Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIII

[SA16]

And if he flops that contract can’t even be bought out. Too much risk.

Compliance buyout if necessary with the new CBA

 

[Tawnos]

Compliance buyout if necessary with the new CBA

That’s only gonna happen if there’s a change to how they calculate the cap or new contract restrictions. I wouldn’t bet on there being one. Could happen of course, but it’s not as obvious as the last time.

 

[Fitzy]

Long term contracts coming off ELC's can be risky but there also can be big reward. I think if we offered Buch something like 7 years for a total of 42M (6M AAV) he'd consider taking it and we'd lock in a second liner with potential to get better long term.

I think 7x6 is a lot for Buch. And a guy who gets scratched a lot isn't going to get that pitch from management.

I offer Kreider that long before Pavel, and yes I know age is a consideration.

 

[Edge]

If we’re already mentioning a potential compliance buyout for a contract we haven’t even agreed to yet, it’s probably a clear sign that we should have some serious reservations about going down that path.

 

[Irishguy42]

Long term contracts on talented players like Buch and ADA are risks worth taking. Bridging them (or any talented player in general) is riskier.

All contracts are risky. Just pay players per game under the table. No risk. Eat Arby's.

 

[Fireonk]

Long term contracts coming off ELC's can be risky but there also can be big reward. I think if we offered Buch something like 7 years for a total of 42M (6M AAV) he'd consider taking it and we'd lock in a second liner with potential to get better long term.

Umm of course he'd take that. Almost all the risk would be on the Rangers with that contract. Best case scenario Rangers save a mil or two off Buch in his prime and hes worth that 6 mil the other years. Worst case scenario is truly a train wreck of a contract.

 

[Irishguy42]

I think some people here seriously overestimate how bad long-term contracts could be at their worst for the skilled players we have.

 

[Bob Richards]

Wonder who we would include in another batch of compliance buyouts.

Who will join Brad Richards and Wade Redden in the ring of honor. Tickets go on sale at midnight.

 

[effen]

Long term contracts coming off ELC's can be risky but there also can be big reward. I think if we offered Buch something like 7 years for a total of 42M (6M AAV) he'd consider taking it and we'd lock in a second liner with potential to get better long term.

Buffalo bought out Cody Hodgson 1.5 years into a 6 year deal and will be paying his corpse until like 2025 iirc. 7/42 is.... generous. To the extreme.

 

[effen]

I think some people here seriously overestimate how bad long-term contracts could be at their worst for the skilled players we have.

Brent Seabrook. He at least had a history of being good!

 

[Edge]

With the amount of times we’ve had to keep relighting the charcoals under Buchnevich, put me down as someone who isn’t even considering a long-term deal at this juncture.

 

[Thirty One]

Wonder who we would include in another batch of compliance buyouts.

Who will join Brad Richards and Wade Redden in the ring of honor. Tickets go on sale at midnight.

Show some respect for Bobby Holik.

 

[I Eat Crow]

I kind of agree with RB and others advocating for short term deals for our younger RFA's. Bridge them now and either extend them if they've earned it, or trade them for a bit of value if they're identified as not part of the future here.

 

[Drew4u]

Yeah let's give 6 million to a middle-sixer who's shown no progression since his rookie season. No thanks. Don't know why people constantly overrate our players, there's a reason why their 7th last.

 

[Bob Richards]

Show some respect for Bobby Holik.

I only recognize the live puck era.

Bobby Holik was getting bought out in the days where the competition was coal miners and soon to be World War I conscripts.

 

[Thirty One]

I only recognize the live puck era.

Bobby Holik was getting bought out in the days where the competition was coal miners and soon to be World War I conscripts.

No.

 

[Irishguy42]

6/27 would be a good deal for Buch, long-term. But I think they'd push for 6/33.

 

[Tawnos]

Buffalo bought out Cody Hodgson 1.5 years into a 6 year deal and will be paying his corpse until like 2025 iirc. 7/42 is.... generous. To the extreme.

But you have to remember that RFA buyouts are 1/3 and not 2/3. They might have bought out Hodgson and be paying for it for a loooong time, but it’s never cost them much more than $1m in cap. A Skjei buyout would kinda be like that.

 

[TheTakedown]

Going into bridge deals with skilled players, like ADA in this case, is just as risky, IMO

Also, you can't really use injuries as an excuse to not go long-term on a player because in most cases, it's completely random. Only a very small subset of players have chronic injury issues.

Especially if the injuries are not immediately related. Guy might break an arm, pull his groin, and bruise a bone... None of those injuries are related, but you can lost 40 games a year if that happens.

Now if the injuries are TOO Far unrelated AND often, then it typically indicates the style of that player is not conducive to long term health, but even then, we typically only see those types of injury-riddled players regarding multiple concussions.

We used to have this argument about Girardi... People would say "OMG HE NEVER MISSES GAMES!", and then when he would play he was utter garbage (2012 excluded)... I remember seeing a post on here and someone said "I'd rather 80 games of girardi than 40 games of letang"... truth is Troube is only missing 15-20 games a year, and the injuries he had are not related...

 

[Thirty One]

But you have to remember that RFA buyouts are 1/3 and not 2/3. They might have bought out Hodgson and be paying for it for a loooong time, but it’s never cost them more than $1m. A Skjei buyout would kinda be like that.

Not all RFAs. 25 and under. Skjei would be eligible for the 1/3 buyout only this summer.

 

[TheTakedown]

Buffalo bought out Cody Hodgson 1.5 years into a 6 year deal and will be paying his corpse until like 2025 iirc. 7/42 is.... generous. To the extreme.

Hodgeson already had a slew of back injuries BEFORE he got that extension, AND THEN he had some serious complications.... Buffalo could have had that diagnosed properly and then LTIR'd him instead of buying him out.

The reason Cody Hodgson retired

Girardi is the same case. Rangers gave him a long term deal when it was so clearly obvious that he was declining RAPIDLY before the ink even hit that contract

 

[Mikos87]

Long term contracts coming off ELC's can be risky but there also can be big reward. I think if we offered Buch something like 7 years for a total of 42M (6M AAV) he'd consider taking it and we'd lock in a second liner with potential to get better long term.

Would be a terrible deal. He's a bridge deal at best.

If you give him term, it's no more than 6 at $4.5M per, and I wouldn't do that. You're talking about term, cap, and total dollars for a proven front line player.

Buch would more than consider taking that deal, he'd run laughing to the bank.

MTL is the team that has regrettable bridge deals:

Subban got $72M after asking for $25M post ELC. Other than that, there aren't many regrettable bridge deals.

 

[Tawnos]

Not all RFAs. 25 and under. Skjei would be eligible for the 1/3 buyout only this summer.

Right yes.

 

[bobbop]

Wait, are you hosting a seminar or training we can attend and learn how to spot those kinds of things?

I did a wine tasting class a few years back, but I think this might be way more interesting.

It is!

 

[Ola]

I look at bridge deals as a way to retain control of the player.

We haven had the kind of talent I'd want to commit 7-8 year terms with. I don't believe that CK / McD / Hayes are deserving of that level of commitment on one contract.

Show me, for longer than 1 year, that you have earned it and I'll happily give you 5 years after your ELC and Bridge.

That's 10 years of control, I'll take that for the talent we have had, over capitulating on an undeserved 7/8 year contract

Hmm, I am not sure I follow, why would we commit 7-8 years to a player just because we weren’t prepared to give him raises all the time?

We can trade players even if they are under contract.

Like let’s say we gave Buch 4m per for 6 years. The first 4 years could not include any NTCs or NMCs. And the buy-out rules are very team friendly for younger players, only 1/3 of the cap hit diveded over twice the number of remaining contract years. So if Buch starts to do crack and just suck and nobody would take him after 3 years, we could buy him out for 666k per season over 6 years.

So I don’t at all understand why you feel that you ‘commit’ to a kid by just not letting his rights float around? We committed to Marc Staal, Hank and co, but compareing the commitment we made to them to the one we would be doing for Buch is totally comparing apples and oranges.