• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Core 4 No More: The Motherfucking Off-Season Thread

2.5 x2 (maybe 3MM) for talbot vs 6x2 plus losing whatever asset bundy (I don't like the nickname as al bundy is awesome) sends out the door
 
Yeah, if we're talking about the sweet spot of acceptable risk it's probably Talbot. Gives you a year to see what Woll is, as well as a development year from Hildebeauty and Akhy in the AHL. Grab whichever veteran falls through the cracks as your #3 and try to stash them in the AHL (Reimer, Driedger, Pickard, Wedgewood, DeSmith, Murray, Comrie....someone is going to be without a chair when the music stops) and we're not in the worst position.

Markstrom shouldn't even be a consideration unless there's minimal assets sent in return, and with some retention. He has negative value imo.
 
Leafin' said:
Helly would be putting your dick on the table. Sign me up.
Click to expand...

Dunno if Winnipeg is selling. The only top end guy even remotely available is probably Sorokin. Full NMC as well, so if Roy continues to antagonize him, maybe that's an option. Would be shocked if Lou made him available right now though.

I agree with the risk committee that neither Saros nor Ullmark are worth overpayment in terms of acquisition cost or AAV. 1st and stuff, fine. ~6 million with reasonable term for their age (like, fuck giving Ullmark a deal until he's 38 or some shit), also fine. 1st + Robbie and other higher round picks, lol fuck off. 7+ x 7yrs or some shit on an extension? Also fuck off.
 
Samsonov has been terrible in 2 of the last 3 years and really good in the other one.

Do you trust him to not be shit next year? Talbot has been good in 4 of the last 5 seasons.
 
zeke said:
Last 2yrs

Talbot (37): 84gs .907 --- (plyff 3gs .861)
Samsonov (27]: 80gs .905 (plff 14gs .897)

Wtf happened to you people
Click to expand...
Yeah, this. Talbot is certainly an option, but not really that interesting imo. At least with Markstrom you'd get a guy with a couple of elite seasons under his belt, 3 years younger, and seems quite durable (since the main argument people keep making is how breakable Woll appears to be).

Still maintain this order (I don't believe Sorokin will be available without a huge overpay):

Ullmark
Saros

Brossoit
Stolarz



Markstrom
Talbot
 
23/24
Talbot: +.27
Sammy: -.39

22/23
Talbot: -.17
Sammy: +.42

21/22
Talbot: +.13
Sammy: -.32

20/21
Talbot: +.21
Sammy: -.17

19/20
Talbot: +.32
Sammy: +.09

They are not the same.
 
axlsalinger said:
At least with Markstrom you'd get a guy with a couple of elite seasons under his belt, 3 years younger, and seems quite durable (since the main argument people keep making is how breakable Woll appears to be).
Click to expand...

Not a couple mate, 1. 1 elite season.

23/24
Talbot: +.27
Sammy: -.39
Markstrom: +.05

22/23
Talbot: -.17
Sammy: +.42
Markstrom: -.32

21/22
Talbot: +.13
Sammy: -.32
Markstrom: +.42

20/21
Talbot: +.21
Sammy: -.17
Markstrom -.10

19/20
Talbot: +.32
Sammy: +.09
Markstrom: +.27

There are age related concerns with Talbot, definitely. But at current Markstrom is 6M x 2 in AAV and an unknown acquisition cost with another suitor driving up the cost. Talbot is free while having been of similar quality or better in 4 of the last 5 seasons and flat out better in 3 of 5.

If you're trying to find a sweet spot in shared risk. Talbot is your guy. If not, just pay for Ullmark or Saros. Fuck Markstrom.
 
There is probably no more topic more divisive on a depressed hockey board than goaltending.

We have Talbot people
We have Brossoit people
We have Markstrom person
We have Saros/Ullmark people
We have a Kallgren person
We have basically a goaltending nihilist who thinks they all stink and nothing is worth doing
 
But yeah I lean towards Woll-Brossoit assuming Brossoit is the cheapest. Saros/Ullmark cost a 1st and a significant cap restructuring moving forward if you keep them beyond next year. But they give you the best odds of average+ goaltending. Is it worth it? I don't know, I guess if you can't find anything else to spend the $$ on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top