Lehner Deal Likely Sets Market Price For Cam Talbot

It’s Draft Day, and there is an insane amount of trade chatter going on. A great deal of that trade chatter is circulating around the most mysterious and frustrating of positions: goaltender.

With this morning’s trade of Ottawa goalie Robin Lehner, the market appears to have been set – and the price is sky-high. The Senators sent Robin Lehner and David Legwand (and his $3 million cap hit this year) to the Buffalo Sabres in exchange for Buffalo’s 21st overall pick in this year’s draft.

Great deal for Ottawa, and Buffalo must have really liked Lehner. The deal has already sent ripples out.

Lehner being off the market probably drives up the asking prices for the remaining three goalies, though it does shrink the pool that could drive the price up.

The Canucks are also said to be taking calls on Jakub Markstrom, while the Flames involvement in goaltender talks likely means that Jonas Hiller is in play to some degree (or that the Flames have zero confidence in young Joni Ortio….or both). Yesterday, Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman speculated on Sportsnet 960 The Fan that the San Jose Sharks may look at Hiller as a back-up plan if they can’t land Devan Dubnyk on the free agent market.

So another trade, or Dubnyk re-signing with Minnesota, could set off a rapid – and expensive, based on the Lehner deal – chain reaction of deals.

The new Oilers GM is already trying to poo-poo the idea that his team will trade their non-McDavid first round pick for a netminder.

Larry Brooks of the New York Post reported this morning that the Rangers had received offers in the vicinity of “multiple second-rounders and a high second-rounder plus a prospect.” The Flames have multiple second rounders, but probably don’t want to trade many prospects.

  • TheoForever

    Reports are saying that Flames are pushing hard for Talbot, I hope it isn’t true. Why pay for this guy when we have Hiller, and Ramo, Niemi and Dubnyk are out there.

  • MontanaMan

    All things being equal, I would take the upside of Talbot over Hiller and wouldn’t hesitate to pull the trigger if it made sense. On an unrelated note (and I know there were a lot of factors involved), but remember when Feaster wrote an offer for ROR and the turmoil it caused throughout the league? Sports analysts were screaming, people were doubting Feaster’s competence and blogs evicerated the Calgary GM. Now a few years later, even the hockey experts (Friedman, et al) are supportive of Edmonton signing an offer sheet for Dougie Hamilton. Interesting times….

    • RexLibris

      That was because Feaster left himself open to losing the player on waivers before he could even report to the Flames, forfeiting a 1st and 3rd round pick without getting so much as a gift basket in return.

      He and Weisbrod argued that they felt they had a case that would stand up in the league offices, but it was a brash and irresponsible move before the ink was dry on the new CBA.

      Offer sheeting Dougie Hamilton, if it can be successful, would be a fantastic idea. By contrast, an offer sheet on a winger like Dustin Penner was, and always will be, a very, very bad idea. Hated it then, still do.

    • piscera.infada

      The biggest issue with the ROR offer-sheet was the clear as day rule that because of his playing status, he would have had to pass through waivers–not the offer-sheet itself. Feaster, no matter what he claims, should have known that rule, and thusly not proceeded with the offer-sheet.

      More to the point, I think the Hamilton offer-sheet would be a horrible idea for Edmonton. You’re signing him for the amount where compensation will be prohibitive (somewhere in the first, second, third; or two-first, second, third). Now balance that with a cap-hit anywhere between $6.5 million and $8.5 million per.

    • Christian Roatis

      I wonder if Edmonton is willing to risk their first rounder next year? I get McDavid but that team is caught in a perpetual suck and what if a few injuries put them in the Auston Mathews sweepstakes?

      • RexLibris

        The 2016 1st rounder is, from what sense I’m getting from the Oilers, being kept in reserve for an offer sheet or trade that brings in a Hamilton-type defenseman.

        Every team can look at the Oilers and say they’re 1st rounders are perhaps more valuable than another team’s because they have been so bad for so long.

        That coupled with the new lottery format gives a team a larger margin for winning that deal if (or rather I should say “when”) the Oilers finish outside the playoffs.

        So the risk is certainly being considered, but the reward would need to be commensurate.

          • RexLibris

            I’d rather see a trade.

            Yakupov, Laleggie and next year’s first lottery-protected to the 1st and 2nd overall pick would be my suggestion.

            Bruins save cap space, get a Hobey Baker finalist defenseman just turned pro, and a winger set to break out on a very good cap contract for two years. As well as a pick that could be as high as 3rd overall with a reasonable chance of being somewhere between 6th and 12th overall next year.

          • RexLibris

            Yep, but both sides could consider it a loss.

            Moving a 1st overall and another 1st as well as a promising young defender in the Torey Krug fashion for a stud defenseman could be considered an overpay by both sides.

            I’m more than willing to suggest options to the fan base, but I rarely concern myself with how they’ll play to the wider audience. Everybody is going to have something nasty to say, regardless of what you offer. Run it past your own sense of impartial fairness and see how you’d feel if you were on either side of the deal.

            If it is uncomfortable both ways but still addresses need, you’re probably on to something.

          • Parallex

            Boston says “No”.

            Joey Laleggie is not a hot commodity, and Hamelton eclipses Yakupov in straight up value and a draft pick of indeterminant value (with a cap on it’s top value) doesn’t bridge the difference. Beyond that Neely wants them to be the “Big Bad Bruins” and trading your 6’5 220Ibs stud 21 year old two-way Rightshooting defenseman is counter-productive to that want.

          • SydScout

            If the Hamilton offer sheet gets done, they’re under extreme cap pressure in a few years. Can’t bend my mind enough (with rum at 9am or otherwise) enough to see them staying under the cap with an already expensive few pieces plus a 10m McDavid plus an ~8m Hamilton.

  • RexLibris

    If it is a high 2nd round pick and a prospect, that must be the Oilers’ offer because of the teams left in the running, they’re 2nd rounder is highest at 33rd.

    Khaira and Moroz were rumoured to be on offer earlier, so my guess is Chiarelli is offering the 33rd, a prospect in that range, and perhaps willing to throw in a 3rd rounder next year.

    I suspect Chiarelli is setting his offer in such a way that the Flames would need to counter either by offering higher-ranked prospects, blowing out all three 2nd rounders, or moving the 15th overall.

    I don’t think Treliving would go that high, but from everything I’ve read analyizing Talbot’s career thus far and his potential, moving the 15th for Talbot, while painful, could sort out the Flames’ netminding for five to eight years.

    What the Sabres paid for Lehner is ridiculous. Good for Bryan Murray, terrible deal for Tim Murray. There is little evidence that Lehner will be better than Enroth whom they traded away this last year and is a pending UFA.

  • Christian Roatis

    If Lehner and Legwand land a first, and Talbot lands two 2nd round picks and maybe more…

    I could see Hiller being moved in the range of at least a 2nd round pick and a prospect, or Flames add to the package and try to move up to San Jose’s 9th pick. This could be interesting.

    • We have the extra prospects, money, picks.

      Hammered would be maybe not quite the word lol

      Still stunned at how close edmonton came to carrying on in hell for the indefinite future. Just gob snacked. Stunned. The Butterfly effect on that the last 5 years and next 5 is hard to wrap your head around

  • Parallex

    “Lehner Deal Likely Sets Market Price For Cam Talbot”

    I disagree. I think there is a pretty big difference between a 27 goalie (Talbot) entering his UFA walk year and a soon-to-be 24 year old goalie (Lehner) with multiple years of team control left.

    Frankly I don’t want Calgary to trade anything for Talbot anyways (unless you could get equal value on a subsequent Hiller trade).

    • Christian Roatis

      There is a good chance that any team that trades for Talbot would make sure they get a sense of whether he would sign an extension with him or not..

      And at 27, a Goalie is just hitting his prime. Usually from 27-33 are a goalies best years.

      • Parallex

        Sure… but a “sense” is different then certainty and even if it’s close to certainty the negotiation leverage is much smaller. So yeah you can probably trade for Talbot with some degree of potential games-played-value safety but any extension you’ll be buying will be UFA years (more expensive) on top of the gamble that the previous back-up goalie you’re committing to is a legitimate #1 starter.

        Like I said I’m open to it… but only if we can mitigate the acquisition cost by subsequently trading Hiller for a package of decently comparable value.

  • Christian Roatis

    I would rather trade a Vanc 2nd back to them for Lack or for Jones & then flip Hiller to San Jose & our #15 for the #9. Even if we have to add a 3rd, whatever.

  • CMG30

    If anything this drives the price for Talbot down.

    -One fewer team courting him.

    -There are more decent goalies options than teams seeking goalies including solid free agent options.

    -Yes there’s interest in Talbot but it’s not rabid. Nobody is willing to blow their brains out on a goalie who looks good in a small number of games on a great team but still has a few question marks AND who you can’t negotiate with till January AND may not be able to re-sign AND/OR needs to re-sign for huge dollars. Especially with the value of picks in this year’s draft.

    Rangers are playing this dumb. If I was a GM interested in Talbot, I’d be calling Sather to let him know that my offer will start to decrease in value as every time a potential suitor picks up a goalie. Especially because every minute that brings us closer to the draft increases the value of those picks everyone is after. If he doesn’t like it, he can keep Talbot as a backup.