Toggle sidebar

Does Hiring Vigneault Mean a Reprieve for Brad Richards?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Atoz*
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Brian Boyle said:
If he gets injured, then we're completely ****ed.

Also, if he doesn't turn it around, we'll still be stuck with an abomination of a player who can't contribute to the roster. It'll just be an anchor to the team.
Click to expand...

Unless it's some sort of career-ending injury, why wouldn't he want to be bought out?

He could pull a Drury and allow the buyout anyway if it's a small injury. He would probably make more money in the long run.

If he gets bought out after next season, he will receive $1.5MM for the next 12 years of his life from the Rangers, which is a total of $18MM. If he signs with another team for let's say $3MM for three years, that will be a total of $27MM.

I'm sure he'd rather do that than stay on the IR.

I say buy him out after next season.
 
GAGLine said:
LTIR won't help us when he retires 3 years before his contract is up.

Some of you guys just don't get it. This decision has nothing to do with the coach. This is 100% on Sather and the rest of the front office.

If not for the change to the amnesty rules, Redden would have spent this season on his couch, because the Rangers weren't going to risk him getting hurt and them not being able to buy him out. Why does anyone believe that it will be any different with Richards?

Richards will get bought out this summer. Period. End o' story.
Click to expand...

The more I think of it, the more I think this will be the case. Although personally I'd strongly argue against it, I'd keep him this season and buy him out next year, the summer of 2014.
Use him as a stopgap this year to make sure our young players develop according to plan. If we buy Richie out THIS year, who replaces him?
At the end of the day, this FA class is a ****show, our young players are not ready to step into that void he leaves.
Who would be our centers? Stepan, Brass, Boyle? I'd keep Richards 1 more year, I know it's a risk, but I think it's worth it.
 
Machinehead said:
Call it a gut feeling if you want but I'd bet money Brad Richards is a Ranger next season.

The main thing is, many people say Torts leaving means Richards leaving but I think this coaching change was in part for him, not against him. His relationship with Torts wasn't the same at the end.
Click to expand...


This is what gave me the idea to start the thread in the first place. I still think he's gone but that's the only reason that I can see him being given another chance. And these are the Rangers, who I always say make their GM's put on the Spock's brain helmet when they take over to do the absurdities only Ranger GM's can do.

But to those that say that the cap will force a buyout no matter how he played, it seems to me that couldn't be the case unless every player at that level would be bought out. Who will take his place as third line center? Who do you think? Everyone's favorite third line center on this team. Five goals a year. 20% of the cost.
 
Richards signed with the Rangers because Torts was the Rangers coach. He went against the advice of his agents and took less money(Calgary) to play for Torts. The Rangers gave a 31 year old Richards a nine year deal because Torts pushed for it. I love how now Richards and Torts don't like each other now. Sather said the Richards benching in the playoffs was an "organizational decision". Management was involved too. Torts is proclaiming his love for Richards after game 4. How much he loves Richards a player and a person. Torts said he thought Richards would bounce back next season. Of course,Torts does. He went out on the limb and pushed ownership to give Richards 9 years and $60M.

Brooks reflects the mood of some people here

Given the change in coaches and the absence of cost-effective available talent down the middle on the free agent market, it is beginning to seem more and more likely the Rangers won’t be asking Brad Richards to clean out his locker during the amnesty buyout period that will follow the Stanley Cup Finals.

If defenseman Roman Josi is worth $28 million over seven years to re-up as a restricted free agent coming off entry level in Nashville, what does that mean for Ryan McDonagh?

Five years, $25 million enough for the Blueshirts to sign him before he can attract a Group II offer sheet — and maybe not from Philadelphia, but from, say, Edmonton?
Click to expand...

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/rang...R5otqf057J?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Rangers

Change in coaches? Cost effective talent in never available in free agency. Richards already cleaned out his locker along with the other players last month. Then Larry discusses $5M for McDonagh. Last month,Brooks wrote about Stepan being worthy of a long term deal just like McDonagh. $5M for him too? The cap is set at $64.3M. The Rangers need more depth throughout their line-up. Where is that money coming from? Pay McDonagh $5M as Brooks suggests. Stepan gets his money. Hagelin gets less than those 2 but he still triples his cap hit from his ELC. That's it. The same team will be back. There's no money to do anything else.
 
RangerBoy said:
Richards signed with the Rangers because Torts was the Rangers coach. He went against the advice of his agents and took less money(Calgary) to play for Torts. The Rangers gave a 31 year old Richards a nine year deal because Torts pushed for it. I love how now Richards and Torts don't like each other now. Sather said the Richards benching in the playoffs was an "organizational decision". Management was involved too. Torts is proclaiming his love for Richards after game 4. How much he loves Richards a player and a person. Torts said he thought Richards would bounce back next season. Of course,Torts does. He went out on the limb and pushed ownership to give Richards 9 years and $60M.

