You are not giving sample size effects near enough weight. Many things can look “exceedingly rare” in small samples – and 57 games as a backup is very limited record for a goalie. These rare things can easily disappear as the sample size increases. Bottom line is that Talbot’s sample size does not provide a reasonable margin of error at this point – and making conclusions based on that sample size and large margin of error is equal parts guessing and science. Doesn’t mean the bet wouldn’t pay off – just means there is little quantitative justification for making it. I would, however, be more convinced if a quality goalie coach (not that the Oilers have ever possessed one of these) vouched that Talbot’s technique is solid to elite as confirmation of the stats which possess an uncomfortably large margin of error. Then there is mental toughness as tested under a starters load of 50-60 games in a season – also untested and unproven. So let’s not suggest that a Talbot bet is anything but risky and fraught with uncertainties.

G Money:
There is some concern over Talbot’s small experience sample.This was my big concern when WG first anointed him McTalbot.Follow on work that WG has done, as have WheatNOil, TheGreatMutato, and I, suggests that what Talbot has achieved may be a small sample, but it is also exceedingly rare, and the likelihood of a goalie doing what Talbot has done and ending up not being elite is around 2%.That’s a good bet.A damn good bet – if Chia can avoid having Slats slats all over him.

Pretty much spot on – another vet top 6 RW would be nice but not critical. But I’d add that if a value contract opportunity came up for a vet RW like Williams or Stewart – the team should seriously consider it. Overpaying or even paying market value for a gig on CMD’s RW is not at all necessary. BJ MacDonald says hi 🙂

misfit:
Williams would be nice for a year or two, but is not a need.

I have no idea what McLelland’s plan for the lines are, but if we have Pouliot-Nuge-Eberle return as a trio, then the spot we’re looking at Williams filling is the RW on Hall-McDavid’s line.

Here are the internal candidates:

Purcell – He’s not a defensive dynamo, but he’s played with skill and is a veteran player.His best season was in Tampa where he played along side St.Louis and Stamkos.Doesn’t seem like it would be much of a departure to play with Hall and McDavid.

Lander – I personally like the idea of Lander playing on the wing on this line.He showed last year that he can play with skilled players at this level, and more specifically showed well with Hall.He also brings a “Pisani-like” element of puck retrieval and defensive acumen which could really be a boon to that line.

Yakupov – High skill, speed, and a great shot.With Hall and McDavid, he wouldn’t be a focal point or have to have the puck on his stick too often (which is where he struggles most IMO).Just find the open ice.This trio could go either way, but it’s probably worth a shot.

I don’t consider guys like Pitlick, Klinkhammer, or Fraser to be legitimate candidates, but I still think we have more than enough options without having to bring in a ~$4M free agent.If they don’t keep the 67-97-14 line together, then we could try two other vets in Eberle and Pouliot as well.Lots of options.

If we go through all of the above without any success, then we’ll have Purcell’s $4.5M off the books and what is so far a very strong UFA class up front to fill the void next offseason.I’m confident we’ll have no trouble getting someone who’ll work.

WG can shake and bake Talbot’s stats all he wants – but the fundamental point is – 57 NHL games is a piss poor sample and there is no way to avoid that reality. Statistical margin of error is frakin huge and I have seen no expert who has seen him good wrt technique. A positive tell for me would be if a solid goalie program like MIN led by a guy like Mason is interested – but no rumors that I’ve heard on that. Expert confirmation would lead me to be more comfortable with WG’s analysis – but at this point it’s decidedly dodgy because of sample size effects.

I’ll give you another perspective – Talbot has only played more than 36 games ONCE in his entire career when he put up a pedestrian .918 in the 55 AHL in 2012-13. He also put up a .846 SP in limited playoff action last year and NYR didn’t trust him in net in the playoffs at all this year. I could make the case that he’s got no record as a workhorse and wilts under playoff pressure – sure small sample size – but the numbers support it 🙂

Look I don’t mind taking a flyer on the guy with a #2nd round pick – but even if it works out – he’s going to be expensive as hell in 12 months. Sather is going to try off-load all the risk on the team taking Talbot – and he’ll laugh his ass off all the way to the bank if someone is foolish enough to cough up a 1st rounder for a guy with this limited a track-record who is UFA in 12 months.

Get Anderson from OTT and have some proven stability in net for a change.

LT you have to admit that Soderburg is in the “nice to have”category” not the “must have category”. He’s not a guy I chase on day 1 – but if he’s still there in week 2 and willing to be flexible – sure you have that conversation. No need to go nuts as soon as the doors open on UFA signing day on guys in the “nice to have” category.

Gordon’s max value will be obtained at the 2016 trade deadline – that’s when you deal him – not this summer.

As for the line of thought that they may just spend the money on another Nikitin – I would agree with that if MacT was still GM – but there’s no evidence for that level of stupidity with this group.

Lowetide: If the Petry isn’t there, and that is the case currently, then you may spend the money on another Nikitin. Even Franson, who looks good from here, may not work out (he didn’t in Nashville although that’sa very small sample size).

Soderberg allows Chiarelli to be creative, spending $4M on a defenseman who is in the discard pile does not. Gordon’s value added to a trade makes sense.

I’d add Stewart to that list. Watched him a bit in the MIN playoffs and he was a load – 6-2 231 lbs would look good on CMD’s RW.

Buying something you don’t really need (Soderburg) just for the sake of buying it isn’t a particularly astute move many times – even if it is quality. Plus the money you give Soderburg this summer will not be available next summer to further improve the defense.

Lowetide: He’s one of the few free agents I’d bother offering money too, along with Franson and Sekera (and Green if the Oilers can offload Schultz AND Nikitin). This isn’t a massive season for UFA’s.

But consider the benefit of trading a vet like Gordon at the March 2016 deadline for max value – then flipping the pick(s) at the 2016 draft to acquire a better vet for next season. It’s what we need to do with the Peron and Petry assets this year. You can’t do this when you are seriously competing – but the Oilers could do it this year and next given the circumstances. Kind of a hockey arbitrage.

speeds: His value may well be higher at the deadline, but it’s also possible that the difference in value between a 5th and a 2nd (for argument’s sake, let’s say that’s what he’s worth this summer and next deadline, respectively) is more than made up for by having the 3M now to use to address another position.

Improvement requires at least 1 of those 3 dmen be removed from everyday use this summer, another one or both by the next trade deadline. Retaining all 3 to keep powder dry while improving is unfortunately impossible. That’s why although Shultz is last on my list to move this summer – he does need to go if there are no opportunities to off-load Ference or Nikitin at the draft since he is without a contract. MacT left Chia a handful of grenades that need to be dealt with systematically and there is little room for error right now. The best moves short-term are low risk moves to improve the team (e.g., vet goalie like Anderson) that won’t eat up cap space or serious assets like the #16 or Yak. Those assets should only be in play for top a 3 dman this summer and not gambits like Talbot.

Lowetide: I can’t disagree with any of that, goaltending is the No. 1 issue and I trust Chiarelli will find a way. Defense is a little different though and I hope you’ll agree that if he can’t find a suitable solution it is best for PC to keep his powder dry, EVEN if it means retaining Nikitin, Ference and Schultz.

G Money….

You are still failing to admit that small samples produce unreliable results – and the analysis is quite likely representative of a “hasty generalization”. Sample size very small, level of significance not defined (likely very low), undefined margin of error (likely very high). Ignoring this doesn’t make it any more solid. All of that makes the analysis extremely sketchy. Fun to chat about on a blog but I would not trust it as a decision-making tool.

Using any reasonable set of criteria the Talbot results would not be considered significant. So it doesn’t matter where you slot his numbers into a table of goalie stats over the past two years – the results are insignificant and essentially useless as a predictive tool.

G Money,