Confirmed with Link: Leafs re-sign Jonathan Bernier - 4.15m for 2 Years

[Paradoc]

If Lou was here earlier I don't think he takes Bernier to team elected arbitration attempting to lower his contact considering he handed out a $1.25 mil raise and claims he doesn't need to prove he is an NHL goalie.

Pretty sure Lou (who is a defense first believer) realizes Bernier's stats were related to the weak defensive team in front of him. By giving him a raise and 2 years extension instead of just 1 year he thinks he can be part of the solution and rebuild.

Agree with you Mess. Lou had Brodeur and Schneider so I'm sure he recognizes the importance of good goaltending. Let Bernier be motivated enough to earn that big contract the next time.

 

[CanadasTeam]

great news.

bright side is JR isn't our default stater.

 

[eddieO]

Because it's tactic strategy. You always lowball your first offer. It doesn't even matter because Bernier got 1 + mill raise from his last contract.

And how exactly am I fit this to my narrative? Lou could have said something else but he didn't. He recognized that the team is at fault and he has the ability and skills of a good goaltender.

Better than your comment of "a moveable contract".

The point is he didn't say anything supportive except that he is an NHL goaltender. Not sure how you derived from that that Lou is a fan. Have you seen his comments about Schneider and Brodeur? Again, that could change but you're reaching if you think that's Lou believing in Bernier.

And it's a moveable contract, that's helpful for us when we do eventually move him. I believe Lou can find better options at goaltender than Bernier.

If it had too much term or value it would be hard to trade. It still could be, but I think Bernier will have a better year than last year. How could he not.

 

[Pookie]

bright side is JR isn't our default stater.

Statements like this suggest that the term "rebuild" is lost on some.

Who cares who our starter is over the next 3-4 years? If anything, we want the team to be bad. Yes, lottery rules have changed but a last place finish, at worst, gets a top 4 pick. Top picks are key to the future.

Goaltending is a massive priority when the team is good and probably the least important thing to worry about when the team is horrible and collecting draft picks.

I would love to see Bernier traded at the deadline for assets. This smaller/moveable contract will help.

 

[Covenant]

Statements like this suggest that the term "rebuild" is lost on some.

Who cares who our starter is over the next 3-4 years? If anything, we want the team to be bad. Yes, lottery rules have changed but a last place finish, at worst, gets a top 4 pick. Top picks are key to the future.

Goaltending is a massive priority when the team is good and probably the least important thing to worry about when the team is horrible and collecting draft picks.

I would love to see Bernier traded at the deadline for assets. This smaller/moveable contract will help.

There's a fine line between losing and getting a high draft pick and winning which builds the confidence of the players on the team and turns them into quality NHLers.

 

[TMLegend]

There's a fine line between losing and getting a high draft pick and winning which builds the confidence of the players on the team and turns them into quality NHLers.

Exactly. I'm shocked this concept is lost on so many. Losing repeatedly breeds a toxic environment. Spend too long in the cellar, and you forget what being a successful team and player even feels like, and that's not good for development of young players.

 

[yubbers]

My god it's nice to see a management team that doesn't throw around 5 year deals like they're Halloween candy.

Well done

 

[eddieO]

Exactly. I'm shocked this concept is lost on so many. Losing repeatedly breeds a toxic environment. Spend too long in the cellar, and you forget what being a successful team and player even feels like, and that's not good for development of young players.

That's true. It's a fine balance. You don't want to be Edmonton.

 

[Stephen]

Seems fine to me.

 

[ponder]

Bernier is the best goalie that the Leafs have had in the past decade.

He's had the unfortunate luck of playing behind a horrific defence where the quality of shots have been way to high. While that is the case, his focus needs to be a lot better for the duration of a game.

Agreed, he's not perfect, but he's a good starter. Also agreed that he's the best goalie we've had since the 04/05 lockout. $4.15 mil/year for him is quite a good deal.

 

[Pookie]

There's a fine line between losing and getting a high draft pick and winning which builds the confidence of the players on the team and turns them into quality NHLers.

It's not a fine line. It's a time line.

Of course winning builds confidence and I agree. Confidence is the key here.

Which is why I really don't care who is in net because this will not be a team that wins. It isn't good enough. The goalie should be a journeyman looking to extend his career. Because in 4-5 years, we will need a new goalie. One with confidence.

It would be best if we feel we have a future #1 in our system to park him with the Marlies for a few years until the team is able to actually win and build confidence.

These years are going to be rough.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Based on what? Them taking him to arbitration? Or the low value and term they agreed on for a contract?

If he was looking for something, then you are too. There's no real "show of confidence" in Bernier here. It's a put up or get out type of deal and it is extremely moveable.

The likelihood he's a Leaf longterm isn't great.

I think they could have just as easily taken the arbitrator's decision with a 1 year deal if they were feeling its a show me or get out contract.

They want the extra year so thats not conducive to your reasoning is it? Just seems they wanted him more than that.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

My god it's nice to see a management team that doesn't throw around 5 year deals like they're Halloween candy.

Well done

Long term deals are generally more trouble than good. I could live with no more than three year deals and 4 on elite core players. They save you nothing really when they go wrong like Lupuls. Lupul is done like dinner and we are stuck with him. Lucky we aren't stuck with Clarkson too is all i can say.

 

[edwardslane]

Well Reimer will def be getting north of 3 million next season from some team on a new contract.. guessing we trade him for a pick this year to a team with an injured goalie or struggling netminder.

I hope we don't go the Dallas stars route and keep 2 goalies north of 3 million on the books.

Reimer can fetch a 3rd NP i think

 

[Suntouchable13]

Now give Reimer the boot and bring in a veteran backup.

 

[yubbers]

Now give Reimer the boot and bring in a veteran backup.

Lou already called Brodeur

 

[BertCorbeau]

Good deal, happy with this

 

[Pyrophorus]

I do think something that may be a consideration is how "tall" Bernier plays. i know people will go/argue it doesn't matter but considering every goalie in our division is taller than Bernier, it might start to be one. Most goalies are huge now. but if he plays taller (and when he's on, he generally does) it shouldn't be a factor at all.

Reimer about average for our division, even though Bishop puts the average up.
Bibeau is an inch taller than the 6'2" Reimer.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Doesn't the Corsi generation teach us that the more shots you face the more likely you are to be scored on?

As for being busy, sure. And I think that is why they will play for their next UFA contract. You've got to admit that a rebuilding team doesn't immediately need to fix goaltending...?

Goaltending is extremely important for contending teams or those looking for first round playoff money. You don't think we are one of those do you?

No I don't, but neither do I think that as soon as you reach that particular state you just go out and get a quality starter. It doesn't work like that. It's the most volatile position to draft and develop for, so if you have a chance for a quality starter then you take it. And Bernier is the closest thing we have right now.

We have a future need for a quality starter, we know that it is damn hard to get one but we have one such opportunity on the roster right now. In such a situation you don't throw away that opportunity because it doesn't fit the rebuilding, or rather tanking, ideal of some, you explore it until you know or can discard.

 

[eddieO]

I think they could have just as easily taken the arbitrator's decision with a 1 year deal if they were feeling its a show me or get out contract.

They want the extra year so thats not conducive to your reasoning is it? Just seems they wanted him more than that.

They wanted him more than they wanted a ruling in his favor at arbitration. It could have been north of 4.5M if the arbitrator was player-friendly and would make him harder to move at the deadline for a pick/prospect.

You're right though. They did show something in the 2 year deal. I think I was arguing someone saying "he's not being traded. He's here for the foreseeable future" which I don't believe. Your argument is sound, they wanted him a bit more than the arbitration ruling.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Long term deals are generally more trouble than good. I could live with no more than three year deals and 4 on elite core players. They save you nothing really when they go wrong like Lupuls. Lupul is done like dinner and we are stuck with him. Lucky we aren't stuck with Clarkson too is all i can say.

yeah i don't know if that's going to fly (though I am so team you). this is why when I take over the NHL, and become Queen commissioner, that's going to be where I plant my flag. 5 year max contracts. either that, or they aren't guaranteed. so if you have poop years, you can retructure it

(so yeah there will be a strike in my first few years as Queen commissioner).

 

[eddieO]

yeah i don't know if that's going to fly (though I am so team you). this is why when I take over the NHL, and become Queen commissioner, that's going to be where I plant my flag. 5 year max contracts. either that, or they aren't guaranteed. so if you have poop years, you can retructure it

(so yeah there will be a strike in my first few years as Queen commissioner).

I like where you're going with this. Let me ask you though, if I'm a player and sign a three year contract and outperform it in year 1, do we restructure so I get more?

Something like that I would be on board with. Where players AND owners dynamically restructure on performance.

 

[Daisy Jane]

I like where you're going with this. Let me ask you though, if I'm a player and sign a three year contract and outperform it in year 1, do we restructure so I get more?

Something like that I would be on board with. Where players AND owners dynamically restructure on performance.

oh for sure. equal strokes for equal folks. if you play out of your mind amazing you deserve to have it restructured so it's not a "deal" but if you stink (you can lower money). I think it would be fair. (and - grumble grumble. I'd still have to have the cap for poor teams you have to be cap compliant within the restructuring).

 

[JEI]

Best part of the deal is how it's structured. 2m in actual salary is a huge plus when it comes to trying to move him (if it comes down to that).

 

[HoweHullOrr]

4.15AAV, 2 years total

http://www.tsn.ca/report-leafs-bernier-agree-to-two-year-deal-1.339838

They settled before the arbitrator made his decision. I think that was wise and probably gave them a better (for the Leafs) term (2 years) and saved them some money.