Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 81

Thread: Marner Watch 2019

  1. #21
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,427
    Rep Power
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyb™ View Post
    He's saying term on the Zaitsev/Ceci swap methinks.
    Right. I actually agree that's how they are viewing it, which is why they mishandled it. Their problem was and still is immediate cap space. Somehow they failed to realize that. They could have let Ceci walk.

  2. #22
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    7,763
    Rep Power
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyb™ View Post
    He's saying term on the Zaitsev/Ceci swap methinks.
    Yea - and it was dumb to think that way when immediate space is their issue.

  3. #23
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,557
    Rep Power
    476
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  4. #24
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Bugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,351
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    I think what McKenzie is getting at is that Toronto wants this to be over with. If Marner signs a 12x7 offer sheet with the Isles, for example, I think they take the picks and are thankful that they no longer have to do this dance. They can argue they tried their earnest to keep him, but the dollars never made sense and they still need/want to field a competitive team.
    Was a blurb last week that the Isles wanted 7 years but Marner wanted only 5 years. Nobody wanted to be locked up with that franchise no mater how good the front office is.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    Sod16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    794
    Rep Power
    23
    Toronto 2019 = NYR 2022

  6. #26
    Banned BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,219
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sod16 View Post
    Toronto 2019 = NYR 2022
    Show the grid.

    No one has shown a realistic grid that makes me worry about any season other than next season.

  7. #27
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    7,763
    Rep Power
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by Sod16 View Post
    Toronto 2019 = NYR 2022
    It's more like 2024 or 2025 when the Rangers might have issues. When the ELCs are up, other than probably Kakko, the young guys will mostly get bridge deals. It's when your Howdens, Chytils, Hajeks, etc. are signing UFA deals that NYR is more likely to have problems.

  8. #28
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,557
    Rep Power
    476
    Assuming they're dumb enough to sink long-term bucks into anyone not at the top of the depth chart, like say Howden, Hajek, etc.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  9. #29
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    7,763
    Rep Power
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Assuming they're dumb enough to sink long-term bucks into anyone not at the top of the depth chart, like say Howden, Hajek, etc.
    Depends on what you mean by the "top." It's not problematic to pay a mid-value contract to a good 3c. But iriririririrregardless of that, you're losing players because of the cap and the point is that you can't keep everyone.

    Also, Hajek is going to be playing 20+ per night. He won't be at the bottom of the depth chart.

  10. #30
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,557
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Future View Post
    Depends on what you mean by the "top." It's not problematic to pay a mid-value contract to a good 3c. But iriririririrregardless of that, you're losing players because of the cap and the point is that you can't keep everyone.

    Also, Hajek is going to be playing 20+ per night. He won't be at the bottom of the depth chart.
    Then pay him. My point is the best-managed teams pay their stud talents and make margin calls in the middle-sixers. On that front, you really need to limit exactly how many you give deals to. It's almost never the 7's and 8's nad 9's that kill you. It's the 4's and 5's and 6's.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  11. #31
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    7,763
    Rep Power
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Then pay him. My point is the best-managed teams pay their stud talents and make margin calls in the middle-sixers. On that front, you really need to limit exactly how many you give deals to. It's almost never the 7's and 8's nad 9's that kill you. It's the 4's and 5's and 6's.
    I know, and in general I agree.

    My point is that, for the Rangers, the cap means losing some of those guys. So no, they won't be in cap trouble necessarily, but they aren't going to be able to pay every guy in the system.

  12. #32
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,557
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Future View Post
    I know, and in general I agree.

    My point is that, for the Rangers, the cap means losing some of those guys. So no, they won't be in cap trouble necessarily, but they aren't going to be able to pay every guy in the system.
    Right. And I'm OK with that. Run out their ELCs and flip 'em when it's time to pony up for something more affordable.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  13. #33
    Banned BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,219
    Rep Power
    0
    No one can afford to pay every guy in the system.

    Not every guy in this system should be paid.

  14. #34
    //reported Junior Division
    phillyb™'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    9,728
    Rep Power
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    No one can afford to pay every guy in the system.

    Not every guy in this system should be paid.
    And in one, two, three years time, we'll have new shiny toys who we'll all want to keep without them playing a single NHL game.
    Cross this bridge when we get to it.
    LGR!

  15. #35
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    7,763
    Rep Power
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Right. And I'm OK with that. Run out their ELCs and flip 'em when it's time to pony up for something more affordable.
    More affordable generally means worse, though.

    If you're subbing, idk, Tyler Ennis for Pavel Buchnevich, or Greg McKegg for Jesper Fast, your team gets worse. I get that a byproduct of the cap means limiting ceilings because you can't pay depth, but there's no guarantee that you can just replace all of your depth pieces and have the same quality. We just saw this between 2014 and 15, when they never adequately replaced Richards, Pouliot, Dorsett or Stralman. So I wouldn't assume that they can just clap their hands and replace, say, Lias, Lemieux, Buch and Hajek with vets or ELCs and not see a dip.

  16. #36
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,557
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    No one can afford to pay every guy in the system.

    Not every guy in this system should be paid.
    Sure they should. Just not all by the same team. Otherwise, I completely agree. You lock down your stars, and you make a couple of margin calls. The rest are cap casualties.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  17. #37
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,557
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Future View Post
    More affordable generally means worse, though.

    If you're subbing, idk, Tyler Ennis for Pavel Buchnevich, or Greg McKegg for Jesper Fast, your team gets worse. I get that a byproduct of the cap means limiting ceilings because you can't pay depth, but there's no guarantee that you can just replace all of your depth pieces and have the same quality. We just saw this between 2014 and 15, when they never adequately replaced Richards, Pouliot, Dorsett or Stralman. So I wouldn't assume that they can just clap their hands and replace, say, Lias, Lemieux, Buch and Hajek with vets or ELCs and not see a dip.
    Not necessarily. What I'm saying is, say Howden wants $4 million on his next ticket but you really don't envision him worth more than $2 million, and you don't want the term. You can move him for a guy in the second year of his ELC and still end up with another year of maneuverability without necessarily ending up with egg on your face.

    Sometimes it backfires. Hagelin for Etem, for example, but it's possible to make right by it.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  18. #38
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    7,763
    Rep Power
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Not necessarily. What I'm saying is, say Howden wants $4 million on his next ticket but you really don't envision him worth more than $2 million, and you don't want the term. You can move him for a guy in the second year of his ELC and still end up with another year of maneuverability without necessarily ending up with egg on your face.

    Sometimes it backfires. Hagelin for Etem, for example, but it's possible to make right by it.
    Why would any other team make that trade if the production is the same?

    The only way that trade happens is if you get a "change of scenery" guy or you trade for an ELC thinking he's going to hit his stride immediately. Either way, the instant return is a lesser player and you justhope it works. And if you have to do it 4 times, you're more likely to get 3 misses than 3 hits. Hagelin for Etem is a lot more likely to ever happen than Hagelin for Rakell.

  19. #39
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    7,763
    Rep Power
    166
    Just because I think this is an interesting topic...let's assume that Howden had 35 points and would be getting his $4m next year. Here's the list of non-expiring ELC forwards who had 30-50 points:

    Nico Hischier - NJD
    Clayton Keller - ARZ
    Brady Tkachuk - OTT
    Jake DeBrusk - BOS
    Anthony Cirelli - TBL
    Dominik Kahun - PIT
    Andrei Svechnikov - CAR
    Jesperi Kotkaniemi - MTL
    Robert Thomas - STL
    Oskar Lindblom - PHI
    Jesper Bratt - NJD
    Nolan Patrick - PHI

    Out of that group, I don't see a 1-1 where the Rangers don't downgrade.

  20. #40
    Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Puck Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    11,202
    Rep Power
    148
    I don’t see any situation where Howden will be getting 4 million. He’d have to get in the 45-60 range with his contract status and lack of history.


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

Page 2 of 5 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
  •