Sod16

The thing about Kreider is that his speed is the source of too few goals, while his size and savvy in front of the net is where he gets most of them. He'll be fast for a long time to come, and when he loses a step, he'll be a pretty good player. It's too bad that we likely are going to lose him.

Everyone knows the Rangers' hand is being forced by the Wednesday deadline, so I can't see anyone trading for him even with retention when they know he will be available to sign on Thursday, probably for less. Yes, as mentioned above, Larry failed to mention that the big cap hit with a buyout will be in 20-21, the year when they can least afford it. As painful as whatever moves await us now, the more painful ones will take place a year from now. If Hank and Staal's contracts were just one year shorter, we'd be in a considerably better position.

I'll wait to be really pissed after they buy out shatty and he goes on to sign with someone for the same terms, 3.3 for two years, that would have applied after retention and a trade for a nominal asset.

The chances of buyouts of Shatty and/or Smith in the next few days are strong. If they haven't been able to deal Shatty up to now, they probably won't want to chance not being able to get rid of him after the buy out period ends. Buying out Smith doesn't really put them in a better net position than burying him in Hartford. Kreider appears doomed, to be shipped somewhere for a maddeningly small return before October 3rd. Signing him to a new contract means a $7m cap charge hitting the books during the worst cap year, 20-21, while Hank and Staal are still on the books. They would really have to make some unsavory moves at that point if they were to extend Kreider.

I assume its two-way. We cannot afford to sign anyone like this to a one-way. Note that John Gilmore got a one way in spite of little more impact than Vinnie at the NHL level.

I would think that if Pionk gets $3m per for two, someone would take Shattenkirk at $3.3 per for two, but everyone seems to take a pass.

At least the di Gueseppe (phon.) contract is two way, rendering it harmless capwise.

Oh what fun it is getting together and swapping terrible contracts!

The big problem with buy outs is that there is a big hit in the second year, which would be 20-21, which is the year in which we can least take cap hits, with Hank and whatever bad contracts we don't buy out (among Shatty, Smith, and Staal) still on the books. This year is cap purgatory. Next year is cap Dante's Inferno.

At least we can ditch him, including a trade to Ottawa, if we don't feel right about this after a year. That's an escape hatch that would have come in handy with a lot of our other big contracts.

Panarin should avoid going outside on rainy days due to the risk of getting stuck with an umbrella. Actually, radioactive material is Putin's current favorite. In all seriousness, I sympathize with Panarin but I hope he hushes up. This could create distractions we don't need. There's a reason that I can't recall any Russian NHL player speaking out against the regime over the past 20 years. He needs to keep his picture of Boris Yeltsin quietly concealed in his locker, as Jagr did in high school with his photo of Ronald Reagan.

If Panarin is going to say things that result in Putin "clearing some cap space" for us, I'd prefer that he wait until he's in year 5 or 6 of the contract and is starting to decline. I think Staal, Namestnikov, Smith and Shattenkirk should be good teammates and chime in in support of Panarin and against Putin.

BTW, I've never gotten straight, and I'm not sure if anyone has straight, what Staal's NMC situation is. Going back to the time he signed the contract there have been conflicting reports as to whether it is a full NMC for the duration or a full NMC for the first three years and a modified one thereafter.

Nice job. You get 31 decent NHL players. You can trade about half of them for more of what you really want. When the dust clears, you've got a good amount of cap space left for UFA's or one sided trades. You then make the playoffs in your first year and are deemed a miracle worker. It's good work if you can get it.

I think the overall cap implications of burying Smith in Hartford versus a buyout are about the same. The Hartford option would confine the problem to the next two years but places an inevitable malcontent with a team we are trying to revamp as a development program. A lot of posters are clinging to the idea that Shattenkirk can be moved with one-half retention and that Names can be moved without retention. If those deals were readily doable, they would have been done. Who would want and over paid Names for a year? If he has another year like last year, he's an overpaid cap liability. If he improves, he can walk at the end of the year. Not very attractive. I think we need to get our hands around the idea of Kreider starting this year without a new contract. It will not be a forgone conclusion that that means he is dealt at the deadline. We can only hope that deals not currently available become doable during the season and then we can address the Kreider situation.

Everyone agrees that Howden showed some very positive flashes early but was then ineffective for the bulk of the season. I don't understand why he was given so much ice time in all situations after proving ineffective for so long. At one point in April, I found myself dumbfounded as to why he was on the ice 6 on 5 down by a goal in the last minute when he had six goals on the season. Quinn was remarkably more lenient with Howden than any other young player, and I am not sure why.

They typically settle immediately before the hearing. Do they still get the second UFA period if they settle before the hearing?

Third line center who would love to come here and would sign a 1 year deal at $2m: Derek Brassard. He might just step up his game here.

Tkaczuk was the key. He was known as "The Human Trypod." That strong on his skates. Fairbairn had a great rookie year. The league catching on to his favorite move along the boards and mononucleosis slowed him down a bit after that. The Bulldog line would have lasted longer, but Dave Balon had leukemia and didn't know it. Had to retire and eventually died from it. In his second season, Tkaczuk finished 5th in the league in scoring and looked like he was going to have an HOF career. Excellent player, but it didn't work out that way.

When it comes to Shattenkirk, it doesn't much matter what we think, and it doesn't much matter what advanced stats say. It only matters what the rest of the league thinks, and if he could be moved with half retention, he would have been. That doesn't mean that that might not change as we approach the season. It should. When you look at what mediocre defensemen are going for, $3.3 per for two years for Shatty should certainly be doable and I think eventually will be. Obviously, moving him is more imperative with the signing of #10.

I'm just happy he's going to wear a real hockey number. Gaborik wore #10. And of course Earl Ingarfield, a quality center in the 60s.

Kreider or Fast. I don't buy this cerebral disqualifier stuff, and yes, this annual players' player award demonstrates real respect.

Actually, not fanciful!

He always dominates the Rangers, and then I look at his numbers and they are quite modest against the rest of the league.

Carolina needs to get out the old photo of Nelson Rockefeller giving the finger that Colorado faxed to Neil Smith after they matched the Joe Sakic offer.