confirmed: Rangers Re-Sign F Vladislav Namestnikov to 2-Year/$8M Extension; $4M AAV

[Phil]

No, it isn't. If you're honestly rebuilding?and the Rangers have given us no reason to disbelieve this?then development is what matters most. They're not going to scoff at wins, but I would imagine management is more than OK with not earning many of them for a while.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Pete]

Quinn understands what he's here for and why he was hired, even if fans don't.

[Respecttheblue]

I like this deal. I'm ok with Namesnikov. That term and dollar amount is not a problem by any means and I think this guy has some good skill in him. He fits the bill for young and can actually play center. Again, I know this year is going to be the first year of a rebuild which amounts to a lot of growing pains.

 

No worries....

 

I just don't wanna see the Rangers start clogging up the roster with experienced dog shit....or just to bring in "experience". If anything, I hope they bring in an enforcer to keep the douche-baggery at a minimum. I don't want teams taking shots at our young guys while their still growing and learning.

 

Once these kids have matured and have some road miles under them.....THEN we can peel off some of the dogs.

 

Sounds like a fair strategy to me.

[Respecttheblue]

Phil, the two year deal won't preclude the rangers from signing him to a new contract in a year or year and a half, if he performs and fits well. Also, if he impresses and we are sellers, he becomes more than a rental. He is a versatile C and plays 200'. The acquiring team knows he'll be willing to reup since he would have been on 3 teams in less than 2 years. We could easily turn Names into a 1st + if he performs.

 

Late addition: With the new contract, Names is worth more now than he was yesterday. Both net worth and around the NHL.

 

Good enough.

 

We made the big trade ? JTMiller ? we better kick thetyresthoroughly, or else!

[Respecttheblue]

No one said anything about allowing players to be lazy. Its not about accepting losing, its about demanding hard work and improvement. The goal is to have the players buy in and get better every game, win or lose.

 

 

This [emoji817] percent

[Ozzy]

Sounds like a fair strategy to me.

 

You see where I'm coming from right Blue?

 

Guys always seem to play a little "bigger" when there's some toughness around them. It kinda rubs off on the team, and I believe if these young guys grow up in that type of environment it's going to catch on that they can play tough, and be very effective in doing so. I think intimidation has it's place in the NHL, even though no one on a broadcast seems to want to admit it.

 

I'm hoping we can protect our guys while they're growing into themselves. By the time they're ready to really take flight they should be fully mature and know how to handle themselves.

[Respecttheblue]

Enough of AV, it was past time he went. He's gone; it's over.

 

Back to Namestnikov.

 

While his end of season play here was disappointing, I hope this team can put some scoring around him.

Pity we don't have a lot of finishers to go around.

 

On that note, I hope some players can get out of the horrible habit of making "one more pass" and relinquishing the element of surprise on the goalie. Maybe they'd finish more and surprise themselves.

 

-- dives of varying depths on Namestnikov can be found here (interesting reading):

 

https://www.rawcharge.com/2017/7/27/16016266/top-25-under-25-4-you-dont-appreciate-vladislav-namestnikov-enough-yes-you-specifically-analytics

 

and here:

 

https://www.rawcharge.com/2018/2/26/17055740/vladislav-namestnikov-a-remembrence

 

Star players like Nikita Kucherov and Ondrej Palat achieve much better results with Namestnikov than without him. In both cases, the shot generation is similar but the shot suppression is much better with Vladdy on their line. If we’re trying to tie all of the information in this post together to understand those results, we might surmise that Vladdy’s skill in exiting the defensive zone and in transition helps boost the shot suppression numbers.

 

That thought process might give us an indication of why the Kucherov, Namestnikov, Steven Stamkos line was so successful. Perhaps a player who is happy to bear the burden of defensive zone work and starting the transition game without needing the puck in the offensive zone is an ideal fit with two offensive dynamos like Stamkos and Kucherov.

https://www.rawcharge.com/2017/7/27/16016266/top-25-under-25-4-you-dont-appreciate-vladislav-namestnikov-enough-yes-you-specifically-analytics

 

You see where I'm coming from right Blue?

 

Guys always seem to play a little "bigger" when there's some toughness around them. It kinda rubs off on the team, and I believe if these young guys grow up in that type of environment it's going to catch on that they can play tough, and be very effective in doing so. I think intimidation has it's place in the NHL, even though no one on a broadcast seems to want to admit it.

 

I'm hoping we can protect our guys while they're growing into themselves. By the time they're ready to really take flight they should be fully mature and know how to handle themselves.

 

On that score, yes I agree. I think it helps some of them play a little braver and bigger.

And I also think up and down the lineup we need players who inherently have lionhearts not kitty kat hearts, and who don't back away from being first to the puck, or whatever it takes.

 

On that score, even though he does sometimes "look like his puppy died," Namestnikov, may not be as meek as some folks think:

 

TBL's Rawcharge site's epitaph for Namestnikov said,

 

For a player that is listed at a generous 6’0” and 170 lbs., he takes no quarter from anyone on the ice. If there is a scrum on the ice, most likely he’ll be involved in it and he’s not afraid to drop the gloves from time to time (hockey fights has him competing in 6 career fights during his NHL tenure).

https://www.rawcharge.com/2018/2/26/17055740/vladislav-namestnikov-a-remembrence

 

 

 

I hope they give Namestnikov the best chance possible here, but our lack of "finishers" does not bode well unless others up their scoring game.

 

As for the role you were talking about, someone to keep the league's dirty guys more honest, I was hoping we'd get Matt Martin, and revisiting Cody McLeod is not at all what I expected, but thsoe are the cards we are dealt.

[Ozzy]

I like this kid, Blue. He has talent...he seems to have some heart too....let's see what he's got this year. I'm very curious to see a lot of these guys this season.

[paddynyc]

I like this kid, Blue. He has talent...he seems to have some heart too....let's see what he's got this year. I'm very curious to see a lot of these guys this season.

 

I agree Ozzy he had a few moments last year, but really tough to tell his true worth. It must've been tough being traded for the first time and then leaving a top tier playoff team to a team not going anywhere, so his psyche must have been shot.

[Phil]

Namestnikov is, in a lot of ways, the exact kind of player you want at his price tag on a rebuilding team entering year one. He's a work ethic prototype, even if the points won't accumulate the way they did running shotgun to Kucherov and Stamkos. And he's ultimately an asset to be flipped, either this year or next before he's UFA eligible. In the interim he can give you great effort, if not good results, which can hopefully have a spillover effect on the young pups.

[Respecttheblue]

Namestnikov is, in a lot of ways, the exact kind of player you want at his price tag on a rebuilding team entering year one. He's a work ethic prototype, even if the points won't accumulate the way they did running shotgun to Kucherov and Stamkos. And he's ultimately an asset to be flipped, either this year or next before he's UFA eligible. In the interim he can give you great effort, if not good results, which can hopefully have a spillover effect on the young pups.

 

I think your point is a very good one, if not a little sad one.

 

Full disclosure FWIW — assuming it was mandatory that we had to trade Miller (and I was not "down with that" idea), I was nevertheless immediately pleased with what we got in the trade, based on what I''d seen of Namestnikov previously, which was not much. To this day I am wondering how much was Miller traded because of AV's ass-hattery or because of Miller's ass-hattery? And how much does the ass-hattery matter considering how well Miller contributed in the playoffs on the Tampa top line? But that's grit and tenacity lost and we have to move on.

 

But after his initial goal scoring in the first game or two, it seemed like Namestnikov fell off a cliff; a really disappointing finish to the season compared with Spooner.

 

But I did my little bit of research and I reopened my mind to the possibility that we are getting a player with some good upside. I just hope the players around him are talented enough and flourish, too.

 

Your point about him becoming an asset to be flipped. I'm sure it's true, I just hate-hate-hate looking at things that sanguinely before we've even had dance around the ballroom. But it is what it is and, of course, you are right, that it is most likely the reality down the road apiece.

 

I guess I have to remember to get unsentimental and remember hockey is a business and I better beware of getting attached to some players, even if I wind up taking a liking to them.

