rangers1314
Registered User
He can still be traded to half the league without his consent, it's not a killer.he’s not with that NTC
He can still be traded to half the league without his consent, it's not a killer.he’s not with that NTC
Not now we aren't. It's backloaded!I don’t think we were going to get Stutzle for Goodrow
Love to include a LNTC and a poison pill year 4 when production drops off a cliff and you can’t dump the contract on a team with cap space who want to save money. Goddamn that’s beyond stupid.
I said it a few days ago and I'll say it again.
If Goodrow signed this deal with the Isles, etc.... How hard would this board be laughing hysterically?
I wouldn’t worry about that too much. I expect that those teams will be on his NTC list anyway.If the contract was frontloaded it would be easier to trade to teams who are on actual budgets besides the salary cap (IE Ottawa).
I'm rounding up. 3.7 it is
I'm rounding up. 3.7 it is
I'm rounding up. 3.7 it is
dont hate the Goodrow contract as much as everyone else but it shows that Gorton letting Fast go last season was absolutely a fire-able offense
I have no issue with the limited no trade, shouldnt change much if we need to deal him. The contract would just become a lot easier to move/buyout later down the line if it was frontloaded.I wouldn’t worry about that too much. I expect that those teams will be on his NTC list anyway.
Rangers didn't get a single break with the entire contract. Overpaid in term, dollars and added a NTC.
That would round down to 3.6
Fast didn't have 2 SC rings under his belt
Maybe I’m misreading that, but I interpreted that as a reaction to the Goodrow dealSo... where is he going?
It's not that bad a deal. He is a player we need and this contract can be moved in year 5 if needed. S
it’s the NTC through the whole contract that bothers me. I wouldn’t care as much if it only went through the first 4 years. but all 6 makes it tough for him to move.