: Larry Brooks:
Sather must decide: Is dealing Girardi best for Rangers?
View Single Post
01-17-2014, 07:55 AM
Now we wait.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia, PA
Originally Posted by
Let's look at some of the top teams, currently, in the NHL:
Anaheim has roughly $30M dedicated to 5 players.
Pittsburgh has $32.5M dedicated to 5 players.
San Jose $30.1M dedicated to 5 players.
Boston $30.1M dedicated to 5 players.
And this is RIGHT NOW, with a cap that's $10M+ lower than it's going to be next season.
You PAY your core. That's how you contend.
Selectively pulling an ES goal stat out of your ass doesn't mean much. In today's NHL, special teams plays a huge role in most games and most playoff games. Lundqvist has found his form, we have 4 pretty solid lines, and we're coming around defensively. Is this team, right now, a deadline seller? I don't think so. Are we a top contender like Anaheim and St. Louis? No. Are we right in the mix in a pretty weak Eastern Conference? Hell yes.
I don't trade those two guys. Especially Girardi. Fantasizing about draft picks that might or might not turn into something instead of having a top pairing minutes-eater like Girardi and a solid captain that plays top 6, kills PK, plays on the PP, and is a team leader is just that. Fantasizing. If these guys were 34 or 35 years old, I probably do it. They aren't. They are in they're prime and, presumably, both want to remain Rangers.
Difference: all of those teams have the money tied in players who are worth it. Nash isn't worth his pay. Callahan and Girardi won't be. Hank is great but overpaid a bit, worth it. McD is worth it. Richards will be bought out.
Also when they are 34 or 35 they aren't going to be worth ****. Of course you would trade them then. Unfortunately once the Rangers over pay them no one will want them for anything of significant value. That's why you trade them now. Maximize value and try something new. They are the old core. This obsession with overpaying them because they were the core of a team run completely different under Torts is absurd. You pay them because they fit going forward and will be worth their next contract.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Ail