“We feel the fit right now is not with Nashville,” Poile said. “He is currently in negotiations in the KHL, but still leaving the window open to a possible return to the NHL. I have reached out to a few teams in the NHL to see whether there is any interest. If there is there’s the possibility we could trade his rights. But that’s where it stands today.”
What NHL team is going to give him 4+ mil on a multiyear deal? If all he cares about is the money, then he'll go back to the KHL for 2 years until he's a free agent and then maybe come back.
If we added guys like Nash and Radulov, both would help make our offense from the mostly one-dimensional chip and chase grind it out, endless cycle offense it is now into more of a puck possession, dynamic, unpredictable offensive attack.
Parise, while certainly a better all-around player than either Nash or Radulov, doesn't change the dynamic of our attack. He makes it better, without question. But itd be the same KIND of exhausting, grind it out attack. I think we need at least one or two wingers who can make our attack more unpredictable and more dynamic. Radulov fills that need that better than Parise. Nash, I think, is somewhere in the middle, but as has been beaten to death, his contract is an albatross.
What NHL team is going to give him 4+ mil on a multiyear deal? If all he cares about is the money, then he'll go back to the KHL for 2 years until he's a free agent and then maybe come back.
I can think of a few...starting with ours. Look, if he doesn't work out, a) given his track record there will be another team that will trade for him and b) if all else fails, KHL teams will take the contract. Scorers are always in demand. Not every deal comes with this much wiggle room.
The Rangers are going to pay Radulov more than they are paying all of the forwards except Gaborik and Richards? That makes no sense. If Radulov was coming off his ELC with his NHL production,he would get $2.5M per in a 2 year deal before being eligible for salary arbitration. He should return to Russia.
book this.
If the Rangers get Radulov on the cheap, say a 2nd rounder, GUARANTEED he gets a 1 year deal at 4.5
that would allow the Rangers to evaluate the player for a year while he's playing for a contract.
The 4.5 would be gone after the season if they choose not to bring him back.
Basically, it's a 2.5 addition to the current roster as the other 2 million would be the Drury Cap hit reduction.
High Risk, high reward, but one I believe we should gamble on.
$4-5 million range is still less than what Parise is going to get. It allows you to keep dubinsky for at least this season. Gaborik will come back in november-december time frame. If we sign Parise we would most likely have to deal dubinsky to leave room under the cap for when gaborik were to return to the lineup.
Bottom line we need another offensive threat. We have the defense and the goaltending. The defense does need to be rounded out (Schultz could be that guy giving us a weapon on the point on the PP and better depth for the top 6). But back to the point, you look at the kings, pretty good defense though I think ours has more talent, and a great goalie. The difference between them and us is they have better offensive talent/weapons depth wise. We don't. They are able to move the puck out of their own end and skate rings around an opposing team in the offensive zone at times. At this point I don't care if its Parise or Radulov. I had an interest in Nash but when the deadline came, Howson quickly dismissed my interests with his outrageous demands. Nash is a great player but that contract was tough to swallow as it is, add the moon price tag and its a no brainer to walk away from that moron of a GM in cbj.
According to capgeek, rangers have 21m in cap space. Let's say they resign Biron prust and mdz for about 5m total, that leaves 16. You can't worry about what may or may not happen 2 yrs down the road w our cap.
1 year at 4.5 is in no way too high of a price. it's 1 year... that's more than more than decent for a 1 year deal. big mistake not chasing it. i mean dubi's making what-- 4.2 on a multi-year deal? 4.5M would be fair for us and him. nobody else we go after to fill that spot will be even close to that price. not to mention at 4.5 we still should have room to negotiate and we don't lose any contracts...
idk how any of you can think 4.5 is too high when dubinsky is making 4.2... cally is making 4.275...
4.5 million for a 1 year deal is better than 3.5m for 5 years with radulov imo. maybe they can work him down to 4 because of his reputation...
hell! redden makes 6.5!!
idk... i just don't see 4.5 being unacceptable.
4 is what i expected him to get. 4.5 for a year is not a bad figure.
4.5 isn't going to put parise out of the question either... and 1 year deals are the **** at the deadline. everybody wants them. minimal risk. high reward.
wrong thread though--sort of... i guess this is free agency discussion.
Last edited by mooskating: 06-06-2012 at 01:46 AM.
What NHL team is going to give him 4+ mil on a multiyear deal? If all he cares about is the money, then he'll go back to the KHL for 2 years until he's a free agent and then maybe come back.
Oh I am 100% sure that several teams would go 4m+ for Radulov. You don't think that's the case?
Why? Nash's cap hit is way bigger than Parise's will end up being and he's going to cost a ton in assets to pry loose from Columbus. That's not even going into the fact that Parise is arguably the better player.
The Rangers don't have $21M. The upper limit will not be $70M next season in the first year of the new CBA. Click the story on capgeek.com. Why we set our upper limit at $70.3M.
The Rangers don't have $21M. The upper limit will not be $70M next season in the first year of the new CBA. Click the story on capgeek.com. Why we set our upper limit at $70.3M.
but wouldn't the temporary cap cover radulov on a year deal anyway and not matter for him or any other 1 year deal? we could severely overpay radulov in this case on a 1 year deal and still have room for plenty of additional depth/scoring. (especially if we sign them all to one year deals ) am i understanding it correctly?
albeit in september wouldn't we risk not being able to make any roster changes or something-- since it's a temporary cap would we be held to that cap all year? or only on signings made during the regular season-- and if it drops as it's speculated, would that make it so that deals in the summer are completely ignored or ignored to a % or something?? or...
idk, maybe i'm not understanding entirely how this works. i understand that the cap in the summer is 70.3mm or w/e and it is a temporary cap. i assume that means we can sign any 1 year deals up to that cap (possibly up to 77 million or w/e due to the temp boost). if we have a 77 million cap this summer(if only for this year)... we could do some serious dealings. am i not understanding the summer cap correctly?
What's the difference between this thread and the offseason thread?
do we really need two of the same threads?
specific subject (free agents) vs a plethora. maybe somebody doesn't want to hear about tortorella's interviews. both have decent information on the subject-- spread from one to the other decently. idk... my 2 cents. not needed, but not seeing the harm.
but wouldn't the temporary cap cover radulov on a year deal anyway and not matter for him or any other 1 year deal? we could severely overpay radulov in this case on a 1 year deal and still have room for plenty of additional depth/scoring. (especially if we sign them all to one year deals ) am i understanding it correctly?
albeit in september wouldn't we risk not being able to make any roster changes or something-- since it's a temporary cap would we be held to that cap all year? or only on signings made during the regular season-- and if it drops as it's speculated, would that make it so that deals in the summer are completely ignored or ignored to a % or something?? or...
idk, maybe i'm not understanding entirely how this works. i understand that the cap in the summer is 70.3mm or w/e and it is a temporary cap. i assume that means we can sign any 1 year deals up to that cap (possibly up to 77 million or w/e due to the temp boost). if we have a 77 million cap this summer(if only for this year)... we could do some serious dealings. am i not understanding the summer cap correctly?
You're understanding it right, but you'd be a fool to believe it's a good idea to spend up to the $70.3m Cap. My guess is that most teams will use this past year's Cap as a baseline. After all, that number represents ~51% of this past season's revenue, which is close to being in the ballpark of what the owners want.
Resigning Del Zotto, Prust, Biron, Mitchell, plus giving Radulov $4.5m, would leave us with about $5m in space under the old cap to bring in another forward and another couple of defensemen. Keep in mind that Redden's contract basically eats the entire summer cushion on it's own, so I generally don't even account for that cushion.
