Toggle sidebar

Around the NHL: Part XV - End the Damn Season Already

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan said:
Agree re: Karlsson.
Panarin, I'm torn on: there are good arguments on both sides. 60/40, don't sign.
Trouba, I disagree. He turns 26 NEXT February, one month earlier than Skjei. There are absoclutely certain pieces that need to be off-limits in trying to acquire him, but in the right deal (e.g. Skjei + ADA for Trouba), he absolutely makes sense. It's not jumping the gun on the rebuild, it's simply reallocating the assets to be used in the rebuild.
Click to expand...

It's all about the right deal. We cleared cap over the last couple of years, entered a rebuild, and we are going to lock ourselves into a big contract when we don't even know how competitive we will be? Now if we can shed the three "S" (Staal, Shattenkirk, and Smith) contracts, then oh yeah, go after these guys, both if possible. I just feel we are a year or two away from making a big splash in the FA market or big trade. But hey I am always optimistic so just hope for the best.
 
The EK deal looks ridiculous but I'm inclined to believe SJ will find a way out after it goes sideways. Every team seems to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wicked Backhand
We dodged a huge bullet with Karlsson staying. Hopefully the team looking at him and now knowing they cannot get him circle back to other options.

Maybe Shatty becomes more valuable on the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYSPORTS
Would you pay a 29 year old Crosby 11 mil for 8 years if you had him? Yeah you would. Karlsson is just as good. He’s a generational player. Not a franchise player. A generational player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown and Devonator
zephyr said:
Not so sure about the buyouts....I don't see Shatt (and maybe Smith) staying beyond this season (if he lasts that long) and I don't see anyone trading for him. You can probably get a pick for Smith.
Click to expand...

I dont understand why people dont want to just wait till next year to see if we can trade them with one year on their contract or just wait out the 2 years. I know we want our young players to have the ability to come in and succeed but again they need to be ready to take those spots and again we are not going anywhere for the next few years. Let those contracts run out and gain around 16-18m in cap space. If we buy them out we are on the hook for nearly 6m with Girardi, Staal and Smith for the next 4 years. Why kill that much cap space when we will be ready to compete then and need the cap space to sign our own players and potential free agents? It makes little to no sense.
 
Chalfdiggity3 said:
I dont understand why people dont want to just wait till next year to see if we can trade them with one year on their contract or just wait out the 2 years. I know we want our young players to have the ability to come in and succeed but again they need to be ready to take those spots and again we are not going anywhere for the next few years. Let those contracts run out and gain around 16-18m in cap space. If we buy them out we are on the hook for nearly 6m with Girardi, Staal and Smith for the next 4 years. Why kill that much cap space when we will be ready to compete then and need the cap space to sign our own players and potential free agents? It makes little to no sense.
Click to expand...
If it turns out our youngsters are ready and do succeeds now, do you really have a choice? I'm not advocating they just bite the bullet and buy them out immediately.
 
NHL Draft Confidential: 10 most interesting anecdotes from...

Katie Strang posted some fun stories from draft interview questions. Here's one about Kevin Hayes an anonymous player.

‘Did you take a shit on a car?’

It was the 2010 combine and one of the top draft-eligible prospects was the talk of the NHL community, not so much for his play but for some of the alleged antics that earned him a substantial suspension from his team that year. When word started to trickle out about what he had done, it spread like wildfire, with teams scrambling to confirm whether the grisly (or at least gross) details were indeed true. Did this player really get caught, pants down, defecating on a car in a moment of teenage hijinks?

“That’s all anyone wanted to know,” said one person who attended the combine that year and knew the question every team was asking: ‘Hey, we heard you shit on a car.’”

One team executive remembers the player being savvy enough to tacitly acknowledge the act while artfully dodging further questions. Another remembered him being much more outright with his transgression.
“We didn’t even have to ask,” the executive recalled. “He walks in, very confident, sits in the chair, no hello’s, no ‘how are you doing?’ no breaking into (small talk). He just said, ‘Yup, it’s true. I shit on my girlfriend’s car.'”
The entire scouting staff dissolved into laughter and struggled to make use of the rest of their time. Each time they’d try to revert back into serious question mode, they’d howl and giggle again.

“I’ve never seen anything like it before and nothing like it since,” the exec said. “It was absurd. I mean he did handle it well for a kid who crapped on a car.”

A handful of other team staffers whose clubs interviewed him gave him credit for owning up to what was an embarrassing-albeit-uproarious topic.

“He’d say, ‘Yeah, you make some mistakes. You live and you learn,’” one person with knowledge of the situation recalled.

The player did not necessarily live and learn: He got caught relieving himself in public again while in college and, after forgetting his pants at the scene of the crime, had to sheepishly return to retrieve his clothes. Luckily for the player, the car owner was a season ticket-holder for the team he played for and opted not to press charges; instead, he simply asked that the mess be cleaned up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Harbour Dog, Do you want ants, Mac n Gs and 4 others
zephyr said:
If it turns out our youngsters are ready and do succeeds now, do you really have a choice? I'm not advocating they just bite the bullet and buy them out immediately.
Click to expand...

Yes you do have a choice lol

Buying out Shattenkirk would be so pointlessly unnecessary.
 
Bob Richards said:
Yes you do have a choice lol

Buying out Shattenkirk would be so pointlessly unnecessary.
Click to expand...
I think keeping him on the roster is pointlessly unnecessary. If they can trade him, more power to them. I still believe (IMO) he will be a buyout candidate.
 
Panarin's younger--he's not banged up. He should help Kakko and/or Kravtsov get better faster. If we move Kreider (that's probably $7 mil per we won't have to pay there) and we can move on from guys like Vesey, Namestnikov, Strome any time if we need more cap space but I doubt we're that near the ceiling. We'll move on from some of that group this year and after next we've got $26 mil + coming off the books all at once because we're not resigning any of Henrik, Shattenkirk, Staal or Smith and by that time we'll probably have at least 10 and maybe even a dozen regulars on our roster on their ELC or second contracts. Cap space ain't going to be an issue for a while. The cap could be close to $90 by then. Panarin should be very doable.

Karlsson is a couple/three years older--he is banged up--he's been dealing with serious injuries for a long while. 8 years is way too long a term. Sharks window is the next couple years and after that they look like they're going to be screwed. Too many older players--not enough younger players--not enough quality as far as prospects. They don't pick until 81 this year--they don't have a first next year. 4/5 years from now the Karlsson contract looks like an albatross. Anyway theirs is a different situation than ours--their goal has to be reached short term. They're going all in for that. The Rangers are putting together a young group but you still need some experience--something to build with and Panarin IMO fits that and so does IMO Trouba.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rongomania
Jayan said:
If we are gonna pay big money for a free agent, said person should be a great leader for our young players.

Bread would make sense for our russians, but would the price be to high? and does he have the right personality? the whole "pay me stupid much or i walk" is not what we want Buch, Kravstov, Rykov and Shestyorkin to adapt.

Honestly i would prefer not grabbing any "elite FAs" and instead focusing on trading for more picks.
Click to expand...

Panarin gets big $'s because A) he's earned it and B) he's the best free agent out there. When Buch and Kravtsov start stringing together 70-80 point seasons no one is going to begrudge them getting big $'s too. Until they do that though--they're going to have to settle for less. For Shesterkin to get to the big $'s--he's not only going to have to beat out Georgiev and become a starting goalie who can play 65 games a year--he's going to have to lead the Rangers into the playoffs and more than once or twice and his numbers are going to have to be comparable to the best goalies in the league. Rykov will probably make a nice living but he's probably never going to get there--maybe I'm wrong but I just don't see first pairing NHL defenseman in his future--I don't see him putting together 40/50 point seasons. He's more a stay at home guy. Those types don't break the bank.

Anyway back to Kravtsov, Buchnevich, Kakko, whoever. Panarin with the big contract is right before their eyes--incentive--what you need to do to make those big $'s. So he could be their motivation to take their talent as far as it will go.
 
Last edited:
zephyr said:
I think keeping him on the roster is pointlessly unnecessary. If they can trade him, more power to them. I still believe (IMO) he will be a buyout candidate.
Click to expand...

A half retained Shattenkirk at 3.325 for only two years will have teams biting on it. Teams are calling the Leafs about Nikita Zaitsev. Hell, providing insulation so that our young D-Men aren't forced out there is a value in and of itself.

Negative value would be the $6 million hit his buyout would place on our cap in 2020-21. Buying him out would be such an unnecessary and bad move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Kovalev27 said:
Would you pay a 29 year old Crosby 11 mil for 8 years if you had him? Yeah you would. A 100% Healthy Karlsson is just as good. He’s a generational player. Not a franchise player. A generational player.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that Achilles injury took away what made him a "generational" talent. That little extra that separated him from the other stars of the league.

IMO, he's still a top 10 defenceman for the first half of that contract, but that doesn't justify $11mx8.

He's just not a "premier" cornerstone anymore.

We saw it with Leetch. Once his legs started to go it didn't matter how much of a wizard he was with the stick, he became a shell of himself, was a liability on the back end, and it hurt his game on the other end. I wouldn't risk roughly 10% of my teams cap for the next 8 years.

Heck, I'd take it a step further and say that with Burns and a still useful Vlasic on that team I have NO idea what that GM is thinking. They don't NEED Karlsson.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wicked Backhand and Nickmo82
Its not that I'm against moving him either for the space but Shattenkirk (even for the player he is now) does not have the most egregious contract in his own defensive corps
 
Bob Richards said:
Its not that I'm against moving him either for the space but Shattenkirk (even for the player he is now) does not have the most egregious contract in his own defensive corps
Click to expand...

If all three of the D you're implying here are 3rd pairing guys... then yes, he does since he makes the most.
 
Looking at another angle with the EK65 signing.

Maybe this opens the door for "The Talk" with Hank to ride off into the sunset of SJ for a couple cup runs.

EK65 back to SJ could be a double down blessing for Gorts & Co.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Bob Richards said:
I am not implying Shattenkirk is a 3rd pairing guy.
Click to expand...

Oh, I wasn't saying you were. I was talking about the players you were implicating.

But Shattenkirk was certainly a 3rd pairing caliber player last year. Hopefully it was just residuals from knee stuff and he'll bounce back this year.
 
Bob Richards said:
Brooks claimed this.

He said they offered him at 50% but teams wanted the Rangers to also take on a bad contract in return which also makes no sense and would defeat the purpose of the Rangers making such a move in the first place lol.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bob Richards
Tawnos said:
Oh, I wasn't saying you were. I was talking about the players you were implicating.

But Shattenkirk was certainly a 3rd pairing caliber player last year. Hopefully it was just residuals from knee stuff and he'll bounce back this year.
Click to expand...

I think Shattenkirk is both an ok player and yet obviously disappointing from what we were hoping for.

Personally I don't think I'm interested in buyouts of Staal or Smith either for whatever that is worth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom