Proposal: NYR Girardi Raanta --- DRW Howard Jurco
- Thread starter bernmeister
- Start date
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
so you say that Howard and Girardi are ballpark similar $ and similar length (we'll ignore the fact that Girardi makes more money and has an extra year)
why the **** are the Wings going to give up Jurco then? this doesn't solve their issues cap wise at all? Girardi doesn't become functional in any system.
not to mention that Girardi's NMC + the expansion draft makes this even worse.
why the **** are the Wings going to give up Jurco then? this doesn't solve their issues cap wise at all? Girardi doesn't become functional in any system.
not to mention that Girardi's NMC + the expansion draft makes this even worse.
Absolutely awful for Detroit, and some piss poor reasoning to go along with it.
You say Detroit has a lot of $ tied up in Dman, and proceed to offer them the Dman with the absolute worst contract in the NHL?
You say Detroit has a lot of $ tied up in Dman, and proceed to offer them the Dman with the absolute worst contract in the NHL?
Finnish your Czech
J'aime Les offres hostiles
jetsforever
Registered User
- Dec 14, 2013
- 28,073
- 24,598
Hell no. Girardi has an extra year and sucks. I would do something like Jurco + Howard for Girardi + 2nd + Good Prospect
Last edited by a moderator:
- May 1, 2011
- 133,765
- 63,663
Howard for Girardi straight up seems to make more sense, or at least it would be fair.
A terrible goaltender on a BAD contract/salary for a terrible defenseman on a bad contract/salary.
Then again, on second thought, both are so bad at their position these days, when compared to other players of the same respective positions, who are on MUCH better contracts in both term and money. It probably doesn't make much sense.
It's close to fair, but maybe it doesn't make sense.
Either way, neither of these guys can be moved without their current teams retaining a whole **** load of money.
A terrible goaltender on a BAD contract/salary for a terrible defenseman on a bad contract/salary.
Then again, on second thought, both are so bad at their position these days, when compared to other players of the same respective positions, who are on MUCH better contracts in both term and money. It probably doesn't make much sense.
It's close to fair, but maybe it doesn't make sense.
Either way, neither of these guys can be moved without their current teams retaining a whole **** load of money.
If Girardi plays that bad again, it's due to his body, not his ability. And he'll retire within the next 2 seasons.
That's a lot of cap space for someone in July 2018.
That's a lot of cap space for someone in July 2018.
yes, that is the IMMEDIATE result NY has to assume to have the opportunity to later on move Howard, who is limited NTC, and can be moved more easily than Girardi with his NMC.
Especially if G guru coach Benoit Allaire can improve Howard's game
then he can be moved at half when some team has injury and is stuck for temporary work around.
They are both anchor contracts.
If Wings were actually playing Howard, that would be different.
They are talking about buying him out.
IF they got anything out of Girardi, that would be better than a buyout now.
Howard can actually still play unlike Girardi and you also want the Wings to throw in a Jurco .
Jurco I put in exclusively to offset the cap hit by giving up Raanta.
If Wings want to make this 2 for 1, fine.
consider Jurco out.
If Det wants to provide alternate cap dump which is a fit that works, no prob
As to Howard can actually play, that is a conditional only yes.
As a practical matter, they are NOT playing him.
If they do not cut him cause of the cap hit (why this has not taken place to date), and they do not play him, too much $ is tied up in net. Have to get productive cheap goalie and need to move Howard to do that.
eco's bones
Registered User
I wouldn't do it. Almost $6 mil for a backup goalie with 3 years left on his contract. He's likely never going to be a serious starting goalie again and he'll be almost impossible to move in a deal. The only option for him will be to buy him out---almost every team in the league has a better starting goaltender option that Howard.
Eric Sachs
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2007
- 18,643
- 1
hmmm so why don't the Wings just keep Howard and move him in a different deal rather than saddling themselves with a harder to move contract? let alone throw in an asset in Jurco?
they just doing this to help a brother out?
Again "BALLPARK" "SIMILAR"
as explained it was good faith to get closer cap neutral on the deal.
no prob, keep Jurco.
I did not claim that, and it is unreasonable to expect that, any one deal is going to provide TOTAL solution.
It DOES help.
Nobody else would take Howard.
It takes the excess $ in net, while giving Wings a fully useful, economical asset in net.
Granted, it adds to the $ problems excessive on the backline.
It looks like Ericsson may have to be bought out.
Granted, it would be ideal to get F help for the D, but no one wants Det D, except for a couple of guys Wings don't want/cant afford to trade. And remember, if you go that route, you are still stuck with Howard.
Also Wings have excess LD not enough RD.
IF Girardi can manage to do 3RD, even if he is overly expensive at it, it helps.
He was too beat up.
Should be largely improved, but he has to be in correct system which is not AV.
He can't do 25ish mins per nite.
Needs to be 3rd line mins.
He will start out ok, then it remains to be seen if the cumulative wear and tear will result in his being LTIR, which is still ok for Det in terms of roster mgmt.
point of this thread is to fine tune, but the premise is
swap of Howard for Girardi, with sweetener of Raanta, makes that one horrible issue bearable.
I already explained, which you conveniently ignore, that Jurco was for cap and it is no prob to take him out if he is suddenly that valuable.
As to "so why don't the Wings just keep Howard and move him in a different deal" the fact is no one wants/needs Howard esp at that salary.
Ergo, THERE IS NO DIFFERENT DEAL
Your sad retort, brother, is flawed.
actually, would rather have Girardi than Ericsson
also I think Clarkson is worse, have to check his numbers
work in progress.
Have responded to your assessment of Jurco value and removed rather than remain for cap.
Help me to make it work if there is a combo of names we can agree on.
Not easy, but let's try
If we had amnesty buyouts which only cost $, then I would agree with you.
Buyouts are staggered. You still have to get a hit on most of the cap $..
That means you HAVE to carry Howard.
you are not using Howard.
I'm giving you Girardi, who may be useful in some capacity as opposed to Howard, who is not, at least not to Det.
More importantly, I am giving you Raanta, very cheap.
Absolutely awful for Detroit, and some piss poor reasoning to go along with it.
You say Detroit has a lot of $ tied up in Dman, and proceed to offer them the Dman with the absolute worst contract in the NHL?
As noted, you are not getting an F.
At least go step in neutral to set up to progress going forward.
yes, what was too much in both net and backline has been replaced with a straightened out goalie solution, while adding to the problem at D. I admit that.
However, while nothing is given, you may expect better workarounds at D than at net.
useful Raanta to compensate for differentials and fact there is NMC.
I am open to discussing any core of
Girardi + Raanta
for
Howard/+ (acceptable cap dump)
that''s rough close, but I think as to value, it should be
a core of
Girardi + Raanta
for
Howard/+ (acceptable cap dump)
but if we get it close enough to a wash, Rangers can pay a reasonable premium to Wings for a guy who has a NMC, which we want to ditch.
Either way, neither of these guys can be moved without their current teams retaining a whole **** load of money.
strictlyrandy
Registered User
With the mental gymnastics Bern has to perform in each trade proposal he/she creates, I'm astonished they're not in Rio right now winning gold.
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
- Jun 3, 2011
- 10,959
- 653
