Toggle sidebar

Larry Brooks: Sather must decide: Is dealing Girardi best for Rangers?

  • 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
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it's a matter of priorities right now. G will have the Olympic break to do the talks.

Cally will have the Olympics as leverage to drive his value on a league wide scale.

Yes, it is going to take a 6-7 year deal.

Yes there are major concerns down the line regarding both players durability.

I look at both these pieces as part of a winning formula. For teams to be consistent playoff teams, they need 5-6 out of 7 types of minute eaters. The Rangers are missing pieces to keep them from being a true contender.

G and Cally fill 2 of those pieces. The concern is after year 2018, and no amnesty buys. Making decisions based on fear isn't a sign of good leadership. If these 2 get you 4 years of playoff berths, you sign them and give limited NTCs on the tail end of the contract for years 5, 6, 7. Use the number of teams on the list as a way to negotiate cap hit.

Financially TOR and Clarkson signed a brilliant deal under this CBA, the player may not be right choice to give out that contract, but structurally that is a nice contract for the player, and Big Market team.
 
Mikos87 said:
I think it's a matter of priorities right now. G will have the Olympic break to do the talks.

Cally will have the Olympics as leverage to drive his value on a league wide scale.

Yes, it is going to take a 6-7 year deal.

Yes there are major concerns down the line regarding both players durability.

I look at both these pieces as part of a winning formula. For teams to be consistent playoff teams, they need 5-6 out of 7 types of minute eaters. The Rangers are missing pieces to keep them from being a true contender.

G and Cally fill 2 of those pieces. The concern is after year 2018, and no amnesty buys. Making decisions based on fear isn't a sign of good leadership. If these 2 get you 4 years of playoff berths, you sign them and give limited NTCs on the tail end of the contract for years 5, 6, 7. Use the number of teams on the list as a way to negotiate cap hit.

Financially TOR and Clarkson signed a brilliant deal under this CBA, the player may not be right choice to give out that contract, but structurally that is a nice contract for the player, and Big Market team.
Click to expand...

It is a matter of priorities. And organizing and acting on those priorities require pragmatism and executing tough decisions. Sather, as usual, seems disinterested in both.
 
With Chara's partner Seidenberg hurt and now Dougie Hamilton's concussion issues, the Bruins may be willing to give up a nice package for a guy like Girardi. Perhaps we can poach a couple of their prospects and find another McDonagh or two.
 
Mikos87 said:
Financially TOR and Clarkson signed a brilliant deal under this CBA, the player may not be right choice to give out that contract, but structurally that is a nice contract for the player, and Big Market team.
Click to expand...

35 games, 3 goals, 5 assists. Yeah, great contract. That's totally worth 5.25 mil per for the next 6 years.
 
Jersey Girl said:
With Chara's partner Seidenberg hurt and now Dougie Hamilton's concussion issues, the Bruins may be willing to give up a nice package for a guy like Girardi. Perhaps we can poach a couple of their prospects and find another McDonagh or two.
Click to expand...

Who though? Morrow is their best dman after Krug and Hamilton, but he's left handed. I would trade Girardi straight up for Hamilton, but seriously doubt the Bs would. For forwards, they have Spooner, but he isn't very big. Khokhlachev isn't very big either.

They could definitely use Girardi, but I'm not sure what they'd be willing to part with that would be of value to us.
 
GAGLine said:
35 games, 3 goals, 5 assists. Yeah, great contract. That's totally worth 5.25 mil per for the next 6 years.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the contract structure. If you'd read what I wrote, you would see that I specify that Clarkson isn't the right choice for that contract.

But how the deal is structured: cap hit, signing bonuses, yearly salary, NMCs, it's a pretty sweet deal.
 
Morrow, Fraser and their 1st for Girardi at half salary and a prospect is something I'd really push for with the Bruins. The risk of a conference rival re-signing him would require a high price like that.
 
GAGLine said:
Who though? Morrow is their best dman after Krug and Hamilton, but he's left handed. I would trade Girardi straight up for Hamilton, but seriously doubt the Bs would. For forwards, they have Spooner, but he isn't very big. Khokhlachev isn't very big either.

They could definitely use Girardi, but I'm not sure what they'd be willing to part with that would be of value to us.
Click to expand...

Doesn't even necessarily have to be a defenseman from Boston, just a good prospect or two and a draft pick.
 
Trxjw said:
Morrow, Fraser and their 1st for Girardi at half salary and a prospect is something I'd really push for with the Bruins. The risk of a conference rival re-signing him would require a high price like that.
Click to expand...
Poor guy. Hasn't he been traded enough?
 
Mikos87 said:
I was referring to the contract structure. If you'd read what I wrote, you would see that I specify that Clarkson isn't the right choice for that contract.

But how the deal is structured: cap hit, signing bonuses, yearly salary, NMCs, it's a pretty sweet deal.
Click to expand...

Who cares about how it's structured if the player it's given to isn't remotely worth it? That's like overpaying for a crappy car and being happy because you got 0% interest on the financing.
 
GAGLine said:
Who cares about how it's structured if the player it's given to isn't remotely worth it? That's like overpaying for a crappy car and being happy because you got 0% interest on the financing.
Click to expand...

Guess I'm just thinking outside the HF logic box.
 
Jersey Girl said:
Doesn't even necessarily have to be a defenseman from Boston, just a good prospect or two and a draft pick.
Click to expand...

Right, that's what I'm asking. I'm not interested in their B level prospects. Among their best young players/prospects, I'm not sure which ones would be of value to us that boston would also be willing to give up. We aren't big down the middle. Boston's 2 best center prospects are on the small side. We have a dearth of right handed dmen and a plethora of left handed dmen. Boston's best dman prospect after Hamilton and Krug is left handed.

I just don't see a good fit for us unless boston is willing to trade Hamilton, which I highly doubt.
 
GAGLine said:
Right, that's what I'm asking. I'm not interested in their B level prospects. Among their best young players/prospects, I'm not sure which ones would be of value to us that boston would also be willing to give up. We aren't big down the middle. Boston's 2 best center prospects are on the small side. We have a dearth of right handed dmen and a plethora of left handed dmen. Boston's best dman prospect after Hamilton and Krug is left handed.

I just don't see a good fit for us unless boston is willing to trade Hamilton, which I highly doubt.
Click to expand...

Meh...if they're prospects they may be a year or two away from being a full-time contributor anyway, just like McDonagh was when he was acquired. Get the best available prospect(s) from Boston or wherever they trade Girardi and/or Callahan, and we'll see in two years where we have holes to fill.

Things can change a lot in two years. Just bring back good players.
 
Rangers need to sell, this run has been nice, and it really is driving the prices of Cally, Girardi and maybe MDZ even higher, but this team is going nowhere, yes they may just make the playoffs but this team is not a cup contender and that is what it should be about. Maybe we can resign one of these players in the off-season too, and we still get the picks/prospects out of it.
 
On NHL Network this morning, there was a mention during the discussion about Girardi & Cally being up for contract that Dan G’s signing may be announced before the Olympic break - some guy on Rangers Rants

fwiw...doubt he just made that up...of course, NHL N may have...
 
These proposals will leave their authors apoplectic over the scrambled mess the team would become over the next few years if their wishes are fulfilled.

This team needs Girardi to play solid, unremarkable, dependable minutes every game, as he does. Without his presence, over a long period, this team would do much worse. Lundqvist's stats will suffer (No! Heaven forfend!). You can't give him away without replacing him unless you want to see us lose a lot more than we already do.
 
True Blue said:
You can if you do not think that you will resign him. And at a level where he is worth.
Click to expand...

I did say as much weeks ago in this forum.

But you still have to replace him. If one is proposing trades where prospects and picks or even forwards are coming back it will be hilarious to read that writer's posts after the trade and we have lost a linchpin of our D.
 
GAGLine said:
It isn't just HF logic. Tell me the benefit of that contract to the leafs.
Click to expand...

Comprehensively take out Clarkson, and TOR, the two parties that signed the deal out of the picture and look at just the structure of the contract in a similar fashion as to how most posters evaluate players here on hf; in a vacuum.

You will see what the bar is for a new new cba big money ufa deal is. The contract is the sort of contract that only big market teams can pay because of the signing bonus structure. Small market teams can't afford to do business that way while big market teams can.

NMCs and NTCs were used to lower cap hits.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom