Quoting: CD282
The sample size is the entire 2019-20 season, not 35 games. And Holtby has been below average for 3 years now, if that's not a large enough sample size for you I don't know what is. I'm not advocating getting Holtby at all.
I must've misinterpreted your initial post then: your minimum value for this season was 35, I read it as guys that have played 35 games.
If Edmonton wants a long-term solution to its goalie situation - and we're in agreement that one of Rodrigue/Konovalov are 2 to 3 years away from being a full-time NHL backup - then Edmonton has very few options. You're either committing term to a tenured UFA/RFA or you're rolling the dice on a relatively unproven backup. The Oilers took the second approach with Talbot and managed a quality year out of him, but little else.
The UFA market for starters is
not saturated. The market for quality back-up goaltenders is. The only goaltender on the UFA market younger than 30 with a save percentage above .900 this summer is Lehner. The only other sub-30 year old goaltender going to free agency this summer with more than 10 games played is Louis Domingue. The cost for Lehner is going to be insane, both in term and in cash dollars. When evaluating goaltenders over a three-year window by 5v5 save percentage and a minimum TOI of 3000min, Lehner ranks 13th in the league with a 0.927sv%. Khudobin and Halak find themselves on this list as well - 1st (0.934) and 12th (0.927) respectively - but neither of these represent a long-term solution nor a smart bet to give starter minutes to. Khudobin will be 36 and Halak 37 come the end of this season. How much longer can they maintain their dominance at even strength? Which team will be foolish enough to give Markstrom or Holtby - both 30 as of right now - term and dollars? Both men are near the .920sv% mark at even strength over that same three year window and won't cost as much as Lehner or an RFA netminder would.
The RFA market offers more solutions, but these by nature come at asset cost. In some cases, there's risk due to the lack of games played. Does this goaltender have enough of a track record to justify giving up pieces to acquire him? Jarry, Merzlikins, and Blackwood are likely all untouchable right now. This leaves the Oilers with their choice of a very unproven Adin Hill, Linus Ullmark, Joonas Korpisalo, Alexandar Georgiev, or Matt Murray as their only real targets for a long-term solution. Because the sample size for most of these guys is smaller, I'm limited in observing data from this season and last season: when sorting by even-strength save percentage, Ullmark ranks 25th (0.923), Murray 30th (0.922), Korpisalo 38th (0.919), Hill 39th (0.919), and Georgiev 52nd (0.915). To me, it comes down to Ullmark and Murray, but the Sabres have little to no incentive to flip Linus instead of Hutton this summer. An argument could be made for Korpisalo, but I genuinely prefer the bulk of experience Murray has seen thus far in his career.
Murray has had an awful season, but how much of it has been beyond his control? The Penguins, especially of late, have been garbage, and over the course of the season have rarely iced a full roster. A player we essentially gave away became a mainstay in their top four out of necessity due to injury. Jarry has thrived in relation to Murray, but there's a myriad of reasons that would explain that. It could be something as simple as Jarry being a better goaltender, but it could be a nagging minor injury, a lack of confidence from the local Yinzers bagging on him nightly, the team not wanting to perform in front of him, Jarry getting the better lineup in front of him more often, you name it.
I've already revised my ask from a previous AGM. I figure this one is as close as taking Larsson out of the equation. Possible that a year and half a million dollars could be shed from Murray's pricetag as well. Unless the Sabres think Ullmark is the problem, Murray is the only "safe" long-term solution to the Oilers' need of a goaltender. Korpisalo is a riskier fit.