[brooks] What is Tony DeAngelo Going to Cost?

The season he’s had has to earn him more than a 1-year deal.

You want to say he hasn’t done enough to earn a long-term deal, that’s fair.

But he’s surely earned 2 years of paydays.

A 2-year bridge deal is appropriate for him.

Arbitrators definitely lean towards one-year deals. Last year five of six cases resulted in one-year contracts and one in a two-year deal. That puts ADA in the driver's seat. If the Rangers are not ponying up something big, he'll get a pretty nice salary for a year and UFA status at age 25. Tough cap issues. Buy outs of Nos. 30, 18 and/or 42 offer slight relief but mostly kick the can down the road for a year. ADA is a priority over Strome, which bodes poorly for the latter.

Just curious, were any of those 2 year awards where the team elected to go 1 year instead?

The season he’s had has to earn him more than a 1-year deal.

You want to say he hasn’t done enough to earn a long-term deal, that’s fair.

But he’s surely earned 2 years of paydays.

 

A 2-year bridge deal is appropriate for him.

That's kinda where I'm leaning right now, 7.

I'm not really a huge advocate of his ability to defend. He's had a hell of a season offensively though. I think DeAngelo might be a good investment, but for a long term/high value deal, I think he's really going to have to learn how to defend a lot better. I wanna see another year of progress defensively....the offense is there...he's proven that. :thumbs:

Next year's deadline is the option I was thinking, Josh man! Not so much now.

 

 

 

We end up trading guys like Ryan Graves because guys like Tony D are here. Graves is currently in the running for a Norris Trophy and leads the league in +/- at (+43).

 

We did get Chris Bigras for him though...I think Bigras walks Gorton's dog now :rofl:

Sorry Ozzy, but I don't see the Ryan Graves argument. He was never really blocked. He didn't play well enough in the A to get a look, but obviously he turned out to be something they didn't think he was capable of becoming any longer. Big difference between trading someone who is blocked from playing versus underestimating a player's ceiling. You think Boston would have traded Lindgren if they knew what he was going to be now? Sometimes that's just how it works and players surprise. That happens so much less than players busting, and so I'm not in favor of trading a 24 y.o. 65 pt defenseman because we're afraid of another Ryan Graves situation. And DeAngelo is better than Graves ;)

I'm saying none of these things. Take him to arbitration because there are no real comparable deals to rely on and because I don't think you can afford to lock up the entire right side of the D long-term and not lose someone for it.

That can either be a good thing or a bad thing. If he is agreeable to 6.5 x 5 do you still take him to arbitration?

That's why I want a 1 year arb deal. Pete wants 2 years.

 

I just want to be as flexible as possible, for next year but in particular when the cap opens up for us the following season. I feel like with one more year of Tony, and one more year of seeing how the prospects develop, we'll have enough info the make the right call. I don't really see the need for a 2 year arb deal, but maybe I'm thinking about it in the wrong way.

I believe the 2 year deal is the best option for the Rangers; to me this is strictly about managing an asset.

If his production continues at the pace that it is, he will be a long term asset for the Rangers, giving them the enviable problem of having to decide which two of the three to keep from DeAngelo, Fox, & Trouba. Even if they feel that DeAngelo is the odd man out, someone will be willing to pay a price to sign him before the 2nd year on that deal expires for his negotiating rights.

Assuming that there is a noticeable drop off in his production, then they are only on the hook for 2 years and can flip his contract like they did with Spooner & Namestikov relatively painlessly.

Just makes sense to me.

Wouldn't you want 2 years, though?

 

I'd really want them to see what he does when he's not playing for a contract before committing to a long-term deal.

Yeah, I like this line of thinking. I hope the Rangers do this.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry Ozzy, but I don't see the Ryan Graves argument. He was never really blocked. He didn't play well enough in the A to get a look, but obviously he turned out to be something they didn't think he was capable of becoming any longer. Big difference between trading someone who is blocked from playing versus underestimating a player's ceiling. You think Boston would have traded Lindgren if they knew what he was going to be now? Sometimes that's just how it works and players surprise. That happens so much less than players busting, and so I'm not in favor of trading a 24 y.o. 65 pt defenseman because we're afraid of another Ryan Graves situation. And DeAngelo is better than Graves ;)

Ok man, I'll go with that. But I would think he's still gotta learn how to defend a lot better, before they make a big investment in him. He's a liability on defense, and that's his primary position. He's become a very capable offensive talent, which is great...but it's only half the battle in my book, RMC.

Also at 5' 11'' 180lbs, he's somewhat undersized in my estimation to go toe to toe with some of these bigger forwards on Cup contending teams....especially in the playoffs, or playoff type games.

Hence the reason to "test it out" with another season at arbitration price and term; I wanna see if he can or will hold up in a playoff game....on defense. I have my doubts. I'd also like to see if he can produce offensively in a playoff game...which again, remains to be seen....and I actually have doubts about that too.

That's why I'm very skiddish about signing a guy that I consider a "one-trick pony" for big bucks and long term.

If ADA can show that he's progressing defensively and can also maintain his offensive potency, then yeah...I think I'd be more comfortable with him back there. Another year, maybe 2 under arbitration guidelines may be just what the doctor ordered.

Ok man, I'll go with that. But I would think he's still gotta learn how to defend a lot better, before they make a big investment in him. He's a liability on defense, and that's his primary position. He's become a very capable offensive talent, which is great...but it's only half the battle in my book, RMC.

 

Also at 5' 11'' 180lbs, he's somewhat undersized in my estimation to go toe to toe with some of these bigger forwards on Cup contending teams....especially in the playoffs, or playoff type games.

 

Hence the reason to "test it out" with another season at arbitration price and term; I wanna see if he can or will hold up in a playoff game....on defense. I have my doubts. I'd also like to see if he can produce offensively in a playoff game...which again, remains to be seen....and I actually have doubts about that too.

 

That's why I'm very skiddish about signing a guy that I consider a "one-trick pony" for big bucks and long term.

 

If ADA can show that he's progressing defensively and can also maintain his offensive potency, then yeah...I think I'd be more comfortable with him back there. Another year, maybe 2 under arbitration guidelines may be just what the doctor ordered.

All perfectly reasonable and valid concerns. I realize I trust him more moving forward than most here. I think he has matured and proven plenty to make him part of the team long term, especially after eating his pride on the near minimum one year deal he was forced to take.

All perfectly reasonable and valid concerns. I realize I trust him more moving forward than most here. I think he has matured and proven plenty to make him part of the team long term, especially after eating his pride on the near minimum one year deal he was forced to take.

Oh I totally agree, RMC. The guy has done exactly what he was supposed to do; put up numbers and play the best he can. But to hit that "next level" of core player, to get those big bucks, I think he's gotta improve a lot in a few areas.

I'd love to see him become "that guy", since he's right here, and the guys have chemistry with him already. He's just got more to prove in my eyes.

But I hear ya 100%, man!! :thumbs:

I'm agree with Pete here on this one. We have a metric ass load of talent coming up in the system on defense, and DeAngelo is seriously a weak link defensively. Putting the puck in the net has not been an issue for this team. Keeping it out HAS!

 

I wanna see another year of ADA before I go spending a ton long term.

 

We have some cap issues for next season as well, so it may not be the opportune time to go making any big money deals.

Putting the puck in the net most certainly is an issue with a two line team. This kid is part of the teams current offensive output. 50+ points is nothing to dismiss.

They can not put the eggs before the basket, especially after a year like this. This kid is young, firey, and produced more offence from the blue line than anyone since Leetch. Why are we thinking towards the future, when the future may very well be here NOW?

On that note, as of now the best option is a 2 year deal. Can't see him getting more than 4- 4.5 per.

On pace for 65 points, and Rangers fans go:

 

- "Make him prove himself next year", after saying "Make him prove himself this year"

 

- "He's blocking defensemen in the pipeline"

 

- "Trade him"

Exactly. This kid is a part of this teams success this year. He's young. Why are we trying to trade him? No other team in the league thinks of trading a 50+ point breakout season youngster. Nobody.

This teams luck with prospects is dogshit. Go with the kid and stop trying to think of the future as a lock. The frikken kid is the real deal and seems to be a personality in the locker room.

The talent level here with this kid... I mean come on. It's game breaking. Trade that? Moped.

Next year's deadline is the option I was thinking, Josh man! Not so much now.

 

 

 

We end up trading guys like Ryan Graves because guys like Tony D are here. Graves is currently in the running for a Norris Trophy and leads the league in +/- at (+43).

 

We did get Chris Bigras for him though...I think Bigras walks Gorton's dog now :rofl:

???? One had nothing to do with the other. Graves fell out of favor and they seemed to make a trade, just to make a trade, thinking someone elses more experienced guy was more in line with what they needed.... Never got that move. Didn't know Graves was having that good of a season either. I knew he was an NHL regular for them. Didn't know he was THAT good though. Definitely a bad trade.... Had zero to do with DeAngelo.

All perfectly reasonable and valid concerns. I realize I trust him more moving forward than most here. I think he has matured and proven plenty to make him part of the team long term, especially after eating his pride on the near minimum one year deal he was forced to take.

Yeah, I'm with you on this one. I think he's a key cog and he's clearly matured.

My concerns are honestly rather straightforward; he's been great, but it's one season.

You can go arb w/him, which might be fair, but that causes some problems for the Rangers. In theory, it caps term at 2 years. Sure, we'll get him cheaper, but two years from now we should be looking at the most open window of all windows. Is that really a problem we want to invite? Further, you've worked so damn hard getting him to a point of maturity. Arb blows that process up.

You can go term w/him, but you can't overpay him. This is the first season he's scored over half a point a game. He's having a fucking amazing season, but he's done it for 67 games and that's just not a big enough sample size to give the dude a Brinks truck. We just got out of that mistake w/Skjei.

I think you play the recent RFA contract card and look to something like 2 years, 10m, split as 3.5 and 6.5. I believe that keeps him an RFA (he'd be 26 at point of expiry) and sets him up for either a QO of 7.1M or the long-term deal, while paying him appropriately and managing the risk.

Exactly. This kid is a part of this teams success this year. He's young. Why are we trying to trade him? No other team in the league thinks of trading a 50+ point breakout season youngster. Nobody.

 

This teams luck with prospects is dogshit. Go with the kid and stop trying to think of the future as a lock. The frikken kid is the real deal and seems to be a personality in the locker room.

 

The talent level here with this kid... I mean come on. It's game breaking. Trade that? Moped.

This is just the business side of the game, Dude man. We can agree to disagree on ADA's game, and that's fine. You have all the reason in the world to believe that's he's a game breaking player. He's having one hell of a season too, I agree 100%. I just see it a little different, that's all;

I see a talented guy who's had a great season this year, but lacks in many areas to which I, as a fan, would like to see him improve in before the team goes and commits a long term, big money deal to....that's all.

As far as trading him; That depends on a lot of factors...considering he goes to arbitration after this season:

How does he play next season?

Does he improve his defense?

Can he improve his being prone to turnovers?

How much does he demand?

How many years does he want?

Who is behind him in the pipeline?

What can we get in return for him if we do deal him?

Are we in the playoffs come the deadline?

Are we buyers?

Are we sellers?

If DeAngelo can make progress as a defenseman, I'm cool and the gang with keeping him and giving him the moon, Dude. Guys like Nicklas Lidstrom don't grow on trees, I get it :rofl:

Let's see what goes down before we go pulling another "Skjei". Hopefully we learned something from that! :thumbs:

4 years x 5. Why limit yourself to a 1 or 2 years when you run the risk of not being able to keep him if he puts up another 60 point season? If you are going to kick the can down the road, you kick it far enough down where you at least get a nice 3-4 year period of his prime, then let him go if he turns into a Karlsson and commands way more than an offensive only D is worth. By that point, Fox is at where ADA now development wise and probably just finishing his first year on whatever RFA contract we just signed him for. If we have a log jam at D 3 years from now, we should have a very tradeable ADA with a fairly reasonable rate to entice teams and fill a hole we might have elsewhere for a cup run.

I think we really downplay his importance on offense to the whole team and not just himself. I’m not saying he is Panarin, but he is a danger out there, makes other offensive players better, and commands enough attention to keep the opposition honest. To be honest, he is not great defensively but considering he’s playing with Staal, I think it’s a bit harsh. Staal is far worse and just whoever his replacement is going to be much better and improve ADA defensively too.

4 years x 5. Why limit yourself to a 1 or 2 years when you run the risk of not being able to keep him if he puts up another 60 point season? If you are going to kick the can down the road, you kick it far enough down where you at least get a nice 3-4 year period of his prime, then let him go if he turns into a Karlsson and commands way more than an offensive only D is worth. By that point, Fox is at where ADA now development wise and probably just finishing his first year on whatever RFA contract we just signed him for. If we have a log jam at D 3 years from now, we should have a very tradeable ADA with a fairly reasonable rate to entice teams and fill a hole we might have elsewhere for a cup run.

I think we really downplay his importance on offense to the whole team and not just himself. I’m not saying he is Panarin, but he is a danger out there, makes other offensive players better, and commands enough attention to keep the opposition honest. To be honest, he is not great defensively but considering he’s playing with Staal, I think it’s a bit harsh. Staal is far worse and just whoever his replacement is going to be much better and improve ADA defensively too.

Agreed with this.

4 years x 5. Why limit yourself to a 1 or 2 years when you run the risk of not being able to keep him if he puts up another 60 point season? If you are going to kick the can down the road, you kick it far enough down where you at least get a nice 3-4 year period of his prime, then let him go if he turns into a Karlsson and commands way more than an offensive only D is worth. By that point, Fox is at where ADA now development wise and probably just finishing his first year on whatever RFA contract we just signed him for. If we have a log jam at D 3 years from now, we should have a very tradeable ADA with a fairly reasonable rate to entice teams and fill a hole we might have elsewhere for a cup run.

I think we really downplay his importance on offense to the whole team and not just himself. I’m not saying he is Panarin, but he is a danger out there, makes other offensive players better, and commands enough attention to keep the opposition honest. To be honest, he is not great defensively but considering he’s playing with Staal, I think it’s a bit harsh. Staal is far worse and just whoever his replacement is going to be much better and improve ADA defensively too.

Why would he limit his earning potential to sign that and sacrifice a year of UFA at what is likely well below market value?

You might be able to do $5Mx3 and take him right to UFA. Maybe. Probably not. You're certainly not getting any UFA years from him at not UFA prices.

Darnell Nurse — 25 — just signed a two year deal worth $5.6 million per that will take him to UFA. He's on pace for 38 points this season on the Edmonton Oilers.

Better UFA-years comparables, all signed in the last two or three years:

Justin Faulk, 27, $6.5M AAV — career 0.44 P/GP player

Jacob Trouba, 25, $8M AAV — career 0.43 P/GP player

OEL, 26, $8.25M AAV — career 0.50 P/GP player

John Carlson, 28, $8M AAV — career 0.63 P/GP player

Cam Fowler, 25, $6.5M AAV — career 0.44 P/GP player

Tony DeAngelo is a career 0.53 P/GP player, for the record.

Find the middle ground. It ain't $5 million.

Why would he limit his earning potential to sign that and sacrifice a year of UFA at what is likely well below market value?

 

You might be able to do $5Mx3 and take him right to UFA. Maybe. Probably not. You're certainly not getting any UFA years from him at not UFA prices.

 

Darnell Nurse — 25 — just signed a two year deal worth $5.6 million per that will take him to UFA. He's on pace for 38 points this season on the Edmonton Oilers.

 

Better UFA-years comparables, all signed in the last two or three years:

 

Justin Faulk, 27, $6.5M AAV — career 0.44 P/GP player

Jacob Trouba, 25, $8M AAV — career 0.43 P/GP player

OEL, 26, $8.25M AAV — career 0.50 P/GP player

John Carlson, 28, $8M AAV — career 0.63 P/GP player

Cam Fowler, 25, $6.5M AAV — career 0.44 P/GP player

 

Tony DeAngelo is a career 0.53 P/GP player, for the record.

 

Find the middle ground. It ain't $5 million.

Not saying he doesn't deserve a significant raise. It's not all about offensive numbers. Playing defense is a factor as well. He IS a d-man after all.

Why would he limit his earning potential to sign that and sacrifice a year of UFA at what is likely well below market value?

 

You might be able to do $5Mx3 and take him right to UFA. Maybe. Probably not. You're certainly not getting any UFA years from him at not UFA prices.

 

Darnell Nurse ? 25 ? just signed a two year deal worth $5.6 million per that will take him to UFA. He's on pace for 38 points this season on the Edmonton Oilers.

 

Better UFA-years comparables, all signed in the last two or three years:

 

Justin Faulk, 27, $6.5M AAV ? career 0.44 P/GP player

Jacob Trouba, 25, $8M AAV ? career 0.43 P/GP player

OEL, 26, $8.25M AAV ? career 0.50 P/GP player

John Carlson, 28, $8M AAV ? career 0.63 P/GP player

Cam Fowler, 25, $6.5M AAV ? career 0.44 P/GP player

 

Tony DeAngelo is a career 0.53 P/GP player, for the record.

 

Find the middle ground. It ain't $5 million.

While I do not think that we should tie him up for 5 million X 5 years on what would be a serious value contract assuming he continued to produce at the current level; I do think that he would and should give that potential contract consideration. Right now, he has never made over a million dollars for playing hockey; that sounds like an enormous amount of money for most of us, but Sean Avery had a great article on how far the league minimum goes and how making high six figure salaries doesn't necessarily mean that you are keeping six figures worth of income.

https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/the-new-avery-rule

Making 25 million across 5 years may be a vast underpayment based on current production, but what is there to guarantee that current production based on 67 games? He could get injured, traded to a less favorable situation, just stop producing like that(it happens) and that kind of money is enough to set him up for life. Like I said, just playing devil's advocate here that I look at that as a fair offer at this stage. The closer he gets to free agency and continues to produce, the more that AAV goes up.

Why would he limit his earning potential to sign that and sacrifice a year of UFA at what is likely well below market value?

 

You might be able to do $5Mx3 and take him right to UFA. Maybe. Probably not. You're certainly not getting any UFA years from him at not UFA prices.

 

Darnell Nurse — 25 — just signed a two year deal worth $5.6 million per that will take him to UFA. He's on pace for 38 points this season on the Edmonton Oilers.

 

Better UFA-years comparables, all signed in the last two or three years:

 

Justin Faulk, 27, $6.5M AAV — career 0.44 P/GP player

Jacob Trouba, 25, $8M AAV — career 0.43 P/GP player

OEL, 26, $8.25M AAV — career 0.50 P/GP player

John Carlson, 28, $8M AAV — career 0.63 P/GP player

Cam Fowler, 25, $6.5M AAV — career 0.44 P/GP player

 

Tony DeAngelo is a career 0.53 P/GP player, for the record.

 

Find the middle ground. It ain't $5 million.

I’m going on the premise that this technically is ADAs first full nhl season, or partially second considering last years was cut short. I don’t remember exactly when the others signed exact deals but most of those had more prior time than just a prior “journeyman” on his third nhl organization and first real full season. Some of those examples are not comparable since they are very established nhl players. Carlsson, Trouba, OEL, Faulk all have a lot more time under their belt with their contracts.

Nurse is a pretty good comparison and Fowler. Nurse though I think is a different type of player and even he has more actual years of experience.

Maybe you’re right. Who knows. I just think ADA is in a bit of a weird situation. 3rd organization, is fairly one dimensional and on the smaller side, still is an RFA, doesn’t even make 1m yet, and wants to be here. I still think you can get him for the 5-6m range until the age of 28 or so and sell it to him 4 years in an organization on the upswing where he wants to be and take him right into a payday when he’s still under 30.

ADA is younger and his ceiling is much higher IMO. He scores 60pnts this season, he could theoretically get to 70 next season. Those kind of numbers are going to demand to get paid.

IF I was his agent, i'd suggest he go to arbitration this offseason an see how much he gets. if his performance on ice equals this season, he should demand no less than $7M per on a long term contract. Even if he sucks defensively, his kind of numbers are rare in the NHL