 

That said, I read your article on Blueshirt Banter I think, in which you opined that NHL's free agency system is broken. The article was more centered on something else, and that seemed to be a side-theme, but I hope you will do a soup-to-nuts piece here on why you think it's broken and what can be done to fix it. I can't put my finger on the provisions of the NHL byelaws that are "fekking it up" specifically, but when I see so many players of youthful value becoming RFAs, and so few of them ever actually moving, I get cranky cranky cranky. It's like that sliver of hope is a mirage.

[Phil]

I think your point is a very good one, if not a little sad one.

 

Full disclosure FWIW ? assuming it was mandatory that we had to trade Miller (and I was not "down with that" idea), I was nevertheless immediately pleased with what we got in the trade, based on what I''d seen of Namestnikov previously, which was not much. To this day I am wondering how much was Miller traded because of AV's ass-hattery or because of Miller's ass-hattery? And how much does the ass-hattery matter considering how well Miller contributed in the playoffs on the Tampa top line? But that's grit and tenacity lost and we have to move on.

 

But after his initial goal scoring in the first game or two, it seemed like Namestnikov fell off a cliff; a really disappointing finish to the season compared with Spooner.

 

But I did my little bit of research and I reopened my mind to the possibility that we are getting a player with some good upside. I just hope the players around him are talented enough and flourish, too.

 

Your point about him becoming an asset to be flipped. I'm sure it's true, I just hate-hate-hate looking at things that sanguinely before we've even had dance around the ballroom. But it is what it is and, of course, you are right, that it is most likely the reality down the road apiece.

 

I guess I have to remember to get unsentimental and remember hockey is a business and I better beware of getting attached to some players, even if I wind up taking a liking to them.

 

That said, I read your article on Blueshirt Banter I think, in which you opined that NHL's free agency system is broken. The article was more centered on something else, and that seemed to be a side-theme, but I hope you will do a soup-to-nuts piece here on why you think it's broken and what can be done to fix it. I can't put my finger on the provisions of the NHL byelaws that are "fekking it up" specifically, but when I see so many players of youthful value becoming RFAs, and so few of them ever actually moving, I get cranky cranky cranky. It's like that sliver of hope is a mirage.

 

That was Tom's article. I spoke to it in my last piece, though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Respecttheblue]

I like this kid, Blue. He has talent...he seems to have some heart too....let's see what he's got this year. I'm very curious to see a lot of these guys this season.

 

Yes Oz. The talent is there.

 

Do we have -- or can we put the right people around him? ... becomes the question for me. I'm not sure we have the players to bring out the best in him on a second line, say. And I'd hate to convert him to RW (although he does shoot lefty, which I like on the RW). Kreider seems like a natch, but Kreider is probably more likely to see time with Zibs and Buch.

 

This kid does best with strong finishers on his line, it seems. But what we have left — Vesey, Hayes, Fast, Zuccarello (did I forget anyone?) -- they all have to become better shoot-first players to make it work, or we'll be seeing passing "till the cows come home;" till the ice runs out; and till the goalie is completely unsurprised; and the angle too oblique for shyte to work. (I leave Spooner off that list as he's a passing center, IMO and not my first choice for Names line, but who knows, maybe that works?) (I also leave Chytil and Andersson off that list as they are centers and I didn't think they'd be a good first choice, but who knows maybe Chytil?)

 

But that procrastination, extra pass, squandering of the element of time and surprise, is a general malaise, even an acute sickness on this team that I hope Quinn is well aware of and addresses. Because it makes for unwatchable hockey and lost games, IMO.

[Ozzy]

I think you guys are right on the money, and Phil has the right idea as far as what's most likely going to happen. For the kid's sake I really hope we find some good complimentary players for him to work with. Spooner may just work...sometimes it's the most unlikely candidates that just click. But I agree with Phil that we're most likely going to be flipping this kid come a deadline somewhere along the line. We could get a really good return if we can get a solid year out of him.

[Future]

Namestnikov is, in a lot of ways, the exact kind of player you want at his price tag on a rebuilding team entering year one. He's a work ethic prototype, even if the points won't accumulate the way they did running shotgun to Kucherov and Stamkos. And he's ultimately an asset to be flipped, either this year or next before he's UFA eligible. In the interim he can give you great effort, if not good results, which can hopefully have a spillover effect on the young pups.

I'd agree, if we knew he was an effort guy. He didn't give much after that first 4-5 games.

[Phil]

I'd agree, if we knew he was an effort guy. He didn't give much after that first 4-5 games.

 

I'm talking about on paper, not the small sample size of games he played here, necessarily. He was certainly physical with the Lightning.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Future]

I'm talking about on paper, not the small sample size of games he played here, necessarily. He was certainly physical with the Lightning.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I guess. But things were always going well when he was in Tampa. Granted it's only 19 games, but he folded when things were going poorly. What happens if the Rangers are clearly a bad team, with no playoff hopes, in December? Is he going to pack it in again after 30 games?

 

I'm not a fan of guys whose effort fades when things aren't going well - frontrunners, if you will. And, small sample or not, that's exactly what he did last year, so I don't have a lot of hope that he isn't that type of player in general.

[Phil]

I'm with you all the way. That's why I referred to him as a prototype. I don't know if it'll work out or not. But he has the natural build to be a valuable interim hockey player.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[The Dude]

I guess. But things were always going well when he was in Tampa. Granted it's only 19 games, but he folded when things were going poorly. What happens if the Rangers are clearly a bad team, with no playoff hopes, in December? Is he going to pack it in again after 30 games?

 

I'm not a fan of guys whose effort fades when things aren't going well - frontrunners, if you will. And, small sample or not, that's exactly what he did last year, so I don't have a lot of hope that he isn't that type of player in general.

 

That's where I'm at with him. I expected a bit more from the guy. I understand the situation sucking for him to go from first to worst. But when Spooner was playing like his career was given another chance, while coming from a similar situation (playoff team with high expectations).... It just soured me on Namestnikov.

 

I do think the Rangers will try to get as much out of him as they can. I feel he will get tons of ice time and special teams roles on both the PK and PP. They will find the best use for him, in hoping he ups his trade value, or more likely to just be a stop gap with the hope he becomes the top six forward they need going forward. They have to. They don't have all that much stocked up at forward as far as prospects go. Giving him and maybe Spooner big roles are pretty much their only options.

 

He's getting a chance. New clean slate for everyone. Its all wait and see from here out.

[CBrowningPI]

Arbitration is looming. Skjei July 31st, Hayes Aug 2nd, Spooner Aug 4th. We should know a little better what the roster will look like within a week. It's sign or trade, right? I can't imagine they'll let it go to arbitration because the players may benefit monetarily in the short run. ?

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[BrooksBurner]

Arbitration is looming. Skjei July 31st, Hayes Aug 2nd, Spooner Aug 4th. We should know a little better what the roster will look like within a week. It's sign or trade, right? I can't imagine they'll let it go to arbitration because the players may benefit monetarily in the short run. ?

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

They are in the driver's seat with Skjei as they have 3 more years of RFA control regardless of arbitration or not. I don't think you will see a trade there regardless of what happens. My guess is they are talking long term, but if they can't agree you will likely see a 2 year deal before it goes to arbitration. Skjei gets the benefit of having 2 years guaranteed, and the Rangers get the benefit of still having RFA control at the end of it.

 

Hayes/Spooner will be UFA eligible after a 1 year arbitration contract, so what happens with those guys is more telling about what the Rangers plan to do with them - in particular Hayes. I have to think it's either long term or trade for Kevin Hayes. They may not care about Spooner going to arbitration. Not sure they want him on more than a 1 year "show me" type deal anyway.

[CBrowningPI]

I was just thinking of the Trouba deal, which sucked for the club. You basically have 3 unknowns in the arbitors, so it's better to sign or trade, period.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[ThirtyONE]

I was just thinking of the Trouba deal, which sucked for the club. You basically have 3 unknowns in the arbitors, so it's better to sign or trade, period.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Disagree. Arbitration almost always splits the difference between the club and the player. They almost always deal out fair market value. It's an unhealthy process for the team and the player relationship but often times the parties come to an agreement the day of the hearing. There would be no time to make a trade, nor would it benefit the team in anyway. Trouba can play his year out and the team can easily move or resign him this season if they have to. RFA status exists for a reason and it's beneficial, mostly in the team's favor.