Penguins Re-Sign Fleury
- Thread starter TSC
- Start date
That's actually a pretty fair (to good) deal for Pittsburgh. They get him through the rest of his peak and then can re-evaluate.
For a guy that puts up very (good) consistent numbers; I wouldn't be too upset if I were a Pens fan.
He may not be the strongest guy under the pressure of the playoffs, but he's been part of a Stanley Cup winning team and Pittsburgh hasn't always surrounded him with the best defensive teams.
For a guy that puts up very (good) consistent numbers; I wouldn't be too upset if I were a Pens fan.
He may not be the strongest guy under the pressure of the playoffs, but he's been part of a Stanley Cup winning team and Pittsburgh hasn't always surrounded him with the best defensive teams.
The problem with the deal is it is four more years of Fleury. If they think he has fixed his playoff issues, than it is a good deal.
But I would not want to be locked into a guy who has had the following Playoff SV% since he won the cup (.891, .899, .834, .883, .915) and has only once had a GAA below 2.4.
His last playoffs were better, (.915 and 2.4) but they better hope that is a new trend and not an outlier.
But I would not want to be locked into a guy who has had the following Playoff SV% since he won the cup (.891, .899, .834, .883, .915) and has only once had a GAA below 2.4.
His last playoffs were better, (.915 and 2.4) but they better hope that is a new trend and not an outlier.
Fleury has been very good since the Penguins hired an actual goaltending coach (Mike Bales) instead of one of Mario's buddies (Gilles Meloche), and his playoff performance last year was not the reason they lost to the Rangers.
I don't mind the deal at all, especially given what was on the UFA market.
I don't mind the deal at all, especially given what was on the UFA market.
I think it is a bad deal. League average save percentage is around .920. Fleury's career regular season save percentage is .910, which dips to .905 in the playoffs. Maybe a new coach and system help, but to me Fleury is the very definition of replaceable and he is not worth $5.75 AAV. They could probably get similar production out of a guy like a Neuvirth at a fraction of the cost.
There is no real need for the Penguins to lock him up this early. They've now committed to him and have no out if he's got pee dripping down his leg come playoff time again.
There is no real need for the Penguins to lock him up this early. They've now committed to him and have no out if he's got pee dripping down his leg come playoff time again.
Where did you get that .920 is league average?cshea said:
.910 to .920 is typically good. .920 to .930 is very good and anything over .930 is excellent. He usually falls between .910 and .920.
Lundqvist had a .920 save percentage last year, I wouldn't call his season average.
EDIT: typed would, meant wouldn't
Lundqvist had a .926 last year was tied for the 5th best save % in the league.
Ben Bishop had a .920, was 14th in the league, and is the definition of average.
MAF had a .916, good for 17th in the league.
Edit: and I clicked down one too many. That was for two seasons ago. I'm going back to bed.
Ben Bishop had a .920, was 14th in the league, and is the definition of average.
MAF had a .916, good for 17th in the league.
Edit: and I clicked down one too many. That was for two seasons ago. I'm going back to bed.
Your point stands though. .920 last year was good for 15-17th in the league last year among the lead leader qualifiers. That's becoming about middle of the pack for goalies. MAF was 24th in the league with a .915 save percentage.
I don't think save percentage is the be all, end all stat (considering Quick was right with MAF at .915), but just providing context to the stats. .920 is about league average nowawadays. It never used to be though.
I don't think save percentage is the be all, end all stat (considering Quick was right with MAF at .915), but just providing context to the stats. .920 is about league average nowawadays. It never used to be though.
FL4WL3SS is right. League average is closer to .910.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/stats/team-save-percentage/2013/
I still think it is a bad deal for Pittsburgh. Since 2010, Fleury is 25th in save percentage amongst goalies with 50 games played. I feel like the Penguins could've spent less in net and received similar production. They also left themselves no out if he has another post season meltdown. They should've played out the season and re-evaluated. Maybe a new coach and system help elevate his play. Maybe he poops his pants again. Who knows? Why sign him now? If the reason was to remove his contract situation as a potential distraction for him, then he's probably not the guy you want to invest in anyway, IMO.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=combined&year_min=2011&year_max=2014&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&birth_country=&franch_id=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=G&handed=&c1stat=games_goalie&c1comp=gt&c1val=50&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=save_pct
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/stats/team-save-percentage/2013/
I still think it is a bad deal for Pittsburgh. Since 2010, Fleury is 25th in save percentage amongst goalies with 50 games played. I feel like the Penguins could've spent less in net and received similar production. They also left themselves no out if he has another post season meltdown. They should've played out the season and re-evaluated. Maybe a new coach and system help elevate his play. Maybe he poops his pants again. Who knows? Why sign him now? If the reason was to remove his contract situation as a potential distraction for him, then he's probably not the guy you want to invest in anyway, IMO.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=combined&year_min=2011&year_max=2014&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&birth_country=&franch_id=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=G&handed=&c1stat=games_goalie&c1comp=gt&c1val=50&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=save_pct
1. You want to evaluate goalies SV% at even strength. Their overall SV% gets thrown off if they face a disproportionately low or high amount of shorthanded situations. Overall SV% last year was .92282 at even strength.
2. Even in one season it's not a big enough sample size to get at the goalie's true level. You see a ton of variance year-to-year - the difference between a Vezina performance and an average starter is a goal every 8-10 games or so, which can have a good amount of luck in it. Fleury's even-strength SV% the last few years: .9193, .9296, .9147, .9267. Most goalies who are not Rask or Lundquist have similar variance just due to sample sizes. So MAF is probably a little better than average overall.
3. Fleury does play a lot of games, so you can spend less on your backup and if he is bad it's not going to hurt you as much.
4. He has had some embarrassing playoffs, but those are a small sample of games overall. If you believe in some kind of clutch thing you're going to mark him down. Of course, you may also think his problems are fixed now. Overall I think he gets a slight knock here, but not very much.
Overall I think he is league average, but can basically be depended on to be that with very little risk of collapse.
So the question becomes, can you find that league average production elsewhere and how much would it cost. There have been a lot of goalies who have come out of nowhere recently, but does Pittsburgh have one of those? Can they identify him and acquire him cheaply? For a team that is basically a contender every year so long as they don't put complete shit around Crosby and Malkin, I think you want to be risk-averse and pay for the security of having league-average goaltending even if it hurts you a bit elsewhere. So, it seems about right.
2. Even in one season it's not a big enough sample size to get at the goalie's true level. You see a ton of variance year-to-year - the difference between a Vezina performance and an average starter is a goal every 8-10 games or so, which can have a good amount of luck in it. Fleury's even-strength SV% the last few years: .9193, .9296, .9147, .9267. Most goalies who are not Rask or Lundquist have similar variance just due to sample sizes. So MAF is probably a little better than average overall.
3. Fleury does play a lot of games, so you can spend less on your backup and if he is bad it's not going to hurt you as much.
4. He has had some embarrassing playoffs, but those are a small sample of games overall. If you believe in some kind of clutch thing you're going to mark him down. Of course, you may also think his problems are fixed now. Overall I think he gets a slight knock here, but not very much.
Overall I think he is league average, but can basically be depended on to be that with very little risk of collapse.
So the question becomes, can you find that league average production elsewhere and how much would it cost. There have been a lot of goalies who have come out of nowhere recently, but does Pittsburgh have one of those? Can they identify him and acquire him cheaply? For a team that is basically a contender every year so long as they don't put complete shit around Crosby and Malkin, I think you want to be risk-averse and pay for the security of having league-average goaltending even if it hurts you a bit elsewhere. So, it seems about right.
Yeah, but Fleury is one of 7 guys with over 200 games played in the top 25 on that list. You have a much larger sample size to know that his performance isn't fluky (and the backups on there have seen easier matchups, not played back-to-backs, etc., inflating their numbers).cshea said:
Puck Daddy has an article with reasons for why this is a good contract and why MAF is an average goalie. Good read.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/six-reasons-to-really-like-marc-andre-fleury-s-new-contract-161802931.html
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/six-reasons-to-really-like-marc-andre-fleury-s-new-contract-161802931.html
True. But 1, Niskanen had a very good season, 2, there's a lot more openings for d-men vs. starting goalies, and 3, that Orpik deal is insane.Greg29fan said:
I don't hate the deal, I think there's value in locking up your starting goalie beyond what his numbers say he's worth. Some guys welcome the pressure of playing for a contract, or being pushed by a quality backup. Other guys maybe perform best with more security. Surely the Pens know this better than any of us.