This is why keeping your #1 draft picks and not trading them away for 39 year olds is important. Now you are forced to overpay for marginal centers instead of getting nothing.
Confirmed with Link: Brassard re-signed (5 years, $5M per)
- Thread starter NYRFAN218
- 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
AlternateSideParking
Registered User
- Dec 11, 2005
- 21,606
- 5,139
How can you complain about Brassard facing soft competition and then complain about not giving Zuccarello the same contract? They face the same competition.
The Rangers didn't have the room for both. When the Rangers signed Zuccarello to the one year deal last Tuesday,you knew Brassard was getting a long-term deal because the funds were there.
Too many people here make no sense. You sound like the fool in the Brassard thread on the main board complaining about the contract structure. He is still upset about the Kovalchuk punishment from four years ago.
Centers are hard to find. The price for a center in group III is $5M. Bolland got $5.5M.
How are the Rangers replacing Brassard? Look at the free agent market next summer. I know the Rangers are making a trade for ROR involving Staal.
Its always the same people complaining.
Brassard will be 32 at the end of this contract. Not 35 like Callahan. No major injury history.
Brassard fits the system.
The Rangers have Nash and MSL on the right side ahead of Zuccarello.
175th best player in the league.
Im sure during the negotiations Sather had next to him a lackey cradling a laptop showing Walsh and Brassard how Brassard's career-best season is not grounds for market value and being the highest scoring forward the last two playoffs combine.
It's ok. Who needs NHL centers when you can just hand 18 mins a night to Boo Nieves in two years. That is, if Kopitar surprisingly disses the Rangers in UFA.
I'm fine with this based on the other contracts we signed ('cept Glass really) and organisational needs. Getting Zucc at $3.5 and Stempniak at $900k make this easier to swallow. Even then, what I wanted was 4x4 or 4x4.5, so this isn't a big difference. It's what the market is, he plays well for us and with Zucc, and we really just need him.
Even with him on board we still need Miller, or Lombardi, or another warm body to turn it up and be a good C. We're lacking depth.
Even with him on board we still need Miller, or Lombardi, or another warm body to turn it up and be a good C. We're lacking depth.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
This Brassard deal is pretty much the going rate for a 40+ point 2C when you consider that 4 out of 5 of the years you're paying for are UFA years.
As for the "PP Specialist" argument, I'd like to see a breakdown of not how many points per 60 minutes Brassard got, but rather how many points he generated per even strength minutes played.
Brassard averaged less than 16 minutes of ice time per game in the playoffs and in the regular season. Take away PP minutes and what are you left with? 12-13 minutes? I'm curious what his stats are going to be if he, MZA and let's say Stempniak are playing consistent 2nd line minutes (17-18) nightly.
As for the "PP Specialist" argument, I'd like to see a breakdown of not how many points per 60 minutes Brassard got, but rather how many points he generated per even strength minutes played.
Brassard averaged less than 16 minutes of ice time per game in the playoffs and in the regular season. Take away PP minutes and what are you left with? 12-13 minutes? I'm curious what his stats are going to be if he, MZA and let's say Stempniak are playing consistent 2nd line minutes (17-18) nightly.
AlternateSideParking
Registered User
- Dec 11, 2005
- 21,606
- 5,139
Yet he was 4th among forwards in PPG despite playing four mins less a night, and outproduced Zuccarello.
He was the leading scorer last postseason and tied for the team lead in points vs Boston.
He was the leading scorer in the Pittsburgh series. He had more points than Stepan in the Pens series and the SCF.
Who are you comparing those 12 in 23 to? Malkin? Toews? How about comparing him to the rest of his teammates?
Also, it was 22 games since he was knocked out early in Game 2.
we'd all love to get the guys who sign for much less and pay much more for the guys who either do not sign or sign to shorter contracts. Nobody will be happy. Think many thought it would be a lower contract, but in the end, if Brassard continues to produce as he has, and he's done that consistently for years, it will be a good contract over five years and for once we need to look at this as something over five years and not just today. It's a moveable contract and it will fit in nicely within the cap structure each year. Why does Brassard get the long-term contract and not Zucc? I can only guess that a centerman has a bit more value than a winger. Heck, most in here worried about the center position all Summer and have worried less about the wing position, including putting a centerman (Miller) on the wing to lessen his responsibilities. Seems like a lot of money, but it's moveable and over the course of the term it should look fine.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
This. So much this.
Leave aside whether or not I think he'll be a 55 point player next year, how unbelievably tradeable this contract will be the moment he gets paid his first bonus, the importance of centers in the league, and the dearth of prospects at the position in the organization...
The going rate for top line players just cracked $10MM - and it's only going to go higher over the life of the deal.
Brassard is locked up for HALF that amount. Heck, our own Benoit Pouliot just got 5x$4MM for crying out loud. I think of the deal as a free option on the 55 point upside I mentioned; but it's equally legitimate to think of it as locking up a serviceable 2C until a better option presents itself, either from within or without the organization. Regardless of how you view it, however, I don't see how people can be complaining about the value.
Last edited:
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Sather has actually been pretty good since the lockout... and Habs fans bashing Sather (lol McD) is just funny.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
Another point:
I've already mentioned the optics of $5.0 vs. $4.9 and how I think that's affected people's thinking. It's also pretty clear that a large portion of the faction that's complaining is viewing this through the prism of Zuccarello's deal and are POed that Brassard got locked up while fan favorite and higher scorer MZA is perceived to have been penny-pinched.
But we know that they only had space under this year's cap to give one of them a long-term contract. Once again, leaving aside the importance of centers, organizational strengths, etc... what if management, based on their knowledge of the individuals, their agents, UFA dynamics, previous contract negotiations and other factors that we may or may not be privy to, simply made the call on which player they thought they'd most likely be able to sign in-season/next summer as a UFA? If Zuccarello signs over the winter for, say, 4x$5.5MM and you're going into the next four years with both of them locked up for a combined cap hit that equals Kane's will people still be singing the same tune?
If MZA has another good year and then walks on the team, I'll be peeved (although I'll still understand the necessity of risking the RW over the C), but my gut is that this all works out and everyone will wind up being very happy with the outcome this time next summer.
I've already mentioned the optics of $5.0 vs. $4.9 and how I think that's affected people's thinking. It's also pretty clear that a large portion of the faction that's complaining is viewing this through the prism of Zuccarello's deal and are POed that Brassard got locked up while fan favorite and higher scorer MZA is perceived to have been penny-pinched.
But we know that they only had space under this year's cap to give one of them a long-term contract. Once again, leaving aside the importance of centers, organizational strengths, etc... what if management, based on their knowledge of the individuals, their agents, UFA dynamics, previous contract negotiations and other factors that we may or may not be privy to, simply made the call on which player they thought they'd most likely be able to sign in-season/next summer as a UFA? If Zuccarello signs over the winter for, say, 4x$5.5MM and you're going into the next four years with both of them locked up for a combined cap hit that equals Kane's will people still be singing the same tune?
If MZA has another good year and then walks on the team, I'll be peeved (although I'll still understand the necessity of risking the RW over the C), but my gut is that this all works out and everyone will wind up being very happy with the outcome this time next summer.
Last edited:
But the market is what dictates who earns what "coin." 6 years ago, Toews and Kane aren't worth south of 11 million, now they are.
Markets fluctuate. The NHL market has increased and players of Brassard's value and play are now worth exactly what he is getting.
Your statement is so contradictory it's actually funny.
Habs fans have really gotten on my nerves since the whole kreider/price incident. You are right they gave away McD for a Gomez so they shouldnt talk
I think this Brassard contract finally validates the reality of the Rangers' center situation. Its tough to find good centers, period.
I dont think a Stepan/Brassard 1-2 punch scares anybody, but they are decent. And perhaps more importantly, the Rangers are strong enough in other areas to be able to deal with the lack of a superstar center.
Thats reality, so I dont mind the Rangers locking up an OK center like Brassard - its better than going on the next wild goose chase on the free agent market.
I dont think a Stepan/Brassard 1-2 punch scares anybody, but they are decent. And perhaps more importantly, the Rangers are strong enough in other areas to be able to deal with the lack of a superstar center.
Thats reality, so I dont mind the Rangers locking up an OK center like Brassard - its better than going on the next wild goose chase on the free agent market.
namely in nets, and the salary structure of the Rangers dictates that. Other teams seem to have guys up front who are better than those on the Rangers, and we belabor that in here, but other teams focus more on that and have $1.5-2MM more to spend as a result of spending that much less in net than the Rangers. Having another two million to spend would mean the Rangers could afford $6.5-7MM on Brassard's position.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
You're right. Obviously, someone drafted last year or this year would be ready to play the role that Brassard plays.
NYR Viper
Registered User
I 100% agree. The Rangers are obviously building towards the Bruins-style. Defense and goaltending win you games. 2-way centers, not overly flashy. Bergeron and Kreijci are good players. Bergeron is more of a 2-way guy who is flanked by a couple of more offensive wingers. Stepan. Kreijci is the more offensive center. No PKing for him. Brassard.
The Bruins pay their defense and expect their wingers to really carry their offense. Reilly. Lucic. Marchand. Iginla last year.
In saying that, I am not totally enamored with paying Rick Nash 7.8 million for the foreseeable future and a lot of this depends on how well the 3c can handle the sheltered minutes given to him and produce.
The only successful center the Rangers have been able to draft in recent memory is Derek Stepan, who was picked with - you guessed it - a 2nd round selection.
I dont disagree that the Rangers are trying to follow a Bruins model, but they have a long way to go to field a team as versatile as the Bruins have been. A lot of that stems from the Rangers inability to develop bottom 6 forwards from within.
Well let's see... #1 Center makes 10mil so that's the market for #1 take that in half and that's the market for#2 Centers oh what do ya know it's 5mil. Brass is our#2 deal with it
If they are trying to be like the Bs then why does AV always talk about being like the wings?
