FireGerardGallant
The Artist Formerly known as FireDavidQuinn
- Mar 19, 2016
- 6,656
- 7,576
Who would you compliance buyout?
- Thread starter Fitzy
- 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
The same buyout rules apply as normal, only the team does not have the cap hits each season. He would receive 2/3 of the remaining base salary, divided over 12 years. Signing bonuses are paid in full and on schedule.
So in the case for Trouba, here's what his payout would look like (post-buyout earnings):
So 34 million for a guy not to play hockey. Yeesh. Not happening. Trouba better figure it out or Gordon screwed the pooch big time.
the fact that people are still talking about getting rid of trouba makes me want to go outside and catch coronavirus cause that can't be more painful then reading this same nonsense argument for the 97 trillionth time
I understand Staal and would vote for him but what are we realistically getting for Georgiev in a trade? i think we would be lucky to get what the Kings got for Campbell. Basically a 2nd and 3rd. If we can't trade Georgiev we just can't have this three goalie situation again with one of them making 8.5 million
But when will you ever be able to trade Georgiev? He's going to be the backup moving forward, clearly, and that cap number starts moving up as soon as this off-season. Hard to see his value increasing substantially. So if we acknowledge we have to move him eventually, might as well be now so we could use the compliance on Staal and let Hank ride off into the sunset. Just seems like the better move to me.
eco's bones
Registered User
Like it or not Staal's replacement hasn't really arrived yet--both Hajek and Rykov need to prove they can hold down an NHL job and Reunanen and Miller are going to need time in Hartford. I think Robertson is going to need more time too.
What's more of a certainty is that both Shesterkin and Georgiev can play NHL goal and that Igor's a budding elite goalie----so Henrik's replacements are already here---and though Henrik can still play they're both better than he is and his is the biggest cap hit so IMO he's the obvious choice and it's sad because he is the best Rangers goalie that I've ever seen and it's not that close. Igor I think can at least match him though.
What's more of a certainty is that both Shesterkin and Georgiev can play NHL goal and that Igor's a budding elite goalie----so Henrik's replacements are already here---and though Henrik can still play they're both better than he is and his is the biggest cap hit so IMO he's the obvious choice and it's sad because he is the best Rangers goalie that I've ever seen and it's not that close. Igor I think can at least match him though.
fine by me. Just saying when we get a 2nd in 2021 and C prospect for Georgiev this board is not gonna be happy.
If we get a good deal for Georgiev it's probably a no brainer to trade him. I'm sure Gorton tested the market before the 2020 TDL and the deals offers probably sucked.
Definitely there's that side of the coin as well. I don't wanna rush Miller or Robertson! Hajek pretty disappointing year and Rykov never got going with his injuries. I'm sure the Rangers look at this angle as well were they probably don't feel comfortable just yet promoting any of these LHD. Rykov would have to be the closest I would think.
Yeah I know a lot of people want a 1st+. I don't think that will happen. You never know with goalies, but still. A 2nd + 4th or 2nd + long shot prospect with upside would work for me.
I feel like you can find a stopgap LD for one year that is still way better than Staal while you wait for your young LD to be ready in 2022. Or maybe they want to pull the trigger on acquiring one through trade. Either way, finding a replacement for Staal is easy, because he is so bad, almost any NHL regular would be an upgrade.
And I just don't see Georgiev increasing his value as the backup. Factor in his salary will eventually see a significant bump when he hits arbitration, and it's probably better to move on now rather than later. And God forbid he has a down year, which is totally possible for a guy who will play 20 games. Let Hank do one more year and then hope Huska or Wall is ready, or sign a backup for cheap (goalies abound in free agency).
I just think the quickest and most substantial move to improve the team for next year is to replace Staal. And long term, I don't think it makes a difference. So I go with Staal.
Inferno
Registered User
I knew you would post something stupid like this....
eco's bones
Registered User
Staal is an easy fall guy for a lot of posters here IMO. It's almost that old Girardi argument to me. If he were making $1.5 to $2 mil a lot of us wouldn't have any problem with him. I get that he's very much on the downside of his career but as a stay behind defenseman who gets in the way--can slow down the attack until help arrives he's alright. He's alright on the PK and as a safety valve for DeAngelo's forays into the offensive zone. On merit though DeAngelo should be making what Staal's making and Staal making what Tony's making. That said things aren't always merit driven or even should be. But anyway Hajek wasn't that impressive and no he's not as good as Staal is right now. He skates and handles the puck better for sure but his offensive game is at least as bad and when defending under pressure he wilts. Maybe all he needs is more time but he's not as good as Staal is right now.
Not that concerned yet about Georgiev's contract. He will get a pay raise for next year but I don't think it will be greatly significant. We're parting ways from Henrik as is--I would let that play out instead. $8.5 frees up a lot of money for us and Georgiev's a better goalie. No one's denying how great Henrik has been but sports as business--the best teams are ones that are able to make the hard decisions and the feel goody stuff is not that way.
Have to take out the highest cap hit so sadly Hank
Smith can be deal IMO. His salary isn’t that bad after the bonus is paid
stuck with Staal
Smith can be deal IMO. His salary isn’t that bad after the bonus is paid
stuck with Staal
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,301
- 21,909
I would rather pay Hank on cap to not play than pay Staal on cap to play. So I chose Staal.
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,301
- 21,909
iit's really not difficult to replace one of the worst regular D in the NHL.
I've never been one to scapegoat a player--I was team Girardi to the end, loved Rozsival, etc. Staal is terrible. He's capable of the odd decent night, but 4/5 games he is a huge negative. And he's a huge negative on his partners, which is borne out in all of the analytics we've seen. He's not an NHL defenseman at this point.
I'm not suggesting that Hajek or Rykov would be ready to step in. Rather, you could find any number of 5/6 LD on the market and sign them for cheap, 1-2 years, and have an immediate upgrade.
That leaves to to trade Georgiev, pick up an asset or assets, and only see a minimal downgrade in the net for the ~20 or so games the backup might play. You gain more from replacing Staal with Joe Average and moving Georgiev than you do from getting rid of Lundqvist and rolling with Staal for another year.
Shesterkybomb
Registered User
- Dec 30, 2016
- 17,659
- 19,368
Hank, even if you're really down on him, is a below average starting goalie in this league at the very worst. Hes a franchise legend and HOF lock, the optics of a buyout here would be horrible.
Staal has been one of the worst players in the league at his position for like 5 years running now. He's compiled a bunch of games onto his resume while playing extremely sub par hockey. He should have been bought out 3 years ago.
I mean if they get to choose from all available options I'd probably just choose to be free of Shattenkirk's buyout money and be done with that but of the 3 options provided here, Staal is the easiest choice.
Staal has been one of the worst players in the league at his position for like 5 years running now. He's compiled a bunch of games onto his resume while playing extremely sub par hockey. He should have been bought out 3 years ago.
I mean if they get to choose from all available options I'd probably just choose to be free of Shattenkirk's buyout money and be done with that but of the 3 options provided here, Staal is the easiest choice.
eco's bones
Registered User
Okay. I'm not in a hurry to move on from Georgiev. Rangers have control of this guy and I think he's going to be a starter for somebody some day.......so trading him is fine but I'd want real value back and a 2nd and/or a 3rd rounder is not enough. If some team were to give us a 1st rounder or equivalent of a top prospect/young player for him I might do that. Otherwise no way. I'm not into selling cheap as surplus a player who might come back and really haunt us some day. Having him in the bank as a backup is not burning a hole in my pocket and IMO I'm not sure Huska's got the goods (Shesterkin way outperformed him in Hartford) and Wall has to sign and we'll have to see.
And as far as Henrik goes I've moved on from him and I've moved on from Staal and Smith as well. They're all place holders in my eyes--they have absolutely no future with the team after 2020-21. They're done. Retire Henrik's jersey--buy him a yacht or a fancy house whatever but no new contract (unless it's a management position) for him either. I want no sentiment to play into his possibly being re-signed to play goal for the Rangers. He's done. The closing chapter is written. If he wants to play for another team--isn't willing to give up---that's fine too. Of all the contracts we're talking about though his is the biggest and his replacements are here already. Right there that makes him at least in my eyes the guy you dump under this scenario. If you want to take some of the savings from that and apply it to two other LD's and buy out one or both of Staal and Smith that's fine with me too.
This all makes sense. My thing is just with Georgiev. He has been the backup for 2.5 years. He's going to be the backup moving forward if it's just him and Shesterkin. He's going to play 20 games per year unless Shesterkin gets hurt. I don't see much room for him to increase his value. His value only goes up if he gets an extended look; and given the small sample of a backup goalie, he could just as easily--more easily, I'd argue--have a bad season and lower his value. And then you factor in, the longer we hold him, the more expensive he gets, and the less team control an acquiring team has.
So, I'm not in a rush to trade him by any means. I just don't see his value increasing much at all. Given that, I think moving him now makes sense.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
He has earned the right to CHOOSE how to go out.
His choices are:
1) Retire.
2) Accept a trade at 50% retained.
3) Be bought out.
He gets to make his own choice. If he refuses 1 and 2, then he is choosing to be bought out.
Some people will never stop.
Rangers have 3 candidates for this. Staal, Smith & Henke. Staal would be a definite choice for me.
Henke would depend on what happens with Georgiev. And the optics would be awful. This is a Rangers legend and one of the best players ever to wear the sweater.
And Smith? Why do I keep getting the feeling that they would want him back?