Brooks reflects the mood of some people here



http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/rang...R5otqf057J?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Rangers

Change in coaches? Cost effective talent in never available in free agency. Richards already cleaned out his locker along with the other players last month. Then Larry discusses $5M for McDonagh. Last month,Brooks wrote about Stepan being worthy of a long term deal just like McDonagh. $5M for him too? The cap is set at $64.3M. The Rangers need more depth throughout their line-up. Where is that money coming from? Pay McDonagh $5M as Brooks suggests. Stepan gets his money. Hagelin gets less than those 2 but he still triples his cap hit from his ELC. That's it. The same team will be back. There's no money to do anything else.
Click to expand...


Don't confuse Larry Brooks with someone that wants to see the Rangers win. The only thing he hates more than the Rangers is that he must cover them because they own the city. Brooks' lips went directly from Al Arbor's a** to Lou Lamoriello's.
 
He will redeem himself. Probably put up 70 points which is better then anyone we will get on the market.

If he stinks again we sit him and buy him out next season, no big deal.


For someone who "stunk" so bad this year, 34 points in 46 games, good for 3rd on the team isnt bad...just saying (yes i know he was brutal though in the playoffs).

He was put in the doghouse by Torts which is why he was going to be bought out, now thats Torts is gone hes very likely to stay.
 
RangerBoy said:
Richards signed with the Rangers because Torts was the Rangers coach. He went against the advice of his agents and took less money(Calgary) to play for Torts. The Rangers gave a 31 year old Richards a nine year deal because Torts pushed for it. I love how now Richards and Torts don't like each other now. Sather said the Richards benching in the playoffs was an "organizational decision". Management was involved too. Torts is proclaiming his love for Richards after game 4. How much he loves Richards a player and a person. Torts said he thought Richards would bounce back next season. Of course,Torts does. He went out on the limb and pushed ownership to give Richards 9 years and $60M.

Brooks reflects the mood of some people here



http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/rang...R5otqf057J?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Rangers

Change in coaches? Cost effective talent in never available in free agency. Richards already cleaned out his locker along with the other players last month. Then Larry discusses $5M for McDonagh. Last month,Brooks wrote about Stepan being worthy of a long term deal just like McDonagh. $5M for him too? The cap is set at $64.3M. The Rangers need more depth throughout their line-up. Where is that money coming from? Pay McDonagh $5M as Brooks suggests. Stepan gets his money. Hagelin gets less than those 2 but he still triples his cap hit from his ELC. That's it. The same team will be back. There's no money to do anything else.
Click to expand...

There is more then enough money to keep richards and resign all those players. Clowe is not coming back. Buyout Richards next season. The team was fine last season, do you want to reconstruct the team every 6 months? The market is horrible this year anyway.
 
Mr Atoz said:
Don't confuse Larry Brooks with someone that wants to see the Rangers win. The only thing he hates more than the Rangers is that he must cover them because they own the city. Brooks' lips went directly from Al Arbor's a** to Lou Lamoriello's.
Click to expand...

Brooks worked for NJD, but the last months I've for the first time even see him directly refer to his time as Ranger fan. IE, having seen ranger games as a kid etc.
 
eco's bones said:
It's not that Richards can't redeem himself as a player--I have my doubts though--it's that his contract can put our team in a hole for a long time. The Rangers shouldn't even be fooling around with this situation. It is the single most important they have left to deal with this summer and at least for me it's ranks equally with the head coaching decisions.
Click to expand...

yea if they give him another yr and he gets concussed and they cant buy him out next summer they are screwed. Pretty much have to do it
 
I don't think they have anything to do with each other. Richards gets bought out because he's an injury away from not being able to be bought out at all and he's a cap recapture risk. The decision to buy him out isn't a hockey one.
 
I counted 5 giveaways per period for him sometimes. He can't control the puck, can't out produce Brian Boyle in the playoffs when it matters most, and most certainly doesn't make the players around him better. Buy him out please.
 
Tawnos said:
I don't think they have anything to do with each other. Richards gets bought out because he's an injury away from not being able to be bought out at all and he's a cap recapture risk. The decision to buy him out isn't a hockey one.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I think Richards can rebound and have a good year. But I'm not willing to risk him getting injured and screwing us on the cap. I doubt the Rangers are either, but we'll see.
 
Green Blob said:
There is more then enough money to keep richards and resign all those players. Clowe is not coming back. Buyout Richards next season. The team was fine last season, do you want to reconstruct the team every 6 months? The market is horrible this year anyway.
Click to expand...

The team wasn't fine last season. Keeping Richards makes no sense for next season and future years. He can't keep up with the play anymore. Where he is going to play? On the 3rd line? Keeping Richards ties the Rangers hands. The Rangers need to dump all of the 4th liners except for Dorsett pretending to be 3rd liners. They need another goal scoring winger. They more depth on D. Maybe you like seeing Eminger play. More depth throughout the lineup. No Newbury and Haley. Real depth. You look at the 4 final teams. The Rangers don't measure up based on the 2013 team.
 
RangerBoy said:
The team wasn't fine last season. Keeping Richards makes no sense for next season and future years. He can't keep up with the play anymore. Where he is going to play? On the 3rd line? Keeping Richards ties the Rangers hands. The Rangers need to dump all of the 4th liners except for Dorsett pretending to be 3rd liners. They need another goal scoring winger. They more depth on D. Maybe you like seeing Eminger play. More depth throughout the lineup. No Newbury and Haley. Real depth. You look at the 4 final teams. The Rangers don't measure up based on the 2013 team.
Click to expand...

Depth is a key issue. It hurt us all year long. Losing Dubinsky, Anisimov, Prust, Fedetenko were major factors why the team took a big step backwards. I understand that players of Nash's ilk are very rare. Even so Dubi, Artem, Prust and Feds were all capable of offense--even if some of them were frustrating. They all killed penalties. We lost toughness and grit. Replacing those 4 with Pyatt, Halpern, Powe and Asham just about dropped us in 1 year from best team in the east to almost not a playoff team. From 4 guys who were providing offense we went to 0 of their replacements providing offense. From 4 guys who were regular penalty killers we went to two and then we traded Halpern. We took a step back with toughness and grit as well. Add to that Richards crappy season and it's almost over achievement making it to the second round.
 
The Rangers lost the Boston series because Richards was benched. How can they possibly expect to win any games next season with him not on the team?
 
JohnC said:
The Rangers lost the Boston series because Richards was benched. How can they possibly expect to win any games next season with him not on the team?
Click to expand...

No, they lost because the defense **** the bed and they couldn't score. Richards wasn't scoring anyway.

He was also in the press box in game 4 and they won that. Please stop pretending that Richards is good anymore. He's done.
 
Green Blob said:
He will redeem himself. Probably put up 70 points which is better then anyone we will get on the market.

If he stinks again we sit him and buy him out next season, no big deal.


For someone who "stunk" so bad this year, 34 points in 46 games, good for 3rd on the team isnt bad...just saying (yes i know he was brutal though in the playoffs).

He was put in the doghouse by Torts which is why he was going to be bought out, now thats Torts is gone hes very likely to stay.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point. 34 points in 48 games is not bad, and if you could get him back for another season cheaply, yeah, why not? Even though he runs the risk of not having a role and ending up benched again when Brassard takes his spot, you could at least give him a chance and role the dice to see if he can regain ppg form.

But that's not what's at stake.

The problem is he's a guy on the decline. There is NO WAY he makes it through the next 7 years at a high level. Chances are he doesn't make it through half those years even as a 50 point player.

This team cannot afford to get stuck with Richards for the length of his contract at that salary. It will be crippling.

It is not worth risking an injury, which would mean we can't buy him out, which would mean we are stuck with him.
 
JohnC said:
The Rangers lost the Boston series because Richards was benched. How can they possibly expect to win any games next season with him not on the team?
Click to expand...

LOLOLOLOL no. Richards was a black hole. We lose cause our transition game sucked and our depth was horrid.
 
Green Blob said:
He will redeem himself. Probably put up 70 points which is better then anyone we will get on the market.

If he stinks again we sit him and buy him out next season, no big deal.


For someone who "stunk" so bad this year, 34 points in 46 games, good for 3rd on the team isnt bad...just saying (yes i know he was brutal though in the playoffs).

He was put in the doghouse by Torts which is why he was going to be bought out, now thats Torts is gone hes very likely to stay.
Click to expand...


Maybe in NHL 2013 it isn't a big deal. This is reality where a guy making $7M bucks a year getting scratched on a nightly basis is a big deal. It would be an unneeded distraction and not something you me or any Rangers fan wants to see. The questions of "why wasn't Richards bought out?" would linger throughout the year. Richards was brutal the whole year. Take away the last two weeks of the season and what were Richards totals? He wasn't put in the doghouse by Torts. Richards put himself in the doghouse. Sather also said it was an organizational decision. Lets not pretend Torts was the sole reason Ricahrds got scratched. For all we know Torts was the sole reason Richards wasn't scratched earlier.

The Rangers should buy Richards out and move on. You can use the money for depth. You can also not use the money and keep it until the trade deadline.

What's more likely to happen, Richards plays great or Richards has another terrible year?
 
honestly i say we keep him.... he only had 1 bad year with us and oh look at that its the year of the LOCKOUT... he obviously didn't train enough to get back into form.. give him a chance or amnesty him and watch him go sign somewhere for 3m and have a 80 point season :p:
 
kingnashty61 said:
honestly i say we keep him.... he only had 1 bad year with us and oh look at that its the year of the LOCKOUT... he obviously didn't train enough to get back into form.. give him a chance or amnesty him and watch him go sign somewhere for 3m and have a 80 point season :p:
Click to expand...

Yeah maybe he can go back to Dallas and have Benn or Eriksson do all the work for him again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom