Triumph

Martin Brodeur - 2 years $9 million

519 posts in this topic

I've always wondered. How many of our under-counted shots are actually the devils giving up less shots casue marty plays the puck so much and helps the D clear the puck better?

Marty's stickhandling does cut down on the shots he sees, and he doesn't get enough credit for that at times.

In this case, I believe what Triumph is talking about is comparing the Devils home scorer against how the scorers on the road rate the numbers of shots the Devils give up. Marty's stickhandling will cancel out the same number of shots in both places, so it's a moot point when comparing home vs. road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lou did the right thing...

Marty will finish his career as a Devil, with over 700 career wins...

Now let's hope Zach resigns, and we may another glorious Cup run next spring!!!

Dead on. Marty buys us two years to find the next franchise goalie.

He can't be replaced here for any price.

Edited by RedArmy8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaay to much money and time, absolutely insane deal if you ask me.

Is nobody else pissed at Marty? I haven't seen that opinion offered yet.

If he really did live for this team and was so loyal then he would have taken a reasonable contract for what he was actually worth instead of getting money hungry when the team is in financial ruin.

Honestly if it weren't Marty, a 40 year old goalie with his current level of play would be hard pressed to get 2.5 million a year, especially for a 2 year deal. I think a one year 3 million dollar contract would be well beyond fair for Brodeur, and would imagine that's what he was being offered at first.

Hell, I'd rather have Michael Leighton at 900k a year for 2 years than Marty for 2 years @ 4.5m per year. They are both goalies that can get hot but generally aren't up to par and let in major softies.

Yes I respect everything hes done but he isn't doing them anymore and a 2 year deal weighs this team down further when his play hasn't warranted it.

And how much money did Brodeur leave on the table by negotiating his own deals and never testing FA all those years?

And Leighton over Brodeur? They don't belong in the same sentence.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so glad we signed our GM, so now we can sign our big UFA. tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think losing Marty and Parise in the same offseason could've been devastating for us and in more ways than just on the ice. I'm glad Marty is back. The money doesn't bother me, the extra year is a bit of a nag, but he deserves to decide when his career is over and to do it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaay to much money and time, absolutely insane deal if you ask me.

Is nobody else pissed at Marty? I haven't seen that opinion offered yet.

If he really did live for this team and was so loyal then he would have taken a reasonable contract for what he was actually worth instead of getting money hungry when the team is in financial ruin.

Honestly if it weren't Marty, a 40 year old goalie with his current level of play would be hard pressed to get 2.5 million a year, especially for a 2 year deal. I think a one year 3 million dollar contract would be well beyond fair for Brodeur, and would imagine that's what he was being offered at first.

Hell, I'd rather have Michael Leighton at 900k a year for 2 years than Marty for 2 years @ 4.5m per year. They are both goalies that can get hot but generally aren't up to par and let in major softies.

Yes I respect everything hes done but he isn't doing them anymore and a 2 year deal weighs this team down further when his play hasn't warranted it.

I am not happy perse with Marty, but I am not mad at him for wanting close to what he could have got elsewhere. I am sure another team would have happily given him $10M for 2 years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what made Hasek so good in his prime...when he averaged a .930 save% over six years back in the 90s ('93-'99), NO ONE else was doing that.

And Roy is at .910, and he started his career when .900+ was considered outstanding. VBK won a Vezina back in '86 with an .887 save%. That figure gets you cut these days.

I was looking up stats a few weeks back and came across Chico's career stats on hockeyDB. Damn, he was much better than people give him credit for. In '75-76, while on the Islanders, he put up a .927 save percentage and a 2.07 GAA over 44 games. Even on the Rockies/Devils his numbers, while only decent, are a little deceiving. His GAAs were poor, Hovering around 4.00, but his save percentage was .871 or higher. Respectable in the period and pretty damn good behind the Swiss cheese he was playing. I wonder what his career would have looked like if he had played for a better team. Those early Devils teams, and the Rockies of course, just plain sucked.

And don't get me started on Bernie Parent. His number hold up well TODAY! Unfrigging-believable. I wish I was old enough to have seen him play and remember it. It is a shame that his career was cut short by those old masks. And then there was Pelle Lindbergh. wow, come to think of it, once upon a time, the Flyers actually had decent to great goaltenders. Owell, fvck'em.

Edited by AEWHistory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking up stats a few weeks back and came across Chico's career stats on hockeyDB. Damn, he was much better than people give him credit for. In '75-76, while on the Islanders, he put up a .927 save percentage and a 2.07 GAA over 44 games. Even on the Rockies/Devils his numbers, while only decent, are a little deceiving. His GAAs were poor, Hovering around 4.00, but his save percentage was .871 or higher. Respectable in the period and pretty damn good behind the Swiss cheese he was playing. I wonder what his career would have looked like if he had played for a better team. Those early Devils teams, and the Rockies of course, just plain sucked.

give him a two year deal at 4.5 per season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2 year contract for $9 million will NOT weigh this team down:

- They're still almost $20 million under the cap for 12-13.

