Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

The Salary-Cap Hell the Rangers are Still Trying to Navigate


Phil

Recommended Posts

May players adapt to stay in the league. There's no reason to think ADA won't

 

Nash totally reinvented himself into a complete player at 30.

 

I mean, sure, but it's rare they find that level of success. How many purely offensive defensemen can you think of that suddenly reinvented themselves (successfully) into 200-foot players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 325
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You're not saying anything different than what I'm saying.

 

The point is, defense can be taught, and if ADA wants to stay in the league, he'll learn it. And there's no evidence to suggest he can't. Plenty of players come into the league with defensive holes and learn as they go. Hayes is another good example.

 

Yes, but all these guys do it over the course of numerous years. No one just ups and becomes a new player overnight. The whole issue re: ADA here was under the auspices of a bridge deal (probably one year) and reassessing based on his improving. I just don't think that's a realistic scenario, at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, sure, but it's rare they find that level of success. How many purely offensive defensemen can you think of that suddenly reinvented themselves (successfully) into 200-foot players?

 

Well, he doesn't need to be a complete 200 foot player this year. This year he works on not being a liability, next year he works on being competent defensively...That's progress...that's development. He's played 130 NHL games. Defenseman usually need around 300 before you can determine "what they are".

 

By contrast, Touba has played 408. We kinda know what he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He comes across as a hard headed guy who probably feels he excels at both ends already. Honestly I don't think he's all that good offensively either. Would be fine without him. I don't see him as a part of the long term solution.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He comes across as a hard headed guy who probably feels he excels at both ends already. Honestly I don't think he's all that good offensively either. Would be fine without him. I don't see him as a part of the long te solution.

 

I like that he's stuck up for teammates in the past, especially for a smaller guy. He's also only 24 and a 1st round pick. I'd really hate to just give up on the guy TBH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he doesn't need to be a complete 200 foot player this year. This year he works on not being a liability, next year he works on being competent defensively...That's progress...that's development. He's played 130 NHL games. Defenseman usually need around 300 before you can determine "what they are".

 

By contrast, Touba has played 408. We kinda know what he is.

 

We know Trouba is an $8m per/7yr defenseman. Fantasy to compare him to ADA when by your own admission he is still working on not being a liability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know Trouba is an $8m per/7yr defenseman. Fantasy to compare him to ADA when by your own admission he is still working on not being a liability.
Yea, 2 things there... Scroll back because I'm not comparing them. Future and Phil are.

 

Secondly, not sure what you're bringing the contract up for. I can say Lucic is a $6 million a year forward and while that's factual, it's not "true".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know Trouba is an $8m per/7yr defenseman. Fantasy to compare him to ADA when by your own admission he is still working on not being a liability.

 

He?s really not an $8 million per D. He really hasn?t done enough yet to truly earn that amount of money or be the league?s 6th highest paid D

 

He was making $5.5 million last year and had a career year, so he definitely earned a raise. His arbitration award would likely have been a 1 year deal in the $6.5-7 million range. That range would have been a fair number on a long-term deal. Ideally, on a 7 year deal he should have gotten something like $45-50 million.

 

Look, he?s a very good player. Has offensive ability. He?s very good in his own end. Will eat minutes. Will play in all situations. Will do so vs top players. He makes them better and does so immediately. He?s big, mobile, physical, has an edge and is hard to play against. At 25, the 7 year term should bother no one. They?re getting his prime seasons. That?s the guy you give 7 years too.

 

But he?s just not an undeniable top D. Based on what he?s done thus far, he?s really in between being a top guy and the next tier below. And at age 25, with 400 games played, he?s pretty much established what he is.

 

The Rangers are betting that his numbers and production last year are representative of him having taken the next step, and getting those top pair minutes and opportunities and getting more time on the PP. While they haven?t said it, it?s pretty clear they feel that with those circumstances in place moving forward, he?ll give them production like he gave Winnipeg last year. But it?s all based off 1 season so it may simply be an aberration or just his career year in a contract year, which we?ve all seen many times.

 

He?s been about a 30-35 point guy based on his per game averages in his career. Was a 50 point guy last year.

If he stays as a 30-35 point guy, at $8 million per, that?s a disappointment. It?s also not reasonable to expect him to be a 50 point guy when he?s always done that once

If he?s really good in his own end vs top players and gives you 40+ points, that would be a level everyone should be happy with.

But they overpaid him. Period.

 

And we should be somewhat concerned about the fact that in 6 seasons he?s played 80 games only twice, and 65 or less games in the other 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s really not an $8 million per D. He really hasn’t done enough yet to truly earn that amount of money or be the league’s 6th highest paid D

 

He was making $5.5 million last year and had a career year, so he definitely earned a raise. His arbitration award would likely have been a 1 year deal in the $6.5-7 million range. That range would have been a fair number on a long-term deal. Ideally, on a 7 year deal he should have gotten something like $45-50 million.

 

Look, he’s a very good player. Has offensive ability. He’s very good in his own end. Will eat minutes. Will play in all situations. Will do so vs top players. He makes them better and does so immediately. He’s big, mobile, physical, has an edge and is hard to play against. At 25, the 7 year term should bother no one. They’re getting his prime seasons. That’s the guy you give 7 years too.

 

But he’s just not an undeniable top D. Based on what he’s done thus far, he’s really in between being a top guy and the next tier below. And at age 25, with 400 games played, he’s pretty much established what he is.

 

The Rangers are betting that his numbers and production last year are representative of him having taken the next step, and getting those top pair minutes and opportunities and getting more time on the PP. While they haven’t said it, it’s pretty clear they feel that with those circumstances in place moving forward, he’ll give them production like he gave Winnipeg last year. But it’s all based off 1 season so it may simply be an aberration or just his career year in a contract year, which we’ve all seen many times.

 

He’s been about a 30-35 point guy based on his per game averages in his career. Was a 50 point guy last year.

If he stays as a 30-35 point guy, at $8 million per, that’s a disappointment. It’s also not reasonable to expect him to be a 50 point guy when he’s always done that once

If he’s really good in his own end vs top players and gives you 40+ points, that would be a level everyone should be happy with.

But they overpaid him. Period.

 

And we should be somewhat concerned about the fact that in 6 seasons he’s played 80 games only twice, and 65 or less games in the other 4.

 

 

I don’t think it is fair to say ‘at 25 he has established what he is’. Like you say in your next paragraph, with the Rangers he will be taking on roles and responsibilities he never had in WPG. Given the size of the contract the Rangers obviously feel he has all the skills needed to meet the challenge. Being a top pair guy that brings a physical presence is my top priority. We have not had that in a long time and it makes a difference. If he plays on PP1 I am sure the points will take care of themselves. We might have similar options and he might be too valuable on defense to use the energy on PP1. Will be fun seeing how things work out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet he was under appreciated

 

Had he done what did as a centerman he?d have been considered one of the leagues best players

 

he was under appreciated by the fanbase, not by Hockey people. When he made the Canadian team in the Olympics, the Canadian coaching staff were saying that they picked Nash because he was great defensively, great at PKer and danger to score goals. He made the team because of his defensive play. Fans know shit! (remember them booing Jagr for not hitting?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, 2 things there... Scroll back because I'm not comparing them. Future and Phil are.

 

Secondly, not sure what you're bringing the contract up for. I can say Lucic is a $6 million a year forward and while that's factual, it's not "true".

 

 

You said at 25 we know what he is. We can quibble over whether it should have been 7.5 or 7 instead of 8, but that is still a very good defenseman. To compare him to ADA based on points with unequal PP opportunities is nutty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he was under appreciated by the fanbase, not by Hockey people. When he made the Canadian team in the Olympics, the Canadian coaching staff were saying that they picked Nash because he was great defensively, great at PKer and danger to score goals. He made the team because of his defensive play. Fans know shit! (remember them booing Jagr for not hitting?)

 

I meant by the fan base. Sorry if I wasn’t clearer on that

I agree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s really not an $8 million per D. He really hasn’t done enough yet to truly earn that amount of money or be the league’s 6th highest paid D

 

He was making $5.5 million last year and had a career year, so he definitely earned a raise. His arbitration award would likely have been a 1 year deal in the $6.5-7 million range. That range would have been a fair number on a long-term deal. Ideally, on a 7 year deal he should have gotten something like $45-50 million.

 

 

And we should be somewhat concerned about the fact that in 6 seasons he’s played 80 games only twice, and 65 or less games in the other 4.

 

 

These were my thoughts too. I was having a hard time finding a comparable type of player to him and certainly one that would make me believe that he's an $8 mil a year guy. I like him but that doesn't appear to be the right amount for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think it is fair to say ‘at 25 he has established what he is’. Like you say in your next paragraph, with the Rangers he will be taking on roles and responsibilities he never had in WPG. Given the size of the contract the Rangers obviously feel he has all the skills needed to meet the challenge. Being a top pair guy that brings a physical presence is my top priority. We have not had that in a long time and it makes a difference. If he plays on PP1 I am sure the points will take care of themselves. We might have similar options and he might be too valuable on defense to use the energy on PP1. Will be fun seeing how things work out.

 

I see the logic in what you’re saying and I’m not at all saying that he isn’t potentially that guy. What I am saying is that 1 season of 50 points, given his production for the other 5 seasons of his career, doesn’t qualify him in my eyes as a true #1 defenseman in the league who has undeniably earned the contract he just signed.

 

I’m saying it’s an overpayment based on his established track record leaning more toward 30ish points vs 50. Clearly the organization feels that the points and roles he gave them last year are what he’s morphed or grown into or they would not have paid him. They could be right about that. But it’s not a certainty.

 

Disagree though on the point of his age and experience establishing what he is

25.

6 seasons

400+ games.

 

Generally at that point a guy is what he is

 

Really the question is whether last seasons point totals were a new norm for him or were they just a high point in a contract year that he won’t match

 

We will see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a comparison of Trouba and John Carlson (WSH). If you look at Carlson's stats over his career they are very compatible. Carlson had his highest point total at age 25 w/ 55 points. Then 2 years in the 30's, Then 68 @28yrs and 70 @29 years. The FO did a great job of projecting how Zib would become a 1st line center when everyone said we didn't have a true first line at the beginning of the season (myself included). Trouba is finally comfortable after signing in the states and there's really no reason to think he'll just underachieve because he is what he is. That's nonsensical. I agree he was paid a little too much but in three years it could seem like a bargain, not unlike Zibby.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said at 25 we know what he is. We can quibble over whether it should have been 7.5 or 7 instead of 8, but that is still a very good defenseman. To compare him to ADA based on points with unequal PP opportunities is nutty.
No. Read back. Phil said at 25 we know what he is.

 

I said at 400+ games we know more what he is than 160 something games from ADA. That's just development, irregardless of age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These were my thoughts too. I was having a hard time finding a comparable type of player to him and certainly one that would make me believe that he's an $8 mil a year guy. I like him but that doesn't appear to be the right amount for him.
Until you watch both play... they're nothing alike on the ice. That means something.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. Read back. Phil said at 25 we know what he is.

 

I said at 400+ games we know more what he is than 160 something games from ADA. That's just development, irregardless of age.

 

I was hoping for 7/$50m so was disappointed he got $8m per. Rangers must be expecting 22+ minutes of top pair and PP1. Might make him a bargain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a comparison of Trouba and John Carlson (WSH). If you look at Carlson's stats over his career they are very compatible. Carlson had his highest point total at age 25 w/ 55 points. Then 2 years in the 30's, Then 68 @28yrs and 70 @29 years. The FO did a great job of projecting how Zib would become a 1st line center when everyone said we didn't have a true first line at the beginning of the season (myself included). Trouba is finally comfortable after signing in the states and there's really no reason to think he'll just underachieve because he is what he is. That's nonsensical. I agree he was paid a little too much but in three years it could seem like a bargain, not unlike Zibby.

 

I wonder how many of his points were assisting on an Ovi snipe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many of his points were assisting on an Ovi snipe?

This might be cheeky, but there's no doubt that playing with Ovi - and really that PP unit in general - inflates his scoring. Carlson isn't a 70-point D in the same way that Brent Burns or EK65 are where he'll do it on every team. He's a facilitator - he's good at it, but there are a lot of guys who can do it on that team. Carlson's points as much a product of him getting all of the PP1 and first-line minutes as they are his development. That's the bet the Rangers are making with Trouba and, realistically, it's what got Trouba to 50 points last year. He didn't develop that much as a player from the year before, Buff just got hurt (and most of his PP assists were secondary, so it's not like he was the playmaker of that group).

 

The difference between NYR and WAS though is that a) the Rangers don't have an Ovi equivalent and b) there are other players on the blueline who are, or potentially are, more gifted offensively (ADA, Fox). As a team, the Rangers are probably better off if one of those guys commands the PP, but that means you're looking at an $8m defenseman who puts up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how everyone wants to credit other people for a player's success when it suits them.

 

As if playing PP1 and chucking 400 shots on net from bad angles, with Thornton Marleau Pavelski Coutoure didn't have anything to do with Burns getting 70 points.

 

It's utter speculation he'd get to 70 on any team same as it's utter speculation that Carlson wouldn't.

 

Hint.... When good players play together, they all benefit from each other... Unless you're a generational talent like Sid Mario or Gretzky... Even Lindros.

 

Even Ovi always had talented centermen. That's OK, Brett Hull did, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...