Ryane Clowe
- Thread starter a tribe cq
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
You mean the 8 year 50 million dollar retirement contract?
.... Guy must be on Walter White's meth lol.Pretty sure I called this exact thing happening right after the first Pitt game in the PGT. The second any of the three new guys did anything wrong, or didn't contribute for more than a 2-3 game stretch, the **** was going to hit the fan. And oh la la, here this thread is being bumped and piled on. I was excited after the Pitt game too - I won't lie, but I wasn't expecting the guy to break out and score a goal per game. Nor was I setting myself up to be disappointed if he went several games without scoring.
But lets get real folks. Clowe hasn't been as bad as reading this thread would lead one to believe. He hasn't put up the points consistently, but the guy has been a relatively good addition so far.
- He has consistently been one of the Rangers' most physical players (the only two ahead of him in the past 7 games are Boyle - 20 hits and Cally - 19 hits -- Clowe has 18 hits).
- He has dropped the gloves a few times and helped spark the team.
- He has actually shown play making skills that are alarmingly lacking on a ton of the forwards on this team. He doesn't have the flash that Nash or even Zucc have with the puck - but he makes simple, smart decisions in moving the puck that more than half our forwards seem to struggle with - and especially so this season.
- If you even look at his points in his time here, he has outscored all but three forwards in the past 7 games (Stepan has 8 points, Brassard has 7 points, Nash has 5 points; Clowe has 4 points). 4 pts over 7 games is the high end of what can be expected from the guy, and how he has been playing with NYR has been a vast improvement over how he played with SJS to start the season.
He is not a ppg player. Let's at least have realistic expectations. My biggest beefs with his play in the last few games is that he needs to use his big body to crash the net more like he did in the first couple games (this was also an issue when he was with SJS) and he needs to take more shots. Other than that, he's about as advertised and I'm not ecstatic, but I'm satisfied and think he fills a role he was brought in to fill very well.
I'm more than willing to stick to my guns. I still want him re-signed. This year he is not as good as he used to be - but he brings several things this team lacks; and even if he just remains a ~45 pt player in the next few years, with the additional things he brings I think he is a good signing. The price and term concern me, as with everyone else - but if its in the $4 to $4.5 mil range I won't be too distraught.
I am not in the camp that blows a gasket if he doesn't score a goal as long as I see him doing other things to contribute and see him creating offense.
He was playing through an injury the first half of the season with SJS. Took time off to heal, and his play improved significantly in the week or so before he was traded. He will be fine. His play here really hasn't indicated that he is anything less than what was advertised. People just had unrealistic expectations after the first Pitt game.
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
I don't think anyone who expected him to duplicate what he did in the Pittsburgh game.
Out of curiosity, what would you offer him this summer?
Last edited:
$4M+ was too high for Dubinsky, but its just fine for a beaten up Ryan Clowe. Sheesh.
The acquisition itself, and handing over draft picks, for a guy on his last legs looking for a retirement contract is all too typical.
They should just let him go, but Sather will feel pressured to re-sign him because of the assets he gave up -- for something he never shouldve acquired in the first place.
The acquisition itself, and handing over draft picks, for a guy on his last legs looking for a retirement contract is all too typical.
They should just let him go, but Sather will feel pressured to re-sign him because of the assets he gave up -- for something he never shouldve acquired in the first place.
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
Yeah, I think that's about right to me. Especially based on the lower salary cap and his decline in production this season and last season.
I was more interested in Richter Scale's number was as he seems to think Clowe will be fine.
Oh ok lol I thought you meant per year for a moment there and yes that sounds just about right and ideal (for us anyway).
You can see flashes in Clowe of the very good player he was. He plays tough, hes got soft hands for a big guy, but hes also got a TON of tread on those tires. Sting made a spot on post earlier about how the guy thinks hes a perimeter playmaker at times. I think thats a byproduct of getting older and trying to prolong his career a bit.
Anyway, pretty sure I wouldnt give him 3 years under any circumstances whatsoever unless the $ amount was obscenely low.
I don't think they realistically did either. But I think it created a perception that he was going to be contributing on the scoreboard a lot more consistently game in and game out than he will be. At this point in his career he is likely a 45-50 pt player (~15-20 goals), and I am absolutely fine with that as long as he brings the other parts of his game too. And if that turns out to be conservative, and he returns to be a 65-70 pt player, then thats gravy, but I'm not expecting it.
In my ideal fantasy land, only a slight bump from his current contract - $3.75 mil per for 3 years.
More realistic? $4.25 mil per for 4 years.
What I'd do with a clothespin on my nose and clenching my teeth if my hand was absolutely forced because Clowe won't budge? $4.75 mil per for 5 years. If he ends up falling off a cliff after 2-3 years, move him for scraps and you free up the cap space.
He isn't going to deteriorate so much in that time that he won't still have some value with the type of game he plays. People also forget that the cap will likely go up in the coming years (not saying that is an excuse to sign Clowe - or any other UFA - to a ridiculous contract, since a higher cap influences the market price of future signings, but it is certainly a part of the considerations in looking at future cap space).
I agree that if you think Clowe is an awful signing, you shouldn't re-sign him and lose the additional pick just because we gave up draft picks already. But, personally, since I think he would make a decent signing, I will not be terribly happy that Sather gave up the two draft picks if the plan wasn't to re-sign him, or it doesn't get done for a reasonable price/term. If the rumors of Clowe and Sather having a "framework" for a deal in place turn out to be untrue and/or Clowe wanted $5-6 mil and 6-8 year term all along, then I'll gladly stand with the people calling Sather an idiot for this move. All depends on what happens in the offseason in my mind.
EDIT: added in "per" to the #s I gave to clarify that I'm not expecting Clowe to sign a $1 mil per year contract.
Last edited:
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
The majority of players who play the way he has over the course of his career have shorter shelf-lives. After 30, Graves really only had two more productive seasons.
Last edited:
Thats absolutely brutal man. Your entire synopsis of what he would bring to this team over the next 4-5 years just isnt rooted in reality. It sounds like a Glen Sather manifesto just before hes about to make another horrible signing.
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
I hate the idea that you sign a player with the thought that would need to consider dumping him for scraps. If that seems like a possibility, I rather let him walk now.
His decline in production (and not just this season) is a concern. And I can't make moves based on what the cap may or may not do. If guess if I have to some many provisional plans based on around him breaking down or the impact of his potential cap hit, I have walk away.
It's the extra pick that bothers me. And I mentioned when the trade was made that the additional pick almost de-incentivizes the Ranger to keep him. So, yeah, the additional pick muddies things, IMO. The fact that the Rangers don't have a first this draft further muddies things.
On a side note, its time for this front office go back into talent evaluation mode. They recognized Prust and what he is and targeted him. They saw what Stralman could be. Go out and beat the bushes and find talent. Don't buy it right before its sell-by date.
Last edited:
In what way? He will continue to play a physical game. He will continue to drop the gloves from time to time and be an intimidating presence on the ice. And I'm anticipating a slight slip in his production from his career low year last year... None of that seems outrageous. But please, give me specifics and show me where I've apparently gone out of my mind.
For the contract you suggested is the absolute max I would be willing to offer him. 4 years tops at 4 mill is ideal. Even 4.25 is too much, this guy could easily be skating on bricks by year 3. If he wants more then anything 4 years and 4.25 a year, they better kick his *** out the door as that contract will greatly risk upgrades on other areas of the team.
Well, for starters, I dont know why "dropping the gloves and being an intimidating presence" is going to cost this team $4-5M a year -- unless you really think Clowe is still a 50 point player, and that sure seems like a suckers bet.
I don't like it either but I don't think he will sign for 2 or 3 years unless hes payed like 6 million which wont be happening for us. I just hope management feels the same way most of us do. I wish we could recoup a 2nd rounder if he doesn't resign. Oh well.
Whats wrong with cutting our loses?
This is a similar situation to when the team buys out Richards and will likely make another bad decision with the cap space.
