TSN: Brad Richards has been BOUGHT OUT.
- Thread starter nevesis
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
You're a bigger man than most of us.
Leaving $5M ($3.3M if you're bought out) on the table?
Come on...
The Lunatic Fridge
why is my name here?
So i should google what i already know? Alright.
Simliar production but somehow worse? That is some interested logic there.
Your point about the LTIR is absolutely pointless. He still wanted to play, whether there was a "strong chance" of LTIR or not (which is a rumor at best btw. no "research" required
) at that point in time he wanted to continue trying to play and so the team respected that and went with a buyout instead of burying him in the minors or whatever else.He was not brought in to be a offensive powerhouse. He was brought in for some grit, some good D and decent production. Which he did until the leg injury. I'm amazed people go so far to throw the guy under the bus like he did something wrong. If you want to talk about full on disappointment you can look no further than gomez who was was going from bad to awful after 1 year and perfectly healthy.
NYRSchrute217
Registered User
- Oct 28, 2008
- 4,739
- 11
That point used to be made all the time and every time it's disputed by saying that Drury could have been paid 5 million for a part time scouting job to help the NYR cap situation. Probably not technically allowed but in a hush hush situation its possible.
You're a bigger man than most of us.
Leaving $5M ($3.3M if you're bought out) on the table?
Come on...
So i should google what i already know? Alright.
Simliar production but somehow worse? That is some interested logic there.
Your point about the LTIR is absolutely pointless. He still wanted to play, whether there was a "strong chance" of LTIR or not (which is a rumor at best btw. no "research" required
He was not brought in to be a offensive powerhouse. He was brought in for some grit, some good D and decent production. Which he did until the leg injury. I'm amazed people go so far to throw the guy under the bus like he did something wrong. If you want to talk about full on disappointment you can look no further than gomez who was was going from bad to awful after 1 year and perfectly healthy.
Stats tell the whole story, I forgot. Drury was much better in 2008 than 2009, it was pretty clear from watching the 2009 team that Gomez and Drury were supposed to lead us following Jagr's departure but in reality Zherdev was our best offensive player.
Drury and Gomez both clearly lost a step that year. The team "respecting" what Drury wanted doesn't really matter. He may have wanted to continue to play but he never did. So that's a what if. Maybe you're right but I'd love to see an actual quote from the team on that. They bought him out because he was terrible and broken down.
It doesn't really matter what Drury was brought here to be if he was paid as a first liner. He should be held to the standard of his salary. Just like Rick Nash gets ripped on when he doesn't score for 10 games when Dom Moore gets a pass. Drury was not the same player in NY, even in his first two years, as he was in Buffalo.
You're a bigger man than most of us.
Leaving $5M ($3.3M if you're bought out) on the table?
Come on...
Regardless it showed a lack of integrity. Gil Meche and Markus Naslund are the two who come to mind but there have been countless people who throughout history had the integrity to say no to money they knew they wouldn't or couldn't earn. It doesn't make Drury evil scum but it certainly showed a lack of integrity
The Rangers gave Drury that contract. Lack of integrity? Get out of here with that self-righteous BS.
PlamsUnlimited
Big Church Bells
Didn't Drury retire because of his knee injury? In that case wouldn't he have been paid the full value of his contract?
You're a bigger man than most of us.
Leaving $5M ($3.3M if you're bought out) on the table?
Come on...
I was horrifyingly surprised by how lazy and stupid Richards play was for a guy with his "winning" reputation. Large stretches of his bad play had nothing to do with him "getting old." He played pretty good in a couple playoffs, so all was not lost. Can't say I will miss him, though.
I'll respectfully disagree and say nope.
At worst, it shows a lack of judgment by the people who okayed this contract...
He was bought out, something you're not allowed to do if the player is injured...
He was bought out, something you're not allowed to do if the player is injured...
He wasn't on IR, he came off to play in the final regular season game and the playoff series vs WSH. He was clearly troubled by his injuries in those games and the knee injuries were given as the reason for his retirement by every source I remember reading.
Dru wanted to play on which is why he had to be bought out. Examinations over the summer concluded that he had to hang'em up.
Either he was injured, in which case he could not be bought out, or he wasn't, in which case the insurance would not pay him.
Six of one, half a dozen...
Or he was, but didn't contest the buyout since he was hoping to get a new contract and be able to keep playing.
The New Originals
Registered User
So long, Brad. I wish we had signed you to a much more reasonable cap hit because this team is going to miss you next year.
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
Hopefully not because that would be very bad if we are lamenting Richards in December.
Darren Dreger was on TSN radio in the last few days discussing Brad Richards. Maybe it was today. Richards is motivated to prove the Rangers made a mistake in buying him out. He was motivated this season too but managed 20 goals and 51 points. The Rangers need more than that for his cap hit and the recapture looming down the road.
Not really relevant here, as you would have to assume he was healthy even though he could hardly skate his last few games.
Several potentially career ending injuries at his age coupled with the wear and tear of the NHL are indications that his body was done. I'm also pretty sure he stated in public that he did not want to quit hockey.
Either way, we're getting way OT. I'll leave it there.
unless in a surprising move Sather called Joe Sakic to inquire about Joe Sakic's return as opposed to what it would take to acquire Stasny and thus Sakic would get his #19 back...
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Was that Richards' point? I don't think it was. I think he wants to earn another contract and prove that he can still play. I don't think he wants to "prove the Rangers made a mistake" - he knows exactly how bad of a business decision it would've been for the NYR to keep him.
The cap recapture in the final 3 years of his contract are absolutely brutal and Richards knows it.
I'd imagine he understands the business decision being made, but would assume he'd want to prove the Rangers wrong by playing at a high caliber of hockey for the next several years to the point at which the cap recapture wouldn't come into play, as opposed to proving them right and pretty much fizzle out and not playing hockey in 2-3 years. Most don't think it's realistic and thus agree with the decision, but I'd guess he still wants to play as long as he can and he wants to play well.
