FireGerardGallant
The Artist Formerly known as FireDavidQuinn
- Mar 19, 2016
- 6,656
- 7,576
Rumor: Ilya Kovalchuk will be signing a 2-3 year deal with NYR
- Thread starter FoxyClean
- Start date
- Status
KirkAlbuquerque
#WeNeverGetAGoodCoach
Kovy plays the point on the PP. Anyway Zib can play that spot on the 2nd unit if need be.
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
ah LOL ok. If we were to go that route, I think a 5 year term for John Tavares would be best. Not sure how I feel about 5x10....
If Gorts plays this rebuild right, he could build up a lot of assets simply by eating up other teams' salary cap as NY can afford the cash - so long as the terms don't cripple our ability to maneuver the roster. Even Kovy at 2 years is great because you can potentially move him at the TDL for some really great assets if we should still not be competitive in that time.
I would have to insist that Kovy does NOT get a NTC. That is super important.
Mika really doesn’t play the point on the power play. He’s in the old Derek Stepan role, right hand shot on the off wing.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Callahan? What? Uh, no. Was always against that.
JT = John Tavares. Not JT Miller.
And, FWIW, I'm saying that I'd sign him before I'd sign Kovalchuk which isn't saying that the Rangers should sign either of them.
Last edited:
pld459666
Registered User
While I'm not completely on board with the potential signing, this is in no way like the old way of doing things.
Bringing this guy in is not for him to be the savior or the missing piece.
It's to bridge a gap for when the youth of the system is ready to assume full control of the team.
I can see the positives and negatives and for what GMJG is looking to do, it makes sense to bring him in.
Just my onion.
Bringing this guy in is not for him to be the savior or the missing piece.
It's to bridge a gap for when the youth of the system is ready to assume full control of the team.
I can see the positives and negatives and for what GMJG is looking to do, it makes sense to bring him in.
Just my onion.
Ex Officer Friendly
Got Nothin To Say
No no please continue it would be best lolHaha..I actually have so much to say to that but I'm gonna stop here so I don't get kicked off the boards
This move tells me that JG just don't have what it takes to put the work in that’s necessary to find a legit scoring winger.
He’d just rather take the easy way out, dip into the old well and just settle for whatever's on the bottom..
He’d just rather take the easy way out, dip into the old well and just settle for whatever's on the bottom..
GeorgeKaplan
Registered User
Blueshirts777
Registered User
- May 8, 2017
- 371
- 420
If those younger Russians won't come to the NYR without Papa Kovy then I don't want them. Either come here because you want to win and be a Ranger or don't come at all.
Its less about having him come over so that they come over and more about them having a friendly face who is familiar with the landscape out here to help them with the transition.
The more comfortable the Russians are when they get here, the better they'll perform.
The more comfortable the Russians are when they get here, the better they'll perform.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
So, what's the difference between signing XYZ at 35+ years old to a lucrative two-three year deal as the final piece of the puzzle and signing a 35+ year old to a lucrative two-three year deal with a team not expected to win?
Not a whole lot. You're still signing the 35+ year old to a lucrative two-three year deal instead of using that money to sign RFA's to longer term deals, signing younger UFA's, or leaving open cap space for possible future deals.
That's my onion.
They can’t do both ? Should have plenty of cap space especially if they can find a taker for Staal
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
I don't see that they'll have a ton of cap space with the RFA's they have to sign, Kovalchuk, and maybe some help on D and another backup goalie if the young Russian isn't ready. I don't forsee anyone taking Staal but one can hope.
pld459666
Registered User
Expectations.
In the past, the expectations after signing these guys were through the roof.
Now, there's a greater understanding (acceptance) that he's not being brought in for any other reason than be a body, score a few goals, fill a few seats and sell a few jerseys.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
So that's the sales pitch? He's body that'll score a few goals, sell a few tickets, and sell a couple of jerseys?
I'd still rather commit it to a couple of younger players that the new coach can get to play "his way" and have them grow with the team than a stop-gap signing like this.
I get the reason. I can't get behind it.
Yeah Kovy plays the point, ie as a defender, on the PP. Zibs plays the left board shooter role, like AO for example.
Its not entirely easy to fit in Shatty, Kovy and Zib on the same PP. But I would look into getting Kovy into that left board shooter role in stead of the point if no moves are made. Because if Shatty and Kovy are taking turns playing the point, there will not be many seconds left of PP time for TDA/Pionk next season.
Go with like:
PP1
---------net-----Zucc--
-------Kreider----------
Zib----------------Buch
----------Shatty---------
PP2
-----------net-----Chytil--
----------Lias----------
Kova--------------Hayes
--------TDA/Pionk------
eco's bones
Registered User
The work necessary to get a legit scoring winger? I'm trying to parse exactly what you mean. One thing I'm pretty sure of is there aren't very many just laying around to be picked up for nothing and if you wanted say a Jeff Skinner--it would cost us a lot working a trade--like Lias Andersson maybe which I wouldn't want to do. And if you decided Vladimir Tarasenko--it would be a lot more than Andersson. So when you say JG isn't willing to put the necessary work into finding that legit winger it just reads to me like you're complaining but there's not a whole lot of substance behind it. Maybe though you can give us an actual example of some kind of target who Gorton could acquire without trading off our best young roster players or prospects.
Off Sides
Registered User
- Sep 8, 2008
- 9,755
- 5,585
Short version: 1 year deal I'd be happy with, 2 years is probably workable but still not a great idea, 3 years is silly.
Long Version:
Kovalchuk pretty much has a no trade clause whether it's in his contract or not, put yourself in the trading teams position, are you going to make a trade for him without his blessing knowing he could retire right then? Are the Rangers going to trade him if he says he is not going to report so they can carry his plus 35 cap hit without him?
The only trade would likely come if he becomes a rental and the Rangers are out of playoff position. He may be more willing to move at that point to chase a Cup or play for his next contract.
Which leads to the next question, if one thinks the Rangers are a playoff team in the last year of the Kovalchuk contract (likely 2 or 3 seasons from now) why are they trading him in his last year instead of self renting?
Is the point to getting Kovalchuk to help the team make the playoffs, even if that is by whatever he does plus helping bring over the KHLers who would be of NHL age by that point?
If that is not the point, what is it? To not make the playoffs with him so they can sell him? Is it because the KHL prospects will not come over without even though Buch, Georgiev, possibly Namestnikov are on the team? Or so they can trade Zucc, who seems to be wanting to work with Chytil, for the same return they would likely get at next years trade deadline for him anyway should they be selling?
The mentoring aspect, on the ice isn't he going to be a fixture on the PP? On one of the top lines 5on5? If so that is one less spot for the Rangers to develop someone like say Buch. If he is passed by and some other player at any point during that contract ends up getting those situations and minutes, is he going to want to stick around to play on a 3rd line with sparse 2nd unit PP time?And will the Ranger reduce his role should it be warranted knowing he is on a plus 35 contract and could just retire or become unhappy? Ask oneself the same about Zucc.
If he will not come over for a 1 year deal, which with bonus money could take him even beyond the rumored 6M, even give him a full clause... I think that is a plenty fair enough offer. If it goes as well as most are predicting he can sign another contract after that 1 year deal. If a 2nd or even a 3rd year has to be added because he wants that security, shouldn't that raise some flags that he is doubting he could secure a 2nd contract after the 1 year deal and is looking at this as a retirement contract?
I'm not doubting he could be helpful both on the ice and in transitioning the KHLers, Not doubting his character.
I am doubting he ends up being traded at all. I'm questioning what he is going to look like versus NHLers rather than the KHLers, and I'm concerned if he does not perform well he is still going to be given playing time above others only because of his veteran status, his contract, and his connections. I'm wondering why it has to be a 2 or 3 year deal versus a 1, after all, if that is all the Rangers are offering and he really wants to play for them, how is making 6M for one season something to reject given the other options are to sign a little longer somewhere else he does not prefer given if he performs well he could get another contact from the Rangers?
That is a ton of questions, mostly rhetorical, but I hope the Rangers are asking themselves the same ones.
Long Version:
Kovalchuk pretty much has a no trade clause whether it's in his contract or not, put yourself in the trading teams position, are you going to make a trade for him without his blessing knowing he could retire right then? Are the Rangers going to trade him if he says he is not going to report so they can carry his plus 35 cap hit without him?
The only trade would likely come if he becomes a rental and the Rangers are out of playoff position. He may be more willing to move at that point to chase a Cup or play for his next contract.
Which leads to the next question, if one thinks the Rangers are a playoff team in the last year of the Kovalchuk contract (likely 2 or 3 seasons from now) why are they trading him in his last year instead of self renting?
Is the point to getting Kovalchuk to help the team make the playoffs, even if that is by whatever he does plus helping bring over the KHLers who would be of NHL age by that point?
If that is not the point, what is it? To not make the playoffs with him so they can sell him? Is it because the KHL prospects will not come over without even though Buch, Georgiev, possibly Namestnikov are on the team? Or so they can trade Zucc, who seems to be wanting to work with Chytil, for the same return they would likely get at next years trade deadline for him anyway should they be selling?
The mentoring aspect, on the ice isn't he going to be a fixture on the PP? On one of the top lines 5on5? If so that is one less spot for the Rangers to develop someone like say Buch. If he is passed by and some other player at any point during that contract ends up getting those situations and minutes, is he going to want to stick around to play on a 3rd line with sparse 2nd unit PP time?And will the Ranger reduce his role should it be warranted knowing he is on a plus 35 contract and could just retire or become unhappy? Ask oneself the same about Zucc.
If he will not come over for a 1 year deal, which with bonus money could take him even beyond the rumored 6M, even give him a full clause... I think that is a plenty fair enough offer. If it goes as well as most are predicting he can sign another contract after that 1 year deal. If a 2nd or even a 3rd year has to be added because he wants that security, shouldn't that raise some flags that he is doubting he could secure a 2nd contract after the 1 year deal and is looking at this as a retirement contract?
I'm not doubting he could be helpful both on the ice and in transitioning the KHLers, Not doubting his character.
I am doubting he ends up being traded at all. I'm questioning what he is going to look like versus NHLers rather than the KHLers, and I'm concerned if he does not perform well he is still going to be given playing time above others only because of his veteran status, his contract, and his connections. I'm wondering why it has to be a 2 or 3 year deal versus a 1, after all, if that is all the Rangers are offering and he really wants to play for them, how is making 6M for one season something to reject given the other options are to sign a little longer somewhere else he does not prefer given if he performs well he could get another contact from the Rangers?
That is a ton of questions, mostly rhetorical, but I hope the Rangers are asking themselves the same ones.
Miamipuck
Al Swearengen
Why don't you guys just all put it on ignore and stop replying to the utter nonsense? That thing is just straight up trolling at this point and it's ruining a bunch of rather decent threads.
- Sep 17, 2007
- 24,993
- 23,000
How is signing a guy to a short term deal taking the easy way out? Kovy won't be coming in here to be the guy when we are competing for a cup. He'll be gone by then. He's a stopgap solution until Gorton can fill the spot with a younger player. The guy he wants might be in this draft or on another team. That player may not ready to contribute at a high level for 2 or 3 years. Gorton's trying to make the team better in the short term without sacrificing the long term.
He brings in Kovy for free, trades Zucc for assets, and then he has even more ammunition to use to move up in the draft or trade for a young player. Why is that so hard to understand? What is it you expect him to be doing, exactly?
- Status
Latest posts
-
GDT: 2024-25 season game 60 LA Kings vs St. Louis blues @7:30pm 3/5/25- Latest: Raccoon Jesus
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Props Alex Ovechkin to Record 895th Career Goal During 2024/25 Regular SeasonWagers: 13Staked: $22,383.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-