confirmed: Rangers Acquire Rights to Barclay Goodrow from TBL for a 2022 7th

Philly certainly overpaid Hayes under similar circumstances. I'm all for signing him at the right price, but you can't let your limited exclusive window create too much inertia and overpay.

Philly certainly overpaid Hayes under similar circumstances. I'm all for signing him at the right price, but you can't let your limited exclusive window create too much inertia and overpay.

 

I was thinking overpay might be 3 instead of 2.5. Anything mid 3s and higher is batshit fucking insane. The dude is a 25 point 4th liner who can slot up to the 3rd.

Even if Goodrow doesn't sign, they turned Howden and a 7th round pick into a fourth round pick, so that's kind of a win right there. I just worry The Rangers are going to really overpay for him, even though he's exactly what they need. He's a really solid third line player who's played on some really deep Tampa Bay teams, with good talent around him and solid line mates which helps. Plus, I think they might overpay just based on the "winning pedigree" mantra and all of that. If he winds up getting in the $4 million range, which I have a bad feeling he may, then not great.

I'm not worried about overpaying guys like this. If we learned anything this year, it's that you need to understand what it takes to win if you want to win. Look at all the highly skilled young teams that got wiped out. The only young team that made it through? Montreal, because of, no surprise, a fourth line full of grizzled cup veterans. These guys don't grow on trees and for an organization and a roster without a single player who has won a cup, let alone played in a final (minus a guy) plus a gaping hole in the bottom 6, pay the man. We have two great and cheap options for the top 6 in the mean time. Need to teach the kids how to win.

I'm not worried about overpaying guys like this. If we learned anything this year, it's that you need to understand what it takes to win if you want to win. Look at all the highly skilled young teams that got wiped out. The only young team that made it through? Montreal, because of, no surprise, a fourth line full of grizzled cup veterans. These guys don't grow on trees and for an organization and a roster without a single player who has won a cup, let alone played in a final (minus a guy) plus a gaping hole in the bottom 6, pay the man. We have two great and cheap options for the top 6 in the mean time. Need to teach the kids how to win.

 

Sure, and the Canadiens were paying those grizzled cup veterans a combined 3.25M or so - half of which was Eric Staal.

 

You can't give Barclay Goodrow money like he's a 2nd liner in a flat cap league. He's not. This is literally what Vancouver tried to do with Jay Beagle and Antoine Roussel and Brandon Sutter - it doesn't work.

Unprotected.

Seattle can take him, and have until July 28 to sign or he becomes UFA

 

I’m pretty sure they have until the 21st to sign him otherwise they can’t take him and have to select someone else from the Rangers. Otherwise he remains rangers property until his contract runs out on the 28th.

 

Could be wrong but I thought one of the TSN guys was saying they have and exclusive 72 hour window to work out a contract with UFAs if they want to select them

Sure, and the Canadiens were paying those grizzled cup veterans a combined 3.25M or so - half of which was Eric Staal.

 

You can't give Barclay Goodrow money like he's a 2nd liner in a flat cap league. He's not. This is literally what Vancouver tried to do with Jay Beagle and Antoine Roussel and Brandon Sutter - it doesn't work.

 

This is similar to the ryan strome argument, which is that who do we have to fill that position instead of the player in question? I don't think anyone would argue that it's a high price for his regular season production, but I also don't think one can look at the playoffs this year and think we can make any sort of progress without some of these guys on the roster, especially considering our bottom six is so bad. If there's a cheaper option, then yeah go for it, but I think reticence towards paying this guy is more reticence towards buying high on an asset we need, which sometimes is something you have to do. I think of it like construction in pandemic times - nobody is thrilled about buying lumber at the prices its been at, but what are you going to do? Not build anything?

I’m pretty sure they have until the 21st to sign him otherwise they can’t take him and have to select someone else from the Rangers. Otherwise he remains rangers property until his contract runs out on the 28th.

 

Could be wrong but I thought one of the TSN guys was saying they have and exclusive 72 hour window to work out a contract with UFAs if they want to select them

 

That's correct on all fronts. Seattle can negotiate with him and take him, and that would be the pick. The Rangers cannot negotiate with him further until the 22nd, as Seattle has an exclusive window up until the expansion draft because he is unprotected.

 

Which is all fine - we threw Tampa a 7th here.

I’m pretty sure they have until the 21st to sign him otherwise they can’t take him and have to select someone else from the Rangers. Otherwise he remains rangers property until his contract runs out on the 28th.

 

Could be wrong but I thought one of the TSN guys was saying they have and exclusive 72 hour window to work out a contract with UFAs if they want to select them

 

Right. Seattle can negotiate with any UFAs left unexposed and sign them prior to expansion. That would use up their selection for that player’s prior team. Seattle likely won’t waste any selections on UFAs they can’t sign unless they’re being paid by a team to do so.

That's correct on all fronts. Seattle can negotiate with him and take him, and that would be the pick. The Rangers cannot negotiate with him further until the 22nd, as Seattle has an exclusive window up until the expansion draft because he is unprotected.

 

Which is all fine - we threw Tampa a 7th here.

 

Probably also why the news "leaked" that the Rangers and Goodrow were already having positive contract talks, so that Seattle would be scared off.

This is similar to the ryan strome argument, which is that who do we have to fill that position instead of the player in question? I don't think anyone would argue that it's a high price for his regular season production, but I also don't think one can look at the playoffs this year and think we can make any sort of progress without some of these guys on the roster, especially considering our bottom six is so bad. If there's a cheaper option, then yeah go for it, but I think reticence towards paying this guy is more reticence towards buying high on an asset we need, which sometimes is something you have to do. I think of it like construction in pandemic times - nobody is thrilled about buying lumber at the prices its been at, but what are you going to do? Not build anything?

 

Bide your time. I'm in this exact spot in life right now, and we've basically said "fuck it, wait for the chaos to clear out". The Rangers can do that too. Goodrow isn't the only big defensive forward with leadership skills and Cup experience who can play that role; a ton of them are coming due, they're generally good commodities on the deadline, and they're usually not making 4m. If you can't get it in free agency, get it at the TDL when the prices might be better.

 

Either way - unless you think Goodrow has that Kreider net-front gene in him and you're absolutely fucking sure of it, you cannot give him 4M a season in a flat cap world. Coleman? I think twice about that - he wins faceoffs, he's a better scorer - that's different.

[/b]

 

Bide your time. I'm in this exact spot in life right now, and we've basically said "fuck it, wait for the chaos to clear out". The Rangers can do that too. Goodrow isn't the only big defensive forward with leadership skills and Cup experience who can play that role; a ton of them are coming due, they're generally good commodities on the deadline, and they're usually not making 4m. If you can't get it in free agency, get it at the TDL when the prices might be better.

 

Either way - unless you think Goodrow has that Kreider net-front gene in him and you're absolutely fucking sure of it, you cannot give him 4M a season in a flat cap world. Coleman? I think twice about that - he wins faceoffs, he's a better scorer - that's different.

 

fair enough

From Vince's story:

 

It sounds like it's going to take a five- or six-year deal, but the average annual value guesses are all over the place. I can tell you it won't be in the $2 million-to-$3 million range some fans are hoping for. My sense is $4 million per season, give or take, which is a significant contract for a bottom-six player.

 

The Rangers have the cap space — just under $25 million to begin the summer — but they also have a lot of players who will need new deals in the next couple years. Their willingness to pay Goodrow only reinforces the notion that pending RFA Pavel Buchnevich is at risk if they end up pulling off a deal for Jack Eichel or another high-priced star.

 

One last thing on the 6-foot-2, 203-pounder: I've been told the Rangers are ready and willing to use him at center, if needed. That will depend on how the rest of the summer goes and whether they bring in other middlemen. But the Lightning used in him in important face-off situations, as he took 324 draws in the regular season and won 50% of them. That's a better percentage than any of the Rangers centers had in 2021.

 

https://www.lohud.com/story/sports/nhl/rangers/2021/07/18/what-make-barclay-goodrow-and-other-ny-rangers-decisions/8007405002/

Yeah, I think rmc had shared that earlier. It's too much money. He's a really good player, but $4 million (really, anything north of like $3.5 million) is just an incredible overpayment for a guy with his offensive limitations. He makes his money in the playoffs, no doubt, but when you pay role players like this, you pretty quickly eat up valuable cap room (in a flat cap, no less) that can cost you more important players down the line. Remember — a six-year deal makes his contract a significant factor in the negotiations for Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Lafreniere, Miller, Jones, Shesterkin, Lundkvist, and even guys who we think will be here but aren't yet in Schneider, Robertson, and Cuylle.

Yeah, I think rmc had shared that earlier. It's too much money. He's a really good player, but $4 million (really, anything north of like $3.5 million) is just an incredible overpayment for a guy with his offensive limitations. He makes his money in the playoffs, no doubt, but when you pay role players like this, you pretty quickly eat up valuable cap room (in a flat cap, no less) that can cost you more important players down the line. Remember — a six-year deal makes his contract a significant factor in the negotiations for Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Lafreniere, Miller, Jones, Shesterkin, Lundkvist, and even guys who we think will be here but aren't yet in Schneider, Robertson, and Cuylle.

 

I know it's only a 7th round pick, but do you think maybe Drury knows he could get Goodrow to sign a more cost friendly deal? I'm kinda thinking he wouldn't have dealt for him, if he didn't think he could sign him.

I'm marginally less miffed on a bigger deal (>3 or so) if he's going to be the 3c on a line with like...Kreider and Barron. That's less egregious and at least ends up providing a clear vision for a real pain in the ass of a line.

I know it's only a 7th round pick, but do you think maybe Drury knows he could get Goodrow to sign a more cost friendly deal? I'm kinda thinking he wouldn't have dealt for him, if he didn't think he could sign him.

 

Multiple sources have noted that Goodrow had interest signing here, which is why Drury did the deal for the negotiations window. This just lets him formally negotiate (without tampering), but I doubt New York is getting a discount just because.

I'm marginally less miffed on a bigger deal (>3 or so) if he's going to be the 3c on a line with like...Kreider and Barron. That's less egregious and at least ends up providing a clear vision for a real pain in the ass of a line.

 

I actually think think 4m cap hit isn't all that terrible for a proper 3rd line player with a defined role. If the Rangers are going to fill these roles with more than scrub level, AHL tweeners and rookies then there's a price to pay. Plus, like you mentioned, if they're using him as a center (which the sharks did) then a pay increase is even more manageable.

 

It's Kreider's 6.5 on the 3rd line that kills you in the long run, not Goodrow. But I expect Kreider to be moved in a few years.

 

I'd also expect a something like a 2m signing for a 4th liner this summer. Again, I can imagine people will be pissed about that, but if you want actual role players, not guys you're taking a flyer on, then you have to pay up. We've seen what taking a flyer on fringe NHLers gets you over the last 4 years, and it's not much. So if you want to pay peanuts, you get what you pay for.

I'm not worried about overpaying guys like this. If we learned anything this year, it's that you need to understand what it takes to win if you want to win. Look at all the highly skilled young teams that got wiped out. The only young team that made it through? Montreal, because of, no surprise, a fourth line full of grizzled cup veterans. These guys don't grow on trees and for an organization and a roster without a single player who has won a cup, let alone played in a final (minus a guy) plus a gaping hole in the bottom 6, pay the man. We have two great and cheap options for the top 6 in the mean time. Need to teach the kids how to win.

 

but Montreal didnt win. and their goalie stood on his head throughout the playoffs.

Multiple sources have noted that Goodrow had interest signing here, which is why Drury did the deal for the negotiations window. This just lets him formally negotiate (without tampering), but I doubt New York is getting a discount just because.

 

Gotcha...Thanks boss! :thumbs:

 

Yeah he's not gonna take a discount, especially after winning a Cup. ...would be awesome to get him though! The Price has to be right, Bob Barker!!

I actually think think 4m cap hit isn't all that terrible for a proper 3rd line player with a defined role. If the Rangers are going to fill these roles with more than scrub level, AHL tweeners and rookies then there's a price to pay. Plus, like you mentioned, if they're using him as a center (which the sharks did) then a pay increase is even more manageable.

 

It's Kreider's 6.5 on the 3rd line that kills you in the long run, not Goodrow. But I expect Kreider to be moved in a few years.

 

I'd also expect a something like a 2m signing for a 4th liner this summer. Again, I can imagine people will be pissed about that, but if you want actual role players, not guys you're taking a flyer on, then you have to pay up. We've seen what taking a flyer on fringe NHLers gets you over the last 4 years, and it's not much. So if you want to pay peanuts, you get what you pay for.

 

I think you're looking at a three or four season runway for Kreider here; it's only a matter of time before some of the draftees figure it out enough. Lafreniere's on the doorstep, I think Barron is another "played center, might be a better wing" guy, Cuylle, probably someone from this draft too, maybe a piece or two we trade for....

 

Panarin and Lafreniere aren't going anywhere. He knows his clock is ticking already.

I'm really looking forward to seeing Cuylle at the NHL level, G!

 

...as far as Goodrow, I'm thinking somewhere around $3 million/4 years...maybe 5??? I'm not sure that hurts too much, considering we finally have Girardi, and Shatty FINALLY coming off the buyout/dead cap in 2 years. That accounts for about $2.5 million of it.

 

The question is what does Goodrow end up commanding?

 

"Mr. Drury, please report to the cashier's window....and bring your checkbook!"

Seravelli tweeting its looking like theyre close with $3.6 x 6y

Link:

Love the term. Not really loving the number. That's probably 250K too high at a minimum.

 

As I said earlier, he'd best be good for 3c minutes here, else this is going to be a rough one.