Confirmed with Link: Rangers re-sign Vlad Namestnikov (2 years x 4.0M)

[Rempe73]

I think we will be very happy with this deal by the end of it.

Namestnikov's ability to possess and transport the puck through the neutral zone will be a big plus in Quinn's system. I think the trade really shook him up and he'll have a fresh start this year which will benefit him.

Good signing.

I like the optimism, and I want to feel this way as well. Really. But I just don't see it. He's one of the most average players I've ever seen. Not bad, but unexceptional. Not quite the typical bottom 6 guy but not quite good enough for the top 6. He is a strange player to get a read on, in my opinion. Maybe he's bad. Maybe he's average. Maybe he's inconsistent. Maybe he's pretty good. I lean towards not very good. I was much happier when we got Spooner. But what do I know?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Spooner Will get Name money, perhaps a tad more. Hayes around 5 M. Vesey Will be bridged under 2 M. Skjei is the Big ? Term Will dictate final numbers

So they are all staying or just the numbers they will get on the teams they play for?

 

[AKA Chief]

Miller also has 3 career goals when it counts... in 57 games.

Better average than Namestnikov, who has only 1 goal in 29 PO games. Woopee!!!

 

[Igor Shestyorkin]

I like the optimism, and I want to feel this way as well. Really. But I just don't see it. He's one of the most average players I've ever seen. Not bad, but unexceptional. Not quite the typical bottom 6 guy but not quite good enough for the top 6. He is a strange player to get a read on, in my opinion. Maybe he's bad. Maybe he's average. Maybe he's inconsistent. Maybe he's pretty good. I lean towards not very good. I was much happier when we got Spooner. But what do I know?

Unless you've thoroughly watched Tampa games and analyzed his stats(not just points), how can you judge his abilities based on 20 games with a horrible team and coach?

 

[egelband]

Unless you've thoroughly watched Tampa games and analyzed his stats(not just points), how can you judge his abilities based on 20 games with a horrible team and coach?

Are you Vlad Namestnikov?

 

[Off Sides]

I think you're overanalyzing this, he's not in the Rangers longterm plans (hence the short deal) and getting him signed will let us trade him at a future trade deadline either in '19 or '20. He'll be a valuable asset in that sense. I just wish it was a bit $cap lower so that guys like Spooner and Hayes can be had for a bit less.

Not sure I agree that was the best term if they want to trade him for value or even if they end up wanting to keeping him after this deal. Also not sure this sets any sort of precedence for any of the other RFAs either unless they plan to pay them 4M for each of their remaining RFA years without buying up any UFA years.

The outcomes here are

He is good, Rangers or some other team want him but see him as a soon to be free agent who will then get a pretty big contract. If he was good and there was some UFA years bought up in this deal then that is a contract that would be worth more both to the Rangers and on the trade front.

He is meh, maybe he could get a small rental return in the 2nd year, Rangers use him as a place filler until then

He is bad, not good any way it's analyzed.

I think meh is the most likely option so I'm not sure why they go this 2 year term when they could have had meh on a one year deal and expedited the process of getting a small rental return, maybe a larger one as he'd be seen as a player with a RFA year left instead of a pure UFA. Plus on a one year, if he was good and they wanted to then sign him longer term the Rangers too would have that one RFA year left to factor into that contract making the AVV less.

Why is that overanalyzing, isn't that just analyzing?

If I were to overanalyze, it does bring up a interesting question, did the Rangers have this plan when they traded for him, to use him as a two year filler that may return a merger return at some point? If so does that bring up whether or not the value in the deal that brought him here was lesser than what was perceived at the time? Or did the Rangers think he was a player they could fit into their long term plans and not quite get that right?

 

[Igor Shestyorkin]

Are you Vlad Namestnikov?

No, I'm rational.

A 20 game sample size is a sad base to go off of.

 

[LORDE]

Anyone who listens to what Gorts had to say after should take away one thing... he never mentioned the $

He mentioned the term.

That is all you need to know.

 

[Rempe73]

Unless you've thoroughly watched Tampa games and analyzed his stats(not just points), how can you judge his abilities based on 20 games with a horrible team and coach?

I tried to watch as many games as possible. But it's not that. If you don't believe me, ask Tampa Bay fans that have watched him play every game this season. They will tell you that he overachieved. That he needs elite players around him in order to produce.

He reminds me of Conor Sheary. Put him with Crosby and he's awesome. Put him on the 3rd line and he's not. Yet I am still higher on Sheary than I am on Vlad. There's a bit more potential with Sheary in my opinion, even though neither player is good at driving offense themselves. But that's beside the point.

Why do we keep expecting mediocre players to turn it around? It's not like they will magically turn into great, or even good, players at age 25-26 if they weren't already. Maybe Vlad is an average player. Maybe he just needs to play with elite players. Maybe he's just bad. I don't know. But hey, I hope I'm wrong. Really.

And yea I looked at his advanced stats, but I forgot if they were good or bad. But the eye test mainly.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

No, I'm rational.

A 20 game sample size is a sad base to go off of.

So why not take his play with Tampa outside of the games he played on a line with two elite players?

 

[LeetchisGod]

So why not take his play with Tampa outside of the games he played on a line with two elite players?

So much this. Namestnikov is the definition of mediocre.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

I wonder how much our other RFAs will want after seeing Namestnikov get a big increase to his already inflated salary.

 

[nyr2k2]

I wonder how much our other RFAs will want after seeing Namestnikov get a big increase to his already inflated salary.

They'll get market value based on what everyone else signs for, not just Namestnikov. Dozens of players set the market. That's how it works. Namestnikov's contract doesn't determine what everyone else gets. This is well established yet you continue to ignore it. I don't know why I bother.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

They'll get market value based on what everyone else signs for, not just Namestnikov. Dozens of players set the market. That's how it works. Namestnikov's contract doesn't determine what everyone else gets. This is well established yet you continue to ignore it. I don't know why I bother.

I like it when we sign players at under market value price, not at market price or above it.

 

[nyr2k2]

I like it when we sign players at under market value price, not at market price or above it.

EDIT: Not worth it. You can figure it out on your own.

 

[Harbour Dog]

I don't think Names is worth 2x4, but I understand why we had to pay that much for him.

Before we got him, I considered him to be the biggest passenger in the league, and he certainly never did anything with us to prove that wrong.

I haven't read this thread, so I apologize if this has already been discussed, but do we think this contract will have an impact on how Hayes is handled?

 

[nyr2k2]

I don't think Names is worth 2x4, but I understand why we had to pay that much for him.

Before we got him, I considered him to be the biggest passenger in the league, and he certainly never did anything with us to prove that wrong.

I haven't read this thread, so I apologize if this has already been discussed, but do we think this contract will have an impact on how Hayes is handled?

The Namestnikov contract will have as much of an impact on the Hayes contract as any of the other comparable RFA deals signed this season or last. There are a lot of comparables. Namestnikov's deal is just one small part of the puzzle.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

I don't think Names is worth 2x4, but I understand why we had to pay that much for him.

Before we got him, I considered him to be the biggest passenger in the league, and he certainly never did anything with us to prove that wrong.

I haven't read this thread, so I apologize if this has already been discussed, but do we think this contract will have an impact on how Hayes is handled?

yeah, basically he has 2 decent seasons in OHL (in the 2nd his goal production went down), then he has average at best season in AHL (only 44 games), then he has a pretty good season in AHL (only 56 games though) and a small taste of NHL, then he splits nest season between NHL and AHL, while AHL production was strong, his rookie NHL season he was on pace for 31 points and had 1 point in 12 playoff games. Then he plays full season in NHL scoring 35 points and 3 points in 17 playoff games.

After all that Tampa overpays him with a 2 year @ 1.937 mil

Next season his production drops to 28 points, no playoff games and next season he scores 44 in 62 on top line of Tampa and 4 in 19 for the Rangers and no playoff games and somehow his salary more than doubles after these 2 seasons. I don't understand it.

Edit: also physically he hasn't done much either 244 hits in 282 regular season games.

 

[Harbour Dog]

The Namestnikov contract will have as much of an impact on the Hayes contract as any of the other comparable RFA deals signed this season or last. There are a lot of comparables. Namestnikov's deal is just one small part of the puzzle.

Sorry, I should of specified.

I mean, will it affect Hayes' future with the team? Does this somehow make him more movable pre-season, or at the deadline?

As long as it does neither of those things, then I am perfectly apathetic about this signing.

 

[nyr2k2]

Sorry, I should of specified.

I mean, will it affect Hayes' future with the team? Does this somehow make him more movable pre-season, or at the deadline?

As long as it does neither of those things, then I am perfectly apathetic about this signing.

Oh, gotcha. Sorry I've been going back and forth with some guy who doesn't understand RFA deals so I immediately jumped to that.

Personally I don't see any way that this deal impacts Hayes' future, but that's just me. Half of this board thinks every minor move is a precursor to five other things, so I'm sure you can find someone who will explain to you why this means we're now locks to sign Panarin next year or something totally unrelated.

 

[Tawnos]

Sorry, I should of specified.

I mean, will it affect Hayes' future with the team? Does this somehow make him more movable pre-season, or at the deadline?

As long as it does neither of those things, then I am perfectly apathetic about this signing.

I think this just gives Gorton the option. Hayes might be a better player than Namestnikov, but that also makes him the more valuable trade commodity. With Namestnikov signed, you've got your middle-6 C, assuming Andersson or Chytil is ready to be the other one. If the market isn't right for a deal, you resign Hayes and move Namestnikov to the wing.

So it could affect Hayes' future with the team. Or it could not. Without signing Namestnikov, there would be no question the Rangers would keep Hayes.

 

[Harbour Dog]

Oh, gotcha. Sorry I've been going back and forth with some guy who doesn't understand RFA deals so I immediately jumped to that.

Personally I don't see any way that this deal impacts Hayes' future, but that's just me. Half of this board thinks every minor move is a precursor to five other things, so I'm sure you can find someone who will explain to you why this means we're now locks to sign Panarin next year or something totally unrelated.

Haha, no worries.

That's good to hear. I think Hayes (and if Past Me could hear this, he'd squint doubtfully) is a good guy to have around for our young guys to learn from.

I appreciate the grounded view as well; I'm sure if I had brought this up in the Spec thread, I would of had to sift through some doozies to get a reasonable answer.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

Also he doesn't kill penalties how can you be considered good defensively if you are not regularly used on PK?

 

[Harbour Dog]

I think this just gives Gorton the option. Hayes might be a better player than Namestnikov, but that also makes him the more valuable trade commodity. With Namestnikov signed, you've got your middle-6 C, assuming Andersson or Chytil is ready to be the other one. If the market isn't right for a deal, you resign Hayes and move Namestnikov to the wing.

So it could affect Hayes' future with the team. Or it could not. Without signing Namestnikov, there would be no question the Rangers would keep Hayes.

This is probably the main reason that I had an initially negative reaction to this signing. Otherwise Names would be, at worst, a filler for a couple years while our young guys iron out their games.

If the signing does end up being Hayes' death knell though; I'm going to absolutely hate it. For an extra million, we could have the player who is longer-tenured, still showing signs of development jumps, and is just all around better.

But for now, I'm going to choose to view this as being unrelated. It isn't like we're in cap hell, nor overwhelmed by depth at the moment.

 

[Tawnos]

This is probably the main reason that I had an initially negative reaction to this signing. Otherwise Names would be, at worst, a filler for a couple years while our young guys iron out their games.

If the signing does end up being Hayes' death knell though; I'm going to absolutely hate it. For an extra million, we could have the player who is longer-tenured, still showing signs of development jumps, and is just all around better.

But for now, I'm going to choose to view this as being unrelated. It isn't like we're in cap hell, nor overwhelmed by depth at the moment.

Is either player likely to have a significant role on the team in their next Cup window? I view both of these guys as somewhat temporary.