Toggle sidebar

News Article: Rangers, Girardi at Impasse in Contract Negotiations

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chief said:
Was Shawn Horcoff insane 4 seasons ago when he got $5.5M for 6 seasons?

Or David Clarkson last summer when he got $5.25M for 7 seasons.

Free agents get (over)paid.
Click to expand...
Yes those were insane deals. Because the cap was lower when Horcoff got his deal. His was horrible. Clarkson was just sheer stupidity by the Leafs. Callahan asking for near $7 million will still be a bad cap hit 3-4 years from now when the cap goes up. He will never be worth that.

Girardi's demands are much more reasonable than those above.
 
With Richards likely being bought out, Callahan almost certainly being traded, and Staal as a UFA next year, the team really can't afford to trade Girardi unless they can absolutely rob some other franchise.

This team isn't so bad and so broken that they should be gearing up for massive turnover yet again.

I'd keep Callahan if he wanted something reasonable. He doesn't. Oh well. He can go be an albatross on some flailing franchise since that's apparently what he wants for god knows what reason. He and Clarkson can get tighter down the line and talk about the times when they were known for being good players instead of horrible contracts.

Girardi, on the other hand, actually does want something reasonable. If anything, he's more important than Callahan, as he plays the top role at his position, and his position is generally harder to fill. Give him what he wants.

If Sather blows these pending UFAs, this should be the last nail in the coffin. Handling this wrong can and will set this team back years.
 
RGY said:
Yes those were insane deals. Because the cap was lower when Horcoff got his deal. His was horrible. Clarkson was just sheer stupidity by the Leafs. Callahan asking for near $7 million will still be a bad cap hit 3-4 years from now when the cap goes up. He will never be worth that.

Girardi's demands are much more reasonable than those above.
Click to expand...

And the fact is that 4 years into the insane Horcoff deal, the Oilers were able to trade him. Free agent contracts can look bad the year they are signed but two or three years from now $7M is going to have the impact of $5M today. Callahan's contract won't be such a big deal and too many people are worried about the implications of a big deal today.

And I'll be curious to see the uproar when Sather spends his Callahan savings on a worse player for too many years.
 
Chief said:
And the fact is that 4 years into the insane Horcoff deal, the Oilers were able to trade him. Free agent contracts can look bad the year they are signed but two or three years from now $7M is going to have the impact of $5M today. Callahan's contract won't be such a big deal and too many people are worried about the implications of a big deal today.

And I'll be curious to see the uproar when Sather spends his Callahan savings on a worse player for too many years.
Click to expand...

Good luck trying to trade callahan at a $7 million cap hit (regardless if the relative value then being "$5 million") when his body is banged up and broken down....


You don't sign that deal.
 
NYR Viper said:
As long as Sather doesn't just hold onto them and lose them for nothing I can be swayed either way
Click to expand...

Too many people apply the "can't hold onto them and lose them for nothing" logic like i universally applies to all teams. I don't believe it does.

Losing players for nothing is what small market teams can't afford to do because they can't afford to sign a replacement free agent or trade for a player with "too high" a salary to replace the player they let walk. The Rangers aren't in that boat. They can let Callahan walk if they want and seek a replacement in free agency or via trade over the summer. Of course, holding onto the player only matters if you think it makes a difference for the playoffs.

I think there are a lot of people here who have the attitude that "we're not winning the Cup this year, so trade Callahan for picks and prospects". I would rather see the Rangers make a smart acquisition (or two or three) to bolster the team for a playoff run and with that mindset, keeping Callahan becomes a greater benefit.
 
Girardi's demands are very reasonable for someone in his position. His 6th season would be age 35. Getting a little restless that a deal hasn't been done yet.
 
Don't really think there is any excuse to not pay Girardi.

They don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. But we can lose Callahan, we CANNOT lose Girardi. That's how I feel.

Stralman has been good, but can we really go into 14-15 with him as our #1 RD? And maybe go Stralman-Klein-McIlrath/UFA down the right? That's not good enough.

On the other hand, we can get a MUCH better return for G than we could Callahan..............

Pay the man.
 
Chief said:
Too many people apply the "can't hold onto them and lose them for nothing" logic like i universally applies to all teams. I don't believe it does.

Losing players for nothing is what small market teams can't afford to do because they can't afford to sign a replacement free agent or trade for a player with "too high" a salary to replace the player they let walk. The Rangers aren't in that boat. They can let Callahan walk if they want and seek a replacement in free agency or via trade over the summer. Of course, holding onto the player only matters if you think it makes a difference for the playoffs.

I think there are a lot of people here who have the attitude that "we're not winning the Cup this year, so trade Callahan for picks and prospects". I would rather see the Rangers make a smart acquisition (or two or three) to bolster the team for a playoff run and with that mindset, keeping Callahan becomes a greater benefit.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't not losing the player for nothing AND getting a replacement via UFA be better than what you are proposing.

There is only (1) possibility that leads to a good decision in keeping the players. That is to win The Cup. That probability is pretty low.
 
silverfish said:
Don't really think there is any excuse to not pay Girardi.

They don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. But we can lose Callahan, we CANNOT lose Girardi. That's how I feel.

Stralman has been good, but can we really go into 14-15 with him as our #1 RD? And maybe go Stralman-Klein-McIlrath/UFA down the right? That's not good enough.

On the other hand, we can get a MUCH better return for G than we could Callahan..............

Pay the man.
Click to expand...

Who are you getting in return for those players? Who do they feel can fill that hole in UFA? There are options available. The Rangers are lucky enough to have (2) 1st pairing LD's in Staal and McDonagh. If he is asking for too much money or too long of a term you have to see what's available.
 
We can't lose both at once -- and certainly not to free agency. I'd rather keep the defenseman, if I had to choose between them, as quality defensive RHDs don't abound.
 
Why can't we trade both at once? Seriously, what's the punishment?
 
Last edited:
NYR Viper said:
Losing highly valuable assets for nothing is the punishment which is a big deal...
Click to expand...

Yeah.... that would really set us back. I still think keeping Girardi is the best move for this franchise. From what I remember, there really aren't any "stellar" dmen on the UFA market this year. Stralman isn't good enough to be a top-pairing guy, and who knows if McIlrath will pan out and make the squad next year?

I think it's certainly in the Rangers best interest to keep G around for a very long time. This of course all pending the offers we get for G. I mean, if Anaheim comes calling with Vatanen and Etem, I don't think Sather is going to hang up the phone :naughty:
 
If we lose both of Girardi and Callahan, not only do we lose them for nothing, but run the risk of having Sather scramble around in free agency to replace at least one or both of them. One would have to hope that Sather has truly learned his lesson from the summer of 2008, in which he replaced Jagr, Shanahan, Straka, and Avery with Redden, Naslund, Voros, and Rissmiller on the free agent market, traded Tyutin for Zherdev, and let Rozy hit the open market on July 1 only to re-sign him to a bad contract hours later.

If Girardi or Callahan are traded rather than both walking, you get some future assets and probably at least 1-2 roster players as well, which gives Sather less holes to fill during the summer. 7 players hitting free agency in addition to some important RFAs and a likely Richards buyout - it's a lot of work for one offseason.
 
haveandare said:
In that case, the "punishment" is having a team without a top pairing d-man, unless they get one back, which would be pretty shocking.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping Sather 'n' Co. didn't decide to run with the McD on the right thing, thinking it made Girardi more expendable.

I'm indifferent on moving Girardi, but I don't think that's a valid justification for doing so.
 
haveandare said:
In that case, the "punishment" is having a team without a top pairing d-man, unless they get one back, which would be pretty shocking.
Click to expand...

That's not what I meant.

People are talking like if we lose Callahan, losing Girardi is absolutely not an option. They have nothing to do with each other.
 
Raspewtin said:
That's not what I meant.

People are talking like if we lose Callahan, losing Girardi is absolutely not an option. They have nothing to do with each other.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Downgrading the roster in two areas is worse than downgrading the roster in one. Callahan for a few months isn't going to bring back an equal player signed beyond that. Girardi, even with a contract, is probably not going to bring back a guy who is a 1D today, or can play 1D passably today. Say they bring back good prospects. That's great, but this team this year, and maybe even next, is weaker at RW and D.

Personally, I'd like to see a trade deadline pass without massive, massive roster turnover. Gaborik for all those guys last year made sense at least. Trading Callahan makes sense. I don't think trading Girardi does short of a blockbuster steal.

I know that around here, downgrading the team today is seen as a means to a better pick, but I'd imagine on the ice and in the locker room, the players want to win yesterday, today and tomorrow. It sends a bad message to sell off two pieces that are really emblematic of the team's culture at once, especially when one of them is willing to take a reasonable contract that other, good teams are willing to sign him to, and even more so when you don't have replacements lined up for either of them. I'd like the players to be happy with the team as much as possible so that we can avoid this circus every time a good player is creeping toward UFA.
 
Raspewtin said:
That's not what I meant.

People are talking like if we lose Callahan, losing Girardi is absolutely not an option. They have nothing to do with each other.
Click to expand...

It depends on what the returns are. If we only get prospects and picks for Callahan then we absolutely must get an NHL ready player back for Girardi. The goal is to not take too big of a step back in order to take 3 steps forward.
 
If the Rangers trade Girardi, they'll either get a D-man in the deal to soften the blow of losing him, or they'll make another move to add one. Doubt they go into the playoffs asking Stralman to replace his minutes.

I think they'll re-sign him. They're too close not to get something done. Half a million per year and one year of term as the difference? That can be worked out.
 
Trxjw said:
If the Rangers trade Girardi, they'll either get a D-man in the deal to soften the blow of losing him, or they'll make another move to add one. Doubt they go into the playoffs asking Stralman to replace his minutes.

I think they'll re-sign him. They're too close not to get something done. Half a million per year and one year of term as the difference? That can be worked out.
Click to expand...
Agreed on both. They'll be fine either way. An Anaheim package with Vatanen included or a 5 x 5.75 works.
 
SERE 24 said:
I think it's becoming pretty plain that G will be staying for about 5.35 x 6 and Cally will be moved within the week.
Click to expand...

well we can start to speculate if anyone misses practice within the next few days...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom