- Nov 2, 2011
- 7,965
- 8,333
Laughton reeks of a guy that would be way overplayed here. Want no part of him.
Speculation: Roster Building thread - Part XVII - (TDL is March 7th)
- Thread starter Leonardo87
- Start date
Savant
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 39,374
- 11,992
i don’t think this regime plays Clarke anyway
Omitting data and laughing it off as an accidental oversight on multiple occasions is disingenuous and the fact that EF doesn’t know every trade clause on the books of all 32 teams off the top his head is proof of absolutely nothing. What an absurd thing to even think reasonable. Nor, again, does it relate to the discussion I was attempting to have which was never, ever, at any point in time, that every team doesn’t have clauses or that other teams haven’t also given out NMCs. It was always, really fairly clearly, that other teams give out NMCs to lower AAVs, which is true of Edvinsson, Henrique and Buchnevich’s contracts too and aside from Trochek’s deal (which also only looks as good as it does because his first two years here he was FAR better than anyone expected; if you want me to pull up the thread from the summer that contract was signed, I promise you will find the same people pointing to it as a discount bitching about how we just overpaid and gave too much term to a 3C) we have not REALLY achieved that in our handling of NMCs.
It wasn’t a fairly complex point and it isn’t some wild conspiracy theory either. Trochek’s deal received VERY mixed feedback before he got stapled to Panarin had two of the best years of his career which no one had seen coming. The Fox deal was, at best, standard for the market when it was signed. It has aged well, which is completely irrelevant when discussing if the guy who only wanted to play here gave us any discount when he signed it. Zibanejad was probably about market too. Shesterkin was just allowed to completely steam roll us. And I’m not even criticizing the players. All I have said was, overall, we have not REALLY utilized NMCs to push down AAVs the way a LOT of other teams have. It isn’t some of insane follow the red string til it crosses the yellow string at the green push pin level of insanity.
I hounded somebody else about it because I asked a specific question, they gave an answer that didn’t address the question I asked at all and acted as if they’d just made the definitive end-all statement of the discussion. So I asked them to back up their perspective by answering the question that was actually asked, but they didn’t want to do the leg work. At that point, I’m going to hound you just because I’m tired of the “I have spoken” mentality several posters here have adopted.
Last edited:
UnSandvich
Registered User
- Sep 7, 2017
- 5,914
- 9,053
5v5, over the last 3 seasons, looking at rates against only, not rates for. Per NST:
Together (2415:16):
- CA/60: 53.26
- FA/60: 38.7
- SA/60: 27.6
- SCA/60: 26.06
- HDCA/60: 11.25
- xGA/60: 2.6
- GA/60: 2.01
Lindgren No Fox (728:57):
- CA/60: 63.54
- FA/60: 38.7
- SA/60: 31.44
- SCA/60: 29.38
- HDCA/60: 12.84
- xGA/60: 2.74
- GA/60: 2.8
Fox No Lindgren (1238:25):
- CA/60: 50.63
- FA/60: 37.01
- SA/60: 26.02
- SCA/60: 24.61
- HDCA/60: 10.32
- xGA/60: 2.24
- GA/60: 2.08
Together (2415:16):
- CA/60: 53.26
- FA/60: 38.7
- SA/60: 27.6
- SCA/60: 26.06
- HDCA/60: 11.25
- xGA/60: 2.6
- GA/60: 2.01
Lindgren No Fox (728:57):
- CA/60: 63.54
- FA/60: 38.7
- SA/60: 31.44
- SCA/60: 29.38
- HDCA/60: 12.84
- xGA/60: 2.74
- GA/60: 2.8
Fox No Lindgren (1238:25):
- CA/60: 50.63
- FA/60: 37.01
- SA/60: 26.02
- SCA/60: 24.61
- HDCA/60: 10.32
- xGA/60: 2.24
- GA/60: 2.08
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
I think I disagree with most of what you wrote here about these contracts. You can question whether they worked out as intended or you can question what value you place, but these were all below market value deals at least in terms of AAV at the time signed IMO. It’s a bit revisionist to say Zibanejad was market at the time he signed that deal. That’s a below market price for a 28 year old PPG C.
You Also have to remember a lot of players want or don’t want term and their willingness to sign for a certain length (short or long term) is often tied to a trade clause
Finally when comparing contracts you have to look at age and what contract number it is for the player as well. That was Zibanejad’s third contract. Comparing it to say Jack Hughes, who signed his second contract for $8M per or whatever as an RFA, is not really a fair comparison for market value
Smith or Smith + gets a 2nd from many suitors, imo
but I'd rather get that elsewhere
this is THE deal w/LA
Tro, Berard, Jones, Robertson
for
Clarke, Dvorak, Helenius
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
Also the point I made about NMC/NTC and how they affect term, and not just AAV, is another consideration.
Fox signed 9.5M for 7 years. Makar 9x6. Makar's deal takes him to UFA at age 28. Fox's to UFA at age 31. That's a big difference for the player in dollars.
It's not as simple as looking at AAV alone
Fox signed 9.5M for 7 years. Makar 9x6. Makar's deal takes him to UFA at age 28. Fox's to UFA at age 31. That's a big difference for the player in dollars.
It's not as simple as looking at AAV alone
Folks , we need to calm down here and stop with the personal stuff. Thanks
- Jul 28, 2011
- 17,499
- 12,429
Every season, the ask on him is so crazy that every team walks away. He's done nothing to warrant the ask the fanbase and organization have for a Scott Laughton trade.
Oh, and his skating absolutely blows.
- Nov 2, 2011
- 7,965
- 8,333
Panarin with 2 mil off, plus Schneider for Fiala and Clarke
This all is make believe and wouldn't happen anyway
Trocheck ain't waiving dawg
- Sep 20, 2007
- 8,471
- 13,691
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
- Nov 2, 2011
- 7,965
- 8,333
It's a moot point, Christmas just happened 2 months ago, of course he isn't going anywhere right now
NYR94
Registered User
This is rich coming from someone who has moved the goal posts enough times on topic alone I'd swear I just watched Lindgren check someone into Igor again.
Because it's gone from "Why do the Rangers have so many NMC! They're supposed to be a destination!"
*Poster points out that other teams have a shit more clauses*
"But those aren't NMCS!*
*Poster points out other teams have more NMCS*
"well... okay other teams have a bunch to but why aren't they getting the same AAV suppression as those teams?!?"
Because they aren't signing the same level of f***ing players.
Yeah no shit the likes of Panarin/Zibanejad/Igor/JTM (They didn't sign it but we'll count it because they have the contract now) aren't going to see any significant salary suppression (I'd argue Miller's does but f*** it, lets not. )Top players in the league (at the time the contracts were signed, lets not hindsight this) usually don't unless they're living in one of the income tax states (this is the true cap circumvention and something they need to suss out in the next CBA but thats another topic entirely.)
Notice how Matthews/Draisaitl/MacK/Pasternak all signed huge deals and got NMCs with basically no salary suppression? Yeah because thats SOP. Panarin (at least RS Panarin) was very much in that class. I don't think I'll get any disagreement from you there.
Same goes for players like Zibanejad and JTM (I think you'll agree that when they signed their deals they were very much in the same league as guys like Jake Guentzel and Elias Lindholm - I'm using these guys as they were UFA's who were just inked last year.) Same class of salary, NMC's for all.
The one guy who actually falls into the bucket of a Henrique/Zucc/Foligno grouping is Trocheck and.... Look at that, AAV Suppression and de-escalating protection on top of that!
The 2 outstanding players are Fox (who is elite) and Igor (goalies at his level have them too.) I’m not defending Igor’s contract either but the NMC is the least problematic part of it.
If there’s anything dishonest it’s trying to lump everyone who has a NMC together.
Fun fact: Buch actually doesn't have a NMC! It's just a full no trade! Now I'm not going to be too big a dick about it because I glossed over the tweet and missed it too but you cannot call out someone on selective reading and do the same exact thing.
PS: I'd never throw you on Ignore. I'm not really enjoying you copping and attitude with pretty much everyone these days and I'm trying to give you as much grace as I can. You’re better than this.
Im done now though. I would have let this die but I don’t enjoy being branded as dishonest or disingenuous because you want to have a “gotcha!” Moment.
and because the NMC convo is still dumb and I’m an idiot for engaging in it for as long as I have.
Why does bednar talk like my weed dealer in undergrad
Maybe I’m confused about what “moving the goal posts” means, but me saying ‘why do we have so many NMCs’ (which was never actually what I said, just how you’re representing it - read on before a response, please? I’m being fairly calm, polite and rational) and being answered with a generalization about all clauses, and then following back with ‘great, I asked about NMCs’ is very, very literally me keeping the goal posts firmly in place. It was also, from my very first post, ‘why aren’t we getting better salary suppression out of the NMCs we hand out since we’re also a place so many players WANT to play’. Other posters who didn’t want to answer the ACTUAL question I asked came back with responses like “we have a normal number of clauses” which led to the “okay, but I was specifically asking about NMCs” side quest that took place. I’ll let you go look - MY first post on the topic was very clearly “if we’re such a desired place to play, why don’t we get as much bargaining power out of the NMCs we hand out compared to other teams who are supposedly less desirable destinations”. It was never unclear. The responses were conflated, the question never changed. Maybe one of the reasons I get so abrasive is that when I ask a very clear question, I get condescending answers that aren’t actually addressing the question.
When I say “if NY is such a destination, why don’t we do a better job exchanging NMCs for better AAVs, as in the case of some other franchises” and someone dismissively says “we have a normal number of (all) clauses” in response, maybe that’s why my subsequent responses get more and more agitated. You’re (not you) mischaracterizing my entire question and acting like you just gave me the most obvious answer in the world, like I shouldn’t have even been silly enough to ask it. I never asked how the number of total clauses on our roster compared to other teams… your (not yours) answer is completely irrelevant, and yet I’m being characterized as the dumb one when you (not you) aren’t even displaying reading comprehension with the response you’ve given. It’s sort of annoying.
Also, Full-NTC or NMC, Buch is a good example of teams getting salary suppression on a good player. No one has even attempted to explain how Fox (saying it’s a good contract - which it is, I’ve stated that, and it’s aging well with a rising cap - but it’s not RELEVANT to the question I’m asking or the discussion of the moment in time that it was signed) only wanting to play in NY and getting a half million bump over the only comparable player at the time is a discount. What was Fox going to do? Sign somewhere else? And then what? Demand a trade to NY?
Fox’s contract might be fair, but there’s no salary suppression or discount at all. Slavin is a star player giving his team a deal because he wants to be there in exchange for security. Again, I’m not criticizing Fox or even saying that his contract isn’t great value now. I’m not trying to say he’s some jerk for not giving us a huge discount like Slavin did. I’m only discussing whether DRURY effectively negotiates the best deals. That’s all. I’m not picking on any of our favorite players. I’m not saying Fox is overpaid or doesn’t deserve or isn’t worth the cap hit. I’m just saying with quite a bit of leverage at his disposal, did Drury REALLY get any salary suppression? We’ll get to Trochek in a second.
Igor’s contract is an abortion. And as far as Trochek goes? As I said previously, the SAME posters saying he gave us a discount today were saying “gross, the term is insane, I hope there’s no NMC” when the deal was signed. No one expected him to come here and have 2 career years. Saying it’s a steal now is PURE revisionist history when he was coming off of a 51 point aeason when we signed him.
That’s your first post in the Trochek signing thread. Here’s some from our friends:
And a pretty rational one from some idiot:
Last edited:
I stand corrected, thanks
he goes nmc to modified next season
he MIGHT waive now, but yr right, today he can veto
peeps remember
not everyone is like bern like Frodo, who can carry the ring and deal with it
PEACE out
Calm your ass down Radagast the brown.
Savant
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 39,374
- 11,992