- They're still almost $5 million UNDER the cap floor, which must be met regardless of the financial problems.

- There's the potential for another $20 million to come off the books next year for UFA's (Elias, Zajac, Zubrus, Clarkson, Zidlicky, Janssen, Harrold). Obviously we'd want some of them resigned, but the payroll room is there if needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

give him a two year deal at 4.5 per season

Lmfao!

Ah, that made my day man. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking up stats a few weeks back and came across Chico's career stats on hockeyDB. Damn, he was much better than people give him credit for. In '75-76, while on the Islanders, he put up a .927 save percentage and a 2.07 GAA over 44 games. Even on the Rockies/Devils his numbers, while only decent, are a little deceiving. His GAAs were poor, Hovering around 4.00, but his save percentage was .871 or higher. Respectable in the period and pretty damn good behind the Swiss cheese he was playing. I wonder what his career would have looked like if he had played for a better team. Those early Devils teams, and the Rockies of course, just plain sucked.

And don't get me started on Bernie Parent. His number hold up well TODAY! Unfrigging-believable. I wish I was old enough to have seen him play and remember it. It is a shame that his career was cut short by those old masks. And then there was Pelle Lindbergh. wow, come to think of it, once upon a time, the Flyers actually had decent to great goaltenders. Owell, fvck'em.

Chico literally didn't have a team in front of him when he was a Rocky/Devil. Those teams were really that bad. Unfortunately for Chico, his numbers took a major beating for it. And to his credit, he never really complained or bitched about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can't trust chico with 4.5M, he would spend it all on hot dogs.

Yea, but he'd help us make the cap floor!

Chico literally didn't have a team in front of him when he was a Rocky/Devil. Those teams were really that bad. Unfortunately for Chico, his numbers took a major beating for it. And to his credit, he never really complained or bitched about it.

Oh absolutely, my point exactly. I revered him as a youngster and as I get older I think I have started to appreciate why I liked him so much. For awhile I had started to think of him as a sort of lovable loser, but as I got a bit older I realized that that wasn't really fair. While he played for losing teams, and he was very personable, he was hardly a loser. Most goalies would have crumbled under the peppering he took. Shoot, Alain Chevrier played for a Devils team that was improving and yet put up poorer numbers. started to put things into perspective for me.

Btw, I owe you a reply from a few weeks back. My apologies. We had a nice debate going and I rather dropped the ball. I have two newborns and am trying to finish a house renovation, so I tend to just disappear at times. Anyway, my apologies and I will respond ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, but he'd help us make the cap floor!

yea but he'd bust through the floor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2 year contract for $9 million will NOT weigh this team down:

I think the consensus at NJDevs is the Devils are no longer going to be a team that spends to the cap. Basically Every contract will weigh them down if the money's not going toward fielding the best hockey team possible at the money JVB whoever is willing to spend. Brodeur's contract is not about hockey, it's about marketing. Unless he becomes BETTER over the next two years the contract will hurt the Devils. If he becomes worse it could be abysmal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, but he'd help us make the cap floor!

Oh absolutely, my point exactly. I revered him as a youngster and as I get older I think I have started to appreciate why I liked him so much. For awhile I had started to think of him as a sort of lovable loser, but as I got a bit older I realized that that wasn't really fair. While he played for losing teams, and he was very personable, he was hardly a loser. Most goalies would have crumbled under the peppering he took. Shoot, Alain Chevrier played for a Devils team that was improving and yet put up poorer numbers. started to put things into perspective for me.

Btw, I owe you a reply from a few weeks back. My apologies. We had a nice debate going and I rather dropped the ball. I have two newborns and am trying to finish a house renovation, so I tend to just disappear at times. Anyway, my apologies and I will respond ASAP.

Don't want to derail the thread, but I have a DVD of a Rockies-Blues game from January 1982 (the Rockies' last season in Colorado). Chico was featured in a pre-recorded interview between the second and third periods. Everything you need to know about Chico the player and Chico the person is in that interview...you could tell he knew he was playing for a mess of a franchise that was going in a million different directions, but he was staying as positive as possible. He was clearly willing to shoulder as much of the responsibility as he could, basically saying that, for the Rockies to have any chance to win, it had to start with him and his play. Keep in mind how tough it must have been, going from an awesome and stacked Islander team to a Rockies team that had no chance, was clearly not going to be in Colorado much longer, and wasn't drawing much more than 8000 fans per game, tops. And he admitted in the interview that the constant spectre of the team moving was weighing on the team's minds...though NJ was the most-mentioned destination, several others were noted as well, and the players simply had no idea what was going to happen when. Chico made it clear that the players had no business feeling sorry for themselves, that other teams weren't going to feel sorry for them, and that it was on the Rocky players to pull together and not let their imminent move become a distraction. Came across as a real stand-up guy in that interview...I was a fan of his before, but even moreso now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the consensus at NJDevs is the Devils are no longer going to be a team that spends to the cap. Basically Every contract will weigh them down if the money's not going toward fielding the best hockey team possible at the money JVB whoever is willing to spend. Brodeur's contract is not about hockey, it's about marketing. Unless he becomes BETTER over the next two years the contract will hurt the Devils. If he becomes worse it could be abysmal.

Yeah, this. I mean, yes, even at 4.5M, Brodeur is one of the lowest paid starting goalies in the NHL. Still, he's been one of the worst starting goalies over the last two years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good contract if you ask me. It's less money than he used to make, which it should be, and may be slightly more than what you'd like to give him, but he's one of the best ever, and you gotta give him what he wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2 year contract for $9 million will NOT weigh this team down:

- They're still almost $20 million under the cap for 12-13.

- They're still almost $5 million UNDER the cap floor, which must be met regardless of the financial problems.

- There's the potential for another $20 million to come off the books next year for UFA's (Elias, Zajac, Zubrus, Clarkson, Zidlicky, Janssen, Harrold). Obviously we'd want some of them resigned, but the payroll room is there if needed.

Thats a real backwards way of thinking if you ask me. Making the cap floor or not Marty's simply noy worth 4.5 million a year now, it will be even worse next year,

If someone gave me 5 bucks to buy candy and I HAD to spend it to reach the candy spending floor I wouldnt just overpay for a Hershey bar and call it quits, Id spend the 5 bucks in the most effective way possible to get value for my 5 bucks

Silly analogy, but all this talk of spending a little extra to reach the floor is foolish when you can get extra players with that money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a real backwards way of thinking if you ask me. Making the cap floor or not Marty's simply noy worth 4.5 million a year now, it will be even worse next year,

If someone gave me 5 bucks to buy candy and I HAD to spend it to reach the candy spending floor I wouldnt just overpay for a Hershey bar and call it quits, Id spend the 5 bucks in the most effective way possible to get value for my 5 bucks

Silly analogy, but all this talk of spending a little extra to reach the floor is foolish when you can get extra players with that money

They signed the best 2 goalies on the free agent market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They signed the best 2 goalies on the free agent market.

They signed them both for 2 years to an age where almost no goaltenders have been league average. This is entirely too reductive a way to look at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a real backwards way of thinking if you ask me. Making the cap floor or not Marty's simply noy worth 4.5 million a year now, it will be even worse next year,

If someone gave me 5 bucks to buy candy and I HAD to spend it to reach the candy spending floor I wouldnt just overpay for a Hershey bar and call it quits, Id spend the 5 bucks in the most effective way possible to get value for my 5 bucks

Silly analogy, but all this talk of spending a little extra to reach the floor is foolish when you can get extra players with that money

Here's what I dont get about this logic.

Who would they spend this money on instead? What extra players? Had we let Marty walk, would you be comfortable with Hedberg starting all year? Who would have been the backup? These are rhetorical, but I only see more questions than answers in not keeping Marty. He had a good 2nd half and a good playoffs and there's no reason to believe (as of now) that he can't continue that. Instead they overpaid (in terms of years, he probably got only a million more than he shouldve) arguably the most important player this franchise has ever known and it all but assures that he will finish his career here. That makes the contract worth it to me. Its more than just Xs and Os. Its not like we went out and spent it on a guy who had never been here before and was an unknown quantity in terms of how he'd react to playing in NJ/chemistry/etc. There also was pretty much garbage on the UFA goaltender market outside of our two. I certainly wouldnt want to go in blind with a kid who had barely if not ever seen the NHL before or get fleeced in a trade for a Bernier-type.

We also don't have any idea what the internal cap is. This signing may not handicap us in terms of what we're able to do. Clearly, we have financial issues, but we just don't know exactly what we can or cannot do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I dont get about this logic.

Who would they spend this money on instead? What extra players? Had we let Marty walk, would you be comfortable with Hedberg starting all year? Who would have been the backup? These are rhetorical, but I only see more questions than answers in not keeping Marty. He had a good 2nd half and a good playoffs and there's no reason to believe (as of now) that he can't continue that. Instead they overpaid (in terms of years, he probably got only a million more than he shouldve) arguably the most important player this franchise has ever known and it all but assures that he will finish his career here. That makes the contract worth it to me. Its more than just Xs and Os. Its not like we went out and spent it on a guy who had never been here before and was an unknown quantity in terms of how he'd react to playing in NJ/chemistry/etc. There also was pretty much garbage on the UFA goaltender market outside of our two. I certainly wouldnt want to go in blind with a kid who had barely if not ever seen the NHL before or get fleeced in a trade for a Bernier-type.

We also don't have any idea what the internal cap is. This signing may not handicap us in terms of what we're able to do. Clearly, we have financial issues, but we just don't know exactly what we can or cannot do.

sums it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now