2.5 AAV, if that. So in that case our total goalie spending would still be manageable

 

[shoop]

To me it is possible but it would take some time. Nilsson can play great but even when he does well he shows flaws. He's still very young for a starter. The tricky part is Brossoit.

I could see some scenario where we re-sign Nilsson if Talbot stumbles a bit or Brossoit shows that he could use more time in the AHL. Nilsson is an RFA though, so if we get him on a bridge deal it would be only about 2.5 AAV, if that. So in that case our total goalie spending would still be manageable

Why would the Oilers want to commit a little under 7M to goaltending?

No reason to sign Nilsson for more than a year at 1.5M. A 50% raise is pretty good. He'll find a tough time getting someone to match that. 2.5M? Waste of money. More than a year? No reason.

The team should keep Nilsson around cheaply if they want Broissoit to get another year of experience in the AHL. If someone else offers Nilsson a better deal, so be it.

 

[Mr Positive]

Why would the Oilers want to commit a little under 7M to goaltending?

No reason to sign Nilsson for more than a year at 1.5M. A 50% raise is pretty good. He'll find a tough time getting someone to match that. 2.5M? Waste of money. More than a year? No reason.

The team should keep Nilsson around cheaply if they want Broissoit to get another year of experience in the AHL. If someone else offers Nilsson a better deal, so be it.

I'm assuming the scenario where Talbot stumbles a bit and Nilsson rises to the occasion. The likely thing happening is that Talbot stays the starter, Nilsson becomes back up. We either sign Nilsson for what you say, or flip him for an asset.

Spending 7 million in net is of course not ideal, but my point is that it isn't awful either. Lots of teams spend more than that, and we will have cap space to spare for a little while. It would be our nightmare scenario.

 

[birchy]

Just going to throw this article out there again.. sorry if it's a repost: http://becauseoilers.blogspot.ca/2015/05/talbot-might-be-new-schneider-if-he-is.html

I'm still firmly convinced that Talbot will be a STUD with competent defense in front of him.

 

[Beerfish]

But it's not an enormous gamble. If Talbot ends up being a decent starter wil anyone call Chia a genius? No. There is enough info already to make this a fairly safe bet. Not a slam dunk, true, but not a long shot either.

Like another poster has said, he has shown enough that he is getting at least this deal (or better), by some GM, come July 1.

Should Chia have "challenged" Talbot to prove his worth? We've seen how that can workout with a guy just months from FA. Wait 2 months and Talbot might just say 'I'm waiting till July 1'

We've got a GM that can make a decision. I'm ok with that.

No, I have no issue with Chia making this move, but he has to be right about it, that is what Gm's are paid for. We've seen such a total litany of bad declensions by previous gms this one has to be right.

 

[NHLNUT04]

Oilers, Talbot agree to three-year extension

 

[Soundwave]

No, I have no issue with Chia making this move, but he has to be right about it, that is what Gm's are paid for. We've seen such a total litany of bad declensions by previous gms this one has to be right.

The Klefbom deal looks pretty darn good and I was skeptical on that, so I'm wiling to give Chia the benefit of the doubt here.

$4 million for your starter is a bargain in the general scheme of things, the actual downside might be in a year or two that we didn't sign him longer at that price.

Or it could blow up in our faces. I don't know. I think Talbot is a decent goalie, not a franchise tier guy like a Price or Lundqvist but you're also going to pay $7 mill+ to get that player.

 

[The Nuge]

The Klefbom deal looks pretty darn good and I was skeptical on that, so I'm wiling to give Chia the benefit of the doubt here.

$4 million for your starter is a bargain in the general scheme of things, the actual downside might be in a year or two that we didn't sign him longer at that price.

Or it could blow up in our faces. I don't know. I think Talbot is a decent goalie, not a franchise tier guy like a Price or Lundqvist but you're also going to pay $7 mill+ to get that player.

Ya, imo, Talbot is in that class below, with guys like Howard. He's not going to drag you into the playoffs, but he'll hold his own

 

[Aerchon]

This. Is it just me that still thinks that Nilsson can be our NO. 1

I'm a big Nilsson fan but in his last game he was bad. Nissons last 5+ games he has been meh to bad. I like his potential better than Talbots but he has taken a big down turn and Talbot has been steady to great over a decent stretch of time.

I think it was too early to give Talbot a contract, and the price was a bit too high as well. But at this point in time Nilsson is not even in the conversation for being our starter.

One or two more bad games by him and I would be calling up Brossoit.

 

[shoop]

I'm assuming the scenario where Talbot stumbles a bit and Nilsson rises to the occasion. The likely thing happening is that Talbot stays the starter, Nilsson becomes back up. We either sign Nilsson for what you say, or flip him for an asset.

Spending 7 million in net is of course not ideal, but my point is that it isn't awful either. Lots of teams spend more than that, and we will have cap space to spare for a little while. It would be our nightmare scenario.

Yeah, that's the risk now. People were screaming to sign Talbot now as his price was just going to keep rising. No guarantees his solid play will continue all season. If he tanks we are in trouble.

Talbot tanking and Nilsson taking the job and running with it are the only way I see Nilsson getting more than 1.5M here. If he even gets that. Admittedly it looked like that exact situation was taking place the first two weeks of December. So I guess it is still possible for that to happen.