Confirmed with Link: Fleury re-signed (4 years, $23M, $5.75M AAV) #2

[radapex]

He's forgetting the key part, though: While being such an average goaltender (and one that tends to implode in the playoffs, as he notes), he's being treated like a franchise player. That's the maddening part and not the dollars or the term.

I don't think it's so much treating him like a franchise player as it is keeping their franchise players happy. Crosby loves the guy, Letang loves the guy, Malkin loves the guy, even Mario loves the guy... letting him go cause a lot of issues in a locker room that's already seems rather prone to issues. Basically, they'd rather a moderately priced average goalie and happy stars than a cheaper average goalie and unhappy stars.

 

[Deutschland Dangler]

I don't think it's so much treating him like a franchise player as it is keeping their franchise players happy. Crosby loves the guy, Letang loves the guy, Malkin loves the guy, even Mario loves the guy... letting him go cause a lot of issues in a locker room that's already seems rather prone to issues. Basically, they'd rather a moderately priced average goalie and happy stars than a cheaper average goalie and unhappy stars.

Yeah, sadly that's probably it.

 

[shureshot66]

Not sure if it was posted in the other thread, but repeating it here for posterity. Elliotte Friedman did some digging on the limited NTC:

Marc-Andre Fleury’s new contract includes a no-move clause to protect against waivers. He can be dealt, but is allowed to provide a 12-team no-trade list. A lot of bandwidth is already destroyed arguing this one, but it is clear the Penguins do believe their desire to hold the puck more will make Fleury a better goalie.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-its-not-going-to-be-easy-for-ted-nolan/

So there you have it.

 

[DawgPens]

the only option is to hope he does well. so i hope he does well

Exactly. I'm not wildly enthusiastic about the deal, but I also get that there might not be a better option out there at the end of this year, barring a block-buster trade with another team.

 

[UnrealMachine]

All the arguments and hyperbole against this are taking me off the fence and pushing me towards being OK with this. Real arguments with valid reasoning (there have been many) against this are getting drowned out by nonsensical statements pretending to be facts.

Perhaps you can provide a short list summarizing the statements pretending to be facts? Or can we add your post to the hyperbole pile as well?

 

[penguins2946*]

What? That does nothing to show that the Pens could not sign Halak before CBOing Fleury.

If anything, had management made a serious push for signing Halak (we now see how unlikely that is, CBOing Fleury was never even considered, clearly) it would certainly have delayed the negotiating process, as him and his agent would have had to think about whether to go to Pitt or NYI. I'd hazard a guess and say, chances are we'd win that one.

I also like how you completely ignored the second half of my response, about Halak being a superior playoff goalie over Fleury.

And again, for some reason you can't understand this, but Halak's rights were traded to the Islanders when we were in the playoffs. We couldn't talk to his agent because his rights were owned by the Islanders, who had full intentions on signing him. It's not a hard concept to comprehend. The only goalie that we could have traded for the rights of and signed before CBOing Fleury was Hiller, which I would have been interested in doing. Halak wasn't an option. Period.

If Halak were actually a superior playoff goalie to Fleury, he would have played more than 2 games in the playoffs since 2010 and not been a backup to Brian freaking Elliot.

 

[Winger for Hire]

Dangler, you seem to be operating under the assumption that the Pens would have been able to sign MAF under the price of his last contract (per year number).

Show me an example, in pro sports (any, not just NHL), where a player who helps their team into the playoffs (a trait a lot of teams would love in a goalie), has no off-field issues and isn't a disruption to the team in good or bad times tests the FA market and gets less than his last contract (again, yearly salary). That is unheard of and no agent that has a client would allow that to happen.

Sure he has had the post-season yips, but he's also shown steps of getting over them (not all the way, but shown progress). He's shown that he is capable of being a playoff level goalie (2008, 2009, 2014) so it's not unreal to think he can find that again seeing as how he's shown progression lately.

There are only two possible outcomes for waiting to re-sign him after the year- 1) He signs the same contract he signed now or 2) he continues progressing and can command more than what he got. If he would pump up his demands with a good playoff showing, then the Pens either pay it to keep him or let him walk, and then we get into the muddy and undesirable waters of the UFA Goalie market which is blindfolded darts, at best.

 

[Pens1566]

this is the single worst personnel/roster move that the penguins have made since the crosby and malkin era, i am pretty sure.

Lofty praise(?) when you consider this team had the nerve to not sign Rathje ...

 

[jdpitt05]

For all the talk of the new goalie coach, Zatkoff's ESSV% last year was 0.916, MAF's was 0.917. That's not uncommon for MAF. Even if Bylsma's system is to blame, MAF didn't outplay his backups.

Well Zatkoff has the much smaller sample size and MAF would typically be playing against the better teams. MAF is definitely a better goaltender than Zatkoff.

 

[penguins2946*]

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on...rys-contract-and-the-trouble-with-the-goalies

Right off the bat, Adam Gretz hits the nail on the head.



He does an excellent job of explaining why no goalie - not just Fleury - should be getting paid. The difference between a good (or above average) and a bad (or below average) goalie will amount to maybe 4-6 points per season.

This sums it up very well. The anti-Fleury crowd is acting like any crappy backup goalie can replace him and this deal is the worst thing to ever happy, and the pro-Fleury crowd are the ones acting like he's some elite goalie. I see a lot more of the former than the later here.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Well Zatkoff has the much smaller sample size and MAF would typically be playing against the better teams. MAF is definitely a better goaltender than Zatkoff.

get the hell out of here with your fancy schmancy context.

 

[wolffy66]

That's called marketing

That's certainly one thing we could call it.

 

[UnrealMachine]

Well Zatkoff has the much smaller sample size and MAF would typically be playing against the better teams. MAF is definitely a better goaltender than Zatkoff.

Is 7 years a big enough sample size? It was posted earlier and the result was the same - Fleury played at the same level as his backups. I guess when it happens again this season we can expect that people will still make excuses.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Is 7 years a big enough sample size? It was posted earlier and the result was the same - Fleury played at the same level as his backup.

just gonna ignore the other half of his quote, huh?

 

[cassius]

This sums it up very well. The anti-Fleury crowd is acting like any crappy backup goalie can replace him and this deal is the worst thing to ever happy, and the pro-Fleury crowd are the ones acting like he's some elite goalie. I see a lot more of the former than the later here.

Statistically, you could make that argument. The numbers don't lie..

"Since 2010, Fleury has a postseason save percentage of .891, which ranks 21st out of 23 eligible goaltenders, which again includes nearly identical numbers from Bryzgalov. Fleury's year-by-year postseason save percentages since winning the Stanley Cup in 2009 are: .891/.899/.834/.883/.915. "

 

[penguins2946*]

Is 7 years a big enough sample size? It was posted earlier and the result was the same - Fleury played at the same level as his backup.

And again, backups always get less starts and they tend to get easier starts as well. You can take any stats out of context to fit your agenda.

Statistically, you could make that argument. The numbers don't lie..

"Since 2010, Fleury has a postseason save percentage of .891, which ranks 21st out of 23 eligible goaltenders, which again includes nearly identical numbers from Bryzgalov. Fleury's year-by-year postseason save percentages since winning the Stanley Cup in 2009 are: .891/.899/.834/.883/.915. "

Except no, you couldn't. You can't make an argument of a backup would be better than Fleury by saying how Fleury is bad.

 

[UnrealMachine]

just gonna ignore the other half of his quote, huh?

The other half of his quote is a lie. Zatkoff played a higher pct. of his games against playoff teams than Fleury last season and played better against the playoff teams than Fleury. Woops.

 

[cassius]

Except no, you couldn't. You can't make an argument of a backup would be better than Fleury by saying how Fleury is bad.

Statistically you could make that exact argument, Fleury ranked 21 out of 23rd in post-season Sv% since 2010. Basically, he sucks so bad at stopping pucks in the post-season that almost anyone could perform better than him.

So he is worse than 91.3% of all goaltenders when it comes to post-season sv%. He's in the bottom 7%.

It's not out of the realm of possibility that a backup could come in and post better numbers, which is an exact scenario that played out when Vokoun led us to the ECF.

 

[Shwag33]

The other half of his quote is a lie. Zatkoff played a higher pct. of his games against playoff teams than Fleury last season and played better against the playoff teams than Fleury. Woops.

but but but..... the defense and and and bylsma's system and #1 draft pick.

 

[wolffy66]

This sums it up very well. The anti-Fleury crowd is acting like any crappy backup goalie can replace him and this deal is the worst thing to ever happy, and the pro-Fleury crowd are the ones acting like he's some elite goalie. I see a lot more of the former than the later here.

This is exactly correct save one small point, its not "any crappy goalie" its any average goalie.

If you have two average goalies, one has choked in the playoffs 3 or 4 times in the last 6 years and one of them hasn't, which do you choose?

Its even worse if you go by playoff stats, then we could say "any crappy goalie" by playoff qualified teams. Then almost any (playoff)goalie would be a better choice.

The stats say he is below average when it counts and merely average in the regular season. This isn't a question or debate, its a fact. He has been an average to bad goalie statistically.

The argument is are you ok with an average to below average goalie. That's where the board is split. Some are OK with it and some are not. Its not about MAF.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

He's forgetting the key part, though: While being such an average goaltender (and one that tends to implode in the playoffs, as he notes), he's being treated like a franchise player. That's the maddening part and not the dollars or the term.

How the F is getting 4 years at average money treating him like a franchise player?

 

[Deutschland Dangler]

Dangler, you seem to be operating under the assumption that the Pens would have been able to sign MAF under the price of his last contract (per year number).

Show me an example, in pro sports (any, not just NHL), where a player who helps their team into the playoffs (a trait a lot of teams would love in a goalie), has no off-field issues and isn't a disruption to the team in good or bad times tests the FA market and gets less than his last contract (again, yearly salary). That is unheard of and no agent that has a client would allow that to happen.

Sure he has had the post-season yips, but he's also shown steps of getting over them (not all the way, but shown progress). He's shown that he is capable of being a playoff level goalie (2008, 2009, 2014) so it's not unreal to think he can find that again seeing as how he's shown progression lately.

There are only two possible outcomes for waiting to re-sign him after the year- 1) He signs the same contract he signed now or 2) he continues progressing and can command more than what he got. If he would pump up his demands with a good playoff showing, then the Pens either pay it to keep him or let him walk, and then we get into the muddy and undesirable waters of the UFA Goalie market which is blindfolded darts, at best.

No, I am not operating under that assumption. The dollar amount itself is market value, together with the term.
I am saying that the only reason that would justify signing him now would be if we could get a steal of a contract. And well, we apparently couldn't. That makes it a bad decision. And the decision gets even worse when you factor in that even if he has two or three Islander-like playoff meltdowns in a row, we are stuck with him. We can't waive him in order to bury him and we can't trade him if he doesn't want to. No matter how terrible he plays, we'll have a goaltender with 5.75m on the books and might have to sign another one for the same price that can actually play in the playoffs. That's a gigantic risk that we're needlessly taking. I would have felt better about taking that risk if he would have shown that he has more than one average playoff run in this decade in him. JR opted to better not try that out.

And your two possible outcomes only covers the best case, namely that he doesn't implode.

It seems like what rapadex said is true, the number one priority is maintaining the family atmosphere. That's sad, but I hope that the Stockholm Syndrome sets in at some point and I can root for the guy again.

How the F is getting 4 years at average money treating him like a franchise player?

Please refer to the last post of page #1.

 

[Riptide]

For all the talk of the new goalie coach, Zatkoff's ESSV% last year was 0.916, MAF's was 0.917. That's not uncommon for MAF. Even if Bylsma's system is to blame, MAF didn't outplay his backups.

Lets look at this for a minute. Zatkoff played 20 games last season. Of those 20 games he played:
OTT, MIN (x2), LA (x2), TBL, DAL, PHI, SJS, NYI (x3), EDM, CBJ (x2), DET, FLA (x2), TOR

Of the 20 games he played, only 11 games were playoff teams. Sure he won more games than he lost (12-6-2), but it certainly helps when your sample size is that of 20 games, and half the games you played were against non playoff teams.

 

[Winger for Hire]

I don't understand how a lot of people seem to think a back-up level goalie is magically going to be a good starter by just putting a Pens' jersey on and playing a starter's workload. These guys are back-ups for a reason (skill, age, injuries, etc).

Ray Emery (singling him out because his name has been thrown around a ton in these discussions) has been on 1 year deals for roughly the past decade. There's a reason he hasn't beaten out any incumbents for a job and earned a multi-year deal. Signing him and putting him in net for 50+ games isn't going to solve anything.

Fleury has his postseason warts, but has shown in the past that he can be a good goalie and the most recent playoff campaign that he is taking steps towards becoming that guy again. All while being able to play at a level in the regular season that can get the team 35+ wins. Even with this offense I doubt most goalies plucked out of the UFA abyss is going to be able to put up 35 wins.

 

[penguins2946*]

This is exactly correct save one small point, its not "any crappy goalie" its any average goalie.

If you have two average goalies, one has choked in the playoffs 3 or 4 times in the last 6 years and one of them hasn't, which do you choose?

Its even worse if you go by playoff stats, then we could say "any crappy goalie" by playoff qualified teams. Then almost any (playoff)goalie would be a better choice.

The stats say he is below average when it counts and merely average in the regular season. This isn't a question or debate, its a fact. He has been an average to bad goalie statistically.

The argument is are you ok with an average to below average goalie. That's where the board is split. Some are OK with it and some are not. Its not about MAF.

And you're not taking into consideration that the other options in net haven't even played a significant amount in the playoffs. Hartzell hasn't choked in the playoffs 3 or 4 times, why can't he be a starter? He can't be any worse than Fleury.

That's basically the argument against Fleury here.

Statistically you could make that exact argument, Fleury ranked 21 out of 23rd in post-season Sv% since 2010. Basically, he sucks so bad at stopping pucks in the post-season that almost anyone could perform better than him.

So he is worse than 91.3% of all goaltenders when it comes to post-season sv%. He's in the bottom 7%.

It's not out of the realm of possibility that a backup could come in and post better numbers, which is an exact scenario that played out when Vokoun led us to the ECF.

And again, that isn't an argument for bringing in any other goalie other than Fleury. You can't statistically argue that any mediocre backup would be better than Fleury, because you don't have the stats to say why that mediocre backup would be better than Fleury. Just as the backup could come in and post better numbers, the backup could come in and post worse numbers. Both are not out of the realm of possibility. Remember Johnson in 2012? He managed to make Fleury's disaster look not that bad.