Toggle sidebar

Rank free agents in order of importance

  • 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
jerseyjinx94 said:
So you think we should deal with 3 RFAs, who we can resign through the calendar year, before any UFAs, who can walk in a week?
Click to expand...

Yes. make the RFA an offer before they can test the market and if they decide to test their value we always have the option to match or better the offer. And URF can walk in a week but wont till other teams make them offers. Offering a URF agent doesn't mean that they take the offer if they have a boner about leaving. Like in Boyle's case. He's said hes not happy with his role here and wants more. Hes not going to stay unless we over pay him to fulfill his role.
 
just gonna simplify and look at it as expendable and non expendable

Must sign (no particular order)
Brassard
Kreider
Zuccarello
Stralman or Staal. Probably won't get both
J. Moore

Would really like to have back, but would trade or let go
Boyle (Would REALLY like for him to stay. Sounds like he wants a bigger role though)
D. Moore
Pouliot

Let em walk
Carcillo (if price is right, sign him up. Gritty but still has talent)
Falk
Diaz


Edited a few. Pouliot and Carcillo would both be great pieces to retain
 
Last edited:
eco's bones said:
If the Rangers have offered Stralman $4 mil per that's pretty much the decision they've made. The rest is up to Stralman--whether to accept that or to become a free agent on July 1. Those are the two scenarios and there's not a lot to figure out about that. If he doesn't sign this week he's pretty much a goner too. The Rangers have too many cap issues to get in a bidding war over a player who has been for them a second pairing defenseman. So the only question possible is whether or not Sather decides to offer him more and I'm thinking that's not going to happen.

Now there might be a lot of posters here who if it were up to them would pull out all the stops--trading any combination of Staal, Girardi and Klein but Girardi especially is unlikely--starting a new contract with a NMC and after having given the team a home town discount and Klein is very unlikely as well--and it's unlikely that any deal for Staal is going to be made if Stralman doesn't re-sign in the next week. The Rangers can ill afford to lose Stralman but to lose another one of their top 4 would be like putting a torpedo right smack dab in the middle of their hull. Stralman signs the Rangers just might move Staal--Stralman doesn't--as Dom Moore said in his Bobby Granger short--forget aboot it.
Click to expand...

I wish we could lose that Klein contract. Its a defensive second pair money for a 3rd line player. I wish we could keep the first two lines the same, (Girardi-Mac and Staal- Stralman) sign J. Moore on the cheep and bring in the kids from Hartford to handle the rest.
 
iamthewalrus said:
just gonna simplify and look at it as expendable and non expendable

Must sign (no particular order)
Brassard
Kreider
Zuccarello
Stralman or Staal. Probably won't get both

Would really like to have back, but would trade or let go
Boyle
Moore

Let em walk
Pouliot
Carcillo
Falk
Diaz
Click to expand...

i feel Pouliot is a must and Carcillo is a steal though
 
iamthewalrus said:
I debated putting Pouliot higher. He really should be in "would like to have back." If we can sign him cheap he's definitely a must though. But that goes for everyone haha same with Carbomb
Click to expand...

Re-watch the finals against LA. He really is the only one on our team with tenacity in front of the net when we have an offensive zone possession. It sounds funny but Nash needs to change is game and take a lesson or two from him.

I have this theory... I feel like if you're going to be a "puck possession" team you need to run plays to break the the opposing teams D's and maintain puck movement in the opposing teams zone. The kings do it, Boston does it, hell even our 4th line did it well. How many times did Dorset dump the puck at the blue line and the rest of the line went to work? The only problem is Boyle was weak in front of the net.

Maybe next year we can have a large bodied forward stand in front of the net and let the offense do their worst in zone. Because that's why i feel we lost those games. The Kings had 2 huge screens on Hank the majority of the time and those 2 huge screens would tip it in shots from the point. Like maybe we could have Nash on one line, Kreider on anther, Poo on the third and Boyle or someone else on the fourth. Just assigned to wreak havoc in the crease.

I know this isn't a new concept, because i grew up watching Graves do it for us for years.
 
I see some bemoaning of the Girardi contract but none for the Lundqvist contract.

Just seems strange to me, Girardi's contract is about where any D man of his stature would end up.

Lundqvist on the other hand is paid as not only the highest cap hit goalie but the highest cap hit goalie by a pretty large margin. Even if he is the best goalie in the NHL which I think is debatable, having a cap hit that surpasses the others that would get put into the debate by at least 1.5M, seems like quite a bit of an overpayment.
 
Off Sides said:
I see some bemoaning of the Girardi contract but none for the Lundqvist contract.

Just seems strange to me, Girardi's contract is about where any D man of his stature would end up.

Lundqvist on the other hand is paid as not only the highest cap hit goalie but the highest cap hit goalie by a pretty large margin. Even if he is the best goalie in the NHL which I think is debatable, having a cap hit that surpasses the others that would get put into the debate by at least 1.5M, seems like quite a bit of an overpayment.
Click to expand...

I agree. I guess the thinking is that as the cap moves up, this salary will become less of an anomaly.

But right now it looks like Lundqvist is getting paid at the expense of icing the best possible team.
 
Off Sides said:
I see some bemoaning of the Girardi contract but none for the Lundqvist contract.

Just seems strange to me, Girardi's contract is about where any D man of his stature would end up.

Lundqvist on the other hand is paid as not only the highest cap hit goalie but the highest cap hit goalie by a pretty large margin. Even if he is the best goalie in the NHL which I think is debatable, having a cap hit that surpasses the others that would get put into the debate by at least 1.5M, seems like quite a bit of an overpayment.
Click to expand...

Regarding hank, no matter how much money he makes I don't think he can be over paid. He was the main reason why we made it deep in the playoffs, without the support from our "stars." (Richards and Nash) If our stars played the way the Kings stars played we'd of won that series in 5. I think it was Barry Melrose who said "You're never gonna win a Stanley Cup if your best line is Brass, Poo, and Zucc. Your stars get paid the big buck to show up in the big games that matter." And i feel Hank is one of those stars and has gone above and beyond "showing up."

In regards to you giraridi's contract i wouldn't mind paying it to him if he played to his potential and made Ranger fans debate who our best D-man was. As of right now, its not even debatable. Mac is the man and probably our next Captain, because of his excellent play and Giraridi's poor play.
 
Carcillo is probably gone. The Rangers really didn't like his attack on that ref, a dumb move.

Falk was useless, sorry kid...no deal for you.

Diaz wasn't that bad, he'll probably stay for a small price if Stralman departs.
 
mandiblesofdoom said:
I agree. I guess the thinking is that as the cap moves up, this salary will become less of an anomaly.

But right now it looks like Lundqvist is getting paid at the expense of icing the best possible team.
Click to expand...

Not so sure about the first part, mostly I am not so sure the cap can rise at the same percentage it has. With 50% to the players versus what they were getting 56% I think it was, and with small market teams still unprofitable, increased revenue sharing, I'm just not sure these ideas about the cap shooting up at the same annual rate are really feasible. Plus I'm not so sure any team is going to give out the same percentage of their cap space to a goalie, most seem to have allocated their cap structure towards there other "star" or up and coming "star" skaters.

Agree with the second part. I agree Lundqvist is the Rangers "star" player and all but the contract seemed to include quite a bump for his marketability rather than just being based on how the team could add cap hits around him.
 
xChrisTilDeathx said:
Regarding hank, no matter how much money he makes I don't think he can be over paid. He was the main reason why we made it deep in the playoffs, without the support from our "stars." (Richards and Nash) If our stars played the way the Kings stars played we'd of won that series in 5. I think it was Barry Melrose who said "You're never gonna win a Stanley Cup if your best line is Brass, Poo, and Zucc. Your stars get paid the big buck to show up in the big games that matter." And i feel Hank is one of those stars and has gone above and beyond "showing up."

In regards to you giraridi's contract i wouldn't mind paying it to him if he played to his potential and made Ranger fans debate who our best D-man was. As of right now, its not even debatable. Mac is the man and probably our next Captain, because of his excellent play and Giraridi's poor play.
Click to expand...

To a point I see what you are saying pertaining to the Rangers, but league wide things are a bit more hazy.

Girardi was going to be a UFA comparing his contract to McD is just not apples to apples. Comparing his contract to say Bouwmeester, Carle, or MacDonald as examples seems to fit in to what some of the other teams are giving to comparable players.

Lundqvist too was going to be a UFA so I think comparing his cap hit to that of the others goalies who signed theirs as UFA is more apt. Compared to say Crawford, Quick, Smith other UFA goalies who signed recently who could have become a UFA I think it's a pretty big difference where as I'm not so sure the quality of play or results differs all that much.
 
Given the organization's depth/lack thereof, the two Moores have to be near the top of our list given the multiple roles both fill for this team, and the lack of anything of substance behind them (doubly so for John Moore given Staal's as-of-yet unresolved status).

Kreider and Zucc are both real risks of getting offer sheets, but with Richard's cap hit off the books, I think the risk is minimized (still, if I'm a team like Florida or Buffalo I'd really make a run at Kreider and try to accelerate the rebuild since you kind of know what you have in him).

Brassard is also a must but I feel that will sort itself out either via a contract or matching an offer sheet.

I'd love to have them all back but I think the UFA market will probably make it unwise to keep Boyle and Stralman (unless I'm really overestimating what it will take to sign them). We can't struggle to score and tie that much money up into the bottom 6 and our second pairing.
 
Off Sides said:
To a point I see what you are saying pertaining to the Rangers, but league wide things are a bit more hazy.

Girardi was going to be a UFA comparing his contract to McD is just not apples to apples. Comparing his contract to say Bouwmeester, Carle, or MacDonald as examples seems to fit in to what some of the other teams are giving to comparable players.

Lundqvist too was going to be a UFA so I think comparing his cap hit to that of the others goalies who signed theirs as UFA is more apt. Compared to say Crawford, Quick, Smith other UFA goalies who signed recently who could have become a UFA I think it's a pretty big difference where as I'm not so sure the quality of play or results differs all that much.
Click to expand...

Yeah but how much would you like to see him paid? I feel like Sather wanted to give him better then the market value on him, and build a team around him. Because you put Hank on say Pit, Minnesota, or any other playoff caliber team we a weak goalie they're automatic cup contenders. Our problem has been goal scoring support for Hank. Its why we let Cally go, brought MSL in, and why the play from Nash and Richards was so infuriating. If those two competed at half of what they were capable we'd have the cup and another banner hoisted in MSG.

And regarding Girardi, i understand it was needed to retain him, and the market demanded that cost. But when you look at his salary and the salary of other D-men who have played better then him on our team it kind of rubs you the wrong way because you want your best players to be making the most money. NOT paying the market value for a URF at the time of his signing.

Hindsight is always 20/20 i suppose...
 
tjs252 said:
Given the organization's depth/lack thereof, the two Moores have to be near the top of our list given the multiple roles both fill for this team, and the lack of anything of substance behind them (doubly so for John Moore given Staal's as-of-yet unresolved status).

Kreider and Zucc are both real risks of getting offer sheets, but with Richard's cap hit off the books, I think the risk is minimized (still, if I'm a team like Florida or Buffalo I'd really make a run at Kreider and try to accelerate the rebuild since you kind of know what you have in him).

Brassard is also a must but I feel that will sort itself out either via a contract or matching an offer sheet.

I'd love to have them all back but I think the UFA market will probably make it unwise to keep Boyle and Stralman (unless I'm really overestimating what it will take to sign them). We can't struggle to score and tie that much money up into the bottom 6 and our second pairing.
Click to expand...

That's why i placed RFA in front of URFA because if you offer them a contract and they accept it without testing the market your problems solved. but if you wait for Florida or Buffalo to make high offers then you need to mach them possibility at an inflated price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom