Confirmed with Link: Craig Anderson signs 2-year extension with Senators

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Not surprised at all and considering our history, I don't mind trying to lock down the position.

Dorion has said many times that he thinks Andy can play later in to his career than the average person because he didn't become a starter until close to 30. Not saying he's right or wrong but that's his line of thinking on extending a 36/37 year old goalie.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

He outplayed 2 of the better goalies in the NHL in those series versus New York and Boston. Guess they aren't good either? I wouldn't say he had a questionable playoff, he was quite good, as he has been every year since joining Ottawa.

Why worry about him regressing when he hasn't showed anything that would suggest he will?

I actually agree with Hale on that one. He did not look himself this playoffs and I think even he would admit he didn't play well a lot of the time.

 

[Micklebot]

Anderson was pretty bad the first two rounds of the playoffs. Was great in the Pittsburgh series but overall he had a questionable playoffs.

The deal will absolutely handcuff this team if Anderson regresses to the point where he's no longer a capable starting goalie, which should be expected, given that he's 36YRs old and is signed until he's 39YRs old.

Better hope Condon develops into a starter, or else we'll have around 7M locked up in two good backup goalies.

Ya, best to use 12 Playoff games as the focus of your sample instead of his 40 reg season games.

Wrt whether or not the deal will handuff us, well the same could be said for any deal for a starter. The question is weighing the likelihood of him regressing to the point where he's no longer a capable starter, and the likelihood of us being able to find a suitable starter with that money if we hadn't re-signed him.

 

[Indrew]

The Senators continue their trend of not letting any important players walk via free agency. Whether this works out or not is up to time, but I'm very happy with this extension.

 

[Hale The Villain]

He outplayed 2 of the better goalies in the NHL in those series versus New York and Boston. Guess they aren't good either? I wouldn't say he had a questionable playoff, he was quite good, as he has been every year since joining Ottawa.

Why worry about him regressing when he hasn't showed anything that would suggest he will?

\

Because goalies tend to regress significantly in their mid-30s just like players and defensemen.

It would have been perfectly fine to re-sign Anderson for a year if he showed he's still a good #1 goalie, but extending him before seeing how he performs in 2016/17 is unnecessary risky. If he regresses and Condon becomes our #1, we now have a 4.75M backup instead of just letting him walk, or re-signing him at a lower salary.

Wouldn't have been happy with re-signing him for 2YRs even after a good season in 2016/17. Dude is going to be 39YRs old when his contract done. You don't think his play will regress when he's pushing 40YRs old?

 

[NickLidstrom]

I think we should have waited until he got at least 10 games under his belt but I don't hate this deal. If he can keep up his current level of play this is very fair, and we really don't have any other options.

 

[Xspyrit]

Pierre Dorion

 

[Smash88]

I actually agree with Hale on that one. He did not look himself this playoffs and I think even he would admit he didn't play well a lot of the time.

He let in a few questionable goals, but ultimately got the wins. That's really all that counts.

I'd rather that, then the goalies we've always had before who would play lights out for 50 minutes but then couldn't make the final saves that we needed.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

I love Andy, but this feels really risky. If he was younger, I'd be doing cartwheels over the deal....but he's already 36.

I hope it works out.

 

[Smash88]

\

Because goalies tend to regress significantly in their mid-30s just like players and defensemen.

It would have been perfectly fine to re-sign Anderson for a year if he showed he's still a good #1 goalie, but extending him before seeing how he performs in 2016/17 is unnecessary risky. If he regresses and Condon becomes our #1, we now have a 4.75M backup instead of just letting him walk, or re-signing him at a lower salary.

Wouldn't have been happy with re-signing him for 2YRs even after a good season in 2016/17. Dude is going to be 39YRs old when his contract done. You don't think his play will regress when he's pushing 40YRs old?

If Anderson doesn't get extended, and tells the team he won't sign a deal during the season, you would be ok with that going into the summer?

You don't think other teams would try to sign him? Who would replace him next season if we let him walk?

 

[Xspyrit]

If we can't re-sign Turris because we are paying an above-average starting goalie an average starting goalie's wage, then it's not the goalie's wage that's the problem. We're already getting a slight discount at the position based on the current market rates.

If Turris walks, this is probably pretty low on the list of reasons why.

I have no problem with Andy's contract BUT why the heck are they paying Mike Condon 2.4 per season to be a N.2?

What kind of salary is that? Surely not a back-up salary... And seriously, Condon is your average back-up

I mean it's not like a 37YR old Anderson would have commanded a significantly higher salary than 4.75M if he were to have had a great year in 2016/17. There's very little upside risk, but a ton of downside risk.

It's completely illogical. Just what I've come to expect from this management group.

2017-18

And there's something you're not thinking about. Since players are human beings, Andy can be more relaxed now since he has a contract for next year.

 

[Stuzchuk]

Same usual suspects will hate this deal.

I like it, it's a 2 year deal, doesn't handcuff us at all. This is below average for a goalie like Anderson.

He hasn't shown any signs of declining, not sure where people are getting that worry from.

on my end all I was trying to say is, why extend him now? why not wait until after the AS Break see how he does this year first. I love Anderson (not his puck moving abilities though ), he accomplished quite a bit since joining our team

 

[PatrickEaves]

Anderson has been great for this franchise. However, he is 36 years old, and when goalies start falling off because of age, they do tend to fall off a cliff in terms of performance. The extension is risky, but par for the course of our management team, who has a habit of giving an extra year to guys that probably shouldn't get one.

Oh well. I'm sorta of resigned to that fact these days.

 

[swiftwin]

Great deal

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

I literally scrolled down to see where Hale the Villian would be saying this deal is stupid. Same old same old from some people around here. This is a perfect deal and well below market value.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

He let in a few questionable goals, but ultimately got the wins. That's really all that counts.

I'd rather that, then the goalies we've always had before who would play lights out for 50 minutes but then couldn't make the final saves that we needed.

I agree for the most part, wins are where it's at. I just felt like I've seen him play way better many other times than he did over that playoff run and I think if he'd been typical Andy that we're used to, then we may have had an easier time and probably made it to the finals.

Love the guy, and happy with this extension, but I think we went as far as we did almost in spite of him at least at times and I would have considered Condon if I were the coach.

 

[Tuna99]

The Senators continue their trend of not letting any important players walk via free agency. Whether this works out or not is up to time, but I'm very happy with this extension.

How did this become a thing with the Senators - Alfie, Methot for nothing, Spezza

I have no problem with Andy's contract BUT why the heck are they paying Mike Condon 2.4 per season to be a N.2?

What kind of salary is that? Surely not a back-up salary... And seriously, Condon is your average back-up

They can always trade Condon, he's an asset. Look what Cam Talbot and Freddie Anderson got as solid backups. If Condon has another solid year they can make a solid solid trade and promote Hogberg.

I got no problem with having 2 solid goalies.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Really glad for Andy, and for us. Give some serious piece of mind for Andy, his family, and for the players who know that the net is set for another two years of playoff challenge.

Many will complain because they like to, many will be unsure, and would have preferred a tentative approach because they tend to have that general approach, but in the end you don't build a team based on fear of the future, you reward performance, and you treat the core players in a manner that best allows them to excel.

Great move, I'm not ready to think of the Sens without Andy

 

[Hale The Villain]

Even for those who like the idea of re-signing Anderson, can someone please explain to me why it makes sense to extend him for 2YRs at 4.75M before seeing him play in 2017/18?

Seems like we're taking on a lot of downside risk, without a whole lot of upside potential, as I really don't think teams would have been pounding on Anderson's door to pay a 37YR old goalie more than 5M to play for them until he's 39YRs old.

 

[saskriders]

Like the term , but not the price. Would have prefered something like 2 years ~3.5-4 AAV

 

[Ice-Tray]

Even for those who like the idea of re-signing Anderson, can someone please explain to me why it makes sense to extend him for 2YRs at 4.75M before seeing him play in 2017/18?

Seems like we're taking on a lot of downside risk, without a whole lot of upside potential, as I really don't think teams would have been pounding on Anderson's door to pay a 37YR old goalie more than 5M to play for them until he's 39YRs old.

Because you move to year by year contracts when a players has started his decline, and you're wanting to keep him on only so ling as he's a benefit to the team, not when you're afraid that he may in a few years.

Andy's actual on ice play has earned him the contractual respect from the team.

Hale, you're just bet-hedging in fantasy land, treating it like a real world option, and then criticizing management based on this; It's ridiculous.

I'd be bummed if management started treating Andy like he was on decline contract status this year, because he was great last year.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

How many people here are willing to say they'd walk from Anderson instead of signing this deal?

FYI, he was hurt in the playoffs. Historically, he's been a big game goalie.

A majority of his injuries have been freak injuries and not the type (ie groin) that have a lasting effect on goalies.

1 year would have been more ideal, but we don't live in a perfect world. It takes two people to a to a contract.

Ultimately, both in salary and cap, Anderson's new contract puts him around the 17th highest paid goalie in the league.

How did this become a thing with the Senators - Alfie, Methot for nothing, Spezza


They can always trade Condon, he's an asset. Look what Cam Talbot and Freddie Anderson got as solid backups. If Condon has another solid year they can make a solid solid trade and promote Hogberg.

I got no problem with having 2 solid goalies.

We probably get 1 more cheap year out of Condon and then flip him for futures before his raise in 2018. In each of the next 3 seasons we are probably consistently paying around 6M combined for goalies.

If people don't like this deal, that's fine. But at least suggest the realistic alternative you'd take to replace Anderson next season.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

Even for those who like the idea of re-signing Anderson, can someone please explain to me why it makes sense to extend him for 2YRs at 4.75M before seeing him play in 2017/18?

Seems like we're taking on a lot of downside risk, without a whole lot of upside potential, as I really don't think teams would have been pounding on Anderson's door to pay a 37YR old goalie more than 5M to play for them until he's 39YRs old.

yes they would. Think about this, Anderson has played 3 less career games than Carey Price. Age is just a number. For physical hockey age purposes, Anderson can definitely play and be good for another three years.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

Because you move to year by year contracts when a players has started his decline, and you're wanting to keep him on only so ling as he's a benefit to the team, not when you're afraid that he may in a few years.

Andy's actual on ice play has earned him the contractual respect from the team.

Hale, you're just bet-hedging in fantasy land, treating it like a real world option, and then criticizing management based on this; It's ridiculous.

I'd be bummed if management started treating Andy like he was on decline contract status this year, because he was great last year.

plus people like Hale would say the team isn't committed to winning and spending if they didn't sign him

 

[Micklebot]

Even for those who like the idea of re-signing Anderson, can someone please explain to me why it makes sense to extend him for 2YRs at 4.75M before seeing him play in 2017/18?

Seems like we're taking on a lot of downside risk, without a whole lot of upside potential, as I really don't think teams would have been pounding on Anderson's door to pay a 37YR old goalie more than 5M to play for them until he's 39YRs old.

We saw him play 5 months ago, not to mention all training camp, it's not like seeing 10 games first this season would have really made a difference.

The upside potential is that if he continues to play at the level his has since his arrival, we have an inexpensive starter. If that age related downside didn't exist, he's probably a 6 mil per year goalie.