Almost every contract that comes out these days gets the "overpaid" tag here.
In most cases, a team is trying to pay the least while a player is trying to get the most. Sometimes, a lot more goes into a deal than just on ice performance.
Let's use fake player Moe Szyslak as an example.
He's a second line center. He's good, but not great. The Isotopes want to keep him, but he isn't really sure if he wants to stay there. The Isotopes are at a disadvantage, because many teams are looking for a second line center. Now, the Isos have not only to pay Szyslak, they have to offer him more than he'd get playing for Charlestown or St. Peter's. It's not a problem for the Isos because they have the cap room and the money.
Is Szyslak overpaid? I don't think so. He may have taken less to play elsewhere, but the Isos wanted him so they got him.
Now let's throw a different look at that. Let's say Szyslak is 25 years old. He's looking for a two year deal so he can frackin' rake as a 27 year old UFA. Smitherton wants him on the team for much longer. Szyslak says he'll take $4M per year for two years. Smitherton doesn't want the two year deal, only to have him walk. They want a four year deal, maybe five. Szyslak will take $4M per for two. Smitherton offers him a five year deal worth $30M. Instead of getting $4M, Szyslak is now making six.
The difference is that Szyslak is giving up cashing in as a UFA for three more years. The surface would tell anyone that Moe isn't a $6M/per player, and the screams of overpaid would begin. The truth is that it's a great deal for both sides.
When new deals are signed, make sure you take into account that there are probably other factors involved prior to screaming about the overpaid player.