This is really not an issue unless he opts to screw by retiring instead of collecting insurance money.
Look at Drury. He would have done the same thing.
-
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
This is really not an issue unless he opts to screw by retiring instead of collecting insurance money.
Look at Drury. He would have done the same thing.
yrrebbor
Registered User
Did Drury? Drury would have stayed on LTIR if we wanted him too. Any broken down player in the other half of their 30s can point at something. Knee/back/shoulder/hip or head.
Richards and Drury are two different players.
Richards is the issue. Drury has been retired for nearly three years.
Drury retired at 34/35.
Why didn't Drury fight the buyout? He lost money in the buyout. The PA would have filed a grievance for him to fight it. Right before the CBA expiring.
The Rangers have an opportunity to free themselves of a contract which ends in 2020 with the player being 40 at the end of that deal. 40 years old. The contract was designed for Richards to not play the last 3 years. Richards wanted to be paid elite player money with dummy years added at the end to lower the cap hit. That's what he got. Bob McKenzie was on NHL Live three months before Richards signed explaining what type of contract Richards wanted. Don't give me the garbage about the cap being $90M so its OK if the Rangers take a huge cap penalty. That's a horrible way to run a business. Richards is not an elite player but he's making elite player money in the first 6 years. $57M. That's a $9.5M cap hit. The last three years worth $3M combined drop the cap hit to $6,666,667. You can see why the NHL wanted cap recapture in the CBA.
pld459666
Registered User
Actual cap number aside you do not commit 6.66 per for 6 years to a fading 34 year old player.
Its stupid.
Its stupid.
pld459666
Registered User
More so when two players that are head and shoulders better just signed for similar dollars and less term.
Actually, in reality, the real wishful thinking is on the rangers end and that Callahan won't get more on the open market
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
Ola, I either completely agree with you or find your positions mindbogglingly difficult to comprehend.
That was back when we all assumed that Cally wanted Clarkson money. Your position was, "well, okay, it's overpaying, but let's do it because you can't guarantee me we're getting a young Zetterberg in return." Then it came out that he wanted $6MM over 7 years, and it was "well, okay, it's overpaying more than I thought, but let's do it because Slat's is just going to spend the money on something equally bad." NOW it's come out that he wants close to SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR and it's "well, overpaying an established player who just happens to be your captain might not be so bad.
So, in other words, you admitted he would have been overpaid at Clarkson numbers, but you're okay with paying him the the numbers that are CURRENTLY being discussed?!?!?
What number would you refuse? At what point do you just simply make the right business decision not to overpay?
They may already have a good auction going and may be able to get back a king's ransom, but even if they don't and only get back an "okay" return for Cally, not screwing your cap for the third best RW on the team (in so doing setting a very dangerous precedent for all your subsequent negotiations, by the way) to maintain cap flexibility for future options is, in and of itself a reward.
What? Richards contract is subject to cap recapture - the NHL fought tooth and nail to get that clause in the CBA to punish the big money teams that they felt had circumvented the spirit of the old CBA and hurt the bottom 75% of the league. Meanwhile his deal is DESIGNED to incentivize him to retire three years early. And you're counting on a wink and a nod cap circumvention to get around the penalty? Goodness gracious, no.
You took a stance early on that the Rangers should keep the players they have unless they can - right now - obtain top 10 prospects in the league for them.
That was back when we all assumed that Cally wanted Clarkson money. Your position was, "well, okay, it's overpaying, but let's do it because you can't guarantee me we're getting a young Zetterberg in return." Then it came out that he wanted $6MM over 7 years, and it was "well, okay, it's overpaying more than I thought, but let's do it because Slat's is just going to spend the money on something equally bad." NOW it's come out that he wants close to SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR and it's "well, overpaying an established player who just happens to be your captain might not be so bad.
So, in other words, you admitted he would have been overpaid at Clarkson numbers, but you're okay with paying him the the numbers that are CURRENTLY being discussed?!?!?
What number would you refuse? At what point do you just simply make the right business decision not to overpay?
They may already have a good auction going and may be able to get back a king's ransom, but even if they don't and only get back an "okay" return for Cally, not screwing your cap for the third best RW on the team (in so doing setting a very dangerous precedent for all your subsequent negotiations, by the way) to maintain cap flexibility for future options is, in and of itself a reward.
What? Richards contract is subject to cap recapture - the NHL fought tooth and nail to get that clause in the CBA to punish the big money teams that they felt had circumvented the spirit of the old CBA and hurt the bottom 75% of the league. Meanwhile his deal is DESIGNED to incentivize him to retire three years early. And you're counting on a wink and a nod cap circumvention to get around the penalty? Goodness gracious, no.
eco's bones
Registered User
You'd have to take it on faith that Richards is going to maintain the level he is at now even for the next three years. After last season I thought we should have pulled the plug. This year he's rebounded somewhat but he's not nearly the point a game player he's been mostly throughout his career and there's very good reason to think that if the level of his play at al moves in the next few years it will move down. He was brought in to be a No. 1 center. He'd been a legit No. 1 center. His play and production no longer justify that. The Rangers cannot afford to run with him for 6 more years at his cap hit.
As explained above this contract incentivizes him to retire after 3 more years. He will have made almost all his money. Even if he were at the same level of play he is now--what's in it for him at that point? It's not a good situation for him $1 mil per year for 3 years and it won't be a good situation for the Rangers either with his $6.667 mil cap hit for those final 3 years. And if you don't think the Rangers are legit contenders with him now why would you hang on to a guy who can't live up to his contract when said contract is going to limit your team getting better for the next several years? It doesn't make any sense.
As explained above this contract incentivizes him to retire after 3 more years. He will have made almost all his money. Even if he were at the same level of play he is now--what's in it for him at that point? It's not a good situation for him $1 mil per year for 3 years and it won't be a good situation for the Rangers either with his $6.667 mil cap hit for those final 3 years. And if you don't think the Rangers are legit contenders with him now why would you hang on to a guy who can't live up to his contract when said contract is going to limit your team getting better for the next several years? It doesn't make any sense.
BPD
Registered User
It may incentivize him to retire, but do you really think that a team won't be incentivized to find a way to keep him on when the cap floor is today's ceiling and he's literally giving you a 6.66 to 1 return on cap hit versus dollars?
Wanna know why Ryan Callahan gets 7M? The writing is on the wall - the cap is going to SKYROCKET under this new CBA. We realize that it's a bad investment for a team spending to the max no matter what like we do, and we're going to run from it.
Look, the NHL grew, on average - even through the recession - at or around 7% a year in cap. They're seeing record attendance, record revenues, just signed a monstrous TV deal and next year's cap is up nearly 12.5%. What reason is there to believe that the gravy train slows down?
Assuming average annual cap growth of 7% - maybe slightly more or less here or there - the cap is going to be close to 85M in a mere three years. Put that in perspective - the highest spending pre-lockout teams have never been matched. Now, it's going to be every team over 77M - and very soon.
The kicker, though - and what's going to be the crux of the 2021 lockout - is the cap floor. You see, the cap floor also flexes up - but it's not fixed at say 50% of the cap, or even 65% of the cap. It's a flat 16M below the ceiling.
Translation? In the 2017-2018 season, we can almost assure that the cap floor will be higher than next year's cap ceiling.
Now, a 71M cap floor is a very scary prospect to a team like, say, Florida, Winnipeg, Nashville - but if they're smart about their contracts, they can finagle a situation where they're paying someone half of their cap hit.
Which, of course, brings us back to Broadway Brad Richards.
Come 2017-2018, Brad Richards is the most valuable commodity in the NHL to a small-market or rebuilding team. He's a wizened veteran who plays a very smart game, probably won't cost you a game, is a strong role model and leader for your team - and fiscally speaking is worth nearly 7 times as much as you spend on him vis a vis the cap.
These backdiving contracts are going to be valuable assets so long as the player doesn't pull the retirement trigger.
The question with Brad Richards is no longer "Is he worth the investment?" - it's now "Can he be a legit 2nd line center for three more years?" - because he's going to be the cheapest option out there.
At what price? If Boyle and Moore want 2M, they can light themselves on fire.
I think he wants to be a Ranger. Getting a 7 year deal is a bigger priority for him though.
Lundqvist and Callahan are not the same.
Absolutely agree. I'll be very disappointed if we don't re-sign Stralman. I'll be irate if we're too shortsighted to lose him for nothing.
It's just business. As a team we're fortunate enough to not NEED Callahan at his asking price. I'm just happy this situation never happened with Lundqvist.
7.5 for Stastny? Holy ****....
Something more disturbing is 2.5M for Boyle...
And Stralman @ 2.7M is a joke. I think he'll get over 4M in free-agency. Maybe even more considering how skimp the market will be with RHD.
Teams operate differently. Callahan might be worth that type of contract for a team out there that lacks what he provides. From a NYR perspective? Nope.
If we don't amnesty Richards this offseason, then I've lost all hope in this franchise.. Although I thought I lost all hope in them the day I realized Sather would never, ever get fired.
It seems to me like what we heard last week was BS. Disinfo. All spun to twist the appearance of how negotiations were going. I feel dupped.
I've decided it's not worth my energy to look into this that much anymore. Its apparent that all sides: Management and Callahan and Girardi are playing this out and I don't want to be led around like a puppy.
Im going to the game tonight to thank callahan and Girardi for their services and Im not going back until the trade deadline is over, at the very least.
Save yourselves some energy and let this play itself out. For those of you perfectly content to either get some sort of value for Callahan and/or Girardi, or signing them to a reasonable deal, you will what your wish. For those who are simply hoping they find a way to work out a deal for these guys to stay. Its become bleak.
Last edited:
I don't know if this was mentioned, but I just saw on NHL network that the Blues have recalled Jaskin from the AHL. Peculiar timing...Let the speculations begin!
NYR Viper
Registered User
I mentioned this a couple of threads back. I wonder what it would require to get him.
I don't think he could. His play will continue to diminish as father time's watch keeps ticking. He came prepared to play this year - you could see it immediately. But after a nice start to the season his play has tapered off. There's no reason to assume it won't continue. It will. And the difference will be more significant over those next three seasons.
It's the legs. Richards isn't Jagr. He isn't Selanne. He's not the physical specimen some of these other guys are.
Bite the bullet. How much more effective is he going to be over Brassard going forward? You have Miller in the pipeline who's ready. Free the team of his cap hit. A growing cap means it's going to cost more to re-sign our players. Staal. Kreider. Stepan. Hagelin. Zuccs.
Dubbed?
You shouldn't be putting so much emphasis on rumors. This happens all the time. Things get leaked, often times for a reason. Negotiations have no rules. It's a game of cat and mouse for both parties. Callahan's the guy who's probably most stressed by this. He's the one who actually has to make a decision. His agent represent a ton of clients - Cally's just another player to him. Same thing with Sather. Cally's just another tool in the box.
NYR Viper
Registered User
I'm no longer hopeful Girardi gets re-signed. It sounds more and more like they will both be walking to UFA. Nothing says that if the Rangers trade the players, they can't re-sign them in the off-season. They have the same shot after they are dealt as keeping them, except they could have the benefit of the 8th year (which they won't use anyways).
This is a business decision, letting high end assets walk away without recouping something is awful asset management.
Girardi to me can wait until after the Olympics. He won't be playing in Sochi. Let Sather talk to the other GM's over the break. Lots of time to talk.
Callahan needs to get done before Sochi. With his playing style, there is a possibility for an injury that could seriously hurt his value. What is the + coming from St Louis? The Rangers need a high end center prospect. They should require a 1st round pick to accompany any package.
Stewart + ______ + 1st
The Blues have been trying to get rid of Stewart all season. No takers. 4+ million on the cap and he plays on the 3rd line. Interesting that St Louis wants to get rid of their 4+ million dollar 3rd liner and there were some people who wanted to re-sign Callahan for 6 million when he has been playing on the 3rd line.
There will be more suitors for Girardi than Callahan. Anaheim's defense is going to be their weakness come playoff time. Watch one of their games. Their forwards buzz around but their defense is slow. Etem + ______ + OTT 1st.
What is the plan with Stralman? There needs to be a decision made sooner rather than later. Do they feel they want to re-sign him? He has been a good soldier while in NY. How much does he want? Term? There would be teams lining up for Stralman's services as well. RD, top-4, good skater. Does he want to test the market no matter what? If so, why not move him and take a shot at re-signing him in the off-season? Again, same chance of re-signing him if he was kept in NY or moved at the deadline. The players want to set themselves up.
The Rangers need to look out for themselves. Do you want to compete for an extended period of time? These are the hard decisions that need to be made. This team won't bottom out. The only other option is to make shrewd trades and to make sure they maximize as many departing assets as possible.
This is a business decision, letting high end assets walk away without recouping something is awful asset management.
Girardi to me can wait until after the Olympics. He won't be playing in Sochi. Let Sather talk to the other GM's over the break. Lots of time to talk.
Callahan needs to get done before Sochi. With his playing style, there is a possibility for an injury that could seriously hurt his value. What is the + coming from St Louis? The Rangers need a high end center prospect. They should require a 1st round pick to accompany any package.
Stewart + ______ + 1st
The Blues have been trying to get rid of Stewart all season. No takers. 4+ million on the cap and he plays on the 3rd line. Interesting that St Louis wants to get rid of their 4+ million dollar 3rd liner and there were some people who wanted to re-sign Callahan for 6 million when he has been playing on the 3rd line.
There will be more suitors for Girardi than Callahan. Anaheim's defense is going to be their weakness come playoff time. Watch one of their games. Their forwards buzz around but their defense is slow. Etem + ______ + OTT 1st.
What is the plan with Stralman? There needs to be a decision made sooner rather than later. Do they feel they want to re-sign him? He has been a good soldier while in NY. How much does he want? Term? There would be teams lining up for Stralman's services as well. RD, top-4, good skater. Does he want to test the market no matter what? If so, why not move him and take a shot at re-signing him in the off-season? Again, same chance of re-signing him if he was kept in NY or moved at the deadline. The players want to set themselves up.
The Rangers need to look out for themselves. Do you want to compete for an extended period of time? These are the hard decisions that need to be made. This team won't bottom out. The only other option is to make shrewd trades and to make sure they maximize as many departing assets as possible.
The info about Girardi seemed pretty clear cut. If you see the quoted, I was responding to a statement about the Girardi info.
And generally speaking I totally agree with you. Thats why I said I suggest others not waste their energy. Your right
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,300
- 21,901
funny thing is i just traded for Jaskin in NHL 14, so maybe its a sign
Boyle for Jaskin + 1st? Get it done Slats!
St. Louis has been doing well lately, maybe there's some legs to this Stewart rumor, don't see a reason for the callup either way.
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
I'm so torn by all of this.
I said to my father last offseason that we need to trade Girardi before his body breaks down. He logs a lot of hard minutes. All of his minutes are against the opponent's best players. His game is going to break down at some point. We should maximize his value in a return.
Same with Callahan. The way he plays is going to make a seven year deal look silly.
But, there is something to be said about loyalty. There is no more loyalty in sports. I know it's a new era, and I know the cap situation is important. I know you can't tie up cap money in average players for long terms.
But I don't want to see Ryan Callahan wear another sweater. There is something to say about continuity and loyalty. We can't dismiss that factor. If Callahan goes, it could be detrimental. If Girardi AND Callahan go, I don't know.
