(with due credit given to my father, who coined the term I used as the post title)
Well, today we signed Alexander Frolov. We'd been talking about it for a few days, and now it happened. Remember when Kovalchuk was gonna be a King? Now Frolov isn't either. Rough couple of weeks, LA. Frolov is a 28-year-old, 6'2", 204 lb. left wing who has over 50 points in each of his 5 NHL seasons to date. The Kings weren't happy with him, claiming that his recent decline in numbers was due to a lack of motivation. I'm more inclined to blame it on slight statistical variation, but we'll see what he does under John Tortorella. Overall, I think it's a pretty good move - we got him for a one-year deal at $3 million, which I will take if it gets us some meaningful scoring, and we can drop him next season if it doesn't.
But here's the really good news - I'm doing some quick math. I'll go into more depth in another post, but I'm adding up our current cap hits, and given that we're still planning on signing Staal at $4 million or so, an additional $3 million hit is telling me there's no way we're planning on keeping Redden's salary. We'd be way over. I'll do some math here for you soon, but this move really seems to say goodbye to Wade. Wow, do I hope I'm right.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
I guess I should post *something*
So, I had this whole long post planned out the day the Kovalchuk contract was signed. It said things like "this isn't about how unreasonably long it is, this is about how it should be illegal." Blah blah blah, average of 10 million a year for the first 8 years, average 1 million a year for the final 7 years, ends when he's 44, clearly bullshit designed to circumvent the cap, etc.
Then I was busy with work, and by the next day, the NHL had actually ruled the thing illegal, which I totally didn't see coming, but it would have made for a nice, exciting story arc on the blog. But because that first post didn't happen, now I'm just writing about what everyone else on the planet is writing about: "ZOMG, the NHL says the contract is bad!"
Whatever. I actually think it's kinda interesting that now, Lamoriello is kinda saying he knew this would happen. Like his response wasn't "damn you NHL I liked that contract" so much as it was "yeah, well - your crazy CBA* says it's legal, so maybe that's flawed." Meanwhile, there's a rumor that the NHLPA might actually come to bat for Kovalchuk and dispute the ruling.
Oh my god come on. We already have a league where there are so many rules in place to benefit individual players that it is almost impossible for a GM to build a team out of the same guys every year. How could the NHLPA possibly think that allowing a contract like this is acceptable? Wanna lock up a great player for lots of money, but don't like the salary cap? Just double his contract, and pay him nothing at the end! He'll retire before then, and you get off free! As long as the contract wasn't signed after he turned 35, we don't care if he's 58 when it ends!
I really hope the NHLPA doesn't take this case. Although in fairness, I'd probably personally find the whole thing more hilarious and less depressing if I wasn't unrelatedly thinking about Marc Staal the whole time.
Then I was busy with work, and by the next day, the NHL had actually ruled the thing illegal, which I totally didn't see coming, but it would have made for a nice, exciting story arc on the blog. But because that first post didn't happen, now I'm just writing about what everyone else on the planet is writing about: "ZOMG, the NHL says the contract is bad!"
Whatever. I actually think it's kinda interesting that now, Lamoriello is kinda saying he knew this would happen. Like his response wasn't "damn you NHL I liked that contract" so much as it was "yeah, well - your crazy CBA* says it's legal, so maybe that's flawed." Meanwhile, there's a rumor that the NHLPA might actually come to bat for Kovalchuk and dispute the ruling.
Oh my god come on. We already have a league where there are so many rules in place to benefit individual players that it is almost impossible for a GM to build a team out of the same guys every year. How could the NHLPA possibly think that allowing a contract like this is acceptable? Wanna lock up a great player for lots of money, but don't like the salary cap? Just double his contract, and pay him nothing at the end! He'll retire before then, and you get off free! As long as the contract wasn't signed after he turned 35, we don't care if he's 58 when it ends!
I really hope the NHLPA doesn't take this case. Although in fairness, I'd probably personally find the whole thing more hilarious and less depressing if I wasn't unrelatedly thinking about Marc Staal the whole time.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Monday, July 12, 2010
Girardi, Eminger, not Staal yet
Man, you go away for the weekend, and things happen!
First of all, we came to a deal with Girardi. It pays $3.1 million this year and $3.4/year over each of the following three, for a cap hit of $3.325 for the next four seasons. That's a little higher than I'd like, but it's not terrible. On the grand scale of Prospal, Dubinsky, Callahan, Christensen, et cetera, it seems high. However, in the frame of Rozsival, Gilroy, Del Zotto, and probably Staal one day soon, it sounds reasonable. Maybe defensemen are just supposed to make more? Anyway, the deal is done, Girardi is locked up, and we move on.
Then, we made a trade: Aaron Voros (finally?) and prospect Ryan Hillier (a left wing) for Ducks D-man Steve Eminger. Eminger is 6'1", 202 lbs, and a fairly physical guy. The Rangers will be his 6th NHL team since the start of the 2007-2008 season, but I would swear I recall liking him when, if I recall him correctly from the ducks. He's supposed to be a hitting, shot-blocking, stay-at-the-goddamn-blue-line kinda guy, and I like that. He's 26 years old, entering the final year of his contract, which will pay him $1.5 million, but is back-loaded, so he's only a $1.125 million cap hit.
I like this move. We clearly didn't see much in Hillier (when do we ever see much in our prospects?), and Voros was never seeing the ice again (we all liked him, but he never did much). Let Voros try to find his game our West, and let us pick up another solid blue-liner.
Meanwhile, the Staal negotiations apparently continue. Word is that the Rangers are trying to lock him down for 6 years, and that he's trying to earn himself a good million dollars more than Girardi. That's not entirely unreasonable. As I've said, I'd rather see Girardi around $2.5 million and Staal around $3.5, but if they're each $750,000 above that, I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.
There should at this point be no one left worrying that Staal will not be a New York Ranger on day one this year. Sather has gone on record saying we will match any offer sheet Staal is given, and that's really Staal's only negotiating power here. This was a wily statement, actually: it discourages teams from actually sending Staal any offers, a fact which gives the Rangers even more leverage in negotiations with him. Personally, I therefore wouldn't be surprised if this standoff holds out for another little while, showing Staal he's not getting any offer sheets, before we finally lock him down. I imagine we'll get the six years we're looking for, and I imagine the length of the contract and lack of offer sheets will keep Staal happy without the money getting too crazy. I expect this contract will end up at $4-4.5 million.
Oops, before I get into this last thing, I forgot to mention last week that we signed defensive prospect Ryan McDonagh to a 3-year contract with an annual salary of $875,000 and potential annual bonuses up to another $425,000. It seems we're giving him every opportunity to be a real Ranger this season, and our defensive corps getting younger, again, can't be a bad thing. McDonagh is 21, 6'1", 200 lbs. Sorry, I really thought I'd written about that - I just totally forgot to.
Anyway, this sure starts to sound like Redden says hello to Hartford, doesn't it? The fools over at SNY Rangers Blog, who tend to have accurate, quick facts about every story, coupled with terrible italicized opinions, are confused about why the Rangers have so many defensemen now. But, they also think Redden deserves another chance (No, really, they said that. I can't find the post right now. Gold Star to anyone who does. But, they said that). Well I'm not all that confused.
Without Redden, we're looking at the following seven as our top-6 plus one to rotate in: Rozsival, Staal, Girardi, Gilroy, McDonagh, Eminger, Del Zotto. That's...actually pretty good, all things considered. If we assume we sign Staal for a $4.25 million hit, those seven amass a total cap hit of $17,837,500. This is all completely reasonable. You know what's not reasonable? Thinking Wade Redden has a place among those other seven, increasing our entire defensive corps's cap hit by over 36% (to $24,337,500). Why would we do that, when we have seven other, better choices, for less money? I say we bring up McDonagh, sign Staal around $4 million, and send Redden packing. We do this, we actually have a pretty good squad of defensemen, at pretty reasonable prices.
More thoughts on total cap space will come here on this very blog after the Staal thing is resolved. But, for your reading pleasure, here are two pieces in which Larry Brooks makes a case that the Rangers should pursue Ilya Kovalchuk. The argument basically boils down to "who the hell else are we saving that money for?" It's a valid point, though with offers on the table like the laughed-at Kings' 12 years/$63.6 million and the reliably-reported-yet-completely-unbelievable Devils' 17 years/something over $100 million, are we really interested in jumping into this game? 17 years from now, Ilya Kovalchuk will be 44, and we will all own flying cars.
Well, the LeBron James of hockey will be making his decision sometime this week. I look forward to the announcement, less for which team he signs on with, and more so I can laugh at the absurd contract length and salary he will no doubt be receiving. I also look forward to more moves by the Rangers, who so far (despite overpaying Girardi and Boogaard by a total of a little over a million dollars) have had a fairly smart off-season.
First of all, we came to a deal with Girardi. It pays $3.1 million this year and $3.4/year over each of the following three, for a cap hit of $3.325 for the next four seasons. That's a little higher than I'd like, but it's not terrible. On the grand scale of Prospal, Dubinsky, Callahan, Christensen, et cetera, it seems high. However, in the frame of Rozsival, Gilroy, Del Zotto, and probably Staal one day soon, it sounds reasonable. Maybe defensemen are just supposed to make more? Anyway, the deal is done, Girardi is locked up, and we move on.
Then, we made a trade: Aaron Voros (finally?) and prospect Ryan Hillier (a left wing) for Ducks D-man Steve Eminger. Eminger is 6'1", 202 lbs, and a fairly physical guy. The Rangers will be his 6th NHL team since the start of the 2007-2008 season, but I would swear I recall liking him when, if I recall him correctly from the ducks. He's supposed to be a hitting, shot-blocking, stay-at-the-goddamn-blue-line kinda guy, and I like that. He's 26 years old, entering the final year of his contract, which will pay him $1.5 million, but is back-loaded, so he's only a $1.125 million cap hit.
I like this move. We clearly didn't see much in Hillier (when do we ever see much in our prospects?), and Voros was never seeing the ice again (we all liked him, but he never did much). Let Voros try to find his game our West, and let us pick up another solid blue-liner.
Meanwhile, the Staal negotiations apparently continue. Word is that the Rangers are trying to lock him down for 6 years, and that he's trying to earn himself a good million dollars more than Girardi. That's not entirely unreasonable. As I've said, I'd rather see Girardi around $2.5 million and Staal around $3.5, but if they're each $750,000 above that, I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.
There should at this point be no one left worrying that Staal will not be a New York Ranger on day one this year. Sather has gone on record saying we will match any offer sheet Staal is given, and that's really Staal's only negotiating power here. This was a wily statement, actually: it discourages teams from actually sending Staal any offers, a fact which gives the Rangers even more leverage in negotiations with him. Personally, I therefore wouldn't be surprised if this standoff holds out for another little while, showing Staal he's not getting any offer sheets, before we finally lock him down. I imagine we'll get the six years we're looking for, and I imagine the length of the contract and lack of offer sheets will keep Staal happy without the money getting too crazy. I expect this contract will end up at $4-4.5 million.
Oops, before I get into this last thing, I forgot to mention last week that we signed defensive prospect Ryan McDonagh to a 3-year contract with an annual salary of $875,000 and potential annual bonuses up to another $425,000. It seems we're giving him every opportunity to be a real Ranger this season, and our defensive corps getting younger, again, can't be a bad thing. McDonagh is 21, 6'1", 200 lbs. Sorry, I really thought I'd written about that - I just totally forgot to.
Anyway, this sure starts to sound like Redden says hello to Hartford, doesn't it? The fools over at SNY Rangers Blog, who tend to have accurate, quick facts about every story, coupled with terrible italicized opinions, are confused about why the Rangers have so many defensemen now. But, they also think Redden deserves another chance (No, really, they said that. I can't find the post right now. Gold Star to anyone who does. But, they said that). Well I'm not all that confused.
Without Redden, we're looking at the following seven as our top-6 plus one to rotate in: Rozsival, Staal, Girardi, Gilroy, McDonagh, Eminger, Del Zotto. That's...actually pretty good, all things considered. If we assume we sign Staal for a $4.25 million hit, those seven amass a total cap hit of $17,837,500. This is all completely reasonable. You know what's not reasonable? Thinking Wade Redden has a place among those other seven, increasing our entire defensive corps's cap hit by over 36% (to $24,337,500). Why would we do that, when we have seven other, better choices, for less money? I say we bring up McDonagh, sign Staal around $4 million, and send Redden packing. We do this, we actually have a pretty good squad of defensemen, at pretty reasonable prices.
More thoughts on total cap space will come here on this very blog after the Staal thing is resolved. But, for your reading pleasure, here are two pieces in which Larry Brooks makes a case that the Rangers should pursue Ilya Kovalchuk. The argument basically boils down to "who the hell else are we saving that money for?" It's a valid point, though with offers on the table like the laughed-at Kings' 12 years/$63.6 million and the reliably-reported-yet-completely-unbelievable Devils' 17 years/something over $100 million, are we really interested in jumping into this game? 17 years from now, Ilya Kovalchuk will be 44, and we will all own flying cars.
Well, the LeBron James of hockey will be making his decision sometime this week. I look forward to the announcement, less for which team he signs on with, and more so I can laugh at the absurd contract length and salary he will no doubt be receiving. I also look forward to more moves by the Rangers, who so far (despite overpaying Girardi and Boogaard by a total of a little over a million dollars) have had a fairly smart off-season.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Our old friend, arbitration
Brrp brrp baaaaaah! (That was a trumpet.) Welcome back to the Rangers' offseason, salary arbitration. We've missed you, since we dismissed Nik Zherdev a year ago. In a move that surprised absolutely nobody, Dan Girardi, who is eligible to file for arbitration this summer, and who rejected some unknown offer from the Rangers, asking instead for a 4-year deal at at least $3 million/year, did in fact file for arbitration. It is believed that the Rangers are very interested in re-signing him, and they will do their best to come to terms before arbitration actually happens. If Girardi and the Rangers can agree to a contract before an arbitration hearing takes place, then this becomes a non-issue: they just sign the contract.
If, however, it comes to it, the NHL will schedule a hearing sometime between July 20 and August 5, at which a third party will decide how much Girardi is worth. The Rangers can then choose to accept this value within 48 hours, in which case Girardi must, or to just let him go - after the 48 hours, he would become an unrestricted free agent.
Hopefully they can find some kind of happy middle ground before it comes to that. If it does come to that, hopefully the arbitrator will come up with a reasonable figure. I'd like to not be paying him more than $3 million a year - as I've said here before, I believe he's worth the same kind of contract we offered Callahan and Dubinsky a year ago: a couple of years at a couple million dollars a year.
Meanwhile, no news on Staal negotiations. The only other news is that apparently Rangers prospect Ryan McDonagh (we traded for him in the Gomez-Higgins trade) is going to be signing a contract with us and trying to make his way onto our already stellar blue line. He's 6'1", 200 lbs, and supposedly a stay-at-home-style defenseman. By comparison, this can't possibly be a bad thing.
If, however, it comes to it, the NHL will schedule a hearing sometime between July 20 and August 5, at which a third party will decide how much Girardi is worth. The Rangers can then choose to accept this value within 48 hours, in which case Girardi must, or to just let him go - after the 48 hours, he would become an unrestricted free agent.
Hopefully they can find some kind of happy middle ground before it comes to that. If it does come to that, hopefully the arbitrator will come up with a reasonable figure. I'd like to not be paying him more than $3 million a year - as I've said here before, I believe he's worth the same kind of contract we offered Callahan and Dubinsky a year ago: a couple of years at a couple million dollars a year.
Meanwhile, no news on Staal negotiations. The only other news is that apparently Rangers prospect Ryan McDonagh (we traded for him in the Gomez-Higgins trade) is going to be signing a contract with us and trying to make his way onto our already stellar blue line. He's 6'1", 200 lbs, and supposedly a stay-at-home-style defenseman. By comparison, this can't possibly be a bad thing.
Friday, July 2, 2010
Free Agent Frenzy Recap
So....yeah. As is becoming our habit, I guess? We did a bunch of reasonable things and then one incomprehensible thing that throws it all into question. Here we go.
We signed Marty Biron as a backup. This is awesome. It's a 2-year deal worth $950,000 this season and $800,000 next, for a cap hit of $875,000/year for 2 years. We get an experienced goalie looking to prove himself, and he was attracted to us for cheap because we're local to his family, and because he wants to work with the incomparable Benoit Allaire (our goaltending coach). Sather kept talking about wanting to sign "a Cadillac at a Honda price" for a backup, and while that is completely ridiculous, this is a very smart signing.
After we tried to low-ball Christensen, offering him 2 years at slightly less than a Qualifying salary, he ended up hitting the free agent market. At which point we upped the offer to slightly more than a Qualifying salary, which he gladly accepted. This is all good. This is how negotiations work. He's good for us, and I wanted to bring him back, but he's not gonna go make $2 million somewhere else. So, we low-balled him, he said, no, then we upped it and he said yes. Good work all around. We have him locked up for another two years at $925,000/year.
We also bothered to re-sign Prospal. As an over-35 deal, it made sense to only sign him to a 1-year contract, which he agreed to. We had to overpay a little for him, but not a ton. Numbers are a little unclear, because it's a bonus-heavy contract, but it looks like we signed him for a $1 million salary with potential to earn another $1.1 million in bonuses. Since all potential bonuses count against the cap, my math says that's a $2.1 million cap hit - not terrible, but a little high. If he plays like he did in the first half of last season, he'll be well worth the money. If he plays like he did in the second half of last season, it's only a 1-year deal.
Worth noting: in this NY Post article, Larry Brooks does math that leads me to believe Prospal's bonuses don't count against the cap (he refers to Christensen and Prospal as a combined $1.95 million hit), but from the research I've done, I am pretty sure he's wrong about that. Just wanna throw that out there, in case I am the wrong one. But I'm really, really pretty sure that Prospal's hit is going to be $2.1 million for the season.
Finally, we increased what had been just a qualifying offer to Brandon Prust, who agreed yesterday to a 2-year deal at $800,000 a year. Totally worth it - he was a huge asset to the team in his short time with us, he's exactly the kind of fourth-liner I wanna see, and we game him a raise and an extra year to show him we want him around, without paying him too much at all. Good signing.
"Hey, hang on, dude," you might now say, my imaginary readers, who evidently borrow their epithets from 1992, "it sounds like Slats has been pretty reasonable so far this season! Between all these smart, relatively low-cost signings, and the reasonable offers and qualifiers given to our RFAs, what's your issue? ...Homes?"
Well, imaginary 90's guy, then we did this weird thing. As we discussed yesterday, we failed to sign Jody Shelley, who went to the Flyers for 3 years at $1.1/year, instead signing Derek Boogaard at 4 years for $1.625/year. We've already covered the demerits of Boogaard, who, along with his brother Aaron, runs a fighting camp for kids in Saskatchewan. When asked about it, Sather gave some pretty reasonable answers: "We were only interested in a two-year deal because of his age [Shelley is 34, Boogaard is 28]...he was looking for a three-year deal... That's really when we changed our minds." Also, "Obviously, he's the biggest and the best [Boogard is 6'8", 257 lbs], we needed that presence here. Last year, there were too many times when I saw guys scraping snow into Henrik's face and I didn't like it. I don't think you'll see that now."
That's actually exactly what I want to be hearing from a GM. That's totally reasonable. Add in the fact that Boogaard is coming from the Wild, where he made his career out of protecting Marian Gaborik, and it starts to sound like a smart choice, giving up Shelley for Boogaard. There's an argument, sure, that we had a good enforcer that was effective and good at some other non-punchy things, and we once again got rid of him for a foreign punching machine (though Boogaard, at least, didn't end last season by incapacitating a beloved Ranger). However, that's not my real problem with the signing. My real problem is the contract's value.
Look, it's no secret that We hAve DeEp salary cap issues, and a little bit of money thrown in here and there ends up hurting. Torts won't play the 4th line more than a few minutes a game, and we know Boogaard won't be scoring too many points, and it's hard to justify $1.625 million. Put another way, let's summarize the signings we've made this off-season so far, in terms of the salary they'll be making this season.
Brandon Prust - $800,000
Erik Christensen - $925,000
Marty Biron - $950,000
Vinny Prospal - $1 million
Derek Boogaard - $1.7 million
Is Boogaard really worth that much more than Prospal, Biron, Christensen, or Prust? 'Cause that's the message our signings so far are sending. That's the issue I have: in a salary-capped league, it's awful hard to justify the above numbers.
Ah, well. Let's see what happens next.
We signed Marty Biron as a backup. This is awesome. It's a 2-year deal worth $950,000 this season and $800,000 next, for a cap hit of $875,000/year for 2 years. We get an experienced goalie looking to prove himself, and he was attracted to us for cheap because we're local to his family, and because he wants to work with the incomparable Benoit Allaire (our goaltending coach). Sather kept talking about wanting to sign "a Cadillac at a Honda price" for a backup, and while that is completely ridiculous, this is a very smart signing.
