View Single Post
Old
08-12-2004, 12:41 AM
  #103
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
first off, i respect your opinions a lot. however i really don't think there will be a salary cap. i believe a stiff luxury tax is what both sides will agree upon. i have no hard, concrete evidence to support this but it's my gut feeling because i have had, still have and will have a hard time believing the owners can get a hard salary cap. i'm in the see-it-to-believe-it philosophy on that.
See I gotta disagree on that and think Larry Brooks of all people brought up the point best. Betteman's butt is on the line this time. There is A LOT riding on this contract situation, probably more than any labor situation in recent memory.

If Betteman fails to get a hard cap or at least a VERY stiff luxury tax system his job is done. Also i will almost gurantee that you will see some clubs folding. If clubs fold that means there are less jobs. Despite their positioning, the NHLPA and almost all of the players know it.

Now if indeed their is a STIFF luxury tax don't think for a moment it will just be money. The current talk right now is your talking about draft picks. The higher above the limit, the higher the draft pick.

Quote:
2nd, i disagree that nylander will be impossible to move contract-wise. if he's beat up and/or unproductive for next season then there's a legit point that he would be hard to trade. but if he has a solid season (and we all agree 55+ points would be solid) then he would be very much in demand to be dealt. i don't think the rangers plan whatsoever to deal him for the next nhl season. in year 2 or 3 perhaps but not next season.

But the big problem is that word "if" when talking about Nylander's season. That is a pretty big "if".

Thats why i have problem with the specifics of the deal. I don't mind a one year deal with a team option for two, but THREE guranteed years puts him at closer to 35 when all is said and done. I gotta tell you, I just don't think Nylander is quite in that high of a class of player to still be very productive into his mid 30's. Just one man's opinion though.

Quote:
and somehow even if they would like to deal him in the next season i believe they could because:

- centers are like defensemen...there will always be a serious need for them on some contender anywhere no matter how good or bad they play

- centers who are playmakers (like nylander is) can play for a long time if they want, which is why guys like him have significant value

- and finally, i would have never thought that deVries could have been dealt in his very first year of a 4-year contract last season, ESPECIALLY with his salary...but lo and behold, he was in pretty high demand by the trade deadline
Few differences in the situation. Devries wasn't hurt and Devries would be almost 2 years younger at the time of a trade {assuming that Nylander IF moved would be moved at next years deadline at the earliest}. And all of this is assuming Nylander can stay healthy and productive for the year {his age, the rangers history and even league history suggest it probably isnt the horse to bet on}.

Also Devries was moved at a time where a lot of teams finally said "screw it, we dont know the future so let's go for it". With a more understood labor situation i just don't see those kind of deals happening.

Devries also has a cup and some serious playoff minutes under his belt. What exactly is Nylander's selling point in a scenario like that? That's where it gets tricky.

I also don't think Nylander is going to be that valuable of an asset into his mid 30's. And again that is assuming the big risk that he actually produces next season. If not the argument itself goes completely out the window because then we can't even point to that.

But that still doesn't even touch on the fact that at the end of the day we needed Nylander because we needed someone to play with Jagr, not because we necessarily wanted him. Once the Rangers realized they couldn't move Jagr they needed to go out and get a center for him. Not for anything but that's not the mindset I want as we try to actually build something.

IF Nylander produces than yes MAYBE we MIGHT be able to move him at some point, but IF he doesn't you won't be able to give him away.

I just don't see how a team that is rebuilding signs a guy to a THREE year contract at this point with so many uncertainties. This team never ceases to amaze me.

We can't afford bonuses for Montoya, or to buy Lundqvists contract for $450,000. but we can sign a 32 year old center, who played 20 some odd games last year and at BEST, IF everything falls into place MIGHT get us 15 goals and 55 points for 3 million dollars a year for a guranteed 3 years.

To quote Motley Crue, "It's the same old situation".

Edge is offline