HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Brooks On Sather's Moves

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-13-2008, 07:56 AM
  #1
nyrage
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 326
vCash: 500
Brooks On Sather's Moves

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07132008...655.htm?page=2



He GM gave Naslund, who will be 35 at the end of the month and is coming off two consecutive disappointing seasons in Vancouver, a full no-move clause.

It also seems Wade Redden needed a sweetener to take his $39M, seven-year deal. So the GM gave the defenseman the annual right to give management a list of eight teams to which he cannot be traded, and it will just be unfortunate if Atlanta should want him in a deal for Ilya Kovalchuk, won't it?

The Rangers have way too many marginal forwards in the $1M range. Is Pat Rissmiller at $1M really necessary? Unless Fred Sjostrom is going to be a regular third-liner, there was no reason to qualify him at nearly $814,000, and if he does play on the top three lines, then Ryan Callahan or Petr Prucha or Nigel Dawes or Lauri Korpikoski or Aaron Voros ($1M) won't. Where in the world does salary arbitration-seeking Dan Fritsche fit in?

nyrage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 08:11 AM
  #2
abev
HFBoards Sponsor
 
abev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,581
vCash: 500
Did Brooks happen to mention that the "Rangers Blueprint" he wrote about 2 weeks ago was a complete fabrication?

abev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 08:23 AM
  #3
Jaromir Jagr
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,263
vCash: 500
Really don't like Brooks but I have to say that he's not in the wrong here..

Don't know why Naslund was given a NMC, and Redden shouldn't of got a NTC - at least a partial one. At these prices, they should be expendable.

Jaromir Jagr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 08:27 AM
  #4
Turambar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 1,724
vCash: 500
Unbelievable.

Turambar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 08:47 AM
  #5
squishy
Registered User
 
squishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,149
vCash: 500
I really, really hate it when I agree with Larry Brooks, but he's dead on with this one. This is two summers running that I think Sather's made a massive error in judgment with his free agent signings.

squishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 08:54 AM
  #6
Bird Law
Daisy's back.
 
Bird Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Country Roads
Country: United States
Posts: 71,429
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Bird Law
I don't really see a problem with Naslund's contract.

At worst, he's Shanahan in his 2nd year. Effective, but not nearly enough.

At best, he regains his form after playing with scrubs the last few years.

I don't see the huge problem.

Definitely don't like the partial NTC for Redden, though. That's just retarded.

Bird Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 08:56 AM
  #7
NorthlandPro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 318
vCash: 500
When Brooks talks about the internal issues facing the NHL he is accurate, when he starts talking about teams and their on ice performance he is lost. He is a horrible beat writer. Brooks is like the NY Times, very bias in his writing. He won't tell you that the reason NT clauses were added is that it is a standard operating procedure in UFA contracts in the marketplace. He also won't mention how NT clauses are irrelivant, many GMs today just pressure the player into yielding thier NT clause. Go ask Dan Boyle and his recently minted NT clause. Ask him how far it got him? Brooks is a rectum when it comes to writing about teams. I won't be surprised if he is actually Eklund! They are about equally inaacurate.

NorthlandPro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 08:59 AM
  #8
Bird Law
Daisy's back.
 
Bird Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Country Roads
Country: United States
Posts: 71,429
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Bird Law
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
When Brooks talks about the internal issues facing the NHL he is accurate, when he starts talking about teams and their on ice performance he is lost. He is a horrible beat writer. Brooks is like the NY Times, very bias in his writing. He won't tell you that the reason NT clauses were added is that it is a standard operating procedure in UFA contracts in the marketplace. He also won't mention how NT clauses are irrelivant, many GMs today just pressure the player into yielding thier NT clause. Go ask Dan Boyle and his recently minted NT clause. Ask him how far it got him? Brooks is a rectum when it comes to writing about teams. I won't be surprised if he is actually Eklund! They are about equally inaacurate.
Maybe you weren't around for the whole year last year, but Redden had a NTC and refused to move it multiple times. McCabe the same. Sundin the same.

There are a lot of players who use it to their full advantage.

Don't just skip over them to make a point.

Bird Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 09:01 AM
  #9
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
When Brooks talks about the internal issues facing the NHL he is accurate, when he starts talking about teams and their on ice performance he is lost. He is a horrible beat writer. Brooks is like the NY Times, very bias in his writing. He won't tell you that the reason NT clauses were added is that it is a standard operating procedure in UFA contracts in the marketplace. He also won't mention how NT clauses are irrelivant, many GMs today just pressure the player into yielding thier NT clause. Go ask Dan Boyle and his recently minted NT clause. Ask him how far it got him? Brooks is a rectum when it comes to writing about teams. I won't be surprised if he is actually Eklund! They are about equally inaacurate.
Yea he's a dink.............man it must be terrible that the team has depth now and competition for spots in camp..........terrible!................plus they are one of the teams that can pull off a 3 for 1 deal if they need and they have more chips than most to move at the deadline

Vitto79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 09:11 AM
  #10
Jaromir Jagr
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
I don't really see a problem with Naslund's contract.

At worst, he's Shanahan in his 2nd year. Effective, but not nearly enough.

At best, he regains his form after playing with scrubs the last few years.

I don't see the huge problem.

Definitely don't like the partial NTC for Redden, though. That's just retarded.
I see a big difference between Naslund and Shanahan. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited to have Naslund here, I believe he will regain form... something you probably have to do when you start playing with players who don't belong in the AHL. However, Naslund is fast. Naslund has a game that you can be excited to watch. I was never excited watching Shanahan, ever. The high point in his Rangers career was the fight with Brashear. Even the shootouts became boring after a while. Shanny was way too slow to keep up with anyone, his game diminished so much from 06-07 to 07-08, and he was a disaster to watch.

I'm praying Naslund isn't anything like the declining Shanahan.

I don't agree with giving him a NMC, but I don't agree with giving most players a NMC/NTC - so that's just me. The availability of movement should be there in case he is a bust, and that's on Sather.

Jaromir Jagr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 09:37 AM
  #11
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
I don't really see a problem with Naslund's contract.

At worst, he's Shanahan in his 2nd year. Effective, but not nearly enough.

At best, he regains his form after playing with scrubs the last few years.

I don't see the huge problem.

Definitely don't like the partial NTC for Redden, though. That's just retarded.
Eh, I'd bet most of these UFA signings have these kind of things though. Most players seem to be demanding them, and you might not be able to sign anyone if you're not willing to at least give out a partial no trade clause.

Besides, I know the real reason people don't like the NT clauses is that then players can't be moved at the deadline for more prospects

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 09:48 AM
  #12
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,060
vCash: 500
Don't really mind the Naslund NMC - he was signed to fill a hole in the top 6 for two years and then roll off the books.

Disappointed to hear that Redden got even a partial one. Of course, that still leaves 21 teams that he CAN be traded to, but still it shouldn't have been necessary. Of course, Brooks' example of Atlanta is just silly, because if they do trade Kovalchuk, it'll be for guys under 30.

BTW, this is the first I've heard of these terms - anyone got slightly more substantial conversation than an offhand comment from Uncle Larry? Something with a source, for example?

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:01 AM
  #13
Blueblood 2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
No big deal on two years with Naslund. Redden deal wasn't that good to start out with, so picking 8 teams a year doesn't make it much worse. Brooks just likes to stir the pot and will switch on the dime if things head in a different direction. Redden can't put Hartford on his list. That is where he is headed if it doesn't work out, or to Atlanta on his way through waivers. Just like the Boyle threat.

Blueblood 2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:02 AM
  #14
SML
Registered User
 
SML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,742
vCash: 500
This is ridiculous. A guy like Naslund came here to be on a contender. While I think there are better teams out there, our defense and goaltending should make us at least a playoff team. Why would you trade naslund anyway, unless things go terribly wrong and we're completely out? In which case, Naslund would probably agree to a trade anyway. We've proven this year, that we're not going to unload "rentals" when we have a shot ourselves. We could have gotten alot for Shanny, Straka, Jagr, Malik, etc at the deadline, but we kept them for our own chances. So Naslund will probably be with us for the full two years regardless. As far as Redden for Kovalchuk, I almost fell out of my chair. Only in the mind of larry Brooks could you come up with a scenario where a guy who was an UFA is getting traded for one of the 3 best goal scorers in the game. If Waddell even answered the phone to hear that offer, he should be fired.

SML is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:05 AM
  #15
Turambar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 1,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post

BTW, this is the first I've heard of these terms - anyone got slightly more substantial conversation than an offhand comment from Uncle Larry? Something with a source, for example?
I've been trying to find something about this since the contracts were signed, this is the first I've heard of it. I even spoke to Weinman about it, he indicated he didn't know and doubted that information was even released to the press. It's therefore possible that this is Brooks just making things up, something we've seen in the past.

Turambar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:09 AM
  #16
BrianLeetch2
Registered User
 
BrianLeetch2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Toms River NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 690
vCash: 803
Send a message via AIM to BrianLeetch2 Send a message via MSN to BrianLeetch2
Quote:
Originally Posted by SML View Post
This is ridiculous. A guy like Naslund came here to be on a contender. While I think there are better teams out there, our defense and goaltending should make us at least a playoff team. Why would you trade naslund anyway, unless things go terribly wrong and we're completely out? In which case, Naslund would probably agree to a trade anyway. We've proven this year, that we're not going to unload "rentals" when we have a shot ourselves. We could have gotten alot for Shanny, Straka, Jagr, Malik, etc at the deadline, but we kept them for our own chances. So Naslund will probably be with us for the full two years regardless. As far as Redden for Kovalchuk, I almost fell out of my chair. Only in the mind of larry Brooks could you come up with a scenario where a guy who was an UFA is getting traded for one of the 3 best goal scorers in the game. If Waddell even answered the phone to hear that offer, he should be fired.
very good point....naslund still has plenty in the tank and for 2 years at 4 mil is a good deal even with the NTC....The Redden deal on the other hand WOO!!!

BrianLeetch2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:42 AM
  #17
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,961
vCash: 500
hate this........neither of them should have a NMC..........at all......i like both of those players, and i liked the signings, but what the hell is sather thinking?.....NMC for older players now will handcuff him later on

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:44 AM
  #18
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
I wonder how many people are hemorraging over being forced to agree with either Brooks or Sather.

DutchShamrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:49 AM
  #19
FutureGM97
Registered User
 
FutureGM97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Connecticut, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,832
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FutureGM97
Naslund's NMC doesn't bother me really. He is here for 2 years to be a top 6 winger...its not like we were going to get rid of him anyway. As for Redden if he can turn his play back up to wat it was then I really don't care if he got a limited NTC. Now that he has the contract he wanted hopefully he will play the way used to. Lets not call these bad signings until we at least give these guys a chance to earn them.

FutureGM97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 10:54 AM
  #20
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,961
vCash: 500
i just dont understand why he had to give them to him.....now 4 players on the team have NMC's?.....if anything happens, like brooks says and they want redden+ for kovalchuk in 2 years and the rangers cant send him because of his NMC sather will be kicking himself.......its not like he didnt give him enough money to give him the extra NMC

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 11:01 AM
  #21
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Really the only difference between Naslund and Shanahan is that Naslund can still skate.

So, you have to figure they will be at least the same in production, but it will be less painful to watch Naslund, because he is still mobile.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 11:03 AM
  #22
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,961
vCash: 500
naslunds i dont have a problem with because he is 35 and he came for less money.....however redden got paid more than many people thought he would and for a longer duration, so why did he need to get a NMC?

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 11:18 AM
  #23
frankthefrowner
Registered User
 
frankthefrowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,651
vCash: 500
What 4 players have an NMC... I bieleve Drury and Naslund are the only ones, Gomez and Redden have NTC's i bieleve, which still how them to be moved down the minors and Reddens is a partial NTC, thats really not that big a deal cause it would be teams not in contention and I doubt those teams would want him anyway.

frankthefrowner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 11:25 AM
  #24
SML
Registered User
 
SML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,742
vCash: 500
I have no problem with the limited NMC for Redden. If you think about it, any player could refuse to report if they really were dead set about going. If they made it public before the deal, it would effectively kill the deal anyway. I wonder if the clause would stay in effect if he were traded? Say we want to trade him to Los Angeles, and he refuses. Could we three way him to say, Columbus, who would then trade him to L.A.? It's the outright no movement clauses, like the "Toronto five" had, that really tie your hands.

SML is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2008, 12:13 PM
  #25
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,298
vCash: 500
Brooks is just sour because his "Jagr + Sundin = Cup" scenario didn't come to fruition. In what world is Atlanta going to want a 31+ y/o Redden in exchange for one of the best goal scorers in the league? You can bet your ass they'd be asking for Staal. Limited NMC is fine. If they really want to move him, theres still 21 other teams that he could go to.

Naslund's NMC isn't an issue either. If he winds up in the same situation Shanny was in this year, who the hell is going to want him anyway? Nobody has signed Shanny as a free agent, so what team was really going to trade for him?

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:37 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.