The Enigma of Wade Redden

When Wade Redden signed that 6 year, $39.5 million deal back in July, most of us cringed. Not because of Redden, but because of the length and the dollar amount committed. The general consensus was that if Redden could “return to form”, he would be worth it for the first few seasons.

The problem there is “returning to form”, just looking at his career stats, Redden was never a #1 defensemen. He has never broken 50 points in a season. He has one season of more than 10 goals, and four more 10 goal seasons. His career highs are:

17G (2003-2004)

40A (2005-2006)

50 points (2005-2006)

+35 (2005-2006)

Essentially, his career years sandwiched the lockout, when he was 26 and 28 years old. The point here is that even in his prime, Redden was never the #1 defensemen, he was never the Lidstrom or Leetch type. Redden, in his prime was a solid #2 defensemen with good offensive skills that could quarterback the powerplay.

It is safe to say that Redden hasn’t aged well. He’s lost a step, it comes with age, and his offensive skills have diminished slightly. He is still on pace for 4/28/32, which isn’t that far off from his previous two season totals. He is probably the 3rd best defensemen on this team, which isn’t far off from what I expected. He will probably put up anywhere from 30-40 points in the first 4 years of his contract, then regress some more.

“But Redden just doesn’t care, he is always coasting to the puck, and just doesn’t seem to try.”
I think that could be the furthest from the truth. Redden has never been the firey guy, the one who wears his emotions on his sleeve. He is a much more passive personality, but don’t mistake that for coasting and complacency. Redden still puts as much effort into his game today as he did three, five, and ten years ago. The difference between this year and his previous years is that he is simply not as fast as he used to be.

“But Redden is getting paid $6.75 million a year to be the #3 defensemen? For that money, he should be the #1 defensemen and start playing like it.”
Let me answer this with a question. Who do you blame for the outrageous contract, the GM that offered the contract, or the player who signed it?
.
.
If you answered the GM that offered the contract, then you are correct. If Sather was dangling $40 million in front of me to play defense for the Rangers, I’d sign that contract too.

“But Redden is -6, no defensemen should be -6, especially someone paid so well and is the #1 defensemen on the team“.
Redden is not the teams #1 defensemen. He’s the #2/#3 defensemen. That said, he shouldn’t be -6. But you can’t single out Redden on a team of underachieving players. The only Rangers defensemen who is on the positive side of the +/- stat is Staal. The next best? Mara and Girardi at -3. So it’s not like the abyssmal defense is all Redden’s fault. It’s not like he’s a -13. Singling out Redden because of his contract (see above) is a pointless argument.

Redden is what we expected him to be, an aging veteran defensemen who is overpaid. It’s not his fault that he’s not in his prime or that Sather offered him that ridiculous contract.

The second half of the season has always been the better half for the Rangers. Hopefully that will rub off on Redden, and I think we will all be happy with 30+ points and even +/- at the end of the season. It’s what he’s been averaging the past two seasons.

If you want to blame anyone for that contract, or for not going after the best free agent defensemen from 2008, blame Sather.