Nobody is talking about actually buying Richards out. Read the thread. All that was mentioned (by me) was that if the cap goes down in the next CBA and there is an amnesty buyout window to accommodate teams that would be over the new cap/unable to keep their team intact going forward that Richards would, while undeserving, be one of the only people it would make sense to use it on because of the size of his cap hit. It has nothing to do with production and his slumping or performance wasn't even mentioned. LMFAO at people who think they can read one sentence in an entire thread and pop off with smart-ass comments.
already talking about buying Richards out...Man, this place is retarded.BUT I Bet you were huge on this signing from the get go..
already talking about buying Richards out...Man, this place is retarded.BUT I Bet you were huge on this signing from the get go..
I like Richards and want him here.
Lets go RANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!
Holy hat... I am not advocating buying Richards out. Reading comprehension is what's retarded here. If you can't understand the difference between wanting to buy a player out because you don't want them on the team/think they're not performing and suggesting that, should the SALARY CAP GO DOWN and the league's SOLUTION is to allow each team a punishment-free buyout, the oldest player with the highest salary would be the one that would probably make the most sense, than I don't know what to say to you. I'm not even suggesting it would happen and there's still no indication there will even be such a thing as the amnesty buyout period, but the whole point was that there isn't really anyone else on the roster with a high enough salary that buying them out would be worthwhile that we would be willing to buyout, thus leaving Richards one of the only logical choices, SHOULD THIS SITUATION EVER ARISE.
I LIKE BRAD RICHARDS and WANT him on the Rangers. I'm 100% content with him even in the "slump" that everyone else is complaining about. There's nothing really difficult to understand about what I'm writing unless you're just not willing to read an entire paragraph before responding or you're hammered drunk at 3pm on a Wednesday.
Holy hat... I am not advocating buying Richards out. Reading comprehension is what's retarded here. If you can't understand the difference between wanting to buy a player out because you don't want them on the team/think they're not performing and suggesting that, should the SALARY CAP GO DOWN and the league's SOLUTION is to allow each team a punishment-free buyout, the oldest player with the highest salary would be the one that would probably make the most sense, than I don't know what to say to you. I'm not even suggesting it would happen and there's still no indication there will even be such a thing as the amnesty buyout period, but the whole point was that there isn't really anyone else on the roster with a high enough salary that buying them out would be worthwhile that we would be willing to buyout, thus leaving Richards one of the only logical choices, SHOULD THIS SITUATION EVER ARISE.
I LIKE BRAD RICHARDS and WANT him on the Rangers. I'm 100% content with him even in the "slump" that everyone else is complaining about. There's nothing really difficult to understand about what I'm writing unless you're just not willing to read an entire paragraph before responding or you're hammered drunk at 3pm on a Wednesday.
Don't worry MPF, some people around here actually do understand context and diction.
Holy hat... I am not advocating buying Richards out. Reading comprehension is what's retarded here. If you can't understand the difference between wanting to buy a player out because you don't want them on the team/think they're not performing and suggesting that, should the SALARY CAP GO DOWN and the league's SOLUTION is to allow each team a punishment-free buyout, the oldest player with the highest salary would be the one that would probably make the most sense, than I don't know what to say to you. I'm not even suggesting it would happen and there's still no indication there will even be such a thing as the amnesty buyout period, but the whole point was that there isn't really anyone else on the roster with a high enough salary that buying them out would be worthwhile that we would be willing to buyout, thus leaving Richards one of the only logical choices, SHOULD THIS SITUATION EVER ARISE.
I LIKE BRAD RICHARDS and WANT him on the Rangers. I'm 100% content with him even in the "slump" that everyone else is complaining about. There's nothing really difficult to understand about what I'm writing unless you're just not willing to read an entire paragraph before responding or you're hammered drunk at 3pm on a Wednesday.
I can't believe you want to see Brad Richards fall off a cliff.
__________________
"I used to pray for good things . I used to ask the Hockey Gods for puck luck for the NYR .
Now all I want is Torts the smug stupid goatee clown to be fired , . I hate Torts . Please hockey gods make him get fired. Please Sean punch him in face" -- Dorado
This is where the salary cap sucks... You get penalized for drafting well...
I see what you mean, but I disagree. If anything, drafting well is MORE important with the salary cap. Every Cup champion since the lockout has had major contributions from players on ELCs. Without cheap production, it's almost impossible to afford enough skill to win the Cup without going over the cap.
I'd argue 3-5 years as the outside window that correlates with Lundqvist and his quote unquote prime, 2 optimal years with the current roster. How much the current roster changes is a big factor obviously.
Rodent has written a few good "window" articles this season.
2012 UFA
Fedotenko
Christensen
Prust
Mitchell
Eminger
Woywitka
Biron
But 2013 is where things get kind of iffy:
2013 RFA
Anisimov
Stepan
Hagelin
McDonagh
Sauer
the only important players imo we need to retain i highlighted, things get easier if u ask me as long as once the space from the wolski,woywitka, etc come off the books and sather doesnt do what everyone here wants him to do which is sign parise to a 8 million dollar contract or trade for weber/nash etc. sather just needs to be smart and im sure he will do the exact opposite of what everyone here wants to do and go NHL 12 style and throw money at guys. Take what cap space we have coming off the books this year, use it wisely with the list of anisimov,stepan,hagelin,mcdonagh,sauer in mind at all times.
if i was sather id try to resign some guys after this season, when the money is there, but regardless we dont have to spend every dollar once it frees up we CAN end next season with 5-6 mill on the cap in preparation to retain all our RFAS
Last edited by SwedishBullet62: 01-18-2012 at 05:38 PM.
id say thats not far off. they are RFAs and not eligible for arbitration as far as i understand off the cuff. only a couple of those guys seem indepensible anyway
LOL at everyone flipping out on what MPF said about Richards.
The more logical thing would have been to say... to just save the amnesty, if there is one, for Richards DOWN THE LINE, just in case he does start to decline on the backend of his contract. Amnesty isn't the same as a buyout. You amnesty a player and it rids their cap hit. Team still has to pay the player though, it just doesn't count towards the cap and the player goes through waivers.
We have the absolute irreplaceables signed up for a while and if any holes appear over the next few years they can be patched up. For as long as you have your three or four star players signed you can have an indefinite window providing you draft well.
Structurally sound organisations don't have 'windows'; only shallow organisations and old players do.
LOL at everyone flipping out on what MPF said about Richards.
The more logical thing would have been to say... to just save the amnesty, if there is one, for Richards DOWN THE LINE, just in case he does start to decline on the backend of his contract. Amnesty isn't the same as a buyout. You amnesty a player and it rids their cap hit. Team still has to pay the player though, it just doesn't count towards the cap and the player goes through waivers.
If we can keep the amnesty clause for a long time then I would agree to use it on Richards if he starts to decline heavily in a few years.
LOL at everyone flipping out on what MPF said about Richards.
The more logical thing would have been to say... to just save the amnesty, if there is one, for Richards DOWN THE LINE, just in case he does start to decline on the backend of his contract. Amnesty isn't the same as a buyout. You amnesty a player and it rids their cap hit. Team still has to pay the player though, it just doesn't count towards the cap and the player goes through waivers.
the cap hit won't be as big of a deal in six years when the cap is $90MM
They're definitely on pace, but for the love of God they must get their PP together. Championship teams don't **** around with the puck on man advantages.
I'd argue 3-5 years as the outside window that correlates with Lundqvist and his quote unquote prime, 2 optimal years with the current roster. How much the current roster changes is a big factor obviously.
Rodent has written a few good "window" articles this season.
this X1000....the only 'window' is linked to how long hank is at the top of his game. as long as he is an elite goalie we can be a contender
and the whole concept to me is just silly. its not like the next years RFA class are 5 elite players that will get monster raises. stepan & mcdonagh are keys and will be signed. hagelin won't make big $$. in a worst case scenario we might be forced to move anisimov cause he'll make too much for what he brings, but i don't see that as a big deal since most of us would trade him tomorrow for a good return. and if erixon and mcilrath develop then losing sauer wouldn't be critical either...and thats ignoring the cap space that could be cleared by getting rid of less important players and having cheaper guys in the bottom 6.
and imo its an insult to the depth we have developed to think that our 'window' closes cause we might lose anisimov and sauer, 2 guys that many don't even consider core guys. the team even under the doom and gloom worst case scenario would still have hank, staal, girardi, dubinsky, callahan, richards, gaborik, etc
I love Gaborik, but if he is in his final contract year and we dont have the cap space, we should trade him for a good rookie.
It saves us cap space and we get a nice young player for the future.
That said, I am very confident that we will be able to re-sign all our guys without dealing away Gaborik.
In fact, depending on what happens to the revenue sharing percentage, revenue increases and salary rollbacks, we csn probably afford Parise if he is willing to sign with us.
at people putting richards,buyout and amnesty clause in the same sentence already.
