Brad Richards

[Rangers ftw]

Of course. But this team has had plenty of top 5 picks in the not so distant past, and they've managed to **** up every single one. It's also possible to trade up in the draft to get one of those picks. We have done neither

If you don't mind, can you put down the name of those "plenty of top 5 picks in the not so distant past" on a list so we can discuss them?

 

[DekeR]

It's in the cards because of the recapture penalty. If he retires with time left on his contract the caphit penalty is bigger than it would be under the old CBA.

However, with the cap expected to go up and Richards having a bounce back year it may not be as black and white as some here expect.

Richards has played very well this year, better than most want to give him credit for. And I think he is a very important figure in the room. I honestly think if the front office thinks they can get 3 more 60+ pt years out of Richards they will chance the penalty down the road.

I tend to agree. There are really no replacements at either the AHL level or the FA market and his production is not out of wack when considering the sad state of affairs with our offensive skill sets in place on the first two lines. This team is comprised of one goal scorer and one goaltender with a bunch of 2nd and 3rd liners mixed in.

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

If you don't mind, can you put down the name of those "plenty of top 5 picks in the not so distant past" on a list so we can discuss them?

Manny Malhotra 7th overall

Pavel Brendl 4th overall

Jamie Lundmark 9th overall

Hugh Jessiman 12th overall

Al Montoya 6th overall

So I should've picked a better number than top 5 overall but the above list is very close. More recently, we took McIlrath 10th overall which IMO was a terrible pick given his ceiling (or lackthereof)

 

[Zamboner]

Richards racks up some of the emptiest points I've ever seen the last 2 and half years. Anybody who pays him money next year will get "production" but be underwhelmed pretty much always.

 

[SlingshotVv]

Good game from Richie. 5 SOG, and two important energy shifts to respond to goals.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

Manny Malhotra 7th overall

Pavel Brendl 4th overall

Jamie Lundmark 9th overall

Hugh Jessiman 12th overall

Al Montoya 6th overall

So I should've picked a better number than top 5 overall but the above list is very close. More recently, we took McIlrath 10th overall which IMO was a terrible pick given his ceiling (or lackthereof)

Miller at #15 was and still is a reach... he might've been there at #45.

 

[The Gloaming]

Miller at #15 was and still is a reach... he might've been there at #45.

What?

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=68892

Miller was ranked 23. Not a reach at all.

 

[n8]

Manny Malhotra 7th overall

Pavel Brendl 4th overall

Jamie Lundmark 9th overall

Hugh Jessiman 12th overall

Al Montoya 6th overall

So I should've picked a better number than top 5 overall but the above list is very close. More recently, we took McIlrath 10th overall which IMO was a terrible pick given his ceiling (or lackthereof)

outside of 2003, those were bad drafts though. If you were to do a hindsight draft I think you would have gotten

Mike Green (chosen 29th, very few good players in the 1st round that year) over Montoya
Getzlaf over Jessiman (but this one has been beaten with dead horses)
Havlat (26th), maybe Ryan Malone (115th), Ryan Miller (138) Zetterberg (Detroit miracle pick at 210), Vrbata (212) are pretty much the only players in the Brendl/Lundmark draft year I would want but a lot of the picks could have been had without the 1st rounders so, yeah, crap year. irrelevant.

Simon Gagne (22) over Malhotra?

I would argue that Malhotra, Lundmark, and Montoya were all picks that were not handled correctly. They weren't properly developed. Montoya should have finished school and UMich. Malhotra, developed properly would have been a Michael Peca in his prime clone.

you could make a better case looking at botched picks that were in better drafts and with better players available (and taken) immediately after ours. For example, if we draft Claude Giroux over MDZ, I feel like it's more likely we take Fowler over McI the following year. MDZ is probably 50% the reason why we pass on Fowler. the other 50% being the Rangers' McI man crush. That said, the jury is still out on McI.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Miller at #15 was and still is a reach... he might've been there at #45.

 

[mike14]

Richards racks up some of the emptiest points I've ever seen the last 2 and half years. Anybody who pays him money next year will get "production" but be underwhelmed pretty much always.

You're not the 1st person to say this one here, but you are the one I'll ask: can you give examples? I went through the 1st 23 assists (goals are goals so can't be 'empty' IMO) BR had on the season (I was child minding so had time), and being critical, I came up with 5 points were he did 'nothing' but still got an assist.

assist #7 - Hags takes a shot, it deflects off BR, off Cally and in. I wouldn't call it 'empty' as the puck might have been saved without the double deflection, but like I said I'm being critical

assist 11 - passes to Nash, Nash does a Nash

assist 12 - passes to McD in def zone, he passes to CK who skates down and scores, simple pass but if he were a D man this 'empty' point would be par for the course

assist 17 - wins faceoff, makes a diving play to get puck to Hags who takes it the length of the ice. Again, doesn't look empty to me but I guess it is his job to win faceoffs

assist 20 - takes shot on PP, gets block but block goes straight to a Ranger wh scores.

Being part of a chain of passes that ends up with someone getting a goal isn't getting 'empty' points. As a forward it's his job to get the puck to teammates in scoring position, it doesn't have to be a highlight reel pass. Feel free to point out any you think I may have missed

 

[TheTakedown]

Good game from Richie. 5 SOG, and two important energy shifts to respond to goals.

i agree...

I tend to not agree with those that want him bought out. With the cap going up, and no viable replacement available via free agency nor the farm team, I see no viable replacement for him.

It's not Stepan just yet, and Brassard will never be more than a 3C...

Here's the list of top 5 Centerman (according to cap hit, which should be an indication of their play) available this upcoming free agency:

Stastny, Paul » C COL 28 $6,600,000 2014 (UFA)
Jokinen, Olli » C WPG 35 $4,500,000 2014 (UFA)
Legwand, David » C NAS 33 $4,500,000 2014 (UFA)
Roy, Derek » C STL 30 $4,000,000 2014 (UFA)
Koivu, Saku » C ANA 39 $3,500,000 2014 (UFA)


Statsny and Roy is the only one under 30, and I can bet Statsny will be resigned... which basically leaves Derek Roy...

Last 8 seasons:
Richards has average 60 points over the last 8 seasons
Roy has 56.5 over the last 8 seasons...

Lets stretch this out to the top 10 available. That makes the list:

Stastny, Paul » C COL 28 $6,600,000 2014 (UFA)
Jokinen, Olli » C WPG 35 $4,500,000 2014 (UFA)
Legwand, David » C NAS 33 $4,500,000 2014 (UFA)
Roy, Derek » C STL 30 $4,000,000 2014 (UFA)
Koivu, Saku » C ANA 39 $3,500,000 2014 (UFA)
Bolland, Dave » C TOR 27 $3,375,000 2014 (UFA)
Grabovski, Mikhail C WAS 29 $3,000,000 2014 (UFA)
Ott, Steve » C BUF 31 $2,950,000 2014 (UFA)
Fiddler, Vernon » C DAL 33 $1,800,000 2014 (UFA)
Goc, Marcel » C FLA 30 $1,700,000 2014 (UFA)

That simply adds Ott, Bolland, and Grabovski to the list

I see no reason to buy out Richards at this point in time

 

[slipknottin]

If you think Richards will be a productive player until he is 35+ then sure, keep him

 

[mike14]

The reason is that if he can't complete the contract the cap recapture is horrible. It has to be a now-or-never buyout with him.

I doubt anyone we can grab in free agency will be much better in the next season or two, but what about after that? It's all well and good to say that he has a better PPG than Stastny over the last 5 seasons, but that's skewed by his PPG seasons in Dallas, the fact is that his numbers are trending downwards while Stastny seem pretty stable.

I'm a BR fan, I'm glad we signed him and liked the contract (the caphit, not the $$). It's sad that the new CBA has basically meant he can't finish his career in NY but to ensure we can be competitive in the mid to long term he needs to go

 

[TheDirtyH]

If you think Richards will be a productive player until he is 35+ then sure, keep him

It's not that hard to imagine since he's 34 now, is it? I mean, I don't think leading our team in scoring, but if he continues to work out with St.Louis in the offseason I wouldn't be surprised if he could still be a solid second centerman for the next three years. Hopefully, by the time he's not useful, the cap will be high enough that buying him out legitimately, or any cap re-capture penalty wouldn't be difficult to have on the books. If the season were to end today, I would keep BR and let Brassard walk. I like Brassard, but I think there are cheaper 3Cs to be found, especially if Miller can continue to improve. I also don't have a great understanding of the complexities of the CBA, so these may all be very unreasonable assumptions to make.

 

[TheDirtyH]

The reason is that if he can't complete the contract the cap recapture is horrible. It has to be a now-or-never buyout with him.

What would the penalty of a regular buyout be, say three years down the line?

 

[mike14]

What would the penalty of a regular buyout be, say three years down the line?

If you bought him out at the end of the 2016 season, you'd be looking at 3 years of $6.5m cap hit plus a bunch (4?) at around 850,000.

If you did it at the end of 2017 it's 3 years at $6m then another 3 at 333,333.

Capgeek.com has a very cool tool for both explaining and calculating buyouts.

 

[iamitter]

If you bought him out at the end of the 2016 season, you'd be looking at 3 years of $6.5m cap hit plus a bunch (4?) at around 850,000.

If you did it at the end of 2017 it's 3 years at $6m then another 3 at 333,333.

Capgeek.com has a very cool tool for both explaining and calculating buyouts.

Might as well keep him till the end at that price.

 

[mike14]

Might as well keep him till the end at that price.

The question then is: will he make it too the end? Does he want to still be playing hockey at 37-38+ (yeah, he signed the contract but when he did those last years expected to be fluff) or will he suffer a career ending injury before then? If either of those happen we're still stuck with the cap penalty

 

[TheDirtyH]

The question then is: will he make it too the end? Does he want to still be playing hockey at 37-38+ (yeah, he signed the contract but when he did those last years expected to be fluff) or will he suffer a career ending injury before then? If either of those happen we're still stuck with the cap penalty

It's a hard question to answer. My opinion only comes from the limited view I have of Richards as a person, and the growing number of players who have remained effective to later and later stages of their careers. I suppose you could say all of them are exceptions, but without a stat sheet to back me up, it's my gut feeling that with proper care for one's body and a driven personality, it's becoming less and less unheard of to be a good late thirties NHLer. Right now BR is leading our team in scoring and TOI. He's a big figure in the locker room. If I look around the league at guys who are playing at a high level at his age, I'd bet a lot of them will still be effective in 4-5 years--Thornton, Marleau, Hossa, Chara, H. & D.Sedin, Kunitz. Obviously a lot of those guys are probably a step up from Richards, but I don't think (for some) their leaps and bounds ahead. Anyway, my point is that in my mind it's as much a gamble as to whether Richards can continue to be effective as it is to sign a UFA and assume he will be more effective than Richards could be. Maybe that's just my Rangers fan bias, but I am afraid of UFAs haha, especially one's we put in big roles to replace big players. I could see us signing Stastny to a similar contract to Richards and him being much less effective...but that's just me.

 

[TheTakedown]

It's a hard question to answer. My opinion only comes from the limited view I have of Richards as a person, and the growing number of players who have remained effective to later and later stages of their careers. I suppose you could say all of them are exceptions, but without a stat sheet to back me up, it's my gut feeling that with proper care for one's body and a driven personality, it's becoming less and less unheard of to be a good late thirties NHLer. Right now BR is leading our team in scoring and TOI. He's a big figure in the locker room. If I look around the league at guys who are playing at a high level at his age, I'd bet a lot of them will still be effective in 4-5 years--Thornton, Marleau, Hossa, Chara, H. & D.Sedin, Kunitz. Obviously a lot of those guys are probably a step up from Richards, but I don't think (for some) their leaps and bounds ahead. Anyway, my point is that in my mind it's as much a gamble as to whether Richards can continue to be effective as it is to sign a UFA and assume he will be more effective than Richards could be. Maybe that's just my Rangers fan bias, but I am afraid of UFAs haha, especially one's we put in big roles to replace big players. I could see us signing Stastny to a similar contract to Richards and him being much less effective...but that's just me.

the bolded in particular a agree with, but you are spot on

 

[bleedblue94]

For example, if we draft Claude Giroux over MDZ

Wrong draft, it was bobby sanguinetti that we drafted right before giroux, and bobby clarke forgot giroux's name on the podium after. Regardless, its another getzlaf situation where numerous other teams missed on a guy, and one team hit a home run...

 

[Clausewitz]

It's a hard question to answer. My opinion only comes from the limited view I have of Richards as a person, and the growing number of players who have remained effective to later and later stages of their careers. I suppose you could say all of them are exceptions, but without a stat sheet to back me up, it's my gut feeling that with proper care for one's body and a driven personality, it's becoming less and less unheard of to be a good late thirties NHLer. Right now BR is leading our team in scoring and TOI. He's a big figure in the locker room. If I look around the league at guys who are playing at a high level at his age, I'd bet a lot of them will still be effective in 4-5 years--Thornton, Marleau, Hossa, Chara, H. & D.Sedin, Kunitz. Obviously a lot of those guys are probably a step up from Richards, but I don't think (for some) their leaps and bounds ahead. Anyway, my point is that in my mind it's as much a gamble as to whether Richards can continue to be effective as it is to sign a UFA and assume he will be more effective than Richards could be. Maybe that's just my Rangers fan bias, but I am afraid of UFAs haha, especially one's we put in big roles to replace big players. I could see us signing Stastny to a similar contract to Richards and him being much less effective...but that's just me.

Couldn't have said it better.

 

[yrrebbor]

assist 20 - takes shot on PP, gets block but block goes straight to a Ranger wh scores.

You must work at NBC.

 

[mike14]

You must work at NBC.

must I? I'd be happy discuss contracts with them if they want me but I'm pretty happy in my current job

 

[zuckera1]

I like Brad as a player, he makes so many smart decisions with the puck especially in the offensive zone. Every now and then I see a flash or two of what made him a great player a few years ago, yet his skating and agility have declined to the point that he's not as effective. He still has a very heavy shot and is a decent play-maker. Off the ice, he's a consummate professional.

Having said all of that, I still believe we should buy him out at the end of the season. This move may hurt in the short-term, but his contract will become an albatross in 2-3 years when he's 35-36 and is a third-line center. Doesn't matter how high the cap is, you don't want to have 6.67 million tied up in a player like that. If he retires or gets hurt, the recapture penalties will hurt us even more. Even if we can't find an immediate replacement for next year, buying him out is still the right move.

If I'm the Rangers I extend Brassard for next season, give him a 1-year deal around 4 million. I'd also want to sign a guy like Grabovski, who would be an excellent 2C. Stay away from Stastny please, we'd have to overpay him and in 2-3 years we may be in the same situation we are in with BR right now.