Confirmed with Link: [TOR] Frederik Andersen - 5 Year Extension [25 Million - AAV: 5M]

Status
Not open for further replies.

thewave

Registered User
Jun 17, 2011
39,875
9,713
Sure, call it cost mitigation... still better than having an overpaid guy.

I think you're full of it and trolling at this point. Explain your deviations, inconsistencies and reasonings more coherently as to give credibility to your opinion or perhaps you should kindly back out of this conversation.
 

seanlinden

Registered User
Apr 28, 2009
24,826
1,342
what i am also curious is - why is 60+ games this magical mystical number all starters need to hit? Not all starters hit that number. (Some players have stated they want the work load) some coaches ride their goalies like a dead horse to the finish line (to quote Paul Maurice here). some starters play 50-55.

I'm not saying this because Andersen had 53 so phew, he's safe - I've been asking this when Reimer/Bernier were here. Neither of them ever hit 40 (let alone 50), and I know that Noodles always said for him a starter is a 50-55 gamer.

When guys are playing 50-55, they're no longer true #1s, they're front half of tandem guys, or guys who couldn't hold the position for the full season.
 

NoTouchIcing

Registered User
Feb 3, 2010
3,273
157
Guelph, ON
I've been totally consistent in that ~60 games is a #1 workload. Obviously, there's room for some variance due to luck of the draw with scheduling and whatnot. At 54, he falls just shy of that.
Well, what is the variance (using historical data and fact) then? Your numbers and your verbiage both appear to be completely arbitrary.
 

seanlinden

Registered User
Apr 28, 2009
24,826
1,342
You can employ any type of semantics you'd like. What I said was not untrue.

Yeah, it was.

You said this is the type of trade that takes you from a cellar dweller to competitive. In reality, it's the type of trade that can, but won't necessarily do so.
 

Daisy Jane

everything is gonna be okay!
Jul 2, 2009
70,212
9,189
When guys are playing 50-55, they're no longer true #1s, they're front half of tandem guys, or guys who couldn't hold the position for the full season.

because you said so?

i flat out said someone actually in the industry put out those numbers. someone who was an actual goalie coach, and part of management staff. So that person goes 50 -55 is a starter load, and you're like oh no it's not?

okay there.
 

Grimmas

Registered User
Mar 13, 2009
251
44
Toronto, Ontario
By the 60 game rule, the only starters in the NHL are:

Jonathan Quick
Devan Dubyk
Braden Holtby
Pekka Rinne
Martin Jones
Henrik Lundqvist
Tukka Rask
Roberto Luongo
Ben Bishop
Craig Anderson

I guess that means 20 teams do not have starting goalies?

Andersen had the 25th most amount of starts of any goalie last season.
 

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,783
21,959
what i am also curious is - why is 60+ games this magical mystical number all starters need to hit? Not all starters hit that number. (Some players have stated they want the work load) some coaches ride their goalies like a dead horse to the finish line (to quote Paul Maurice here). some starters play 50-55.

I'm not saying this because Andersen had 53 so phew, he's safe - I've been asking this when Reimer/Bernier were here. Neither of them ever hit 40 (let alone 50), and I know that Noodles always said for him a starter is a 50-55 gamer.

As far as I'm concerned, 60 is just another in a long line of meaningless arbitrary numbers.
 

Nithoniniel

Registered User
Sep 7, 2012
20,913
16,749
Skövde, Sweden
By the 60 game rule, the only starters in the NHL are:

Jonathan Quick
Devan Dubyk
Braden Holtby
Pekka Rinne
Martin Jones
Henrik Lundqvist
Tukka Rask
Roberto Luongo
Ben Bishop
Craig Anderson

I guess that means 20 teams do not have starting goalies?

Andersen had the 25th most amount of starts of any goalie last season.

You forgot that a key word there too. 'Generally'.

So I took a look at who has done that for the last five years and came up with this list:



But hey, I figured that it was probably unfair to look at five years and decreased that to 3 years. New list:

Quick, Rask, Fleury, Holtby, Bishop.

Next step, checking if one of them have missed tough games.
 

NoTouchIcing

Registered User
Feb 3, 2010
3,273
157
Guelph, ON
As far as I'm concerned, 60 is just another in a long line of meaningless arbitrary numbers.
They're completely arbitrary, which is why that argument holds no water. Public perception consists of a lot more observational data then just one or two guys' opinions. So, when that perception is he's 'a number 1 goalie, and he excelled', it's a lot easier to gravitate to that opinion.
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,371
9,674
Waterloo
Sure, call it cost mitigation... still better than having an overpaid guy.

Lol you don't get. There is always a risk of having a chance of an overpaid guy- IF performance falls off. There is NO chance of having an underpaid guy without gambling on term.

Odds of total flop- 1.6 dead cap

vs.

Odds of status quo -cap neutral with an above average 50 game #1
+
Odds of Freddie taking next step- 2-3 million cap surplus vs performance with an upper echelon/ elite #1

If you only want to acquire those that are proven bold you

A-deal with the fact theyre not available
B-pay the acquisition cost- much more than 30 plus a second
C- pay the contract- much more than 5x5

and are still left with the risk of regression, both to the middle step and the bottom.
 
Last edited:

JonnyMacAwesome

Registered User
Jan 27, 2016
479
26
Ottawa, ON
I've been totally consistent in that ~60 games is a #1 workload. Obviously, there's room for some variance due to luck of the draw with scheduling and whatnot. At 54, he falls just shy of that.

at 54 games... with 2 injuries in that season...do injuries not weigh in on "luck of the draw" type stuff?
 

ACC1224

Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
Aug 19, 2002
73,070
38,119
I've been totally consistent in that ~60 games is a #1 workload. Obviously, there's room for some variance due to luck of the draw with scheduling and whatnot. At 54, he falls just shy of that.

:laugh: Darn, so close!
 

crump

~ ~ (ړײ) ~ ~
Feb 26, 2004
14,743
6,498
Ontariariario
The goalie starts the most is the starting goaltender. 54 is the majority of games, so uh huh..starting goaltender.

Workhorse is another question. Watch closely this year to find out what a workhorse looks like. He'll be 6'4" tall wearing 31 in the Leaf net.
 

Crysis

Registered User
Jun 28, 2015
1,144
296
Here's to hoping Hunter can find the next Jason Allison(with better skating) somewhere in this draft. We badly need a point per game big man that can absolutely dominate along the boards and use his soft hands to feed our young snipers for one timers.
 

Damisoph

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
8,985
2,310
Here's to hoping Hunter can find the next Jason Allison(with better skating) somewhere in this draft. We badly need a point per game big man that can absolutely dominate along the boards and use his soft hands to feed our young snipers for one timers.

sounds like Auston Matthews.
 

Crysis

Registered User
Jun 28, 2015
1,144
296
sounds like Auston Matthews.

I think you forget how dominant Allison was on the boards. Mathews doesn't have the sheer size and strength to duplicate that but I'm not saying he won't be a much better player than Allison overall, just not in that one area. That year he put up 60 in 66 games for us he must have been playing at 230 pounds on that 6'3 frame, he was massive. No one could move him off the puck and it was a sight to see. I was also more thinking Mathews would be one of the snipers being fed.
 
Last edited:

Gallagbi

Formerly Eazy_B97
Jul 5, 2005
48,490
11,107
When guys are playing 50-55, they're no longer true #1s, they're front half of tandem guys, or guys who couldn't hold the position for the full season.
So there are only 16-17 true #1s right now in the league?

That's how many goalies played 60 games in either of the last 2 seasons. It also includes a few guys who are now tandem #1s, but weren't at the time.
 

seanlinden

Registered User
Apr 28, 2009
24,826
1,342
Lol you don't get. There is always a risk of having a chance of an overpaid guy- IF performance falls off. There is NO chance of having an underpaid guy without gambling on term.

Odds of total flop- 1.6 dead cap

vs.

Odds of status quo -cap neutral with an above average 50 game #1
+
Odds of Freddie taking next step- 2-3 million cap surplus vs performance with an upper echelon/ elite #1

If you only want to acquire those that are proven bold you

A-deal with the fact theyre not available
B-pay the acquisition cost- much more than 30 plus a second
C- pay the contract- much more than 5x5

and are still left with the risk of regression, both to the middle step and the bottom.

Like I said, I wouldn't be restricted to guys that are proven. I would've had no problem trading for Andersen and signing him to a 2-year deal.

I also have no problem paying more than 5x5 for somebody that's proven he can be a #1. As I mentioned earlier, goaltending is not the position to take big risks on.
 

Grimmas

Registered User
Mar 13, 2009
251
44
Toronto, Ontario
Like I said, I wouldn't be restricted to guys that are proven. I would've had no problem trading for Andersen and signing him to a 2-year deal.

I also have no problem paying more than 5x5 for somebody that's proven he can be a #1. As I mentioned earlier, goaltending is not the position to take big risks on.

What if you can't trade for a "proven" (by your terms, not by a lot of people's) or sign Anderesen to two years? Just go with Bernier until that comes along?
 

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,783
21,959
What if a goalie starts 60 games, but gets pulled in 10 of them so finishes 50?

How does that compare to a goalie that starts 54 games but only gets pulled twice so finishes 52 games?

One's a starter and the other isn't because 60 is where we draw the line correct?

If the other guy doesn't meet the criteria for a starter, perhaps there should be a new term - finisher?

What's more valuable, a starter or a finisher?

What' a workhorse - does it depend on the number of games he starts, finishes or both?

So many questions. Is this what they mean by advanced analytics? :sarcasm:

Oh almost forgot - what's the definition of proven?
 

seanlinden

Registered User
Apr 28, 2009
24,826
1,342
By the 60 game rule, the only starters in the NHL are:

Jonathan Quick
Devan Dubyk
Braden Holtby
Pekka Rinne
Martin Jones
Henrik Lundqvist
Tukka Rask
Roberto Luongo
Ben Bishop
Craig Anderson

I guess that means 20 teams do not have starting goalies?

Andersen had the 25th most amount of starts of any goalie last season.

It means that 10 teams had true #1s last the duration of the season, the rest, either ran with more of a tandem situation, or had a #1 that couldn't last the whole year. The tandem is becoming more popular these days.

Obviously, there's guys like Carey Price, Marc Andre Fleury, Corey Crawford, Corey Schneider,and Semyon Varlamov, who teams view as / have established themselves as #1s, but for a variety of reasons outside of the ordinary reasons, failed to reach that level.

Guys like Mrazek, Mason, Ward, Miller, Niemi, Allen -- fall into the #1A category.
 

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,783
21,959
Find somebody that you can sign for 2 years.

That reminds me of when the great Harold Ballard was asked who the next coach of the Maple Leafs would be and his answer was - "someone who will work for 50 grand a year". That was I believe was indeed what the next coach (Brophy) got paid. So those are the good times you're pining for huh? Yikes!

"Remember the good times we've had together
Don't you want them back again?"
- Rolling Stones
 

Slot

Registered User
Mar 6, 2012
2,691
197
I think you forget how dominant Allison was on the boards. Mathews doesn't have the sheer size and strength to duplicate that but I'm not saying he won't be a much better player than Allison overall, just not in that one area. That year he put up 60 in 66 games for us he must have been playing at 230 pounds on that 6'3 frame, he was massive. No one could move him off the puck and it was a sight to see. I was also more thinking Mathews would be one of the snipers being fed.

Once again this sounds like Auston Matthews. At 18 he's over 6'2" and 217lbs, think of what that frame will be like in 5 years.
 

seanlinden

Registered User
Apr 28, 2009
24,826
1,342
That reminds me of when the great Harold Ballard was asked who the next coach of the Maple Leafs would be and his answer was - "someone who will work for 50 grand a year". That was I believe was indeed what the next coach (Brophy) got paid. So those are the good times you're pining for huh? Yikes!

"Remember the good times we've had together
Don't you want them back again?"
- Rolling Stones

That's only if you can't find a proven guy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->