HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Brad Richards News Part IV

View Poll Results: Will Richards Sign In NY?
Yes 118 53.15%
No 64 28.83%
Kesler Did It 40 18.02%
Voters: 222. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-11-2011, 12:14 AM
  #76
Kane One
Global Moderator
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,508
vCash: 2860
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM PUNK View Post
well yeah i'm not saying $7 mil each of the 1st 7 years and then drop to $1 mil. i meant front load it so it declines within the rules with the 8th year being $1 mil

something like 10, 10, 9, 8, 6, 4, 2, 1 i believe would be legal under the rules...he gets most of the $$ in the first 6 years.
That's what I'm saying. That will only be a $6.25M cap hit. Why will he turn a contract like that down?

__________________
Kane One is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 12:24 AM
  #77
Machinehead
RIP Robin Williams
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 33,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Boyle View Post
LOL.

The third option is a joke. Because of Kesler being the second coming of Toews where everything involved Kesler being amazing.
Keslermania all started with a thread I made in round 2. I sincerely apologize.

Machinehead is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 03:51 AM
  #78
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,287
vCash: 500
I've officially jumped off the Richards bandwagon.

It's been a gradual process, but I've finally come to the realization that the Rangers can't keep throwing big money every other year, especially if the contract exceeds 4 or more years.

Richards was once a model of consistency and has played well recently, but there are concerns:

1) Take away his best three seasons (2006, 2010, 2011), he's under a PPG producer. In fact, he only avergaes about 65 or so points a season in the 7 years I am talking about.

Keep in mind, two of his three career-best seasons (2006, 2011) were walk years.

2) The injuries are starting to pile up. Since 2008, he's had a broken wrist, a broken hand, hip surgery and the concussion. From 2001 to 2007, Richards only missed 2 games. Two games out of a possible 492.

In 4 seasons since 2007, he hit the 80-game mark once. Forty six games lost to injuries in that span. His body (naturally) is trending downward.

3) He isn't the 1991 Mark Messier, one season removed from a Hart and Conn Smythe-worthy Cup run. Richards get a lot of praise for his Cup and Conn Smythe, but that was 7 years ago. I'm not saying he wont produce in the playoffs, but he hasnt played in a playoff game in three years. If he is going to get big money, you'd like to have a current playoff resume IMO.

4) Richards is God-awful defensively. God-awful. Takes a lot of risks in his own end and at the blue line. Say what you want about our defense and Henrik, but anybody who knows this team can't forget how offensive zone turnovers have been killing us.

5) Derek Stepan had an excellent rookie season and is 10-times better defensively than Richards ever was. He is also a very good playmaker. You have to consider he went straight from the NCAA to the NHL. He deserves an increased role and right now is as cheap as they come. IMO, the likelihood of Richards busting while simultaneously stunting Stepan's development is far greater than Stepan or AA never hitting 65 points, which is what Richards produces in non-walk years.

I am not denying that Richards is a world-class talent. I can only go by what I know about this organization and this city, and its combined penchant to make big-name and expensive veteran acquisitions under-perform.

Tampa signed Richards to a massive contract and cut sling load in less than two years. That tells me something. Richards reportedly also said he deosnt want to be in a big hockey and media market. WTF does that mean? "I dont want to take responsibility as a leader when the team isnt producing?"

Eff that. No friggin thanks. As a fan and a new Yorker, I want the guys who want to come here because it's a tough place to play. Because by the sounds of it, the only thing bringing Richards to New York are Torts and money. IMO, there is no way in hell that Richards will be worth the money and the term.

IMO, Paul Statsny is the guy to target.

GWOW is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 08:44 AM
  #79
beastly115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
I've officially jumped off the Richards bandwagon.

It's been a gradual process, but I've finally come to the realization that the Rangers can't keep throwing big money every other year, especially if the contract exceeds 4 or more years.

Richards was once a model of consistency and has played well recently, but there are concerns:

1) Take away his best three seasons (2006, 2010, 2011), he's under a PPG producer. In fact, he only avergaes about 65 or so points a season in the 7 years I am talking about.

Keep in mind, two of his three career-best seasons (2006, 2011) were walk years.

2) The injuries are starting to pile up. Since 2008, he's had a broken wrist, a broken hand, hip surgery and the concussion. From 2001 to 2007, Richards only missed 2 games. Two games out of a possible 492.

In 4 seasons since 2007, he hit the 80-game mark once. Forty six games lost to injuries in that span. His body (naturally) is trending downward.

3) He isn't the 1991 Mark Messier, one season removed from a Hart and Conn Smythe-worthy Cup run. Richards get a lot of praise for his Cup and Conn Smythe, but that was 7 years ago. I'm not saying he wont produce in the playoffs, but he hasnt played in a playoff game in three years. If he is going to get big money, you'd like to have a current playoff resume IMO.

4) Richards is God-awful defensively. God-awful. Takes a lot of risks in his own end and at the blue line. Say what you want about our defense and Henrik, but anybody who knows this team can't forget how offensive zone turnovers have been killing us.

5) Derek Stepan had an excellent rookie season and is 10-times better defensively than Richards ever was. He is also a very good playmaker. You have to consider he went straight from the NCAA to the NHL. He deserves an increased role and right now is as cheap as they come. IMO, the likelihood of Richards busting while simultaneously stunting Stepan's development is far greater than Stepan or AA never hitting 65 points, which is what Richards produces in non-walk years.

I am not denying that Richards is a world-class talent. I can only go by what I know about this organization and this city, and its combined penchant to make big-name and expensive veteran acquisitions under-perform.

Tampa signed Richards to a massive contract and cut sling load in less than two years. That tells me something. Richards reportedly also said he deosnt want to be in a big hockey and media market. WTF does that mean? "I dont want to take responsibility as a leader when the team isnt producing?"

Eff that. No friggin thanks. As a fan and a new Yorker, I want the guys who want to come here because it's a tough place to play. Because by the sounds of it, the only thing bringing Richards to New York are Torts and money. IMO, there is no way in hell that Richards will be worth the money and the term.

IMO, Paul Statsny is the guy to target.
Your argument goes completely out the window when you suggested Paul "Statsny." Literally everything you argued against Richards can also be applied to Stastny. The injuries. The skewed PPG stats. Stastny has played in 15 playoff games and scored a whopping 8 points.

And I think you are severely underrating Richards defensive play. He's no Datsyuk but he's no Kovalchuk. He's average, IMO which is fine with me.

beastly115 is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 09:24 AM
  #80
Blueblood 2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
I've officially jumped off the Richards bandwagon.

It's been a gradual process, but I've finally come to the realization that the Rangers can't keep throwing big money every other year, especially if the contract exceeds 4 or more years.

Richards was once a model of consistency and has played well recently, but there are concerns:

1) Take away his best three seasons (2006, 2010, 2011), he's under a PPG producer. In fact, he only avergaes about 65 or so points a season in the 7 years I am talking about.

Keep in mind, two of his three career-best seasons (2006, 2011) were walk years.

2) The injuries are starting to pile up. Since 2008, he's had a broken wrist, a broken hand, hip surgery and the concussion. From 2001 to 2007, Richards only missed 2 games. Two games out of a possible 492.

In 4 seasons since 2007, he hit the 80-game mark once. Forty six games lost to injuries in that span. His body (naturally) is trending downward.

3) He isn't the 1991 Mark Messier, one season removed from a Hart and Conn Smythe-worthy Cup run. Richards get a lot of praise for his Cup and Conn Smythe, but that was 7 years ago. I'm not saying he wont produce in the playoffs, but he hasnt played in a playoff game in three years. If he is going to get big money, you'd like to have a current playoff resume IMO.

4) Richards is God-awful defensively. God-awful. Takes a lot of risks in his own end and at the blue line. Say what you want about our defense and Henrik, but anybody who knows this team can't forget how offensive zone turnovers have been killing us.

5) Derek Stepan had an excellent rookie season and is 10-times better defensively than Richards ever was. He is also a very good playmaker. You have to consider he went straight from the NCAA to the NHL. He deserves an increased role and right now is as cheap as they come. IMO, the likelihood of Richards busting while simultaneously stunting Stepan's development is far greater than Stepan or AA never hitting 65 points, which is what Richards produces in non-walk years.

I am not denying that Richards is a world-class talent. I can only go by what I know about this organization and this city, and its combined penchant to make big-name and expensive veteran acquisitions under-perform.

Tampa signed Richards to a massive contract and cut sling load in less than two years. That tells me something. Richards reportedly also said he deosnt want to be in a big hockey and media market. WTF does that mean? "I dont want to take responsibility as a leader when the team isnt producing?"

Eff that. No friggin thanks. As a fan and a new Yorker, I want the guys who want to come here because it's a tough place to play. Because by the sounds of it, the only thing bringing Richards to New York are Torts and money. IMO, there is no way in hell that Richards will be worth the money and the term.

IMO, Paul Statsny is the guy to target.

I have always felt the same way about any thirty something who will be declining. Has history taught us nothing? Too much money to tie up and the concussion is key
as well. He is going to the highest bidder with the best terms and I don't blame him. I pray it's not the Rangers, at that cost.

Blueblood 2 is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 09:44 AM
  #81
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaqup View Post
Your argument goes completely out the window when you suggested Paul "Statsny." Literally everything you argued against Richards can also be applied to Stastny. The injuries. The skewed PPG stats. Stastny has played in 15 playoff games and scored a whopping 8 points.

And I think you are severely underrating Richards defensive play. He's no Datsyuk but he's no Kovalchuk. He's average, IMO which is fine with me.
First of all, it was a typo. Calm down.


Stastny is six years younger than Richards, and has had nowhere near the talent Richards has worked with since he came into the league. His injuries are not as significant as Richards. If you want to count an appendicitis as being on par with hip surgery, then go right ahead. The most time he missed was because of a broken arm. But that doesnt matter, because comparing a 25-year-old's injuries to a 31-year-old's injuries in terms of dishing out a long term contract is completely out of balance. Stastny's in better shape than Richards.

As far as production, how is Stastny's point production skewed? He signed his 5-year extension in November of 2008. In 2010 he had his best year as a pro. His goal production last season actually increased in 2011 despite missing 8 games and playing with either Kevin Porter, David Jones or a declining Milan Hejduk -- give Stastny a power play with Eriksson, Ribiero, and Morrow and I can guarantee you that he would have hit his career average in production.

As far as his defensive abilities you speak of, what makes you say he isnt a turnover machine? I've been watching the guy for 10 years and he is the last guy you would ever consider "average". Granted, Eminger was a turnover machine and he seemed to fix that problem here. But putting two of the league's most careless players with the puck (Gaborik and Richards) on the same line is not going to provide the success everybody thinks.

Stastny is younger, cheaper, in better shape and 100 times better defensively. He's better in the dot, a better goal scorer and in my opinion would be worth the assets it would cost us to acquire him. He's got 3 years left on his deal, which means you're probably going to get max effort from him when the rest of the young Rangers are in their prime.

Richards isnt going to be "free" as a UFA. Signing him will block/stunt AA or Stepan's development and relegate them to a 3rd line. It makes more sense to trade one of them (ideally) for the better younger player who will provide the team with exactly what they are looking for.

GWOW is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 09:50 AM
  #82
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,285
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
Tampa signed Richards to a massive contract and cut sling load in less than two years. That tells me something.
What it should tell you is that we had payroll drastically cut by ownership that wanted to sell the team, and incoming owners were, well, not exactly the brightest bulbs in the pack. Had absolutely nothing to do with the player's hockey skills or performance.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 09:54 AM
  #83
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,658
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
What would it take to get Jordan Staal?
2012 2nd, AA and Grachev/Valentenko for Staal ?
Or is this too much? Or not enough?
He would look great together on a 2nd line with Dubi + Cally imo.
Then we have the 1st line to figure out.
Some of the surplus D for a young LWer
Or the UFA market this year or next...
Center on line one - no secret here - is the BIG ???
If Richards goes elsewhere - maybe Stepan moves up to 1C
I believe he could do this as he has shown great glimpses so far as a rookie
Needs to improve skating (BU anyone?) and muscle mass.
Possibly Lindberg on the 3rd line C in the future flanked with homegrown wings (chose btwn MZA, Kreider, Thomas, Hagelin, Fasth, Grachev?...)
Boyle on the 4th ewith Prust and a fast grinder.
A heavyweight and a vet as spares.
Not really advocating this trade - love AA btw - just bored & asking...


Last edited by BBKers: 06-11-2011 at 10:03 AM.
BBKers is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 10:15 AM
  #84
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,774
vCash: 500
The winning formula is depth down the middle. Goal. Defense. Centers. You can look at Vancouver with Luongo,their depth on D(Edler is excellent) and Kesler and Sedin. You can look at Boston with Thomas,their D(Chara,Seidenberg)and Krejci and Bergeron. The Rangers have Lundqvist,an excellent group of young emerging D(everyone loves Tim Erixon. Was listening to a podcast of Eric Duhatschek(Erixon is another Staal) and Bill Watters talking about Erixon. They couldn't stop raving about him after speaking to some scouts) and two very good young centers in Stepan(Scott Gordon compared Stepan to Bergeron. Gordon coached Bergeron in Providence during the lockout. Gordon coached Stepan in the World Championships) and AA. The Rangers need another top center. Take the pressure off the young guys. As long as you have those components in goal,on D and at C,you should have a very good team. Then you have Gaborik,Callahan and Dubinsky as top six wingers.

Some people may not agree but the Rangers aren't very far from being a very good team.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 10:51 AM
  #85
Blueblood 2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The winning formula is depth down the middle. Goal. Defense. Centers. You can look at Vancouver with Luongo,their depth on D(Edler is excellent) and Kesler and Sedin. You can look at Boston with Thomas,their D(Chara,Seidenberg)and Krejci and Bergeron. The Rangers have Lundqvist,an excellent group of young emerging D(everyone loves Tim Erixon. Was listening to a podcast of Eric Duhatschek(Erixon is another Staal) and Bill Watters talking about Erixon. They couldn't stop raving about him after speaking to some scouts) and two very good young centers in Stepan(Scott Gordon compared Stepan to Bergeron. Gordon coached Bergeron in Providence during the lockout. Gordon coached Stepan in the World Championships) and AA. The Rangers need another top center. Take the pressure off the young guys. As long as you have those components in goal,on D and at C,you should have a very good team. Then you have Gaborik,Callahan and Dubinsky as top six wingers.

Some people may not agree but the Rangers aren't very far from being a very good team.

Couldn't agree more. Center is a need but I hesitate on over reaching for Richards. We also need a forward who can fill the net. Time to renew our relationship with Edmonton and poach one of their many young first rounders. We have D men knocking on the door and no space at the Inn. Time is right to give a little, to get the mix right. Erixon move was brilliant! A precursor in my view.

Blueblood 2 is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 10:52 AM
  #86
beastly115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
First of all, it was a typo. Calm down.


Stastny is six years younger than Richards, and has had nowhere near the talent Richards has worked with since he came into the league. His injuries are not as significant as Richards. If you want to count an appendicitis as being on par with hip surgery, then go right ahead. The most time he missed was because of a broken arm. But that doesnt matter, because comparing a 25-year-old's injuries to a 31-year-old's injuries in terms of dishing out a long term contract is completely out of balance. Stastny's in better shape than Richards.

As far as production, how is Stastny's point production skewed? He signed his 5-year extension in November of 2008. In 2010 he had his best year as a pro. His goal production last season actually increased in 2011 despite missing 8 games and playing with either Kevin Porter, David Jones or a declining Milan Hejduk -- give Stastny a power play with Eriksson, Ribiero, and Morrow and I can guarantee you that he would have hit his career average in production.

As far as his defensive abilities you speak of, what makes you say he isnt a turnover machine? I've been watching the guy for 10 years and he is the last guy you would ever consider "average". Granted, Eminger was a turnover machine and he seemed to fix that problem here. But putting two of the league's most careless players with the puck (Gaborik and Richards) on the same line is not going to provide the success everybody thinks.

Stastny is younger, cheaper, in better shape and 100 times better defensively. He's better in the dot, a better goal scorer and in my opinion would be worth the assets it would cost us to acquire him. He's got 3 years left on his deal, which means you're probably going to get max effort from him when the rest of the young Rangers are in their prime.

Richards isnt going to be "free" as a UFA. Signing him will block/stunt AA or Stepan's development and relegate them to a 3rd line. It makes more sense to trade one of them (ideally) for the better younger player who will provide the team with exactly what they are looking for.
Stastny's production is skewed because you're happy to throw out Richards 3 best seasons but that doesn't apply to Stastny? You can't just discard years to skew stats to support your argument.

And frankly, it's hard to believe you've watched Richards for 10 years. One of the league's most careless players with the puck? Oookkkk. Guess we'll agree to disagree on that one.

beastly115 is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 11:27 AM
  #87
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The winning formula is depth down the middle. Goal. Defense. Centers. You can look at Vancouver with Luongo,their depth on D(Edler is excellent) and Kesler and Sedin. You can look at Boston with Thomas,their D(Chara,Seidenberg)and Krejci and Bergeron. The Rangers have Lundqvist,an excellent group of young emerging D(everyone loves Tim Erixon. Was listening to a podcast of Eric Duhatschek(Erixon is another Staal) and Bill Watters talking about Erixon. They couldn't stop raving about him after speaking to some scouts) and two very good young centers in Stepan(Scott Gordon compared Stepan to Bergeron. Gordon coached Bergeron in Providence during the lockout. Gordon coached Stepan in the World Championships) and AA. The Rangers need another top center. Take the pressure off the young guys. As long as you have those components in goal,on D and at C,you should have a very good team. Then you have Gaborik,Callahan and Dubinsky as top six wingers.

Some people may not agree but the Rangers aren't very far from being a very good team.
Great analyse!

One thing is that we might not be very far from being a top 8 team in the league, with the roster we have I think we are very close and its up to Torts to get it done next season for sure, no more excuses so to speak -- but at the same time, we are pretty far from being able to compete with a healty Pittsburg Penguins... But as the last two seasons have proven -- it doesn't always take that much.

Ola is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 11:29 AM
  #88
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,804
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBKers View Post
What would it take to get Jordan Staal?
2012 2nd, AA and Grachev/Valentenko for Staal ?

The Pens would want a Dubi or Cally for Staal. AA still leaves them with a glut down the middle.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 11:33 AM
  #89
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,658
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
The Pens would want a Dubi or Cally for Staal. AA still leaves them with a glut down the middle.
Kind of defeats the purpose of the trade then - as I saw the three of them together as an awesome 2nd line for many years to come. Thanx

BBKers is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 11:40 AM
  #90
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,405
vCash: 500
here is some sanity on the TB side

http://www.rotoworld.com/sports/nhl/hockey

Vitto79 is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 11:49 AM
  #91
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The winning formula is depth down the middle. Goal. Defense. Centers. You can look at Vancouver with Luongo,their depth on D(Edler is excellent) and Kesler and Sedin. You can look at Boston with Thomas,their D(Chara,Seidenberg)and Krejci and Bergeron. The Rangers have Lundqvist,an excellent group of young emerging D(everyone loves Tim Erixon. Was listening to a podcast of Eric Duhatschek(Erixon is another Staal) and Bill Watters talking about Erixon. They couldn't stop raving about him after speaking to some scouts) and two very good young centers in Stepan(Scott Gordon compared Stepan to Bergeron. Gordon coached Bergeron in Providence during the lockout. Gordon coached Stepan in the World Championships) and AA. The Rangers need another top center. Take the pressure off the young guys. As long as you have those components in goal,on D and at C,you should have a very good team. Then you have Gaborik,Callahan and Dubinsky as top six wingers.

Some people may not agree but the Rangers aren't very far from being a very good team.
The teams in the finals have good players at all positions. I don't see how Boston and Vancouver fighting for the cup proves that we need to sign Brad Richards.

Plus, show me the centers on those teams making 7.5 Mil.

MSG the place to be* is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 01:35 PM
  #92
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
What it should tell you is that we had payroll drastically cut by ownership that wanted to sell the team, and incoming owners were, well, not exactly the brightest bulbs in the pack. Had absolutely nothing to do with the player's hockey skills or performance.
Richards was having a garbage season when he was traded. The decision to trade him and not Vinny or the older, cheaper MSL was partly based off of Richards having back-to-back subpar seasons after a terrific 2004 and 2006.

The owndership issue played a big part, but Richards made the decision easier.

GWOW is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 01:40 PM
  #93
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,285
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
Richards was having a garbage season when he was traded. The decision to trade him and not Vinny or the older, cheaper MSL was partly based off of Richards having back-to-back subpar seasons after a terrific 2004 and 2006.

The owndership issue played a big part, but Richards made the decision easier.
Jay Feaster did not want to trade Brad Richards at all and only did so because the order came from higher up the food chain.

It tore him up to do it. (And, yes, I know that for a fact because he told me himself.)

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 01:49 PM
  #94
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaqup View Post
Stastny's production is skewed because you're happy to throw out Richards 3 best seasons but that doesn't apply to Stastny? You can't just discard years to skew stats to support your argument.

And frankly, it's hard to believe you've watched Richards for 10 years. One of the league's most careless players with the puck? Oookkkk. Guess we'll agree to disagree on that one.

It doesnt apply to Stastny because he didnt have his two best seasons in the NHL during walk years. I already proved that he had his career best season immediately after he signed his multi-million dollar contract extension.

I'm not "throwing out" Richards three best seasons. I just said that two of his three best seasons were walk years. The rest, outside of 2010, made him as productive as Stastny.

Plus, you just want to ignore the fact that Richards has played with superior offensive talent his entire career.

Prove to me that Richards is an average defensive forward. "Because I said so" wont work.

Last season he was 4th among all NHL forwards in giveaways. Almost a 2:1 ratio from giveaway to takeaway. 73 giveaways, only 47 takeaways, 50.6 in the dot and he never kills penalties (averages 20 secs a game).

He's a career -72, and last season (+1) was the first time since 2004 that he was actually a plus player.

GWOW is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 01:52 PM
  #95
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
Jay Feaster did not want to trade Brad Richards at all and only did so because the order came from higher up the food chain.

It tore him up to do it. (And, yes, I know that for a fact because he told me himself.)
Really nothing groundbreaking here. The fact remains that Richards was not playing well at all when he was traded.

GWOW is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 01:56 PM
  #96
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The winning formula is depth down the middle. Goal. Defense. Centers. You can look at Vancouver with Luongo,their depth on D(Edler is excellent) and Kesler and Sedin. You can look at Boston with Thomas,their D(Chara,Seidenberg)and Krejci and Bergeron. The Rangers have Lundqvist,an excellent group of young emerging D(everyone loves Tim Erixon. Was listening to a podcast of Eric Duhatschek(Erixon is another Staal) and Bill Watters talking about Erixon. They couldn't stop raving about him after speaking to some scouts) and two very good young centers in Stepan(Scott Gordon compared Stepan to Bergeron. Gordon coached Bergeron in Providence during the lockout. Gordon coached Stepan in the World Championships) and AA. The Rangers need another top center. Take the pressure off the young guys. As long as you have those components in goal,on D and at C,you should have a very good team. Then you have Gaborik,Callahan and Dubinsky as top six wingers.

Some people may not agree but the Rangers aren't very far from being a very good team.
Agree 100 pct.

I just dont think Brad Richards will a) live up to the contract from a production standpoint and b) is the only option out there.

Bergeron and Krejci both had under 40 points as rookies and were given top linemates their next season. Stepan and AA have shown no signs that they cant be top-6 centers simply by looking at their career progression.

GWOW is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 03:46 PM
  #97
AXN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,451
vCash: 500
I hear it is between three teams Rangers, Maple Leafs and Kings. I don't think it will be the Maple Leafs. He might like the Kings. They lost in the Kovalchul bitting to the Devils and Kovalchuk signed for 11 million. I don't know how much they would offer but I would give Richards up to 8 million for five years. If it goes higher I would not do it.

AXN is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 03:57 PM
  #98
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
I just dont think Brad Richards will a) live up to the contract from a production standpoint and b) is the only option out there.
.
And what are those other options? Ive seen you bring up Stastny, whose cap hit approaches what Richards would be, not to mention the king's ransom of assets it would cost to get him, pretty much gutting the current team.

I mean, you've already sold Richard's abilities and game extraordinarily short, but thats a different argument for a different day.

Im more interested to hear about these other options you're talking about.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 04:09 PM
  #99
AXN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
And what are those other options? Ive seen you bring up Stastny, whose cap hit approaches what Richards would be, not to mention the king's ransom of assets it would cost to get him, pretty much gutting the current team.

I mean, you've already sold Richard's abilities and game extraordinarily short, but thats a different argument for a different day.

Im more interested to hear about these other options you're talking about.
Richards won a stanley cup with the Rangers coach in Tampa Bay. His ex players really play well for him. Look at Prospal and Fedotenko. Stansny has not won anything yet.

AXN is offline  
Old
06-11-2011, 04:45 PM
  #100
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,285
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
Really nothing groundbreaking here. The fact remains that Richards was not playing well at all when he was traded.
And the fact remains that that's not why he was traded.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:27 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.