Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 130

Thread: Rangers' Cap Woes Will Return Next Summer

  1. #21
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Flynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Down South
    Posts
    1,476
    Rep Power
    21
    Jesus.. I had it in my head Glass was a 2 year deal.. yuck

  2. #22
    #MakePetrGreatAgain BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    80,814
    Rep Power
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by Flynn View Post
    Jesus.. I had it in my head Glass was a 2 year deal.. yuck
    Three, but he's on a contract that the Rangers can easily get out from underneath if they choose to. They may even move him just to add that much more breathing room this season, or next summer.
    Hidden Content

    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "I've always said, I'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a kitty cat."
    - Dean Lombardi


    "If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, “I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.”"
    - Christopher Hitchens

  3. #23
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Giacomin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,060
    Rep Power
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Rome 2.0 View Post
    Except in reverse. It's usually these teams watching their UFA-eligible players walk for greener pastures.
    Sure, but who decided professional sports must have as close to parity as absolutely possible, all else notwithstanding? (Not saying you are doing this)

    There are other important guiding principles, beyond parity making this issue more complex. A meritocracy is just as important as parity. I'd also submit that not every market can maintain a competitive NHL team. Why should the global hockey market as a whole, suffer because a few franchises struggle financially? Is putting forth extraordinary efforts to attain parity the most efficient way to promote the overall growth of the NHL? Is Vegas really where the NHL wants the next franchise? Is Florida going to sell many more tickets if they are better this year? Arizona is still an uncertain longterm location. Why should these franchises and a few small mkt Canadian clubs dictate financial parity with no compromise?

    Parity should be delivered mostly through draft positioning. The current rules to allow teams to lockup their own players before or during the RFA period, also creates parity. But does every financial decision by any healthy team need to be in the soirit of parity?

  4. #24
    #MakePetrGreatAgain BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    80,814
    Rep Power
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by Giacomin View Post
    Sure, but who decided professional sports must have as close to parity as absolutely possible, all else notwithstanding? (Not saying you are doing this)

    There are other important guiding principles, beyond parity making this issue more complex. A meritocracy is just as important as parity. I'd also submit that not every market can maintain a competitive NHL team. Why should the global hockey market as a whole, suffer because a few franchises struggle financially? Is putting forth extraordinary efforts to attain parity the most efficient way to promote the overall growth of the NHL? Is Vegas really where the NHL wants the next franchise? Is Florida going to sell many more tickets if they are better this year? Arizona is still an uncertain longterm location. Why should these franchises and a few small mkt Canadian clubs dictate financial parity with no compromise?

    Parity should be delivered mostly through draft positioning. The current rules to allow teams to lockup their own players before or during the RFA period, also creates parity. But does every financial decision by any healthy team need to be in the soirit of parity?
    Of course not, but we're not going to agree, I don't imagine, over the merits of those financially struggling teams. Hockey-strong markets can, and do suffer immensely when the local team doesn't win, or win often. Colorado, for example, was a bustling market that's dwindled to largely being a "small market" team the last decade plus because the product on the ice was bad. Fans stopped coming. Fans stopped coming to see traditionally "strong" markets like Pittsburgh and Chicago too, when they were equally as bad. In fact, Pittsburgh nearly went bankrupt and were moved. Jim Balsilie, who later tried to purchase and move the Predators—a team who've now found local fanfare because of their recent success—tried to move both teams to Hamilton.

    You won't get much fight for Sunrise, Florida out of me, and you won't get it for Glendale, Arizona either (though I have repeatedly pointed out that the team drew quite well when they were still located in Phoenix, not an hour plus outside the city in the middle of the fucking desert).

    But parity itself has also saved teams like the Rangers and the Flyers and the Leafs, who traditionally had $100M+ payrolls regardless of whether their clubs made the playoffs or not. It actually forced them to operate as all teams now operate in a league that sees parity as a good thing. It put an emphasis on drafting and building a team instead of always trying to buy one.
    Hidden Content

    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "I've always said, I'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a kitty cat."
    - Dean Lombardi


    "If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, “I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.”"
    - Christopher Hitchens

  5. #25
    Banned Mite Division NYR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    189
    Rep Power
    0
    Depending on the cap, is this our last year of competing for a cup? Not the playoffs, the cup, there is a difference.

    The salary cap will bite us on the ass again and that means somebody needs to go. Is it Nash? We trade a 40 goal scorer and get some young pieces and a roster player. Will those guys help more than Nash? Or Girardi? He makes a lot of money but he is a work horse and eats minutes. What do we get back and who replaces him? Do we move Staal? Same as Girardi basically.

    It sucks, the salary cap fucks us good and i think we can win a cup if we are healthy but we need to also manage the cap which means losing players.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Giacomin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,060
    Rep Power
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Rome 2.0 View Post
    Of course not, but we're not going to agree, I don't imagine, over the merits of those financially struggling teams. Hockey-strong markets can, and do suffer immensely when the local team doesn't win, or win often. Colorado, for example, was a bustling market that's dwindled to largely being a "small market" team the last decade plus because the product on the ice was bad. Fans stopped coming. Fans stopped coming to see traditionally "strong" markets like Pittsburgh and Chicago too, when they were equally as bad. In fact, Pittsburgh nearly went bankrupt and were moved. Jim Balsilie, who later tried to purchase and move the Predators—a team who've now found local fanfare because of their recent success—tried to move both teams to Hamilton.

    You won't get much fight for Sunrise, Florida out of me, and you won't get it for Glendale, Arizona either (though I have repeatedly pointed out that the team drew quite well when they were still located in Phoenix, not an hour plus outside the city in the middle of the fucking desert).

    But parity itself has also saved teams like the Rangers and the Flyers and the Leafs, who traditionally had $100M+ payrolls regardless of whether their clubs made the playoffs or not. It actually forced them to operate as all teams now operate in a league that sees parity as a good thing. It put an emphasis on drafting and building a team instead of always trying to buy one.
    Sounds like we agree more than disagree. For me, it is a matter of degree to which I want the league to operate with parity in mind. Like you and the league, I think it is a good thing. However, I do not think parity should be the 'be all, end all' panacea. In fact, if every competitive and operating decision is based solely on parity, I'd bet the league is not maximizing it's health and growth.

    Also, I'm not sure we agree about every cause and effect. You mentioned the Pittsburg problem and others mkts that were not supporting the team enough to be profitable. However, I'd be cautious attributing that to the cap. Maybe ownership in Pitt had other issues? Maybe hockey was not enjoying the growth they wanted because of poor mktg, outdated rules and gameplay, not enough nat TV, strikes and lockouts, the fact that there is infinitely more entertainment choices than any owner anticipated, etc.

    The league had to adjust and made some great moves. Improving the gameplay and excitement/speed/beauty of the sport, creating parity in the point system so that teams are in the race longer, etc.

    Another important issue is that league wide winning is a zero sum game. For every winner there is a loser. Cap or no cap, there will still be the same amount of losing teams that could turn off a fickle fanbase. The NHL loser point and shootout did more for competitiveness than any cap did. You said yourself, it is not like the rich teams were winning with their gaudy payroll.

  7. #27
    #MakePetrGreatAgain BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    80,814
    Rep Power
    354
    I don't believe parity is the be-all and end-all either. I just recognize it's necessity in creating the type of playing field that gives every team a chance at success, even those not blessed with calling traditional hockey-strong markets home.
    Hidden Content

    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "I've always said, I'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a kitty cat."
    - Dean Lombardi


    "If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, “I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.”"
    - Christopher Hitchens

  8. #28
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Flynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Down South
    Posts
    1,476
    Rep Power
    21
    The good news is that if Kreider, Miller, Hayes and Etem are all in line for big raises based on performance, 15-16 will probably be a damn good season.

  9. #29
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Giacomin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,060
    Rep Power
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Rome 2.0 View Post
    I don't believe parity is the be-all and end-all either. I just recognize it's necessity in creating the type of playing field that gives every team a chance at success, even those not blessed with calling traditional hockey-strong markets home.
    Parity has its important role and it is implemented with the draft, the loser point, free agency, the cap, among other things. But the cap rules for the majority of good teams have gone too far. Chicago fans should be forced to part ways with 1, maybe 2 core players because of the cap. But 3 or 4? How does that promote fan loyalty. As much as the "sweater" proponents dismiss it, we fans are still people who like to root for our fav players.

    The cap is too low in order to accomodate small mkts. So Dunny is proposing a great solution/compromise. A luxury tax.

    Then Chicago gets to keep Saad. Or the Rangers get to keep Hags. Or Kreids. Both were forced out by the cap, not necessarily hockey trades. Not everyone stays, but why should teams have to lose 3/4 guys in one off season. The lux tax then gives poorer teams more money to spend on players, mktg, promos. It goes back into the system like an investment.

  10. #30
    #MakePetrGreatAgain BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    80,814
    Rep Power
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by Giacomin View Post
    Parity has its important role and it is implemented with the draft, the loser point, free agency, the cap, among other things. But the cap rules for the majority of good teams have gone too far. Chicago fans should be forced to part ways with 1, maybe 2 core players because of the cap. But 3 or 4? How does that promote fan loyalty. As much as the "sweater" proponents dismiss it, we fans are still people who like to root for our fav players.

    The cap is too low in order to accomodate small mkts. So Dunny is proposing a great solution/compromise. A luxury tax.

    Then Chicago gets to keep Saad. Or the Rangers get to keep Hags. Or Kreids. Both were forced out by the cap, not necessarily hockey trades. Not everyone stays, but why should teams have to lose 3/4 guys in one off season. The lux tax then gives poorer teams more money to spend on players, mktg, promos. It goes back into the system like an investment.
    Because they made a choice to invest a significant portion of their salary cap in other players who they felt were more integral to their long-term success. Namely Toews, Kane and Keith. So, as a result, you cannot keep all the others.

    But if you want to jump into that conversation regarding a luxury tax, lets move that part of the discussion into that thread so it's not happening simultaneously in two threads. This one is geared toward the Rangers cap next summer with Kreider, Miller, etc.
    Hidden Content

    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "I've always said, I'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a kitty cat."
    - Dean Lombardi


    "If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, “I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.”"
    - Christopher Hitchens

  11. #31
    Former Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Cash or Czech?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    16,318
    Rep Power
    60
    Etem will be an arbitration-eligible RFA as well next summer. Moore will more than likely be let go with Lindberg being a cheaper option. Boyle and Yandle will be off the books but will also need replacements. I'm betting management is hoping Skjei and McIlrath will be able to step in at least partially in the 2016-17 season to ease the need for free agent acquisitions. It's going to be tight, but I think we'll be able to squeeze under. I hope a guy like Zuccarello or Brassard isn't a cap casualty, but we theoretically have the replacements developing on the lines just below them.

  12. #32
    #MakePetrGreatAgain BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    80,814
    Rep Power
    354
    I wonder if McIlrath will be around long enough to be seen as a potential replacement? He requires waivers this year, as does Diaz... are the Rangers going to carry eight D out of camp? Seems to me that only one of the two will be here.

    So maybe only Skjei right now really projects to be one of the fill-ins. They're probably going to have to go shopping in UFA to fill the other, unless they get a body back in a trade.
    Hidden Content

    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "I've always said, I'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a kitty cat."
    - Dean Lombardi


    "If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, “I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.”"
    - Christopher Hitchens

  13. #33
    I feel sorry for the earth's population BSBH Prospect
    AmericanJesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    19,298
    Rep Power
    319
    This is what we're looking at with some modest numbers assuming Miller, Etem and Hayes do enough that they're still top 9 forwards and Kreider improves a little more.

