- Jul 28, 2011
- 15,624
- 10,374
Bro, don't go and tell me it's already 2024...Because it wasn't. It was 12 years ago
Bro, don't go and tell me it's already 2024...Because it wasn't. It was 12 years ago
Every time I see Buchy's name I feel a deep rage inside my soul
yup.Every time I see Buchy's name I feel a deep rage inside my soul
I handwave it because its years ago now and constantly rehashing it does NOTHING constructive, we ALL know it was a bad trade. Somehow we still made it to the ECF TWICE, so "ruined" may be a tad hyperbolic. Also, we keep him we can't sign Trocheck... I'll take Vinnie over him every day of the week and twice on Sunday, at a slightly lower cap hit to boot.yup.
yet people still handwave it or try to justify it. it's noncents.
if they keep buch, they can't sign goodrow reaves and nemeth.
it was The Move that ruined us.
I don’t think people try to hand wave it.yup.
yet people still handwave it or try to justify it. it's noncents.
if they keep buch, they can't sign goodrow reaves and nemeth.
it was The Move that ruined us.
Doesn't happen if the team defends each other. They didn't. Country club rot had already set in.yup.
yet people still handwave it or try to justify it. it's noncents.
if they keep buch, they can't sign goodrow reaves and nemeth.
it was The Move that ruined us.
this is the typa stuff i mean.I handwave it because its years ago now and constantly rehashing it does NOTHING constructive, we ALL know it was a bad trade. Somehow we still made it to the ECF TWICE, so "ruined" may be a tad hyperbolic. Also, we keep him we can't sign Trocheck... I'll take Vinnie over him every day of the week and twice on Sunday, at a slightly lower cap hit to boot.
Saying its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Trocheck must mean you also think its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Goodrow, Reaves and Nemeth... If you are going to do it to further your narrative, you should expect the opposing analogous circumstance... You're applying a double standard. The entire point of me posting that was if you are going to make those sorts of assumptions, you have to allow other assumptions that are in the same vein but are not so supportive of your contention.this is the typa stuff i mean.
we paid more for goodrow reaves and nemeth than buch cost the next year. and we had room for the troch to strome salary increase.
you wanna tell me it's unproductive to keep rehashing buchnevich and you're tired of it? Fine. i get it. it is indeed what it is.
but don't keep spewing nonsense justification like "we wouldn't have been able to afford trocheck." that's just straight up incorrect from dollars and cents perspective. it's just false.
you can't make any assumptions about hypothetical situations unfortunately.So much nonsense. "Country club rot" Hell of a club if it keeps showing up in the CF. Fans still beating themselves up over trades from years ago too. Assuming one thing would happen but ignoring that other things may not have. Etc
dude it was the same offseason.Saying its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Trocheck must mean you also think its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Goodrow, Reaves and Nemeth... If you are going to do it to further your narrative, you should expect the opposing analogous circumstance... You're applying a double standard. The entire point of me posting that was if you are going to make those sorts of assumptions, you have to allow other assumptions that are in the same vein but are not so supportive of your contention.
That's a very cool story, but that squad didn't defend each other all year and I can only assume CF means "didn't make the playoffs club".So much nonsense. "Country club rot" Hell of a club if it keeps showing up in the CF.
We have had this conversation before, but you keep memory holing James Dolan firing upper management during the f***ing season because of their attitudes towards the Wilson incident and failures to adequately build a team that would defend each other.dude it was the same offseason.
do you think letting strome go and signing troch were unrelated? of course not.
the point is that there is no justification, at the time or since, that stands up to logical analysis. The idea of trading buch was always and will forever be a bad one.
I'm glad Erixon retained some value in this trade but man, what a terrible trade that was. Rangers thought they were getting the 2012 version of Adam Fox. Granted, I don't have a lot of faith in our scouts, especially not circa 2011 (they didn't scout Erixon very well) but William Karlsson, Nikita Kucherov, Vincent Trocheck, Adam Lowry all available at those picks.
It is the way of a Rangers fan.Still muttering about ancient history. Time to look forward
I'm glad Erixon retained some value in this trade but man, what a terrible trade that was. Rangers thought they were getting the 2012 version of Adam Fox. Granted, I don't have a lot of faith in our scouts, especially not circa 2011 (they didn't scout Erixon very well) but William Karlsson, Nikita Kucherov, Vincent Trocheck, Adam Lowry all available at those picks.
It is the way of a Rangers fan.
Of course they were not unrelated. But they weren't the only two things related in all of this. If we had kept Buch HE would have needed HIS 5.8mil AAV contract and we would NOT have signed Trocheck.... for me Troch is far superior. Does that make it a less awful trade? Nope.dude it was the same offseason.
do you think letting strome go and signing troch were unrelated? of course not.
the point is that there is no justification, at the time or since, that stands up to logical analysis. The idea of trading buch was always and will forever be a bad one.
Country club is basically the most lazy analysis a person can make about a team that underperforms based on certain expectations.So much nonsense. "Country club rot" Hell of a club if it keeps showing up in the CF. Fans still beating themselves up over trades from years ago too. Assuming one thing would happen but ignoring that other things may not have. Etc
Never thought we traded Buch for Reeves, Nemeth and Goodrow. Always thought we traded Buch to open up a top 6 RW spot for KK and Krav. The trade was a mistake but have you seen our cap? We do not have Reeves, Goodrow or Nemeth anymore and we still would have a lot of trouble fitting Buch in today. Hindsight being 20-20 I would not do the trade but it isn't about money. Its because KK and Krav did not live up to top 6 RW hopes as of today. All teams have bad trades. We got McD for Gomez. We got Zibs for Brass. I do not know any teams that do not have bad trades or bad drafts. With that said we have had a pretty darn good team the last 3 seasons including leading the NHL in points this season so its not all bad imo.this is the typa stuff i mean.
we paid more for goodrow reaves and nemeth than buch cost the next year. and we had room for the troch to strome salary increase.
you wanna tell me it's unproductive to keep rehashing buchnevich and you're tired of it? Fine. i get it. it is indeed what it is.
but don't keep spewing nonsense justification like "we wouldn't have been able to afford trocheck." that's just straight up incorrect from dollars and cents perspective. it's just false.
The second argument the CRA makes potentially has wider implications for pro athletes with similar deals.
Tavares’ contract specifies that his bonus is dependent on him playing games to the best of his ability, reporting to training camp, and keeping in good physical condition. If Tavares retires, withholds his services, or leaves the Leafs without consent, he breaches his contract and would be forced to repay a portion of the bonus.
Because the specific obligations Tavares has under the contract are performed during the season, the Canadian tax authority says that money is actually not an inducement to sign a contract — but rather a payment for services provided.
That puts a target on non-resident athletes playing in Canada who have similar bonus structures.
Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.
I think they'd have to wait a full season before resigning him...however, as haohmaru stated, ain't worth the trouble. If Rangers could pull off ANY deal, they should run in the opposite direction as fast as they can.Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.
I don't think they are allowed but if they do Im taking a vacation from this board for 7 days lolWould the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.
In that scenario, Calgary wouldn't be able to buy him out until next June. For the 2nd buyout window, the player has to have been on the team's roster as of the last trade deadline.Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.