It is not ideal. And of course you don't sign a player anticipating that you will need to dump them. My point was that if you're going to sign a 28-32 year old player - especially one like Clowe (who I think fits one thing that this team needs, but who plays a style not conducive to aging well) - that you're taking a risk. In the short term (2-3 years), I think Clowe brings a lot of valuable things to the team. Past that, I'd like to think he could continue it, but realistically recognize that you can't rely on that. So that gives Sather an out if his hand is forced with Clowe into a borderline contract.
This is going to go against what I've said elsewhere about Sather continually not looking at the future with his FA signings in the past decade, but at some point a team needs to step back and decide whether they think they have the core in place and the prospect depth to be a competitor in the next few years. Personally, I think the Rangers do (and in this, I recognize that I may be a bit optimistic or naive). At that point, management needs to do what they can to bring in the complimentary pieces to complete the puzzle. Not all of those pieces are going to be 21-25 year olds. In my mind, Clowe could be one of those complimentary pieces.
Virtually every team that has won a cup since the lockout has brought in those complimentary pieces either the season they won or just a couple seasons before - many of whom were on or nearing the wrong side of 30.
2006-2007 Ducks:
Pronger - 32 y/o.
Brad May - 35 y/o.
Shawn Thornton - 29 y/o.
Rob Niedermayer - Brought in at 28, won it with them at 31.
Scott Niedermayer - Brought in at 32, won it with them at 33.
Sean O'Donnell - Brought in at 35, won it with them at 36.
Teemu Selanne - Brought back to them at 35, won it with them at 36.
Todd Marchant - Brought in at 32, won it with them at 33.
2007-2008 Red Wings:
Brian Rafalski - Brought in at 35 y/o for a multi year contract.
Dallas Drake - Brought in at a 1 year contract at 38.
Brad Stuart - Brought in at a multi year contract at 28.
Darren McCarty - Brought back at 35 y/o for this season.
Mikael Samuelsson - Signed a multi year contract with them a few years earlier at 31. Won the cup with them this year at 33.
2008-2009 Penguins:
Bill Guerin - 38 y/o.
Kunitz - 29 y/o.
Feds - 30 y/o.
Cooke - 30 y/o.
Craig Adams - 31 y/o.
2009-2010 Blackhawks:
Hossa - signed for 12 year contract at the age of 31.
Kopecky - 28 y/o.
Madden - 36 y/o.
Brian Campbell - 29 y/o.
2010-2011 Bruins:
Recchi - 43 y/o.
Chris Kelly - 30 y/o.
Peverly - 28 y/o.
Kaberle - 33 y/o.
2011-2012 Kings:
Mike Richards - 27 y/o.
Jeff Carter - 27 y/o.
Simon Gagne - 32 y/o.
Dustin Penner - brought in at 28, won with them at 29.
Scuderi - signed a multi year contract at 31, won with them at 34.
Every single one of those teams either signed or traded for a significant piece of their championship team that year or a couple years before who was over 30. Clowe is 30 now.
Agreed on not making moves based on what the cap will or will not do - and said as much. I was just pointing it out since people seem to expect that it will stay at $64 mil forever; pretty unrealistic. But sure, I see your point.
As for production. Yea, last year was his worst year of his career with a pace for about 50 pts. Even if he declines further to 40-45 pt pace, as I said, I'll be happy with him considering everything else he brings. But I get where your concern comes from.
On the same page with the majority of this. But don't see one or two complimentary UFA signings as the end of the world. Sather's issues with FA's have been when he has gone for the big ticket risks and failed. Clowe is certainly sought after, but I don't see him as a big ticket (assuming Sather doesn't go crazy with the contract as I said in the other post).
One weak counter point does not an argument make.
I didn't say he'll be a 50 pt player. I hope he will be and think he can be - but I'm being conservative and saying I'm happy even if he is in the 40-45 pt range. And yes, if all he did was drop the gloves, a goon isn't worth $4-5 mil per year. He is not a one dimensional goon and brings more to the table than that.
But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, unless there was some other crazy out there projection that I made which I'm not seeing.
Last edited:
If "I dont think this guy will be 1. good for his cap hit AND 2. good for the entire term" is considered a weak counter point, then I better gracefully bow out of this conversation.
Because a perfectly legitimate concern, some might say THE most important concern, like that gets ignored by this organization too, and it pisses me off.
