Rask hits the jackpot - Bergy too

[dash]

Wowza...

Boston, MA - Boston Bruins General Manager Peter Chiarelli announced today, July 10, that the club has signed goaltender Tuukka Rask to an eight-year contract through the 2020-21 season. Rask’s salary is worth an annual cap figure of $7,000,000.

 

[esls79]

Very rarely are long term deals for goalies worth it - we shall see

 

[davnlaguna]

Very rarely are long term deals for goalies worth it - we shall see

My thought last year with Quick

 

[Slimpikins]

It will be a steal of a contract when the cap goes up to 80M in three years...

 

[dash]

Henrik Lundqvist just received the news and here's some footage of his reaction:

 

[David_son]

Except Lundy not going to get anywhere near the years he is already 31. And I really do love having him on the Rangers and I think he is one of the Elite Goalies in the league but his GAA is going to take a hit now that he doesnt have all 5 guys jumping on the puck

 

[forty_three]

Thank God the Bob situation got resolved before that.

Holy jumpin

 

[beantownmaniac]

Except Lundy not going to get anywhere near the years he is already 31. And I really do love having him on the Rangers and I think he is one of the Elite Goalies in the league but his GAA is going to take a hit now that he doesnt have all 5 guys jumping on the puck

I would be so quick to say that. As far as I know, Lundy hasn't ever had any real issues with injury and Goalies have played to near 40, even past, for years now. IMO he's one of a few net minders I would take that risk on.

 

[David_son]

I would be so quick to say that. As far as I know, Lundy hasn't ever had any real issues with injury and Goalies have played to near 40, even past, for years now. IMO he's one of a few net minders I would take that risk on.

Yeah you might be right and we all know how much Sather loves giving out long huge contract to old players Thats right Richards and Redden im talking about you......

The wise thing would be sign him 5 years if he is still the Lundqvist we know and love give him another contract.

 

[forty_three]

I would be so quick to say that. As far as I know, Lundy hasn't ever had any real issues with injury and Goalies have played to near 40, even past, for years now. IMO he's one of a few net minders I would take that risk on.

I'd actually more willingly take the risk on Lundqvist than Rask. Lundy's been consistent for a long time and there's no reason to believe he would sharply drop off before year 5 of that contract, if ever.

Rask is spectacular, but he's only played 138 games and won 66 of them. Hardly a mind-blowing stat worthy of a jump in salary from 1.5 to 7 million.

Henry's won twice as many games as Tuuka has played.

 

[jstewismybastardson]

Bruins spending options after rask deal

 

[elocomotive]

Spending that much on a goalie is fucking insane. Terrible contract, ESPECIALLY at 31. Here's why, simply put...

The best goalie in the league is 2% better than an average goalie. The best forward in the league is 50% better than an average forward.

 

[dash]

Spending that much on a goalie is fucking insane. Terrible contract, ESPECIALLY at 31. Here's why, simply put...

The best goalie in the league is 2% better than an average goalie. The best forward in the league is 50% better than an average forward.

I think I hate the length (term) of the contract more than the dollar figure per season. From the player perspective, it's nice to have that security of a 8 year contract though.

 

[Vadered]

I'd actually more willingly take the risk on Lundqvist than Rask. Lundy's been consistent for a long time and there's no reason to believe he would sharply drop off before year 5 of that contract, if ever.

Rask is spectacular, but he's only played 138 games and won 66 of them. Hardly a mind-blowing stat worthy of a jump in salary from 1.5 to 7 million.

Henry's won twice as many games as Tuuka has played.

This, I'd rather risk a long contract on Lundqvist than Rask. With goalies you need some serious consistency to merit that kind of money for that kind of time.

Of course, in my mind a long goalie contract is also 5 years. Eight is getting into DiPietro land...

 

[Vadered]

Spending that much on a goalie is fucking insane. Terrible contract, ESPECIALLY at 31. Here's why, simply put...

The best goalie in the league is 2% better than an average goalie. The best forward in the league is 50% better than an average forward.

Depends on your definition of better. Let's say goalie A with a .910 SV% is average and goalie B with .930 is the best in the league. 2% better, right? Not really, because I don't care how many goals my goalie kept out, just how many he let in. Goalie A allows 9 goals per 100 shots. Goalie B allows 7 goals per 100 shots. Goalie B gives up 7/9 as many goalies, or about 22% fewer goals.

Meanwhile, in forward land, the leading player in points per ice time last year was Sidney Crosby at 13:34 (I'm ignoring a few guys who played in a few games for a few minutes and got a point or two, since I don't think less than 40 shifts qualifies you as the best forward in the league). The average is about 41:00, something like Daniel Winnik, making Crosby about 200% better than the average forward.

So that just makes your point even more, right? Well, not necessarily. Crosby is great, and he should be paid as such, but he's on the ice for about 2/5 a game (he was actually only 21 minutes this year, but we'll be generous), meaning in an 82 game season he plays about 33 games worth of hockey at 300% the production of an average forward. He's probably worth an extra 50 (team) goals a year compared to the average forward. A stud goalie plays about 60 games of hockey at 78% the goals allowed of a regular goalie, meaning if he faces 30 shots a night, that .930 save percentage "saves" you .6 goals a night, 60 nights a year, or 36 goals a year. If you equate goals scored to goals prevented, that means a top flight goalie is 70% as valuable to the team as Sidney Crosby is to the Pens. 70% of Crosby's salary is around 6 million a year.

All that said, I don't disagree with you that spending that much on a goalie is nuts, because it is. The reason you shouldn't spend that much money on a goalie is because goalies are really inconsistent. Over the past five years, the top five goaltenders in the league in save percentage (minimum of 41/24 regular season appearances) include seventeen different names from the 100-200 starting goalies. The top five point getters in that span are fifteen guys from the probably at least 400 guys that primarily played forward on a top two line during that time. Spending money on forwards, particularly after they have had a pair of good seasons, is much safer in terms of likely return than gambling that your goalie will maintain his form.

Of course, don't listen to me on this one, what would a Philly guy know about overpaying for goalies?

(Seriously though, my math is very fuzzy and I made a lot of simplifying assumptions with which you may or may not agree. That's okay though, it's 4 am and I should sleep now)

 

[esls79]

Apparently Bergeron also got a 8 year deal for just slightly less than Rask's

 

[dash]

Apparently Bergeron also got a 8 year deal for just slightly less than Rask's

You are correct sir.

Boston Bruins ‏@NHLBruins 2m Bergeron's 8-year extension will kick in beginning 2014-15 (1 year left on current 3-yr deal); worth an annual cap figure of $6.5 million

 

[forty_three]

Capgeek shows Boston over by 1.3m.

Thank God for LTIR...