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 Buyout Kevin Shattenkirk


Phil

Recommended Posts

They're there because of decisions made in the past. I know you didn't like the Panarin signing, and we don't have to go over that again, but I think signing Panarin and Trouba were the right decisions and they were made knowing there would be consequences.

And please, let's not try and create a narrative where Kreider is a cap casualty. If they move on from him it's because they don't want to commit to him for 7 years, not because of the cap.

 

Rangers could have landed trouba,won huge with getting kakko and fox. Had a terrific summer just with that. They could have spent this season letting the kids grow while the bum contracts burnt another year. They could have went this route and everybody would still be very happy myself included. There would be no cap problem and no dead cap in the years that matter. They also could have gotten a better understanding of what they have just through time. Kreiders situation wouldn’t change, it would still be hinged on his play and what’s out there through trade. The rangers have no room to do anything right now. And this team is still loaded with holes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Makes zero sense buying him out next year when in the following year he comes off the books anyway. Staal has been one of their better defensive defensemen and is a good leader on the ice and in the locker room. Move him and you have zero veteran presence on a very young blue line. We saw what happened to MDZ when we had no veteran presence on the blue line, let’s not make that mistake again.

 

Del Zotto had both Rozsival and Redden. His failings had nothing to do with having no veterans around. Staal and Girardi, only 3 seasons ahead of MDZ, had no issue developing. McDonagh even credited Redden for helping him grow while in Hartford.

 

I agree with the idea of preserving a veteran presence, though, especially given how good of a man-on-man defender Staal used to be. Doesn't hurt to have guys coming onto the team getting pointers from him. Staal was half of the reason the Rangers shut down Crosby in 2014 and that was in the thick of his injuries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Del Zotto had both Rozsival and Redden. His failings had nothing to do with having no veterans around. Staal and Girardi, only 3 seasons ahead of MDZ, had no issue developing. McDonagh even credited Redden for helping him grow while in Hartford.

 

I agree with the idea of preserving a veteran presence, though, especially given how good of a man-on-man defender Staal used to be. Doesn't hurt to have guys coming onto the team getting pointers from him. Staal was half of the reason the Rangers shut down Crosby in 2014 and that was in the thick of his injuries.

 

I wouldn’t say that Roszival and Redden were good veterans to help MDZ. He really didn’t have anyone until Richards came here. Redden helped more than in Hartford than he did here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangers could have landed trouba,won huge with getting kakko and fox. Had a terrific summer just with that. They could have spent this season letting the kids grow while the bum contracts burnt another year. They could have went this route and everybody would still be very happy myself included. There would be no cap problem and no dead cap in the years that matter. They also could have gotten a better understanding of what they have just through time. Kreiders situation wouldn’t change, it would still be hinged on his play and what’s out there through trade. The rangers have no room to do anything right now. And this team is still loaded with holes.

 

Kreider's situation hasn't changed. They're either going to arrive on a contract soon or they're going to find a way to move him. That's been indicated repeatedly. Adding Panarin has nothing to do with that. Did it make their cap situation tighter? Sure, but it's not prohibitive. The rationale for trading Kreider is whether or not he's remotely worth a hit of over $7M on a team that's going to have players like Kravtsov, Kakko, Chytil, and Zibanejad expiring over the next three seasons. I definitely don't think he's worth it. So long, Chris.

 

Also, you say they should wait but then also complain about holes? No one is saying they're competing this season. Of course, they're going to have holes while you're still carrying five plus players with significant salaries that won't be on the team come two years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t say that Roszival and Redden were good veterans to help MDZ. He really didn’t have anyone until Richards came here. Redden helped more than in Hartford than he did here.

 

Based on? Rozsival being bad was hugely overblown, he was just grossly overpaid. He never even got to a level of being as bad as Girardi or Staal over the last few years. His final season in NY before he got traded for Wolski he had actually been one of the team's steadier defensemen. Redden obviously went to shit but a much better defenseman in McDonagh even leaned on him. Maybe MDZ didn't get better, not because of the veterans, because he isn't that good and was rushed in at 19.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kreider's situation hasn't changed. They're either going to arrive on a contract soon or they're going to find a way to move him. That's been indicated repeatedly. Adding Panarin has nothing to do with that. Did it make their cap situation tighter? Sure, but it's not prohibitive. The rationale for trading Kreider is whether or not he's remotely worth a hit of over $7M on a team that's going to have players like Kravtsov, Kakko, Chytil, and Zibanejad expiring over the next three seasons. I definitely don't think he's worth it. So long, Chris.

