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

Rangers Re-Sign Jacob Trouba to 7-Year/$56M Extension; $8M AAV


Phil

Recommended Posts

When Crosby signed it was like, whoa shit -- that's a big cap hit. Then, 6 years later it's not a big cap hit at all. In fact it's quite small comparatively. You can't compare Trouba's deal to a deal last year, let alone two years ago -- that is a lazy, obvious take that makes no sense considering inflation and cap ceiling.

 

Similar to Trouba, OEL also has but one 50 point season. So while you may hold him up as some top flight dman, your logic is flawed. OEL makes more money, on a contract signed a year earlier, on a team that's literally had no success, while only scoring a career high 55 points, one time four years ago.

 

So... Please explain how that's a better deal.

I've already done it, so not gonna do it again.

 

I've said my piece and at this point, to be honest, don't care who agrees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 223
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Carlson is also signed until he's 37, while Trouba is only signed for his prime years. Carlson also got 8th years instead of 7 AND he took a hometown discount to stay with the team he just won a cup with.
Right, so Washington bought more UFA years, which costs more.

 

Trouba wanted to be here. He forced a trade here. Really unclear to me why we'd then also pay top money for ... Again... One. Good. Season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got a 25 year old potential top pair defenseman. To pay him $8m x 7 the Rangers brain trust must obviously think he will be very good. Who cares that he was not the top guy on WPG or that he only had 50 points once. If he becomes the lead dog here he will be worth the price. Not a bad offseason when you add the top forward and top Dman available and draft a potential stud. Sure beats keeping the powder dry while we are on a long term rebuild.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got a 25 year old potential top pair defenseman. To pay him $8m x 7 the Rangers brain trust must obviously think he will be very good. Who cares that he was not the top guy on WPG or that he only had 50 points once. If he becomes the lead dog here he will be worth the price. Not a bad offseason when you add the top forward and top Dman available and draft a potential stud. Sure beats keeping the powder dry while we are on a long term rebuild.
Sure.... Which is why my point the whole time has been:

 

1. We didn't HAVE to pay him.

2. This is a risk.

3. It may work out, it may not.

 

You can say those things about most contracts. And it's what we debate here.

 

My issue is with people acting like this contract was owed and automatic. It's not. There are better D who've signed recently who make what he's making.

 

I'd have been more comfortable if he had another season or 2 like lasts year's under his belt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure.... Which is why my point the whole time has been:

 

1. We didn't HAVE to pay him.

2. This is a risk.

3. It may work out, it may not.

 

You can say those things about most contracts. And it's what we debate here.

 

My issue is with people acting like this contract was owed and automatic. It's not. There are better D who've signed recently who make what he's making.

 

I'd have been more comfortable if he had another season or 2 like lasts year's under his belt.

 

Always risk with any move. When you bring in a young guy that has already achieved that still has potential there will always be greater financial risk. When the Rangers acquired Trouba I would certainly hope that they realized the financial commitment it would take to keep him.

 

It may work, it may not. We certainly had a need. I have faith that Gorton & Co got it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure.... Which is why my point the whole time has been:

 

1. We didn't HAVE to pay him.

2. This is a risk.

3. It may work out, it may not.

 

You can say those things about most contracts. And it's what we debate here.

 

My issue is with people acting like this contract was owed and automatic. It's not. There are better D who've signed recently who make what he's making.

 

I'd have been more comfortable if he had another season or 2 like lasts year's under his belt.

 

The risk is term, more than anything else.

 

We're all going to be rooting for a few more of those 50 point seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure.... Which is why my point the whole time has been:

 

1. We didn't HAVE to pay him.

2. This is a risk.

3. It may work out, it may not.

 

You can say those things about most contracts. And it's what we debate here.

 

My issue is with people acting like this contract was owed and automatic. It's not. There are better D who've signed recently who make what he's making.

 

I'd have been more comfortable if he had another season or 2 like lasts year's under his belt.

 

We didn’t HAVE to. But the alternative was going through arbitration and then losing him in free agency at which point he’d almost certainly get 8m. He was negotiating from a position of strength, and realistically allowing him to reach UFA after giving away assets to get him was never on the table. Unless his ask was ridiculous, which - whilst on the high side - it isn’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck, the rangers are already in cap trouble and they aren't even finished rebuilding

 

They are at this very moment, however in the grander scheme of things? They really aren't.

 

We've locked up the #1F and #1D. That's good.

 

Our expiring contracts next season are expected to be replaced both production and cost-wise largely by ELCs (Kreider might be the exception here).

 

Our cap positioning is ALL ABOUT 2021-2022 right now; at the worst possible case, that's when the following things all happen:

 

Hank off the books

Shattenkirk off the books

Smith off the books

Staal off the books

 

Must extend:

Chytil

Howden

Andersson

Hajek

 

We're not at risk of losing a player we shouldn't with the notable exception of Buch/ADA, and ADA is debatably in that camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure.... Which is why my point the whole time has been:

 

1. We didn't HAVE to pay him.

2. This is a risk.

3. It may work out, it may not.

 

You can say those things about most contracts. And it's what we debate here.

 

My issue is with people acting like this contract was owed and automatic. It's not. There are better D who've signed recently who make what he's making.

 

I'd have been more comfortable if he had another season or 2 like lasts year's under his belt.

 

Sure.... Which is why my point the whole time has been:

 

1. We didn't HAVE to pay him.

2. This is a risk.

3. It may work out, it may not.

 

You can say those things about most contracts. And it's what we debate here.

 

My issue is with people acting like this contract was owed and automatic. It's not. There are better D who've signed recently who make what he's making.

 

I'd have been more comfortable if he had another season or 2 like lasts year's under his belt.

 

They overpaid him. That’s just a fact. I like him a lot but I don’t at this point view him as a clear cut top D. 50+ points 1 time shouldn’t get you $56 million. He has more to prove. And I don’t think you will see 50+ points regularly from him.

Think he’s a 40-45 point guy.

 

Having said that, I’m glad they have him. He does fill a glaring need and immediately he makes you better. He will eat 22-25 minutes a night. At 25 the 7 year term is perfect. 32 at end of deal. You’re paying for his prime years.

And I personally feel that he’s very good in his own end. I feel he’s underrated there. Physical. Nasty disposition and hard to play against, but also mobile with a heavy shot and some offense to his game.

 

So all in all I like that they have him. Think he suits well as a guy who can play a lot of minutes vs top players in more of a shut down role and come out on top more often than not. And while it’s only 1 season of it, there’s offense there.

The $8 million per is high. But that looks better as the cap increases and other D make more money.

 

But agree on risk and not having fully proven himself worthy of that payday

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are at this very moment, however in the grander scheme of things? They really aren't.

 

We've locked up the #1F and #1D. That's good.

 

Our expiring contracts next season are expected to be replaced both production and cost-wise largely by ELCs (Kreider might be the exception here).

 

Our cap positioning is ALL ABOUT 2021-2022 right now; at the worst possible case, that's when the following things all happen:

 

Hank off the books

Shattenkirk off the books

Smith off the books

Staal off the books

 

Must extend:

Chytil

Howden

Andersson

Hajek

 

We're not at risk of losing a player we shouldn't with the notable exception of Buch/ADA, and ADA is debatably in that camp.

 

Yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are at this very moment, however in the grander scheme of things? They really aren't.

 

We've locked up the #1F and #1D. That's good.

 

Our expiring contracts next season are expected to be replaced both production and cost-wise largely by ELCs (Kreider might be the exception here).

 

Our cap positioning is ALL ABOUT 2021-2022 right now; at the worst possible case, that's when the following things all happen:

 

Hank off the books

Shattenkirk off the books

Smith off the books

Staal off the books

 

Must extend:

Chytil

Howden

Andersson

Hajek

 

We're not at risk of losing a player we shouldn't with the notable exception of Buch/ADA, and ADA is debatably in that camp.

 

Here we go! I think this has it summed up pretty well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They overpaid him. That’s just a fact. I like him a lot but I don’t at this point view him as a clear cut top D. 50+ points 1 time shouldn’t get you $56 million. He has more to prove. And I don’t think you will see 50+ points regularly from him.

Think he’s a 40-45 point guy.

 

Having said that, I’m glad they have him. He does fill a glaring need and immediately he makes you better. He will eat 22-25 minutes a night. At 25 the 7 year term is perfect. 32 at end of deal. You’re paying for his prime years.

And I personally feel that he’s very good in his own end. I feel he’s underrated there. Physical. Nasty disposition and hard to play against, but also mobile with a heavy shot and some offense to his game.

 

So all in all I like that they have him. Think he suits well as a guy who can play a lot of minutes vs top players in more of a shut down role and come out on top more often than not. And while it’s only 1 season of it, there’s offense there.

The $8 million per is high. But that looks better as the cap increases and other D make more money.

 

But agree on risk and not having fully proven himself worthy of that payday

 

would have liked to have seen more like 7x7 but in this market another mill a year, with a supposedly decent TV contract on the horizon its not going to kill you.

 

my question was always whether he can be a clear no 1, as its something he never was up to this point. I'll leave his production 45-50 points to others on this board who can more accurately project what peek production and points equate to for defenseman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Trouba doesnt produce anything the first 2-3 games into the season he's going to start to get the Malik/Roszival treatment from the fickle fan base.

 

Nah, there'll be mixed sentiment. People will talk about how great he is defensively, and how many goals he "saves" when he's putting up 25 points. It'll be like the defenseman version of Rick Nash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, there'll be mixed sentiment. People will talk about how great he is defensively, and how many goals he "saves" when he's putting up 25 points. It'll be like the defenseman version of Rick Nash.

 

If that's what Trouba turns out to be then I'd be more okay paying him 8 than the 5.25 Skjei gets to be a sieve in the D zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, there'll be mixed sentiment. People will talk about how great he is defensively, and how many goals he "saves" when he's putting up 25 points. It'll be like the defenseman version of Rick Nash.

 

Nah, there'll be mixed sentiment. People will talk about how great he is defensively, and how many goals he "saves" when he's putting up 25 points. It'll be like the defenseman version of Rick Nash.

 

I don’t think there’s real danger of him being a 25 point player

 

Maybe he has an off year and does that

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...