again I am fine with these players next yr. Sick of turnover , they need to fine tune
Kreider, Stepan, Nash
Hagelin, Brassard, Callahan
Zuccarello, Miller, Dorsett
X,X,X..............maybe Fast, Kristo , Lindberg , Hrvik can crack the lineup
just let Boyle, Moore, Pouliott, Pyatt, Asham, Powe walk as UFA or trade them. Its pretty simple. Richards has to get bought out with the cap hit
Sign Steve Ott for grit and leadership. Yea offense is still crap so if they can fit in a scorer like Vanek they kind of have to do it
I am sick of Rnager fans not understanding this. I had to explain this to a ticket holder at the last game I went to...
Richards at 6.6M is a BARGAIN... 50-70 point producer and 1st/2nd line center. To put this in perspective, Callahan is going to be asking for MORE than Richards currently gets (I understand that this is comparing old contracts to new, but i'm talking straight $ into the players pocket), for producing less than HALF (dare I bring up the Gaborik argument again?) than Richards...
It's Richards cap penalty if he does retire. But realistically, with the cap going up, I don't see this penalty as an issue unless he retires in the last 2 years of the contract.
If we're looking for a cup in the next 3-5 years, Richards MIGHT be part of the answer
This is the problem with Evander Kane. He is like that, I don't know, pizza with extra everything. But in the end you still just get a pizza...
But you can describe him in two ways:
He is a Canadian that is big, physical, skates well and what not. He is only 22 and has still made it to the NHL and scores around .75 PPG.
Or you can answer the following questions: If you watch him play, do you go "wow this guy really makes his team better and makes a diffrence on the ice"? Does he win 1 on 1 battles on the ice on a regular basis? He is a force on a PP? He is a force along the boards? He is a force on the forecheck or backcheck?
The bottom line is that the first one makes you go "wow lets move Cally, Miller, MDZ and a 1st for him" and the other makes you go "hm". The truth of course lies somewhere inbetween those two approches. From my point of view, I am just always going to be sceptical if you get what you pay for with a player like E. Kane. Not that I mind the player in any way. I also wouldn't rule out that he could go like Correy Perry on you. But I just don't get that "this player could be a cornerstone on a great team"-wibe with him, and his price if high if you go below that...
And as far as Evander Kane goes. Yeah, sure I'd love to get a kid like him and his caliber on this team, who wouldn't? But the asking price for him is astronomical. He doesn't strike me as that franchise player that is going to put up 80+ point seasons, or is a phenomenal 2-way Center that puts up 65-75 pts (Toews, Dats, Bergeron). He seems like a Bobby Ryan, hell even Nash as far as numbers will go type player to me. Consistent 30 goal scorer, but not a guy you can rely on to carry the team when needed and bring you far in the playoffs.
Then again, I haven't watched the kid play much at all outside games the Rangers have played against him and I don't remember ever being too threatened by him (although he was in the WC, and I think he was out when we just played WPG earlier?)
I really don't think the Clarkson contract is going to set the market. That contract was a mistake and many GMs and agents realize it is not indicative of market value. Wade Redden's contract wasn't used as the gold standard for defensemen, otherwise we would have seen many more defensemen with cap hits north of $6.5 million.