View Single Post
09-23-2013, 03:16 PM
HFBoards Sponsor
GAGLine's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 11,355
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Off Sides View Post
The parameters the Rangers came up with for Stepan were wrong from the get go, they should have done what other teams are doing with their core players and locked him up long term.
If that's the argument you want to make, I have no problem with it. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I wouldn't have been against Stepan getting a long term deal.

The whole reason the Rangers are so set on a two year deal is because that is all the space they have left for this year and next.
This is where your argument falls apart. You keep insisting that Stepan is only getting 2 years because the Rangers didn't leave themselves enough space to sign him to a longer term. You've got your cause and effect backwards. They only have that much space left because they never intended to give Stepan more than 2 years. If they had planned to give him a long term deal, they would have left themselves more cap space.

Like I said, if you disagree with the decision to give him a bridge contract rather than a long term deal, that's fine. But that decision was made months ago. It has nothing to do with how much cap space they have left.

GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote