Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: Brady Skjei re-signed [6 years, $5.25MM AAV]

  • 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
Status
Not open for further replies.
Harbour Dog said:
What's the advantage to not front-loading a contract? I'm drawing a blank.
Click to expand...
Well they can earn interest on that money they’re not spending in the early years of the contract, and a potential buyout would be lighter on the cap. But I think it would be better to front-load contracts more and more often than the Rangers do. We saw the benefits in the Brassard trade.
 
Thirty One said:
Well they can earn interest on that money they’re not spending in the early years of the contract, and a potential buyout would be lighter on the cap. But I think it would be better to front-load contracts more and more often than the Rangers do. We saw the benefits in the Brassard trade.
Click to expand...

Well that's something, I guess. Hopefully having to potentially buy him out wasn't a consideration while they were negotiating the contract though.

I guess it would also hold Skjei a little more accountable towards the end of the contract, but again, if that's a consideration then maybe you shouldn't be signing him in the first place.

Just seems like all parties benefit more from front-loading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pavel Buchnevich and Thirty One
It's an OK deal. I just don't see it ever being a huge bargain. I like Skjei, he's a great skater and decent defenseman. That said, I just don't see the hockey sense in him to make this deal a steal. Where he improves significantly enough on his weaknesses to become a McD type of player.

The way I see it. It's obviously more likely to become a cheaper contract in a few years strictly because of league inflation or cap expansion if you will. I see Skjei more or less he is what he is at this point.

Conversly, I don't see a huge decline to make this deal dreck either. He's too good a skater to significantly regress in the next 5 years at least.
 
Thirty One said:
Well they can earn interest on that money they’re not spending in the early years of the contract, and a potential buyout would be lighter on the cap. But I think it would be better to front-load contracts more and more often than the Rangers do. We saw the benefits in the Brassard trade.
Click to expand...


That would be even more of an advantage in a non restricted contract, like this one.
 
I don't think he'll play out his contract as a Ranger. Term and money a bit too much for my liking, but shouldn't cause any long term cap complications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hi
Hmm,

Let's say those 3 UFA years would have cost 7M, or 21M total

They would be paying about 3.5M average for his remaining RFA years. I guess that is about right?

If those UFA years would have cost 6M each, they are paying on average 4.5M for the 3 RFA years. Which seems high for them.

I'm not sure I see a huge upside to this deal other than so far no clauses have been reported and it's 6 year worth of something.

Also not sure about the structure, as has been asked, front loading is something the Rangers can do without it stressing them.

I don't dislike it that much either, guess the Rangers either expect him to improve, or they really expect the price for the UFA years of the Skjei's of the league to go way up. All the same he is signed, I don't think this becomes one of those anchor contracts or anything, just not sure I see it as a bargain either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thirty One
Off Sides said:
Hmm,

Let's say those 3 UFA years would have cost 7M, or 21M total

They would be paying about 3.5M average for his remaining RFA years. I guess that is about right?

If those UFA years would have cost 6M each, they are paying on average 4.5M for the 3 RFA years. Which seems high for them.

I'm not sure I see a huge upside to this deal other than so far no clauses have been reported and it's 6 year worth of something.

Also not sure about the structure, as has been asked, front loading is something the Rangers can do without it stressing them.

I don't dislike it that much either, guess the Rangers either expect him to improve, or they really expect the price for the UFA years of the Skjei's of the league to go way up. All the same he is signed, I don't think this becomes one of those anchor contracts or anything, just not sure I see it as a bargain either.
Click to expand...

This kind of thinking is starting to be a little out of date. Teams are beginning to want to pay more for a players upcoming best years rather than past performance. This mitigates the leverage issue that caused the big difference between RFA and UFA salaries. RFA salaries have been rising as a result, while UFA contracts have, overall, been getting shorter and cheaper.

This doesn’t apply so much to the top end guys as the middle tier of players getting $3-7m.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Sides
Tawnos said:
This kind of thinking is starting to be a little out of date. Teams are beginning to want to pay more for a players upcoming best years rather than past performance. This mitigates the leverage issue that caused the big difference between RFA and UFA salaries. RFA salaries have been rising as a result, while UFA contracts have, overall, been getting shorter and cheaper.

This doesn’t apply so much to the top end guys as the middle tier of players getting $3-7m.
Click to expand...


Good point, in a way I am noticing the same trend although if that is true that would also mean these UFA years in this contract in the future maybe could have been cheaper than the 7M I used in the example.
 
Off Sides said:
Hmm,

Let's say those 3 UFA years would have cost 7M, or 21M total

They would be paying about 3.5M average for his remaining RFA years. I guess that is about right?

If those UFA years would have cost 6M each, they are paying on average 4.5M for the 3 RFA years. Which seems high for them.

I'm not sure I see a huge upside to this deal other than so far no clauses have been reported and it's 6 year worth of something.

Also not sure about the structure, as has been asked, front loading is something the Rangers can do without it stressing them.

I don't dislike it that much either, guess the Rangers either expect him to improve, or they really expect the price for the UFA years of the Skjei's of the league to go way up. All the same he is signed, I don't think this becomes one of those anchor contracts or anything, just not sure I see it as a bargain either.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that we are rebuilding. We are paying a "premium" on his AAV right now in a year that we couldn't care less about cap space.
 
Cap friendly added a 10 team no trade in the final 3 years.

Again not that I think it's the worst thing ever but it's just seems to me like the Rangers felt more of a need to get this long term done here than maybe they really needed to. Something like they did not want him to end up being able to leave as early as he could as a UFA.

It's not like I am against Skjei, I think he is a good player but to put it into one perspective, he will be about ~65th highest cap hit among D and while I'm sure some other contracts will push him down that list as the years go by, on the flip side some above him will retire or decline, I'm just not sure he quite fits in the ~65th-75th or so cap hit range among D. I guess I just never saw him as just outside of top pair.
 
Miamipuck said:
It's an OK deal. I just don't see it ever being a huge bargain. I like Skjei, he's a great skater and decent defenseman. That said, I just don't see the hockey sense in him to make this deal a steal. Where he improves significantly enough on his weaknesses to become a McD type of player.

The way I see it. It's obviously more likely to become a cheaper contract in a few years strictly because of league inflation or cap expansion if you will. I see Skjei more or less he is what he is at this point.

Conversly, I don't see a huge decline to make this deal dreck either. He's too good a skater to significantly regress in the next 5 years at least.
Click to expand...

Two years in is his peak? Okay
 
Still one of the better young D in the NHL and he's locking into a relatively friendly deal. Good for both sides. Really interested on if he can become the anchor of the defense.

Also, by the time this deal is coming to an end, we could be looking at a team that has Hajek, Lindgren, and possibly Miller on the left side, all in their mid-early 20s. You don't want to throw it out there, but there could be a reasonable ground to trade him in year 5 or 6, depending on where the team is going at that point AND who is on the roster.
 
The Crypto Guy said:
That’s kind of odd though, most players, especially defesenman, takes 3-4 years to hit their primes. Any specific reason why you think he’s done developing?
Click to expand...

Yeah pretty wild conclusion, especially on the fact he had a better rookie year than second (which is normal, in addition to taking in the fact the entire nyr stunk last year and his partner for half a year was Rob OGara)
 
TheGuarantee said:
Yeah pretty wild conclusion, especially on the fact he had a better rookie year than second (which is normal, in addition to taking in the fact the entire nyr stunk last year and his partner for half a year was Rob OGara)
Click to expand...
He played 110 minutes with O'Gara.
 
This is probably the only signing I'm on board with so far but having to watch this kid even attempt to take on the monumental task of trying to cover up for all of Shattenkirk's defensive deficiencies is going be a joke..
 
The Crypto Guy said:
That’s kind of odd though, most players, especially defesenman, takes 3-4 years to hit their primes. Any specific reason why you think he’s done developing?
Click to expand...


Yeah I specifically said, I don't think he has the hockey smarts to be a top tier #1 defenseman. That is what would make the contract a bargain, I mean a true #1 he doesn't have to be a top tier. He has a lot of physical ability and relies on it. If I am wrong I am wrong. I happen to subscribe to the he is what he is at this point. I think he is best suited to the 3-4 slot. Of course on this team he's going to be bumped up to the #1-2 area.

And it ain't no f***ing wild conclusion.
 
Last edited:
NYR said:
This is probably the only signing I'm on board with so far but having to watch this kid even attempt to take on the monumental task of trying to cover up for all of Shattenkirk's defensive deficiencies is going be a joke..
Click to expand...
Hey, what is the update on our bet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom