[friedman] Rangers Are Thinking "More and More" About Keeping Kreider

Right. Radulov gave a hometown discount to...Dallas. LOL.

 

What did going on this tangent prove exactly? You still don't have a good example for a considerable discount for a UFA equivalent to $1M per season.

Proved that players DO give hometown discounts. Named them. You cited the examples as not good enough and that no income tax was the reason they signed where they did. I showed that hardly anyone signs anywhere due to income tax... You didn't care...

Radulov came from the KHL mid season. If I remember correctly, he resigned with them the following summer. At a lower than market value...m

Proved that players DO give hometown discounts. Named them. You cited the examples as not good enough and that no income tax was the reason they signed where they did. I showed that hardly anyone signs anywhere due to income tax... You didn't care...

You didn't prove anything. You just listed a bunch of players who once re-signed contracts most of whom were RFAs. I wasn't the only one to call you out on that. I'm also not the only person to ever cite income tax as a benefit for a team.

I'm sorry that your points were unconvincing.

Radulov came from the KHL mid season. If I remember correctly, he resigned with them the following summer. At a lower than market value...m

Radulov came over and played a full season for Montreal where he put up 54 points. He then got paid appropriately for that production and because of risk. Teams don't trust KHL production. Remember Vadim Shipachyov?

. Remember Vadim Shipachyov?

I do. Drafted him with my last pick in fantasy. That one....was a miss lol

Worst top 6 forward? How do? Panarin and Zib have him beat. There ARE NO top 6 forwards here save for them. Kreider isn't the #2 LW?

 

Not grasping what you're trying to say here. Is 7 mill really a lot for your third best forward?

in 4, 5, 6, 7 years... Then that's still a lottery team

You didn't prove anything. You just listed a bunch of players who once re-signed contracts most of whom were RFAs. I wasn't the only one to call you out on that. I'm also not the only person to ever cite income tax as a benefit for a team.

 

I'm sorry that your points were unconvincing.

 

 

 

Radulov came over and played a full season for Montreal where he put up 54 points. He then got paid appropriately for that production and because of risk. Teams don't trust KHL production. Remember Vadim Shipachyov?

The Rangers are prime examples of RFA's signing deals equal to UFA's.

Trouba was a RFA. Fuckin guy got 8 mill.

Brady Skjei. 5.25 for his 2nd contract...

People are saying DeAngelo can ask for 7 mill ( I disagree) after one good season. They say that because it seems RFAs are getting paid.

Why do you think people talk about buying out UFA years when signing RFAs? It definitely has more to do with a player being closer to UFA than it does with kids coming off the ELCs, but not always hence the 2.5 mill overpayment that is Skjei.

Im sorry you think no income tax is the sole reason for players taking team friendly contracts. If income tax were an issue at all, nobody would want to play in NY. If you're really going down the tax road, states with low or no income tax, tax the shit out of you on everything else. Why wouldn't flat tax rate states be more desirable? Like Colorado, PA, Mass, Mich, Carolina?

Taxes really are a non issue when it comes to athletes.

in 4, 5, 6, 7 years... Then that's still a lottery team

I don't think anyone is on board with going over 5 years. I seriously hope the Rangers aren't. Shoot for 4, agree to 5. You probably get 3 solid years out of him then transition him to 3rd line PP specialist and or try to trade him.

I don't see a fit for a top six role within the system, not within the next 3 years. I don't want to waste Panarin and Zibs prime years. Which IMO will be the next 2-3 years.

The Rangers are prime examples of RFA's signing deals equal to UFA's.

 

Trouba was a RFA. Fuckin guy got 8 mill.

Brady Skjei. 5.25 for his 2nd contract...

 

People are saying DeAngelo can ask for 7 mill ( I disagree) after one good season. They say that because it seems RFAs are getting paid.

 

Why do you think people talk about buying out UFA years when signing RFAs? It definitely has more to do with a player being closer to UFA than it does with kids coming off the ELCs, but not always hence the 2.5 mill overpayment that is Skjei.

Um. No. High RFA contracts are the byproduct of two reasons.

1. Risk minimization regarding future deals. Let?s use the Derek Stepan contract as an example. When Stepan and McDonagh were initially bridged, Stepan and McDonagh wanted matching deals. We all know the contract McDonagh got and how it was a bargain for a large portion of its length. Stepan instead got a bridge deal which was followed up by a $6.5M deal that ended up being too bloated. If you put Stepan on that initial $4.7M deal then he probably never gets dealt in 2017 because of his contract being prohibitive of other moves. Brady Skjei is just what happens when you take that risk to get a player for cheaper than a future anticipated cost and it doesn?t work. He was expected to be McDonagh?s successor. It didn?t work. Zibanejad is another example comparable to McDonagh. They could?ve bridged him but instead signed him to a $5.35M deal that is now an absolute bargain with two more years left. But ?the Rangers are prime examples of RFAs signing deals equal to UFAs.? Give me a break. The only one you?re right about is Trouba and he was a year from UFA. I can?t explain his bumblefuck deal but it?s more of an exception than the rule.

2. The game is now a young man?s game. Teams are now paying for what they deem to be the most productive years out of NHL players. The greybeards of the NHL aren?t as effective in today?s game. That however doesn?t mean that UFAs are getting paid less in lieu of RFAs. UFA contracts are higher than ever. For the players that didn?t get those big RFA deals but still ended up productive, UFA or even the prospect of UFA bumps up their salary that much. Players who are anticipating UFA or are UFAs are going to want the best deals they can get especially now with careers flaming out just several years after UFA. If you think buyouts are precluding teams from still handing out considerable contracts to UFAs you?re wildly wrong.

Im sorry you think no income tax is the sole reason for players taking team friendly contracts. If income tax were an issue at all, nobody would want to play in NY. If you're really going down the tax road, states with low or no income tax, tax the shit out of you on everything else. Why wouldn't flat tax rate states be more desirable? Like Colorado, PA, Mass, Mich, Carolina?

 

Taxes really are a non issue when it comes to athletes.

If you?re already playing in the state, which most of the examples mentioned were, why would you turn down a tax free $9.5M on a compatible team for an equivalent salary elsewhere after tax? It?s not a matter of taxes being an issue. It?s the matter of a lower salary being equivalent to a higher salary elsewhere because of taxation. For a team like the Rangers that doesn?t matter because they can piss money.

it doesn't matter who gives you 29 goals and 50 points. its could be a 4 foot midget. What Kreider gives you is very replaceable.

Um. No. High RFA contracts are the byproduct of two reasons.

 

1. Risk minimization regarding future deals. Let’s use the Derek Stepan contract as an example. When Stepan and McDonagh were initially bridged, Stepan and McDonagh wanted matching deals. We all know the contract McDonagh got and how it was a bargain for a large portion of its length. Stepan instead got a bridge deal which was followed up by a $6.5M deal that ended up being too bloated. If you put Stepan on that initial $4.7M deal then he probably never gets dealt in 2017 because of his contract being prohibitive of other moves. Brady Skjei is just what happens when you take that risk to get a player for cheaper than a future anticipated cost and it doesn’t work. He was expected to be McDonagh’s successor. It didn’t work. Zibanejad is another example comparable to McDonagh. They could’ve bridged him but instead signed him to a $5.35M deal that is now an absolute bargain with two more years left. But “the Rangers are prime examples of RFAs signing deals equal to UFAs.” Give me a break. The only one you’re right about is Trouba and he was a year from UFA. I can’t explain his bumblefuck deal but it’s more of an exception than the rule.

 

2. The game is now a young man’s game. Teams are now paying for what they deem to be the most productive years out of NHL players. The greybeards of the NHL aren’t as effective in today’s game. That however doesn’t mean that UFAs are getting paid less in lieu of RFAs. UFA contracts are higher than ever. For the players that didn’t get those big RFA deals but still ended up productive, UFA or even the prospect of UFA bumps up their salary that much. Players who are anticipating UFA or are UFAs are going to want the best deals they can get especially now with careers flaming out just several years after UFA. If you think buyouts are precluding teams from still handing out considerable contracts to UFAs you’re wildly wrong.

 

 

 

If you’re already playing in the state, which most of the examples mentioned were, why would you turn down a tax free $9.5M on a compatible team for an equivalent salary elsewhere after tax? It’s not a matter of taxes being an issue. It’s the matter of a lower salary being equivalent to a higher salary elsewhere because of taxation. For a team like the Rangers that doesn’t matter because they can piss money.

Not exactly sure how you come to the conclusion that Stepan would sign a long term deal at that price at the time of the bridge deal. In the end they bought UFA years on that one too. Thanks for adding another name to the list. I guess we can add Lundqvist to the list. Wanna throw more on there? Girardi? Staal? This team has a habit of extending their RFAs to deals that are higher in annual and in length than they should. I think the amount of cap space held in buy outs should be evidence enough to prove that. Along with the two cap destroyers that are still here in Lundqvist, Staal. There's also Shattenkirk.. But he came here on what was perceived as a team friendly deal, taking less money and less years than he could have gotten elsewhere (we all wish he did).

I'm sure there are examples for other teams where they over do it in these situations. I'm sorry I'm not providing them.

I don't recall saying RFAs are getting more than UFAs. Just that they are getting UFA money at younger ages. Hence the whole buying UFA years phrase I keep using. It's a gamble when they do so on younger players such as the Skjei situation. But that's exactly what I'm talking about. You get the younger players for term IF you add extra so they don't hit UFA on your time. Some teams do a better job than others. Somehow the Rangers overpay their mediocre guys, while Boston can get their top tier kids locked in at mediocre prices.. Buyouts aren't just for UFA screw ups. We are entering a time where teams are going to be buying out more and more players just to squeeze the talent (young and old) onto the roster.

That last paragraph makes no sense. It's not about taxes.. But it's about taxes....? The Rangers can piss money because of this? Huh?

I think Kreider would take a really team friendly deal.. Leaving money and years on the table. You don't. Can we leave it at that?

While playing for Rangers...

 

16-17 Krieder 28 G with PP1 time, Grabner 27 from the 3rd line with no PP time.

17-18 Kreider 16 G in 58 GP, Grabner 25 G in 59 games.

Just goes to show you the danger of cherry picking stats.

I'm still not sure why anyone thinks Krieder would take a team friendly deal when he saw what they've just paid 2 players coming in off the market.

Same reason we hoped Zucc would. Hope.

I gotta say...Kreider is making this a way, way harder decision than it was a month ago.

I'm still not sure why anyone thinks Krieder would take a team friendly deal when he saw what they've just paid 2 players coming in off the market.

Just wishful thinking and baseless optimism overcoming logic.

Athletes are human so....if I'm offered a job in Edmonton making significantly more money than my current job but love my life where I live and enjoy the area on top of the kick ass company I work for, I go to my boss and say, these guys offered me a boatload of money to relocate. Can you give me something to make me stay? I love it here but this money would be life changing. In turn the current company gives you a small bump, you continue loving life and edmonton finds a new schlep to try and poach.

It all comes down to priorities. In those shoes, seeing my future with an up and coming juggernaut with a leadership role for a cup contender in my prime/veteran years, I'm taking that and settling down.

I'm no where near that status (obviously) but doesnt it get to a point where a few million doesnt change your lifestyle. Proper investments can make up the difference.

Just wishful thinking and baseless optimism overcoming logic.

I don't know about baseless. Truly - have we EVER seen this version of Kreider? Kreider's knock forever has been his consistency. He'd flip-flop from unstoppable to invisible every 7 games.

The Kreider we're talking about is....not that. He's not gone more than a game without a point since Dec 8 against Vegas. He's got 30 points in his last 28 games. He's making shit happen. He's actually looking like the player we could swear up and down we were getting when we picked him.

We've seen hot streaks. We've not seen consistent heat from him, ever. This is new, and combined with our sudden ascent in the standings, I think it does complicate the decision - partly because he looks like a guy you want around (finding consistency, beloved in the clubhouse, big leader, etc), but also because when you're on fire like he is, the offers increase.

Athletes are human so....if I'm offered a job in Edmonton making significantly more money than my current job but love my life where I live and enjoy the area on top of the kick ass company I work for, I go to my boss and say, these guys offered me a boatload of money to relocate. Can you give me something to make me stay? I love it here but this money would be life changing. In turn the current company gives you a small bump, you continue loving life and edmonton finds a new schlep to try and poach.

 

It all comes down to priorities. In those shoes, seeing my future with an up and coming juggernaut with a leadership role for a cup contender in my prime/veteran years, I'm taking that and settling down.

 

I'm no where near that status (obviously) but doesnt it get to a point where a few million doesnt change your lifestyle. Proper investments can make up the difference.

I could see that being a thing, actually. Kreider is known to love it here. I can absolutely see a world where Gorton trades Kreider and tells him he'd love him back in July - come to me with your offers and we'll see what we can do.

This week is probably the single most important week we've had since the draft lottery - possibly even since the letter. We win all four games this week, and suddenly we're maybe 4 points back, and we might just start thinking about the playoffs being a thing with a game or two in hand. We have at least one soft game against SJ, but we've got a tough Boston team, a desperate Carolina team, and a very desperate Chicago team.

Not exactly sure how you come to the conclusion that Stepan would sign a long term deal at that price at the time of the bridge deal. In the end they bought UFA years on that one too. Thanks for adding another name to the list.

This was common knowledge. I like how you completely missed the point of how underpaying can lead to overpaying.

I guess we can add Lundqvist to the list. Wanna throw more on there? Girardi? Staal?

Marc Staal went from a 5 year $3.95M deal signed as an RFA to a 5 year deal at $5.7M when he was 28. He was going to be a UFA. How does he fit your argument? Dan Girardi went from a 4 year $3.325M deal signed as an RFA to a 6 year $5.5M when he was . How does he fit your argument? Lundqvist got a one year bridge at $4.25M after his ELC and then signed a 6 year deal for $6.875M. He had three consecutive top 3 Vezina nominations when he signed that deal. His $8.5M deal came when he was well old enough to be a UFA.

This team has a habit of extending their RFAs to deals that are higher in annual and in length than they should.

I've shown you're wrong in most cases here. Do you forget most of the birdge deals and Sather's reputation for being stingy? Do you understand how factors like age and arbitration play into how players sign deals?

I think the amount of cap space held in buy outs should be evidence enough to prove that.

None of those contracts were signed while they were RFAs as shown above. Wrong.

I'm sure there are examples for other teams where they over do it in these situations. I'm sorry I'm not providing them.

Because you don't have real ones.

I don't recall saying RFAs are getting more than UFAs. Just that they are getting UFA money at younger ages. Hence the whole buying UFA years phrase I keep using. It's a gamble when they do so on younger players such as the Skjei situation. But that's exactly what I'm talking about. You get the younger players for term IF you add extra so they don't hit UFA on your time.

Most of the players signing big RFA deals are only having around 2 years of UFA bought up if at all.

Some teams do a better job than others. Somehow the Rangers overpay their mediocre guys, while Boston can get their top tier kids locked in at mediocre prices.. Buyouts aren't just for UFA screw ups. We are entering a time where teams are going to be buying out more and more players just to squeeze the talent (young and old) onto the roster.

The Bruins signed Marchand to an extension while he was a 60 point player and not a 90 point player. Pastrnak had one 70 point season before they locked him in at $6.66M for 6 years. They just paid early and didn't get burnt. Zibanejad is the same situation.

That last paragraph makes no sense. It's not about taxes.. But it's about taxes....? The Rangers can piss money because of this? Huh?

It makes sense. You just don't understand it.

I think Kreider would take a really team friendly deal.. Leaving money and years on the table. You don't. Can we leave it at that?

We could.

I don't know about baseless. Truly - have we EVER seen this version of Kreider? Kreider's knock forever has been his consistency. He'd flip-flop from unstoppable to invisible every 7 games.

 

The Kreider we're talking about is....not that. He's not gone more than a game without a point since Dec 8 against Vegas. He's got 30 points in his last 28 games. He's making shit happen. He's actually looking like the player we could swear up and down we were getting when we picked him.

 

We've seen hot streaks. We've not seen consistent heat from him, ever. This is new, and combined with our sudden ascent in the standings, I think it does complicate the decision - partly because he looks like a guy you want around (finding consistency, beloved in the clubhouse, big leader, etc), but also because when you're on fire like he is, the offers increase.

Yes and this is all happening at 29, where we know most forwards peak, and I'm not interested in paying long term for a historically inconsistent player who's having a career year at 29 years old.

It's like we've seen a hundred versions of a movie where our favorite character dies, but we're willing to see it again because it's the Brad Pitt remake hoping this time it will be different...but he still dies at the end....

Kreider Zibanejad Buchnevich should all re-sign at their current salaries.

Thanks.

Kreider Zibanejad Buchnevich should all re-sign at their current salaries.

 

Thanks.

True. Problem solved. That was easy.

Just wishful thinking and baseless optimism overcoming logic.

The fact that he's still here and nothing is being leaked about an extension or any trade possibilities makes me think they are closing in on an extension which would HAVE TO make sense for the team. Only thing that makes sense is a team friendly deal.

Chris Kreider making it more and more difficult for the Rangers to deal him

The more Chris Kreider scores, and the bigger the goals he scores, the more difficult it is to imagine the Rangers dealing him away at the NHL’s Feb. 24 trade deadline, which now is just over a week away.

https://www.newsday.com/sports/columnists/colin-stephenson/rangers-chris-kreider-mika-zibanejad-1.41867337

All the hoopla and peeps can't see the forest for the trees.