After we tried to low-ball Christensen, offering him 2 years at slightly less than a Qualifying salary, he ended up hitting the free agent market. At which point we upped the offer to slightly more than a Qualifying salary, which he gladly accepted. This is all good. This is how negotiations work. He's good for us, and I wanted to bring him back, but he's not gonna go make $2 million somewhere else. So, we low-balled him, he said, no, then we upped it and he said yes. Good work all around. We have him locked up for another two years at $925,000/year.
We also bothered to re-sign Prospal. As an over-35 deal, it made sense to only sign him to a 1-year contract, which he agreed to. We had to overpay a little for him, but not a ton. Numbers are a little unclear, because it's a bonus-heavy contract, but it looks like we signed him for a $1 million salary with potential to earn another $1.1 million in bonuses. Since all potential bonuses count against the cap, my math says that's a $2.1 million cap hit - not terrible, but a little high. If he plays like he did in the first half of last season, he'll be well worth the money. If he plays like he did in the second half of last season, it's only a 1-year deal.
Worth noting: in this NY Post article, Larry Brooks does math that leads me to believe Prospal's bonuses don't count against the cap (he refers to Christensen and Prospal as a combined $1.95 million hit), but from the research I've done, I am pretty sure he's wrong about that. Just wanna throw that out there, in case I am the wrong one. But I'm really, really pretty sure that Prospal's hit is going to be $2.1 million for the season.
Finally, we increased what had been just a qualifying offer to Brandon Prust, who agreed yesterday to a 2-year deal at $800,000 a year. Totally worth it - he was a huge asset to the team in his short time with us, he's exactly the kind of fourth-liner I wanna see, and we game him a raise and an extra year to show him we want him around, without paying him too much at all. Good signing.
"Hey, hang on, dude," you might now say, my imaginary readers, who evidently borrow their epithets from 1992, "it sounds like Slats has been pretty reasonable so far this season! Between all these smart, relatively low-cost signings, and the reasonable offers and qualifiers given to our RFAs, what's your issue? ...Homes?"
Well, imaginary 90's guy, then we did this weird thing. As we discussed yesterday, we failed to sign Jody Shelley, who went to the Flyers for 3 years at $1.1/year, instead signing Derek Boogaard at 4 years for $1.625/year. We've already covered the demerits of Boogaard, who, along with his brother Aaron, runs a fighting camp for kids in Saskatchewan. When asked about it, Sather gave some pretty reasonable answers: "We were only interested in a two-year deal because of his age [Shelley is 34, Boogaard is 28]...he was looking for a three-year deal... That's really when we changed our minds." Also, "Obviously, he's the biggest and the best [Boogard is 6'8", 257 lbs], we needed that presence here. Last year, there were too many times when I saw guys scraping snow into Henrik's face and I didn't like it. I don't think you'll see that now."
That's actually exactly what I want to be hearing from a GM. That's totally reasonable. Add in the fact that Boogaard is coming from the Wild, where he made his career out of protecting Marian Gaborik, and it starts to sound like a smart choice, giving up Shelley for Boogaard. There's an argument, sure, that we had a good enforcer that was effective and good at some other non-punchy things, and we once again got rid of him for a foreign punching machine (though Boogaard, at least, didn't end last season by incapacitating a beloved Ranger). However, that's not my real problem with the signing. My real problem is the contract's value.
Look, it's no secret that We hAve DeEp salary cap issues, and a little bit of money thrown in here and there ends up hurting. Torts won't play the 4th line more than a few minutes a game, and we know Boogaard won't be scoring too many points, and it's hard to justify $1.625 million. Put another way, let's summarize the signings we've made this off-season so far, in terms of the salary they'll be making this season.
Brandon Prust - $800,000
Erik Christensen - $925,000
Marty Biron - $950,000
Vinny Prospal - $1 million
Derek Boogaard - $1.7 million
Is Boogaard really worth that much more than Prospal, Biron, Christensen, or Prust? 'Cause that's the message our signings so far are sending. That's the issue I have: in a salary-capped league, it's awful hard to justify the above numbers.
Ah, well. Let's see what happens next.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Mid-day updates
Crazy day at work, computer is down, etc. The quick story is: Alex Auld went to Montréal and nobody cared. Real early, we signed Marty Biron as the backup we're looking for: $950,000 this year and $800 next. Fine. Smart move. Then, we locked down Christensen, who we had just let hit the market, for 2 years at $950,000/year. Also really smart. And word is we're renegotiating with Prospal, or trying to. All good things!
So then of course we had to go do something insane. I think Glen Sather doesn't understand how enforcers work. Orr was well-respected and sometimes shot the puck, so we let him go and signed Brashear for more money than Orr ended up with. We know how well that went. So, now, we're at it again: we picked up Jody Shelley, who fought hard and was well-respected and actually had a really good net presence. Then, we let him go sign with Philly for just $1.1 million a year for 3 years. That was stupid. But maybe, you think, maybe we didn't wanna lock down an enforcer for 3 years. Maybe you learn from your Brashear mistake and don't sign that long a contract for someone who doesn't score a ton.
And then, of course, the really stupid. Derek Boogaard, owner of the longest active goalless streak in the NHL (222 games, his last goal was January 7, 2006). He has scored 2 goals and 13 assists in his 265 games over 5 seasons in the NHL. And we signed him for four years at $1.625 million/year.
Four years, $1.625 million per year.
This is, as Larry Brooks tweets, an "inexplicable blunder." This makes no fucking sense. Next season, Colton Orr and Jody Shelley will make a combined $2.1 million from the Flyers and the Leafs. Donald Brashear and Derek Boogaard will make a combined $3.025 million from the Rangers. I do not understand the thinking, at all.
Seriously, can we go one free agent day or trade deadline day without making at least one move that is universally considered terrible by everyone?
So then of course we had to go do something insane. I think Glen Sather doesn't understand how enforcers work. Orr was well-respected and sometimes shot the puck, so we let him go and signed Brashear for more money than Orr ended up with. We know how well that went. So, now, we're at it again: we picked up Jody Shelley, who fought hard and was well-respected and actually had a really good net presence. Then, we let him go sign with Philly for just $1.1 million a year for 3 years. That was stupid. But maybe, you think, maybe we didn't wanna lock down an enforcer for 3 years. Maybe you learn from your Brashear mistake and don't sign that long a contract for someone who doesn't score a ton.
And then, of course, the really stupid. Derek Boogaard, owner of the longest active goalless streak in the NHL (222 games, his last goal was January 7, 2006). He has scored 2 goals and 13 assists in his 265 games over 5 seasons in the NHL. And we signed him for four years at $1.625 million/year.
Four years, $1.625 million per year.
This is, as Larry Brooks tweets, an "inexplicable blunder." This makes no fucking sense. Next season, Colton Orr and Jody Shelley will make a combined $2.1 million from the Flyers and the Leafs. Donald Brashear and Derek Boogaard will make a combined $3.025 million from the Rangers. I do not understand the thinking, at all.
Seriously, can we go one free agent day or trade deadline day without making at least one move that is universally considered terrible by everyone?
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Updates
Okay, I finally understand what we were thinking with Christensen: Sather was afraid of giving the qualifier not for the $75,000 a year difference, but because Christensen qualified for arbitration, and he was afraid that would get expensive. So, by moving it to a slightly lower, 2-year deal, he would avoid it being an official qualifying offer, which means arbitration would not be a concern - basically, Sather could make the multi-year deal now and then not have to worry about it anymore - one contract done.
Unfortunately, Christensen rejected an offer of $750,000 a year for 2 years, so all signs point to him hitting the free agent market tomorrow. I guess we'll see what other offers he picks up - I liked the way he played, but there's no sense overpaying for him. If Toronto or the Islanders want to pay him $2 million a year, then good for them. Otherwise, maybe some negotiations could take place and he could still end up back on the squad next season.
Meanwhile, it sounds like we've offered Shelley a deal in the neighborhood of $850,000 for two years. That's a reasonable offer, but we're going to have to be prepared for a counter-offer that's a bit higher, given Brashear as the precedent. Still, this is a good first step, I'm glad we're negotiating with him, and I hope that we find agreement quickly and move on.
Larry Brooks reports, though it may be speculation, that the Rangers' number one priority tomorrow will be finding a backup we can trust to play a good 15-18 games a season. He suggests Marty Biron or Moose Hedberg. I like this plan, but I have trouble buying into the idea that Torts will ever play the backup, no matter who we get. He's got goalie fears as it is, and he likes Lundqvist a lot, so it seems unlikely - see what happened to Auld last season. At least Valiquette didn't perform well the couple of times he was put in in front of the new coach. Auld barely got a shot at all. So, I like that we want a competent, trustworthy backup - I just hope we give him a chance to actually become trusted.
I guess that, frighteningly enough, that means I'm mostly on board with what Sather has and hasn't done so far. The only thing I'm really fuzzy on is why we're not yet renegotiating a small deal with Prospal, before he hits the market tomorrow. It wouldn't have to be a big offer, just something to keep him around. Unless he really wants a longer-term deal, in which case I'd let him shop around, but from what I hear so far, we haven't even made him a single-year offer. Oh, well. So far, we're okay.
So far.
Unfortunately, Christensen rejected an offer of $750,000 a year for 2 years, so all signs point to him hitting the free agent market tomorrow. I guess we'll see what other offers he picks up - I liked the way he played, but there's no sense overpaying for him. If Toronto or the Islanders want to pay him $2 million a year, then good for them. Otherwise, maybe some negotiations could take place and he could still end up back on the squad next season.
Meanwhile, it sounds like we've offered Shelley a deal in the neighborhood of $850,000 for two years. That's a reasonable offer, but we're going to have to be prepared for a counter-offer that's a bit higher, given Brashear as the precedent. Still, this is a good first step, I'm glad we're negotiating with him, and I hope that we find agreement quickly and move on.
Larry Brooks reports, though it may be speculation, that the Rangers' number one priority tomorrow will be finding a backup we can trust to play a good 15-18 games a season. He suggests Marty Biron or Moose Hedberg. I like this plan, but I have trouble buying into the idea that Torts will ever play the backup, no matter who we get. He's got goalie fears as it is, and he likes Lundqvist a lot, so it seems unlikely - see what happened to Auld last season. At least Valiquette didn't perform well the couple of times he was put in in front of the new coach. Auld barely got a shot at all. So, I like that we want a competent, trustworthy backup - I just hope we give him a chance to actually become trusted.
I guess that, frighteningly enough, that means I'm mostly on board with what Sather has and hasn't done so far. The only thing I'm really fuzzy on is why we're not yet renegotiating a small deal with Prospal, before he hits the market tomorrow. It wouldn't have to be a big offer, just something to keep him around. Unless he really wants a longer-term deal, in which case I'd let him shop around, but from what I hear so far, we haven't even made him a single-year offer. Oh, well. So far, we're okay.
So far.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Well, it's something
Aaron Voros, Donald Brashear, Patrick Rissmiller. These three were placed on waivers today. Assuming no one picks them up, I guess that means they probably play for Hartford for a while? Which we all assumed Rissmiller was doing regardless. Anyway, this is largely meaningless - Brashear stays on the cap anyway, and no one expected him on the team, Voros was a million dollars no one really cared about, who only got ice time when no one else did, and Rissmiller was gonna be in the 'Pack this year already. So, like, it's only kinda news. But it is news.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Thanks, Twitter
Some Twitter user named ElenaW tweeted what I was about to tweet (see, I know lingo!), asking Steve Zipay what the deal with Christensen is. So now I don't have to. Turns out we're not missing anything - rather than trying to sign him for $825,000 for one year, claims Zipay, we're trying to sign him for a multi-year deal for less money. Now, I'm a little fuzzy on that math - I was pretty sure that the qualifying offer for a salary between $660,000 and $1 million was a 5% raise, not 10%, but maybe those tiers have shifted. I'll try to research. Meanwhile, we are just trying to undercut Christensen on a few hundred thousand by making it up to him in years. Think he'll go for it? He did say he saw the Rangers as his "last chance," and I'm sure he doesn't wanna move again if he doesn't have to. This may be a shrewd way for Sather to save some cash, lock Christensen up a little longer, and have one fewer free agent he has to be negotiating with. Maybe it's really smart. Guess it depends how it's recieved. Thanks, ElenaW!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)