Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 "Tony DeAngelo" has expressed interest in a loan to the American Hockey League," Seravalli said. "That’s what he let the Rangers know, that he’d like to get playing again. He’s been skating for the last month to this point on his own. "He’s willing to accept a loan to any AHL franchise, and I believe the Rangers are interested in facilitating that, but it would take someone else stepping up to do so because the Rangers have let him know he’s not welcome in Hartford. The ties have been cut with the entire Rangers organization to this point." Listed at No. 3 on the TSN Trade Bait Board, DeAngelo signed a two-year, $9.6 million contract in October and carries a $4.8 million cap hit. https://www.tsn.ca/tony-deangelo-seeking-ahl-loan-from-new-york-rangers-1.1601814 -- Real quick sidebar for anyone seeking to hijack this to bang the grievance drum again: “I had spoke to him at that time and said: ‘Listen, if there’s any more issues here, the time is going to come where we’re going to put you on waivers and move on. No more issues. If your name is in anything at all that we have to hear, we’re going to move on,’" Gorton recalled on Feb. 1. “I made that statement to him, something happened and I pretty much have to stay true to my word here and the organization’s word that it was time to move on." We're not going to relitigate why DeAngelo isn't here again, so don't bother trying. I've instructed the Staff to remove anyone who does from the thread pretty much from the hop. It's been asked and answered from the start and reiterated again above. Let's use this thread to discuss the fact that he's seeking an AHL loan (who might give him a shot?) and that despite all that's happened, he's slotted as the third-highest player on TSN's trade bait board.
Long live the King Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 I don't know why any franchise would. They know who he is as a player so they don't need the audition. They also know his reputation. His best shot at playing competitively would be a loan to Europe, but it doesn't sound like he wants to go that far. Don't know the rules for the different Euro leagues about adding a guy this late into the season...
NYR2711 Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 I don't know why any franchise would. They know who he is as a player so they don't need the audition. They also know his reputation. His best shot at playing competitively would be a loan to Europe, but it doesn't sound like he wants to go that far. Don't know the rules for the different Euro leagues about adding a guy this late into the season... Aren't a lot of the Euro leagues ion their playoffs right now? I agree, it doesn't make sense for any team to let him play on their AHL team, especially if they can't use him.
paddynyc Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 I don't know why any franchise would. They know who he is as a player so they don't need the audition. They also know his reputation. His best shot at playing competitively would be a loan to Europe, but it doesn't sound like he wants to go that far. Don't know the rules for the different Euro leagues about adding a guy this late into the season... If he went to Europe and got hurt would that then void the contract ?
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 I don't know why any franchise would. They know who he is as a player so they don't need the audition. They also know his reputation. His best shot at playing competitively would be a loan to Europe, but it doesn't sound like he wants to go that far. Don't know the rules for the different Euro leagues about adding a guy this late into the season... Right. The other thing is, you can't buy out an injured player, so there's a risk in even allowing him to be loaned while retaining the risk should he get hurt playing. I'm a little surprised the Rangers are even willing to entertain the idea, frankly. The way the tea leaves read to me, they wanted a clean break, either via trade or buyout this summer. If he went to Europe and got hurt would that then void the contract ? No. He'd be on loan from the Rangers to whichever team, so the Rangers would be accepting the risk.
Long live the King Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 Right. The other thing is, you can't buy out an injured player, so there's a risk in even allowing him to be loaned while retaining the risk should he get hurt playing. I'm a little surprised the Rangers are even willing to entertain the idea, frankly. The way the tea leaves read to me, they wanted a clean break, either via trade or buyout this summer. No. He'd be on loan from the Rangers to whichever team, so the Rangers would be accepting the risk. I guess from the front office point of view, if anther organization accepts him onto their AHL team then they have a fish on the hook to try and work a trade with.
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 I guess from the front office point of view, if anther organization accepts him onto their AHL team then they have a fish on the hook to try and work a trade with. Maybe, yeah. Similar to the Avery/Wolf Pack situation from years back, I suppose. Though that was purely waivers/re-entry waivers.