I miss the days where this wasn't an issue. Teams like Chicago and Pittsburgh have been through this. They have so many good players that they can't keep them all. They do a good job of maximizing their returns on players or getting assets for them prior to them reaching free agency (Staal, Frolik, Bolland, etc.). I want to emulate those organizations, but I want my captain to be a Ranger. To me there is really only three options here.
1. Sign them to cap-reasonable deals. Something like 6/36.
2. Trade them for an abundance of assets.
3. If you don't get that return, make a run in the playoffs and let them walk.
I am not for trading them just to get something in return here. You trade them because some team overpaid for them, not because you are going to lose them for nothing. I don't care if they walk for the highest bidder. This team is a playoff team and can make a run with Henrik Lundqvist. We have good depth and a balanced defense. I'm not saying we are going to win the Cup, but I'm not trading Callahan for Chris Stewart. They need to trade them for the value they have to the RANGERS, not their perceived value to the rest of the league, or their actual value. Otherwise, to me, it's not worth it.
/End conflicted thoughts
I said to my father last offseason that we need to trade Girardi before his body breaks down. He logs a lot of hard minutes. All of his minutes are against the opponent's best players. His game is going to break down at some point. We should maximize his value in a return.
Same with Callahan. The way he plays is going to make a seven year deal look silly.
But, there is something to be said about loyalty. There is no more loyalty in sports. I know it's a new era, and I know the cap situation is important. I know you can't tie up cap money in average players for long terms.
But I don't want to see Ryan Callahan wear another sweater. There is something to say about continuity and loyalty. We can't dismiss that factor. If Callahan goes, it could be detrimental. If Girardi AND Callahan go, I don't know.
I miss the days where this wasn't an issue. Teams like Chicago and Pittsburgh have been through this. They have so many good players that they can't keep them all. They do a good job of maximizing their returns on players or getting assets for them prior to them reaching free agency (Staal, Frolik, Bolland, etc.). I want to emulate those organizations, but I want my captain to be a Ranger. To me there is really only three options here.
1. Sign them to cap-reasonable deals. Something like 6/36.
2. Trade them for an abundance of assets.
3. If you don't get that return, make a run in the playoffs and let them walk.
I am not for trading them just to get something in return here. You trade them because some team overpaid for them, not because you are going to lose them for nothing. I don't care if they walk for the highest bidder. This team is a playoff team and can make a run with Henrik Lundqvist. We have good depth and a balanced defense. I'm not saying we are going to win the Cup, but I'm not trading Callahan for Chris Stewart. They need to trade them for the value they have to the RANGERS, not their perceived value to the rest of the league, or their actual value. Otherwise, to me, it's not worth it.
/End conflicted thoughts
Off Sides
Registered User
- Sep 8, 2008
- 9,755
- 5,585
I agree with what you are saying, but why wouldn't they retire rather than go to some small market most likely non contender team at that point?
The only out would be something along the lines of a team trades for that Richards contract then uses a regular buyout on it as soon as they are allowed to.
Richards would get 2/3rd remaining amount instead of retiring. The trading for team would still get a cap hit without paying out that much real money, and the Rangers would get rid of the contract entirely.
That would all be dependent on 3 parties though and there is no guarantee they'd all go through with it.
BPD
Registered User
Oh, his legs are definitely going. No doubt.
I'm thinking that we can realistically get 50 points per season out of him for the next 2-3 seasons. He'll be a third line center by 2016, maybe even a wing. He'll still run our powerplay and make himself valuable if only because he's a smart player.
Given the price of points (I mean, if Callahan thinks 50 points is worth 7m, what's 50 points worth in 2 years?) I'm starting to find the argument to buy out Richards difficult.
Plus, we could just pay half those guys now. I mean...Stepan, Hagelin and Staal can work out extensions as early as July 1, Zucc and Kreider can sign 3-4 year deals if we're lucky too.
- Status
