Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part III: Day by Day

[THE BIG WHISTLE]

The more years you get the more you have to pay, generally.

Meh players usually take less to get more years actually. RFAs that is.

 

[RGY]

The more years you get the more you have to pay, generally.

Its just what i am hoping for.

 

[GAGLine]

Give Zibanejad the Brassard contract. 5 years, $25 million. Buys out 2 UFA years. Call it a day.

5 years would buy 3 UFA years. Zib has been in the league for 5 years.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Split the difference. 4.5 x 2 for RFA years. 6 x 2-3 for UFA years.

Probably a 5.25-5.5 cap hit on a 4-5 year deal.

 

[Mac n Gs]

I think that's reasonable. Get him for 6 years now for the bulk of his prime and move forward from there

 

[Fireonk]

In regards to Staal, if you put the AV factor aside, there are two options. One, he outplays the younger guys and is our best option for that spot to start the year. Two, he ends up as the 7th or 8th D and that makes it way more likely he waives his NTC for us.

I would hope management at least spoke to AV to say that at the very least they want an open competition for that spot.

 

[coolbean04]

I think that's reasonable. Get him for 6 years now for the bulk of his prime and move forward from there

I am tired of these 5+ years contracts. It seems like they are a complete failure compared to working out. I rather sign players 3-4 years and that's it. If they regress, you are not hampered with a bad contract. If they work out, evaluate the next contract. Pay them more or let them walk. I rather take that approach then risk having an anchor of a contract and be forced to buyout for dead cap space.

Gerardi - terrible
Staal - terrible
Stepan - about to be bad

Z is not a generational talent. I can see his contract being terrible if it's a 5-6 year deal.

I rather sign him to a low cap hit for 3 years because it is his RFA years.

 

[Mac n Gs]

I am tired of these 5+ years contracts. It seems like they are a complete failure compared to working out. I rather sign players 3-4 years and that's it. If they regress, you are not hampered with a bad contract. If they work out, evaluate the next contract. Pay them more or let them walk. I rather take that approach then risk having an anchor of a contract and be forced to buyout for dead cap space.

Gerardi - terrible
Staal - terrible
Stepan - about to be bad

Z is not a generational talent. I can see his contract being terrible if it's a 5-6 year deal.

I rather sign him to a low cap hit for 3 years because it is his RFA years.

So if Mika keeps improving, then he's a UFA after three years and costs even more. He's 24 years old and well worth a 5 year deal. Using Stepan (bad example) and Girardi and Staal who weren't RFAs at the time and had much more wear and tear at the time doesn't equate well with this situation.

 

[SA16]

I would rather give him a 7 year deal than a 5 year deal.

 

[NickyFotiu]

wowoowowowoww

At that price, management will have zero problem ever in working out a long term deal. If it costs upwards of Mika's ask for the long term deal, it's still a good deal.

4.1-5.3 is exactly the reasonable range it should have been. The crazy numbers some folks threw around made no sense for us.
I would be happy with,

4-5 years
4.7mill-5.0mill

 

[NickyFotiu]

I am tired of these 5+ years contracts. It seems like they are a complete failure compared to working out. I rather sign players 3-4 years and that's it. If they regress, you are not hampered with a bad contract. If they work out, evaluate the next contract. Pay them more or let them walk. I rather take that approach then risk having an anchor of a contract and be forced to buyout for dead cap space.

Gerardi - terrible
Staal - terrible
Stepan - about to be bad

Z is not a generational talent. I can see his contract being terrible if it's a 5-6 year deal.

I rather sign him to a low cap hit for 3 years because it is his RFA years.

I have been saying this for years. We should do everything we can to avoid any contract over 5 years max unless the player is named McDavid. 4-5 years should be our long term contracts. The rest of the NHL should follow suit. These ultra long term contracts are bad for fans. How many of today's Rangers were on our team 6 years ago? Not many.

 

[eco's bones]

On the question of why buy out Staal now if you don't need the cap savings.

I can think of at least two good reasons:

1. he'll be blocking players that are younger and better than he is. Almost every poster on this forum already think there are least 6 better D than Marc. Without a doubt McDonagh, Shattenkirk, Skjei and Smith for starters. A Holden who can put up 34 points playing on the wrong side is a better player than Staal who can hardly stickhandle with the puck without looking at his feet--and then you get into the kids DeAngelo, Bereglazov, Pionk, Graves and it's even arguable IMO that Kampfer is more useful. So the best case scenario if we don't buy Staal out is that we don't play him and his $5.7 mil cap hit. Where is the sense in that? Might as well take whatever cap savings you can and who the **** cares if another team signs him and for how much?

2. the Rangers if they're going to add another center are probably going to be needing cap room for that player. Even if they don't get a center right away--cap room can make a difference later on during the season--for instance if you bring an expensive player in in late December or even at the trade deadline.

 

[Fireonk]

The Mcdonagh contract is a reason to consider going 5+ on a contract.

 

[bigdog16]

I am tired of these 5+ years contracts. It seems like they are a complete failure compared to working out. I rather sign players 3-4 years and that's it. If they regress, you are not hampered with a bad contract. If they work out, evaluate the next contract. Pay them more or let them walk. I rather take that approach then risk having an anchor of a contract and be forced to buyout for dead cap space.

Gerardi - terrible
Staal - terrible
Stepan - about to be bad

Z is not a generational talent. I can see his contract being terrible if it's a 5-6 year deal.

I rather sign him to a low cap hit for 3 years because it is his RFA years.

The McDonagh contract worked out

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

The biggest reason Staal would be bought out is if the front office believes Bereglazov and DeAngelo/Pionk are ready to take on a bigger role

To a lesser extent for the cap savings right now, if they give Mika 5 million, they will not have alot of wiggle room

 

[Mikos87]

I don't think it's a wise move to buyout Staal... retain & trade yes... but it will cripple the Rangers cap with the numbers Girardi is on the hook for.

They're going to give him the benefit of the doubt and see if he can do what Eric did with Minny... and that is come into camp in shape... and put forth a full effort for every game he dresses for.

Everyone knows he slagged through for months last year... everyone knows he handles the puck like a grenade on his stick... but you put fitness and effort back into the equation... and counter that with depth... IE legitimate options to dress over him every night... then you look at two factors of accountability:

One Marc.

Two The Coaching Staff.

They both need to be self-accountable and hold each other accountable.

No more of this complacency based on seniority or comfort.

I think Lindy Ruff can add some elements to this and am glad he's on board. He's not a good tactician, but at least he doesn't have a problem getting in guys faces.

The PIT teams from the last two years will show you what having a coaching staff that holds it's players accountable can do. They went from a soft "I'm smarter than you" guy in Johnston (who ran a misfit system) to a coach that stresses structure and accountability.

That PIT team from two years ago was on track to miss the playoffs to winning the cup.

 

[NickyFotiu]

I look at guranteed contracts as sunk money once they are signed but don't we actually recoup 1/3 of that sunk cost in a buyout? For example if a guy has 12 mill in salary/cap total due over 2 years due doesn't a buy out reduce that to 8 mill over 4 years?

Nobody ever answered my question. I often hear about dead cap amounts but don't we actually save around 1/3 of the already sunk guaranteed salary/cap hit and then have the remaining 2/3 divided over double the years?

 

[coolbean04]

So if Mika keeps improving, then he's a UFA after three years and costs even more. He's 24 years old and well worth a 5 year deal. Using Stepan (bad example) and Girardi and Staal who weren't RFAs at the time and had much more wear and tear at the time doesn't equate well with this situation.

i will take that chance because history shows that for every long term contract that works, you have 6 bad ones.

What situation would you rather be in.

1. Long term deals for Staal, Girardi, and McDonaugh.

2. Short term deals for all 3?

I pick 2 and pay McDonaugh more when his deal is up. At least you know what you are getting by now.

 

[SA16]

i will take that chance because history shows that for every long term contract that works, you have 6 bad ones.

What situation would you rather be in.

1. Long term deals for Staal, Girardi, and McDonaugh.

2. Short term deals for all 3?

I pick 2 and pay McDonaugh more when his deal is up. At least you know what you are getting by now.

How is giving a long term contract to Staal at age 28 and Girardi at age 29 remotely similar to giving one to Zibanejad at age 24 and McDonagh at age 24

 

[Mikos87]

Pavelec was god awful for Winnipeg. But I know that a very talented goalie coach called Pavelec one of the most talented goalies in the world. He is seen as a sick puck stopper in the business. Working with him on the ice, he is supposedly amazing at reading the shots and so is his reflexes.

Allaiere got to work with Sean Burke in 01'. At the time, it was the fifth team in three years for a 32-year-old Burke, and his game was based on the reactive, stand-up style – aggressive, upright and challenging – and Burke was really on the decline. Allaiere worked hard with Burke and the next season Burke was an All-Star again, and the year after that he was a finalist for both the Vezina and Hart Trophies, as well as the Lester B. Pearson Award. Allaiere also reinvented Khabibulins game.

Pavelec is 30 y/o. I think Anders Nilsson made a big mistake going to Vancouver. It will be a mess there and he will never establish himself. Bad career decision. Had he signed with us we could have used him for 1.5 years and then trade him for at least a 2nd round pick, if not more, or he even could have replaced Hank. Pavelec will never return that, but maybe Allaiere can make a good backup of him?

They said the same thing about Bobrovsky... they both have that human gumby ability... but if that is controlled... then you have an outstanding goalie... Mitch Korn is another one that is a bit of a Zen master with his goalies... I think it Andy Pavs they need to work on positioning and leg work.

Keep him in the crease and only come out to challenge direct shots. But the legwork for rebound control is going to be a huge thing for him.

Is Neal Pionk really NHL ready? The Rangers are better off sending him to the AHL and having him play top pair minutes. It's a big jump from college hockey to the NHL. A stint in the AHL in the next step. That's not to say the Rangers shouldn't re-evaluate in January but having Pionk play in the AHL seems the right move.

The Rangers brought in Lindy Ruff to run the D. He did a really job as an assistant in Florida. Ed Jovanovski and Rhett Warrener were two young D on that team. Jovo-cop was matched up against Eric Lindros in that playoff series in 1996. The Flyers were supposed to win the Cup that season.

Ulf Samuelsson ran the D and then he left to coach the Canes AHL team for one season. He is an assistant in Chicago under coach Q. They played together on the Whalers. Did Ulf have a falling out with AV? He leaves to become a head coach in the AHL and applies for two NHL assistant jobs. He also spoke with the Kings this summer. Jeff Buekeboom was there for just one season.

The 2nd buyout window



Zibanejad signs on Tuesday morning. Third day is Friday. The window would be Saturday and Sunday.

It's a lot of buyout money on the cap. I know it's also money not on the cap.

Can the Rangers make a trade with Staal? Why would he waive? Staal would keep his contract. If the Rangers have a deal with a team like Ottawa and Staal says no,the Rangers can say we are going to buy you out. Good luck finding a decent contract in early August. Free agency stopped on July 1. Ottawa signed Pageau early. His hearing was on July 28. Ottawa knows how much the player will cost and how much money is left in their budget.

Pionk is going to surprise a lot of people. His skating ability and passing ability are tailor made for this system and the modern NHL D. If he can defend... he will play. I agree with you in the sense that he should get some AHL time. Let him become the top option there.

If the D-Core ends up being

McD-Shatts
Skjei-ADA
Smith-Pionk

Then you have all 6 players that are top skaters and puck movers. The team can effectively run a 5 man forecheck and consistenly send 4 on the rush. Not many teams in the league can defend against that.

I can answer that with a question. Does the Sahara Desert have a lot of sand?

I was at a bachelors party a few years ago where many NHL players, agents and scouts took part. AV came up as a point of discussion. No details, but it was (unanimously) not Pretty. Someone said he should coach a bad team for once. Maybe his next job gives him that opportunity

AV's a very smart hockey man... but controlling... and doesn't really listen to his players. Outside of Babcock, he's the best match-up coach in the league imo... but one that will outsmart himself or be too predictable in a series.

His fellow coaches know what he's going to do because he's OCD about certain things and won't change his gameplan mid-game. Which to me is when the other coaches adapt and take advantage.

If he didn't have a top 5 goalie bailing him out in the last 10 minutes of a third period, then his record would be a lot worse.

There's another coach in this league whose as cocky as AV is, and called wins and shutouts versus AV and hit the mark. Unlike AV, that coach will double shift and alter his ice-time and did that versus Alain, and threw Alain's gameplan off to the point where he would consistently have his top scoring unit out against the Rangers pluggers and center that couldn't win a face-off.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

5x5 and call it a day.

 

[Mikos87]

Nashville working on a 7 year extension with Arvidsson, 4.25M per year. how does Nashville do this stuff?

Quality of life, finding these guys in the middle rounds, developing them, treating them well when they're in the minors, having their guys go through Milwaukee to learn the system, and offering them long term contracts before they hit 2-3 great seasons in a row.

They don't bridge their front-line players.

True, but isn't a forward missing an open net just as bad as a defender coughing up the puck right infront of the net so that someone get a slam dunk? I know that a lot of coaches feel that fans gets on their defense too much, while forwards gets much more of a call it "artistic freedom" or whatever.

I sometimes argue against the use of certain metrics, but I do think especially Corsi and the likes are important to help people see a bigger picture when it comes to defensemens. A mistake can result in a chance against. A bad defender can take the breath out of his team.

Missing the net doesn't lead to a direct loss, but I think it depends on the forwards ability to make an impact. The mistakes are less visible.

With Corsi, I can tell you for a fact that some teams use it mid-game to make adjustments... but they do it on a unit basis.

For example: a team like TOR (who runs these metrics live) looks at their forward units versus the D unit on the opposition, and vice versa. They'll make the adjustment if there is a big gap. But that doesn't always show up on the corsi sheet. Roman Polak for example doesn't attempt to shoot a lot of pucks and gets off the ice when the puck is out of the zone... but he does a good job of taking away second chance opps and blocking shots. Both of which prevent goals... his corsi isn't going to be as good as an Alec Martinez who can do both, but also get pucks through.

The lack of a two-way game is what holds Polak back in terms of value when compared to Martinez. Thus the latter is more valuable. But if you were to take Polak v Clendening... then you have a different story and a different trade off.

Other teams use zone time.

It's a matter of how long a team can get pinned in their own end... goals against and penalties are more likely with fatigue and zone time against.

 

[Tawnos]

Nobody ever answered my question. I often hear about dead cap amounts but don't we actually save around 1/3 of the already sunk guaranteed salary/cap hit and then have the remaining 2/3 divided over double the years?

Well yeah. That's how a buyout works...

People want to talk about the simple savings of the buyouts, but you have to remember that no one in the business, GMs, Presidents and Owners, wants to pay money or use cap space for someone who isn't on the team. I think that reluctance is more than understandable.

At the same time, I don't disagree that there can be benefits to reallocating those resources. If for the same $5.7m cap hit, you can improve the team with a player on an ELC plus Staal's buyout, than you should.

I've been pretty outspoken over the years about how the relative cap hit of players doesn't matter once you get into the season. What matters more is the role. Rick Nash might be getting $7.8m and doesn't perform that way, but if you have him and Kreider both on the roster and Kreider is filling that size role, than it doesn't really matter. Nash needs to live up to the role he's given, rather than the salary he makes (for example).

All of that being said, we don't actually know that our ELC defenseman are an improvement over Staal. And to clarify, I'm not saying that Staal is any good. But what if you buy out Staal and replace him with someone who it turns out isn't an improvement? Now you aren't paying the same $5.7m and improving the team. Some would say that it's worth the risk. Things look somewhat different when you're the one responsible for the real dollars.

 

[Mikos87]

Well yeah. That's how a buyout works...

People want to talk about the simple savings of the buyouts, but you have to remember that no one in the business, GMs, Presidents and Owners, wants to pay money or use cap space for someone who isn't on the team. I think that reluctance is more than understandable.

At the same time, I don't disagree that there can be benefits to reallocating those resources. If for the same $5.7m cap hit, you can improve the team with a player on an ELC plus Staal's buyout, than you should.

I've been pretty outspoken over the years about how the relative cap hit of players doesn't matter once you get into the season. What matters more is the role. Rick Nash might be getting $7.8m and doesn't perform that way, but if you have him and Kreider both on the roster and Kreider is filling that size role, than it doesn't really matter. Nash needs to live up to the role he's given, rather than the salary he makes (for example).

All of that being said, we don't actually know that our ELC defenseman are an improvement over Staal. And to clarify, I'm not saying that Staal is any good. But what if you buy out Staal and replace him with someone who it turns out isn't an improvement? Now you aren't paying the same $5.7m and improving the team. Some would say that it's worth the risk. Things look somewhat different when you're the one responsible for the real dollars.

And that's how teams look at it when they don't have to worry about their finances. Although I think we'll see a beastly year from Nash.

He wants another deal and has a reputation for the better part of the last decade as a guy that only shows full effort when he feels like it.

So I can live with Staal at $5.7M as a third pair option if any of the ELC's can handle top 4 minutes (They can and have- Thanks Brady).

FLA and CAR look at things a little differently because they don't sell out every game. Those teams need their top paid players in top roles.

 

[Ola]

Mikos- Yeah I am sure they are running live stats and look at possession data also or shots/attempts, but I don't think Babs have to consult them that often though to see if a unit fails a match-ups or not.