article: Karlsson an "obvious fit" with the Rangers?

Karlsson, to me, seems like the guy who signs for 7 years and then LTIRetires after 5 due to "injury".

 

He might just want the security of knowing he's getting paid for 7 years, but you can probably Robidas him if he's that bad.

 

And in reality you don't have to worry about superstar contract for Krav or the #2 overall for another 3 years and by then we'll have a ton of guys coming off the cap. You'd also hope that one of these guys turns into a MacKinnon/Pasta situation when they wind up breaking out after they ink their 7 year, $7 million contracts and not $11 million LOL.

That's true. I guess there's no sense in worrying about future Ranger problems. It's impossible to know who will be getting paid what. We can only hope Kakko and Vitali are stars. It's a low probability that they'll both need superstar money but we can cross that bridge if we get there.

I guess you can "disappear" someone if you need to but it seems risky. I can't imagine they're having an easy time trying to disappear Shattenkirk right now.

Sign him for 5 years and I'm happy. I'm thrilled, even. That extra dead money at the end scares the shit out of me.

Toronto's problem isnt having JT, Mathews and Marner. Pittsburgh's problems isnt Crosby and Malkin. Chicago's problem isnt Kane and Toews.

 

Its all those middle 6/pair guys they over paid. The Danger Zone.

It's the Marleaus, Zatisev contracts, Pittsburgh will be looking to ship out contracts between 4m - 7m. And Chicago has plenty of cap space with Seabrook, Saad and Anisimov, too.

 

As long as you dont hand out Skjei contracts to guys just for being around, you'll be fine.

Bingo. Avoid this like the plague. I know I've argued in the past for keeping Kreider, for example, but he's a prime target here. If we're talking about Karlsson and Panarin versus Panarin and Kreider, I'm going the former every single time.

When Andersson needs his next deal, provided he's still around and progresses, or you're contemplating even bridge deals at like $5- or $6 million on other middle-of-the-road players, the answer is simple. Don't. Trade them instead and let someone else pay for it. Think Lucic and Boston.

That's true. I guess there's no sense in worrying about future Ranger problems. It's impossible to know who will be getting paid what. We can only hope Kakko and Vitali are stars. It's a low probability that they'll both need superstar money but we can cross that bridge if we get there.

 

I guess you can "disappear" someone if you need to but it seems risky. I can't imagine they're having an easy time trying to disappear Shattenkirk right now.

 

Sign him for 5 years and I'm happy. I'm thrilled, even. That extra dead money at the end scares the shit out of me.

Leafs managed to make both Robidas and Lupul go away.

Bingo. Avoid this like the plague. I know I've argued in the past for keeping Kreider, for example, but he's a prime target here. If we're talking about Karlsson and Panarin versus Panarin and Kreider, I'm going the former every single time.

 

When Andersson needs his next deal, provided he's still around and progresses, or you're contemplating even bridge deals at like $5- or $6 million on other middle-of-the-road players, the answer is simple. Don't. Trade them instead and let someone else pay for it. Think Lucic and Boston.

There isn’t a successful team ever that has been able to avoid these deals. If your building up to s championship team you need the middle six depth to put around the superstars. They will want their money and you will choose to trade them for cheap unknowns and take a step back or pay them. Choosing to always trade them may just waste the prime years of the Stars you built around. It’s unrealistic but nice to say and dream about.

I don't disagree but when you look at a team like Toronto, you see where the Rangers could be headed. Sure having too many stars to pay it's a good problem to have but it's still a problem. I too think Karlsson is fucking dynamic and was probably the best player in the league two years ago. That said, I'm weary of signing the biggest names for the biggest prices because we've already been there. We've already failed doing that exact thing.

 

I think it's safe to assume Karlsson will not age well. His contract might be worth it for the next three years but after that it's very questionable. I'd be more than happy to give him 4-5 years at an astronomical price than 7 years at a fair price. Look at Hanks deal. We're talking about another Hank deal, only worse.

Says who? Hank was a phenom even at age 35 and 36. It was at 37 he fell off in a noticeable way.

There isn’t a successful team ever that has been able to avoid these deals. If your building up to s championship team you need the middle six depth to put around the superstars. They will want their money and you will choose to trade them for cheap unknowns and take a step back or pay them. Choosing to always trade them may just waste the prime years of the Stars you built around. It’s unrealistic but nice to say and dream about.

And the right ones lock up one or two and deal the rest. They don't carry three, four, five guys making $5 million to put up 40 points or score 25 from the back end.

And the right ones lock up one or two and deal the rest. They don't carry three, four, five guys making $5 million to put up 40 points or score 25 from the back end.

Yes they do. But only for a window. Look at Tampa.

Ever hear of Ryan Callahan?

Tampa is surviving, despite some bad contracts. A few of those have been an issue since signed.

Yes they do. But only for a window. Look at Tampa.

Who are reportedly looking to move a few of them this summer. AND buy out Callahan.

For this very reason.

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Who are reportedly looking to move a few of them this summer. AND buy out Callahan.

 

For this very reason.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Which is my point LOL. They took a few cracks at it, now they ship some guys out. Not a big deal.

Which is why drafting is so important

agreed. as colie put it re the devils back in the day "an interchangeable flock of forwards"

Which is my point LOL. They took a few cracks at it, now they ship some guys out. Not a big deal.

Right. And no one is looking at them and saying "fuckin' Stamkos, Hedman, and Point are why we can't keep ."

Which is my point LOL. They took a few cracks at it, now they ship some guys out. Not a big deal.

Your “yes they do” response is being interpreted as “yes it works”

Your ?yes they do? response is being interpreted as ?yes it works?

so pay them, but don't give them clauses.

Right. And no one is looking at them and saying "fuckin' Stamkos, Hedman, and Point are why we can't keep ."

No they aren?t, they are just going home early every spring without a cup. They have traded and signed Callahan and miller in hoping to ad the missing grit that they think they need to get over the top. Wrongly in hindsight but even tampa isn?t immune from bad contracts to middle six players. Coburn on defense probably isn?t helping either.

the problem with the rangers past cap management is that seemingly didn’t understand each players pecking order and value on the team. You can’t be paying bottom pair defenseman $6m a year and hope to contend. The same as paying bottom six forwards $4-5m. The rangers are still doing it.

The productive elc players of course are the big trump cards because they inevitably out perform their contracts. If you can build a good team without too many overpays and then infuse the team with a couple really good elc players you get that perfect storm. Not many wings get $12m a year if any and a handful of dmen get that. If you sign two guys at that kind of money they can really only break even in production compared to cap. There really is no benefit to a rebuilding team to completely use up their cap space with huge ufa signings unless they believe that their kids are ready to win. In three years time those kids will be needing substantial raises. At that point those huge ufa signings become prohibitive and may force less than ideal roster decisions or contract extensions. It’s all an unknown but it has to be carefully considered. I think most agree that this is not about next year, it’s about 4-5 year window three years from now.

No they aren’t, they are just going home early every spring without a cup. They have traded and signed Callahan and miller in hoping to ad the missing grit that they think they need to get over the top. Wrongly in hindsight but even tampa isn’t immune from bad contracts to middle six players. Coburn on defense probably isn’t helping either.

haven't followed Tampa closely, have Callahan and JT underperformed?

haven't followed Tampa closely, have Callahan and JT underperformed?

not sure under performed, more like they are what they are at this point

Callahan

GP G A Pts +/-

52 7 10 17 +7

Miller

GP G A Pts +/-

75 13 34 47 +8

The Games played with Cally is always the concern for me....but 17 pts in 52 games is pretty low in my opinion.

Miller is what Slobby said...he is what he is; a "middle of the pack, serviceable grinder" in my estimation.