Michael Leighton signs with PHI for 2 years, $3.1M

I frequently read things like this and find myself wondering if there is not some inherent marketing value in signing a guy like Leighton as opposed to some other retread.

At the end of the day, sports franchises are about making money, which means selling tickets or attracting eyeballs. And while there is little doubt that winning is the number one attraction to fill those seats or draw those eyeballs, around the margins there must be something else to sell. And I wonder how that influences management when anyone with a calculator and a free agent list could do the same math as here.

But if you are Philly, and you are only going to sign a marginal goaltender at best, and you have the cap space, does the extra million or so per season to bring in last years hero, he of the three straight shutouts, the third only all time hockey come back from 3-0, the guy who put the team that needed a shootout win on the last day of the season to get into the playoffs and took them to the Final. I think about whether if selling that story for another year or two doesn’t get you an extra million in revenue.

And I wonder if that isn’t a good reason.

Not much room for disagreement on this one. Good for Leighton, not so much for the Flyers.

Ugh, people who are all on the Leighton bandwagon piss me off. Sorry, to any reading here.

He had a great season. Why does that mean he deserves a contract? Why does that mean he deserves a multi-year deal? Why does he deserve a 150% raise? Why does he need to be signed to this deal before 10 goalies hit the market and dilute their value??

Sorry, it just doesn’t make sense. If he’s the starter in Philly, fine. Good bargain if the savings are spent wisely. But if he’s the backup, why pay him at least $600k more to replace Brian Boucher?

If this deal was signed a week from now, I’d be fine. Signing it today pisses me off.

So because he didn’t arrive as a talent until this year, his salary should forever be tied to his performance as a back-up goaltender on losing teams from 2003-2009?

$1.55 million for the goaltender with the strongest performance through this year’s playoffs. Are people expecting his agent to push for the standard 2% cost-of-living increase that you get as the fry guy at Burger King? The way people are reacting, you’d think he got DiPietro’s contract.

Not to mention, “Hey Mike. Good job. Here’s a little something extra in your next few pay checks.” Is that so wrong? My God.

Whoever the Flyers sign as their starter will go down with something at some point in the season, as they always do. And then Leighton will step in, go on a string of wins, and keep the Flyers ship righted until the starter returns. Is $1.55 million really that much to pay for solid goaltending depth for a team with Stanley Cup aspirations? How many goalies did we go through last year? This isn’t an area where we really need some serious depth?

Go ahead and ban me for the use of sarcasm and a word I hear out of my two year old four times daily. No one will accuse you of having a thin skin. /SARCASM

If you’re so convince of the purity of the data, run the same analysis on skaters.

SAME*** date range.

COMPARABLE*** roles (like a 3rd line player, since my argument has revolved around Leighton being the deserving recipient of a well-earned modest raise) TOP 10 means TOP players on teams, and is not in line with what I have been arguing (He’s a really good BACKUP)..

If you don’t find several examples proving exactly what I’ve argued, I’ll eat my hat.

Until then, I appreciate your analysis, but it looks far from complete.

What I’m talking about is if you used the SAME date range for SIMILAR player roles, you’ll find plenty examples of skaters who received similar raises in salary after their first good year on the score sheet.

I brought up skaters who have benefited from similar increases in salary. You countered with an example using two years of data rather than the eight years you used for your goaltender analysis. That seems unfair.

The example you returned was of Top 10 players. Considering I was talking about a BACK UP goaltender, that is NOT an apples-to-apples comparison. A BACK UP goaltender and a third line skater? That’s a more appropriate context.

And I’m certain that if you look from 2003-2010 (not 2008-2010 as you offered) for players in similar roles (that is to say SECONDARY players such as back up goaltenders and 3rd line skaters – and NOT Top 10 scorers as you offered in your answer), then you will most certainly find plenty of players that got salary increases in line with what the Flyers gave to Leighton after finally producing for the first time in their careers.

All I was asking for was some objectivity and a comparison made in an appropriate context. I really can’t explain it any more simply than that.

Niitymaki just signed in SJ for $4M/2 years. The market has spoken, and the Flyers got Leighton at below market value.

Players without track records often fail. That is fact.

If this were poker instead of hockey then it’d be a no-brainer, winning once or even going on a short run isn’t an indicator of future winning. Apparently hockey is rocket science by comparison.