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

Rangers sign Chris Higgins; 1yr/$2.25M

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-06-2009, 06:34 PM
  #76
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 11,016
vCash: 500
Hmmm... Yet another possibility for the one year deal - perhaps Slats went with the lowest cost options because he is saving his pennies for Versteeg/Barker...?

Not really Slats' style to go after them if the situation blows up in CHI's face, however.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 06:56 PM
  #77
lucky13
Iron Chic
 
lucky13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: selden...L.I.
Country: United States
Posts: 700
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Higgins is too young and too good to be considered a place holder.

Naslund was a place holder.

Higgins should now be considered a big part of the Rangers future.

He is currently 26 years old. And primed to break out and become a second tier star.

That's why i don't like the one year deal. I was hoping to have him around for a long time.

People are going to love this guy. He has a ton of skill, and a ton of work ethic to go with it.
but chances are he didnt want to sign a multi yr deal.....this year.....

him and his agent both also know that he has this talent and work ethic......and they both also know that he'll be a ufa next yr.....so im sure they're figuring that if he puts up 25-25 this yr that he can resign with the rangers or anywhere else for a multi yr of atlest lil as 3.25 which is a full mill more per yr .......and depending on the market maybe even close to 4 mill per ......

these guys know what the'yre doing.....

lucky13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 08:08 PM
  #78
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,810
vCash: 500
If this kid can re-discover his 25 goal/50 point ability and play his normal style, Ranger fans are going to love him.

He's not a fighter, but he's gritty and fast.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 08:18 PM
  #79
EEL
Registered User
 
EEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: HHI
Country: United States
Posts: 118
vCash: 500
The price is right and I'm looking foward to his work rate. This is the type of player we were lacking last year. I just wish we would have tied him up a little longer.

EEL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 08:46 PM
  #80
Kovy274Hart
Registered User
 
Kovy274Hart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Shaolin
Country: United States
Posts: 1,498
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kovy274Hart
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
If this kid can re-discover his 25 goal/50 point ability and play his normal style, Ranger fans are going to love him.

He's not a fighter, but he's gritty and fast.
Agreed Edge. He plays hard and is a good skater who also is an effective PKer.

No surprise just a year coming off injury season. Prove yourself kid.

Kovy274Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 09:39 PM
  #81
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Not much fanfare given to restricted free agent Higgins signing a one-year deal worth $2.25 million with the New York Rangers, who acquired his rights in the Scott Gomez deal last week. On one hand, the Rangers get a very good player cheap, cheap, cheap for next season. On the other hand, Higgins has set himself up nicely for the unrestricted free-agent market next July if he's unable to sign an extension with the Rangers. If he has a good season, he'll get his payday.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/...=lebrun_pierre

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 09:49 PM
  #82
Jonas1235
Registered User
 
Jonas1235's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,530
vCash: 500
You have to keep in mind that the salary cap may go down and the Rangers might need to dump salary to get under the cap.

Trading Rozsival would go a long way in keeping Zherdev and Higgins long-term.

Jonas1235 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 10:06 PM
  #83
DM23BK30
Registered User
 
DM23BK30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 17,440
vCash: 500
Textbook move by Higgins and his agent. I love the deal because we get a 25/50 guy for about 1.5 to 2 million cheaper than Zherdev or Antro and since he is playing for big bucks in 2010, I expect a very solid all-around season from him.

DM23BK30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2009, 10:24 PM
  #84
geisenNYR
Registered User
 
geisenNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 243
vCash: 500
I think higgins can be a huge help on the power play because he will attack the nets and bang home the rebounds playing on the other side of gaborik. Similar to how prucha scored 30 goals in 05 playing with jagr on the power play. How can u blame him for wanting a one year deal, if he puts up the 25-30 goals everyone seems to expect he is going to get, he will be primed for a deal in the range of 5 mil a year for 4 or 5 years, but at this point in he is not worth that.

geisenNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 09:53 AM
  #85
NYR1084
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 348
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to NYR1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYLine24 View Post
A little, but like I said, I think its more of Sather saying prove yourself after that off season he had. He will bounce back and hopefully Sather will be waiting at the end of the season with the extension in hand.

Could be the other way also...Sather could have offered him 3 years at 2.25 and Higgins asked for just a year to prove himself that he's worth more then 2.25?

Who knows. Either way, I dont think Sather is thinking about losing him come July 1st just yet.

2 year deal wasnt working out for both parties, so they went with 1 instead

NYR1084 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 09:57 AM
  #86
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
This was my inintial thought as well, but I'm not sure... who do we have coming off the books next year? The surprising answer is no one. EVERYONE currently signed is signed for at least two years. So what's the benefit of doing a one year deal and then reupping in January? This would make sense if you were planning on paying him out of salary currently allocated to someone else. But in this case, there's no other player who fits that description. (Unless we're about to sign some UFA for a one year deal?) In fact, for that reason, I would think it would make it all the MORE desirable to sign him for multiple years (especially coming off of the down year he had).

I guess the only scenario that makes sense is that Higgins asked for a one year deal (which I can see given that he came off of a bad year and is one year removed from UFA) and Slats accomodated him. Hopefully that engenders some loyalty...

EDIT: Of course, the one other reason for a single year could be that Slats is playing the cap REAL tight and the difference between the one year price and anything that took him into his FA years was significant enough that Slats went for one year and will hope to sort it out over the coming year (or let him go next summer).
I think Drury's contract actually becomes moveable next year, with only two years & $13MM remaining on it, as will Rosie's (if he's still here). Plus, Voros & Rissmiller will in all likelihood gone, as well. Just those latter two contracts opens up $$$ for Higgins.

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 12:04 PM
  #87
Hockey2000nyr
Registered User
 
Hockey2000nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker View Post
I think Drury's contract actually becomes moveable next year, with only two years & $13MM remaining on it, as will Rosie's (if he's still here). Plus, Voros & Rissmiller will in all likelihood gone, as well. Just those latter two contracts opens up $$$ for Higgins.
how is it moveable when the guy has a NO MOVEMENT CLAUSE!!!!!! and he is the captain of the team hes wanted to play for his entire life. tell me how is that a moveable contract?

Hockey2000nyr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 12:18 PM
  #88
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey2000nyr View Post
how is it moveable when the guy has a NO MOVEMENT CLAUSE!!!!!! and he is the captain of the team hes wanted to play for his entire life. tell me how is that a moveable contract?
Players waive these clauses all the time. I don't think Drury will want the rep that Sundin got when he refused to waive his NTC/NMC at the 2008 trade deadline. A lot can change in a year. He's a proud and fierce competitor, and doesn't want to be the anchor holding a team down.

I didn't say it was likely, but as we saw with Gomez, even what appears to be the most un-moveable contract can be moved if all parties are interested.

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 12:27 PM
  #89
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 16,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker View Post
Players waive these clauses all the time. I don't think Drury will want the rep that Sundin got when he refused to waive his NTC/NMC at the 2008 trade deadline. A lot can change in a year. He's a proud and fierce competitor, and doesn't want to be the anchor holding a team down.

I didn't say it was likely, but as we saw with Gomez, even what appears to be the most un-moveable contract can be moved if all parties are interested.
True, but Gomez was the most moveable contract of the 3. Guess time will tell. At least Drury only has 2 more years after this coming season.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 12:31 PM
  #90
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
True, but Gomez was the most moveable contract of the 3. Guess time will tell. At least Drury only has 2 more years after this coming season.
Let's not forget, too, that the CBA expires on 9/12/2012 (or there abouts), meaning that in all likelihood if we don't move/cut/buyout Redden before that date, he'll be off our books when a new CBA is ratified.

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 12:43 PM
  #91
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 13,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker View Post
Let's not forget, too, that the CBA expires on 9/12/2012 (or there abouts), meaning that in all likelihood if we don't move/cut/buyout Redden before that date, he'll be off our books when a new CBA is ratified.
Doesnt sound right to me.

Isnt a player entitled to the length of contract no matter what CBA it was signed under?

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 12:53 PM
  #92
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
Doesnt sound right to me.

Isnt a player entitled to the length of contract no matter what CBA it was signed under?
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant as a potential buy-out. At the beginning of the last CBA, teams were allowed to buy out players with no cap hit (see Holik, Bobby), and weren't allowed to re-sign those players for one year.

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:08 PM
  #93
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,688
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker View Post
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant as a potential buy-out. At the beginning of the last CBA, teams were allowed to buy out players with no cap hit (see Holik, Bobby), and weren't allowed to re-sign those players for one year.
That was a negotiated, one-time thing. There's certainly no guarantee that option will be on the table again.

nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:19 PM
  #94
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
That was a negotiated, one-time thing. There's certainly no guarantee that option will be on the table again.
Of course not, but you can argue that both sides benefited from this one-time action. I would all but guarantee that there will be something similar, especially if there is a strike/lock-out. MANY teams, especially smaller market ones, will want a way to shed salary if more than 1/4 of the 2012-13 season is not played.

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:27 PM
  #95
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 10,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker View Post
Players waive these clauses all the time. I don't think Drury will want the rep that Sundin got when he refused to waive his NTC/NMC at the 2008 trade deadline. A lot can change in a year. He's a proud and fierce competitor, and doesn't want to be the anchor holding a team down.

I didn't say it was likely, but as we saw with Gomez, even what appears to be the most un-moveable contract can be moved if all parties are interested.
I can't believe that people are still making light of NMCs as if they are non-problematic, especially after what is going on with Dany Heatley.

Asking a player to waive an NMC often results in a sticky situation, and I wouldn't exactly say that players waive them "all the time." Kaberle didn't, Sundin didn't, Redden didn't, Heatley refused to waive his NMC to go to Edmonton (although the situation is slightly different because Heatley demanded to be traded). If Drury refused to waive his NMC, I can guarantee that there would a fan backlash much like there was with Sundin.

I don't think Drury sees himself as an anchor holding the team down. He grew up a Rangers fan and has family in the area. I doubt he'd be eager to leave so quickly. Do you think Drury wants to play in Edmonton instead of living close to his family and playing for his favorite team? I think not.

OverTheCap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:43 PM
  #96
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,587
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker View Post
I don't think Drury will want the rep that Sundin got when he refused to waive his NTC/NMC at the 2008 trade deadline.
Sundin was on a last place team and his contract was up at the end of the season. Different situation.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:45 PM
  #97
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
I can't believe that people are still making light of NMCs as if they are non-problematic, especially after what is going on with Dany Heatley.

Asking a player to waive an NMC often results in a sticky situation, and I wouldn't exactly say that players waive them "all the time." Kaberle didn't, Sundin didn't, Redden didn't, Heatley refused to waive his NMC to go to Edmonton (although the situation is slightly different because Heatley demanded to be traded). If Drury refused to waive his NMC, I can guarantee that there would a fan backlash much like there was with Sundin.

I don't think Drury sees himself as an anchor holding the team down. He grew up a Rangers fan and has family in the area. I doubt he'd be eager to leave so quickly. Do you think Drury wants to play in Edmonton instead of living close to his family and playing for his favorite team? I think not.
He may not now, but if he continues to struggle next season he may. He respects Tortorella, and if the coach says he may not fit any more, who's to say he doesn't ask to be moved. Lots of places to play that aren't that far for his family to travel to. Maybe he retires, who knows?

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 01:52 PM
  #98
NYROrtsFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker View Post
He may not now, but if he continues to struggle next season he may. He respects Tortorella, and if the coach says he may not fit any more, who's to say he doesn't ask to be moved. Lots of places to play that aren't that far for his family to travel to. Maybe he retires, who knows?
Drury has been fine... He is what everyone expected (or should have expected). He's around his numbers and considering his linemates, the numbers are what you'd figure.

If he was to play with Higgins and Gaborik this year on his wings, then i'd fully expect his numbers to be near the two years in Buffalo.

The only truly bad contract we have in my opinion is Redden. Drury at least is closer to being worth his contract than Redden is to his. Drury always makes it clear that he at least belongs out there, while Redden sometimes makes you wonder if he should not be playing. Redden did do much better under Torts last year however.

NYROrtsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2009, 10:09 PM
  #99
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by geisenNYR View Post
I think higgins can be a huge help on the power play because he will attack the nets and bang home the rebounds playing on the other side of gaborik. Similar to how prucha scored 30 goals in 05 playing with jagr on the power play.
The biggest difference is that Jagr was also quite a playmaker. Gabby, not so much. Gaborik is one of the few people in the league that does not need to rely on other people to set him up. Prucha's goals were not just scored collecting garbage. He also got some nice feeds from Jags.

That said, if the Rangers can keep some cap space open and if Higgins does what he has done for most of his career, he and the team can come to a nice accomodation that will benefit everyone.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2009, 07:23 AM
  #100
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 11,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
The biggest difference is that Jagr was also quite a playmaker. Gabby, not so much. Gaborik is one of the few people in the league that does not need to rely on other people to set him up. Prucha's goals were not just scored collecting garbage. He also got some nice feeds from Jags.

That said, if the Rangers can keep some cap space open and if Higgins does what he has done for most of his career, he and the team can come to a nice accomodation that will benefit everyone.
I dunno - if he puts up, say, 55 points on Gabby's off wing, he's looking at a multi-year deal in the $4-5MM range. And then buh-bye (unless we move one/some of our bigger contracts) Just seems to me that this is exactly the situation where you take a small risk and lock him up for like 3 years at $3MM per year.

Of course, we don't know what went on in the negotiation and what the motivations of each party were (and there are plenty of plausible, justifiable reasons above), but I was disappointed to see it was only one year.

BrooklynRangersFan 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 04:10 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.