HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Steve Mason signed to a multi-year extension (3 years, $12.3M per media)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-19-2014, 02:29 PM
  #151
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilaFlyers View Post
I don't love the deal, but with the cap likely going up, I can live with it.
I second your assessment. Tough negotiations could have shaved a few hundred thousands, but the fit between Mason and the Flyers seems to be a comfortable and positive one. Plus, he seems to be well liked on the team. Still, a deal in February-March could have given time to see where the trend of late will be going. I'm cautiously optimistic.

A telling point will be whom the Flyers sign as back-up.

BernieParent is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2014, 02:46 PM
  #152
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 9,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
Worst case scenario, realistically, if they wait out the rest of the season and he plays well he gets paid 5 mil instead of 4.1 or so and that's worst case scenario in terms of waiting until the end of the season to sign him. Worst case scenario to this deal is that he craps out the rest of the season and we're all suddenly extremely nervous about his new deal.

Either way there's the possibility of him improving or regressing, but like many others have mentioned it's about reducing risk and Holmgren failed to do that here.
No, it's not. It's about reducing risk while maximizing potential reward. Under your worst case waiting scenario, we have very little reward by giving up an extra million for Mason. Sure, it may be safer, but it also handcuffs the team by adding an unnecessary extra million to our cap. It's a double edged sword, and Holmgren's job is to find the balance.

I guarantee you would be crapping on this deal had Holmgren waited. I can see your argument right now: Holmgren needlessly spent more than he had to. He should have signed Mason earlier when we could have had him for 4m. Just another example of Holmgren's bad cap management.


It's funny. Holmgren makes a move to potentially save cap room by signing Mason now-- "It's about reducing risk!". But when Holmgren waits and has to pay up more money, suddenly it's, "It's about cap management, could have been a lower AAV!"

And you can say Mason had no leverage all you want, but it doesn't make it so. If Mason goes into the summer without a new deal, what do the Flyers do then? If they don't make a play for another option, suddenly Mason has ALL the leverage. So is your bright idea that the Flyers should have entered the offseason without a commitment from Mason while looking for additional options in net? Do you really believe that should have been a serious option?

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2014, 03:00 PM
  #153
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 16,137
vCash: 500
Didn't really read this thread but my guess it is the Homer defenders vs. the Homer questioners arguing with each other.

As someone who has watched Mason since his Columbus days I am abit worried about the deal. I have seen Mason struggle mightily with the Jackets, and even if they were not the best team, he let in some major soft goals. That being said his play this season, even with some of the bad games he has had, has been very good. He has been more consistent and has played differently than his time with the Jackets. He doesnt get down on himself when he gets scored on like he used to.

This deal can go both ways. He plays good and asks for a bigger raise at the end of the season, or he plays terribly and this deal looks bad. Totally up in the air until the last game of the season.

This deal looks to be one where in 3 years, they can contemplate if Stolaz is closer to being ready, if Mason was worth the deal and maybe extend for alittle if Stolaz is ready. Stolaz is considered our goalie of the future. Right now they are just waiting.

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2014, 09:22 PM
  #154
onlylordsvsmorebp
Registered User
 
onlylordsvsmorebp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOfDoom91 View Post
I see one goalie on there who's a clear upgrade over Mason & that's Varlamov who's having a great season but has had his ups & downs in this league so far in his career. We would have to pay significantly & give assets just to pry him out of Colorado.
after seeing quite a few colorado games this season-thats the name that jumped out at me too.lights out.

onlylordsvsmorebp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2014, 10:50 PM
  #155
GoneFullHextall
JR=clueless
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 34,880
vCash: 50
so if you arent 100 percent on board with this deal then you are a "armchair GM"
umm wut?

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2014, 11:44 PM
  #156
ugiswrong
Registered User
 
ugiswrong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: deutschland
Country: United States
Posts: 803
vCash: 500
I'm ok with the dollar amount just to have the same goalie in net for four years, regardless of how good he is or not.

ugiswrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 07:33 AM
  #157
Hiesenberg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 3,918
vCash: 500
Man. I'm in the minority for not minding this deal I feel. I mean there are people that "HATE IT." Really? Hate it?

Hiesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 08:21 AM
  #158
El Emperor
Registered User
 
El Emperor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodstown, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,310
vCash: 500
When all is said and done, it is only 3 years. It really could be worse... we could be looking at 6 more years at 5.6 for Bryzgalov.

4.1 per season for a somewhat unproven commodity is on the brink of being complaint-worthy, but at least we have see what he can do on the Flyers when he is on his game. Plus, it's only 3 years AND the NHL is soon to up the cap. Honestly, a few years from now, there's a chance we look at even Hartnell's contract and say that it's not that bad simply because the average NHL salary could go up.

Giving 5.6 per season to Bryzgalov wasn't a good move because of the system he came from. Seems like any goalie putting on a Coyotes uniform has at least decent goalie stats. I may be remembering differently, but the only times that Bryz looked really good in a Flyers uniform was when Lavy pulled back on his offensive system. March of 2012 comes to mind where he looked good, but at the same time, I recall we did not score a lot of goals either.

El Emperor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 08:26 AM
  #159
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,596
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiesenberg View Post
Man. I'm in the minority for not minding this deal I feel. I mean there are people that "HATE IT." Really? Hate it?
You'll always be in the minority if you aren't finding something wrong with a move made by Homer. There is nothing wrong with this deal at all, and even the people complaining about the deal aren't really complaining about the terms...they are complaining about the TIMING of the deal.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 08:38 AM
  #160
Hiesenberg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 3,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
You'll always be in the minority if you aren't finding something wrong with a move made by Homer. There is nothing wrong with this deal at all, and even the people complaining about the deal aren't really complaining about the terms...they are complaining about the TIMING of the deal.
Meh...I guess you can wait, but why? Go get a back up for 800k-1mm and you are set at Goalie with less question marks

Hiesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 08:41 AM
  #161
Hiesenberg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 3,918
vCash: 500
http://capgeek.com/comparables/?play...2&year_id=2014

Looking at this I don't really see a big deal.

So you do an RFA deal for what? 3M for 1 year? Then have to hope he has a good year without being too good because then he may cost you 5-6M a year?

Hiesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 08:55 AM
  #162
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,596
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiesenberg View Post
Meh...I guess you can wait, but why? Go get a back up for 800k-1mm and you are set at Goalie with less question marks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiesenberg View Post
http://capgeek.com/comparables/?play...2&year_id=2014

Looking at this I don't really see a big deal.

So you do an RFA deal for what? 3M for 1 year? Then have to hope he has a good year without being too good because then he may cost you 5-6M a year?
Exactly. There is a potential benefit to waiting, sure. But there is also a potential detriment. You have a couple of scenarios that could go down.

1) You wait, and he ***** the bed second half. Then you either get him for cheaper. Instead of $4.1 maybe he gets $3.1. You save $1 million. Good, for sure.

2) You wait, and he ***** the bed in the second half. You let him walk and now we have no real starter and have to overpay in UFA. Not ideal but not terrible, you don't want a goalie just to have a goalie, but you are stuck overpaying in UFA for a guy that likely isn't going to be worth it any way. Or you trade and get the same result, a guy you over pay for.

3) You wait, and he plays lights out. Now you are likely paying more for longer, or more for a one year deal until he gets to UFA status, depending on which direction both parties want to go. Not terrible, because if he is worth it, then go for it, but still, you are paying more. Maybe he gets $4.5-$5.1 for a year or two longer, or maybe he gets $4.5 for a year to get him to UFA depending on how things shake out.

4) You sign him when Homer did. Now you get him for a fair price and don't have to worry about anything else. Maybe it is a couple hundred thousand too much, maybe you got him for a couple hundred thousand less than what it would have cost.

People are going to try and tell me that option #4 is a BAD option? It would seem that this would be the better of the four options, but I guess I'm just being a Homer apologist. It is always better to have patience, right?

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 09:06 AM
  #163
RJ8812*
Hellooooo ladiiiies
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,092
vCash: 500
It doesn't matter what Mason signed for because there are people out there that will ***** and complain about every move he makes for no real reason

RJ8812* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 09:10 AM
  #164
Hiesenberg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 3,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Exactly. There is a potential benefit to waiting, sure. But there is also a potential detriment. You have a couple of scenarios that could go down.

1) You wait, and he ***** the bed second half. Then you either get him for cheaper. Instead of $4.1 maybe he gets $3.1. You save $1 million. Good, for sure.

2) You wait, and he ***** the bed in the second half. You let him walk and now we have no real starter and have to overpay in UFA. Not ideal but not terrible, you don't want a goalie just to have a goalie, but you are stuck overpaying in UFA for a guy that likely isn't going to be worth it any way. Or you trade and get the same result, a guy you over pay for.

3) You wait, and he plays lights out. Now you are likely paying more for longer, or more for a one year deal until he gets to UFA status, depending on which direction both parties want to go. Not terrible, because if he is worth it, then go for it, but still, you are paying more. Maybe he gets $4.5-$5.1 for a year or two longer, or maybe he gets $4.5 for a year to get him to UFA depending on how things shake out.

4) You sign him when Homer did. Now you get him for a fair price and don't have to worry about anything else. Maybe it is a couple hundred thousand too much, maybe you got him for a couple hundred thousand less than what it would have cost.

People are going to try and tell me that option #4 is a BAD option? It would seem that this would be the better of the four options, but I guess I'm just being a Homer apologist. It is always better to have patience, right?
For this one....

Here is the UFA list:

http://capgeek.com/ufa-finder/?position_id=G

Anybody really stand out? I think Halak/Elliott are names you have to worry about because of the team that plays in front of them.

Hiesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 09:19 AM
  #165
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,596
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiesenberg View Post
For this one....

Here is the UFA list:

http://capgeek.com/ufa-finder/?position_id=G

Anybody really stand out? I think Halak/Elliott are names you have to worry about because of the team that plays in front of them.
Yeah that's what I'm saying. Sure, that is an option to let Mason walk and go after someone else, but you are either going to overpay for that person or get someone that is on the same level as Mason for around the same price. Six of one half dozen of the other. The contract is fine and the timing is fine. It isn't the greatest deal in the world, but there is no problem with it, unless you want to complain just to complain.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 09:25 AM
  #166
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 114,490
vCash: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
You'll always be in the minority if you aren't finding something wrong with a move made by Homer. There is nothing wrong with this deal at all, and even the people complaining about the deal aren't really complaining about the terms...they are complaining about the TIMING of the deal.
I wish there was an outlet on the internet where it's worth discussing and critiquing said transactions.

__________________
Philadelphia's Real Alternative
(ynotradio.net)

Stop Feeding the Rumor-Monger

"I wonder if Norstrom has Forsberg's spleen mounted on his wall." - KINGS17

My 50 Favorite Albums of 2014 (sorry it's late)
GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 09:30 AM
  #167
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,596
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
I wish there was an outlet on the internet where it's worth discussing and critiquing said transactions.
You've certainly found one right here at HFBoards, where there is something wrong with every single move ever made by the Flyers.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 09:47 AM
  #168
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 114,490
vCash: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
You've certainly found one right here at HFBoards, where there is something wrong with every single move ever made by the Flyers.
Good, then stop demonizing anyone who does it given you know what happens here. Or anywhere.


RT @twolinepass: mason's first 27 games w/ CBJ: .936 sv%. next 205: .899. first 27 games w/ PHI: .936. next 17: .890. defense isn't the problem.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 09:55 AM
  #169
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,596
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Good, then stop demonizing anyone who does it given you know what happens here. Or anywhere.
I'm not demonizing anyone for anything any more than someone demonizing someone else for agreeing with a move. I have no problem criticizing the team or the GM. But when your only complaint about a signing is the timing, you are grasping at straws searching for something to complain about.

If you don't like the move because you don't think Mason is the answer, I can understand that and really wouldn't have a problem with that argument. It is certainly a fair argument. If you think it is too much money, I'd likely disagree but again, at least there would be some sort of merit to the argument. But just to complain about the timing of the argument because there was a possibility that maybe he might have been had for maybe possibly less than what he got now but also maybe more than what he got now is just silly.


Quote:
RT @twolinepass: mason's first 27 games w/ CBJ: .936 sv%. next 205: .899. first 27 games w/ PHI: .936. next 17: .890. defense isn't the problem.
Interesting stat. Hopefully he bucks the trend and gets back on track.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 10:04 AM
  #170
BillDineen
Registered User
 
BillDineen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
That timing point is that if he continues with a .890 the rest of the season and ends up with a .906 sv% (assuming 20 games), he gets another 1 year 1.5m contract or similar, not the one he just signed.

BillDineen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 10:09 AM
  #171
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
so if you arent 100 percent on board with this deal then you are a "armchair GM"
umm wut?
Half the people on this site and even this sub-forum are very silly in that way.

It's impossible to criticize a move or analyze it without being demonized or called an armchair GM or whatever.

In reality nobody is upset at this signing or thinks it's terrible. There are just people pointing out that it isn't the best timing and that they should have waited, which is very true. It has nothing to do with anyone being physically upset or just trying to complain.

If people weren't aware, this site is made for hockey discussion and fan analysis. If some people had their way on here (not going to point out any names since it's against site rules) we'd just agree with literally everything and nothing would ever be talked about.

Garbage Goal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 10:27 AM
  #172
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,596
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillDineen View Post
That timing point is that if he continues with a .890 the rest of the season and ends up with a .906 sv% (assuming 20 games), he gets another 1 year 1.5m contract or similar, not the one he just signed.
Sure, definitely a possibility. But if he also plays better, you risk paying him more money on a possibly longer term. But that gets thrown out the window for some reason like it is not a real concern.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 10:53 AM
  #173
Hiesenberg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 3,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
I'm not demonizing anyone for anything any more than someone demonizing someone else for agreeing with a move. I have no problem criticizing the team or the GM. But when your only complaint about a signing is the timing, you are grasping at straws searching for something to complain about.

If you don't like the move because you don't think Mason is the answer, I can understand that and really wouldn't have a problem with that argument. It is certainly a fair argument. If you think it is too much money, I'd likely disagree but again, at least there would be some sort of merit to the argument. But just to complain about the timing of the argument because there was a possibility that maybe he might have been had for maybe possibly less than what he got now but also maybe more than what he got now is just silly.




Interesting stat. Hopefully he bucks the trend and gets back on track.
How is defense not the trend? Its been widely reported that columbus' defense was garbage.

Hiesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 10:55 AM
  #174
BillDineen
Registered User
 
BillDineen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Sure, definitely a possibility. But if he also plays better, you risk paying him more money on a possibly longer term. But that gets thrown out the window for some reason like it is not a real concern.
Only way he could get more at this point is to play lights out and win the Conn Smyth from his .915 now. I don't think anyone would complain about him getting more then. Other than that, I couldn't see him getting more.

BillDineen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2014, 10:55 AM
  #175
Hiesenberg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 3,918
vCash: 500
I know there are stats and there are eye tests.

I can't catch a lot of the games, but nobody seems to be trashing Mason even though his play has dipped. Tons of people basically said that Saturdays game was not even close to his fault that the defense was crap, and basically that's been the running concern lately, that the defense has just fallen apart.

Hiesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:18 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.