Did Carey Price live up to his 8 year, $84M contract?

[Lshap]

2014 history lesson / reminder: Tokarski played adequately. Not sensational, but adequate. He wasn't why they lost to the Rangers; it's entirely possible the Rangers would've beaten them regardless. And the Habs would have had zero - repeat that, z-e-r-o - chance in the SCF versus either the Hawks or Kings. I take it none of us have forgotten that the WCF that year was arguably the best playoff series of the decade and it was widely believed before it even started that it was going to be the true SCF that year. Nobody but nobody gave either the Rangers nor Canadiens a prayer against whomever won the West. Rightfully so as it turned out. Those Hawks and those Kings were both good enough to three-peat had history turned out differently, but of course they had to go through each other in 13 & 14 so neither of them ultimately did.

Carry on.

Tokarski was a very clear downgrade to Carey Price. That's not even debatable. Of course it's possible NY may still have won with Price in nets, however it's also possible that having a superior goalie like Price would've been the difference for Montreal.

But yeah... I agree that whether it was Montreal or New York, LA would've likely won the Cup.

 

[Bring Bak Damphousse]

Tokarski was a very clear downgrade to Carey Price. That's not even debatable. Of course it's possible NY may still have won with Price in nets, however it's also possible that having a superior goalie like Price would've been the difference for Montreal.

But yeah... I agree that whether it was Montreal or New York, LA would've likely won the Cup.

I had to re-check the stats, but between the 5 games in 12-13, 13-14 the Habs played the rangers, Price had 4 wins, 1 loss and 3 shutouts, only allowing 2 goals, in those 5 games, one of the losses was a 1-0 game, one of the wins was 3-1. No doubt in my mind the Habs win with a healthy Price, the finals were a different story though.

Carey Price 2012-13 Stats per Game - NHL - ESPN

The 2012-13 NHL season stats per game for Carey Price of the Montreal Canadiens on ESPN. Includes full stats, per opponent, for regular and postseason.

www.espn.com

 

[thadd]

Price led a team that had no business making it into the playoffs all the way to the Stanley Cup finals.

I think he did fine.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

2014 history lesson / reminder: Tokarski played adequately. Not sensational, but adequate. He wasn't why they lost to the Rangers; it's entirely possible the Rangers would've beaten them regardless. And the Habs would have had zero - repeat that, z-e-r-o - chance in the SCF versus either the Hawks or Kings. I take it none of us have forgotten that the WCF that year was arguably the best playoff series of the decade and it was widely believed before it even started that it was going to be the true SCF that year. Nobody but nobody gave either the Rangers nor Canadiens a prayer against whomever won the West. Rightfully so as it turned out. Those Hawks and those Kings were both good enough to three-peat had history turned out differently, but of course they had to go through each other in 13 & 14 so neither of them ultimately did.

Carry on.

Carey Price was about more than just stopping pucks. Great stick handler who played like a third defender. Teams could not dump and chance against Montreal because it would come right back out. The Rangers took full advantage of that.

Again, no disagreement on it being a long shot afterwards. But not zero. Zero chance was the 21 team vs the Lightning. The 2014 club had a healthy prime Subban and Price. Absolutely a long shot with David Desharnais… and Therrien. But as remote a chance as it was it was a much better shot than against the Lightning. That was going to be brutal no matter what.

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

I say he did. In my opinion he was the best goalie in the league for ten years. Some may disagree, but if he was on a team like Chicago (kind of wish they drafted had he fell to them in the 2005 draft) he probably would've been a consistent Vezina winner like Lidstrom was with Norris trophies and deemed one of the GOATS possibly ahead of Patrick Roy and Marty Brodeur.

Montreal was a bad team and should've been in rebuild mode for most of the time he was there but they managed to still be a good team. Once he was gone after bringing his team to the finals in 2021 where the team fell last place in 2022.

 

[Voight]

I say he did. In my opinion he was the best goalie in the league for ten years. Some may disagree, but if he was on a team like Chicago (kind of wish they drafted had he fell to them in the 2005 draft) he probably would've been a consistent Vezina winner like Lidstrom was with Norris trophies and deemed one of the GOATS possibly ahead of Patrick Roy and Marty Brodeur.

Montreal was a bad team and should've been in rebuild mode for most of the time he was there but they managed to still be a good team. Once he was gone after bringing his team to the finals in 2021 where the team fell last place in 2022.

I dont think the team he was on factors into the fact that he had two Vezina nominations in his career. Keep in mind its less of narrative award because its voted on by the GMs and not the PHWA.

 

[Toby91ca]

8 year $84m deal, 186 total NHL regular season + playoff games played. That's a hard no from me. Winning a cup would make it okay, but that didn't quite happen.

Exactly....I have to assume this wasn't an actual serious question. He signed an 8 year contract at $10.5M, which at the time I thought was crazy high $$$. Still the highest ever, even with cap having risen quite a bit since then. But, some other goalies have signed big $$ contracts lately. I think it's a mistake a lot of the time. On one hand, goalies are super important and if you don't have a good one, you almost have no chance, but they are also not as known commodities as other players. You can have a goalie become a star one year or two and then disappear forever. I know that can happen with any player, but more likely with a goalie....getting a very strong goalie, who is consistent year in and year out for a long time is somewhat rare.

Anyway, on this specific contract, 8 years, he played the first 2 years, the best of which saw him 12th in GAA and 14th in SV%....not terrible, but not what you want from a $10.5M goalie.....but that's just 1 year a well....so I'd say he didn't live up to it even if was just a 2 year contract. In year 3 he played 25 games and in year 4 he played 5 games.....hasn't played since. Question of whether he lived up the contract is crazy.

 

[Toby91ca]

I say he did. In my opinion he was the best goalie in the league for ten years. Some may disagree

Huh? What's your argument for having lived up to the contract? Whether I agree or disagree of him being the best goalie in the league for 10 years is irrelevant though.....for the record, absolutely disagree. If you were to ask....over that 10 year period, who would you pick as the best, he'd be in the conversation for sure...but best every year for 10 years....no chance. However, irrelevant as even if he was, those 10 years happened before this contract, so has nothing to do with whether he lived up to the contract or not.

To me, to live up to that contract, which, as I suggest, thought was way too much $$$, he would have had to be the best goalie in the league, unquestionably, for the duration of the contract and 1) he only played 25% of the contract and 2) looking at that 25% in isolation, he wasn't even in the conversation as best, let alone unquestionably the best.

 

[shadowmanzz]

All team accomplishments, or lack of them aside, It is simple,

If you give a goalie a contract like this, the expectation should be that he wins at least one Vezina within the duration of that contract.

He never did, so it's a failure.

He was paid to be the best goalie in the league, however during the duration of this contract, he never was, not one time, that means failure.

People say he dragged a bad team on his shoulders to a stanley cup final during a special rules covid year, but then they completely ignore the other years where he was complete garbage, and they blame the team in front of him.

So when the team made the cup finals, the success was all because Price was great, but when there was no success for the team in the other years, the team is to blame, and it was all because they didn't put a good team in front of Price, and Price is not responsible for anything during those years, you can't have it both ways.

When the team did great it was because Price was great, but then when the team did poorly, those same people blame the team in front of him, and Price is not to blame

Habs fans who give Price praise for a cup run, are the same fans who absolve him of all blame when the team sticks.

Habs do great = Carey Price is a God !!

Habs do terrible = Well what do you expect, the team in front of Price stinks !!

 

[Toby91ca]

All team accomplishments, or lack of them aside, It is simple,

If you give a goalie a contract like this, the expectation should be that he wins at least one Vezina within the duration of that contract.

He never did, so it's a failure.

I think that is still setting the bar very low....highest paid goalie ever and all you are looking for is one Vezina? Even if that was the BAR, he didn't even come within shouting distance of that.