LaffyTaffyNYR
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2012
- 17,113
- 2,662
Speculation: The Off-Season Thread Part VI - Are we there yet? (Grabovski to Caps, 1 yr)
- Thread starter NYR Viper
- 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
- Status
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,975
- 13,635
No to Thornton.
Calgary is going to offer up something ridiculous anyway. They're deseparate for centers.
Calgary is going to offer up something ridiculous anyway. They're deseparate for centers.
Jabroni
The People's Champ
- Jun 1, 2008
- 7,526
- 174
Come on now. Thornton would be a mistake.
Let's sign Brad Richards. He's only 30/31 and has been one of the best playmakers in the league.
Now: Why didn't we buyout Richards?
Let's sign Thornton. He'll be 35, but is a top playmaker in the league.
Let's devlope Stepan, Brassard, Miller and Lindberg. If a young top center becomes available either via trade or FA, then you explore.
Let's sign Brad Richards. He's only 30/31 and has been one of the best playmakers in the league.
Now: Why didn't we buyout Richards?
Let's sign Thornton. He'll be 35, but is a top playmaker in the league.
Let's devlope Stepan, Brassard, Miller and Lindberg. If a young top center becomes available either via trade or FA, then you explore.
Barnaby
Registered User
I didn't propose the idea as 'Go out and get him at all costs' or 'multi year deal.' If Brassard and Lindberg go off this year, then awesome.
Assuming Thornton plays at the level he's played at the last 2 seasons, then I think it could pay huge dividends. The two major factors here are IF you can still get all of our current young guys locked up, and IF he would play under a Jagr type of situation. A 1 year deal, possibly do 2 at most. At worst, Thornton would be a nice 2C. I'm looking at a low risk/high reward type of deal. Of course, a team like Florida could come out and offer 4 years for 24 million at which point this discussion is a waste of time. Brassard could also keep up his play from the end of last year, and Lindberg may establish himself as an awesome 3C, but those things are unknown at this point. I'm just speculating on potential situations.
Additional: A young top center would be highly coveted by every team, except maybe Pitt so it would cost a ton to get. If a guy like that goes FA, then you could be paying up to 7-8-9 million a year. I'd love to work out a deal involving MDZ + for RoR, but that's probably pretty unlikely.
We're not signing him to a seven year deal. I'd do 3 years max. I think with the fact that we have his best buddy, Nash, and a good chance of winning the cup, we would be a preferred destination.
Jabroni
The People's Champ
- Jun 1, 2008
- 7,526
- 174
Jabroni
The People's Champ
- Jun 1, 2008
- 7,526
- 174
Low risk with a name like Thornton does not sound like Sather. That's the worry.
If you can satify the 2 conditions above, I see no reason as to why not to give him a short term deal.
LaffyTaffyNYR
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2012
- 17,113
- 2,662
Thornton wouldnt be signed til the end of time though. on a 3 year deal why not? He's still awesome and putting him w Nash?
Barnaby
Registered User
My guess is that Sather is basically the mouth piece. He might negotiate trades, but I believe it's running through someone else at this point (i.e let's see what we can do about getting Kristo). I can't believe that MTL called about Christian Thomas - I have to believe that began as a Ranger inquiry. I think Gorton is running this ship (I picture Sather as more of an overseer), and I'm very happy about that. All speculation on my part...
http://www.thestar.com/sports/hocke...quabble_the_prelude_to_larger_battle_cox.html
Group II's have a December 1 signing deadline. The player needs to get his ass in camp to get the big contract.
Subban got the same 2 year bridge deal as Couture. Different structure. Subban got $2M in the short season. $3.75M in 13-14. Couture got $2.75M and $3M. Couture didn't see much of the $2.75M.
Jabroni
The People's Champ
- Jun 1, 2008
- 7,526
- 174
If Gorton is running the ship ultimately, I trust him to make a smart decision regarding Thornton.
I'd say 1 year would be optimal, 2 years would be the maximum. 3 is just too much. He'd be 37-38 in the last year of a 3 year deal and by that time I see him having regressed.
Point totals from the last 3 NHL seasons: 70 points in 80, 77 points in 82 and 40 points in 48 (prorated to ~68 over an 82 game season if I did the math correctly).
If he can give us 70 points on a 1-2 year deal for a respectable cap hit, that would be great. I just think it's too good to be true.
We praised Richards that he wouldn't regress a la Drury because his game is built on intelligence. You could make the same argument for Thornton: not a physical presence, he is known for his playmaking ability. Look at the current situation with Richards now.
Barnaby
Registered User
I don't think anyone here is advocating a Richards/Drury/Gomez/Holik contract. My point is that IF the numbers work - it would be more of a Jagr type signing with Philly or Dallas scenario. This team is in a major city, it has a chance to win, and it has his buddy Nash... all of these things together could make the Rangers a potential favorite. There are some if's in my scenario - but I think the potential could be there for some real value if things play out in a certain way...
Thornton is also 6'4... Drury was a much smaller player, Richards as well... They are not similar at all except that they are all good passers. It would be a much smaller commitment which is my point.
Jabroni
The People's Champ
- Jun 1, 2008
- 7,526
- 174
Right, but 3 years in my mind is too much. Thornton is bigger, but the issue is not the size. It's the playmaking ability. Thornton and Richards are (Richards was?) world-class centers with great playmaking ability, and the rationale was that Richards wouldn't regress like Drury because his game was build on hockey IQ and playmaking. As of now, that projection is not the case.
At first, the idea of a big name player that is older and past his prime was an instant reminder of Sather's poor choices in the past.
But your argument is good and it changed my overall point of view in that a 1-2 year deal at most with a reasonable cap hit would be something to kick the tires on.
I just feel it is too good to be true because of our past rationalizations with Richards and how quickly he has regressed, although a low-risk/high-reward move a la Frolov could pay dividends.
As you can see, I'm torn here. Part of me agrees with your argument and the other part is weary of the idea.
BBKers
Registered User
Count me in if:
But I seriously doubt Big Joe would want to play for a team that is as soft as The New York Rangers
- The deal is MAX 2 years
- We resign all our key pieces first
But I seriously doubt Big Joe would want to play for a team that is as soft as The New York Rangers
NYR Viper
Registered User
Big pass on Thornton. I like him as a player but at 35+ no thanks. He is a power forward. Big guys break down.
If I had to guess at the players who the Rangers would look at:
Phaneuf
H. Sedin
D. Sedin
Kessel
Pominville
Vanek
But the biggest concern should be locking up Girardi, Callahan and Hank.
I could really see the Rangers going after the Sedins. Links to Hank. Lindberg and Fast on the way. Stralman and Hagelin on the team already. Closer to Sweden than Vancouver. Better travel. Oh yeah, their old coach.
If I had to guess at the players who the Rangers would look at:
Phaneuf
H. Sedin
D. Sedin
Kessel
Pominville
Vanek
But the biggest concern should be locking up Girardi, Callahan and Hank.
I could really see the Rangers going after the Sedins. Links to Hank. Lindberg and Fast on the way. Stralman and Hagelin on the team already. Closer to Sweden than Vancouver. Better travel. Oh yeah, their old coach.
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
I wouldn't hate the idea of Thornton. But the thing with the free market is that some team WILL offer him something stupid. A 4 year contract or something. And there is no way the Rangers should try to match that.
I think the Sedins will probably Re-up, but if the Rangers bought out Richards and they were on the market, you'd have to think about it. I wouldn't go long term either, which probably wouldn't be enough.
Off Sides
Registered User
- Sep 8, 2008
- 9,755
- 5,585
Almost all players break down.
Even someone like Naslund retired after playing at 35. Drury at 34.
There were 34 forwards league wide last season who were born in 1977 or earlier. That includes 5 players who played in 10 or less games
24 born in 1976 or earlier including 3 who played in 10 or less games.
Odds are most NHL forwards are either declining fast by 34-35-36 years old or just about done. There are certainly exceptions, Thornton may very well be one of them, but is it really worth the chance?
Rangers need to learn how to draft, develop, trade for younger top tier forwards. They've done some of that recently and it's better than the random Naslund, Shanahan, signing in terms of long term team building.
They have plenty of vet leadership. They have plenty of mentors and in a recent change, enough coaching to cover their bases. Their drafting and development process has improved.
While I am not ready to proclaim that this team is totally on the right track and has accomplished anything outstanding, they are finally running like a organization rather than a place where old past their prime star players go to retire (Richards aside) I'd rather see them go with it and see where the process takes them for at least a couple years before they end up having to buyout yet another player or two or worse not be able to.
Even someone like Naslund retired after playing at 35. Drury at 34.
There were 34 forwards league wide last season who were born in 1977 or earlier. That includes 5 players who played in 10 or less games
24 born in 1976 or earlier including 3 who played in 10 or less games.
Odds are most NHL forwards are either declining fast by 34-35-36 years old or just about done. There are certainly exceptions, Thornton may very well be one of them, but is it really worth the chance?
Rangers need to learn how to draft, develop, trade for younger top tier forwards. They've done some of that recently and it's better than the random Naslund, Shanahan, signing in terms of long term team building.
They have plenty of vet leadership. They have plenty of mentors and in a recent change, enough coaching to cover their bases. Their drafting and development process has improved.
While I am not ready to proclaim that this team is totally on the right track and has accomplished anything outstanding, they are finally running like a organization rather than a place where old past their prime star players go to retire (Richards aside) I'd rather see them go with it and see where the process takes them for at least a couple years before they end up having to buyout yet another player or two or worse not be able to.
NYR Viper
Registered User
The cap will go back up and the Rangers have a lot f young players looking to make the jump by next season (Fast, Lindberg, Hrivik, Miller, McIlrath, Kristo) plus Richards coming off the books. They will have space. I am not sure if they will have enough for both of them, but they should have space.
darko
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2009
- 70,272
- 7,803
Lundqvist, Callahan, Girardi need new deals. Moore and Kreider will get pay rises. Hagelin will need the pay rise the year after that. That same year Staal is a free agent.
Say cap goes to 70 mill and we buy out Richards. That'd give us what, around 14 mill extra to spend. 14 mill alone may not be enough for Sedins.
Say cap goes to 70 mill and we buy out Richards. That'd give us what, around 14 mill extra to spend. 14 mill alone may not be enough for Sedins.
- Status
