Do we buy-out Richards and make a play for Stastny?

[silverfish]

I think Brassard and Stepan can be your first and second line centers while still being a top-10 team in the league. However, they simply can't be the best players on their line for that to really work. You need to surround them with the right players to emphasize their strengths, and hide some of their weaknesses.

It'll be very hard to land a top-line center at the draft, let alone a young one, without surrendering our 1st round pick this year (assuming we still have it) and at least one top-prospect. Probably JT Miller.

I don't share the same opinion of Brassard. He's a 3C on a top-10 team. Unless we add another premiere winger like Vanek to take some of the heat off of DB.

Kreider - Stepan - Nash
Vanek - Brassard - MSL

Yeah, that works. But we're buying out Richards' deal to replace it with a bigger one in Vanek? A guy who would get tortured on a daily basis by this board

(I'd love to add Vanek, just think most posters here would be against his demeanor on the ice).

 

[silverfish]

Giving him that job is easing him into a bigger role. It's the next step in his development. We can have a prospect come up and develop without many expectations because we already have a top 6 in place.

It's hard to take advantage of your chances when you average 11 minutes of ice time and know if you don't produce consistently you'll be sent down. The point production you are looking for from a 3C is about .5 PPG. I think Miller is capable of that next season.

There lies the problem. We do not have a top 6 in place if Miller is our 3C, because then Brassard is our 2C.

I have no idea how you can confidently predict that Miller is capable of a 0.5 ppg next season.

 

[Crease]

Should be interesting to see how this all plays out. You have to imagine the Rangers, by this time next year, will have only two of Richards, Brassard, and Miller. I'm not thrilled with the idea any plan that involves both buying out Richards AND letting Brassard walk. Too much turnover. AV's system is not for everyone.

 

[KreiMeARiver*]

I really don't have a problem keeping Richards.

Statsny, he's pretty good, but will be overpaid.

 

[pld459666]

This ^.

Unless....

if Richards says, ok, I've made enough $ and my bud MSL is here and I'm willing to go a year at a time with him as he extends.

So I will amend my current contract by means of a new contract which
a) will extend the current deal for 1 year at league minimum;
b) does so in a way that incorporates what is left of the present deal, reducing the $ and particularly the cap hits even further;
and c) allows team generous buy out clause in case I turn into Drury.

I doubt that can be done in that exact scenario, but that is what it would take to make financial sense for Rangers.

Need to amnesty Richards to have operating room.

Otherwise, go the other way. Buy out Richards, and enjoy MSL, but if he wants the Richards pivot, deal him in his last year to wherever Richards signs.

A more ideal scenario might be, if that option existed, to use the buy out AFTER the season, coinciding with end of MSL deal, depending on what happens with Marty. The cord would be cut for both simultaneously. But my understanding is existing amnesty, which is last chance before it expires, must be before next season during a very limited window.

So that is not in the cards as presently dealt.
I see the advantage of retaining Richards, but even if MSL extended to match, cost of Richards too much.

Cannot happen.

Richards gets bought out, the Rangers are precluded from re-signing him to a cheaper deal.

 

[Jersey Girl]

I really don't have a problem keeping Richards.

Statsny, he's pretty good, but will be overpaid.

As would Richards

 

[KreiMeARiver*]

As would Richards

Indeed. haha

I just figure, if he re-clicks with MSL, keep those 2 together.

Is there a buyout window for him or can we do it any year during his contract?

 

[Trxjw]

I don't share the same opinion of Brassard. He's a 3C on a top-10 team. Unless we add another premiere winger like Vanek to take some of the heat off of DB.

Kreider - Stepan - Nash
Vanek - Brassard - MSL

Yeah, that works. But we're buying out Richards' deal to replace it with a bigger one in Vanek? A guy who would get tortured on a daily basis by this board

(I'd love to add Vanek, just think most posters here would be against his demeanor on the ice).

I don't think Brassard is that bad of a player that he needs THAT much support, but like I said, he simply can't be the best player on his line. The team is going to have to improve either at center, or on the LW. The easier move is at LW, and I expect that's what they'll do. Wouldn't be shocked to see Moulson wearing a Rangers' sweater come October. Quick fix, free-agent splash, and only costs money. That's Sather's M.O.

 

[silverfish]

I don't think Brassard is that bad of a player that he needs THAT much support, but like I said, he simply can't be the best player on his line. The team is going to have to improve either at center, or on the LW. The easier move is at LW, and I expect that's what they'll do. Wouldn't be shocked to see Moulson wearing a Rangers' sweater come October. Quick fix, free-agent splash, and only costs money. That's Sather's M.O.

I'd rather avoid Moulson. I'm not sold on him. Can't remember the last Ranger who was as dangerous as Moulson is in front of the net, but if we're relying on Brassard to feed him the puck......

Suppose we could go Moulson with Stepan and Nash, Kreider with Brass and MSL. And not to mention Moulson would come quite cheaper than Vanek... Could see Sather doing that. Leaves Zucc as the odd man out on a weak third line, though...

Sign me up for Moulson, as long as we grab Ott on a two-year deal, too.

We'd have to cut money on the fourth line, Boyle, and go with a guy like Lindberg on the fourth line; or a cheap vet.

 

[Ail]

I'd rather avoid Moulson. I'm not sold on him. Can't remember the last Ranger who was as dangerous as Moulson is in front of the net, but if we're relying on Brassard to feed him the puck......

Suppose we could go Moulson with Stepan and Nash, Kreider with Brass and MSL. And not to mention Moulson would come quite cheaper than Vanek... Could see Sather doing that. Leaves Zucc as the odd man out on a weak third line, though...

Sign me up for Moulson, as long as we grab Ott on a two-year deal, too.

We'd have to cut money on the fourth line, Boyle, and go with a guy like Lindberg on the fourth line; or a cheap vet.

Says J.T. Miller isn't ready for 3C duties, advocates letting Boyle walk and filling his spot with Lindberg. Okay.

 

[silverfish]

Says J.T. Miller isn't ready for 3C duties, advocates letting Boyle walk and filling his spot with Lindberg. Okay.

Miller is not ready. Lindberg has played in a league against men and run quite well in a top-6 role. I think you'd be surprised on Lindberg's status with the Rangers next season.

I also said a cheap vet could fill that spot. Bringing back Moore on a one-year value contract.

 

[Ail]

Miller is not ready. Lindberg has played in a league against men and run quite well in a top-6 role. I think you'd be surprised on Lindberg's status with the Rangers next season.

I also said a cheap vet could fill that spot. Bringing back Moore on a one-year value contract.

Watch one Wolfpack game or just go read the damn thread for the past month and tell me who you think those of us watching the Wolfpack think is more NHL ready.

 

[silverfish]

Watch one Wolfpack game or just go read the damn thread for the past month and tell me who you think those of us watching the Wolfpack think is more NHL ready.

There's a difference between plugging Miller into the third-line, and plugging Lindberg into the fourth line. One is a much easier transition for a young player. I would not advocate playing Miller on the fourth line, as his game needs to be developed by playing more than 8 minutes a night, while I believe Lindberg's game (specifically two-way, and faceoffs) could excel in a fourth line role even next season.

 

[Boom Boom Geoffrion*]

Miller isn't just ready; he's been ready. Maybe not for a top-6 role yet but certainly for a third-line role. And next season he should solidify a permanent spot in our line-up.

There isn't anything else for him to do in Hartford.

 

[Beer League Sniper]

you keep saying that Brassard is not a 2nd line center.

At what point does a player that CONSISTENTLY POSTS 2nd line numbers become less than a 2nd line player?

in the last 4 seasons Brassard has posted 47-41-29(in 47 would have equated to 49 in 80 GP) this season he's on pace for 45 in 81

if the body of work shows a player to be a 2nd line player, then THAT'S what he is.

Please describe for us what you think a 1st liner should be producing, then a 2nd liner, then a 3rd.

I'd really like to know.

Advanced stats pretty clearly bear out that Brassard faces easier competition than both Stepan and Richards, while getting almost 60% offensive zone starts. I don't care that his points put him 52nd in the league among centers, defining a 2nd line center purely based on points is asinine. That means Brad Richards is a 1st line C, right? Why the hell are we buying him out then?

I'll believe what my eyes tell me from watching him every game. Brassard, while extremely talented, is not a 2nd line center. He's too streaky offensively, and simply not good enough defensively. That doesn't make him a bad player, it just means he shouldn't be playing 2C on a team looking to compete.

Also, as others have stated, yes, we could roll with Brassard at 2C if we pick up another high-end winger. But why would we do that when we have decent organizational depth at wing, with players that could grow into those roles. What we don't have is center depth, which is why it makes most sense to address that first, either via UFA or trade.

 

[silverfish]

Miller isn't just ready; he's been ready. Maybe not for a top-6 role yet but certainly for a third-line role. And next season he should solidify a permanent spot in our line-up.

There isn't anything else for him to do in Hartford.

How can you say this with such confidence? I just don't understand, I don't. Not from what I've seen at the NHL level.

Statements like "he's been ready" baffles me. What has he done at the NHL leve thus far to prove that he's capable of being in the NHL game in and game out?

I'm glad his game in Hartford doesn't need any more proof that he can be a great AHL player, but it has yet to translate to NHL ice.

 

[Beer League Sniper]

Miller isn't just ready; he's been ready. Maybe not for a top-6 role yet but certainly for a third-line role. And next season he should solidify a permanent spot in our line-up.

There isn't anything else for him to do in Hartford.

I don't disagree with this at all. I just want to see him eased in on the wing. If he excels and takes the 3C spot, that's great. I just don't think that should be counted on to happen. We need to have a plan for the 3C spot that doesn't bank on Miller being able to handle it right off the bat.

 

[pld459666]

Advanced stats pretty clearly bear out that Brassard faces easier competition than both Stepan and Richards, while getting almost 60% offensive zone starts. I don't care that his points put him 52nd in the league among centers, defining a 2nd line center purely based on points is asinine. That means Brad Richards is a 1st line C, right? Why the hell are we buying him out then?

I'll believe what my eyes tell me from watching him every game. Brassard, while extremely talented, is not a 2nd line center. He's too streaky offensively, and simply not good enough defensively. That doesn't make him a bad player, it just means he shouldn't be playing 2C on a team looking to compete.

Also, as others have stated, yes, we could roll with Brassard at 2C if we pick up another high-end winger. But why would we do that when we have decent organizational depth at wing, with players that could grow into those roles. What we don't have is center depth, which is why it makes most sense to address that first, either via UFA or trade.

Richards IS a 1st line center. He's a FADING 1st line center and the only reason there is talk of buying him out this summer is because we have another comliance buy out that we can use so as to not affect the cap situation as we move forward.

We can buy Richards out next summer and then be assessed dead cap space.

OR we can cut ties now, use the much needed space to shore of the rest of the roster and solidify the team for the next 5-7 years.

We agree to disagree. While I would never say that Brassard is good defensive player, he's adaquete in that regards.

As for his streakiness, you're right he is streaky.

Elite players are there every game.

Top line players are there 75% of the time

You get where I'm going?

Over the course of the season Brassard is posting a point every 2 games.

Any more consistent and we're having a vastly different conversation.

 

[silverfish]

Here's a fun statistic...

Miller's ice time charts clock in at playing with Pouliot 47% of the time, and Brassard 40.9% of the time.

Miller has 6 points in 28 games this season.

In the 28 games Miller has played for the Rangers this season:

Brassard: 5 goals, 8 assists (23 points in the other 36 games)
Pouliot: 8 goals, 4 assists (1 scratch) (12 points in the other 35 games).

Miller had an assist on 2 Brassard goals, and Pouliot had an assist on 1 Miller goal. So of those combined 25 points that Brass and Pouliot put up in games that Miller played in, despite being his most heavily used line-mates, Miller has contributed a goal or assist on just 3 of those 25 points.

(Can you guys tell how slow of a day it is at work for me? )

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

I think we can fit Stastny in, it will just force us to play a lot of kids. I'm a fan of the player, I'm a fan of the way he would fit into this team, I don't even think the contract would be that horrible but IMO we wouldn't be getting him at no cost. Our NHL depth is a good thing to have. Our prospects aren't all blue-chippers and it forces them to fight hard for a spot. Combine that with the fact that Staal + Stepan will need extensions/raises and this team is kind of in between a rock and a hard place. Everything depends on what the magic number is - we can't be the only ones.

After crunching the numbers (which obviously wouldn't be much different with Richards) I'd almost be tempted to go with Stepan/Brassard/Miller - and I don't think that's a good group, I don't think Miller's defensively responsible enough to play center yet, I like Stas etc.

CapGeek Armchair GM Roster
FORWARDS
Rick Nash ($7.800m) / Paul Stastny ($7.200m) / Martin St. Louis ($5.625m)
Chris Kreider ($1.900m) / Derek Stepan ($3.075m) / J.T. Miller ($0.894m)
Carl Hagelin ($2.250m) / Derick Brassard ($3.700m) / Mats Zuccarello ($3.150m)
Oscar Lindberg ($0.675m) / Dominic Moore ($1.200m) / Daniel Carcillo ($0.925m)
Ryan Bourque ($0.688m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Dan Girardi ($5.500m) / Ryan McDonagh ($4.700m)
Marc Staal ($3.975m) / Kevin Klein ($2.900m)
John Moore ($1.200m) / Dylan McIlrath ($0.703m)
Justin Falk ($1.024m) /
GOALTENDERS
Henrik Lundqvist ($8.500m)
Cameron Talbot ($0.563m)
BUYOUTS
Wade Redden ($0.000m)
Brad Richards ($0.000m)
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(estimations for 2014-15)
SALARY CAP: $71,100,000; CAP PAYROLL: $68,146,250; BONUSES: $1,026,667
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $2,953,750

 

[CHGoalie27]

Brassard is a 2C at least. Depending on who you put with him.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

Brassard is a 2C at least. Depending on who you put with him.

Yea... and I'm also able to projectile people through walls whenever I feel like it, too.

In what universe is your statement a reality?

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Here's a fun statistic...

Miller's ice time charts clock in at playing with Pouliot 47% of the time, and Brassard 40.9% of the time.

Miller has 6 points in 28 games this season.

In the 28 games Miller has played for the Rangers this season:

Brassard: 5 goals, 8 assists (23 points in the other 36 games)
Pouliot: 8 goals, 4 assists (1 scratch) (12 points in the other 35 games).

Miller had an assist on 2 Brassard goals, and Pouliot had an assist on 1 Miller goal. So of those combined 25 points that Brass and Pouliot put up in games that Miller played in, despite being his most heavily used line-mates, Miller has contributed a goal or assist on just 3 of those 25 points.

(Can you guys tell how slow of a day it is at work for me? )

He's 20. What do you expect out of a player that age, getting third line minutes?

 

[Thirty One]

Miller, to me, is an interesting case. I think he projects long-term as a center, but he struggles with that responsibility at the NHL level.

In his last stint at center with the Rangers, his zone starts looked like:

If he's centering the third line, he needs to be good enough defensively to not take offensive zone starts away from St. Louis/Nash.

 

[Boom Boom Geoffrion*]

How can you say this with such confidence? I just don't understand, I don't. Not from what I've seen at the NHL level.

What don't you understand? I think his development will take a hit if he's competing against lesser competition. He's physically ready for the NHL. He needs experience now. He's done what he has to do in Hartford to prove that he's ready for a bigger role.

And when he's' been in our line-up he hasn't been out of place. We're not talking about a player who's a liability when he's on the ice.

Statements like "he's been ready" baffles me. What has he done at the NHL leve thus far to prove that he's capable of being in the NHL game in and game out?

He's proven he can compete at this level. He's not out of place when he's in our line-up.

I'm glad his game in Hartford doesn't need any more proof that he can be a great AHL player, but it has yet to translate to NHL ice.

Oh you're right, terrific excuse, Miller's not ready for a third line role because his greatness in the AHL hasn't translated to the NHL. Just because he's not a great NHL player doesn't mean he can't help this team regularly playing on our third-line.