Will demand for goalies in an expanding league drive up their value?
- Thread starter Washed Up 29YearOld
- Start date
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,816
- 5,424
That can give some idea:
www.spotrac.com
Been a while since a team paid a big price for a goaltender via trade, the position seem to have become a bit like running back in the nfl, when they are working they are incredible for a team but who it will be in 2 years seem a bit like rolling a dice, one good for a while can come out at any time for anyone, etc...
Post Luongo in 2006, not many example come to mind.
Cory Schneider got a really draft pick for (#9 overall) but that nothing in the Marner range.
NHL Transactions
A real-time look at the NHL news & transactions updated daily, including signings, releases, trades, & more.
www.spotrac.com
Been a while since a team paid a big price for a goaltender via trade, the position seem to have become a bit like running back in the nfl, when they are working they are incredible for a team but who it will be in 2 years seem a bit like rolling a dice, one good for a while can come out at any time for anyone, etc...
Post Luongo in 2006, not many example come to mind.
Cory Schneider got a really draft pick for (#9 overall) but that nothing in the Marner range.
I think if goalies were as consistent as players their value would go up a bit but many teams have been burned by paying for goalies whether through trade or by big contracts. Goalies have so much shift in performance year over year.
Bobrovsky was awful before coming alive last playoffs and Schneider was highly touted before almost immediately turning to trash as a few examples.
Sure skaters can massively drop in performance but you see it less often with guys who are in their prime.
Bobrovsky was awful before coming alive last playoffs and Schneider was highly touted before almost immediately turning to trash as a few examples.
Sure skaters can massively drop in performance but you see it less often with guys who are in their prime.
I feel like the league is also slowly getting more used to a tandem style. Starters it seems are playing less games
GeeoffBrown
Registered User
- Jul 6, 2007
- 6,129
- 4,128
one problem with goalies is that they are unpredictable and adding more teams will not change that factor
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 30,061
- 18,598
Ullmark will be an interesting case study. A lot of teams need a Goaltender. Boston has two. Recent history suggests teams don't want to pay a big price for a goaltender.. we'll see what sort of bidding order emerges and what that brings in this instance.That can give some idea:
NHL Transactions
A real-time look at the NHL news & transactions updated daily, including signings, releases, trades, & more.
Been a while since a team paid a big price for a goaltender via trade, the position seem to have become a bit like running back in the nfl, when they are working they are incredible for a team but who it will be in 2 years seem a bit like rolling a dice, one good for a while can come out at any time for anyone, etc...
Post Luongo in 2006, not many example come to mind.
Cory Schneider got a really draft pick for (#9 overall) but that nothing in the Marner range.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,816
- 5,424
Either when they draft or trade,
0 top 10 drafted goaltender since 2014 played a game in the nhl.
Only 5 first rounder and maybe 8.5 is now the maximum they will go cap hit wise, even Sorokin is at $8.25m, can still spend not top anymore but good money if you seem the rare pearl but those could be hard to move without accepting at least a mediocre contract in the return package, their own team love them and have confidence but the others ?
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 30,061
- 18,598
Yes, we'll see if Rangers extend Shesterkin a year early this off-season (I imagine they will). Figure he becomes top paid goaltender. Swayman as RFA this offseason is also interesting, everyone knows he's good but he's only split time thus far. Figure he signs for around $7.5 million AAV, which could be a big steal for Boston.
Push Dr Tracksuit
Gerstmann 3:16
- Jun 9, 2012
- 13,299
- 3,396
There's so much to the goalie discussion that goes beyond supply and demand.
A game changing goalie might make 1 more save than a good goalie but that 1 save could cost you 4 million more in cap hit.
A game changing forward might score 20 more goals than a good forward for the 2 million more in cap hit.
Add to that theres more room for a forward to have variance from season to season. If Matthews only scores 55 goals next season he would still be considered game chaning talent. If a goalie averages 1 less save per game he might not even be considered a starter.
Then there's the question of who is the cause of the goals. Its easy to see matthews fire a puck into the net and say he scored it. But a goalie goes from .920 to .900 (28 saves on 30 shots vs 27) and its not that easy to determine if it was the play in front of him or his fault that caused the sv% to drop.
There's just so many aspects of goaltending that rely on things independent of the goaltender that safe money is money spent elsewhere. And 1 of those things is that desperate teams make desperate decisions and average goaltenders get above average contracts. So thats my roundabout way of saying that 1 off seasons in contract years will net goalies more lucrative contracts but no the position of goaltender wont see a spike in value.
A game changing goalie might make 1 more save than a good goalie but that 1 save could cost you 4 million more in cap hit.
A game changing forward might score 20 more goals than a good forward for the 2 million more in cap hit.
Add to that theres more room for a forward to have variance from season to season. If Matthews only scores 55 goals next season he would still be considered game chaning talent. If a goalie averages 1 less save per game he might not even be considered a starter.
Then there's the question of who is the cause of the goals. Its easy to see matthews fire a puck into the net and say he scored it. But a goalie goes from .920 to .900 (28 saves on 30 shots vs 27) and its not that easy to determine if it was the play in front of him or his fault that caused the sv% to drop.
There's just so many aspects of goaltending that rely on things independent of the goaltender that safe money is money spent elsewhere. And 1 of those things is that desperate teams make desperate decisions and average goaltenders get above average contracts. So thats my roundabout way of saying that 1 off seasons in contract years will net goalies more lucrative contracts but no the position of goaltender wont see a spike in value.
Divine
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2010
- 19,161
- 13,326
Goalies are too unpredictable, which is why teams don't want to pay a top price for them.
Sorokin just signed a 8.25M contract and played 1 game in the playoffs. Varlamov who was making 2.75M played much better in both the regular season and playoffs.
I think teams will pay for a bonafide superstar goalie but those are very rare. Usually the top goalies switch from season to season.
Sorokin just signed a 8.25M contract and played 1 game in the playoffs. Varlamov who was making 2.75M played much better in both the regular season and playoffs.
I think teams will pay for a bonafide superstar goalie but those are very rare. Usually the top goalies switch from season to season.
No lmao. Goaltending is far too volatile.
Saros, Sorokin, Gustafsson, Oettinger Vasy, Samsonov were 6 of the top 9 goalies in GSAx in 22-23, combining for 190 GSAx.
Overall the top 9 goalies in GSAx last year combined for 290.11 GSAx.
This year those 6 goalies combined for 3 GSAx.
The top 9 goalies from last year combined for 81.25 GSAx this year
Saros, Sorokin, Gustafsson, Oettinger Vasy, Samsonov were 6 of the top 9 goalies in GSAx in 22-23, combining for 190 GSAx.
Overall the top 9 goalies in GSAx last year combined for 290.11 GSAx.
This year those 6 goalies combined for 3 GSAx.
The top 9 goalies from last year combined for 81.25 GSAx this year
Martin Skoula
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 11,957
- 16,842
That can give some idea:
NHL Transactions
A real-time look at the NHL news & transactions updated daily, including signings, releases, trades, & more.
Been a while since a team paid a big price for a goaltender via trade, the position seem to have become a bit like running back in the nfl, when they are working they are incredible for a team but who it will be in 2 years seem a bit like rolling a dice, one good for a while can come out at any time for anyone, etc...
Post Luongo in 2006, not many example come to mind.
Cory Schneider got a really draft pick for (#9 overall) but that nothing in the Marner range.
I think the main factor in this is relative prime ages. A high end forward will often have 3+ years of first line production by the time they’re 23, a high end goalie is usually either in a platoon or getting their first taste of a starter’s workload at that age. If we take 3 seasons of starter numbers/first line forward numbers as establishing a track record for the purpose of trade value then the goalie only becomes a peak asset at 26+ in a best case scenario unless we’re talking about an obvious young phenom like Vasi, but you’d be insane to trade him that early.
Basically it’s hard to sell a goalie in the sweet spot of having a proven elite track record but still being young enough to keep performing at that level for a decade. You’re either gambling on an unproven younger goalie or gambling on how long a high end 28 year old is going to be worth his big UFA deal. There’s a lot more scenarios of an RFA aged forward with 3 PPG seasons under his belt returning a haul.
HockeyVirus
Woll stan.
- Nov 15, 2020
- 16,928
- 25,236
If I had a Brodeur, prime Vasi, Prime Price who I knew would be elite year in and out I would pay them like MB paid Price.
Issue is, you can be the best goalie on the planet for 82 games+ and forget how to stop pucks 3 months later
Issue is, you can be the best goalie on the planet for 82 games+ and forget how to stop pucks 3 months later
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 29,579
- 14,259
If there aren't enough good goalies to go around, the good goalies will never move thereby having no discernable trade value. And subsequently if everyone else has mediocre goalies their value will plummet because what does it matter having trash goalie A, B, or C?
It further proves the point that not having a terrible goalie is more important than having a great goalie. Good enough is by definition good enough.
It further proves the point that not having a terrible goalie is more important than having a great goalie. Good enough is by definition good enough.
dirtydanglez
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2022
- 4,914
- 4,820
Alexei Yashvalev
Registered User
Theory: Stick technology has progressed to the point it's not humanly possible to be a reflex goalie in the NHL anymore. Goalies play the percentages and try to put themselves in the spot where it's most statistically likely the puck will hit them. This is vulnerable to bad luck and the shooter happening to make the perfect shot. If goalies get bad luck they get in their own heads and start chasing and it goes downhill from there.
Goalies seem unpredictable because it's a luck based position.
Goalies seem unpredictable because it's a luck based position.
I don’t think the problem is paying guys like Sorokin and Saros. They both had down years but they were two of the best goalies in the league last year statistically and have been for many years. Even great goalies are subject to poor seasons. Good if not great chance both bounce back next year.
Teams get themselves into trouble by when they hand out 4 and 5 year x $5 million deals to the likes of Campbell, Merzlikins, Korpisalo, Jarry or an aging Kuemper.
I feel like with goalies - you need to either lock in a superstar or go very short-term or ride your young guy on the cheap deal. Trying to go long-term on a middle class goalie is asking for issues. The big middle class of goalies can get put through a blender from year to year.
Teams get themselves into trouble by when they hand out 4 and 5 year x $5 million deals to the likes of Campbell, Merzlikins, Korpisalo, Jarry or an aging Kuemper.
I feel like with goalies - you need to either lock in a superstar or go very short-term or ride your young guy on the cheap deal. Trying to go long-term on a middle class goalie is asking for issues. The big middle class of goalies can get put through a blender from year to year.
dirtydanglez
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2022
- 4,914
- 4,820
How does "pick can upgrade into a 2nd if unlikely conditions are met" = upwards of a 2nd?
Besides if Jake Allen plays half the games and takes us to the playoffs he's well worth a 2nd. Would you pay a 2nd for a 2 mill starting goalie who can lead you to the playoffs? because if jake allen gets a 2nd, that's what he will have done
dirtydanglez
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2022
- 4,914
- 4,820
Upwards of a second suggests the devils traded a 2nd+ something else.
They traded a 3rd, with unlikely to be met conditions to upgrade to a 2nd
dirtydanglez
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2022
- 4,914
- 4,820
i dont think the conditions are that unlikely. devils should make the playoffs and haven't done anything significant with goaltending in recent year even though there was an obvious need. allen being the starter next year, or even a platoon goalie, wouldn't shock me.
Jake Allen has played 40+ games in 1/6 seasons. And even that barely crossed the threshold.
Another goalie will be brought in, and Schmid and Daws will get starts as well
Ad
Latest posts
-
Jim Coleman conference final: Broome Dusters vs. Windsor Spitfires- Latest: spitsfan24
-
-