 

Also, you say they should wait but then also complain about holes? No one is saying they're competing this season. Of course, they're going to have holes while you're still carrying five plus players with significant salaries that won't be on the team come two years.

 

I said kreiders situation is the same. I’m not complaining about holes I’m pointing out they still have many. Some we are assuming a teenager is going to fill now or in the future. Problem is the rangers have made it extremely tough to maneuver because of their money situation. They are in the middle of a rebuild as a team, they should not be having cap problems already. Panarin and trouba are of course better than shattenkirk and whomever. That isn’t the point though. The rangers should be doing everything with focus on 20-21. Let all those contracts expire, have no dead cap, see what you have with two more years of player development, TAKE advantage of the league wide problem of cap mismanagement with smart transactions. Instead they are the team looking to get pennies on the dollar for their assets to fit inder the cap all the while icing what is probably a lottery team once again. Even after buying our shattenkirk they still have zero room to much of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe we're still complaining about Panarin.

 

While we disagree about Staal, Panarin is a bona fide offensive force and he wants to be here. Nash was supposed to be that, and while he was decent, fell short. Gaborik, same thing, though in fairness his style didn't mesh with Tortarella, through no fault of either, simply a reality.

 

This idea that you're going to grow all your young guys into a core is only part of NHL success. Otherwise the RNH/McDavid Oilers would be polishing mutiple Cups. You need to add good players as you go along. The cap-as this makes starkly clear-means every season is another set of variables. And Panarin is very valuable variable. Bluntly for the last few years we have had a lot of lines that did nothing to scare opponents. This guy changes that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said kreiders situation is the same. I’m not complaining about holes I’m pointing out they still have many. Some we are assuming a teenager is going to fill now or in the future. Problem is the rangers have made it extremely tough to maneuver because of their money situation. They are in the middle of a rebuild as a team, they should not be having cap problems already. Panarin and trouba are of course better than shattenkirk and whomever. That isn’t the point though. The rangers should be doing everything with focus on 20-21. Let all those contracts expire, have no dead cap, see what you have with two more years of player development, TAKE advantage of the league wide problem of cap mismanagement with smart transactions. Instead they are the team looking to get pennies on the dollar for their assets to fit inder the cap all the while icing what is probably a lottery team once again. Even after buying our shattenkirk they still have zero room to much of anything.

 

The Rangers cap situation will be fine for 20-21. At the very least Kreider, Fast, Namestnikov and Beleskey all off the books. The following year, which is likely when the true window starts, they'll be in great shape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangers could have landed trouba,won huge with getting kakko and fox. Had a terrific summer just with that. They could have spent this season letting the kids grow while the bum contracts burnt another year. They could have went this route and everybody would still be very happy myself included. There would be no cap problem and no dead cap in the years that matter. They also could have gotten a better understanding of what they have just through time. Kreiders situation wouldn’t change, it would still be hinged on his play and what’s out there through trade. The rangers have no room to do anything right now. And this team is still loaded with holes.

 

What are the holes? Because it seems like you're being selective in which holes you're willing to pay for.

 

"The rangers have no room to do anything right now."

 

What is there to do? If you're dead set on waiting for things to just magically get better, then by your logic there should be nothing left for them to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem is the rangers have made it extremely tough to maneuver because of their money situation. They are in the middle of a rebuild as a team, they should not be having cap problems already.

 

You say that as if their cap situation was a problem created yesterday. The main culprits are contracts like Lundqvist, Staal, Shattenkirk, Smith, etc. None of whom were signed when the Rangers waived the white flag. They had cap problems preceding the rebuild. They removed their most valuable assets to replace with cost-controlled ones and still haven't been able to rid themselves of the albatrosses they've carried for years. It's almost as though you have the presumption that being in a rebuild means you have no money tied up. That's not the case. Those contracts are a large part of why they had to rebuild in the first place. No one wants to take them at cost. They have one fewer bad contract today than they did yesterday. I'll gladly accept that.

 

 

The rangers should be doing everything with focus on 20-21. Let all those contracts expire, have no dead cap, see what you have with two more years of player development, TAKE advantage of the league wide problem of cap mismanagement with smart transactions. Instead they are the team looking to get pennies on the dollar for their assets to fit inder the cap all the while icing what is probably a lottery team once again. Even after buying our shattenkirk they still have zero room to much of anything.

 

The organization has repeatedly said not to get hopes up for this season. That despite what the media is clamoring, the rebuild is NOT over. The Shattenkirk buyout doesn't change that. It doesn't restrict them. If they're a lottery team again this season is anyone really surprised? Analytical projections have them as a bottom team even with new additions. They have to grow and be patient. They also need to add players that help the team now and in the future i.e. Panarin and Trouba. They absolutely took positive steps this offseason and then removed a piece that was becoming more of a net negative. They haven't sold anyone recently for pennies on the dollar either. The Shattenkirk buyout, if anything, signals the opposite. Did I miss Kreider getting traded for a 2nd? So they might have to get rid of Strome or Namestnikov. That's been inevitable. I don't really see what the problem is.

 

I don't get what your plan is? To not have a plan? To just sit and wait for all your bad salaries to disappear? How does that really help?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said kreiders situation is the same. I?m not complaining about holes I?m pointing out they still have many. Some we are assuming a teenager is going to fill now or in the future. Problem is the rangers have made it extremely tough to maneuver because of their money situation. They are in the middle of a rebuild as a team, they should not be having cap problems already. Panarin and trouba are of course better than shattenkirk and whomever. That isn?t the point though. The rangers should be doing everything with focus on 20-21. Let all those contracts expire, have no dead cap, see what you have with two more years of player development, TAKE advantage of the league wide problem of cap mismanagement with smart transactions. Instead they are the team looking to get pennies on the dollar for their assets to fit inder the cap all the while icing what is probably a lottery team once again. Even after buying our shattenkirk they still have zero room to much of anything.

 

What more do you expect the Rangers to do? It is a bit unusual to add a talent like Panarin while still building, but he wanted to be a NYR and was available. Buying out guys is not ideal. Most likely Kreider will eventually be dealt. But if Panarin delivers those things will seem like nothing down the road. How much easier will he make it for our youth to develop? Seems like we are on course to make the big splash in a few years once the dead weight is gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You say that as if their cap situation was a problem created yesterday. The main culprits are contracts like Lundqvist, Staal, Shattenkirk, Smith, etc. None of whom were signed when the Rangers waived the white flag. They had cap problems preceding the rebuild. They removed their most valuable assets to replace with cost-controlled ones and still haven't been able to rid themselves of the albatrosses they've carried for years. It's almost as though you have the presumption that being in a rebuild means you have no money tied up. That's not the case. Those contracts are a large part of why they had to rebuild in the first place. No one wants to take them at cost. They have one fewer bad contract today than they did yesterday. I'll gladly accept that.

 

 

 

 

The organization has repeatedly said not to get hopes up for this season. That despite what the media is clamoring, the rebuild is NOT over. The Shattenkirk buyout doesn't change that. It doesn't restrict them. If they're a lottery team again this season is anyone really surprised? Analytical projections have them as a bottom team even with new additions. They have to grow and be patient. They also need to add players that help the team now and in the future i.e. Panarin and Trouba. They absolutely took positive steps this offseason and then removed a piece that was becoming more of a net negative. They haven't sold anyone recently for pennies on the dollar either. The Shattenkirk buyout, if anything, signals the opposite. Did I miss Kreider getting traded for a 2nd? So they might have to get rid of Strome or Namestnikov. That's been inevitable. I don't really see what the problem is.

 

I don't get what your plan is? To not have a plan? To just sit and wait for all your bad salaries to disappear? How does that really help?

 

So I’m on board with everything but signing panarin. That is sitting around doing nothing? Not signing panarin would allow them to wait for their bad contracts to expire. It would allow them to take advantage of other cap strapped teams. Panarin is a great player. He should be when he’s the second highest paid guy in the league. That isn’t a shrewd move or anything. The guy is going to have an almost impossible time living up to his cap hit ala nash.

 

Still complaining about panarin? The guy is making close to $12m for 7 years. For Christ sake people in all these threads still complain about hanks contract. Panarin will be talked about for 7 years. He’s going to be highest paid ranger in all likelyhood during those 7 years and the teams success will be directly tied to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I’m on board with everything but signing panarin. That is sitting around doing nothing? Not signing panarin would allow them to wait for their bad contracts to expire. It would allow them to take advantage of other cap strapped teams. Panarin is a great player. He should be when he’s the second highest paid guy in the league. That isn’t a shrewd move or anything. The guy is going to have an almost impossible time living up to his cap hit ala nash.

 

Still complaining about panarin? The guy is making close to $12m for 7 years. For Christ sake people in all these threads still complain about hanks contract. Panarin will be talked about for 7 years. He’s going to be highest paid ranger in all likelyhood during those 7 years and the teams success will be directly tied to him.

 

Taking advantage of cap-strapped teams would just delay the process even more. What contracts were they taking on in your scenario? We all talked about the Callahan contract for the longest time and that just got dealt for peanuts. Talk about pennies on the dollar. The goal is to get rid of bad players and contracts, not add more. Surround the young players with players that push them. You don't need anchors just to hoard more assets when you have plenty and more to come.

 

I also fail to see how Lundqvist and Panarin compare. Comparing a forward and a goalie is weird enough, but even if you compare injury history, the time they signed their contracts, etc there's nothing that puts the two in the same category. Panarin's contract by all accounts was market value. He's the second-highest-paid player in the league after being the 8th highest scorer since he came into the league just four seasons ago. He has no prevailing injury history, came from a league with very limited physical contact, and has since joining the NHL been on the receiving end of hits fewer and fewer times each season. He just signed a contract at 27 soon to be 28. I'm pretty confident that he'll maintain his elite status. He doesn't compare to Lundqvist who signed his mega-deal at 32 having already played 666 games (regular and postseason). There's a very significantly different type of wear. Panarin also doesn't compare to Nash or Gaborik. Gaborik was actually incredibly successful in NY but had an undeniable injury history. Nash was an absolute bull in his first season in NY until injury history pertaining to concussions caught up to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's a bit more justification to scrutinize signing a goaltender at the age of 32 for 8 years at $8.5M. Especially when that goaltender was already getting cortisone shots in his knees in his late 20s, had 666 games of mileage by that point, and played a game reliant on his reflexes which were bound to fade with age. He never should have gotten as many years as he did at that cap hit. He earned his money. Just not that many years of it.

 

I've already thoroughly explained how Panarin doesn't compare.

 

Your argument really seems to amount to more of: "I can lament about what I want." And by all means, do so. But also understand that people can say "told you so" now about Lundqvist because he has fallen off. I think most of us would have hoped for that not to happen. If Panarin falls off, by all means, fire away. Let those of us who supported the move thoroughly have it. But he hasn't played a single game with the Rangers yet and I'm pretty sure, by the essence of being a Ranger fan, I'd hope you'd rather him succeed than being able to say "told you so." I just think it's tiring trying to fight reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cap hit for Shattenkirk next summer still leaves New York with more than $16 million in projected room under the ceiling as per Greg Wyshynski of ESPN.

 

This is your "$16m in free space for 2020" lineup

 

Panarin - Zib - Buch

______ - _______ - Kakko

Chytil - Andersson - Kravtsov

_______ - Howden - _______

________

 

Skjei - Trouba

Staal - Deangelo

Hajek - Fox

_______

 

Lundqvist

__________

 

 

I have Deangelo at 2.6, Lemieux at 1.8, Georgiev at 2m

Team total is 72,197,299 with 9 forwards, 7 D and 2 G

Holes 2 or 3C depending on growth, 2LW, depth forward, 13th forward.

Also have to be open to the idea of ELC bonuses carrying over for next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is your "$16m in free space for 2020" lineup

 

Panarin - Zib - Buch

______ - _______ - Kakko

Chytil - Andersson - Kravtsov

_______ - Howden - _______

________

 

Skjei - Trouba

Staal - Deangelo

Hajek - Fox

_______

 

Lundqvist

__________

 

 

I have Deangelo at 2.6, Lemieux at 1.8, Georgiev at 2m

Team total is 72,197,299 with 9 forwards, 7 D and 2 G

Holes 2 or 3C depending on growth, 2LW, depth forward, 13th forward.

Also have to be open to the idea of ELC bonuses carrying over for next season.

 

Yeah about that. That's some team right there, not too many holes to fill at all. lmao.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They'll have more than $16M to work with. The cap increase this year was at the far low end at just $2 million more than last season's. Bettman can keep up his fight on escrow but they're gonna have to raise the cap more next season. Look at all the RFAs that are yet to be signed. There are a bunch of large contracts yet to be given out. There's gonna be a push to have more space to work with next season. You're most likely looking at more than a $2M raise, but for safety let's just say it goes up $2.5M from this year to $84M. That's $16.627M plus the rising cap of $2.5M gives you $19.127M. That initial $16M figure doesn't account for Kravtsov, but that just about evens out with the savings gotten from burying Smith.

 

$19M and change is plenty to fill what are mostly ancillary roles on short-term deals. All it means is that next summer they won't be big game hunting.

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...