Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 219

Thread: Rangers Buyout Kevin Shattenkirk

  1. #41
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    Sod16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    779
    Rep Power
    23
    Staal will be a prime candidate for a buyout next year. It will take most of his contract off the books for 20-21, when we most need the space, and move it to the following season, when we will be better able to take it with Hank off the books. The fact that we couldn't move Shatty with 50% retention does not bode well for getting rid of Namesnikov. I would think that Strome, at 3.1 and coming off a good season, would be moveable without retention. But all of these dumps are tougher than expected!

    In addition to cap concerns, the expansion draft is militating against an extension for Kreider. With an NMC, he would have to be protected, and that will mean not protecting some good young player who otherwise would be protected.

  2. #42
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Kevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    3,833
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Sod16 View Post
    Staal will be a prime candidate for a buyout next year. It will take most of his contract off the books for 20-21, when we most need the space, and move it to the following season, when we will be better able to take it with Hank off the books. The fact that we couldn't move Shatty with 50% retention does not bode well for getting rid of Namesnikov. I would think that Strome, at 3.1 and coming off a good season, would be moveable without retention. But all of these dumps are tougher than expected!

    In addition to cap concerns, the expansion draft is militating against an extension for Kreider. With an NMC, he would have to be protected, and that will mean not protecting some good young player who otherwise would be protected.
    I can see him waiving his NMC to go play for Calgary at the deadline depending where we are. 1/2 retained is still better than the buyout and maybe we'll get a 3rd rounder back.

  3. #43
    day-to-day Midget Division
    fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Too far from MSG
    Posts
    4,827
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    No it’s not. It’s wasted cap space and it hurts the team. To what degree will be determined
    It's worse to keep young defenders in the minors, and a business decision. Shattenkirk doesn't fit with roster construction of the team, keeping him around is worse than the cap hit.
    "We're all f*cked. It helps to remember that." - George Carlin

    "How many Cups you've got?" - Esa Tikkanen

    "Hatred can keep you warm when you run out of liquor" - Ray Ratto, Dan Patrick show 1/20/2017

  4. #44
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,639
    Rep Power
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by fletch View Post
    It's worse to keep young defenders in the minors, and a business decision. Shattenkirk doesn't fit with roster construction of the team, keeping him around is worse than the cap hit.
    Maybe. Being in the position they are in to have to buyout shattenkirk should have never happened being where they are as a team. Impatience causes bad decisions and has cost this franchise since the beginning of time. The decision on July 1st 2019 will be felt for years to come. Kreiders up next.

  5. #45
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Gravesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,810
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    Maybe. Being in the position they are in to have to buyout shattenkirk should have never happened being where they are as a team. Impatience causes bad decisions and has cost this franchise since the beginning of time. The decision on July 1st 2019 will be felt for years to come. Kreiders up next.
    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.

  6. #46
    Member Mite Division MuddyInTheMiddle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    36
    Rep Power
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    Maybe. Being in the position they are in to have to buyout shattenkirk should have never happened being where they are as a team. Impatience causes bad decisions and has cost this franchise since the beginning of time. The decision on July 1st 2019 will be felt for years to come. Kreiders up next.
    Sorry I don't buy the rhetoric; Panarin(11.5 million) + Trouba(8 million) > Shattenkirk(6.5 million) + Kreider(7 million).

  7. #47
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    77,922
    Rep Power
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by rangers02 View Post
    Players like Staal and Shatty don't have the skills they had in their Prime and when they do talk about these "intangibles", it reinforces the narrative that they aren't able to maintain that they aren't the players they were.
    Whatever you said here that makes sense is inaccurate but none of it really makes sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by rangers02 View Post
    And the buyout means we won't be able to trade Kreider since he has one more year left on his UFA Contract and will be stuck about whether to trade or extend him before July 1st of next year

    https://www.newsday.com/sports/hocke...out-1.34507374
    We can still, and should, trade Kreider. One has nothing to do with the other.

  8. #48
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    77,922
    Rep Power
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugg View Post
    Disagree. Because Sam and Joe said it night after night doesn't make it so. He is positionally is okay, but he isn't physical, he doesn't make a good breakout pass nor carry the puck and he gives you nothing offensively. These young guys are all going to make mistakes but they'd be hard-pressed to be any less impactful that Staal.When you bring up "intangibles" like leadership you are saying he isn't much of a player.

    Having said that, now makes no sense to buy him out at least until next summer.
    I don't care who says it, it's a fact. Young teams need leadership and Staal provides it. You act like Quinn was doing Staal any favors pairing him with Pionk and Shattenkirk... And yet Staal was still decent playing with probably the two weakest defensive players he's ever partnered with.

  9. #49
    Formerly Dru23 BSBH Prospect
    NYR2711's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    West Babylon
    Posts
    13,826
    Rep Power
    86
    I know we had to buy out either Shatty or Smith, but I kind of wish it was Smith only because next years hit is gonna hurt. I feel if Shatty could have played better this year, he would have been movable at the deadline. No one is taking Smith unless he is packaged with someone else. Smith is an absolute waste here. If anything, would rather have seen Shatty bought out next year to save some cap space.

  10. #50
    Formerly Dru23 BSBH Prospect
    NYR2711's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    West Babylon
    Posts
    13,826
    Rep Power
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugg View Post
    Disagree. Because Sam and Joe said it night after night doesn't make it so. He is positionally is okay, but he isn't physical, he doesn't make a good breakout pass nor carry the puck and he gives you nothing offensively. These young guys are all going to make mistakes but they'd be hard-pressed to be any less impactful that Staal.When you bring up "intangibles" like leadership you are saying he isn't much of a player.

    Having said that, now makes no sense to buy him out at least until next summer.
    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, letís not make that mistake again.

  11. #51
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,639
    Rep Power
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Gravesy View Post
    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.

  12. #52
    Shawcappella BSBH Prospect
    Drew a Penalty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    13,988
    Rep Power
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by NYR2711 View Post
    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.

  13. #53
    Formerly Dru23 BSBH Prospect
    NYR2711's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    West Babylon
    Posts
    13,826
    Rep Power
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew a Penalty View Post
    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.

  14. #54
    Shawcappella BSBH Prospect
    Drew a Penalty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    13,988
    Rep Power
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    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.

  15. #55
    Shawcappella BSBH Prospect
    Drew a Penalty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    13,988
    Rep Power
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by NYR2711 View Post
    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.

  16. #56
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,639
    Rep Power
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew a Penalty View Post
    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.

  17. #57
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Bugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,315
    Rep Power
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    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.

  18. #58
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Gravesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,810
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    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.

  19. #59
    Senior Member BSBH Prospect
    ThirtyONE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    11,857
    Rep Power
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    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.
    GORTON 2020

  20. #60
    Shawcappella BSBH Prospect
    Drew a Penalty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    13,988
    Rep Power
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    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?

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •