PDA

View Full Version : The end of the Brad era? (Update page 10. Team decides to keep Brad)



NYY09
05-23-2013, 12:57 PM
Via BSB:


Per Andrew Gross, Brad Richards will be a healthy scratch tonight. Richards was on the ice with the extra skaters following today’s optional skate. For those saying players are never held accountable, here’s your proof that they ARE held accountable.

So, is this it? is this the official end of the Richards era on Broadway? and if so, where does the team go from here?

NYY09
05-23-2013, 01:00 PM
Also from LoHud:


Brad Richards, who less than two years ago signed a nine-year, $60 million free agent contract to become a Ranger, will now be an ex-Ranger.

Richards was informed by his long-time ally and coach John Tortorella this morning that he will be a healthy scratch for Game 4 against Boston tonight, after being demoted to the fourth line, and then having his minutes limited to fewer than nine in Game 3.

The next step is then obvious. The Rangers will use their one remaining compliance buyout within the new CBA to end Richards’ relationship with the team this summer. Richards, who rceived $12 million in 2011-12 and most of his $12 million for the lockout 2013 season, will get a $24 million going-away present this summer (spread out over twice the remaining seven years), removing his contract from the books and his salary from the decreasing salary cap.

Richards will then be an unrestricted free agent, able to strike a deal with any of the other 29 teams, but not with the Rangers. And he surely will resurface after a summer of conditioning, and sign somewhere at a much smaller salary.

Richards told reporters after this morning’s skate that he was “surprised” and “disappointed” about being scratched and that he would work hard to make sure this never happens again. If it does happen again, it will be elsewhere.

With Richards’ exit, that means that two-thirds of the Rangers’ first line from the start of this season will be gone, including Marian Gaborik (and his $7.5 million salary). The remaining first-line player, Rick Nash ($7.8 million) has one goal in 10 playoff games.

There had been speculation that Richards would be given one more year to try to work himself into shape this summer and see if he could resurrect his skating and overall game before being bought out next summer. But that would be too risky—and the Rangers know it—because he could be injured next season and then ineligible for the buyout, which would have to be done next summer or not at all.

SLY WILLIAMS
05-23-2013, 01:06 PM
I think the stories of being out of shape are a bit of a stretch. Even if the speculation that he was out of shape after the lockout were true I do not know why he would still be out of shape after 5 months, 70 practices and 60 games

mikel816
05-23-2013, 01:54 PM
Is it crazy to think that he will be another high priced free agent that couldn't cut it long term in NY but signs somewhere else and flourishes. It's crazy to me how some players can't cut it here.

bsi
05-23-2013, 02:54 PM
New York is a hard place to keep focus, a lot of good players fall victim to the wide array of things to do and the nightlife of NY. Not saying Richie is a boozebag or anything just that it's easy to go out to eat in NY instead of maybe going home to a salad and protein shake and that's what kills some of the talent that comes here. This is Tortorella trying to save his own *****, he's desperate and knows the axe is about to fall.

bsi
05-23-2013, 03:04 PM
Also, I don't think we'd really see the end of Brad Richards unless we had this compliance buyout really. But since it's a one time thing we may be forced to do it this year. If it was something that could be done next year I think they'd give him a year to figure it out but time isn't on his side. I think they'll try and trade him by draft time and if not buy him out.

NYY09
05-23-2013, 03:07 PM
Also, I don't think we'd really see the end of Brad Richards unless we had this compliance buyout really. But since it's a one time thing we may be forced to do it this year. If it was something that could be done next year I think they'd give him a year to figure it out but time isn't on his side. I think they'll try and trade him by draft time and if not buy him out.

The only problem, as stated in one of the articles, is injury and its a major one. If he gets hurt by some chance they couldn't buy him out and at this point, with a shrinking cap, thats a major gamble that they dont want to take.

bsi
05-23-2013, 03:19 PM
The only problem, as stated in one of the articles, is injury and its a major one. If he gets hurt by some chance they couldn't buy him out and at this point, with a shrinking cap, thats a major gamble that they dont want to take.

I think the biggest factor in Brad being benched is that he can't physically handle Boston's 4th line, and if he can't play 4th line and he's not playing well enough to push out the other 3 centres then something has to give I guess.

NYY09
05-23-2013, 03:40 PM
I think the biggest factor in Brad being benched is that he can't physically handle Boston's 4th line, and if he can't play 4th line and he's not playing well enough to push out the other 3 centres then something has to give I guess.

I think the biggest factor in his benching is the fact that he's been terrible. Plain and simple.

bsi
05-23-2013, 05:16 PM
I think the biggest factor in his benching is the fact that he's been terrible. Plain and simple.

For sure, he hasn't been good, but who has? Has Rick Nash blown our doors off? He's got one goal all playoffs, the same as Richards but he's playing on the 1st line. What about the rest of our forwards, Callahan, Zuccarello, etc etc haven't been able to generate any offense. These are guys that are supposed to score for us To a man this team hasn't generated any offense, they haven't been able to score on the PP, they haven't even given Lundqvist the protection he deserves. Lundqvist is the only guy who's shown up and done what he's capable of this series.

NYY09
05-23-2013, 05:59 PM
For sure, he hasn't been good, but who has? Has Rick Nash blown our doors off? He's got one goal all playoffs, the same as Richards but he's playing on the 1st line. What about the rest of our forwards, Callahan, Zuccarello, etc etc haven't been able to generate any offense. These are guys that are supposed to score for us To a man this team hasn't generated any offense, they haven't been able to score on the PP, they haven't even given Lundqvist the protection he deserves. Lundqvist is the only guy who's shown up and done what he's capable of this series.

Oh for sure, there are a lot of culprits on offense but with Richards he turned into a huge liability also on defense along with being non-existent on offense. At least the other guys weren't a black hole on the defensive end as well. Just an awful year for Brad.

beast023
05-24-2013, 01:49 PM
I can't really see anyone taking a chance on a trade for him after what he did this season... Although no one saw the Gomez deal coming and I can only hope history repeats itself... With that being said who does Sather pull a Gainey on and for what?

bsi
05-24-2013, 06:44 PM
Was listening to Bob MacKenzie talk about this and he felt that Richards would be getting a compliance buyout anyway unless he was totally lighting it up and dominating. The new CBA penalizes back door contracts of which this is one and would cost us cap and money if he were to retire early which is what the structure of the contract would lead you to believe was gonna happen. He also felt that the Rangers might wait until next year to do the buyout. I think this is probably the most likely scenario as there's a possibility Richards can get it going again next year, who knows maybe instead of a buyout you trade him for some pieces at the deadline or make a playoff run with him on board and then do the buyout. Either way it sounds like he's done here like most others because of a bad contract signed by Sather.

bsi
05-24-2013, 06:51 PM
I can't really see anyone taking a chance on a trade for him after what he did this season... Although no one saw the Gomez deal coming and I can only hope history repeats itself... With that being said who does Sather pull a Gainey on and for what?

When I was suggesting trade I wasn't a lot back because of his play and contract but maybe you send him to say to Toronto for a guy like Jesse Blacker or Matt Finn to help fill some holes we have on D. However as I said in my last post I think NY will keep him around for next year and see if he gets back to his old self in a real season.

Sandman
05-24-2013, 10:43 PM
From here, assuming Sather is still in charge, he swipes Dolan's credit card for Richard's buyout and acquires the biggest name (not necessarily the best player or best fit) he can.

NYY09
05-24-2013, 11:41 PM
From here, assuming Sather is still in charge, he swipes Dolan's credit card for Richard's buyout and acquires the biggest name (not necessarily the best player or best fit) he can.

Its not a lock that Richards gets bought out but at this point it would be a surprise. Also I'm not sure that Glenn will go big game hunting if Brad does get bought out. The team needs to resign some key players and it would seem like they will add a piece or two but not sure that it will be a big name signing, esp cuz there really isnt that type of player out there.

It would make more sense to add some depth and have cap space going into the season so they can make a deadline move if need be and have the space to do it.

nyr2002nyr
05-25-2013, 09:35 AM
Its not a lock that Richards gets bought out but at this point it would be a surprise. Also I'm not sure that Glenn will go big game hunting if Brad does get bought out. The team needs to resign some key players and it would seem like they will add a piece or two but not sure that it will be a big name signing, esp cuz there really isnt that type of player out there.

It would make more sense to add some depth and have cap space going into the season so they can make a deadline move if need be and have the space to do it.

Sather should never be allowed to ever sign another "BIG" Free agent

bsi
05-27-2013, 06:15 PM
.

Rangers in 7
05-27-2013, 07:05 PM
there really isnt anyone available this summer that will have an impact that richards was supposed to have, i think you buy him out and promote jt miller and play him as your 3rd line center to fill the spot with brassard and stepan playing as 1a and 1b

NYSPORTS98
06-21-2013, 11:47 PM
Why doesn't the NHL allow partial buyouts?

Richards would be awarded all his money if bought out and free to sign with another team. If the Rangers still value Richards (and I'm not sure why they would), why can't they buyout half the contract (or any percentage) and let the remaining contract continue? The team retains the player, the player still gets his money yet it frees up cap space.

Sandman
06-22-2013, 05:06 PM
Why doesn't the NHL allow partial buyouts?

Richards would be awarded all his money if bought out and free to sign with another team. If the Rangers still value Richards (and I'm not sure why they would), why can't they buyout half the contract (or any percentage) and let the remaining contract continue? The team retains the player, the player still gets his money yet it frees up cap space.
That would just be getting around the salary cap, it'd be like a payout instead of a buyout. What would stop a team from buying out 99% of a contract and keeping a guy on the team for 1$

bsi
06-22-2013, 05:40 PM
I'm calling it. Brad Richards is playing with this team next year no matter what the cap implications. However I see our 14 million being spent like this and I'm gonna go by comparables and what they got when they were RFA's.
Marc Staal got 3.9 for 5 years, I see Ryan McDonagh getting similar but maybe not as high as Staal is our best D no matter what people think of him and he's an alternate captain, so for McDonagh I see a 5 year with an average of 3.5-4, I know people will want to compare him to Subban but that's the Norris trophy winnner so he's gonna get less than him.
Ryan Callahan vs Derek Stepan, Callahan got 4.25 for 3 years coming off his best season here as an RFA. I see Stepan somewhere in the 4 mill for 3-5 years depending on whether Stepan's agent feels as though he'll be better under AV.

Ryan Clowe is worth some cash but he can't be signed for over 5 million, and personally with his concussions this year he should be signed for around Callahan money so I'm gonna give him 4-4.5 mill and only for 2 years max. If he leaves we'll have to make sure Zuccarello is kept.

Carl Hagelin and MZA should only be signed if they are willing to do it for 1-1.5, and I doubt Zuccarello will want that so he's likely the odd guy out.
So to sum up in my perfect world.
Hagelin 1.25
Clowe 4.25
Stepan 4
McDonagh 3.5
Which leaves roughly 13 mill of our 14.155 million minus the 1.5 you save from putting Pyatt in the minors. This only solves the problem for this year but we have a good enough team to make a solid run at the cup, and if things don't work out we can look at buying out Richards or trading Clowe at a late date. I just think our roster is weak without those two in it and we're gonna have to go looking for players if we don't have them on the team.

Richards and Brassard can switch spots, but I see a resurgence in Richy under AV.

Kreider Stepan Nash
Clowe Richards Callahan
Hagelin Brassard Dorsett
Powe Boyle Asham---Pyatt is odd man out

Staal Girardi
McDonagh DelZotto
McIlrath Stralman

apdamico
06-22-2013, 06:17 PM
BSI, Why would you have tryouts at left wing and why don't you see Chris Kreider on next season's team? Regardless, we should know in the next couple of days about Richards, but I'm thinking he's no longer a Ranger:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/hockey/rangers/rangers-discuss-richards-future-upcoming-days-article-1.1379641?localLinksEnabled=false

bsi
06-22-2013, 08:13 PM
BSI, Why would you have tryouts at left wing and why don't you see Chris Kreider on next season's team? Regardless, we should know in the next couple of days about Richards, but I'm thinking he's no longer a Ranger:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/hockey/rangers/rangers-discuss-richards-future-upcoming-days-article-1.1379641?localLinksEnabled=false

Damnit forgot bout Kreider haha. Knew I forgot someone. I had him in my cap space but forgot to include him in the lineup. I'll edit. I really think that Alain Vigneault will want Richards on his team, and I think Sather will give him the year to see what he can do and if he's not fitting in then the buyout next year. Centermen of Richards caliber aren't easy to come by, he had a slower year yes but that's not the norm.

nyr1980
06-22-2013, 08:30 PM
I'm really on the fence with Richards. I think they may need the cap space, but I also think there's a strong chance of him having a bounce back season. If he did that, they look very nice and deep down the middle, with Stepan, Brass, Richards, Boyle, and Miller. Could move Miller to the wing then, if needed.

NYSPORTS98
06-22-2013, 11:10 PM
I'm calling it. Brad Richards is playing with this team next year no matter what the cap implications.n

You too can own a million dollar house with an interest only loan. Credit pigs don't know any better yet i'm hoping Sather does.

bsi
06-22-2013, 11:47 PM
You too can own a million dollar house with an interest only loan. Credit pigs don't know any better yet i'm hoping Sather does.

We have a chance at a cup next year with all those players I mentioned, I see no reason to dump it down the drain. We have a year to buy him out or trade him at the deadline. There's a chance he rebounds and puts up good numbers next year under AV. Dumping him now is a panic decision. What happens if we buy him out and he goes to Pitsburgh or New Jersey for a million a year and puts up 80 points? Not only did we lose an 80 point guy but we gave one to our rivals at a steal. I don't like the idea of buying him out based on a shortened season and I really don't like handing another team a top 6 forward for a low cap number.

nyr1980
06-23-2013, 12:10 AM
Buy him out and he'll go catch on somewhere else, find his PP game again, and be a point per game guy again.

metswon69
06-23-2013, 07:12 AM
Buy him out and he'll go catch on somewhere else, find his PP game again, and be a point per game guy again.

I wouldn't be so sure of that just because it didn't look like all his struggles were system related last year. He was a step or two slow most of the season, his conditioning was not there, and his shot looked awful from the point on the PP.

The former two can be blamed on the lockout hypothetically but a veteran like Richards should know how to keep himself in shape even after an extended lockout so i don't know how much of that is an excuse. To me, it's a sign of age and although Lecavalier is the same age, his frame presumably will hold up better than Richards given Vinny has 4 inches and 30lbs on Brad.

That said, I could see Slats giving Brad the extra year with a new coach but if Vinny becomes available i would love to see him in a Ranger's uniform.

bsi
06-23-2013, 07:39 AM
I wouldn't be so sure of that just because it didn't look like all his struggles were system related last year. He was a step or two slow most of the season, his conditioning was not there, and his shot looked awful from the point on the PP.

The former two can be blamed on the lockout hypothetically but a veteran like Richards should know how to keep himself in shape even after an extended lockout so i don't know how much of that is an excuse. To me, it's a sign of age and although Lecavalier is the same age, his frame presumably will hold up better than Richards given Vinny has 4 inches and 30lbs on Brad.

That said, I could see Slats giving Brad the extra year with a new coach but if Vinny becomes available i would love to see him in a Ranger's uniform.

Brad Richards 46 11 23 34 +8
Vincent Lecavalier 39 10 22 32 -5
Lecavalier is a downgrade from Richards in pretty much every aspect of the game and that's comparing Richards in his worst year to him, if you compare the last 4 years Lecavalier is 63 points short and he's missed over 40 games compared to Richards 14 games missed. Buying Richards out doesn't guarantee you get Lecavalier for cheap as Montreal will throw whatever is needed to get him home.

Richards has never been a fast player, he was always better when he had players moving ahead of him, something that was a problem with our collapsing defensive coverage, our wingers were too low to have a proper breakout.

redwhiteandblue
06-23-2013, 03:42 PM
I was on the fence, hell even at one point over it, with getting rid of Brad. Truth is though as long as the buyout is eligible next off-season, the juice is worth the squeeze here. Only way the team should have bought him out was if Getzlaf was on the open market, and now he's not.

Not even sure next years FA class, but I hope there is a good centermen in case we do buy him out.

Or who knows, Stepan truly stepped it up this past year and that caliber of great play may be his ceiling (nothing wrong with that), but maybe he goes to another level and JT Miller comes along and sets himself up as a nice future #2.

Either way, we will be enduring another "?" down the middle of our line up to start another season.

I do feel good about a revived career for Richards under AV though.

metswon69
06-23-2013, 06:07 PM
Brad Richards 46 11 23 34 +8
Vincent Lecavalier 39 10 22 32 -5
Lecavalier is a downgrade from Richards in pretty much every aspect of the game and that's comparing Richards in his worst year to him, if you compare the last 4 years Lecavalier is 63 points short and he's missed over 40 games compared to Richards 14 games missed. Buying Richards out doesn't guarantee you get Lecavalier for cheap as Montreal will throw whatever is needed to get him home.

Richards has never been a fast player, he was always better when he had players moving ahead of him, something that was a problem with our collapsing defensive coverage, our wingers were too low to have a proper breakout.

+/- is not the best statistic when you have a team in the Lightning that was second to last in the EC this year. Even Stamkos as good as he was this year was a -4. Like i said, i don't see it happening anyway because there are a lot of variables here like does Richards get bought out? Does Lecavalier get bought out? Do they presumably give Richards another year because of the change in system?

Richards was awful to start the season, he caught fire down the stretch like alot of the team did but he was again non existent in the playoffs. I never said Richards was a burner but to me he looked a step slow even for Brad for most of the season.

I'd rather have the more physical presence with the better shot.

Not to mention games missed are another thing i kind of take issue with. Richards being banged up and still going out there while sometimes being a 3rd or 4th line center (based on play) is not what they gave him 60+ million dollars to be.

bsi
06-23-2013, 07:47 PM
+/- is not the best statistic when you have a team in the Lightning that was second to last in the EC this year. Even Stamkos as good as he was this year was a -4. Like i said, i don't see it happening anyway because there are a lot of variables here like does Richards get bought out? Does Lecavalier get bought out? Do they presumably give Richards another year because of the change in system?

Richards was awful to start the season, he caught fire down the stretch like alot of the team did but he was again non existent in the playoffs. I never said Richards was a burner but to me he looked a step slow even for Brad for most of the season.

I'd rather have the more physical presence with the better shot.

Not to mention games missed are another thing i kind of take issue with. Richards being banged up and still going out there while sometimes being a 3rd or 4th line center (based on play) is not what they gave him 60+ million dollars to be.

Without Richards this year we miss the playoffs, he was that good going down the stretch, he was in a funk and he got out of it, like he always did.. As for playoffs, name a guy outside of Brassard that actually scored enough during playoffs? Having Richards demoted to the third and fouth line is on the coach, he never should have been sent that low on the roster, the same way Darrell Powe should never be on the first line. Most coaches let their top players get out of their funk on their own, much like Chicago did with Patrick Kane and it's paid out big time since the last game of the L.A series. People can argue all they want but a team lacking scoring in the playoffs sat out Brad Richards and played Michael Haley, a guy who couldn't make the roster all year and couldn't find the back of the net with a gps, so Richards being on the 4th line should never have happened.

Secondly Lecavalier hasn't been physical in years, and it's probably because he's constantly missing time. Richards hasn't missed much time with the exception of his concussion in Dallas, so arguing that Lecavalier is more durable isn't true. In fact Richards seems to be able to avoid getting creamed by clean checks, he's a smart hockey player who maybe wasn't ready for this season due to the lockout but he's still a good player no matter how he played this season.
I agree with you that if Richards were bought out we should maybe look at other buyouts but if we're comparing just the players right now I take Richards over Lecavalier every day of the week as he's outscoring him in a defensive system. I'm not saying I wouldn't take Lecavalier, I'm just saying Richards is still the better player. I'd be surprised if Alain Vigneault took this team over without knowing that Brad Richards wasn't being bought out. I'm telling you now that Richards will have a big year under AV, he's going to be given plenty of lattitude to be creative and make the odd mistake without the fear of being demoted.

metswon69
06-23-2013, 08:57 PM
Without Richards this year we miss the playoffs, he was that good going down the stretch, he was in a funk and he got out of it, like he always did.. As for playoffs, name a guy outside of Brassard that actually scored enough during playoffs? Having Richards demoted to the third and fouth line is on the coach, he never should have been sent that low on the roster, the same way Darrell Powe should never be on the first line. Most coaches let their top players get out of their funk on their own, much like Chicago did with Patrick Kane and it's paid out big time since the last game of the L.A series. People can argue all they want but a team lacking scoring in the playoffs sat out Brad Richards and played Michael Haley, a guy who couldn't make the roster all year and couldn't find the back of the net with a gps, so Richards being on the 4th line should never have happened.

Secondly Lecavalier hasn't been physical in years, and it's probably because he's constantly missing time. Richards hasn't missed much time with the exception of his concussion in Dallas, so arguing that Lecavalier is more durable isn't true. In fact Richards seems to be able to avoid getting creamed by clean checks, he's a smart hockey player who maybe wasn't ready for this season due to the lockout but he's still a good player no matter how he played this season.
I agree with you that if Richards were bought out we should maybe look at other buyouts but if we're comparing just the players right now I take Richards over Lecavalier every day of the week as he's outscoring him in a defensive system. I'm not saying I wouldn't take Lecavalier, I'm just saying Richards is still the better player. I'd be surprised if Alain Vigneault took this team over without knowing that Brad Richards wasn't being bought out. I'm telling you now that Richards will have a big year under AV, he's going to be given plenty of lattitude to be creative and make the odd mistake without the fear of being demoted.

True but he was outplayed by Brian Boyle and Derrick Stepan in the playoffs as well. Now i understand that was heavily due by his TOI restrictions and demotions Torts put on Brad but a guy like that should be playing than -3 and 1 goal in 10 playoff games. I mean this is a guy who was consistently a PPG player in his time in Tampa and Dallas. I just don't know if he will revert back to that under AV.

I hope you are right but i just don't have the confidence in a guy who disappears for long stretches of the season. He was bad to start last season and this season his game was equally bewildering at times. How much of that is on the coach and system? This is a guy who played for Tortorella before, had a whole preseason to work out the adjustments last season, and should have been well versed in what he was doing this year.

To me it didn't seem that way.

And i wasn't saying that Lecavalier has been more durable i am saying imo he would be more durable as they both to continue to age based on their physical stature. I agree that Tortorella's shaking up of lines did many of the Ranger players no favors at times but Richards should still be a better player than what he has been.

Hopefully Vigneault can fix that with a more wide open offensive system.

nyr1980
06-23-2013, 09:17 PM
Richards has been the more complete, more clutch player out of the pair. Great as Vinny has been, it was Richards play that won them,that cup. Plus, he's got fewer miles on his tires, and has had fewer injuries. I'd rather keep Richards than buy him out and pick up Vinny if available.

bsi
06-23-2013, 09:22 PM
True but he was outplayed by Brian Boyle and Derrick Stepan in the playoffs as well. Now i understand that was heavily due by his TOI restrictions and demotions Torts put on Brad but a guy like that should be playing than -3 and 1 goal in 10 playoff games. I mean this is a guy who was consistently a PPG player in his time in Tampa and Dallas. I just don't know if he will revert back to that under AV.

I hope you are right but i just don't have the confidence in a guy who disappears for long stretches of the season. He was bad to start last season and this season his game was equally bewildering at times this year. How much of that is on the coach and system? This is a guy who played with Tortorella before, had a whole preseason to work out his kinks last season, and should have been well versed in what he was doing this year.

To me it didn't seem that way.

And i wasn't saying that Lecavalier has been more durable i am saying imo he would be more durable as they both to continue to age based on their physical stature. I agree that Tortorella's shaking up of lines did many of the Ranger players no favors at times but Richards should still be a better player than what he has been.

Hopefully Vigneault can fix that with a more wide open offensive system.

Nobody outside of Derek Brassard played particularily well offensively this playoffs and yes Richards wasn't the best this playoffs but who was outside of Brassard? As always Torts picked a scapegoat and moved him around the lines, and finally sat him out. Rick Nash never played well yet he held on to his top line spot, why wasn't he put to the 4th line? Derek Stepan didn't have a good playoffs either yet he was still on the top line, Brian Boyle played well yet was never moved up the roster so it made little sense to demote Richards right out of the lineup. The year before it was Dubinsky's fault, this past year it was Gaborik until he was traded and then it became Richards, it was DelZotto before Dubinsky. As I said before there wasn't really a lot of good going on in our top lines and there isn't a coach in the world outside of Tortorella that would scratch him for Michael Haley, especially since Richards was our best playoff forward last year. I just don't buy that Richards can be great down the stretch and then just forget how to play hockey, there was more at play than that, there was a problem between him and the coach IMO.

metswon69
06-23-2013, 09:32 PM
Nobody outside of Derek Brassard played particularily well offensively this playoffs and yes Richards wasn't the best this playoffs but who was outside of Brassard? As always Torts picked a scapegoat and moved him around the lines, and finally sat him out. Rick Nash never played well yet he held on to his top line spot, why wasn't he put to the 4th line? Derek Stepan didn't have a good playoffs either yet he was still on the top line, Brian Boyle played well yet was never moved up the roster so it made little sense to demote Richards right out of the lineup. The year before it was Dubinsky's fault, this past year it was Gaborik until he was traded and then it became Richards, it was DelZotto before Dubinsky. As I said before there wasn't really a lot of good going on in our top lines and there isn't a coach in the world outside of Tortorella that would scratch him for Michael Haley, especially since Richards was our best playoff forward last year. I just don't buy that Richards can be great down the stretch and then just forget how to play hockey, there was more at play than that, there was a problem between him and the coach IMO.

Well that's what i hold on to between the system change and the change in the demeanor of coach, hopefully Brad will be able to go back to being his more offensive self. My question is how much does the change translate to statistically and how much of his game was affected by Tort's system? Does age play into it now? Is he not the same player he was the last say 2 years in Dallas? How much of the physical pace (in his career) has conversely affected Richard's production?

These are all questions we will get answers to next season but we do agree that Tort's system constant line changing, quick demotions, calling out players publicly, and just his locker room presence affected certain players negatively. Probably moreso on Richards because of what was expected out of him and what his true production ended up being.

My question is like i said how much?

nyr2002nyr
06-23-2013, 10:34 PM
+/- is not the best statistic when you have a team in the Lightning that was second to last in the EC this year. Even Stamkos as good as he was this year was a -4. Like i said, i don't see it happening anyway because there are a lot of variables here like does Richards get bought out? Does Lecavalier get bought out? Do they presumably give Richards another year because of the change in system?

Richards was awful to start the season, he caught fire down the stretch like alot of the team did but he was again non existent in the playoffs. I never said Richards was a burner but to me he looked a step slow even for Brad for most of the season.

I'd rather have the more physical presence with the better shot.

Not to mention games missed are another thing i kind of take issue with. Richards being banged up and still going out there while sometimes being a 3rd or 4th line center (based on play) is not what they gave him 60+ million dollars to be.


While I agree brad is a career - player and to me that says a lot

NYSPORTS98
06-23-2013, 10:39 PM
Richards stunk in every area of the game. Buy him out. He skated slow as heck, he couldn't thread the needle on a breakout, couldn't QB the PP down low or from the point. He held onto the puck forever, rarely won any battle in the corners, and has a mediocre shot. He was awful.

rocowear21
06-24-2013, 12:05 PM
Richards stunk in every area of the game. Buy him out. He skated slow as heck, he couldn't thread the needle on a breakout, couldn't QB the PP down low or from the point. He held onto the puck forever, rarely won any battle in the corners, and has a mediocre shot. He was awful.

Fully agree in no way should we be keeping Richards around. Got I believe he gave the other team more scoring chances then our own. Remember all of his no look blind passes he did. Good god they were horrible. He couldnt keep up with anyone either. I respect him as a player but when you have the chance to shred this kind of contract you have to do it. If he gets hurt during the year next year then we cant buy him out. You have to do it now

J4KOP99
06-24-2013, 04:05 PM
Ok, so we let Richards go this off season... Then what do we do? Are there really any feasible options that will be drastically better?

MJL80
06-24-2013, 04:16 PM
I don't think he'll be back... while I'd like to see him have a bounce back year (and confident he could under AV's system), we have to look at the big picture. It's a huge risk to take keeping him around another year, especially when we have to lock up Henrik and 4 key players.

This drama will be hanging over Brad and the rangers all season long. I say buy him out, let him have a fresh start and find his game elsewhere. It's time for Stepan, Brassard, and the kids to step up their game and take it to the next level.

theRANGEREAGLES
06-24-2013, 04:54 PM
Ok, so we let Richards go this off season... Then what do we do? Are there really any feasible options that will be drastically better?

Why keep a $6.7 mil player on the roster to keep on the third line? Step and Brassaard are both better, younger, and cheaper than him, Boyle is perfectly capable of playing 3rd line, not to mention we have jt miller waiting and can also play 3rd or 4th line minutes

metswon69
06-24-2013, 04:58 PM
Ok, so we let Richards go this off season... Then what do we do? Are there really any feasible options that will be drastically better?

Not to this point but we don't know who or who won't be bought out yet. Richard's cap hit is significant (over 10% of the available cap room). If they could get off the hook for that, it would be great.

Then you make a strong push for Lecavalier or another possible player like that who is bought out and you move laterally talent wise while opening up a decent amount of cap space to add other players in the future.

Again that's all dependent on who is bought out this offseason.

bsi
06-24-2013, 05:10 PM
It looks like management is exploring trade possibilities before the draft before they tip their hand. While many of you think Richards is washed up I don't believe most of the league feels the same way. A team like Detroit would take him in a heartbeat as long as the trade was something they could live with. I believe that's why Slats hasn't said one way or the other what he's doing, I personally think he'll stay for the year if there's no trade made.

Rangers in 7
06-24-2013, 06:01 PM
personally getting rid of richards would be great for us, id look at danny brier? (sp) if he gets bought out, he can play good minutes in an AV system and can still put the puck in the net, plus we arent looking for him to score 50, we are looking for depth scoring and he can also help out on the pp

fingerbang
06-24-2013, 06:27 PM
Richards season was underwhelming. Everyone expected a ppg from him. Having said that, he was still on pace for about 60 points, he's not completely useless. Sign the kids and then see how much money is left. Might be better off signing depth though.

nyr2002nyr
06-25-2013, 12:41 AM
I'm just at a loss as to why everyone is so shocked about him making bad plays and turning it over. It's nothing new. I know his scoring slowed some and maybe it making it stand out more I guess.

apdamico
06-25-2013, 03:39 PM
Richards can only be bought out between now and 7/4. He also has a no movement clause in his contract, so there won't be a trade as some hoped. Sather has already made his decision, but is likely waiting to see what other players get bought out and become free-agents. I really can't see the Rangers taking the chance of injury and being forced to live with this contract. I'm sure that Sather knows one hit or errant puck could cost the Rangers (like Sauer/Staal type injuries) to be stuck with no recourse; thus, making this an easy decision.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-25-2013, 03:40 PM
I'm calling it. Brad Richards is playing with this team next year no matter what the cap implications. However I see our 14 million being spent like this and I'm gonna go by comparables and what they got when they were RFA's.
Marc Staal got 3.9 for 5 years, I see Ryan McDonagh getting similar but maybe not as high as Staal is our best D no matter what people think of him and he's an alternate captain, so for McDonagh I see a 5 year with an average of 3.5-4, I know people will want to compare him to Subban but that's the Norris trophy winnner so he's gonna get less than him.
Ryan Callahan vs Derek Stepan, Callahan got 4.25 for 3 years coming off his best season here as an RFA. I see Stepan somewhere in the 4 mill for 3-5 years depending on whether Stepan's agent feels as though he'll be better under AV.

Ryan Clowe is worth some cash but he can't be signed for over 5 million, and personally with his concussions this year he should be signed for around Callahan money so I'm gonna give him 4-4.5 mill and only for 2 years max. If he leaves we'll have to make sure Zuccarello is kept.

Carl Hagelin and MZA should only be signed if they are willing to do it for 1-1.5, and I doubt Zuccarello will want that so he's likely the odd guy out.
So to sum up in my perfect world.
Hagelin 1.25
Clowe 4.25
Stepan 4
McDonagh 3.5
Which leaves roughly 13 mill of our 14.155 million minus the 1.5 you save from putting Pyatt in the minors. This only solves the problem for this year but we have a good enough team to make a solid run at the cup, and if things don't work out we can look at buying out Richards or trading Clowe at a late date. I just think our roster is weak without those two in it and we're gonna have to go looking for players if we don't have them on the team.

Richards and Brassard can switch spots, but I see a resurgence in Richy under AV.

Kreider Stepan Nash
Clowe Richards Callahan
Hagelin Brassard Dorsett
Powe Boyle Asham---Pyatt is odd man out

Staal Girardi
McDonagh DelZotto
McIlrath Stralman


Clowe at 4-4.5 mill and another 2nd round pick?

Richards at 9 mill?

Slats will have to consider the risk that they can not have their contracts dumped if they are injured.

I could see us keeping 1 of them but find it doubtful we will risk almost 1/4 of our salary cap on keeping them both given their age, declining production, and the injury/salary risk.

As far as Mats goes I think he will be resigned for 1.5-1.8 mill a year. It is very hard to find guys that will get you 50 points a season and can play both wings for less than that. In fact some fans would not be shocked if Mats has as many points as Clowe or Richards next season.

metswon69
06-25-2013, 03:47 PM
Clowe at 4-4.5 mill and another 2nd round pick?

Richards at 9 mill?

Slats will have to consider the risk that they can not have their contracts dumped if they are injured.

I could see us keeping 1 of them but find it doubtful we will risk almost 1/4 of our salary cap on keeping them both given their age, declining production, and the injury/salary risk.

As far as Mats goes I think he will be resigned for 1.5-1.8 mill a year. It is very hard to find guys that will get you 50 points a season and can play both wings for less than that. In fact some fans would not be shocked if Mats has as many points as Clowe or Richards next season.

Welcome back Sly :)

bsi
06-25-2013, 05:10 PM
Clowe at 4-4.5 mill and another 2nd round pick?

Richards at 9 mill?

Slats will have to consider the risk that they can not have their contracts dumped if they are injured.

I could see us keeping 1 of them but find it doubtful we will risk almost 1/4 of our salary cap on keeping them both given their age, declining production, and the injury/salary risk.

As far as Mats goes I think he will be resigned for 1.5-1.8 mill a year. It is very hard to find guys that will get you 50 points a season and can play both wings for less than that. In fact some fans would not be shocked if Mats has as many points as Clowe or Richards next season.

Sorry Sly, I know you love Zuccarello but he's too small for playoff hockey bud. He's got a ton of courage and skill but he's just not big enough to be a 2nd line winger and isn't suited to be a checking forward on the lower lines. AV is notorious for having his top lines scoring and bottom checking, I just don't see a fit here for him unless he's willing to adjust his game which I'm doubtful he will want to. I see us using Christian Thomas as a cheaper option than Zuccarello if we need a scoring winger. While Zuccarello might have points in the regular season he's not going to be as effective as Clowe in the playoffs. Watching him trying to hit Boston's D was almost comical as he was like a fly trying to take down an elephant, I love his skill and heart but as they say, you can't teach big. Zuccarello would be nice to keep around but I really don't see him wanting to be a part time NHL'er at this point in his career.
Clowe is a much better suited player for the second line, our team is bigger, stronger and even more skilled with him on the #2 line, I see him worth as much as Callahan as long as he's healthy. If we learned anything this playoffs we need players like Clowe to be successful on the road to the cup, the teams that were successful this year had bigger skilled physical forwards, Boston (Lucic, Horton), Chicago (Bickel), L.A (Penner) . If I was guaranteed that we'd get Clarkson or Bryan Bickel I'd be ok with letting Clowe go but there may be no guarantee of that and we have the inside track on Clowe right now so it might be the easier signing and Clowe picked our team to come to so maybe he'd be willing to take a little bit of a cut over Clarkson or Bickel. We were a much better team with Clowe and I think we'd have had a much better chance of beating Boston had we had him and ofcourse Staal back. If we don't add some size be it Clowe, Clarkson, or Bickel etc then I guess we'd be smart to sign Zuccarello given his skill level but we need more size in our top 6 to compete.

Also Richards cap hit is 6.66 not 9, what Dolan pays him is irrelevant to what the team does really, it's the cap number that matters in NY.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-25-2013, 05:39 PM
Welcome back Sly :)

Thanks dude. I read the board while away but did not sign in. :)

SLY WILLIAMS
06-25-2013, 05:50 PM
Sorry Sly, I know you love Zuccarello but he's too small for playoff hockey bud. He's got a ton of courage and skill but he's just not big enough to be a 2nd line winger and isn't suited to be a checking forward on the lower lines. AV is notorious for having his top lines scoring and bottom checking, I just don't see a fit here for him unless he's willing to adjust his game which I'm doubtful he will want to. I see us using Christian Thomas as a cheaper option than Zuccarello if we need a scoring winger. While Zuccarello might have points in the regular season he's not going to be as effective as Clowe in the playoffs. Watching him trying to hit Boston's D was almost comical as he was like a fly trying to take down an elephant, I love his skill and heart but as they say, you can't teach big. Zuccarello would be nice to keep around but I really don't see him wanting to be a part time NHL'er at this point in his career.
Clowe is a much better suited player for the second line, our team is bigger, stronger and even more skilled with him on the #2 line, I see him worth as much as Callahan as long as he's healthy. If we learned anything this playoffs we need players like Clowe to be successful on the road to the cup, the teams that were successful this year had bigger skilled physical forwards, Boston (Lucic, Horton), Chicago (Bickel), L.A (Penner) . If I was guaranteed that we'd get Clarkson or Bryan Bickel I'd be ok with letting Clowe go but there may be no guarantee of that and we have the inside track on Clowe right now so it might be the easier signing and Clowe picked our team to come to so maybe he'd be willing to take a little bit of a cut over Clarkson or Bickel. We were a much better team with Clowe and I think we'd have had a much better chance of beating Boston had we had him and ofcourse Staal back. If we don't add some size be it Clowe, Clarkson, or Bickel etc then I guess we'd be smart to sign Zuccarello given his skill level but we need more size in our top 6 to compete.

Also Richards cap hit is 6.66 not 9, what Dolan pays him is irrelevant to what the team does really, it's the cap number that matters in NY.

If the teams 2nd leading playoff point scorer (Mats) is too small for playoff hockey at 1.5 mill a season than what are Clowe (only 2 playoff games played) and Richards (1 playoff point) at 4.5 mill and 9 mill? The kid out produced every single NY Ranger player except Brass in the playoffs.

Mats has shown time and time again that he does not have to be on the 2nd line to produce.

I believe the notion that the 3rd and 4th lines have to be a bunch of unskilled grinders left town a few weeks ago. I believe Mats will be resigned.

Wrapping up 15 mill in salary for both Clowe and Richards would be a huge risk. Not only would we be giving away another 2nd round pick for Clowe but we would be giving away the ability to dump their contracts if either player gets injured. On a team that will have a tight cap situation (after resigning Lundy) a guy (Mats) that can get them 50 points and some shootout wins for 1.5-1.7 mill a season is a real need never mind luxury.

Rangers in 7
06-25-2013, 06:11 PM
zucc will no doubt be resigned in my mind for 2 or 3 years and 1-1.5 per year and he will be a great option, i dont see us signign clowe though, especially for 4.5 million

bsi
06-25-2013, 06:31 PM
If the teams 2nd leading playoff point scorer (Mats) is too small for playoff hockey at 1.5 mill a season than what are Clowe (only 2 playoff games played) and Richards (1 playoff point) at 4.5 mill and 9 mill? The kid out produced every single NY Ranger player except Brass in the playoffs.

Mats has shown time and time again that he does not have to be on the 2nd line to produce.

I believe the notion that the 3rd and 4th lines have to be a bunch of unskilled grinders left town a few weeks ago. I believe Mats will be resigned.

Wrapping up 15 mill in salary for both Clowe and Richards would be a huge risk. Not only would we be giving away another 2nd round pick for Clowe but we would be giving away the ability to dump their contracts if either player gets injured. On a team that will have a tight cap situation (after resigning Lundy) a guy (Mats) that can get them 50 points and some shootout wins for 1.5-1.7 mill a season is a real need never mind luxury.

How many of those points did he get against Boston? He had 2 assists, and one of them was of the phantom variety where Nash took the puck up the ice himself and buried it and the second was on a PP shot from the point by Girardi. He was overpowered in that series, and like I said before God love him, I wish everyone on the team played as hard as him but he was like a kid playing a man's game against Boston. Sure he had some points against a less physical Washington team but that's the whole reason Washington lost to us in the first place. Personally I'd rather have Clowe, and if we're signing Zuccarello for almost 2 million I'd rather put that towards Clowe's salary. We have one option for two top 6 LW's if Clowe isn't resigned, and we may not even have 1 option if Kreider doesn't show up ready this year as Hagelin isn't a top 6 LW. LW is always our problem, Clowe finally addressed that and our PP was finally good with him in the lineup.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-25-2013, 06:51 PM
How many of those points did he get against Boston? He had 2 assists, and one of them was of the phantom variety where Nash took the puck up the ice himself and buried it and the second was on a PP shot from the point by Girardi. He was overpowered in that series, and like I said before God love him, I wish everyone on the team played as hard as him but he was like a kid playing a man's game against Boston. Sure he had some points against a less physical Washington team but that's the whole reason Washington lost to us in the first place. Personally I'd rather have Clowe, and if we're signing Zuccarello for almost 2 million I'd rather put that towards Clowe's salary. We have one option for two top 6 LW's if Clowe isn't resigned, and we may not even have 1 option if Kreider doesn't show up ready this year as Hagelin isn't a top 6 LW. LW is always our problem, Clowe finally addressed that and our PP was finally good with him in the lineup.

I wish we had more "phantom" break out taps like that pass by Mats that allowed Nash to break out with speed instead of blindly dumping it up the boards. Boston had several great chances off the same exact type of break out touch passes. He only had 2 points in 5 games vs the Bruins. Did our team score a lot vs the Bruins? How many Rangers produced more points per minute played in that series?

Clowe had a very good first game but I would not say he solved our power play woes after that 1 game.

If we were talking a healthy Clowe at 28 it would be something to consider but at this age, declining production, 3 concussions, costing another 2nd round pick, etc it is a different dynamic.

It is not Clowe or Mats. Both guys will be looked at individually and their situations will decide if they are signed. Mats can play LW or RW. He can play 2nd or 3rd line. Clowe is closer to a 3rd liner than a 2nd liner based on his last season.

Based on salary it may come down to Clowe vs Richards. Or neither.

Rangers in 7
06-25-2013, 07:39 PM
id have to go zucc over clowe on this one, clowe is aging and has been declining over the years

bsi
06-25-2013, 08:45 PM
I wish we had more "phantom" break out taps like that pass by Mats that allowed Nash to break out with speed instead of blindly dumping it up the boards. Boston had several great chances off the same exact type of break out touch passes. He only had 2 points in 5 games vs the Bruins. Did our team score a lot vs the Bruins? How many Rangers produced more points per minute played in that series?

Clowe had a very good first game but I would not say he solved our power play woes after that 1 game.

If we were talking a healthy Clowe at 28 it would be something to consider but at this age, declining production, 3 concussions, costing another 2nd round pick, etc it is a different dynamic.

It is not Clowe or Mats. Both guys will be looked at individually and their situations will decide if they are signed. Mats can play LW or RW. He can play 2nd or 3rd line. Clowe is closer to a 3rd liner than a 2nd liner based on his last season.

Based on salary it may come down to Clowe vs Richards. Or neither.

Clowe had 8 points in 12 games in the regular season and had a point in his game he played in playoffs (I know he dressed two games but only played a shift or two the second one.) That's about 55pts in a full season, pretty well par for the course for Clowe and not exactly declining numbers. I know his concussions are an issue, he shouldn't have been dressed for the second game he tried to play, but if we're talking about injuries and such, how long do you think Zuccarello will last in this league at his size, he's 5'7" and playing against guys like Lucic, Chara, Orpic etc? He's not Gionta and he's not St.Louis, the odds are against him. I'm ok with resigning him but not if it costs us a power forward who pots 50 points a year, fights for his team, hits on the forecheck and makes everyone bigger around him. There's really no comparisson between the two if they are both getting 50 points and in playoffs they're in different universes. Clowe is to the Rangers what Lucic is to the Bruins.

Also saying "nobody scored" doesn't excuse Zuccarello if that's the only reason he is there. He can't physically intimidate anyone, knock anyone off the puck, or even be described as a defensive player, so if he's not scoring, what is he doing?

BTW I'm not saying I don't like Zuccarello, I love his energy, skill level and his compete. I just think we need more size on our top 6 and especially on our LW. There's no way Zuccarello knocks off Nash or Callahan for RW on either line. It comes down to what we need and what we need is a physical LW, not a small but skilled RW that is going to play with Brian Boyle and Derek Dorsett.

nyr2002nyr
06-26-2013, 08:50 AM
If the teams 2nd leading playoff point scorer (Mats) is too small for playoff hockey at 1.5 mill a season than what are Clowe (only 2 playoff games played) and Richards (1 playoff point) at 4.5 mill and 9 mill? The kid out produced every single NY Ranger player except Brass in the playoffs.

Mats has shown time and time again that he does not have to be on the 2nd line to produce.

I believe the notion that the 3rd and 4th lines have to be a bunch of unskilled grinders left town a few weeks ago. I believe Mats will be resigned.

Wrapping up 15 mill in salary for both Clowe and Richards would be a huge risk. Not only would we be giving away another 2nd round pick for Clowe but we would be giving away the ability to dump their contracts if either player gets injured. On a team that will have a tight cap situation (after resigning Lundy) a guy (Mats) that can get them 50 points and some shootout wins for 1.5-1.7 mill a season is a real need never mind luxury.


Agreed

nyr2002nyr
06-26-2013, 08:56 AM
Clowe had 8 points in 12 games in the regular season and had a point in his game he played in playoffs (I know he dressed two games but only played a shift or two the second one.) That's about 55pts in a full season, pretty well par for the course for Clowe and not exactly declining numbers. I know his concussions are an issue, he shouldn't have been dressed for the second game he tried to play, but if we're talking about injuries and such, how long do you think Zuccarello will last in this league at his size, he's 5'7" and playing against guys like Lucic, Chara, Orpic etc? He's not Gionta and he's not St.Louis, the odds are against him. I'm ok with resigning him but not if it costs us a power forward who pots 50 points a year, fights for his team, hits on the forecheck and makes everyone bigger around him. There's really no comparisson between the two if they are both getting 50 points and in playoffs they're in different universes. Clowe is to the Rangers what Lucic is to the Bruins.

Also saying "nobody scored" doesn't excuse Zuccarello if that's the only reason he is there. He can't physically intimidate anyone, knock anyone off the puck, or even be described as a defensive player, so if he's not scoring, what is he doing?

BTW I'm not saying I don't like Zuccarello, I love his energy, skill level and his compete. I just think we need more size on our top 6 and especially on our LW. There's no way Zuccarello knocks off Nash or Callahan for RW on either line. It comes down to what we need and what we need is a physical LW, not a small but skilled RW that is going to play with Brian Boyle and Derek Dorsett.


Thats just it with his concussions his game is also going to change. He has no choice the last thing he needs is another concussion at the start of the season. For the amount of $ and years he wants and the 2nd rd pick bring him back shouldnt even be an option

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 09:21 AM
Also saying "nobody scored" doesn't excuse Zuccarello if that's the only reason he is there. He can't physically intimidate anyone, knock anyone off the puck, or even be described as a defensive player, so if he's not scoring, what is he doing?

BTW I'm not saying I don't like Zuccarello, I love his energy, skill level and his compete. I just think we need more size on our top 6 and especially on our LW. .

One thing about Zucs, in that Washington series, he did what Richards was supposed to do. At least he brought something. Get rid of Richards. He's worthless and the hype before the signing was comical.

bsi
06-26-2013, 10:03 AM
One thing about Zucs, in that Washington series, he did what Richards was supposed to do. At least he brought something. Get rid of Richards. He's worthless and the hype before the signing was comical.

Take Tortorella away and Richards is fine....same as Gaborik, same as Prospal, same as Dubinsky, same as everyone he picked on, DelZotto will be himself again. The only guys that played somewhat decent down the stretch were the new guys that weren't tired of his crap. There's nothing wrong with Richards, just as there was nothing wrong with Gaborik. Gaborik was so nerved up from the coach that he lost the puck, twice on breakaways just before he was traded, then he leaves and he's a new man again. You can't put that much pressure on some players, they need to be loose and comfortable with their game. I'm fine with people saying Richards should be bought out because of his contract that's fine but really he's still a guy that under the proper system can get you 70+ points, but he can't do that if he's being barked at, demoted, and benched all together by the coach.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 10:12 AM
Take Tortorella away and Richards is fine....same as Gaborik, same as Prospal, same as Dubinsky, same as everyone he picked on, DelZotto will be himself again. .

Well, that's where we differ. This "blame the coach" theory, IMO, is a comical scape goat. Richards couldn't physically compete in any aspect of the game.

Rangers in 7
06-26-2013, 01:33 PM
Well, that's where we differ. This "blame the coach" theory, IMO, is a comical scape goat. Richards couldn't physically compete in any aspect of the game.

i agree....he looked slow and his decision making was poor, that does not reflect the coach...especially at the pro level

bsi
06-26-2013, 02:10 PM
Well, that's where we differ. This "blame the coach" theory, IMO, is a comical scape goat. Richards couldn't physically compete in any aspect of the game.

It's not comical, it's fact, it's the reason he's not here today. The players do not want to play for him anymore. When you have a toxic work environment work ethic suffers, it's the same as in any business or company. It was fine to be yelled at and demoted when you're winning, players can see that the system is working and will play within that system, however when you aren't winning and the players lose faith in their coaches system then it's just a bunch of yelling for nothing, it's toxic and it affects productivity. The coach's shelf life expired, it was evident in the fact that the ones that succeeded in his final days were the ones who were here the shortest and had dealt with his crap the least and the ones that he criticized before and had sent packing to other teams began to succeed again. The players were rattled, uncomfortable on the ice because of it, gripping their sticks too tight and making mistakes because of it. Have you ever noticed there's always someone in Tortorella's dog house? It's because he's full of himself, he needs someone to blame when things go wrong. For the first part of the year it was Gaborik, when he left Boyle took over for a bit and then finally Richards. Dubinsky and DelZotto were before that. Name a coach in the league that demotes his star players and criticizes them in the media as much as Tortorella and I'll show you a team that can't win a cup.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 02:16 PM
It's not comical, it's fact, it's the reason he's not here today. The players do not want to play for him anymore. When you have a toxic work environment work ethic suffers, it's the same as in any business or company. It was fine to be yelled at and demoted when you're winning, players can see that the system is working and will play within that system, however when you aren't winning and the players lose faith in their coaches system then it's just a bunch of yelling for nothing, it's toxic and it affects productivity. The coach's shelf life expired, it was evident in the fact that the ones that succeeded in his final days were the ones who were here the shortest and had dealt with his crap the least and the ones that he criticized before and had sent packing to other teams began to succeed again. The players were rattled, uncomfortable on the ice because of it, gripping their sticks too tight and making mistakes because of it. Have you ever noticed there's always someone in Tortorella's dog house? It's because he's full of himself, he needs someone to blame when things go wrong. For the first part of the year it was Gaborik, when he left Boyle took over for a bit and then finally Richards. Dubinsky and DelZotto were before that. Name a coach in the league that demotes his star players and criticizes them in the media as much as Tortorella and I'll show you a team that can't win a cup.

This.

You can't optimize performance out of your employees if you are always giving them ****. That's any work environment. People can subscribe to the theory that "hockey players needed tougher skin" but that's an outdated philosophy. Handling personalities in the locker room is just as important as a coach's strategy.

No one is suggesting you have to kiss these player's *** but dogging them in the media, demoting them constantly, etc is not the way to coach guys either.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 02:19 PM
It's not comical, it's fact, it's the reason he's not here today. The players do not want to play for him anymore. When you have a toxic work environment work ethic suffers, it's the same as in any business or company.


If your theory was true, why did the team battle not only to make the playoffs but battle back in the Washington series to win? Your theory doesn't make any sense in this case b/c the team never folded b/c of some "toxic work environment". They lost to a team which mauled them and almost won the cup.

bsi
06-26-2013, 02:27 PM
If your theory was true, why did the team battle not only to make the playoffs but battle back in the Washington series to win? Your theory doesn't make any sense in this case b/c the team never folded b/c of some "toxic work environment". They lost to a team which mauled them and almost won the cup.

As I said before the players that played well were the ones that were here the shortest plus the guys going to free agency this year. Brassard, Clowe, Zuccarello(here before but was only here a short time this year), and Moore all new, and Stepan, McDonagh, Hagelin, Clowe and Zuccarello all needed contracts at the end of this year. Outside of those guys who was playing well? The only guy I can tell you is Lundqvist, as even our most reliable guy in Girardi looked out of sorts. Everyone but those guys I mentioned above was sick of the yelling and constant cloud hanging over the bench and it showed on the ice and ended up in the firing of John Tortorella.

fingerbang
06-26-2013, 02:33 PM
As I said before the players that played well were the ones that were here the shortest plus the guys going to free agency this year. Brassard, Clowe, Zuccarello, Moore all new, and Stepan, McDonagh, Hagelin, Clowe and Zuccarello all needed contracts at the end of this year. Outside of those guys who was playing well? The only guy I can tell you is Lundqvist, as even our most reliable guy in Girardi looked out of sorts. Everyone but those guys I mentioned above was sick of the yelling and constant cloud hanging over the bench and it showed on the ice.

Maybe that's because one half of the team was new and the other half were up for contracts. Who's left really? Callahan had a great year but played through injuries. Staal played great but was injured. Stralman had a great year. Del Zotto was meh but he turned out to be injured too.

bsi
06-26-2013, 03:02 PM
Maybe that's because one half of the team was new and the other half were up for contracts. Who's left really? Callahan had a great year but played through injuries. Staal played great but was injured. Stralman had a great year. Del Zotto was meh but he turned out to be injured too.

It's funny how some people give Stralman credit for a great season. He had points in the season he was good and he was better than last year but he really wasn't great. Gaborik, Richards, and Nash are your best forwards going into this year, yet none of them blew us out of the water, Nash was good early on but fizzled at the end. I know that seems like a short list but that's your offense going into this year, a 30+ goal scorer, a consistant 65-80 point guy and a 41 goal scorer from last year. That's your entire offense. Gaborik has a goal scoring drought in NY and the day after he's traded starts scoring again. Dubinsky was a dog house victim of Tortorella but he had a good season in spite of his injuries in Columbus as well and ended up being one of their alternate captains after being singled out under Tortorella. I think Tortorella is a smart guy but you can only yell and scream at a pro hockey player so long before he tunes you out, this team was sick of him and they got rid of him. I said it before we had our stretch run that the team was only going to go as far as Lundqvist, Nash, and Richards took them. Gaborik played on the third line at times and Tortorella put Richards on the 4th line, no other coach in the league would do that, especially when your answer is to put Michael Haley in his place. When you take your clutch playoff player from the previous year, your alternate captain and sit him in the box seats and put your 40 goal scorer on with Boyle and Pyatt you're playing with fire and you have to be prepared to face the consequences and he did.

bsi
06-26-2013, 03:09 PM
Also....Richards will be playing here this year, I'm 90% sure of it.

fingerbang
06-26-2013, 03:19 PM
It's funny how some people give Stralman credit for a great season. He had points in the season he was good and he was better than last year but he really wasn't great. Gaborik, Richards, and Nash are your best forwards going into this year, yet none of them blew us out of the water, Nash was good early on but fizzled at the end. I know that seems like a short list but that's your offense going into this year, a 30+ goal scorer, a consistant 65-80 point guy and a 41 goal scorer from last year. That's your entire offense. Gaborik has a goal scoring drought in NY and the day after he's traded starts scoring again. Dubinsky was a dog house victim of Tortorella but he had a good season in spite of his injuries in Columbus as well and ended up being one of their alternate captains after being singled out under Tortorella. I think Tortorella is a smart guy but you can only yell and scream at a pro hockey player so long before he tunes you out, this team was sick of him and they got rid of him. I said it before we had our stretch run that the team was only going to go as far as Lundqvist, Nash, and Richards took them. Tortorella put Richards on the 4th line, no other coach in the league would do that, especially when your answer is to put Michael Haley in his place. When you take your clutch playoff player from the previous year, your alternate captain and sit him in the box seats you're playing with fire and you have to be prepared to face the consequences and he did.

Gaborik didn't start scoring when he left. His numbers prorate to something like 20 goals and 55 points over an 82 game season. He clearly still didn't have it. His shooting % was just as terrible there.

fingerbang
06-26-2013, 03:20 PM
Also....Richards will be playing here this year, I'm 90% sure of it.

I'm 99% sure he won't be playing the year after.

bsi
06-26-2013, 03:26 PM
I'm 99% sure he won't be playing the year after.

That's possible as we'll have some signings to make but it's not a lock. I have a feeling we're about to see some moves we may not have seen under Tortorella as Vigneault puts different players in place to suit himself. The thread is the end of the Brad era and I don't see it happening yet. He'll get this year to prove his worth, if he does he'll stay if not they'll buy him out. That was the just of my post, we should keep Richards and see if we can sign Clowe short term and make a run at a cup next year, with the players we have now we should be able to do that. If we don't resign Clowe and let Richards walk and can't find replacements for either we'll be looking at a high draft pick the year after. It's a gamble, but I think we're close to a contending team with our current roster as long as Kreider takes the next step and we can find another reliable D-man be it McIlrath or someone outside and Staal doesn't get taken out by a puck to the face again.

bsi
06-26-2013, 03:30 PM
Gaborik didn't start scoring when he left. His numbers prorate to something like 20 goals and 55 points over an 82 game season. He clearly still didn't have it. His shooting % was just as terrible there.

Gaborik played really well when he got there, problem was he hurt his ribs towards the end of the season yet continued to play through it. He had to have abdominal surgery to repair it. He had 6 points in 5 games until he got hurt and then finished with 2 points in the last 7 with his injury.

fingerbang
06-26-2013, 04:00 PM
Gaborik played really well when he got there, problem was he hurt his ribs towards the end of the season yet continued to play through it. He had to have abdominal surgery to repair it. He had 6 points in 5 games until he got hurt and then finished with 2 points in the last 7 with his injury.

How do you know that's when he hurt his abdomin? It was never checked out until the season was over. For all we know he could have played through a large portion of the season with it.

bsi
06-26-2013, 04:07 PM
How do you know that's when he hurt his abdomin? It was never checked out until the season was over. For all we know he could have played through a large portion of the season with it.

I heard it on the NHL Home ice where John Davidson had said he hurt it with 7 games to go but had played through it to see if they could get a playoff spot.

bsi
06-26-2013, 04:10 PM
I couldn't find a quote of him saying it was the last 7, but heard it on the Satellite radio but here's a quote from Davidson talking about it.

"Marian experienced some soreness towards the end of the season and after undergoing his exit physical and further examination today, it was decided that surgery is the best option for a quick and full recovery," said Jackets president of hockey operations John Davidson"

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 04:19 PM
As I said before the players that played well were the ones that were here the shortest plus the guys going to free agency this year. Brassard, Clowe, Zuccarello(here before but was only here a short time this year), and Moore all new, and Stepan, McDonagh, Hagelin, Clowe and Zuccarello all needed contracts at the end of this year. Outside of those guys who was playing well? The only guy I can tell you is Lundqvist, as even our most reliable guy in Girardi looked out of sorts. Everyone but those guys I mentioned above was sick of the yelling and constant cloud hanging over the bench and it showed on the ice and ended up in the firing of John Tortorella.

100% guesswork just like NY fans with Tom Coughlin. It's a media driven and guess work b/c the team didn't win the cup. They lost to a much better team, end of story.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 04:21 PM
Also....Richards will be playing here this year, I'm 90% sure of it.

100% sure he's bought out by next season and would be bought out by early July if the Rangers couldn't flex the buyout to 2014.

bsi
06-26-2013, 04:24 PM
100% guesswork just like NY fans with Tom Coughlin. It's a media driven and guess work b/c the team didn't win the cup. They lost to a much better team, end of story.

Sure Boston is probably a better team but we really should have been able to get atleast 2 games out of it. It doesn't take a genius to put two and two together, Tortorella talks to the media after talking about the future with Sather like he's going to be there next year and then the day after the GM has his sit down with the players he's canned. Media has nothing to do with the optics of that.

bsi
06-26-2013, 04:26 PM
100% sure he's bought out by next season and would be bought out by early July if the Rangers couldn't flex the buyout to 2014.

"As of Monday afternoon, newly hired Rangers head coach Alain Vigneault had spoken to one player on his roster: Richards. Why? "I know him a little bit," he said. "During the [2004-05] lockout, I was coaching in P.E.I. and he skated with us for two months before going overseas. He was outstanding. In junior, you don't have a huge coaching staff, so he would take three or four guys and go work with them. He was so good with those guys ... I just wanted to reach out and have a conversation, see how he was doing after a tough end to the season."

metswon69
06-26-2013, 04:26 PM
100% guesswork just like NY fans with Tom Coughlin. It's a media driven and guess work b/c the team didn't win the cup. They lost to a much better team, end of story.

You keep comparing coaches like Tom Coughlin and Bill Parcells to John Tortorella. Parcells and Coughlin had guys jump through walls for them because they were very good at handling individual personalities. Tortorella is not that type of coach. His act gets old quickly. Teams will continue to re-hire him because of his resume but he's also had some talented teams at his disposal. He's inheriting another one in Vancouver that has more talent than this Ranger team.

And how many times did Coughlin need the last game or two of the regular season to save his job?

fingerbang
06-26-2013, 04:30 PM
You keep comparing coaches like Tom Coughlin and Bill Parcells to John Tortorella. Parcells and Coughlin had guys jump through walls for them because they were very good at handling individual personalities. Tortorella is not that type of coach. His act gets old quickly. Teams will continue to re-hire him because of his resume but he's also had some talented teams at his disposal. He's inheriting another one in Vancouver that has more talent than this Ranger team.

And how many times did Coughlin need the last game or two of the regular season to save his job?

A lot, lol. He's missed the playoffs quite a few times and I was lucky enough to go to the Giants-Jets game in 2011. That was a must win game.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 04:38 PM
This isn't all a media manifestation anyway. There was discord in the locker room, his caustic style got old, and when you have your franchise guy threatening to leave, the coach has to go.

It's easy to say "Oh the media hated him so it was time for him to go" but what about the fact this team was dead in the water before the trade or guys like Gaborik weren't responding to him anymore. You even had the captain taking shifts off. When did that ever happen before last season?

We keep getting into this circular argument but the truth is the Rangers needed offensive help and help on the PP. A guy like Vigneault can help a Del Zotto, hopefully Richards, Stepan, Kreider, etc etc become better offensively and it wasn't like the Canucks suffered on the defensive end.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 04:40 PM
Sure Boston is probably a better team but we really should have been able to get atleast 2 games out of it. It doesn't take a genius to put two and two together, Tortorella talks to the media after talking about the future with Sather like he's going to be there next year and then the day after the GM has his sit down with the players he's canned. Media has nothing to do with the optics of that.

So if the Rangers won game 1 in overtime the culture was fine. Does that now equate to genius? If you believe the media didn't have anything to do with this, I'm speechless. They are 100% full of shiat and led by an (blank) name Brooks who is an absolute dirt bag.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 04:46 PM
You keep comparing coaches like Tom Coughlin and Bill Parcells to John Tortorella. Parcells and Coughlin had guys jump through walls for them because they were very good at handling individual personalities. Tortorella is not that type of coach. His act gets old quickly. Teams will continue to re-hire him because of his resume but he's also had some talented teams at his disposal. He's inheriting another one in Vancouver that has more talent than this Ranger team.

And how many times did Coughlin need the last game or two of the regular season to save his job?

How the heck do you know Torts doesn't handle the players well? They busted their tails for him. The only dopes selling b.s. stories are the media which is the same bunch of dirtbags that did it to Coughlin. People looked for a scapegoat and found it. Coddle the players, lots of love, blah, blah, blah. A few blown assignments on defense and the media will start another fire with some fans jumping right on a new bandwagon. Likely "this isn't east hockey" b.s.

And Coughlin had more chances than Torts.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 04:52 PM
"As of Monday afternoon, newly hired Rangers head coach Alain Vigneault had spoken to one player on his roster: Richards. Why? "I know him a little bit," he said. "During the [2004-05] lockout, I was coaching in P.E.I. and he skated with us for two months before going overseas. He was outstanding. In junior, you don't have a huge coaching staff, so he would take three or four guys and go work with them. He was so good with those guys ... I just wanted to reach out and have a conversation, see how he was doing after a tough end to the season."


Oh that's great. Back in 2004-05 he was outstanding. Too bad it's 2013 and the guy sucks with some believing a new system will suddenly open up the East like he's still playing in Dallas. Slow, not shot, holds onto the puck too long, can't win on the boards, can't catch up to the play, can't QB a PP or play down low. Oh yeah, let's bring him back . . . then we can blame the next coach.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 04:52 PM
"As of Monday afternoon, newly hired Rangers head coach Alain Vigneault had spoken to one player on his roster: Richards. Why? "I know him a little bit," he said. "During the [2004-05] lockout, I was coaching in P.E.I. and he skated with us for two months before going overseas. He was outstanding. In junior, you don't have a huge coaching staff, so he would take three or four guys and go work with them. He was so good with those guys ... I just wanted to reach out and have a conversation, see how he was doing after a tough end to the season."


Oh that's great. Back in 2004-05 he was outstanding. Too bad it's 2013 and the guy sucks with some believing a new system will suddenly open up the East like he's still playing in Dallas. Slow, not shot, holds onto the puck too long, can't win on the boards, can't catch up to the play, can't QB a PP or play down low. Oh yeah, let's bring him back . . . then we can blame the next coach.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 04:55 PM
How the heck do you know Torts doesn't handle the players well? They busted their tails for him. The only dopes selling b.s. stories are the media which is the same bunch of dirtbags that did it to Coughlin. People looked for a scapegoat and found it. Coddle the players, lots of love, blah, blah, blah. A few blown assignments on defense and the media will start another fire with some fans right on that bandwagon. Likely "this isn't east hockey" b.s.

If your boss called you out in front of other coworkers, demoted you for a single instance of incorrect behavior, and was constantly abrasive with you in said environment, wouldn't that suggest to you he's not very good at handling personalities? This is something that has followed Torts since his days in Tampa. What first starts as accountability turns into a freaking charade.

I think their play in the first half of the season was pretty indicative of a coach that had lost that locker room to some extent. You can disagree but it wasn't just adjusting to a new system for their recent acquisitions, that team wasn't playing hard before the trade. Losing to teams like Tampa, Florida, Buffalo, and their inconsistent play was inexcusable.

See it's not one thing or the other to me. I understand where getting on guy's ***** is the right thing. I just don't think getting on their ***** all the time is. You need to know how an individual player responds whether it's tough love or propping a guy up when he isn't playing well. It's as much about being a psychologist in sports nowadays then it is about strategy.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 04:58 PM
The Canucks have been top 10 in GA allowed 4 of the last 5 years in the harder conference. In 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, they were number 1 in that category. And the Rangers have better defensive talent and a better goaltender (Lundqvist> Luongo or Schneider) than those teams did at least imo.

So where is this misconception that the Rangers are going to open it up offensively and all of a sudden pay for it defensively?

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 05:06 PM
If your boss called you out in front of other coworkers, demoted you for a single instance of incorrect behavior, and was constantly abrasive with you in said environment, wouldn't that suggest to you he's not very good at handling personalities? This is something that has followed Torts since his days in Tampa. What first starts as accountability turns into a freaking charade.

I think their play in the first half of the season was pretty indicative of a coach that had lost that locker room to some extent. You can disagree but it wasn't just adjusting to a new system for their recent acquisitions, that team wasn't playing hard before the trade. Losing to teams like Tampa, Florida, Buffalo, and their inconsistent play was inexcusable.

See it's not one thing or the other to me. I understand where getting on guy's ***** is the right thing. I just don't think getting on their ***** all the time is. You need to know how an individual player responds whether it's tough love or propping a guy up when he isn't playing well. It's as much about being a psychologist in sports nowadays then it is about strategy.


Oh gosh, give me break. Let's take the Hagelin scenario

Media - why isn't Hagelin on the PP?
Torts - b/c he's not

repeat non-stop
Media - why isn't he on the PP? 50 more times

Finally the coach says "b/c the sucks" and then explains how he's a good player but is too nervous on the PP.

The media then runs with a B.S. story which isn't really a story. Anybody in the workforce knows that bosses are up their @sses non-stop in this economy and especially where the stakes are very high.

Rangers fans that think team was that good don't understand hockey, plain and simple. It was a strike shortened season, many players lost to free agency, other lost and gained in trades, games practically every other night and a continual search for identity. The team made the playoffs, fought back against the caps and couldn't defeat a Bruins team which returned 11 out of 12 forwards from their Stanley Cup team while the Rangers were without Staal, any shot from the point, a miserable Richards and multiple other players either out with injuries or facing surgery to repair torn labrums. That's too much to digest to let's allow the media to tell us it was the coach b/c he was mean and lost a locker room. Please, I've never heard of such B.S. (actually, I hear how Coughlin lost the locker room 5 straight years)

bsi
06-26-2013, 05:07 PM
Oh that's great. Back in 2004-05 he was outstanding. Too bad it's 2013 and the guy sucks with some believing a new system will suddenly open up the East like he's still playing in Dallas. Slow, not shot, holds onto the puck too long, can't win on the boards, can't catch up to the play, can't QB a PP or play down low. Oh yeah, let's bring him back . . . then we can blame the next coach.

Sometimes all of what you are saying is indicative of a system that doesn't suit the player. As I've said before our breakout is abysmal, and it's because of Tortorella's collapsing defence. The forwards are too low, the defenceman has too much time to decide whether to pinch or not and when the center or D gets the puck he's already ahead of his wingers, he's either got to hold on to it and try and beat the two d at the blueline or chip it out and give it to the other teams D. Pushing the forwards closer to the D hastens the D's decision making, gives the center or D and option to pass to the winger and the breakout starts there with 2-3 three forwards and possibly a D coming out together. I just don't think Tortorella's system was made for the current team we have.

Also I'm pretty sure Vigneault has a better grasp of what Brad Richards offers a hockey team than any of us.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 05:11 PM
Also I'm pretty sure Vigneault has a better grasp of what Brad Richards offers a hockey team than any of us.

I'm sure Torts has a better grasp than anybody endorsing this miserable player. It's not enough to learn from the dozen plus aging free agents that sucked prior to Richards but, miraculously, Richards is different despite showing nothing. I'm sure the Devils, Bruins, Ottawa, etc will allow Richards to suddenly skate around freely. "Go ahead Brad, take your time, we'll let you hold the puck forever and skate around". Give me a break

bsi
06-26-2013, 05:17 PM
Oh gosh, give me break. Let's take the Hagelin scenario

Media - why isn't Hagelin on the PP?
Torts - b/c he's not

repeat non-stop
Media - why isn't he on the PP? 50 more times

Finally the coach says "b/c the sucks" and then explains how he's a good player but is too nervous on the PP.

The media then runs with a B.S. story which isn't really a story. Anybody in the workforce knows that bosses are up their @sses non-stop in this economy and especially where the stakes are very high.

Rangers fans that think team was that good don't understand hockey, plain and simple. It was a strike shortened season, many players lost to free agency, other lost and gained in trades, games practically every other night and a continual search for identity. The team made the playoffs, fought back against the caps and couldn't defeat a Bruins team which returned 11 out of 12 forwards from their Stanley Cup team while the Rangers were without Staal, any shot from the point, a miserable Richards and multiple other players either out with injuries or facing surgery to repair torn labrums. That's too much to digest to let's allow the media to tell us it was the coach b/c was mean. Please, I've never heard of such B.S.

While I'm not saying Hagelin would be good or bad on the PP, he never got much of a chance on it and our PP in general was terrible so to single one guy out on your roster as being bad on it was like blaming one cow in a heard for a field of cow patties. Secondly the day after that he was on the PP for 20 seconds and had a shot on net, something the team struggled to do in 2 mins, yet never saw the PP again. Again I'm not saying he'd be good on it but he never really got the chance, and the coach could have worded it differently to say the least. "He's just not effective on the PP"...."He's not comfortable with him there"..."He's keeping him fresh for a PK or 5 on 5" whatever, just don't say your player stinks.
A happy employee is a productive employee, same goes for players and coaches.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 05:20 PM
Oh gosh, give me break. Let's take the Hagelin scenario

Media - why isn't Hagelin on the PP?
Torts - b/c he's not

repeat non-stop
Media - why isn't he on the PP? 50 more times

Finally the coach says "b/c the sucks" and then explains how he's a good player but is too nervous on the PP.

The media then runs with a B.S. story which isn't really a story. Anybody in the workforce knows that bosses are up their @sses non-stop in this economy and especially where the stakes are very high.

Rangers fans that think team was that good don't understand hockey, plain and simple. It was a strike shortened season, many players lost to free agency, other lost and gained in trades, games practically every other night and a continual search for identity. The team made the playoffs, fought back against the caps and couldn't defeat a Bruins team which returned 11 out of 12 forwards from their Stanley Cup team while the Rangers were without Staal, any shot from the point, a miserable Richards and multiple other players either out with injuries or facing surgery to repair torn labrums. That's too much to digest to let's allow the media to tell us it was the coach b/c was mean. Please, I've never heard of such B.S.

I do like how you completely avoided the question, which suggests to me you agree to some extent. Moreso have you ever seen a Ranger's practice or seen how he handles players in closed doors? This idea that it's about solely about being the toughest is a load of crap. It's an outmoded idea that's indicative of the sport you keep trumping (the NFL). How many teams win the Superbowl nowadays airing it out and putting 35 points a game on the scoreboard?

You act like Tortorella is not to blame in any of their failings. Why was everyone so confident when we started the Boston series then? Wasn't it because almost everyone felt including most hockey analysts that the Rangers matched up well with the Bruins?

Granted, the regular season doesn't matter as much but Lundqvist was 21-7-2 with a 1.67 goals-against average and a .943 save percentage in 30 career games against the Bruins. A team no less that had struggled to end this season dropping from the 2nd seed to the 4th seed.

Tortorella ran his course here and AV is a good freaking coach. His career resume certainly suggests that. He may not be the sexiest hire but the Canucks were a very good team the last 5 years and were better than the Rangers defensively in some of those same Tortorella seasons you love so much.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 05:22 PM
While I'm not saying Hagelin would be good or bad on the PP, he never got much of a chance on it and our PP in general was terrible so to single one guy out on your roster as being bad on it was like blaming one cow in a heard for a field of cow patties. .

Maybe the media should have asked why other players weren't on the PP 24/7 and hundreds of times. Did you bother to hear this cr@p from the media? They bombarded Torts with the same question non-stop. Now it's a story that's being told, sold and accepted? Did you hear the compliments during the same questioning? Why weren't they put in print? My gosh, the media does know their audience :facepalm:

bsi
06-26-2013, 05:25 PM
I'm sure Torts has a better grasp than anybody endorsing this miserable player. It's not enough to learn from the dozen plus aging free agents that sucked prior to Richards but, miraculously, Richards is different despite showing nothing. I'm sure the Devils, Bruins, Ottawa, etc will allow Richards to suddenly skate around freely. "Go ahead Brad, take your time, we'll let you hold the puck forever and skate around". Give me a break

Brad Richards is a puck mover, he's not a puck carrier. If nobody is open he's gonna get in trouble. If the wingers are behind him that's just a case of not using Brad Richards correctly. Anyone that's ever watched him would know that, he's never had amazing dangling skills or speed, he's a move the puck quick type player that finds seems to open players. If nobody is available for a pass he's hanging on to the puck too long. The system doesn't suit him and putting him on the ice with Powe and Asham only exacerbated that problem. Richards doesn't want to hold on to the puck that long, anyone with a brain knows that. Pavel Datsyuk can get away with that, Jonathon Toews can get away with that, but Richards was never that type of player and expecting him to all of a sudden start dangling or get faster is unrealistic.

bsi
06-26-2013, 05:29 PM
Maybe the media should have asked why other players weren't on the PP 24/7 and hundreds of times. Did you bother to hear this cr@p from the media? They bombarded Torts with the same question non-stop. Now it's a story that's being told, sold and accepted? Did you hear the compliments during the same questioning? Why weren't they put in print? My gosh, the media does know their audience :facepalm:

I don't care what the context was, you don't publicly berate your players and then expect them to play hard for you. If he's wondering why the players turned on him at the GM/player meetings he might want to go back and see what he's been saying about his own team over the years. He's buried everyone from Hank to Gaborik, he shouldn't have expected any less from the players.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 05:30 PM
I do like how you completely avoided the question, which suggests to me you agree to some extent. .

I've read enough illusions about what happened without responding to "he lost the locker room" etc. theories. I read the media's b.s. stories for the past 6 years on how Coughlin lost the locker room too yet no players mentioned anything. Where are all the rebelling Rangers players? They must the un-named sources just like the Giants.

Fact is; with all these changes and the existing roster, there was no way they were defeating the Bruins. The coach took the fall, the media blamed the coach and the roster got a pass. The roster wasn't good enough, the media are a bunch of scumbags and the coach kept the roster together. Without the coach, these kids would have blown assignments on defense non-stop. It's a process in which some of fans don't understand and will never understand. Anybody in business knows the top grad from Yale is still the FNG who needs to learn. It's no different in sports yet the fans coaches are the media b/c they can't figure out what's actually happening on the field/ice. They reach for theories. Can't wait for the next ones. "You can't play West coast hockey in the East" Bank on it.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 05:34 PM
I don't care what the context was, you don't publicly berate your players and then expect them to play hard for you. If he's wondering why the players turned on him at the GM/player meetings he might want to go back and see what he's been saying about his own team over the years. He's buried everyone from Hank to Gaborik, he shouldn't have expected any less from the players.

So the next coach should be a politician and continually answer the same question hundreds of times to appease the fans. The same fans which will jump on a "he's too soft" bandwagon if the coach doesn't snarl after answering the same question hundreds of times. Let's put Hagelin on the PP to appease the media. Maybe a hat filled with suggestions as to how to coach would work too.

Forget it, it was the coach as this was Stanley Cup team despite all the roster changes, right? Love the fans

Question: what line of work are you in where the boss doesn't explode once in a while? Never heard of one and have worked the financial market for 25+ years.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 05:37 PM
Brad Richards is a puck mover, he's not a puck carrier. If nobody is open he's gonna get in trouble. If the wingers are behind him that's just a case of not using Brad Richards correctly. Anyone that's ever watched him would know that, he's never had amazing dangling skills or speed, he's a move the puck quick type player that finds seems to open players. If nobody is available for a pass he's hanging on to the puck too long. The system doesn't suit him and putting him on the ice with Powe and Asham only exacerbated that problem. Richards doesn't want to hold on to the puck that long, anyone with a brain knows that. Pavel Datsyuk can get away with that, Jonathon Toews can get away with that, but Richards was never that type of player and expecting him to all of a sudden start dangling or get faster is unrealistic.

Excuse me but Richards handled the puck on the PP both at the point and down low like he was playing with a bowling ball.

bsi
06-26-2013, 05:43 PM
So the next coach should be a politician and continually answer the same question hundreds of times to appease the fans. The same fans which will jump on a "he's too soft" bandwagon if the coach doesn't snarl after answering the same question hundreds of times. Let's put Hagelin on the PP to appease the media. Maybe a hat filled with suggestions as to how to coach would work too.

Forget it, it was the coach as this was Stanley Cup team despite all the roster changes, right? Love the fans

Question: what line of work are you in where the boss doesn't explode once in a while? Never heard of one and have worked the financial market for 25+ years.

The Rangers were picked by most as being top 3 with regards to winning the cup to start the season so I think we had a good enough team to be not struggling to make it into the playoffs.

Answer to your Question....I'm the boss at work and if I treated my my employee's like Tortorella did nothing would get done.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 05:46 PM
The Rangers were picked by most as being top 3 with regards to winning the cup to start the season.

Answer to your Question....I'm the boss at work and if I treated my my employee's like Tortorella did nothing would get done.

Yep same here, supervisor of set construction for multiple Ny theaters and every guy is different when it comes to handling them. But i know if i called them out or berated them all the time, they would be looking for another job.

apdamico
06-26-2013, 06:00 PM
This is very simple, remember the hit Richards took last season from Kaleta. That could have been disastrous, seems like a very easy decision.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 06:04 PM
Anybody who believes Torts "berated" his players all the time only listened to the media and to be honest, the media wasn't even that blind.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 06:17 PM
One more thing regarding Ricahrds contract and the buyout; if the player gets injured, you can't buy him out. Oh yeah, let's keep him. B.TW. - want know he penalties the Rangers face if Richards retires? According to the article, it could be as high as $17 million in 2019.

Oh yeah, let's keep him and hope doesn't get injured next season doesn't retire. The same who blame the coach 100% are endorsing this. Hello?


http://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2013/6/26/4464888/why-brad-richards-needs-to-be-bought-out




The Rangers would be facing whopping penalties should Richards not play out the remaining seven years of his contract. Should he retire in the offseason of 2017, the Rangers would be hit with a $5.66 million penalty, $8.5 million in 2018 and a dizzying $17 million in 2019. Plus, if the Rangers don't utilize the buyout this summer, they run the risk of Richards sustaining an injury next season. A team cannot buy out an injured player

metswon69
06-26-2013, 07:51 PM
Anybody who believes Torts "berated" his players all the time only listened to the media and to be honest, the media wasn't even that blind.

Even if he berated his players more often than not, the point remains. No coach/boss is in the business of making friends but you don't get your employees or in this case players to respond to you by being on their *** even 70% (hypothetically) of the time.

There are times and places for that and 99% of coaches/bosses would tell you the same thing.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 07:55 PM
One more thing regarding Ricahrds contract and the buyout; if the player gets injured, you can't buy him out. Oh yeah, let's keep him. B.TW. - want know he penalties the Rangers face if Richards retires? According to the article, it could be as high as $17 million in 2019.

Oh yeah, let's keep him and hope doesn't get injured next season doesn't retire. The same who blame the coach 100% are endorsing this. Hello?


http://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2013/6/26/4464888/why-brad-richards-needs-to-be-bought-out

The hope is that with AV, Richards goes back to being close to a PPG scorer. I don't know if he will be able to do that at 33 years old having underperformed here in the past but if the Rangers are going to part ways with him they have to find a replacement. He was still on pace for 60+ points last year if they had played a full season and that type of production just doesn't drop from the sky.

I would amnesty him myself but only depending on who is available in FA.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 08:14 PM
Even if he berated his players more often than not, the point remains. No coach/boss is in the business of making friends but you don't get your employees or in this case players to respond to you by being on their *** even 70% (hypothetically) of the time.

There are times and places for that and 99% of coaches/bosses would tell you the same thing.

Yeah i know, it's a Stanley Cup Championship team but the coach derailed it according to you.

bsi
06-26-2013, 08:30 PM
Well bottom line is that the Ranger organization felt the players and the team were better without Tortorella. We'll see how they feel about Brad Richards, I would assume that Jeff Gorton would be able to evaluate the risk vs reward with regards to Richards. As I said before it's not just the fact that you are buying out Richards and losing whatever production he brings. You are also setting a team like Pitsburgh, Boston, Islanders, Devils etc etc up at a chance to get a potential 60-80 point guy for pennies on their cap. That's my biggest concern with this, what happens if Boston signs him for whatever amount he would have gotten on top of his buyout and we have to play against him every year knowing we allowed them to get a good player with minimal cap hit, not only did you lose 60-80 points but you gave them to someone else.

metswon69
06-26-2013, 08:32 PM
Yeah i know, it's a Stanley Cup Championship team but the coach derailed it according to you.

No i just think they can be better with a more wide open offensive system and a difference in personnel more suited to AV's style.

Again Vancouver didn't suffer defensively with Vigneault behind the bench.

According to you, Tortorella is blameless when to me its a cumulation of many things including talent, coaching, scouting and GM.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 09:05 PM
No i just think they can be better with a more wide open offensive system and a difference in personnel more suited to AV's style.

Again Vancouver didn't suffer defensively with Vigneault behind the bench.

According to you, Tortorella is blameless when to me its a cumulation of many things including talent, coaching, scouting and GM.

Every fan thinks a wide open system makes more sense. When the team doesn't score on the rush, how do they score? They team sucked on the boards. Did you watch the Stanley Cup finals with AV's team vs the Bruins? The Bruins kicked the cr@p out of the Canucks on the boards.

I never said anything you mentioned in that cockadoodle last sentence which is right in line with those guesses of how he "lost the locker room" which is exactly what some fans thought about Tom Coughlin. No players says anything but the media leads some fans around by the nose.

NYSPORTS98
06-26-2013, 09:07 PM
Well bottom line is that the Ranger organization felt the players and the team were better without Tortorella. We'll see how they feel about Brad Richards, I would assume that Jeff Gorton would be able to evaluate the risk vs reward with regards to Richards.

First line true

Second line - do you really need a calculator to calculate the ramifications of this contract? If he gets injured, they can't even buy it out. If he retires, it's almost a $20 million dollar hit in 2020. Think!!!!!!!!

metswon69
06-26-2013, 09:25 PM
Every fan thinks a wide open system makes more sense. When the team doesn't score on the rush, how do they score? They team sucked on the boards. Did you watch the Stanley Cup finals with AV's team vs the Bruins? The Bruins kicked the cr@p out of the Canucks on the boards.

I never said anything you mentioned in that cockadoodle last sentence which is right in line with those guesses of how he "lost the locker room" which is exactly what some fans thought about Tom Coughlin. No players says anything but the media leads some fans around by the nose.

Meanwhile the Canucks were up 3 games to 2 and one game away from winning the Stanley Cup in 2010-2011 against those same Bruins.

For the fourth time, the Canucks were top 10 in GA for four of the last five seasons playing most of their games in a harder conference. Twice being best in the league. Where is AV this go for broke offensive style coach where defense is sacrificed? I don't see it.

Believe what you want to believe. I believe to an extent Tort's act was old and it was time to move on. He did a good job but what's done is done now. Let's see how each coach does in their new respective places.

bsi
06-26-2013, 10:01 PM
First line true

Second line - do you really need a calculator to calculate the ramifications of this contract? If he gets injured, they can't even buy it out. If he retires, it's almost a $20 million dollar hit in 2020. Think!!!!!!!!

I understand all that. I'm leaving it in the hands of the people that run the Rangers and their lawyers that get paid to figure these things out. However I'm speculating that they'll keep him anyway, there's bound to be a loophole in there somewhere. I'm guessing that if he were to be injured during his final years the cap wouldn't count as he'd be on LTIR. Anything from a sore back to bad knees could trigger that. The last CBA proved that nothing is iron clad.

NYSPORTS98
06-27-2013, 07:41 AM
Meanwhile the Canucks were up 3 games to 2 and one game away from winning the Stanley Cup in 2010-2011 against those same Bruins.

Sure, and that same Bruins team returned 11 of 12 forwards from the Championship team and defeated the Rangers who couldn't match up. You blame the coach and bring up an Islanders record without bothering to recognize the changes, it's not only a shortened season (a sprint) and they were tied for 9th most wins in all of hockey


For the fourth time, the Canucks were top 10 in GA for four of the last five seasons playing most of their games in a harder conference. Twice being best in the league. Where is AV this go for broke offensive style coach where defense is sacrificed? I don't see it.

It obvious you don't believe in, don't understand or watch board play.

Believe what you want to believe. I believe to an extent Tort's act was old and it was time to move on. He did a good job but what's done is done now. Let's see how each coach does in their new respective places.

I'll root the new coach just as hard as Torts. Yet if I see a coach with an extremely young team, grow the team, have it almost win the President's trophy, get his team gutted, still defeat the hottest team going into the playoffs (Washington) and then lose to a powerhouse Bruins team, I likely won't listen to the fickle media or those fans who believe the coach lost the team despite no indication that happened.

NYSPORTS98
06-27-2013, 07:45 AM
I understand all that. I'm leaving it in the hands of the people that run the Rangers and their lawyers that get paid to figure these things out. However I'm speculating that they'll keep him anyway, there's bound to be a loophole in there somewhere. I'm guessing that if he were to be injured during his final years the cap wouldn't count as he'd be on LTIR. Anything from a sore back to bad knees could trigger that. The last CBA proved that nothing is iron clad.


How can you take a stance of pure speculation against the fact? You want the player and justify keeping him by shooting into the abyss with "leaving it the hands of people that run . . . figure things out" and "there's bound to be a loophole"? Seriously? I know a lot of fans don't understand the cap but blind faith isn't reality. Why not just go out and sign $100 million dollars worth of free agents too? I'm sure a loophole could get them out of it. Not happening.

nyr2002nyr
06-27-2013, 08:31 AM
How can you take a stance of pure speculation against the fact? You want the player and justify keeping him by shooting into the abyss with "leaving it the hands of people that run . . . figure things out" and "there's bound to be a loophole"? Seriously? I know a lot of fans don't understand the cap but blind faith isn't reality. Why not just go out and sign $100 million dollars worth of free agents too? I'm sure a loophole could get them out of it. Not happening.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/images/smilies/beatdeadhorse5.gif

NYSPORTS98
06-27-2013, 08:44 AM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/images/smilies/beatdeadhorse5.gif

The cap isn't a dead horse but the response is the tail end of the animal.

bsi
06-27-2013, 10:04 AM
How can you take a stance of pure speculation against the fact? You want the player and justify keeping him by shooting into the abyss with "leaving it the hands of people that run . . . figure things out" and "there's bound to be a loophole"? Seriously? I know a lot of fans don't understand the cap but blind faith isn't reality. Why not just go out and sign $100 million dollars worth of free agents too? I'm sure a loophole could get them out of it. Not happening.

I'm sure I'll be right and he'll be playing this year no matter what you say or speculate. The only way we buy him out is if Lecavalier says he wants to come here today, of which I really doubt. I'm willing to put more faith in the group that's running the show here than some guy behind a computer ranting about blind faith and whatever. The only thing that's not happening is a Brad Richards buyout in 2013.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-27-2013, 10:26 AM
Clowe had 8 points in 12 games in the regular season and had a point in his game he played in playoffs (I know he dressed two games but only played a shift or two the second one.) That's about 55pts in a full season, pretty well par for the course for Clowe and not exactly declining numbers. I know his concussions are an issue, he shouldn't have been dressed for the second game he tried to play, but if we're talking about injuries and such, how long do you think Zuccarello will last in this league at his size, he's 5'7" and playing against guys like Lucic, Chara, Orpic etc? He's not Gionta and he's not St.Louis, the odds are against him. I'm ok with resigning him but not if it costs us a power forward who pots 50 points a year, fights for his team, hits on the forecheck and makes everyone bigger around him. There's really no comparisson between the two if they are both getting 50 points and in playoffs they're in different universes. Clowe is to the Rangers what Lucic is to the Bruins.

Also saying "nobody scored" doesn't excuse Zuccarello if that's the only reason he is there. He can't physically intimidate anyone, knock anyone off the puck, or even be described as a defensive player, so if he's not scoring, what is he doing?

BTW I'm not saying I don't like Zuccarello, I love his energy, skill level and his compete. I just think we need more size on our top 6 and especially on our LW. There's no way Zuccarello knocks off Nash or Callahan for RW on either line. It comes down to what we need and what we need is a physical LW, not a small but skilled RW that is going to play with Brian Boyle and Derek Dorsett.

Is it fair to cherry pick the best 12 games of Clowes season and ignore the 29 games he did not score a single goal this season? Wouldn't most players from Gabs to Richards look pretty good if we only looked at their best 12 game stretch and ignored the rest of their season? Even those 8 points in 12 games are a bit deceiving because he had 4 of the 8 points in his first game if my memory is correct and then only 4 points in the remaining 11 games. Do you really want to invest 4.5-5 mill a year and another 2nd round pick in to Clowe knowing he could be 1 hit away from being out again? He is a tough guy and a hitter. For him to be effective doesn't he have to fight and hit? He was never a very fast player but he looked pretty slow in between the blue lines this season. Once inside the offensive end I thought he looked good.

Looks like Vinny just got bought out. If he can still play well I hope he has some interest in our team.

apdamico
06-27-2013, 01:25 PM
Sather got what he was waiting for, Tampa will buyout Lecavalier. I think it's a very strong possibility, based the Rangers glamour for Vinny in the past, to buyout Richards and sign Lecavalier.

bsi
06-27-2013, 01:26 PM
Sather got what he was waiting for, Tampa will buyout Lecavalier. I think it's a very strong possibility, based the Rangers glamour for Vinny in the past, to buyout Richards and sign Lecavalier.

I agree that that's a good option but from everything I'm hearing Vinny is going north.

bsi
06-27-2013, 01:30 PM
Is it fair to cherry pick the best 12 games of Clowes season and ignore the 29 games he did not score a single goal this season? Wouldn't most players from Gabs to Richards look pretty good if we only looked at their best 12 game stretch and ignored the rest of their season? Even those 8 points in 12 games are a bit deceiving because he had 4 of the 8 points in his first game if my memory is correct and then only 4 points in the remaining 11 games. Do you really want to invest 4.5-5 mill a year and another 2nd round pick in to Clowe knowing he could be 1 hit away from being out again? He is a tough guy and a hitter. For him to be effective doesn't he have to fight and hit? He was never a very fast player but he looked pretty slow in between the blue lines this season. Once inside the offensive end I thought he looked good.

Looks like Vinny just got bought out. If he can still play well I hope he has some interest in our team.

Milan Lucic didn't score much this year, in fact he scored as many goals in playoffs as he did regular season, but he was a beast in playoffs, that's the type of player we need to get to the next level. Guys like Clowe are hard to find, I'd be fine if we were able to add Clarkson or Bickel from Chicago and let Clowe go but I really think its the type of player we need to win.
I'm hearing Montreal as Vinny's most likely destination.

bsi
06-27-2013, 01:35 PM
I hear Dave Bolland is available, 1 year left on a 3.3 contract, might be an ok option if the price is right.

fingerbang
06-27-2013, 01:44 PM
Bolland's a good two way center.

metswon69
06-27-2013, 02:25 PM
I'll root the new coach just as hard as Torts. Yet if I see a coach with an extremely young team, grow the team, have it almost win the President's trophy, get his team gutted, still defeat the hottest team going into the playoffs (Washington) and then lose to a powerhouse Bruins team, I likely won't listen to the fickle media or those fans who believe the coach lost the team despite no indication that happened.

I don't really put a ton of stock in beating the Capitals who notoriously choke in the playoffs regardless of who their coach is. It was well earned but the Rangers matched up well the Capitals going into that series and once they shut down the Caps PP, they had them by the cojones.

Well of course you won't because if you dismiss every media report "written by a bunch of hacks" as you say, at no point would you would willing to concede Torts might have lost the locker room.

The Canucks did a good job of collapsing, playing assignment hockey, and keeping the puck out of the net in AV's time there. The Rangers have good defensive personnel and obviously a great goaltender, there is no reason why he shouldn't maximize that to his advantage in the easier conference.

fingerbang
06-27-2013, 02:41 PM
You don't put a ton of stock in beating a higher seeded team that was hot at the end of the season? A team that had home ice, c'mon.

NYSPORTS98
06-27-2013, 02:42 PM
I don't really put a ton of stock in beating the Capitals who notoriously choke in the playoffs regardless of who their coach is. It was well earned but the Rangers were better than the Capitals going into that series regardless of record and once they shut down the Caps PP, they had them by the cojones.

Well of course you won't because if you dismiss every media report "written by a bunch of hacks" as you say, at no point would you would willing to concede Torts might have lost the locker room.

The Canucks did a good job of collapsing, playing assignment hockey, and keeping the puck out of the net in AV's time there. The Rangers have good defensive personnel and obviously a great goaltender, there is no reason why he shouldn't maximize that to his advantage in the easier conference.


Lol - wow, that's rich. You don't put a lot of stock in defeating the caps who defeated the Rangers a few years back. Not to mention, the Rangers haven't done **** in two decades come playoff time (if they even made the playoffs) despite loaded rosters.

But hey, put stock in a bunch of hacks who have zero proof the coach lost the locker room. After all, those media hacks play coach to an otherwise ******** audience who obviously don't know hockey.

metswon69
06-27-2013, 02:47 PM
Lol - wow, that's rich. You don't put a lot of stock in defeating the caps who defeated the Rangers a few years back. Not to mention, the Rangers haven't done **** in two decades come playoff time (if they even made the playoffs) despite loaded rosters.

But hey, put stock in a bunch of hacks who have zero proof the coach lost the locker room. After all, those media hacks play coach to an otherwise ******** audience who obviously don't know hockey.

How have the Rangers and other teams handled the Caps in the last 6 years? Have they gotten out of the semifinals with 4 different coaches in that time? With all that offensive talent, they haven't made one ECF since Ovechkin has been there. Not ONE!!!

They're constantly overrated by the ESPN, NBC, and hockey analysts because they are a sexy pick to win the cup every year with Ovi at the helm. Never means anything because they can't get out of the second round.

Yeah the "hockey hacks" you speak of don't have inside sources with the players and such, it's just all speculation and bias writing against a coach they don't like :rolleyes:. Nothing is objective or written with any knowledge of the game, it's just a bunch of guys that have no idea what they are talking about.

I can buy some of Tortorella hate you are talking about but not all of it.

NYSPORTS98
06-27-2013, 03:34 PM
So the Caps are consistently overrated but the Rangers are legit?

What inside information do these Ny writers have? They're nothing but confrontational and 100 times worse than anything John Tortorella has ever done. They lie, spread rumors, whine in the papers, don't even bother to name their sources and badger the coaches nonstop with leading question to aggravate the coach and disrupt the entire team. A coach gets sick of their B.S. and some fans actually cry boo hoo and ridicule to coach for doing so? You actually believe this nonsense? Apparently, but this perceived prick just got a 5 year deal within a month of being canned.

Brooks and hacks are on to their next victim who better kiss their tails or else. At least the Giants were strong enough to support Coughlin whereas the Rangers were as weak as the Jets and Mets with the media dragging the weakest around by nose.

metswon69
06-27-2013, 04:28 PM
So the Caps are consistently overrated but the Rangers are legit?

What inside information do these Ny writers have? They're nothing but confrontational and 100 times worse than anything John Tortorella has ever done. They lie, spread rumors, whine in the papers, don't even bother to name their sources and badger the coaches nonstop with leading question to aggravate the coach and disrupt the entire team. A coach gets sick of their B.S. and some fans actually cry boo hoo and ridicule to coach for doing so? You actually believe this nonsense? Apparently, but this perceived prick just got a 5 year deal within a month of being canned.

Brooks and hacks are on to their next victim who better kiss their tails or else. At least the Giants were strong enough to support Coughlin whereas the Rangers were as weak as the Jets and Mets with the media dragging the weakest around by nose.

Aside from this year have they been overrated during Tort's reign? No one expected them to be a #1 seed last year but they did and for that Torts and that team deserve credit. That said, this team was expected to do more this year or at least be in the ECF given almost everyone's expectations and predictions. Like i asked you in the previous post. Do you regret the Nash trade? Do you regret losing Fedetenko, Mitchell, Dubi, Anisimov, and Erixon (we all wanted Prust back) because of the trade and financial implications of Nash's contract? Unless you can tell me you were dead set against that trade and can prove it then you are just judging this team in hindsight. Anyone can do that. I can find posts in January where i said this team needed time to transition and the new guys needed time to learn a new system but i would still make that Nash trade 100 times out of 100.

Torts got a 5 year deal because he has a legitimate resume and for an established team like the Canucks i am sure they didn't want to turn over the reigns to a guy with little to no coaching experience. They were also looking for a change in culture that Torts will provide. That said, he could very well wear out his welcome because unless his personality changes, he is not going to go over well with a veteran team that is used to a certain way.

Like i said, i can agree to some extent that the media is agenda driven and that there are stories out there about Torts and his treatment of players that aren't true but not all of them. It sounds like a conspiracy theory at that point. The truth is his abrasiveness didn't go over well and it's been evident in his coaching stops. Whether you choose to believe that is your deal, not mine. I certainly believe to some extent that there was division in that locker room and that the coach's personality had run its course with a group of players.

NYSPORTS98
06-27-2013, 05:18 PM
I was all for the Nash trade and even the coach said you "make that trade 10 out of 10 time" but they did lose the dynamic which made them successful the prior year. The added some of what was missing at the deadline. Unfortunately, Staal never returned and Clowe was gone. They needed all the help they could find against the Bruins. Comically though, Brad Richards was lost and couldn't physically compete. The coach wasn't given the opportunity to to finish the job and complete the process of developing the young kids and winning a cup. This was lacking and only the blind couldn't see it as both the Devils and the Bruins were bigger tougher teams in which nobody, especially the Rangers, are going to fly up and down the ice while scoring on the rush. The penguins couldn't even do it.

Meanwhile, how quickly fans dismiss the miserable play in the opponents end. Nobody could shoot and they stayed on Nash non-stop. No blast from the point. Did you watch the finals? Everybody is blasting from the point while the Rangers have Nobody with a shot.

The coach took the fall despite a very flawed team while the media sells a flawed personality as the culprit which B.S.

metswon69
06-27-2013, 05:24 PM
Katie Strang ‏@KatieStrangESPN 3m

#NYR W/ wireless issues at BOG, failed to tweet a couple of items: 1) Sather said team has yet to make decision on Richards but will shortly

Katie Strang ‏@KatieStrangESPN 2m

#NYR Also, during BOG mtg Sather and Leafs GM Dave Nonis stepped out together for pvt. convo. Could be nothing, but interesting nonetheless

NYSPORTS98
06-27-2013, 05:28 PM
Katie Strang ‏@KatieStrangESPN 3m




Katie Strang ‏@KatieStrangESPN 2m


Lol - hopefully Sather is telling him Richards veteran presence would have prevented the Leafs collapse despite him being MIA for the blue shirts.

nyr2002nyr
06-27-2013, 06:48 PM
I was all for the Nash trade and even the coach said you "make that trade 10 out of 10 time" but they did lose the dynamic which made them successful the prior year. The added some of what was missing at the deadline. Unfortunately, Staal never returned and Clowe was gone. They needed all the help they could find against the Bruins. Comically though, Brad Richards was lost and couldn't physically compete. The coach wasn't given the opportunity to to finish the job and complete the process of developing the young kids and winning a cup. This was lacking and only the blind couldn't see it as both the Devils and the Bruins were bigger tougher teams in which nobody, especially the Rangers, are going to fly up and down the ice while scoring on the rush. The penguins couldn't even do it.

Meanwhile, how quickly fans dismiss the miserable play in the opponents end. Nobody could shoot and they stayed on Nash non-stop. No blast from the point. Did you watch the finals? Everybody is blasting from the point while the Rangers have Nobody with a shot.

The coach took the fall despite a very flawed team while the media sells a flawed personality as the culprit which B.S.

He wasn't given a chance to develop the young kids? How could they develop when he benches them every other shift. He had no clue how to handle and bring along the kids

fingerbang
06-27-2013, 07:07 PM
He wasn't given a chance to develop the young kids? How could they develop when he benches them every other shift. He had no clue how to handle and bring along the kids

Ummm....

Stepan? McDonagh? MDZ? Hagelin?

bsi
06-27-2013, 07:21 PM
I wonder if Slats and Nonis are talking a Richards for Grabovski swap? Grabovski is overpaid by about 2 mill but he contract is much shorter than Richards and he's younger.

nyr2002nyr
06-27-2013, 11:57 PM
Ummm....

Stepan? McDonagh? MDZ? Hagelin?

He brought along McDonagh? The kid played from the day he came over. And I like how you mention only a few of the kids. :rolleyes:

fingerbang
06-28-2013, 12:07 PM
He brought along McDonagh? The kid played from the day he came over. And I like how you mention only a few of the kids. :rolleyes:

Who didn't I mention? Kreider? That kid that sucked in the AHL for a good part of the season, too.

If Tortorella is judged to be bad with young players based on the Kreider situation than AV is a ****ing incompetent ****** based on the Hodgson situation.

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 01:27 PM
Ummm....

Stepan? McDonagh? MDZ? Hagelin?

Etc, etc. the whole roster is kids

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 01:35 PM
He brought along McDonagh? The kid played from the day he came over. And I like how you mention only a few of the kids. :rolleyes:

Who are we talking about then? Should he have thrown Miller to the wolves? Kreider, who sucked in Hartford? Torts had a team of kids he was grooming for years. He wasn't allowed to finish the job and if he was as short sighted as some fans are regarding the history of this changing roster, maybe Torts should have pushed for Nash by using Kreider and Miller as bait and keep his existing successful team together.

fingerbang
06-28-2013, 04:38 PM
NYR will not be using their remaining compliance buyout this summer so Brad Richards will remain a Blueshirt.

https://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/350713050204090369

nyr2002nyr
06-28-2013, 04:41 PM
https://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/350713050204090369

Well that sucks!

fingerbang
06-28-2013, 05:20 PM
Who gets bounced out of the top 6? Brassard is an offensive player but Stepan probably deserves it more.

MJL80
06-28-2013, 05:34 PM
https://twitter.com/TSNBobMcKenzie/status/350713050204090369

Looks like the end of the Brad era will be next summer then.... fingers crossed that the dude stays healthy, or we're screwed

SLY WILLIAMS
06-28-2013, 05:37 PM
They said there were conflicting opinions on this decision in the organization. I wonder if this will play a role in the Clowe decision.

fingerbang
06-28-2013, 05:42 PM
Don't even know if they can afford to bring Clowe back. The Richards buyout was supposed to open up the cap space to make moves.

J4KOP99
06-28-2013, 05:47 PM
Well, I hope that he bounces back and stays healthy... If he sucks again we are in a tough spot.

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 06:16 PM
Great job Sather, no cup coming to the Rangers

Mr.Wiskers
06-28-2013, 06:38 PM
Hold all of your comments on Richards till he plays in AV's system, How can you just cut a the guy without seeing what he can do under another coach and another system. We still have 1 more year to use the buyout.
As far as the Torts thing with the kids, come on he continuously bashed his own players in public--never taking the blame for his poor coaching. If he would have admitted to himself that he needed help, he could have hired another coach to help him. Maybe if he wasn't so arrogant he would still be coaching our team, people like him don't last because sooner or later they wear on people. And as far as the personnel, he sits with Sather and decides who should be brought back and who should go.

nyr2002nyr
06-28-2013, 06:39 PM
Great job Sather, no cup coming to the Rangers


Way to stay positive you might as well be a Cubs fan

Mr.Wiskers
06-28-2013, 06:42 PM
We've been thru this already with Tort's, its a dead conversation. He gone whether you like it( i do) or you don't.

Let's just talk about the cap and what players we might be able to get.
Would love Bickel and Clarkson, but we do need another d-man.

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 06:53 PM
Way to stay positive you might as well be a Cubs fan

Might was well tell that to all the Rangers fans who are outrage on every site beside PSD. What a shocker, you're acting like a Mets fan.

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 06:54 PM
Great job Sather, no cup coming to the Rangers

This will go down as the dumbest move in Rangers history. Wade Redden was #1 with ESPO's firing of Bergeron #2. This Richards move will be #1.

nyr2002nyr
06-28-2013, 07:01 PM
This will go down as the dumbest move in Rangers history. Wade Redden was #1 with ESPO's firing of Bergeron #2. This Richards move will be #1.

