Proposal: Roster Building Thread Part IV: High Hopes

[bigdog16]

What happens next year if Staal is injured during the buyout window? Now you're looking at possibility of losing a young core player because of cap space. It's too risky not buying out Staal when we could.

That'd be just our luck

 

[NYR Viper]

I'm going to post this again....

I'm not against keeping Staal this year but his minutes need to be drastically reduced. Buying him out this year would have been ideal because the net cap gain percentages are only slightly lower in the next couple years, but those years happen to be Hank's twilight years, which is where we could have used the cap space on a guy like Duchene....

What's most likely happened is that Gorton tried to make some trades for another centerman, trades that would require us to take on cap space. If there was something available I have no doubt that Staal would have been bought out--I actually think Duchene was a target, just a gut check, but I see now reason as to why he wouldn't be. My guess is that there wasn't anything available, so they are going to keep Staal as a reserve option and hope that he has a bounce back year..

I'm not counting on it--last year was supposed to be that year.

Not that I would ever wish injury on someone, but the only possibility of getting Staal off this team scott-free would be LTIR or retirement. His NMC + the cost of packaging an asset to move the player is a net negative compared to the buyout cap space changes

Another side note, Spotrac has completely different contract info for Marc Staal compared to Cap Friendly.
http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/new-york-rangers/marc-staal-1938/
https://www.capfriendly.com/players/marc-staal

I can't figure out whether the $1M or $3M signing bonus is the correct number. There's also the matter of whether or not he has a modified or full NMC..

I understand what you are saying, I am just not seeing the need for the cap space this year. If Gorton needed it, I agree, Staal would be gone. But shortening the buyout by a year at the end (and while we may not think it's that big of a deal right now, $1.9m is not insignificant) is reason enough to hang onto him.

His minutes need to be reduced. He needs prime PK time and 3rd pairing minutes.

I think Gorton had something in the fire which is why Holden is still around. I don't think he wants to go into Training Camp with 2 rookies on the 3rd pairing. It was going to be either Staal or Holden. With Staal staying, Holden will be gone

 

[TheTakedown]

I understand what you are saying, I am just not seeing the need for the cap space this year. If Gorton needed it, I agree, Staal would be gone. But shortening the buyout by a year at the end (and while we may not think it's that big of a deal right now, $1.9m is not insignificant) is reason enough to hang onto him.

His minutes need to be reduced. He needs prime PK time and 3rd pairing minutes.

I think Gorton had something in the fire which is why Holden is still around. I don't think he wants to go into Training Camp with 2 rookies on the 3rd pairing. It was going to be either Staal or Holden. With Staal staying, Holden will be gone

I mostly agree, but that means that Staal needs to be treated like a 6-7th dman, which I only half-way trust AV to do. 12 mins of 5v5 + all PK time is fine with me, but that actually needs to come to fruition.

The only thing that I feel very confirmed about regarding Staal is that management made it clear that he **** the bed last year. He was given a lot of responsibility and he flopped. He blew off the media on breakup day, he rode the coattails of AV who over-valued him as a player, and it's completely backfired in his face.

In response to this:

Staal himself has:
- Most likely changed his workout plan, as I am sure he doesn't want to risk losing 33% of his contract to a buyout
- Is most likely motivated to prove everyone wrong and show that last year was an outlier

NYR has:
- Hired Lindy Ruff to manage the defense
- Gave Skjei a promotion which will become a demotion for Staal
- Signed Smith to a 4 year contract who can play both sides
- Signed Bereglazov to an ELC who can play both sides
- Loaded up the farm with defensemen this offseason: Pionk, Day, Graves, DeAngelo, Zborovskiy
- Gorton has made comments about who is getting playing substantial time, and it's been very apparent that they acquired both Shattenkirk and DeAngelo to play, and play a LOT of minutes

The writing is on the wall for Staal. He needs to prove it or he's toast, that's basically what it is at this point. The biggest issue with that contract of his is the $3M signing bonus in the final year, and it's a shame because that's not even the lockout year, so I don't know why Sather put it in the contract.

Long and short, there's a lot of pressure on Staal to perform. If he's even an inkling of an athlete, we *should* see a slightly improved Staal. Pairing him with Bereglazov and DeAngelo should also help his game. Giving him 40-55 games instead of 82 games should also be done to shelter his time

 

[Raspewtin]

Staal needs to be in the press box which is why the buyout is, like it or not, a good option. Take him off the team permanently and don't prematurely bomb our chances of contending this year. It goes beyond "needing cap savings". Getting rid of Staal forces the complexion of this roster to be better by default because there is no "old reliable" to fall back on and could give us room for deadline deals.

There is no "bounce back". Staal is unequivocally and without doubt a garbage hockey player. One who's 30 and barring a miracle not going to improve.

 

[McRanger]

I don't see any difference between buying out Staal now and buying him out next year. Unless you think there is a legitimate chance you can trade him, I dont see how the delay helps

'18 BO----'17 BO-----Difference
$5.70-----$2.13 -------$3.57
$2.06-----$2.13 ------($0.08)
$3.06-----$3.13 ------($0.08)
$3.86-----$3.93 ------($0.08)
$1.36-----$1.43 ------($0.08)
$1.36-----$1.43 ------($0.08)
$1.36-----$1.43 ------($0.08)
$0--------$1.43--------($1.43)

The only difference between a BO this year and a BO next year is 80k savings for 6 seasons and one year of 1.43m in 2024. Which means there really isn't any difference. 80k is 0.1% of the cap.

That and we have to watch Marc Staal play another year.

You don't keep him unless you think you can trade him, and as things stand now I would be surprised if there is much interest next off season, even at 50% retained.

 

[NYR Viper]

I wonder if Staal is contemplating going on LTIR. No discussion with the media at years end. No mention of him by management from what I can recall. Even after adding all of these young defensemen. His comment last year after coming back from his concussion was telling.

Could Gorton be holding that in his back pocket?

 

[TheTakedown]

Staal needs to be in the press box which is why the buyout is, like it or not, a good option. Take him off the team permanently and don't prematurely bomb our chances of contending this year. It goes beyond "needing cap savings". Getting rid of Staal forces the complexion of this roster to be better by default because there is no "old reliable" to fall back on and could give us room for deadline deals.

There is no "bounce back". Staal is unequivocally and without doubt a garbage hockey player. One who's 30 and barring a miracle not going to improve.

Like I said, I agree, the additional year of $1.9M at the end of the contract, though possibly having a major effect, is still insignificant at the end of that term. Hank will be gone or resigned at a much smaller contract and thus eliminating that massive $8.5M cap hit...

I think buying him out now was a good move, but I understand why it wasn't done--keeping a semi-season vet for 3rd pairing duties isn't the worst thing in the world... If Gorton had only done that and signed Shattenkirk, I'd be pissed because you'd see a top 4 of:

McDonagh-Shattenkirk
Staal-Holden/Smith

but then he went out and acquired Bereglazov, DeAngelo, and Pionk, and then made it clear that Skjei was getting a promotion. That alone indicates a top 4 of:

McDonagh-Shattenkirk
Skjei-Smith

Which leaves all of:

Staal, Holden, DeAngelon, Bereglazov, Pionk, Day, Graves, Zborovskiy

Fighting for 3rd pairing spots. Staal has a ton of actual, ready to play competition in front of him. Like I said, he knows the writing is on the wall, it's up to him to erase it.

I also feel like Gorton has gone out of his way to ensure that AV doesn't pull the same **** again, which is why Ruff is here.

 

[TheTakedown]

I wonder if Staal is contemplating going on LTIR. No discussion with the media at years end. No mention of him by management from what I can recall. Even after adding all of these young defensemen. His comment last year after coming back from his concussion was telling.

Could Gorton be holding that in his back pocket?

Can you link me to those comments? I am curious

 

[silverfish]

I wonder if Staal is contemplating going on LTIR. No discussion with the media at years end. No mention of him by management from what I can recall. Even after adding all of these young defensemen. His comment last year after coming back from his concussion was telling.

Could Gorton be holding that in his back pocket?

He can't go on LTIR unless he's actually hurt. And he's not. And the Rangers can't prove that he is, because he isn't.

 

[TheTakedown]

He can't go on LTIR unless he's actually hurt. And he's not. And the Rangers can't prove that he is, because he isn't.

if he gets another concussion (since he's gotten like, idk 3 in the last 3 years?), he could be a candidate for possible Post-concussion syndrome, which will be an issue for him to continue playing professionally.

 

[Tawnos]

He can't go on LTIR unless he's actually hurt. And he's not. And the Rangers can't prove that he is, because he isn't.

I don't exactly agree. It's not out of the realm of possibility that his reflexes and other physical abilities diminish to the point that make his eye injury debilitating.

Let's not forget that Staal is permanently injured.

 

[silverfish]

I don't exactly agree. It's not out of the realm of possibility that his reflexes and other physical abilities diminish to the point that make his eye injury debilitating.

Let's not forget that Staal is permanently injured.

How do you explain him playing 84 games last year at 19 minutes a night?

One day he just wakes up and decides his eye is too bad to play? Is it getting worse? Proof? Can the Rangers prove it?

 

[Tawnos]

How do you explain him playing 84 games last year at 19 minutes a night?

One day he just wakes up and decides his eye is too bad to play? Is it getting worse? Proof? Can the Rangers prove it?

Some of his play last year might prove it already. And with a permanent injury like that (we know his vision is impaired) the only proof you need is him no longer being comfortable enough to play with it. Hell, that's a mirror of how Hossa is on LTIR.

 

[MisterUnspoken]

Not buying out Staal is a huge mistake imo. Oh well.

Maybe there is some truth to the injury issues but I've never heard anything like that make the rounds before this thread. I hope Marc Staal is healthy and happy but from a team perspective it would be ideal if he were bought out or not in the lineup.

 

[NYR Viper]

Can you link me to those comments? I am curious

http://nypost.com/2017/02/04/rangers-standout-ponders-life-after-nhl-as-concussions-mount/

I think this was the gist of it.

 

[silverfish]

Some of his play last year might prove it already. And with a permanent injury like that (we know his vision is impaired) the only proof you need is him no longer being comfortable enough to play with it. Hell, that's a mirror of how Hossa is on LTIR.

Some of his play last year, yet he still logged 19 minutes a night and played 84 games? Seems like a week defense.

Hossa has a legitimate condition that causes him pain with medications that have side-effects he doesn't feel like dealing with anymore. It's legit, whether we like it or not.

Yeah, if Staal gets an eye-exam and the doctor says he can't see ****, then maybe he can go on LTIR, but that clearly isn't happening.

It seems, to me, that if I was the member of the NHL "investigating" a Staal LTIR claim based on his eyesight, I'd call shenanigans on it. And I'd tell him if he can't play, to retire.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

I wouldn't have thought Klein would retire at this point last year.

It's definitely a stretch but if there is no pressing need for the space, wouldn't it make sense to keep the optionality? The main argument against is AV's usage but that to me is a different conversation.

 

[NYR Viper]

Some of his play last year, yet he still logged 19 minutes a night and played 84 games? Seems like a week defense.

Hossa has a legitimate condition that causes him pain with medications that have side-effects he doesn't feel like dealing with anymore. It's legit, whether we like it or not.

Yeah, if Staal gets an eye-exam and the doctor says he can't see ****, then maybe he can go on LTIR, but that clearly isn't happening.

It seems, to me, that if I was the member of the NHL "investigating" a Staal LTIR claim based on his eyesight, I'd call shenanigans on it. And I'd tell him if he can't play, to retire.

I think that would be illiegal in a guaranteed contract. If the player feels that after all of his injuries he can no longer play at this level safely then that doesn't mean he can't walk or skate anymore. It just means he may not feel safe playing at this level which could lead to a very serious injury.

 

[Levitate]

Staal isn't retiring or going on LTIR or "taking one for the team and his teammates" cmon people

He thinks he can still play, and he will unless Gorton finds a taker

 

[silverfish]

I think that would be illiegal in a guaranteed contract. If the player feels that after all of his injuries he can no longer play at this level safely then that doesn't mean he can't walk or skate anymore. It just means he may not feel safe playing at this level which could lead to a very serious injury.

I'm not going to pretend to know the language involved with these contracts, and I'm not going to hypothesize what is, or is not, in the language of these deals regarding players retiring early out of fear of further injury.

But I think if this language did exist, then why didn't Kevin Klein use it? My shoulder is busted, I don't want to injure it further, I'm going to retire, also pay me my money please.

 

[Tawnos]

Some of his play last year, yet he still logged 19 minutes a night and played 84 games? Seems like a week defense.

Hossa has a legitimate condition that causes him pain with medications that have side-effects he doesn't feel like dealing with anymore. It's legit, whether we like it or not.

Yeah, if Staal gets an eye-exam and the doctor says he can't see ****, then maybe he can go on LTIR, but that clearly isn't happening.

It seems, to me, that if I was the member of the NHL "investigating" a Staal LTIR claim based on his eyesight, I'd call shenanigans on it. And I'd tell him if he can't play, to retire.

But what I was saying isn't dependent on simply his eyesight. Natural age deterioration could very easily exacerbate the accommodations he already has to make for his vision issues. And he easily might have fought through it last year and doesn't want to fight through it this year.

I'm not saying this is what's happening. But I really do think that Staal can go on LTIR whenever he chooses.

 

[NYR Viper]

I'm not going to pretend to know the language involved with these contracts, and I'm not going to hypothesize what is, or is not, in the language of these deals regarding players retiring early out of fear of further injury.

But I think if this language did exist, then why didn't Kevin Klein use it? My shoulder is busted, I don't want to injure it further, I'm going to retire, also pay me my money please.

Because if he retired from the NHL and was being paid to sit, he couldn't play in Europe

 

[silverfish]

But what I was saying isn't dependent on simply his eyesight. Natural age deterioration could very easily exacerbate the accommodations he already has to make for his vision issues. And he easily might have fought through it last year and doesn't want to fight through it this year.

I'm not saying this is what's happening. But I really do think that Staal can go on LTIR whenever he chooses.

He can't go on whenever he chooses. He needs to be proven legitimately unfit to play by the team's phsyician, and then a league-appointed physician if the NHL feels they ought to 'challenge' it.

Again, I go back to the fact that Staal played 84 games @ 19 minutes a night last year.

The only way Staal ends up on LTIR if he gets injured again. Not because of past injuries. You can't just wake up one morning and be like: "I don't feel like playing hockey anymore, but I want my money. I'm going to go on LTIR!"

Because if he retired from the NHL and was being paid to sit, he couldn't play in Europe

I think you missed the point I was making. And I've added further clarification above with language from the CBA. The NHL can challenge any LTIR with a neutral doctor. If they find that Staal isn't worthy of LTIR, they can tell him to play or retire (aka, no, you can't go on LTIR)

You can't just up and go on LTIR one day without being legitimately injured. Staal is not legitimately injured.

 

[Levitate]

I'm pretty sure Staal wants to play hockey. He's played like 4 years of hockey at this point with the eye injury.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I wonder if Staal is contemplating going on LTIR. No discussion with the media at years end. No mention of him by management from what I can recall. Even after adding all of these young defensemen. His comment last year after coming back from his concussion was telling.

Could Gorton be holding that in his back pocket?

I'm gonna go ahead and say no.