HFBoards

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

Just say no to the buyouts this year

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-03-2011, 09:19 PM
  #101
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
Notice that two years ago, Heatley was a mega-star who scored 100 points twice.
Do you look into any of the details before you make a silly comment? Which forwards was Dany Heatley playing with in Ottawa when he logged those 2 seasons? Do you remember? I think you do. So after his two 100 point seasons, he never breaks 82 points again while continuing to play with top centers in players like Spezza and later Thornton, and only puts up 64 points this year logging time with Thornton again. Did you want to bring him here to play with Christensen or Anisimov when he was shopped? If you seriously think you're getting 'value' from trading Dubinsky for Heatley (at $7.5 mil cap hit) and playing him on a team with no first line center, that really hurts your credibility to argue about the merits of the acquisition of Brad Richards. So far all you've argued in this thread is A) We can't afford the dead cap space the next 2 seasons, B) Richards will be like Drury and be overpaid and too old in a couple years to contribute C) The Rangers will subsequently have no chance at advancing in the playoffs if they acquire Richards so we should do nothing and wait around for rookies to fill huge holes on our depth chart. Oh and D) That we can easily make trades for key pieces of the puzzle later down the road yet you've failed to name any hypothetical trades that are feasible and would significantly improve the team. More than a few individuals have pointed out that the dead cap space is minimal and that the UFA options are less than desirable the coming two off-seasons, but if you want to keep ignoring the valid points than that's your choice. Thanks for providing that list earlier of which the 3 most desirable players are all the most likely to be re-signed by their teams. Traviz Zajac and Nathan Horton, really? If we add those guys we're a shoe in for the cup! There are several flaws and risks with your suggested course of action and you don't want to respond to any of them. There is far more benefit to the organization and far less risk in signing an elite first line center this summer, immediately improving the team without losing assets, and retaining the ability to remove that cap hit (either through trade or waiver process) at a later time. No NMC = no problem, I don't know why that is such a difficult concept.


Last edited by wolfgaze: 05-03-2011 at 09:38 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 09:46 PM
  #102
Florida Ranger
Bring back Torts!
 
Florida Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tampa, FLA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
So many people are calling for buyouts. But why? Drury, Wolski, and Avery are at the end of their contracts next season. If we hold them, the cap hit is gone next summer. If we buy them out, the cap hit for a into 2012-13. It will be less with a buyout, but who cares about next year? Let's have next year eat the cap and start clean in 2012-13.

It's not as if we are going anywhere in 2011-12. We will still have the money to sign Brad if we go that way, which we should not.

This team won't be ready to compete next season. We can make it lose in 7 instead of in 5, maybe it can get an upset win in the first roubd, but it certainly won't go far. At the end of the day, nobody will remember if we lost in 5 or in 6.

Why not use up all the crap and start anew next summer?
Brad Richards.

Florida Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 10:04 PM
  #103
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
Wolf,

I'm glad that we didn't deal Dubi for Heat. But Heat is very much a legit first liner. I'm just saying that first liners usually become available sooner or later, and there's no need to rush things, trapping ourselves in a $50 million contract.

Like I said, if Brad wants $30, I'm in. But his agent would be committing malpractice if that's all he gets him. At $50, I am opposed to signing Brad, and I suspect it will take about that much to get him.


Last edited by Beacon: 05-03-2011 at 10:09 PM.
Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 10:13 PM
  #104
3Four3
Registered User
 
3Four3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
Just because players are supposed to become UFA in 2012-2013, that doesn't mean they will become UFA (Contract extensions) or that they will definitely sign with the Rangers.

3Four3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 10:19 PM
  #105
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
Wolf,

I'm glad that we didn't deal Dubi for Heat. But Heat is very much a legit first liner. I'm just saying that first liners usually become available sooner or later, and there's no need to rush things, trapping ourselves in a $50 million contract.

Like I said, if Brad wants $30, I'm in. But his agent would be committing malpractice if that's all he gets him. At $50, I am opposed to signing Brad, and I suspect it will take about that much to get him.
Why is the assumption it's going to be $50 million contract? Every GM, Player, Agent understands the inflated nature of pre-lockout contracts. His current cap hit has no bearing on what he'll earn on his next contract. Leafs or any other team can throw all the money in the world at him but it won't influence the going rate if he has no desire to play for those teams... If anything his age decreases the likelihood that he'll get such a long term contract, at 28 or 29, he might land a 7-8 year deal, but being 31 works against that. The reality is that he'll have a very short list of teams he's looking to negotiate with. If he's going to come here, the difference is going to be the location (NYC) and the Tortorella connection, not the overall dollar figure, because the Rangers will make a very competitive offer for his services. If some team wants to step in and make an absurd offer, and he wants to sign where the money is, well then I'll be perfectly fine with missing out on that acquisition, because we want players who want to play here and have a vested interest in playing here other than for a mere paycheck.

5 years at $7-$7.5 mil is quite feasible. As long as there's no No Movement Clause, I don't see the big risk. No only has the cap been going up but there is a very good chance there will be some type of cap-exempt buyouts put in place when the CBA is re-negotiated.

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 10:21 PM
  #106
3Four3
Registered User
 
3Four3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
No only has the cap been going up but there is a very good chance there will be some type of cap-exempt buyouts put in place when the CBA is re-negotiated.
Why not settle for a "franchise tag" like in the NFL?

3Four3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 10:37 PM
  #107
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
5 years at $7-$7.5 mil is quite feasible.

Why would Brad get less money than Gaborik got when he was coming off several injured years?

Why would he get no more money (and fewer years) than Vanek, Campbell, Drury? Isn't he a superior player?

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 10:41 PM
  #108
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
The choice we have is to we skip this year as the kids mature or do we pay Brad over $50 million? When/if Slats gives Brad $8.5m over 6-7 years, this whole board will wish he did nothing.
Let's make a bet: If Brad Richards signs for a cap hit that is greater than or equal to his current cap hit with ANY team, I'll stop posting here. If he signs with ANY team for a cap hit of less than his current cap hit, you stop posting here. Deal?

That's how positive I am that you have no clue. And not just about Brad Richards and his next contract, either.

I see absolutely no reason to believe that a single player in the Rangers system is going to be an 85-90 point player. If this season proved anything, it's that Derek Stepan has less of a chance of being a number one center than we thought before this season, since he spent the entire season doing anything he possibly could to avoid the responsibilities of a number one center. No playmaking, no vision, no puck distribution. I'm not saying he is incapable of those things, but risking not having a number one center, the most important piece of a team in today's NHL and the hardest piece to acquire in this league (which we haven't had since 1997), for at least another 3-4 years on the small chance that Derek Stepan will be good enough is just simply self-destructive.

If the Rangers don't sign Richards this summer, they are basically guaranteeing that, barring an incredibly fortunate Thornton-esque circumstance that happens once in a blue moon, they will be a playoff bubble team for AT LEAST the next 3-4 years. There is absolutely no reason to believe that any of the league's top centers whose contracts are expiring in 2012 or 2013 will be leaving their clubs, and you're basically wasting the rest of the career of the second greatest homegrown Ranger of all-time.

There is little reason to believe that Richards will decline as much as you think, since players like Richards traditionally decline at a far slower rate than players who rely on their physical abilities do. Saying that he will be the next Drury is simply ignorant and irrational. Chris Drury is one of my favorite players of all time, but even at his very best, he's significantly worse than Brad Richards on his worst day. Brad Richards is a superstar, while Chris Drury is and always has been a role player.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:52 PM
  #109
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 18,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Let's make a bet: If Brad Richards signs for a cap hit that is greater than or equal to his current cap hit with ANY team, I'll stop posting here. If he signs with ANY team for a cap hit of less than his current cap hit, you stop posting here. Deal?

That's how positive I am that you have no clue. And not just about Brad Richards and his next contract, either.

I see absolutely no reason to believe that a single player in the Rangers system is going to be an 85-90 point player. If this season proved anything, it's that Derek Stepan has less of a chance of being a number one center than we thought before this season, since he spent the entire season doing anything he possibly could to avoid the responsibilities of a number one center. No playmaking, no vision, no puck distribution. I'm not saying he is incapable of those things, but risking not having a number one center, the most important piece of a team in today's NHL and the hardest piece to acquire in this league (which we haven't had since 1997), for at least another 3-4 years on the small chance that Derek Stepan will be good enough is just simply self-destructive.

If the Rangers don't sign Richards this summer, they are basically guaranteeing that, barring an incredibly fortunate Thornton-esque circumstance that happens once in a blue moon, they will be a playoff bubble team for AT LEAST the next 3-4 years. There is absolutely no reason to believe that any of the league's top centers whose contracts are expiring in 2012 or 2013 will be leaving their clubs, and you're basically wasting the rest of the career of the second greatest homegrown Ranger of all-time.

There is little reason to believe that Richards will decline as much as you think, since players like Richards traditionally decline at a far slower rate than players who rely on their physical abilities do. Saying that he will be the next Drury is simply ignorant and irrational. Chris Drury is one of my favorite players of all time, but even at his very best, he's significantly worse than Brad Richards on his worst day. Brad Richards is a superstar, while Chris Drury is and always has been a role player.
You always bring that up about Stepan and I disagree completely. In fact this season showed me that's he smarter than I thought he was and that he won't let his deficiencies hold him back in the NHL. Maybe if we could get the 20 year old rookie some players who can actually bury the puck his various set-ups would've been seen more on the score-sheet, but that's not going to happen with Drury and Redden handicapping us in even signing Richards.

Everything else I agree with though, Richards is an absolute must.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:54 PM
  #110
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
Why would Brad get less money than Gaborik got when he was coming off several injured years?
Because Marian Gaborik's contract isn't the standard by which completely different players and their respective agents negotiate contracts? Gaborik was not only younger, but he also didn't hit free agency after making a very lucrative pre-lockout salary for several years, the way Richards will be.

Quote:
Why would he get no more money (and fewer years) than Vanek, Campbell, Drury? Isn't he a superior player?
Do you remember how Vanek got his monster contract? He was offer-sheeted and signed it. By no means did the Sabres want to pay him anything close to what he's making, they simply could not afford to lose him and matched. Vanek has no place in this discussion. Campbell? Why would you even bring him up.... So now every bad signing in the league is the guideline for how much moneys UFA's will get? So every declining and old UFA defenseman in the league should ask for Wade Redden money during negotiations because Sather gave Redden that bad contract? This logic doesn't make sense, you're cherry-picking the worst case examples, and reasoning that if Player A is better than Player B, and Player B makes X amount of dollars, than player A is worth ---- ..... The league doesn't work that way, certainly not with regards to the players with the worst value contracts. Guess what Joe Thornton's cap hit is? $7 mil... And you mentioned Drury again.


Last edited by wolfgaze: 05-04-2011 at 12:19 AM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 01:35 AM
  #111
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
I brought up Campbell and Drury because they were seen as premier UFAs in their offseasons. It's not that they failed. That's not the important thing here. Even if Drury did not fail, he would still be massively overpaid.

Look at Gomez. He came to the Rangers and immediately had his second-best offensive output of his career. Yet, everyone still hated the signing, hated Gomez, hated Sather for signing Gomez, and everyone wanted to trade him away as soon as possible... all that while Gomez was having his second-best season.

That's because any premier UFA is so badly overpaid that even if he plays well (as compared to his career), he'll still be overpaid. But what if Gomez were better, you ask? If he were a better player in his career, then he would get another million or more when he signed. Why? Because if he were better, when the Rangers offered him $7.3, another team would offer him more.

Signing a UFA, by definition, means that you pay a player so much that every other team in the league say, "to hell with this, if he's going to make this much, then he's not worth it, even if I can get him for free, without surrendering any assets."

29 out of 30 GMs must say that the money is too much for them.

This is not true for lesser players because there is a large supply of them. But when it's THE premier free agent, then all teams or nearly all teams would want him free of charge so long as he's not terribly overpaid.

LA Kings, as just one example, don't really need a guy like Brad Richards, but don't you think they would take him for free if he weren't overpaid? Come on!

Vanek's signing is important to show how much some teams are willing to pay.

The fact is that there will always be a team willing to pay more than $6, more than $7 and likely more than $8 for the services of a true first line player and if that team is on the verge of contending, it makes sense.

If let's say MDZ had a breakthrough season and played as well as Mike Green, and Wolski had come here and suddenly played to the maximum of his talent, scoring 30+ goals this year, I would say, yeah, let's sign Brad no matter the cost. Why? Because then he'd be the final piece and with him, we would have a chance to win the Cup.

There are teams like that around the NHL. There are teams that are truly one player away from contending.

Detroit, for instance, can certainly use a first line center. They are an aging, but still good team, and this would be a good time for them to take their final stab at things.

Even a team like New Jersey would be better suited to bid for his services if they can afford to max out their cap. They will get Parise back, Kovalchuk will likely recover from a bad season, and if you add Brad Richards to center either one of them, that teams becomes very, very dangerous right away. Plus, the Rangers must hope that Brad has chemistry with Gabby, whereas the Debbies can say, "if not Parise, then with Kovalchuk, but one of them should work out, double the odds of chemistry here." And plus, since Brodeur is about to retire, it makes all the sense in the world to take one final stab at it now because when he's gone, they are done as a contender for a while.

There are several teams out there which better suited to throw whatever it takes to sign Richards. The teams I brought up were just the first that popped into my head, but certainly, almost any team would want Brad if he's not overpaid, and many teams are in better position to overpay him than we are. If we outbid them, you won't like the terms.

It will likely be either $8+ million for a half a dozen years or else it will include a no-trade clause ... or both.


Last edited by Beacon: 05-04-2011 at 01:48 AM.
Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 01:41 AM
  #112
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
By the way, one more thing.

People seem to think that if a player is better, he's going to be less overpaid. That's why I read things like, "but Gomez was overpaid because he sucks, whereas Brad Richards is great, so therefore he won't be overpaid."

In fact, it's just the reverse. If you don't sign "good" player, you know another "good" player will always be available. But if you are talking about a star first liner, you keep bidding even after you realize that he's overpaid because there won't be any other star first liners available who will come without you surrendering any assets.

The better the player, the more desirable he is, the more a GM would want to bid on him, the more a GM would overbid for his services. It's obviously not worth overpaying for the services of Zherdev or Prust because other such players can always be found.

But when you can get an All-Star for nothing, it's ok to bid an extra couple of million per year to sign him. It's ok to give him a couple extra years. It's ok... if he'll make you a contender, meaning you are presently one player away.

It's not ok if you are multiple players away.


Last edited by Beacon: 05-04-2011 at 02:02 AM.
Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 02:25 AM
  #113
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
I brought up Campbell and Drury because they were seen as premier UFAs in their offseasons. It's not that they failed. That's not the important thing here. Even if Drury did not fail, he would still be massively overpaid.
Oh, you can't possibly be serious, can you?

Campbell, Drury, Gomez, and Briere were simply the "top" free agents in an enormously underwhelming free agent season. Except at least Campbell and Briere are serious difference makers offensively. Gomez makes a serious difference, too. He makes you a whole lot ****ing worse. That's the difference. That's what you simply don't understand. That these are not elite players, while Brad Richards is. I wanted absolutely no part of any of those players, or Redden, or even Gaborik (but we're stuck with him for now and we need to help him). None of them are Richards' equal. Not even close.

Quote:
Look at Gomez. He came to the Rangers and immediately had his second-best offensive output of his career. Yet, everyone still hated the signing, hated Gomez, hated Sather for signing Gomez, and everyone wanted to trade him away as soon as possible... all that while Gomez was having his second-best season.
The second-best offensive output of a career in which he's proven to be one of the most inefficient players in the league, one of the stupidest players in the league, and one of the biggest wastes of talent in the league.

IMO, you really don't understand how to evaluate a player if you don't understand that Scott Gomez is a humungous turd that you should never want on your team in the current NHL, even at a discounted salary (unless your team is so incredibly stacked and/or well-oiled that you can afford to deal with a piece of **** like Gomez. The most important thing one must learn when trying to understand hockey from a strategic and tactical and analytical point of view is that the first concept that must be mastered in order to become a good and worthy player is becoming the antithesis of Scott Gomez. Meaning, a player must be smart, motivated, hard-working, in gung-ho physical fitness, consistent, cool under pressure, intelligent, not a tremendous underachiever, and able to use the tools available to reach the best possible result.

Quote:
That's because any premier UFA is so badly overpaid that even if he plays well (as compared to his career), he'll still be overpaid. But what if Gomez were better, you ask? If he were a better player in his career, then he would get another million or more when he signed. Why? Because if he were better, when the Rangers offered him $7.3, another team would offer him more.
Riiight...but he isn't better, and thus everything else you have to say doesn't really come into play. Scott Gomez is garbage, that's why he shouldn't have been signed in the first place. At the point when the Rangers signed him, Wade Redden was also pure garbage, which is why he shouldn't have been signed. Chris Drury and Marian Gaborik were not garbage, but there were also reasons not to sign them. Chris Drury was a phenomenal third-line center who spent the bulk of his career playing over his role with phenomenal offensive teams. Marian Gaborik is an injury-prone pure sniper on a team with less creativity, playmaking and distributing ability, and sheer talent than any team in the league.

Brad Richards IS a great player, and he fills TWO huge needs that are totally uncertain to us at this point and very difficult to fill from the outside (1st line center and PP QB). Back then, while we needed a first line center and a first pair defenseman, we instead signed a horrible second line center, a great third line center, and a horrible uninspired and immobile #6.

AND ALL OF THESE DESCRIPTIONS WERE KNOWN PRIOR TO THE RANGERS SIGNING THEM. NOTHING CHANGED EXCEPT THE DROP IN SURROUNDING TALENT, A PROBLEM THAT COMPETENT MANAGERS MIGHT HAVE ANTICIPATED.

Quote:
Signing a UFA, by definition, means that you pay a player so much that every other team in the league say, "to hell with this, if he's going to make this much, then he's not worth it, even if I can get him for free, without surrendering any assets."

29 out of 30 GMs must say that the money is too much for them.

This is not true for lesser players because there is a large supply of them. But when it's THE premier free agent, then all teams or nearly all teams would want him free of charge so long as he's not terribly overpaid.
Most people understand that many things in life have exceptions, hockey free agency included. Imagine that maybe not every single top player in the league is going to choose money over every other factor.

Quote:
Vanek's signing is important to show how much some teams are willing to pay.
We don't need Vanek's signing to show how much some teams are willing to pay. We have Gomez, Redden and Drury. Nothing has ever come close to topping that! But it's completely irrelevant because everything you're saying is predicated on the bogus and fraudulent belief that these players are in any way shape or form comparable to Brad Richards.

Quote:
It will likely be either $8+ million for a half a dozen years or else it will include a no-trade clause ... or both.
You have no comprehension of how the economics of the NHL work, apparently, if you think any team except MAYBE the Toronto Maple Leafs is going to be willing to pay Brad Richards upwards of his expiring salary. Nor do you comprehend Richards, as a player or a person.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 07:05 AM
  #114
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
richards will be a ny ranger come july. period. you guys can bank on that.

dont fool yourselves into thinking that slats and torts dont know what this guy can bring to this team. the ju-ju is perfect and he fits right into the mantra weve been hearing the last few years.

''we wont move youth but we will add skill ''

bottom line, you add brad richards to last years team and were still playing right now. we arent that far off, last year showed me that. a better pp and a few more 5 on 5 goals and were right there. BR brings that.

hes coming here.

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 09:24 AM
  #115
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
Sting,

You keep arguing that Brad is superior to other free agents. But your conclusion on that is reverse of what it should be. You've convinced yourself that nobody will get more than Gomez money, but the better the player, the more he will get paid, and the more he will get overpaid.

A third liner won't get overpaid as a UFA. A second liner might get overpaid a little. A first liner will her overpaid a lot.

Gomez is a turd,but that just means he will get overpaid less than a legitimate star. You make the assumption that Brad will get paid the same as lesser players, while playing better.

But why? Why would not some teams offer him more money than they offered lesser or more injured money?

As for taking less money to play in NYC, we always hear that from our fans, but how often does that really happen? He played for Torts over half a decade ago, big freaking deal.

And if he really wants to play in NYC so much so that he is taking less money, why wouldn't he insist on a NMC?

Again, why would a superior player get a contract no better (or even worse) than an inferior one, especially since the cap rose since then?

I suspect he will go to the highest bidder or to a Cup contender, not to his old coach or to the NYC pressure cooker where so many stars failed.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 09:28 AM
  #116
3Four3
Registered User
 
3Four3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
I'd have no problem if Sather offered him a contract that paid him 8-8.5 million a season. The duration of the contract might make me queezy.

3Four3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 09:36 AM
  #117
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
If you were a 31 yr old player who had half the league bidding for your services, would you sign a three year contract?

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 09:39 AM
  #118
3Four3
Registered User
 
3Four3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
If you were a 31 yr old player who had half the league bidding for your services, would you sign a three year contract?
Who said it was only going to be three years?

Five-six years? No problem.

Seven-eight? Oh boy.

3Four3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 09:59 AM
  #119
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 8,074
vCash: 500
5 years 7.75 mil per.

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 10:33 AM
  #120
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by offdacrossbar View Post
5 years 7.75 mil per.

This is the most realistic estimate I've seen around here. People saying he'll take $6 per are going to be totally shocked by what he gets.

You've got to figure someone will offer him more than lesser players (who were getting $6 to $7.5 per) who hit free agency.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 10:46 AM
  #121
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,360
vCash: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
I'm glad that we didn't deal Dubi for Heat. But Heat is very much a legit first liner. I'm just saying that first liners usually become available sooner or later, and there's no need to rush things, trapping ourselves in a $50 million contract.
Are you suggesting that acquiring Dany Heatley via trade would have been a better idea than signing Brad Richards via free agency, given the money and terms are the same?

If that's the case then you truly are completely and totally out of touch. Not only do you lose players, picks, prospects, whatever as compensation in a trade to acquire that player as SJS had to pay a price to get Heatley. You also have to acquire a contract that is less to your terms, it's already predetermined. Heatley is also dogmeat of a player. The guy shows up when he wants to and whines the rest of the time. He's asked for a trade twice in his career and eventually wears out his welcome. That's the kind of player you want on the Rangers? Uh hello....roll the clock back a few years bud, the Rangers was flooded with guys like that and they purged the roster of all of them in 2004 because they hadn't made the playoffs in 7 straight years of whiny, overpaid, superstars floating around the ice. GET A CLUE and start watching ESPN Classics or something, MSG rewind, visit the library. Do something but what you've done so far, has failed you.

IF you're pinning your dreams on quality stars hitting free agency, keep dreaming. It's not going to happen, they'll be resigned. Montreal used to have hopes of signing Vinny Lecavalier some day too, you know.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 10:46 AM
  #122
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
If you were a 31 yr old player who had half the league bidding for your services, would you sign a three year contract?
Dude, you seriously need to know when to quit. You are way off base here.

Richards' cap hit is currently 7.8 mil. There are only 4 players in the entire league with a higher cap hit, Ovechkin, Malkin, Crosby and Eric Staal. All of those players are superstars and under the age of 27. Richards will be 31. There is NO WAY he will have a cap hit at or above 7.8 mil.

http://www.capgeek.com/leaders.php?type=CAP_HIT

Nash signed his contract at age 25 and is one of the best players in the league. Lacavalier got his contract at age 29, and it is universally agreed that it was a bad contract. Chara just signed a new contract at age 34 and his cap hit is dropping from 7.5 to a little under 7. Joe Thorton just signed a new contract (age 32) and his cap hit will drop from 7.2 to 7.

Richards will get a contract in the 6-7 year range with a cap hit between 6 and 7 mil. Bank on it. 7 years, 45.5 mil would be a 6.5 mil cap hit. I'd be fine with that, as long as there's no NMC in the last 3 years.

GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 11:20 AM
  #123
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vipernsx View Post
Are you suggesting that acquiring Dany Heatley via trade would have been a better idea than signing Brad Richards via free agency, given the money and terms are the same.
No, but I am not sure the terms will be the same (Heat signed a 6 year contract as a 26 year old, not 31 year old). The second issue is that it's always better to acquire someone when you know your actual need. There's absolutely no guarantee that our need when the kids mature will be a center, nor that Brad will still be any good.

What if our need is a first line winger to replace Gaborik, and now we are stuck with a major, unmovable contract we gave Richards? You don't lock yourself into a long-term, super-expensive contract when you don't even know your needs, and you don't know how the 30+ year old player will hold up in his later years.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 11:20 AM
  #124
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
This is the most realistic estimate I've seen around here. People saying he'll take $6 per are going to be totally shocked by what he gets.

You've got to figure someone will offer him more than lesser players (who were getting $6 to $7.5 per) who hit free agency.
i think richards has made comments about regretting the fact that his salary forced him out of tb implying that in hindsight he would have rather taken less $$/year to stay in tb. so the assumption/hope is that he might be willing to take a lower cap hit to be on a better team...

now lower cap hit doesn't necessarily mean less $$...our best bet for him is probably to give him a front loaded deal with extra years tacted on the end, not to the extreme of kovalchuk but similar concept. he'll paid big $$ the first few years but the cap hit will be kept down

CM PUNK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2011, 11:28 AM
  #125
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,046
vCash: 500
GAGline, but I thought everyone here says that Brad Richards is a once in a generation chance to get a star without surrendering assets. Why would GMs all around the league pass on his services unless he was getting paid so much all of them thought it's too much, regardless that he is the only star for years who can be acquired for free?

There are only two ways to look at him: he's a once in a generation UFA or he's not.

1. If he is a once in a lifetime (or at least many years) UFA, then there will be a ridiculous bidding war for him, with other teams in better position to acquire his services because they are closer to winning the Cup.

2. If he's not a very rare UFA, then let's wait until we know our needs after the kids mature.

Beacon is online now   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 01:02 AM.

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.