Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
I think this is why we aren't seeing teams throw as much money at goalies anymore. The deviation between skill levels of goalies just isn't that big anymore. When looking at Calgary's future, this finding also supposes that we shouldn't waste an early pick on a goaltender.
|
I don't think we're seeing that at all. List is below, I listed multiple goalies for teams that don't have a defined #1.
Playoff teams this year:
Sharks:
Niemi - 3.8M
Red Wings:
Howard - 5.3M
Bruins:
Rask - 7.0M
Pens:
Fleury - 5.0M
Blackhawks:
Crawford - 2.7M, goes up to 6M next year
Kings:
Quick - 5.8M
Habs:
Price - 6.5M
Blues:
Miller - 6.25M
Rangers:
Lundqvist - 6.9M, goes up to 8.5M next year
Ducks:
Hiller - 4.5M
Anderson - 925K, up to 1.2M next year
Stars:
Lehtonen - 5.9M
Avs:
Varlamov - 2.8M, goes up to 5.9M next year
Minnesota:
Backstrom - 3.4M
Bryz - 2.2M
Harding - 1.9M
Tampa:
Bishop - 2.3M
Lindback - 1.8M
Flyers:
Emery - 1.5M
Mason - 1.5M, goes up to 4.1M next year
The vast majority of the good teams still spend a significant amount of money on #1 goalies, and goaltending in general.
It doesn't matter if the deviation between goaltenders is narrow - it exists, and it translates to wins. It's why teams pay for it. Good goalies are paid on par with good forwards and defenders, and elite goalies are paid on par with elite forwards and defenders.