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

Ryane Clowe

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-04-2013, 01:40 PM
  #251
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,507
vCash: 500
They will give him a 5 year deal, and by year 3 of that contract, this board will be chock full of Clowe-bashing. By year 4, Clowe will be dealt somewhere for the next set of role players and reclamation projects, and the cycle of retooling on the fly will continue. Championships, meanwhile, will continue to evade the team.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 01:44 PM
  #252
Green Blob*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
The most you would give him is two years? That's equally preposterous as giving him 8.
I dont think so. You can always re up him again in 2 years. If you give him an 8 year contract then your ****ed if it doesnt work out. Who is going to want that contract in year 3 if he is horrible and looks like Drury out there? There is no more buyouts, that would be a terrible risk.

Green Blob* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 01:57 PM
  #253
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 10,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
They will give him a 5 year deal, and by year 3 of that contract, this board will be chock full of Clowe-bashing. By year 4, Clowe will be dealt somewhere for the next set of role players and reclamation projects, and the cycle of retooling on the fly will continue. Championships, meanwhile, will continue to evade the team.
I don't disagree with the bolded really at all, but you never know who's going to win. If you're so sure they're going to lose - what's the point of even following?

haveandare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 02:02 PM
  #254
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
They will give him a 5 year deal, and by year 3 of that contract, this board will be chock full of Clowe-bashing. By year 4, Clowe will be dealt somewhere for the next set of role players and reclamation projects, and the cycle of retooling on the fly will continue. Championships, meanwhile, will continue to evade the team.
Agreed. I want to avoid an extension at all costs, but that's probably not going to happen.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 02:02 PM
  #255
Lindbergski
24ski
 
Lindbergski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: Poland
Posts: 350
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Lindbergski Send a message via Yahoo to Lindbergski
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Blob View Post
The most I give him is a 2 year contract. If he won't take that, well then goodbye and we keep our 2nd round pick.

Really disappointing to hear those contracts demands. Guess thats why Sharks had to unload him.
Who do you replace Clowe with next year if you don't resign him? 5 years should be what the Rangers look at. 5/18-20M.

Lindbergski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 02:03 PM
  #256
RangerBoy
HOPE & CHANGE
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 35,571
vCash: 500
Clowe's contract demands are a moving target. Russo reported Clowe wants 5 years/$25M. CSN Bay Area reported Clowe wants 6 years. Kyper reported the Rangers and Kent Hughes have agreed on parameters. Whatever that means.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 03:59 PM
  #257
Green Blob*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaporNY View Post
Who do you replace Clowe with next year if you don't resign him? 5 years should be what the Rangers look at. 5/18-20M.
Who knows, I haven't looked through all the UFAs but id rather go a year without a Clowe then sign him for 5. People need to realize he is declining. In 2-3 years there is a very strong possibility that he will not be an effective player at all except for dropping the gloves. Dont we learn anything from these long term contracts?

Green Blob* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 04:19 PM
  #258
shinchanyo
Registered User
 
shinchanyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Here
Posts: 3,120
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
They will give him a 5 year deal, and by year 3 of that contract, this board will be chock full of Clowe-bashing. By year 4, Clowe will be dealt somewhere for the next set of role players and reclamation projects, and the cycle of retooling on the fly will continue. Championships, meanwhile, will continue to evade the team.
Yea I can see this happening unless we win a cup. if there was a timid smiley I'd post it. I have no problem risking a 3 year 4.5 mil per but some ridiculous 5 year deal unless it's some uber discounted 3 mil per would drive me nuts. I believe he's going to be a great player for his role for another 2 years but then again I thought Richards would give us at least 3

shinchanyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 06:59 PM
  #259
dethomas07
Registered User
 
dethomas07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,631
vCash: 500
4yr deal max 4.25

dethomas07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 07:44 PM
  #260
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 12,149
vCash: 500
LOL he wants 7/8 years?? Most I'd give him is 3.. come on thats ridiculous.

Lundsanity30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 07:45 PM
  #261
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 12,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaporNY View Post
Who do you replace Clowe with next year if you don't resign him? 5 years should be what the Rangers look at. 5/18-20M.
He should be given more than Callahan?

Lundsanity30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 07:54 PM
  #262
Riverdale
Registered User
 
Riverdale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 5,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oh Thats Nashty View Post
I'm terrified of a McDonagh offer sheet. Sather plays hardball with RFA's. A ridiculous offer by Holmgren would put the Rangers in a bad spot.
I wouldn't worry about it.

Riverdale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 07:57 PM
  #263
Giglio NYR15
Section 417
 
Giglio NYR15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,572
vCash: 500
Im going to be pissed if they give him more than 5 years....hes 30.

Giglio NYR15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2013, 08:03 PM
  #264
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
They will give him a 5 year deal, and by year 3 of that contract, this board will be chock full of Clowe-bashing. By year 4, Clowe will be dealt somewhere for the next set of role players and reclamation projects, and the cycle of retooling on the fly will continue. Championships, meanwhile, will continue to evade the team.
Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

I jest a little here, but I have to admit you make a good point. The difference that I see now as compared to say the years immediately following the lock out is the Rangers prospect pipeline. It's better than it has been in a long time. Would you agree with that?

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 07:28 AM
  #265
NYR Viper
Registered User
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 32,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

I jest a little here, but I have to admit you make a good point. The difference that I see now as compared to say the years immediately following the lock out is the Rangers prospect pipeline. It's better than it has been in a long time. Would you agree with that?
I would. Although back when Callahan, Dubi and Anisimov were coming up, with Staal, Girardi and Sauer was a pretty good time. Prucha, Dawes, Tom Pyatt as well.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 08:20 AM
  #266
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dethomas07 View Post
4yr deal max 4.25
I wouldn't even go that high, but no worries because that's not enough to get it done anyway.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 08:23 AM
  #267
Placid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Norway
Posts: 4,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
I wouldn't even go that high, but no worries because that's not enough to get it done anyway.
hehe, a Sharks fan came over here when the deal was confirmed, and said that Clowe likely wanted a good contract to end his career with.

In the ballpark of 5 - 6 years, at 5 - 6 mill each year.

I shudder at the thought in all honesty

EDIT : ahh, here it is

Placid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 08:35 AM
  #268
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecemleafs View Post
u cant just retire and end it in this cba. the caphit remains.
Not the full cap-hit. What counts is the difference between the cap-hit and actual salary for the remaining years of the contract.

If Richards retires when he reaches his $1M years his cap penalty would be $6.667M - $1M = $5.667M/year for the remaining years.

Since contracts cannot be front-loaded in the same manner under the new CBA, Clowe retiring before the end of his contract would likely carry little to no penalty at all.

Blue Blooded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 09:37 AM
  #269
RangerBoy
HOPE & CHANGE
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 35,571
vCash: 500
McDonagh will file for salary arbitration. Sather can't hardball him. McD has the hammer.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 09:45 AM
  #270
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 7,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
They will give him a 5 year deal, and by year 3 of that contract, this board will be chock full of Clowe-bashing. By year 4, Clowe will be dealt somewhere for the next set of role players and reclamation projects, and the cycle of retooling on the fly will continue. Championships, meanwhile, will continue to evade the team.
I hate this attitude. Really.

96.66% of NHL teams fail to win a championship each and every year. That's the cold reality of how difficult it is to win the Stanley Cup. If failing to win the Cup is your measure of success, then the overwhelming majority of teams are miserable failures every year. There has to room for a broader definition of "success" than simply winning the Cup. The odds are terribly long against each and every team every year.

If the Rangers make the playoffs this year, they'll have been a playoff team for 7 out of the last 8 years having gone to the semi finals at least once. How many other teams can say that? I realize the ultimate goal is championships, but that sets the bar impossibly high. I realize it's disappointing to not go deeper, more consistently, every year. But parity, loser points, salary caps, etc... have watered down the NHL to the point where nearly every team is in the picture nearly all season long.

haohmaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 10:26 AM
  #271
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
I hate this attitude. Really.

96.66% of NHL teams fail to win a championship each and every year. That's the cold reality of how difficult it is to win the Stanley Cup. If failing to win the Cup is your measure of success, then the overwhelming majority of teams are miserable failures every year. There has to room for a broader definition of "success" than simply winning the Cup. The odds are terribly long against each and every team every year.

If the Rangers make the playoffs this year, they'll have been a playoff team for 7 out of the last 8 years having gone to the semi finals at least once. How many other teams can say that? I realize the ultimate goal is championships, but that sets the bar impossibly high. I realize it's disappointing to not go deeper, more consistently, every year. But parity, loser points, salary caps, etc... have watered down the NHL to the point where nearly every team is in the picture nearly all season long.
Well, the feeling is mutual, because I absolutely loathe this attitude. The point isn't that a championship must be won, and certainly not every year. But success should be measured by how often the team has a serious chance to win a championship, and for this team, that has happened once, last season.

This team has accomplished a whole boatload of mediocrity. They made the playoffs a bunch of times when Lundqvist dragged in awful teams that had no business being there. One of their series wins was against what might be one of the worst teams to ever qualify for the playoffs in tha Atlanta team.

One real contender in 8 years, and major changes to the roster every 2-3 years.

Sustained Success? That's a joke. The only thing that has been sustained is mediocrity. Just because this team finally figured out how to develop good complimentary players doesn't mean that we should all line the Canyon of Heroes and jump for joy. That's not nearly enough, and so far, that's about the only thing they've gotten right.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 10:32 AM
  #272
SixGoalieSystem
HFBoards Sponsor
 
SixGoalieSystem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 3,349
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
I don't disagree with the bolded really at all, but you never know who's going to win. If you're so sure they're going to lose - what's the point of even following?
Loyalty?

SixGoalieSystem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 10:37 AM
  #273
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 7,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
Well, the feeling is mutual, because I absolutely loathe this attitude. The point isn't that a championship must be won, and certainly not every year. But success should be measured by how often the team has a serious chance to win a championship, and for this team, that has happened once, last season.

This team has accomplished a whole boatload of mediocrity. They made the playoffs a bunch of times when Lundqvist dragged in awful teams that had no business being there. One of their series wins was against what might be one of the worst teams to ever qualify for the playoffs in tha Atlanta team.

One real contender in 8 years, and major changes to the roster every 2-3 years.

Sustained Success? That's a joke. The only thing that has been sustained is mediocrity. Just because this team finally figured out how to develop good complimentary players doesn't mean that we should all line the Canyon of Heroes and jump for joy. That's not nearly enough, and so far, that's about the only thing they've gotten right.
See my post in the other thread.

haohmaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 10:53 AM
  #274
RangerBoy
HOPE & CHANGE
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 35,571
vCash: 500
In the salary cap NHL,there are no great teams. Chicago had a great team in 2010. The cap and their success forced them to make major changes. Has Chicago won a playoff series since winning the Cup? The other dynasty in Pittsburgh hasn't come close to the Cup since winning it in 2009. Losing Crosby is a huge blow to the Cup hopes. He will return by the playoffs. No time to form chemistry with Iginla and the other new players. Pitt has lost in the first round twice in the last 2 years. Crosby and Malkin were out in 11. They were both healthy last year when Philly beat them. Those are two teams people point to because they tanked and built themselves back up. Boston won the Cup after Chicago and Pitt. They didn't tank and basically give away seasons.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-05-2013, 12:07 PM
  #275
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 16,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Blob View Post
I dont think so. You can always re up him again in 2 years. If you give him an 8 year contract then your ****ed if it doesnt work out. Who is going to want that contract in year 3 if he is horrible and looks like Drury out there? There is no more buyouts, that would be a terrible risk.
Well I think we all know that he isn't signing a 2 year deal, and we didn't give up a 2nd and a 3rd to bring him here for two months. So the question is what does he get? Clearly 7-8 years isn't happening either. In the end I'd guess he gets somewhere around 4-5 years. Certainly the back end of that deal would likely be a problem...but when is that not an issue with contracts today?

broadwayblue 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 07:17 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.