HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

What is Brad Richards worth?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2006, 06:34 PM
  #76
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,286
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0v
I don't agree with you . May be he could do it , but he wouln't because it 's too much money for 3 players and that would not correct that goaler situation .
You need to take into consideration the fact that our GM is currently insisting that we don't have a problem in net and that we're not in the market for a goalie.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 07:42 PM
  #77
gobolt7
Registered User
 
gobolt7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Florida.
Country: Ireland
Posts: 11,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0v
.But if you keep both Richards and Lecavalier , you are going to have no room to move if you have to , during the season.
We are up against the cap now, so being tight money wise is nothing new to us.

My guess on our situation: we will not make a move for a goalie at the deadline, the cap will go up 3-4 million dollars, and we will resign Richards in the offseason.

gobolt7 is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 08:48 PM
  #78
jfont
Registered User
 
jfont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 15,374
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobolt7
We are up against the cap now, so being tight money wise is nothing new to us.

My guess on our situation: we will not make a move for a goalie at the deadline, the cap will go up 3-4 million dollars, and we will resign Richards in the offseason.
does tampa have the ability to even go up to the cap? tampa is a small market team, no?

paying 3 guys over $6M a year is just abit too much for one team. the avs got rid of forsberg (who only signed for less than $6M) and foote...and lacroix doesn't mind spending the big money...btw, they too only have 2 guys making over $6M.

My guess is richards will test the FA market...

__________________
Due to budget cuts, the light at the end of the tunnel will be turned off
jfont is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 08:59 PM
  #79
gobolt7
Registered User
 
gobolt7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Florida.
Country: Ireland
Posts: 11,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfont
does tampa have the ability to even go up to the cap? tampa is a small market team, no?
Before the lockout, I vaguely remember Davidson saying that we would have whatever we needed to keep the core together financially.

(Sorry I cant give you anything more specific, but I have tries to clear my memory of all lockout related events)

gobolt7 is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 09:24 PM
  #80
jfont
Registered User
 
jfont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 15,374
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobolt7
(Sorry I cant give you anything more specific, but I have tried to clear my memory of all lockout related events)
lockout? what lockout?

jfont is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 09:32 PM
  #81
Asiaoil
Registered User
 
Asiaoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Thailand
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick - Flames Fan
Not even close. Go away.
Brilliant post flame boy - sour grapes for not signing him - go away yourself.

Stoll 43 points, 60% in FO, $500,000 salary. Richards 45 points, 50% FO, $3.5 million salary. This trade value is a lot closer in a capped league than you would like to admit.

Asiaoil is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 10:33 PM
  #82
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,286
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfont
does tampa have the ability to even go up to the cap? tampa is a small market team, no?
Small market, owner with extremely deep pockets. Pre-lockout I believe he had okayed at least $45M to keep the team together, if memory serves.

Quote:
My guess is richards will test the FA market...
He's RFA, so you're thinking there's a GM out there willing to make the first offer sheet in a long time for him? That should prove interesting.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 11:50 PM
  #83
flambers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobolt7
Lets do the math:

Lets say the salary cap goes up by 1.5 million. (I think it will be more, but lets just use this, I think it is more than fair.)

Sydor is probobly on his way out after this year. 2.15 Million

Thats almost 4 million right there, there are plenty of ways that Feaster can free up another 2 million. (If the salary cap makes him and does not goe up any further.)
Okay, so the Lightning lose a top 3 dman and spend the money on a forward.....yah that makes sense...............

flambers is offline  
Old
01-21-2006, 11:52 PM
  #84
flambers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobolt7
We are up against the cap now, so being tight money wise is nothing new to us.

My guess on our situation: we will not make a move for a goalie at the deadline, the cap will go up 3-4 million dollars, and we will resign Richards in the offseason.
I have never heard any stories that claims the cap is going up 3 to 4M.

flambers is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 01:59 AM
  #85
WILDTATE10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asiaoil
Brilliant post flame boy - sour grapes for not signing him - go away yourself.

Stoll 43 points, 60% in FO, $500,000 salary. Richards 45 points, 50% FO, $3.5 million salary. This trade value is a lot closer in a capped league than you would like to admit.
Richards is ten times better then Stoll no matter what stats say.

WILDTATE10 is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 02:08 AM
  #86
Hockeyfan02
Registered User
 
Hockeyfan02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pistivity
Country: United States
Posts: 13,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flambers
Okay, so the Lightning lose a top 3 dman and spend the money on a forward.....yah that makes sense...............
With the way Sydor is playing this season, it makes perfect sense. He's been terrible.

Hockeyfan02 is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 05:38 AM
  #87
Asiaoil
Registered User
 
Asiaoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Thailand
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WILDTATE10
Richards is ten times better then Stoll no matter what stats say.
Obviously the concept of caproom is beyond you - so let me explain.

Stoll is statistically playing roughly as well this season as Richards - but Richards is clearly a better player right now although Stoll is younger. If Stoll signs for $1.5 million next season (not unreasonable to get a $1 miilion raise) and Richards signs for $5 million (again not unreasonable) that would leave TAM with $3.5 million to fill other holes (like in goal) that they could not if they simply resigned Richards. So Stoll plus $3.5 million in cap space allows Tampa to spend cap dollars on one or several UFAs as they choose (like a goalie).

See - not so complicated

Asiaoil is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 08:17 AM
  #88
gobolt7
Registered User
 
gobolt7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Florida.
Country: Ireland
Posts: 11,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asiaoil
Obviously the concept of caproom is beyond you - so let me explain.

Stoll is statistically playing roughly as well this season as Richards - but Richards is clearly a better player right now although Stoll is younger. If Stoll signs for $1.5 million next season (not unreasonable to get a $1 miilion raise) and Richards signs for $5 million (again not unreasonable) that would leave TAM with $3.5 million to fill other holes (like in goal) that they could not if they simply resigned Richards. So Stoll plus $3.5 million in cap space allows Tampa to spend cap dollars on one or several UFAs as they choose (like a goalie).

See - not so complicated
Just because Stool is playing "statisically" as well as Richards this year does not mean Tampa should go out and sign him to a long term contract to replace Richards. That makes no sense whatsoever, in a cap world or not.

I think the problem here is that people dont understand that our GM has stated many times he is not in the market for a goaltender. Why would we make room under the cap for a goalie when we are currently not looking for one.

gobolt7 is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 08:52 AM
  #89
Timmy1973
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Orlando
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyfan02
With the way Sydor is playing this season, it makes perfect sense. He's been terrible.
He hasn't been that bad, the team just isn't getting what it's paying him for. If he were at half the money, it wouldn't be so bad. He's an okay defenseman and blocks enough shots, but in the salary cap world you can get that for less.

And flambers, he isn't in the top 3 here. Boyle, Kubina and Sarich are the top three. You can sort out Pratt, Ranger and Sydor 4-6 just about anyway you want on any given night. $2.2M is too much for a guy that low. Lukowich was not resigned because the money he wanted was too much for where he was on the depth chart. I think Sydor has played his way into the same situation this year.

Timmy1973 is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 11:15 AM
  #90
BoltsnRags
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 20
vCash: 500
A little confused by Brads next contract

Reality suggest anyone can be traded and the superstar never returns enough for the fans of said team to be happy. There are excetpions but most fans overestimate how much of a return a player should net.

With that being said, I have been wondering why it is being overlooked that Brad already counts $3.4 mill against the cap and his raise can be fit in just by the expected increase in the salary cap (caveat - this is still an unproven amount and will not be determined until year end), therefore his % of the new cap will go up modestly. Brad's salary is not the problem. Brad and Vinny should equal 1/4 of the cap because they are the super stars. Brad's value always comes under attack because he is not the proto type super star we have come to yearn for. He performs equally great in all aspects of the game but does t in a way that can be overlooked.

If I were GM and looking to trade him, I would be looking for a top tier prospect (all NHL), a current young #2 center, and a #1 pick this year or a 2nd in 2006 and 1st in 2007.

Bigger problems for the Bolts are the overpayment that St Louis $6.5 and more importantly Boyles $2.75 received (per NHLPA website). Now Dmen seem to be overpaid by a lot of teams and maybe Boyle's not greatly overpaid but now how do the Bolts resign Kubina for less. Kubina is definitely higher rated around the league then Boyle's and will have to be traded if they keep Brad IMO.

BoltsnRags is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 01:03 PM
  #91
BruinAddict
Registered User
 
BruinAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,236
vCash: 500
Richards will easily earn as much as Lecavalier. He has a better case statisically (and hardware-wise) than Lecavalier minus not being a top-pick. So essentially, 20M for 3 guys, while needing to resign many players and realizing that they still don't have a #1 goalie, but 2 decent back-ups.

If/when the cap goes up, it won't even help them keep their team together due to the fact that all their UFAs will get their values jacked-up by all the other teams with new-found cap room.

End result, St.Louis will get traded in the off-season/deadline for a mediocre return due to his contract/length/age.

BruinAddict is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 02:37 PM
  #92
LastoftheBrunnenG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Jets Go
By peanuts I was saying that you will NOT get more than what Boston got for Thornton.

So because Boston's GM can't make a good trade, Feaster can't make a good one for Richards? The two are not mutually exclusive.

LastoftheBrunnenG is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 02:43 PM
  #93
LastoftheBrunnenG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinAddict
Richards will easily earn as much as Lecavalier. He has a better case statisically (and hardware-wise) than Lecavalier minus not being a top-pick. So essentially, 20M for 3 guys, while needing to resign many players and realizing that they still don't have a #1 goalie, but 2 decent back-ups.

If/when the cap goes up, it won't even help them keep their team together due to the fact that all their UFAs will get their values jacked-up by all the other teams with new-found cap room.

End result, St.Louis will get traded in the off-season/deadline for a mediocre return due to his contract/length/age.
Keep fantisizing about a cap situation you don't understand. This board was collectively wrong about signing Vinnie...then St Louis...they'll be wrong about Richards. Eventually, by shear repitition/coincidence they'll be correct about something. I'm sure you look forward to that day so you can say "I told you so!" Various Lightning fans have gone over the numbers OVER AND OVER again, but you're STUCK ON STUPID with the "$20M for 3 forwards" mantra.

LastoftheBrunnenG is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 02:48 PM
  #94
FoppaArGud
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: PHILLY
Country: United States
Posts: 395
vCash: 500
For the millionth time, the St Louis signing doomed this team

youve gotta pay everyone, why not pay boyle, kubina, richards, vinny and maybe bulin (i have to believe they could have gotten him two years 5M a year or a little under) and let a guy walk who had a career year. didnt they give marty a 5 year deal? that is just asinine, oh well, they had their day in the sun. could they have been ANY luckier in 2004? not saying bulin didnt put in work and they didnt have great team chemistry but to only lose 17 games to injury ALL YEAR is pretty ****ing lucky if you ask me who spent the year watching the FLyers and Kings put AHL lines on the ice.

FoppaArGud is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 03:03 PM
  #95
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,286
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoppaArGud
youve gotta pay everyone, why not pay boyle, kubina, richards, vinny and maybe bulin (i have to believe they could have gotten him two years 5M a year or a little under)
I believe we actually offered him more than that. If memory serves, he gets about the same money overall in Chicago as he would have gotten here, but with a 1-year difference in length of contract.

Quote:
and let a guy walk who had a career year. didnt they give marty a 5 year deal? that is just asinine, oh well, they had their day in the sun. could they have been ANY luckier in 2004? not saying bulin didnt put in work and they didnt have great team chemistry but to only lose 17 games to injury ALL YEAR is pretty ****ing lucky if you ask me who spent the year watching the FLyers and Kings put AHL lines on the ice.
Luck, well, you make your own luck. Combine it with an excellent conditioning program, starting before training camp and continuing all season long. Post-game statement from Calgary's head coach to Tampa's head coach immediately after Game 7: "You wore us out." That's not all luck, that's conditioning and training.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 04:37 PM
  #96
firstroundbust
lacks explosiveness
 
firstroundbust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Parts Unknown
Country: United States
Posts: 5,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobolt7
If Jay Feaster is talking to the Wild, (which I dont think will ever happen) he starts with Gaborik and goes from there.



however gaborik and richards contracts are relatively similar, and if I am not mistaken, Risebrough used Brad's contract as a measuring stick.

Gabs is a RFA, so you'd be in the same boat regardless.

firstroundbust is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 09:10 PM
  #97
jfont
Registered User
 
jfont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 15,374
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029
Small market, owner with extremely deep pockets. Pre-lockout I believe he had okayed at least $45M to keep the team together, if memory serves.



He's RFA, so you're thinking there's a GM out there willing to make the first offer sheet in a long time for him? That should prove interesting.
the kings had a $45M payroll the last season ... this year, they're at $35M. and they're not going up. now with a big market team like LA not going up, what more with tampa? and the kings owner is one of the richest in the world...

jfont is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 09:17 PM
  #98
Hockeyfan02
Registered User
 
Hockeyfan02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Pistivity
Country: United States
Posts: 13,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfont
the kings had a $45M payroll the last season ... this year, they're at $35M. and they're not going up. now with a big market team like LA not going up, what more with tampa? and the kings owner is one of the richest in the world...
The Lightning owner was willing to spend as much as it took to keep the team together during the 04 offseason. That's why most Lightning fans are assuming that if the cap goes up, the Lightning owner will be willing to spend up to the limit.

Hockeyfan02 is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 09:25 PM
  #99
jfont
Registered User
 
jfont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 15,374
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeyfan02
The Lightning owner was willing to spend as much as it took to keep the team together during the 04 offseason. That's why most Lightning fans are assuming that if the cap goes up, the Lightning owner will be willing to spend up to the limit.
it could work and i'm not saying the tampa owner won't or coulnd't do it...but with all these other supporting players a team needs, it would be very hard to pay 3 players over $6M. don't you think?

jfont is offline  
Old
01-22-2006, 09:46 PM
  #100
Garbs
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Garbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobolt7
Lets do the math:

Lets say the salary cap goes up by 1.5 million. (I think it will be more, but lets just use this, I think it is more than fair.)

Sydor is probobly on his way out after this year. 2.15 Million

Thats almost 4 million right there, there are plenty of ways that Feaster can free up another 2 million. (If the salary cap makes him and does not goe up any further.)
Okay, and? You still have a bottom seeded playoff team, only now minus Sydor. You're sure as Hell not going to improve.

If the Tampa Bay Lightning want to stay competitive - competitive with the likes of Philadelphia and Ottawa, not Atlanta and Montreal, then they simply can not spend 18+ million dollars on 3 players (Three forwards no less, still no goaltender). That's not how you build yearly competitive teams.

And it's not as if Tampa Bay has a plethora of elite prospects that can come in and make up ground. If they have any sense at all, they will trade one of the three, and address other pressing needs in doing so.

Garbs 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 12:40 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.