    Nash
    Stepan
    Brassard
    MZA
    Glass
    Fast

    Forwards: $26.2M

    Staal
    Girardi
    McDonagh
    Klein

    Defense: $18.8M

    Hank

    Goalies: $8.5M


    RFAs:
    Kreider - $5M
    Hayes - $2.5M
    Miller - $2.0M
    Etem - $2.0M

    Total above RFAs: $11.5M

    Total: 15 players, $65M


    We still need 2 forwards, 2 defenders, 1 goalie plus spares. We have $6.4M to fill out that roster, plus what ever the cap increases.

    Minor league possibilities:

    Lindberg (F) $650K
    Skjei (D) $925K
    Hellberg (G) $625K

    Total $2.2M

    Now we're down to $4.2M (plus increase) for 1 forward, 1 defender and spares. That should be relatively easy to fill out, although we're relying each year on more and more rookies/young players to become core guys.

  14. #34
    #MakePetrGreatAgain BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    80,814
    Rep Power
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanJesus View Post
      Spoiler: {option} 
    This is what we're looking at with some modest numbers assuming Miller, Etem and Hayes do enough that they're still top 9 forwards and Kreider improves a little more.

    Nash
    Stepan
    Brassard
    MZA
    Glass
    Fast

    Forwards: $26.2M

    Staal
    Girardi
    McDonagh
    Klein

    Defense: $18.8M

    Hank

    Goalies: $8.5M


    RFAs:
    Kreider - $5M
    Hayes - $2.5M
    Miller - $2.0M
    Etem - $2.0M

    Total above RFAs: $11.5M

    Total: 15 players, $65M


    We still need 2 forwards, 2 defenders, 1 goalie plus spares. We have $6.4M to fill out that roster, plus what ever the cap increases.

    Minor league possibilities:

    Lindberg (F) $650K
    Skjei (D) $925K
    Hellberg (G) $625K

    Total $2.2M


    Now we're down to $4.2M (plus increase) for 1 forward, 1 defender and spares. That should be relatively easy to fill out, although we're relying each year on more and more rookies/young players to become core guys.
    And maybe that's OK? That's the way the system is designed to operate from an optimal perspective, anyway.
    Hidden Content

    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "I've always said, I'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a kitty cat."
    - Dean Lombardi


    "If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, “I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.”"
    - Christopher Hitchens

  15. #35
    Former Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Cash or Czech?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    16,318
    Rep Power
    60
    IMO looks like we'll be trying to trade on of Brassard, Zuccarello, Staal and Girardi. And yes, I'm taking into consideration the NMCs and NTCs.

  16. #36
    Senior Member Junior Division
    ThirtyONE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    9,145
    Rep Power
    58
    I'm in the mind set that we can worry about next year when it comes. Look at what this summer had in store and Gorton was able to wiggle out. I'm sure he'll find a way to do what's best for the team without having to blow the thing up. A lot can happen between now and then anyway. Who knows what players will be coming back.
    FIRE VIGNEAULT

  17. #37
    Former Moderator BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74,851
    Rep Power
    438
    This isn't a realistic discussion regarding the salary cap issue for next year, so we shouldn't hijack the thread debating what, for all intents and purposes, is a fantasy trade proposal.

    Thanks in advance!

  18. #38
    Banned Mite Division NYR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    189
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    This isn't a realistic discussion regarding the salary cap issue for next year, so we shouldn't hijack the thread debating what, for all intents and purposes, is a fantasy trade proposal.

    Thanks in advance!
    Sorry, just posted that lineup when you posted this. Crap

  19. #39
    Former Moderator BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74,851
    Rep Power
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by NYR View Post
    Sorry, just posted that lineup when you posted this. Crap
    No worries. I'll break it out into a new thread.

  20. #40
    Former Moderator BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74,851
    Rep Power
    438

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •