HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Proposal: NYR/Phoenix (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1339693)

Vitto79 02-02-2013 05:14 AM

NYR/Phoenix
 
minor move

Rupp.............1 yr left at 1.5
3rd rounder

for

Gordon.............UFA
Bissonette......one yr left at 700Kish

Rangers could shed some salary for next yr to a cap floor team. get a few depth F for this yr.

Coyotes take the 3rd and Rupp's leadership into their room

DevilChuk* 02-02-2013 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vitto79 (Post 58882077)
minor move

Rupp.............1 yr left at 1.5
3rd rounder

for

Gordon.............UFA
Bissonette......one yr left at 700Kish

Rangers could shed some salary for next yr to a cap floor team. get a few depth F for this yr.

Coyotes take the 3rd and Rupp's leadership into their room

Why wouldn't the Rangers just buy out Rupp and save the third? Hell, they can even bury him and eat 600k (i.e. less than Bissonette would cost them). Makes no sense from a cap or depth point of view IMO.

BBKers 02-02-2013 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vitto79 (Post 58882077)
minor move

Rupp.............1 yr left at 1.5
3rd rounder

for

Gordon.............UFA
Bissonette......one yr left at 700Kish

Rangers could shed some salary for next yr to a cap floor team. get a few depth F for this yr.

Coyotes take the 3rd and Rupp's leadership into their room

Rupp for Bisonette straight up
No takebacks

BBKers 02-02-2013 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilChuk (Post 58882351)
Why wouldn't the Rangers just buy out Rupp and save the third? Hell, they can even bury him and eat 600k (i.e. less than Bissonette would cost them). Makes no sense from a cap or depth point of view IMO.

The Rangers are going to want to retain the option of using the compliance buyout until after the 2013/2014 season. Using it on Rupp would be a total waste IMO. Not going to divulge on this subject any further, will just be stirring up a huge storm of cow manure if this goes in the direction where it might go... Just saying

DevilChuk* 02-02-2013 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKers (Post 58882509)
The Rangers are going to want to retain the option of using the compliance buyout until after the 2013/2014 season. Using it on Rupp would be a total waste IMO. Not going to divulge on this subject any further, will just be stirring up a huge storm of cow manure if this goes in the direction where it might go... Just saying

Not sure what you're trying to say in the latter half of your post but I was just pointing out that the OP's suggestion that the Rangers would trade a third along with Rupp to save some cap space is a bad one considering they could 1) use a buyout on Rupp if they wish or 2) bury Rupp in the minors if they wish

I don't expect the Rangers to use that second compliance buyout unless Richards regresses dramatically in the next year and a half

Vitto79 02-02-2013 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilChuk (Post 58882679)
Not sure what you're trying to say in the latter half of your post but I was just pointing out that the OP's suggestion that the Rangers would trade a third along with Rupp to save some cap space is a bad one considering they could 1) use a buyout on Rupp if they wish or 2) bury Rupp in the minors if they wish

I don't expect the Rangers to use that second compliance buyout unless Richards regresses dramatically in the next year and a half

I see that your saying they could just buy out Rupp but I think they may want to hold onto that 2nd buyout and may move a pick to do so. Plus its not just dealing a 3rd if you get a few depth F back as well

DevilChuk* 02-02-2013 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vitto79 (Post 58883185)
I see that your saying they could just buy out Rupp but I think they may want to hold onto that 2nd buyout and may move a pick to do so. Plus its not just dealing a 3rd if you get a few depth F back as well

So why not send Rupp down and have his cap hit be 1.5M-900k=600k instead of replacing him with a player with a cap hit of 800k?

If its for pure cap reasons, you're paying a 3rd round pick to absorb an extra 200k in cap hit. Makes no sense.

XX 02-02-2013 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilChuk (Post 58883603)
So why not send Rupp down and have his cap hit be 1.5M-900k=600k instead of replacing him with a player with a cap hit of 800k?

If its for pure cap reasons, you're paying a 3rd round pick to absorb an extra 200k in cap hit. Makes no sense.

Boyd Gordon is actually a useful hockey player. Coyotes say no.

Kris Chreider 02-02-2013 08:57 AM

No real point to this trade. Rupp is UFA soon anyways and he's not coming back.

Mikos87 02-02-2013 09:03 AM

I would love to get Gordon. I'd keep Rupp unless we were getting a heavy weight that can play, and is a better skater than him. But Gordon is a guy I wanted traded for last year. Doubt the Coyotes move him, but I'd give up a mid level prospect and/ or picks for him in a jiffy.

Vitto79 02-02-2013 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilChuk (Post 58883603)
So why not send Rupp down and have his cap hit be 1.5M-900k=600k instead of replacing him with a player with a cap hit of 800k?

If its for pure cap reasons, you're paying a 3rd round pick to absorb an extra 200k in cap hit. Makes no sense.

So you want dead cap space? From what I understand the AHL salary that counts is around 375K so Rupps hit would be more than a million, may be wrong on that.

If he is sent down he is automatically going to be replaced on the roster with a player making around 800K anyways. Most players make atleast that, even Gilroy, Eminger do........not sure what's the big deal in moving the guy in a deal with a 3rd rounder to get a useful player like a Gordon to help now

Vitto79 02-02-2013 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris Chreider (Post 58883815)
No real point to this trade. Rupp is UFA soon anyways and he's not coming back.

He's a UFA after next season and they need to sign McDonaugh and Stepan who are going to get a big raise. Hagelin is struggling so he may not get as much but for the Rangers sake I hope he turns it around this yr, plenty of time.

They need to shed salary, not a big one but a smaller one like Rupp that I think can be moved still

DevilChuk* 02-02-2013 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vitto79 (Post 58884101)
So you want dead cap space? From what I understand the AHL salary that counts is around 375K so Rupps hit would be more than a million, may be wrong on that.

If he is sent down he is automatically going to be replaced on the roster with a player making around 800K anyways. Most players make atleast that, even Gilroy, Eminger do........not sure what's the big deal in moving the guy in a deal with a 3rd rounder to get a useful player like a Gordon to help now

900k is the AHL salary that counts.

Rupp's hit would be 600k. If the difference between acquiring a UFA/trade asset is 600k of cap space, then the Rangers are in cap trouble to begin with.

Vitto79 02-02-2013 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilChuk (Post 58884205)
900k is the AHL salary that counts.

Rupp's hit would be 600k. If the difference between acquiring a UFA/trade asset is 600k of cap space, then the Rangers are in cap trouble to begin with.

hey I hope your right......so for example Haley has a 1 way NHL deal at I think 600K next yr, does that mean if he's in the minors its not on the NHL cap?

DevilChuk* 02-02-2013 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vitto79 (Post 58884471)
hey I hope your right......so for example Haley has a 1 way NHL deal at I think 600K next yr, does that mean if he's in the minors its not on the NHL cap?

I'm pretty sure that's how it works. So yea, he wouldn't be on the cap at all.

Quote:

Teams also can't bury players in the minor leagues for salary-cap reasons, as the New York Rangers have done with Wade Redden and his $5.6 million cap hit. Under the new rules, a player earning more than $900,000 who is sent to the minors still will have his cap hit count against the salary cap.
I think the way it works is the team is given a cap credit of 900k and then anything over that amount counts against the cap. can't find any good examples on capgeek though.

rt 02-02-2013 11:30 AM

Gordon is tremendously valuable to Phoenix's playoff efforts.

If you want Bissonnette, take him for free. He's all you.

E! can shot a reality show "Biznasty in the Big Apple".

Seriously, Biz is a pretty darn good back checker. He's really is good in his own zone. He can angle guys off the puck, win battles, and chip it out shockingly effectively. On the forecheck, though, he's worthless. He won't cycle because he's too scared to be caught up ice if it goes the other way. He's like a reverse cherry picker. He will wait at the blueline, and not engage offensively, because he wants to keep good defensive positioning. He's the exact opposite if Nikita Filatov.

Anyway, Dave Tippett looks for a strong forecheck out of his bottom six. He wants puck possession and
cycling. Paul Bissonnette is a terrible fit on a Dave Tippett team. On another team, I think he could be a decently effective 4th line NHL player. He will fight anybody, he's good in the room and he will never hurt your team defensively because he's actually solid in that department.

You can have him for free.

Vitto79 02-02-2013 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rt (Post 58887831)
Gordon is tremendously valuable to Phoenix's playoff efforts.

If you want Bissonnette, take him for free. He's all you.

E! can shot a reality show "Biznasty in the Big Apple".

Seriously, Biz is a pretty darn good back checker. He's really is good in his own zone. He can angle guys off the puck, win battles, and chip it out shockingly effectively. On the forecheck, though, he's worthless. He won't cycle because he's too scared to be caught up ice if it goes the other way. He's like a reverse cherry picker. He will wait at the blueline, and not engage offensively, because he wants to keep good defensive positioning. He's the exact opposite if Nikita Filatov.

Anyway, Dave Tippett looks for a strong forecheck out of his bottom six. He wants puck possession and
cycling. Paul Bissonnette is a terrible fit on a Dave Tippett team. On another team, I think he could be a decently effective 4th line NHL player. He will fight anybody, he's good in the room and he will never hurt your team defensively because he's actually solid in that department.

You can have him for free.

I wouldnt really want him for free,lol........I rather send Rupp over otherwise Bissonnette is basically useless to the Rangers as well. He would fight a ton in the Atlantic though. Any other UFA F in Phoenix that can be had?

Machinehead 02-02-2013 02:03 PM

I'll drive Rupp to the airport.

Joey Bones 02-02-2013 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKers (Post 58882497)
Rupp for Bisonette straight up
No takebacks

Yes!! Sign the papers!!

Kimahri 02-02-2013 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Bones (Post 58904473)
Yes!! Sign the papers!!

Never thought I would see someone so excited at the thought of getting Paul Bissonnette.

Gaborikthebeast 02-02-2013 04:31 PM

Nyr/phx
 
Asham for Bissonette+Future Considerations


Rangers get rid of this Terrible Players, and add a Good fighter, and Futures

Coyotes do this to add another Vet into the Room who could be good on Quiet PHX team

rt 02-02-2013 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vitto79 (Post 58887943)
I wouldnt really want him for free,lol........I rather send Rupp over otherwise Bissonnette is basically useless to the Rangers as well. He would fight a ton in the Atlantic though. Any other UFA F in Phoenix that can be had?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaborikthebeast (Post 58908235)
Asham for Bissonette+Future Considerations


Rangers get rid of this Terrible Players, and add a Good fighter, and Futures

Coyotes do this to add another Vet into the Room who could be good on Quiet PHX team

No. No.

You can have him for nothing or not at all.

Machinehead 02-02-2013 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimahri (Post 58907495)
Never thought I would see someone so excited at the thought of getting Paul Bissonnette.

You haven't seen Rupp lately have you? :laugh:

Kimahri 02-02-2013 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Machinehead (Post 58916025)
You haven't seen Rupp lately have you? :laugh:

I don't understand how Rupp being a poor player makes Bissonnette a better player. I'd rather not have either one.

rt 02-02-2013 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimahri (Post 58918207)
I don't understand how Rupp being a poor player makes Bissonnette a better player. I'd rather not have either one.

I'm good with Chipchura and Johnson as 4th line wingers. You only need two.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:43 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.