Keirik Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 I think it’s fair for Tony to ask this. I don’t see the Rangers having any problem with it either since they were shopping him. Hell if he gets seriously hurt, he goes on LTIR anyway and helps us cap wise the same way. That doesnt help next year but the buyout window is over the summer no? If he’s still hurt by then, he’s likely hurt very long and still would be LTIR when the season starts. I’m sure they could do some shady thing like the rest of the league does.
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 I think it’s fair for Tony to ask this. I don’t see the Rangers having any problem with it either since they were shopping him. Hell if he gets seriously hurt, he goes on LTIR anyway and helps us cap wise the same way. That doesnt help next year but the buyout window is over the summer no? If he’s still hurt by then, he’s likely hurt very long and still would be LTIR when the season starts. I’m sure they could do some shady thing like the rest of the league does. No, that's not how LTIR works. It only applies if you spend over the cap. Getting hurt doesn't just make his cap hit disappear, and the relief can only extend up to his full cap charge. Getting hurt is a legitimate risk to a buyout.
Pete Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 No, that's not how LTIR works. It only applies if you spend over the cap. Getting hurt doesn't just make his cap hit disappear, and the relief can only extend up to his full cap charge. Getting hurt is a legitimate risk to a buyout. Which is why the Rangers shouldn't agree to this. The other teams have made it clear they're not interested in trading for him at his price tag or for what the Rangers want back...If they want him gone they have to buy him out.
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 Yup, that's where I'm at. That's why I'm surprised they are even entertaining it. I don't think another club is going to take them up on it, though. He's still radioactive. Team X picking him up for their AHL team isn't going to avoid the question simply because he's not on the main roster, you know?
Keirik Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 No, that's not how LTIR works. It only applies if you spend over the cap. Getting hurt doesn't just make his cap hit disappear, and the relief can only extend up to his full cap charge. Getting hurt is a legitimate risk to a buyout. But I’m going on the assumption the Rangers are getting to the flat cap ceiling. If they aren’t, his LTIR isn’t an issue regardless. No?
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 But I’m going on the assumption the Rangers are getting to the flat cap ceiling. If they aren’t, his LTIR isn’t an issue regardless. No? Next season? I guess it depends on what they choose to spend on and just how big they want to go on raises for Buch, Chytil, and Shesterkin. As of right now, they project to have $25 million, give or take, in cap going into the off-season.
Keirik Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 Next season? I guess it depends on what they choose to spend on and just how big they want to go on raises for Buch, Chytil, and Shesterkin. As of right now, they project to have $25 million, give or take, in cap going into the off-season. Well, I’m just figuring they finally say next season is a must playoff year. Obviously they re-up Shesty, Chytil, Lindgren, probably Buch. That’s a good chunk of cap right there and I think you have to add a real 4th line/grinders and not spare parts. Gauthier, Howden, Hajek, Smith, JJ, PDG are all wildcards to bring back, but if you don’t, you replace them with either ufas or guys from within that are cheaper but with some performance bonuses the roll into the following year. I think cap wise they will be right there.
ThirtyONE Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 Which is why the Rangers shouldn't agree to this. The other teams have made it clear they're not interested in trading for him at his price tag or for what the Rangers want back...If they want him gone they have to buy him out. Yeah. I tend to agree with this. It's a big risk. Someone might still take a chance on him at the deadline too.
LindG1000 Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 I'd venture a guess that they're unconcerned with buyout implications - they'd rather trade him. I'd also guess that if the worst thing that happens is that they can't buy him out, that might be just fine by them. He'd represent a 3.725 cap hit next year, which leaves us with just over 27M in space for 2021-22 to handle four key raises and two spots on defense. It's probably fine either way, and if it boosts his trade value, so be it. I'm more in the Phil boat here - not really sure why a team takes him on loan and deals with the radioactivity.
BrooksBurner Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 As others mentioned, I don't see how doing this would benefit the Rangers at all. Maybe this is just more of a way of DeAngelo and the Rangers communicating to other teams that he is willing to make major changes to get his career back on track. A 50-60 point defenseman doesn't need the AHL and him not being claimed had nothing to do with his on ice play. It was contract and off-ice. But if the message is "Hey, I'm changing my behavior and attitude, and I'll prove that by being willing to go to the AHL as an example of what I will do to find some favor with another team", maybe a team is more inclined to take him.
4EverRangerFrank Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 Another take on this is Rangers contract liability from a wrongful termination standpoint. I read Gorton's statement and oh-boy, if you were a litigious person, you might have cause to seek some relief. Asking to be loaned to the AHL is a smart play by his agent and I assume, his attorney since it pressures the Rangers into action. ADA doesn't want to sit on the shelf losing game-shape by the minute and softening the skills. This is a power-move IMO to get the Rangers to write a check...or seek immediate trade to a NHL team.
Pete Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 As others mentioned, I don't see how doing this would benefit the Rangers at all. Maybe this is just more of a way of DeAngelo and the Rangers communicating to other teams that he is willing to make major changes to get his career back on track. A 50-60 point defenseman doesn't need the AHL and him not being claimed had nothing to do with his on ice play. It was contract and off-ice. But if the message is "Hey, I'm changing my behavior and attitude, and I'll prove that by being willing to go to the AHL as an example of what I will do to find some favor with another team", maybe a team is more inclined to take him. Based on the Brooks piece, he's not remorseful. I doubt this is about his image and more about the career killer it would be to sit for an entire season. That's not really easy to come back from.
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 As others mentioned, I don't see how doing this would benefit the Rangers at all. Maybe this is just more of a way of DeAngelo and the Rangers communicating to other teams that he is willing to make major changes to get his career back on track. A 50-60 point defenseman doesn't need the AHL and him not being claimed had nothing to do with his on ice play. It was contract and off-ice. But if the message is "Hey, I'm changing my behavior and attitude, and I'll prove that by being willing to go to the AHL as an example of what I will do to find some favor with another team", maybe a team is more inclined to take him. Normally, I'd agree, but not in his case. The Brooks piece says otherwise, as Pete just mentioned, and I think this is purely more about him wanting to remain in game-shape by actually being able to play in competitive games.
BrooksBurner Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 Normally, I'd agree, but not in his case. The Brooks piece says otherwise, as Pete just mentioned, and I think this is purely more about him wanting to remain in game-shape by actually being able to play in competitive games. I read the Brooks piece and came away with a different take. One that showed he was taking responsibility for his actions and a desire for it to not happen again.
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 Fair enough, but I still think the desire to simply remain in game-shape is a key factor here.
Keirik Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 I read the Brooks piece and came away with a different take. One that showed he was taking responsibility for his actions and a desire for it to not happen again. Yeah. Same. Especially when you have one of the more respected players/legacy in the game in Staal saying positive stuff about ADA. But we are dangerously close to opening the door to the bad side of this conversation.
Phil Posted March 3, 2021 Author Posted March 3, 2021 Yeah. Same. Especially when you have one of the more respected players/legacy in the game in Staal saying positive stuff about ADA. But we are dangerously close to opening the door to the bad side of this conversation. Eh, not yet. We're reacting differently to his only public statements since, is all. The crux of the thread is still good. Oddly enough, Grand Rapids — the Wings' AHL affiliate — were exactly who I thought might be willing to do it.
Keirik Posted March 3, 2021 Posted March 3, 2021 Eh, not yet. We're reacting differently to his only public statements since, is all. The crux of the thread is still good. Oddly enough, Grand Rapids — the Wings' AHL affiliate — were exactly who I thought might be willing to do it. I know uli got shot down for it earlier, but I really do think the Red Wings made the most sense for a destination. Even with the Yzerman history.
Recommended Posts