Confirmed with Link: Kreider extended 7 years, AAV approximately $6.5MM

[Hire Sather]

I love the details of CK's contract. How come more contracts are not made this way? It's totally based on performance. If I understand what signing bonuses are. Do I have that right? Generally a signing bonus is money given to a person who just joins a company. But here I think, but not sure, it's based on certain goals. Is that correct? Cause if it is, it lights a fire under his butt to produce, particularly the next 3 years. Plus after 4 years, he can be moved at a fairly enticing salary.

• Year 1: $2 million salary, $8 million signing bonus, NMC
• Year 2: $3.5 million salary, $6 million signing bonus, NMC
• Year 3: $1 million salary, $5 million signing bonus, NMC
• Year 4: $4 million salary, $2 million signing bonus, NMC
• Year 5: $5 million salary, NTC
• Year 6: $4 million salary, NTC
• Year 7: $4 million salary, $1 million signing bonus, NTC

And why is it, he only counts at 6.5 towards the Cap when he can make 10 mil next year?

It's not performance based at all, no contracts are after ELCs.

He will get every penny of his deal if he never plays another game.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Back before the Rangers demoted Redden there was no need for a no movement clause, they were all called no trade clauses.

A NMC is a Full No Trade where the team can also not reassign the player to any other league (AHL or anywhere else)

Kreider has a NMC clause for 4 years, means he can not move anywhere without his approval.


Last 3 years it turns into a limited no trade, he can list 15 teams to not be traded to, yet still has the no movement part pertaining to not being able to be reassigned.


In my opinion it does not really matter the clauses, if he is still good the Rangers will keep him, if not no other team is going to really want to trade for him anyway. The only advantage is if the Rangers want to attach something good to him to move him, maybe some team not on his no trade list may take him. A losing position anyway.

The more important yet still a losing position is the ability to buy him out without a giant penalty for doing so. Likely still cost them ~3M for some amount of year(s) and a lesser amount beyond that. So at worst they just can weaken their team by not keeping or adding something else that would help them at that time.

The limited NTC is probably why we went to 7 years.

I bet that we offered 6 with a NMC and that he wanted 7 so we got a bit from him to get to that 7.

 

[klingsor]

I liked it very much but as of now I reserve my Rangers "Love Category" to signing Panarin.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

It's not performance based at all, no contracts are after ELCs.

He will get every penny of his deal if he never plays another game.

Well, not exactly. There are 2 types of contracts, aside from ELCs, that can contain a performance bonus.

- 35+ contracts
- 1-year contracts for players coming off serious injuries

 

[Mac n Gs]

I'm still iffy on the term of the deal, but I'd lean more towards "indifferent" than "don't like" now that I've seen the structure of the contract. Getting the AAV to $6.5M is definitely beneficial.

Hopefully this helps set some precedent for Mika in a few years to take a slightly more team-friendly deal.

 

[mulli25]

Again, you either missing or don’t want to acknowledge the point. Is the team better off with or without Kreider in the next 3-4 years at a reasonable cap hit? Did they structure the contract so that there’d be a way to get out of it (moving) in years 5-7? Because EVERYONE wanted Kreider on a 5 year deal and those who didn’t want him signed were concerned about years 5-7. These concerns were preemptively addressed via structure. What will ACTUALLY happens we will see in four - five years.

I believe you're the one missing my point here.

Yes, there's a way out in 5-7 years if the wheels absolutely fall off. What about the more realistic case, where the deal is bad-but-not-horrific? What if he plays 68 games in year 5 and puts up 36 points? Are they buying him out?

You're acting like this is a 5 year deal that just looks like a 7 year deal on paper. This is a seven year deal that we're stuck with unless its an unmitigated disaster.

 

[Irishguy42]

I'm still iffy on the term of the deal, but I'd lean more towards "indifferent" than "don't like" now that I've seen the structure of the contract. Getting the AAV to $6.5M is definitely beneficial.

Hopefully this helps set some precedent for Mika in a few years to take a slightly more team-friendly deal.

Agreed. $11.5M instead of $12M.

 

[Off Sides]

The limited NTC is probably why we went to 7 years.

I bet that we offered 6 with a NMC and that he wanted 7 so we got a bit from him to get to that 7.

In hindsight, I don't think they were ever going to trade Kreider without getting back an unrealistic return.

Yet that threat was the only leverage they had to have him both take a slight discount and get some breaks on clauses and contract structure. I think had he stuck at 7x7 full no movement clause, with more buyout protection, the Rangers still would have signed him.

What to me that says about the Rangers is they have flipped the switch to go for it mode. I would not be surprised to see the picks/prospects/youth for vets thing coming if and when they can fit that under the cap.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

In hindsight, I don't think they were ever going to trade Kreider without getting back an unrealistic return.

Yet that threat was the only leverage they had to have him both take a slight discount and get some breaks on clauses and contract structure. I think had he stuck at 7x7 full no movement clause, with more buyout protection, the Rangers still would have signed him.

What to me that says about the Rangers is they have flipped the switch to go for it mode. I would not be surprised to see the picks/prospects/youth for vets thing coming if and when they can fit that under the cap.

I would be pretty surprised. We just traded a vet for a 1st rounder, for example. This team appears ready to continue building from within and won't be trading cheap assets for veterans.

 

[Off Sides]

I would be pretty surprised. We just traded a vet for a 1st rounder, for example. This team appears ready to continue building from within and won't be trading cheap assets for veterans.

I do not think they use that pick to draft unless it ends up early. More to trade for something a little more developed. Maybe not a vet, yet something that is in the NHL, if they can fit it under the cap.

The Jets 1st and Pionk for Trouba kind of thing.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I do not think they use that pick to draft unless it ends up early. More to trade for something a little more developed. Maybe not a vet, yet something that is in the NHL, if they can fit it under the cap.

The Jets 1st and Pionk for Trouba kind of thing.

Yeah, but that's fine. Young NHL players are obviously good to trade for

 

[Off Sides]

Yeah, but that's fine. Young NHL players are obviously good to trade for

Of course yet this time they have less cap space to operate with, so someone is going to have to go if the return is anything like an 8M cap hit.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

I think a lot of the value Kreider brings isn't always apparent on the scoresheet. For an example look no further than the go-ahead, Fox goal.

 

[klingsor]

I think a lot of the value Kreider brings isn't always apparent on the scoresheet. For an example look no further than the go-ahead, Fox goal.

Yes.

Screening the goalie and/or otherwise occupying the defenders doesn't show up in the stats just like "boxing out" in basketball.

 

[True Blue]

No, you need a FRANCHISE center. The top of the top of the top. Zibanejad is an elite center yes but not on the level of previous Cup winners

Let's all recall. You need a FRANCHISE center. Like Ryan O'Reilly. If you want to win the Cup, can't do it with Zibanejad being your #1. He is far better off as the center behind the center.

 

[JT Kreider]

Let's all recall. You need a FRANCHISE center. Like Ryan O'Reilly. If you want to win the Cup, can't do it with Zibanejad being your #1. He is far better off as the center behind the center.

I still stand behind that Zibanejad is not on the level of past Cup winning centers, last night does not change that.

 

[True Blue]

I still stand behind that Zibanejad is not on the level of past Cup winning centers

Then no offense, but you are being obtuse.

You would honestly take Ryan O'Reilly or Backstrom ahead of him? Or Kopitar? 2015 Toews?

Aside from Crosby, please tell me who you are taking ahead?

 

[Thordic]

That's seriously a hot take. If Mika can produce anywhere near this seasons level for the next few years, he's absolutely one of the best centers in the league.

He's a defensive stud out there, and his offense has skyrocketed.

 

[JT Kreider]

Then no offense, but you are being obtuse.

You would honestly take Ryan O'Reilly or Backstrom ahead of him? Or Kopitar? 2015 Toews?

Aside from Crosby, please tell me who you are taking ahead?

I take all of them excluding Backstrom. 2009 Crosby, 2010 Toews, 2011 Bergeron, 2012 Kopitar, 2013 Toews, 2014 Kopitar, 2015 Toews, 2016 Crosby, 2017 Crosby, 2019 O'Reilly.

But more importantly, they also had Malkin, Richards, Krejci, Kuznetsov, Carter, Schenn behind them. That's also the problem, the depth behind him.

Exclude 2015 Toews but he also had a peak absolute top of his game Keith which we will probably never have either.

They all have a careers worth of elite play, not just a season and a half of sample size.

 

[Edge]

I feel like there are players we hedge on, and it makes sense to take that approach.

Zibanejad from about February 2018 until now just isn't one of those guys for me.

What he's doing this season only cements my belief.

 

[Leetch3]

I still stand behind that Zibanejad is not on the level of past Cup winning centers, last night does not change that.

you are right last night doesn't change that, it just re-enforces the fact that you were wrong to begin with

 

[True Blue]

I take all of them excluding Backstrom. 2009 Crosby, 2010 Toews, 2011 Bergeron, 2012 Kopitar, 2013 Toews, 2014 Kopitar, 2015 Toews, 2016 Crosby, 2017 Crosby, 2019 O'Reilly.

If you are holding out for Crosby, you may be waiting for a long, long time. There is a reason that generational players come along, well once in a generation. That aside, if this is who ZBad is, I would take him over every other person on that list.

But more importantly, they also had Malkin, Richards, Krejci, Kuznetsov, Carter, Schenn behind them. That's also the problem, the depth behind him.

That is true, but not the debate. Let's not go strawman here, shall we? Your point was that ZBad is the guy who should be behind one of these type of players. No one is arguing depth.

Exclude 2015 Toews but he also had a peak absolute top of his game Keith which we will probably never have either.

Also not the debate. And if you are talking offensively, allow me to point you in the direction of what one Tony DeAngelo is currently doing.

They all have a careers worth of elite play, not just a season and a half of sample size.

So now we are talking about judging with the benefit of hindsight over the course of this career? In which case your argument can solely be argued after another 5-6 years. In which case, why bring it up now?

 

[JT Kreider]

If you are holding out for Crosby, you may be waiting for a long, long time. There is a reason that generational players come along, well once in a generation. That aside, if this is who ZBad is, I would take him over every other person on that list.

That is true, but not the debate. Let's not go strawman here, shall we? Your point was that ZBad is the guy who should be behind one of these type of players. No one is arguing depth.

Also not the debate. And if you are talking offensively, allow me to point you in the direction of what one Tony DeAngelo is currently doing.

So now we are talking about judging with the benefit of hindsight over the course of this career? In which case your argument can solely be argued after another 5-6 years. In which case, why bring it up now?

If you backtrack to my OP, it was actually a response about how we are lacking in the type of elite talent necessary if the "rebuild is over". We have Zibanejad and Panarin but still a number of key components short.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

OliverDobson straight up throwing out hot takes in this thread like candy on Halloween.

 

[True Blue]

If you backtrack to my OP, it was actually a response about how we are lacking in the type of elite talent necessary if the "rebuild is over". We have Zibanejad and Panarin but still a number of key components short.

That does not change that your point is that teams do not with with a center like ZBad unless he is a second line center. Or your viewpoint that Ryan O'Reilly is better.

That the team needs depth is a different discussion.