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 free agent thoughts

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-14-2010, 07:45 PM
  #126
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzy Duke of NY View Post
I dont buy the "now now now" argument.

You dont handicap your team NOW, while Drury and Rozy are on the books, you stay the course, grow the core of your team, and in two years, you sign. Or you wait one more year and Crosby is a UFA, with 1 year still left on Lundqvist and Gaborik.
Hahaah wow can you imagine Crosby coming here? The fickle new york sports fan who boo'd his every move would adore him. It would be sickening, but expected.


I agree with your assessment.

If we DO actually STAY THE COURSE, we will actually be a team who can be a top flight team year after year. It might take half a decade. It might take a decade.

But for a team who has one 1 Stanley Cup in the last 70 years I think that is absolutely acceptable.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 07:46 PM
  #127
HVPOLARBEARS19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Country: Israel
Posts: 2,055
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to HVPOLARBEARS19 Send a message via MSN to HVPOLARBEARS19
I am of the mindset that we go after Kovy and Volchenkov (only if Volchenkov wants less than $5m, but I'd pretty much be willing to give Kovy the $8.5m or whatever that he wants...), resign Auld, Prust, Staal, Girardi (if it's $2.5m or less), Shelley, Christensen and then stand pat.

I do not understand why we wouldn't resign Auld, he basically fits everything Tortorella said he wants in a backup...aside from that, if we make any UFA signings, I really don't want any long term "reaches", such as Kotalik (why we did that signing I have no idea, it just made no sense). If we do some one-year deals to hold us over with guys like Prospal, I can live with that, but ABSOLUTELY no long term deals for guys that are no game-breakers. I'd rather save that money for the elite guys, especially with Jokinen's big cap hit coming off the books, and god-willing, Redden's cap hit disappearing in Hartford.

No second-tier guys that are 2nd-3rd liners tweeners...we already have enough of them, no reason to overpay for them via free agency.

HVPOLARBEARS19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 07:50 PM
  #128
captain9nyr
@captain9nyr
 
captain9nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hammonton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 936
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to captain9nyr
Quote:
Originally Posted by HVPOLARBEARS19 View Post
only if Volchenkov wants less than $5m.
I thought you didn't want to overpay...

captain9nyr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 08:00 PM
  #129
HVPOLARBEARS19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Country: Israel
Posts: 2,055
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to HVPOLARBEARS19 Send a message via MSN to HVPOLARBEARS19
Quote:
Originally Posted by puckhead94 View Post
I thought you didn't want to overpay...
I don't but I believe we really could use Volchenkov...I was going to say if he wanted no more than $4.5, but I can't see him signing for that low. So, let me change it to $4.5 now...does that make any difference, or do you think there's a chance he'd sign for lower than that? I personally don't, but I could definitely be wrong.

HVPOLARBEARS19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 08:16 PM
  #130
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,477
vCash: 500
Same thing every summer around here. Chasing the big names in free agency.

I'd really love to see a team where the stars came up through our own system and aren't hired guns. It's been far too long. Over a decade and we have Lundqvist to show for it. Had this team been built correctly, we wouldn't be dealing with the "We're wasting Lundqvist's and Gaborik's prime years!" issue.

You don't build a team through free agency and then draft around it. You build through the draft and via trade, and then you add the final pieces through free agency. I'll gladly gamble on a like like MZA, but I'll pass on guys like Plekanec, Volchenkov, Frolov, or Kovalchuk.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 08:17 PM
  #131
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzy Duke of NY View Post
I dont buy the "now now now" argument.

You dont handicap your team NOW, while Drury and Rozy are on the books, you stay the course, grow the core of your team, and in two years, you sign. Or you wait one more year and Crosby is a UFA, with 1 year still left on Lundqvist and Gaborik.
The problem with that scenario is that since the lockout, every major first line talent in his prime who was coming up on free agency outside of Gabby, Kovy and, to a lesser extent, Hossa... never made it to free agency. Even the guys who LOOK like they MIGHT be approaching that level (e.g. Kesler) get locked up by their existing teams before they hit the open market.

So you DO make your play for Kovy now, because there's not much likelihood anyone approaching his talent at his age will be available next year, the year after that or any time soon. (That, or as Inferno suggested, you sell Hank to the highest bidder and grow through the draft.)

And I don't see where the timing of when the contracts of Rozsie (who I think will be traded this offseason) and Drury have any bearing on things. You lock down the three (Kovy, Gabby & Hank), keep the young vets, integrate the kids and eschew all other UFAs. And then, when Drury comes off the books, you've got that same cap room. In the meantime, yes, you are forced to let guys like Volchenkov, Plekanic and others go by the wayside - and I am FINE with that. Signing guys like that to $5MM and $6MM contracts is what got us in this mess to begin with. (And you don't pay $4MM or more for a Dman who brings no offense.)

[Some caveats to this post - all of this assumes Redden gets buried. And I am NOT advocating Kovy for whatever he wants, because if his cap hit is eight figures it's simply too much for one player under the anticipated cap. But if you can sign him to a deal that has an average cap hit of, say, $8.5MM, then you HAVE to do it.]

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 08:25 PM
  #132
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrok22 View Post
How will our cap situation suddenly be better next offseason? Rozi and Drury will still have a year left on their deals (and Redden would still be in Hartford). You'd have the same exact situation next offseason.

Kovalchuk > Thornton > Richards... he's also several years younger, and there's no guarantee that Thornton or Richards will hit UFA a year from now or ever (yes, I know the Devils could re-sign or trade Kovalchuk, but I'm operating on the assumption that he's there on July 1st).

Passing on Kovalchuk because you think the grass will be greener next offseason is foolish. It's the same type of arguments being made last offseason about not signing Gaborik because Kovalchuk would be an UFA. Gabby worked out pretty good, eh? Get the bird in hand while you can.
We pass on Kovalchuk because we can't afford him. If he's getting 8+ million, we'll probably need to do more than just waive Redden to fit him under the cap. Next year, Brashear is gone. Voros is gone. Gilroy is RFA and we can replace him for cheaper if he doesn't work out. If he does work out, then maybe we trade Girardi or Rozy.

Richards, assuming he becomes UFA, will cost less than Kovy, leaving us enough money to sign our RFAs.

But as I've said before, I think it's all moot anyway. I see no reason why Kovy would sign here. If he wants to play for a winner, he'll sign somewhere else.


Last edited by GAGLine: 04-14-2010 at 08:34 PM.
GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 08:25 PM
  #133
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Same thing every summer around here. Chasing the big names in free agency.

I'd really love to see a team where the stars came up through our own system and aren't hired guns. It's been far too long. Over a decade and we have Lundqvist to show for it. Had this team been built correctly, we wouldn't be dealing with the "We're wasting Lundqvist's and Gaborik's prime years!" issue.

You don't build a team through free agency and then draft around it. You build through the draft and via trade, and then you add the final pieces through free agency. I'll gladly gamble on a like like MZA, but I'll pass on guys like Plekanec, Volchenkov, Frolov, or Kovalchuk.
I get this. I understand this. But you can't dial back the clock to 2005 - we are where we are. So, if you keep Hank and Gabby, you've got no other choice.

IMO, the only other real choice is to trade those two players for crazy returns (and I can imagine how that would be received!) and then try a proper rebuild to grow the stars through our system.

If you aren't willing to do the former OR the latter, I'm afraid you're doomed to repeat 85-95 point seasons over and over and over again until Hank and Gabby start to lose their skills.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 09:21 PM
  #134
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
I get this. I understand this. But you can't dial back the clock to 2005 - we are where we are. So, if you keep Hank and Gabby, you've got no other choice.

IMO, the only other real choice is to trade those two players for crazy returns (and I can imagine how that would be received!) and then try a proper rebuild to grow the stars through our system.

If you aren't willing to do the former OR the latter, I'm afraid you're doomed to repeat 85-95 point seasons over and over and over again until Hank and Gabby start to lose their skills.
I do agree to an extent. It's definitely a lousy situation to be in. Still, I just don't think investing close to 20% of the cap in a guy like Kovalchuk is a wise idea. Not only from a cap management standpoint, but from a team identity standpoint. You just don't see teams that are built this way achieving any kind of success in this league.

I'm on the fence about dealing away Lundqvist and Gaborik. On one hand, I think it's unfair to both players to "sell" them, especially Lundqvist, after they've carried this team on their backs. On the other hand, I don't think it's fair to make them play through this cluster **** year after year.

Additionally, I don't think you'd have to "start from scratch" so to speak if you dealt them. There's a lot of possibilities. For example:

Lundqvist, Avery, 2nd 2011 for Sharp, Beach, Huet, Chi 1st in 2010

Target one of: J. Quick/J. Bernier, C. Schneider, J. Halak/C. Price

Does that set us back tremendously? I suppose next season it might, but any one of those goalies listed can step in and be a #1 in this league -- I suppose Schneider would be the easiest to acquire, but has also proven the least at this level. Not to mention Huet has proven he can be a #1 at times.

In addition, you've added a 30 goal scorer on a reasonable contract in Sharp, a stud power-forward prospect in Beach, and another solid prospect with the extra 1st rounder. I believe it puts us just over the cap depending on who we retain and how much we dish out in raises, but it's feasible.

Does that fit in entirely with my "home grown" gripe? Hell no. But it's manageable moving forward. You overpay free agents. It might be "only 1 or 2 mil" but if you add that up across 2 or 3 free agents, that's 3-6 mil in dead cap space you could have avoided.

So again, I'm not advocating the trading of Lundqvist, I'm just presenting a scenario to demonstrate it doesn't have to set us back years and years.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 09:33 PM
  #135
Puckface NYR*
R.I.P. Boogyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
We pass on Kovalchuk because we can't afford him. If he's getting 8+ million, we'll probably need to do more than just waive Redden to fit him under the cap. Next year, Brashear is gone. Voros is gone. Gilroy is RFA and we can replace him for cheaper if he doesn't work out. If he does work out, then maybe we trade Girardi or Rozy.

Richards, assuming he becomes UFA, will cost less than Kovy, leaving us enough money to sign our RFAs.

But as I've said before, I think it's all moot anyway. I see no reason why Kovy would sign here. If he wants to play for a winner, he'll sign somewhere else.
If we get rid of Redden, Jokinen is also coming off the books so that DEFINITELY leaves enough to fit Kovy+everyone else under the cap.

I really am not sold on Richards unless he comes down to about 5-6 mil/ year.

Voros can be sent down, Lisin is probably gone, Gilroy will likely be down, who knows what happens with Brashear.

Sending Redden down leaves the Rangers numerous options. the only handicapped contract after that is Drury's who still remains a worthwhile asset, just not at 7.5.

Roszival might be dealt but he's also a worthy top 4 defensmen.

I understand people wanting to build through the draft and to some extent i completely agree. The only problem is i dont see the Rangers (regardless of what i want) attempting to do a complete rebuild, its never been there style and i assume that while under Dolan this will never occur.

Every year they are out to make the playoffs, for this reason alone i think the Rangers need to JUMP at the chance to scoop up a player like Kovalchuk because, as previously stated, many top players often do not come on the market anymore.

the Rangers problem isnt with signing guys who are worth there money, i.e. Gaborik, Kovalchuk etc. its signing FA who are not worth there money. This is what the Rangers are notorious for, overpaying! It is absolutely possible to build a team using free agency, the Rangers just don't seem to understand how.

Signing guys like kotalik, gomez, redden, drury, naslund etc...to overpaid contracts is the problem with the Rangers. You cant build a cup worthy team when you make giant mistakes with guys who never produced up to those kinds of dollars.

As ive said before, with a little patience and smart FA signings the Rangers can be a competative force for many years in about 2-3 seasons. We have a strong prospect pool management just needs to be smart with there money for once.

An example of a foolish offseason move would be signing plekanec to a long term contract or signing volchenkov to a 5 mil or more contract.

Puckface NYR* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 09:43 PM
  #136
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
I do agree to an extent. It's definitely a lousy situation to be in. Still, I just don't think investing close to 20% of the cap in a guy like Kovalchuk is a wise idea. Not only from a cap management standpoint, but from a team identity standpoint. You just don't see teams that are built this way achieving any kind of success in this league.

I'm on the fence about dealing away Lundqvist and Gaborik. On one hand, I think it's unfair to both players to "sell" them, especially Lundqvist, after they've carried this team on their backs. On the other hand, I don't think it's fair to make them play through this cluster **** year after year.

Additionally, I don't think you'd have to "start from scratch" so to speak if you dealt them. There's a lot of possibilities. For example:

Lundqvist, Avery, 2nd 2011 for Sharp, Beach, Huet, Chi 1st in 2010

Target one of: J. Quick/J. Bernier, C. Schneider, J. Halak/C. Price

Does that set us back tremendously? I suppose next season it might, but any one of those goalies listed can step in and be a #1 in this league -- I suppose Schneider would be the easiest to acquire, but has also proven the least at this level. Not to mention Huet has proven he can be a #1 at times.

In addition, you've added a 30 goal scorer on a reasonable contract in Sharp, a stud power-forward prospect in Beach, and another solid prospect with the extra 1st rounder. I believe it puts us just over the cap depending on who we retain and how much we dish out in raises, but it's feasible.

Does that fit in entirely with my "home grown" gripe? Hell no. But it's manageable moving forward. You overpay free agents. It might be "only 1 or 2 mil" but if you add that up across 2 or 3 free agents, that's 3-6 mil in dead cap space you could have avoided.

So again, I'm not advocating the trading of Lundqvist, I'm just presenting a scenario to demonstrate it doesn't have to set us back years and years.
I don't really disagree with you here. Just a couple of points:

1) As I said in a previous post, I'm not advocating signing Kovy for whatever he wants. If he's going to come close to 20% of the cap (i.e. an annual cap hit in the $10-11MM range), then I agree that it's too much. He simply takes up too much room, no matter how rationally you've distributed the rest of your contracts. I'm only saying that you make an offer in the $8-8.5MM annual cap hit range and hope it's the winner.

2) If I'm trading Gabby, or especially Hank, I want a package back that includes at least one guy who has a chance to be as good in the future as Gabby/Hank is now. I'm not sure if Beach fits that criterion. Go to Colorado and get Duchene, Stoa and their #1 & #2 this year.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 09:45 PM
  #137
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface Avery View Post
If we get rid of Redden, Jokinen is also coming off the books so that DEFINITELY leaves enough to fit Kovy+everyone else under the cap.

I really am not sold on Richards unless he comes down to about 5-6 mil/ year.

Voros can be sent down, Lisin is probably gone, Gilroy will likely be down, who knows what happens with Brashear.

Sending Redden down leaves the Rangers numerous options. the only handicapped contract after that is Drury's who still remains a worthwhile asset, just not at 7.5.

Roszival might be dealt but he's also a worthy top 4 defensmen.

I understand people wanting to build through the draft and to some extent i completely agree. The only problem is i dont see the Rangers (regardless of what i want) attempting to do a complete rebuild, its never been there style and i assume that while under Dolan this will never occur.

Every year they are out to make the playoffs, for this reason alone i think the Rangers need to JUMP at the chance to scoop up a player like Kovalchuk because, as previously stated, many top players often do not come on the market anymore.

the Rangers problem isnt with signing guys who are worth there money, i.e. Gaborik, Kovalchuk etc. its signing FA who are not worth there money. This is what the Rangers are notorious for, overpaying! It is absolutely possible to build a team using free agency, the Rangers just don't seem to understand how.

Signing guys like kotalik, gomez, redden, drury, naslund etc...to overpaid contracts is the problem with the Rangers. You cant build a cup worthy team when you make giant mistakes with guys who never produced up to those kinds of dollars.

As ive said before, with a little patience and smart FA signings the Rangers can be a competative force for many years in about 2-3 seasons. We have a strong prospect pool management just needs to be smart with there money for once.

An example of a foolish offseason move would be signing plekanec to a long term contract or signing volchenkov to a 5 mil or more contract.
I had some serious disagreements with you down the stretch, Puckface. But I think you're dead on with this post.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 09:49 PM
  #138
HockeyGuy1985*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
IMO, Kovalchuk is worth equal of what Gaborik is. No way is he worth more.

Volchenkov should be HEAVILY sought, but only if its 3.5-4. Staal should be re-upped at 2.8, but thats not going to happen.

Of course, this all is contingent on SENDING REDDEN TO HARTFORD.

He is such dead weight, its not even funny. Its actually just ridiculous that its actually allowed to happen. and that Sather STILL has a job. Unfathomable.

HockeyGuy1985* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 09:52 PM
  #139
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,917
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuy1985 View Post
IMO, Kovalchuk is worth equal of what Gaborik is. No way is he worth more.

Volchenkov should be HEAVILY sought, but only if its 3.5-4. Staal should be re-upped at 2.8, but thats not going to happen.

Of course, this all is contingent on SENDING REDDEN TO HARTFORD.

He is such dead weight, its not even funny. Its actually just ridiculous that its actually allowed to happen. and that Sather STILL has a job. Unfathomable.
Kovalchuk has no injury history and multiple 50 goal seasons. He's worth a lot more than Gaborik.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:00 PM
  #140
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface Avery View Post
I understand people wanting to build through the draft and to some extent i completely agree. The only problem is i dont see the Rangers (regardless of what i want) attempting to do a complete rebuild, its never been there style and i assume that while under Dolan this will never occur.

Every year they are out to make the playoffs, for this reason alone i think the Rangers need to JUMP at the chance to scoop up a player like Kovalchuk because, as previously stated, many top players often do not come on the market anymore.
I can understand where you're coming from on just about everything you said, except for the bit I quoted.

Just because the current front office is doing things one way, it doesn't mean I have to suck it up and tune my ideas to fit their strategy. Just because they love signing UFA's doesn't mean I have to condone it.

Why is it that virtually every other team in the league has "top players" but aren't pulling them from the FA pool?

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:01 PM
  #141
Jaromir Jagr
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuy1985 View Post
IMO, Kovalchuk is worth equal of what Gaborik is. No way is he worth more.

Volchenkov should be HEAVILY sought, but only if its 3.5-4. Staal should be re-upped at 2.8, but thats not going to happen.

Of course, this all is contingent on SENDING REDDEN TO HARTFORD.

He is such dead weight, its not even funny. Its actually just ridiculous that its actually allowed to happen. and that Sather STILL has a job. Unfathomable.
Kovalchuk > Gaborik first off.

Second off, Volchenkov at 3.5-4? Try 5ish. And Staal at 2.8 is an insult.

Jaromir Jagr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:02 PM
  #142
HockeyGuy1985*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzy Duke of NY View Post
Kovalchuk has no injury history and multiple 50 goal seasons. He's worth a lot more than Gaborik.

Hes a 1.11 PPG since the lockout.

Gaborik is a 1.12.

Kovalchuk has only two 50 goal seasons (both 52), which are also the only two times hes scored more than Gaborik ever has. (he did have a 43 goal year but I wont count it since Gaborik basically had an empty netter that he tried giving to Prospal instead)

HockeyGuy1985* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:03 PM
  #143
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,917
vCash: 50
Right, but we got Gaborik for 7.5 mil because his price was brought down by a lack of team's offers due to injury history.

Such a thing doesnt exist for Kovalchuk.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:04 PM
  #144
HockeyGuy1985*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaromir Jagr View Post
Kovalchuk > Gaborik first off.

Second off, Volchenkov at 3.5-4? Try 5ish. And Staal at 2.8 is an insult.

Gaborik is the better all around player. Im basing this on talent, not injury.

This year we have seen what Gaborik can do. He finished with 1 better point than Kovalchuk with much lesser supporting cast. (42 G, 44A, opposed to 42 G, 43 A both in 76 games)

HockeyGuy1985* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:09 PM
  #145
HockeyGuy1985*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaromir Jagr View Post
Kovalchuk > Gaborik first off.

Second off, Volchenkov at 3.5-4? Try 5ish. And Staal at 2.8 is an insult.

Overrating these guys.

Higher money value should go to guys that contribute on the scoresheet.

While both of their shutdown games are among the best in the league, its like paying Drury $7million. You shouldnt be giving out that kind of money for blocking shots and playing defense.

If Callahan and Dubinsky were both signed for less than that, how is Staal at 2.8 per an insult?

If you had a choice between a sniper and a shutdown defensemen, which would you sign at the highest value?

HockeyGuy1985* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:10 PM
  #146
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
I don't really disagree with you here. Just a couple of points:

1) As I said in a previous post, I'm not advocating signing Kovy for whatever he wants. If he's going to come close to 20% of the cap (i.e. an annual cap hit in the $10-11MM range), then I agree that it's too much. He simply takes up too much room, no matter how rationally you've distributed the rest of your contracts. I'm only saying that you make an offer in the $8-8.5MM annual cap hit range and hope it's the winner.
I think other teams will be willing to crack open the piggy bank this summer for Kovalchuk.

Quote:
2) If I'm trading Gabby, or especially Hank, I want a package back that includes at least one guy who has a chance to be as good in the future as Gabby/Hank is now. I'm not sure if Beach fits that criterion. Go to Colorado and get Duchene, Stoa and their #1 & #2 this year.
The problem is that Hank is the highest paid goalie in the league. You're going to have to take some salary back and find a team that is truly in need of a legitimate #1 goalie. Personally, I think Colorado is more sold on Anderson than Chicago is on Niemi, Huet, or Crawford. Plus, they're in a lousy cap situation. Meaning we could possibly get even more out of the deal.

I think Beach is going to be a fantastic power-forward in the NHL. I don't see him as a Todd Bertuzzi in his prime or anything, but I think 30-30 with a willingness to drop the gloves with anyone is well within his reach. He also plays the off wing and would, in my opinion, be great paired up with Gaborik and, dare I say, Ryan Johansen. Or maybe he ends up being the winger that gives Anisimov or Stepan enough space to do their thing on the 2nd line. It opens up a lot of possibilities.

Chicago and Philly are the teams that are in dire need of a #1 goalie. Unfortunately, there's no way in hell I'm giving Philly a franchise net-minder.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:11 PM
  #147
nyr2417
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
I do agree to an extent. It's definitely a lousy situation to be in. Still, I just don't think investing close to 20% of the cap in a guy like Kovalchuk is a wise idea. Not only from a cap management standpoint, but from a team identity standpoint. You just don't see teams that are built this way achieving any kind of success in this league.

I'm on the fence about dealing away Lundqvist and Gaborik. On one hand, I think it's unfair to both players to "sell" them, especially Lundqvist, after they've carried this team on their backs. On the other hand, I don't think it's fair to make them play through this cluster **** year after year.

Additionally, I don't think you'd have to "start from scratch" so to speak if you dealt them. There's a lot of possibilities. For example:

Lundqvist, Avery, 2nd 2011 for Sharp, Beach, Huet, Chi 1st in 2010

Target one of: J. Quick/J. Bernier, C. Schneider, J. Halak/C. Price

Does that set us back tremendously? I suppose next season it might, but any one of those goalies listed can step in and be a #1 in this league -- I suppose Schneider would be the easiest to acquire, but has also proven the least at this level. Not to mention Huet has proven he can be a #1 at times.

In addition, you've added a 30 goal scorer on a reasonable contract in Sharp, a stud power-forward prospect in Beach, and another solid prospect with the extra 1st rounder. I believe it puts us just over the cap depending on who we retain and how much we dish out in raises, but it's feasible.

Does that fit in entirely with my "home grown" gripe? Hell no. But it's manageable moving forward. You overpay free agents. It might be "only 1 or 2 mil" but if you add that up across 2 or 3 free agents, that's 3-6 mil in dead cap space you could have avoided.

So again, I'm not advocating the trading of Lundqvist, I'm just presenting a scenario to demonstrate it doesn't have to set us back years and years.
Hank is worth alot more than that

nyr2417 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:12 PM
  #148
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,917
vCash: 50
The hell are we talking about trading Gaborik and Hank for? did I miss something or are we just having fun with hypotheticals.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:13 PM
  #149
Jaromir Jagr
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuy1985 View Post
Gaborik is the better all around player. Im basing this on talent, not injury.

This year we have seen what Gaborik can do. He finished with 1 better point than Kovalchuk with much lesser supporting cast. (42 G, 44A, opposed to 42 G, 43 A both in 76 games)
Are you completely disregarding every year other than this one? Kovalchuk has 50 goal seasons under his belt. The fact that he isn't injury prone like Gaborik shouldn't decrease his price; in fact, it increases it.

If you look back at both of their entire NHL careers; this is what they average: Kovalchuk = 0.54 GPG. Gaborik = 0.45 GPG.

Now, if you want to make the argument that their first few seasons are developing seasons and you just want to discount them. OK.

Let's take post-lockout stats into account:

Kovalchuk = 0.58 GPG
Gaborik = 0.58 GPG

So, even though they are tied in actual production in the stat of goals-per-game, Kovalchuk plays more games, and thus, is more productive. Also: UFA status.

Kovalchuk will get more than Gaborik because he's slightly superior. He's not Ovechkin-ish. He doesn't deserve 10. But he might get it.

Jaromir Jagr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2010, 10:15 PM
  #150
Jaromir Jagr
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuy1985 View Post
Overrating these guys.

Higher money value should go to guys that contribute on the scoresheet.

While both of their shutdown games are among the best in the league, its like paying Drury $7million. You shouldnt be giving out that kind of money for blocking shots and playing defense.

If Callahan and Dubinsky were both signed for less than that, how is Staal at 2.8 per an insult?

If you had a choice between a sniper and a shutdown defensemen, which would you sign at the highest value?
You're going into dimensions that make no sense. Just because they are primary defensive specialists means they aren't entitled to money because they aren't offensive powerhouses? You have to look at comparables. Staal's comparables (even this year) have signed extensions for right around $3.5. Staal MIGHT take a hometown/long term discount, however, it'd still be past $3 at the very least. You don't lowball home talent. And that's what you're doing.

Jaromir Jagr 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 03:15 PM.

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.