Daniel Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 3 of those results are Dominik Hasek who played for the best teams post-lockout. As I've argued, I think a #29 pick now is worth a #20 pick in 2 years, but the Devils have absolutely no guarantee of putting themselves in that position, not with ol' slow-starts in net. I would just take you one further and say that even if we had Marty from six years ago in net, it's very unlikely thatwe'd be drafting that low again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 It'll have to work because a ~.910 save percentage is what Marty's given us most of his career. His career average is .913 so I don't think that .908 is that terrible of a drop really. Exactly. And Marty won't be starting the vast majority of games anyway. I'm glad we signed our legend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefiestygoat Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 All I care about his him being a career Devil. Love this deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Our real problem lies with the goaltenders we have drafted. I mean seriously, who is the last goalie besides Marty that we drafted that actually became anything? Mike Dunham? LOL Haha good point... 1990: (1)Brodeur, (3)Dunham, (10)Corey Schwab. 1993: (9)Judd Lambert. 1994: (6)Luciano Caravaggio, (10)Scott Swanjord 1995: (5)Chris Mason, (8)Frederic Henry 1997: (1)Jean Francois Damphousse, (8)Scott Clemmensen 1999: (1)Ari Ahonen 2000: (5)Matus Kostur 2003: (6)Jason Smith 2004: (6)Josh Disher 2005: (2)Jeff Frazee 2010: (3)Scott Wedgewood, (6)Maxime Clermont Looks like of these, Chris Mason and Scott Clemmensen were the only ones after Marty's draft year. But, it's also pretty clear that after 1999, it wasn't much of a focus for the Devils. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 (edited) I would just take you one further and say that even if we had Marty from six years ago in net, it's very unlikely thatwe'd be drafting that low again. You're not really understanding what I am saying. Let's say that there's no circumvention penalty. The Devils have their #29th overall pick. If you somehow knew that a team would finish 20th in 2 years, would you exchange 1st round picks with them? No, you wouldn't, because a draft pick now is worth more than a draft pick later. It's not about how low you finish - picks 20-30 aren't that far different from one another. The key is getting that low in the draft again, and it might be difficult to do with poor goaltending. Nd5: goaltending has changed a lot since Brodeur started his career - a .913 was a great save percentage back then, now it is merely average. And again, some of that has to do with undercounting shots - if Brodeur played in Chicago or Florida, his career save percentage would probably be .006 higher. Edited July 2, 2012 by Triumph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Hockey Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Haha good point... 1990: (1)Brodeur, (3)Dunham, (10)Corey Schwab. 1993: (9)Judd Lambert. 1994: (6)Luciano Caravaggio, (10)Scott Swanjord 1995: (5)Chris Mason, (8)Frederic Henry 1997: (1)Jean Francois Damphousse, (8)Scott Clemmensen 1999: (1)Ari Ahonen 2000: (5)Matus Kostur 2003: (6)Jason Smith 2004: (6)Josh Disher 2005: (2)Jeff Frazee 2010: (3)Scott Wedgewood, (6)Maxime Clermont Looks like of these, Chris Mason and Scott Clemmensen were the only ones after Marty's draft year. But, it's also pretty clear that after 1999, it wasn't much of a focus for the Devils. I forgot about Mason and don't know how I forgot about Clemmensen but ya the proof is all right there. None of these guys have gone on to become really great number 1 starters anywhere. Mason had a few years as a starter but ended up falling off. Clemmensen wasn't even the starter come playoff time this year. Hopefully Wedgewood comes through but we are going to have to wait and see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 You're not really understanding what I am saying. Let's say that there's no circumvention penalty. The Devils have their #29th overall pick. If you somehow knew that a team would finish 20th in 2 years, would you exchange 1st round picks with them? No, you wouldn't, because a draft pick now is worth more than a draft pick later. It's not about how low you finish - picks 20-30 aren't that far different from one another. The key is getting that low in the draft again, and it might be difficult to do with poor goaltending. Nd5: goaltending has changed a lot since Brodeur started his career - a .913 was a great save percentage back then, now it is merely average. And again, some of that has to do with undercounting shots - if Brodeur played in Chicago or Florida, his career save percentage would probably be .006 higher. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshall Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Mixed feelings about this, but it is what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindcrime30 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I'm just happy we chose to maintain our status as "oldest team in the league." With age comes wisdom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe B Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 You're not really understanding what I am saying. Let's say that there's no circumvention penalty. The Devils have their #29th overall pick. If you somehow knew that a team would finish 20th in 2 years, would you exchange 1st round picks with them? No, you wouldn't, because a draft pick now is worth more than a draft pick later. It's not about how low you finish - picks 20-30 aren't that far different from one another. The key is getting that low in the draft again, and it might be difficult to do with poor goaltending. Nd5: goaltending has changed a lot since Brodeur started his career - a .913 was a great save percentage back then, now it is merely average. And again, some of that has to do with undercounting shots - if Brodeur played in Chicago or Florida, his career save percentage would probably be .006 higher. 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? A couple gaffs as well this year(this was the most noticeable the trapezoid rule affected him in a few years) but, when he is playing well, you know he wont get rattled in a big spot. Not thrilled with the second year, but if any nameless goalie took a team to the finals it'd be tough to not give a second year. I thought he made more highlight reel saves this year then he has in a long time. He still reminds me of the fastball pitcher that lost his velocity and still wins with junk. Doesn't come back from injury well, but evaluates his game and evolves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedArmy8 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 (edited) 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 July 2, 2012 by RedArmy8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
third man in Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I'm so glad we signed our GM, so now we can sign our big UFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghdi Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeCups Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AEWHistory Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 (edited) 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 July 2, 2012 by AEWHistory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justdo3043 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z-Man Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AEWHistory Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 give him a two year deal at 4.5 per season Lmfao! Ah, that made my day man. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeroGravityFat Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 you can't trust chico with 4.5M, he would spend it all on hot dogs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AEWHistory Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeroGravityFat Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Yea, but he'd help us make the cap floor! yea but he'd bust through the floor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.