He can still use it. What im sure he is doing is giving him a chance with a full camp in a new system and if he doesnt like what Richards looks like later on he will use it. And dont forget TROTTIER!

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 07:03 PM
All the Rangers fans elsewhere really love this move. (quite the opposite)

Mr.Wiskers
06-28-2013, 07:04 PM
So anybody here anything about the draft, we have 3-3rd Rd picks, a 4th and a 6th Rd pick.
Any chance we package and move up?

bsi
06-28-2013, 08:03 PM
Told ya they wouldn't be buying him out this year.

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 08:41 PM
Told ya they wouldn't be buying him out this year.

You obviously have less faith in Slats than I did. I should have know after the Redden deal how stupid the fella is. Certainly not smarter than a 5th grader.

bsi
06-28-2013, 08:58 PM
You obviously have less faith in Slats than I did. I should have know after the Redden deal how stupid the fella is. Certainly not smarter than a 5th grader.

I'm unsure why they pay him and you're sitting there looking at the computer screen with all the answers for free.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-28-2013, 09:10 PM
According to a few sources people in the organization had differing opinions on this move just like us fans. From what the media says this is now being looked at like a 1 year deal that could be bought out next season.

bsi
06-28-2013, 09:15 PM
According to a few sources people in the organization had differing opinions on this move just like us fans. From what the media says this is now being looked at like a 1 year deal that could be bought out next season.

Was pretty much what I assumed anyway because you give him the year to prove last year was a bad year due to a shortened season, tensions with the coach or whatever it was. If he comes back and plays like the real Brad Richards this team is a much better team. I understand the cap implications down the road if he doesn't play well but if he does play well and continues to then that cap hit may not look so bad considering top tier players these days are looking for 10 mill, and the cap isn't going to stay where it is, the NHL had was hugely successful this year inspite of the lockout, the cap is going to go up again next year.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-28-2013, 09:24 PM
Was pretty much what I assumed anyway because you give him the year to prove last year was a bad year due to a shortened season, tensions with the coach or whatever it was. If he comes back and plays like the real Brad Richards this team is a much better team. I understand the cap implications down the road if he doesn't play well but if he does play well and continues to then that cap hit may not look so bad considering top tier players these days are looking for 10 mill, and the cap isn't going to stay where it is, the NHL had was hugely successful this year inspite of the lockout, the cap is going to go up again next year.

I like Brad. I'm a Brad fan. It is mostly his cap hit that is an concern (along with a declining impact). What I'm concerned about is not injury for Brad. I'm concerned that somebody that could help us more could become available and we will not have cap room. With that said I do think Slats and the rest of the team probably considered most the possibilities. They may have let AV make the final call as coach.

NYSPORTS98
06-28-2013, 09:38 PM
According to a few sources people in the organization had differing opinions on this move just like us fans. From what the media says this is now being looked at like a 1 year deal that could be bought out next season.



And if he gets hurt, the cap is crippled and you can kiss the youth away. The dumbest move in Rangers history.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-28-2013, 09:41 PM
And if he gets hurt, the cap is crippled and you can kiss the youth away. The dumbest move in Rangers history.

You are right. The injury risk is huge. That is a fear for sure. I would not say this is the dumbest move (Middleton for Hodge???) but I will say it is one of the riskiest.

Mr.Wiskers
06-28-2013, 11:18 PM
If he gets hurt, you have to figure he does the right thing---keeps his mouth shut comes back plays a few games and then let's the Rangers buy him out and retires. He'll get his money and we get our cap relief.

Lisound15
06-28-2013, 11:34 PM
Hey guys, i don't really post here much but I just wanted to offer a different perspective on the richards situation. I'm kind of confused as to why everyone wants this richards buyout to happen so bad. Yes, he underachieved last year, but still managed to finish with more points than guys like bobby ryan, patrick marleau, mike richards, jeff carter & evander kane... My point is that it was a lockout shortened season, and plenty of guys had down years due to the lack of a training camp & other factors.

Additionally, we are coming off of a coaching change, and getting a coach that has shown to let his star players do their thing offensively. Nobody knows what was going on between Torts & Richards, but things obviously weren't working. We should give AV a shot at working with Richards and getting him back to his peak performance level.

Lastly, I just don't feel we should sell low on our assets, especially Richards, a proven point-per-game player. By buying him out this year, we receive nothing in return except for cap space in a free agent market that isn't very attractive. If we give him one last shot, he performs well this year, than we can get a much higher return for him if we decide to trade him, or we can keep him and have excellent depth at center (similar to the boston bruins).

Thats just my perspective, feel free to disagree.

fingerbang
06-29-2013, 01:41 AM
Hey guys, i don't really post here much but I just wanted to offer a different perspective on the richards situation. I'm kind of confused as to why everyone wants this richards buyout to happen so bad. Yes, he underachieved last year, but still managed to finish with more points than guys like bobby ryan, patrick marleau, mike richards, jeff carter & evander kane... My point is that it was a lockout shortened season, and plenty of guys had down years due to the lack of a training camp & other factors.

Additionally, we are coming off of a coaching change, and getting a coach that has shown to let his star players do their thing offensively. Nobody knows what was going on between Torts & Richards, but things obviously weren't working. We should give AV a shot at working with Richards and getting him back to his peak performance level.

Lastly, I just don't feel we should sell low on our assets, especially Richards, a proven point-per-game player. By buying him out this year, we receive nothing in return except for cap space in a free agent market that isn't very attractive. If we give him one last shot, he performs well this year, than we can get a much higher return for him if we decide to trade him, or we can keep him and have excellent depth at center (similar to the boston bruins).

Thats just my perspective, feel free to disagree.

He's under a microscope because he makes a lot of money. He was expected to outproduce all of the players you mentioned offensively. He didn't live up to expectations, he was out of shape this season, and if he's injured this time next year he's on the books until 2020.

IAmARanger18
06-29-2013, 02:30 AM
Is he staying for sure? I think it's a good move, under AV he will be reignited

NYY09
06-29-2013, 07:51 AM
I really don't get the gamble, guess they figured there was no better option out there, trade FA or buy out. Dont dislike the guy and if Gomez can get moved so can a "rejuvenated" Richards but I really figured they would go the safe route, like they did with AV, oh well...

NYSPORTS98
06-29-2013, 08:19 AM
I'm unsure why they pay him and you're sitting there looking at the computer screen with all the answers for free.

As a financial advisor, I stare at at lot of computer screens and it's not for free Pal.;) As far as Richards, this decision was made by Sather who has been a buffoon since he arrived.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-29-2013, 12:50 PM
With the draft coming up I started thinking of another way to value a player. If a guy can not bring back a 1st round pick in a trade that player should not be paid 4-9 million a year in my opinion.

In fact a guy that makes 6-9 million should be able to bring back a 1st round pick plus a prospect or two 1st round picks.

Can Brad bring back 1st round picks?
Can Clowe bring back a 1st round pick?

If the answer is no than it is possible we are over paying for them.

bsi
06-29-2013, 01:57 PM
With the draft coming up I started thinking of another way to value a player. If a guy can not bring back a 1st round pick in a trade that player should not be paid 4-9 million a year in my opinion.

In fact a guy that makes 6-9 million should be able to bring back a 1st round pick plus a prospect or two 1st round picks.

Can Brad bring back 1st round picks?
Can Clowe bring back a 1st round pick?

If the answer is no than it is possible we are over paying for them.

Sorry Sly but that really doesn't hold much water.

Firstly Clowe isn't going to be making 6-9 million anywhere.
Secondly as much as the cap has gone down, the players salaries are still going up and a player making 7 million today might be more likely to make 10 in 3 years time on the open market. As well with player salaries going up there's very few teams in this league that would part with 2 first round picks for anyone not named Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, like everyone they need those cheap players to offset the 10 mill contracts. The problem with what you are saying is that the cap has dropped this year, a lot of teams are struggling to get under it, they just can't add a 6 million dollar player to their roster as they are trimming fat as it is, even if they wanted to trade for a guy in that price range it's just not possible for them at all. This is a different year where a draft pick is worth more than a already contracted player because teams have to shed money not add it.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-29-2013, 02:21 PM
Sorry Sly but that really doesn't hold much water.

Firstly Clowe isn't going to be making 6-9 million anywhere.
Secondly as much as the cap has gone down, the players salaries are still going up and a player making 7 million today might be more likely to make 10 in 3 years time on the open market. As well with player salaries going up there's very few teams in this league that would part with 2 first round picks for anyone not named Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, like everyone they need those cheap players to offset the 10 mill contracts. The problem with what you are saying is that the cap has dropped this year, a lot of teams are struggling to get under it, they just can't add a 6 million dollar player to their roster as they are trimming fat as it is, even if they wanted to trade for a guy in that price range it's just not possible for them at all. This is a different year where a draft pick is worth more than a already contracted player because teams have to shed money not add it.

I did not say Clowe would be making 6-9 mill. While he reportedly turned down 5 mill during the season I have doubts that he will even be offerred 5 mill.

If a player is to be paid 4-5 mill as a free agent he should have the value to bhring back a 1st round pick in my opinion. Staal would bring back a 1st round pick. So would many other players in that salary range.

In my opinion in a capped league you have to look at salary in regards to production and trade value. Lundy will make 6-9 million. Lundy can bring back 2 1st round picks or a 1st round pick and a prospect. Brad and Vinny were going to make 6-9 mill. They can not bring back 2 1st round picks so they were bought out or in danger of being bought out.

I have no problem with you disagreeing but salary as well as the trade market are both measures of a players worth. I judge a player by both. If a players production does not measure up to their trade value or salary they are being paid too much.

Lisound15
06-29-2013, 04:14 PM
He's under a microscope because he makes a lot of money. He was expected to outproduce all of the players you mentioned offensively. He didn't live up to expectations, he was out of shape this season, and if he's injured this time next year he's on the books until 2020.


I don't necessarily think he's far better than those players offensively, maybe slightly but he wasn't as dreadful as people make it sound, he was top 60 in the league in scoring. This coming from somebody who was on him all season, I couldn't stand his game, the constant turnovers in our zone, the blind passes and the hesitancy to shoot. However, the lockout had a LOT to do with his struggles. Yes, it was his own fault for failing to participate in an offseason regimen, but he was not the only NHL player to do so. Why not give him one last shot, if it isn't working we can get rid of him after this year anyways.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-29-2013, 05:19 PM
I don't necessarily think he's far better than those players offensively, maybe slightly but he wasn't as dreadful as people make it sound, he was top 60 in the league in scoring. This coming from somebody who was on him all season, I couldn't stand his game, the constant turnovers in our zone, the blind passes and the hesitancy to shoot. However, the lockout had a LOT to do with his struggles. Yes, it was his own fault for failing to participate in an offseason regimen, but he was not the only NHL player to do so. Why not give him one last shot, if it isn't working we can get rid of him after this year anyways.

Brad had a mixed season for sure but we are basically doing what you propose. The only difference is that I think it is possible he may be bought out next off season no matter how he performs because I think next off season would be the the last chance to get out from under his long term contract.

bsi
06-29-2013, 10:58 PM
I did not say Clowe would be making 6-9 mill. While he reportedly turned down 5 mill during the season I have doubts that he will even be offerred 5 mill.

If a player is to be paid 4-5 mill as a free agent he should have the value to bhring back a 1st round pick in my opinion. Staal would bring back a 1st round pick. So would many other players in that salary range.

In my opinion in a capped league you have to look at salary in regards to production and trade value. Lundy will make 6-9 million. Lundy can bring back 2 1st round picks or a 1st round pick and a prospect. Brad and Vinny were going to make 6-9 mill. They can not bring back 2 1st round picks so they were bought out or in danger of being bought out.

I have no problem with you disagreeing but salary as well as the trade market are both measures of a players worth. I judge a player by both. If a players production does not measure up to their trade value or salary they are being paid too much.

Ya but this is a special year. If the CBA hadn't changed there's no problem getting a prospect and a 1st out of Richards at the deadline, not saying you're gonna be at the top of the 1st round but you'd get one. Problem is that teams that might be interested in him now have to cut salary not add it. If the cap hadn't changed and we wanted to trade Richards there'd be a lineup looking for him. The list of teams that can actually add 6+ million right now are slim, and most of them have cap space because they don't have huge pockets to begin with. The other problem right now is that players like Lecavalier have been bought out and are now a cheaper option to get because they've already gotten their payday and can just play where they want to not necessarily where they can get the most money. There's going to be a lower team this year make some big signings because they have cap space. Teams like the Islanders, Jets, Senators are all primed for making offers on those buyouts and offering trades to teams over the cap because they have cap space and they'll low ball the heck out of the other teams because they know they have to shed cap.

bsi
06-29-2013, 11:03 PM
Just a thought here but what is stopping two teams say the Rangers and Chicago from buying out Hossa and Richards. Richards goes to Chicago and Hossa to New York. One year passes and they trade for each others players back. I know it would take a lot of maneuvering and a risk of having one get injured but wouldn't that be better than all this crud we're going through?

NYSPORTS98
06-30-2013, 10:54 AM
Just a thought here but what is stopping two teams say the Rangers and Chicago from buying out Hossa and Richards. Richards goes to Chicago and Hossa to New York. One year passes and they trade for each others players back. I know it would take a lot of maneuvering and a risk of having one get injured but wouldn't that be better than all this crud we're going through?

I think there is a very good chance this happens.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-30-2013, 10:58 AM
Just a thought here but what is stopping two teams say the Rangers and Chicago from buying out Hossa and Richards. Richards goes to Chicago and Hossa to New York. One year passes and they trade for each others players back. I know it would take a lot of maneuvering and a risk of having one get injured but wouldn't that be better than all this crud we're going through?


I think there is a very good chance this happens.

That is a interesting idea but if there is no current rule against it I believe either the players union or the league would say the teams are trying to circumvent the CBA.

bsi
06-30-2013, 12:58 PM
That is a interesting idea but if there is no current rule against it I believe either the players union or the league would say the teams are trying to circumvent the CBA.

Only thing is that you can't really stop a guy from signing on the open market I don't think, and the league would really have to prove that they actually planned it I'd say, as long as the new contract was only a year I don't think there's much they could do, and worse case scenario we keep Hossa they keep Richards.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-30-2013, 01:08 PM
Only thing is that you can't really stop a guy from signing on the open market I don't think, and the league would really have to prove that they actually planned it I'd say, as long as the new contract was only a year I don't think there's much they could do, and worse case scenario we keep Hossa they keep Richards.

The problem is you are talking about a preplanned transaction between 2 players, 2 teams organizations, and 2 agents. The purpose is to circumvent the CBA. Sometimes people have loose lips. If anyone talked the penalty could make it not worth the risk.

bsi
06-30-2013, 03:05 PM
The problem is you are talking about a preplanned transaction between 2 players, 2 teams organizations, and 2 agents. The purpose is to circumvent the CBA. Sometimes people have loose lips. If anyone talked the penalty could make it not worth the risk.

I suppose but there's going to be stuff like that go down, every time they think they've iron cladded a CBA they find loopholes to use and get around it. I think by the time Richards contract is up they'll be in the clear of it somehow.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-30-2013, 04:50 PM
I suppose but there's going to be stuff like that go down, every time they think they've iron cladded a CBA they find loopholes to use and get around it. I think by the time Richards contract is up they'll be in the clear of it somehow.

A cap loophole is a bit different than a preplanned transaction agreed to by 2 teams and 2 players but hidden from the NHL office and the public. I believe that type of pre agreed but hidden transaction would be illegal even before the cap. The closest I could see is if a deal was made and 1 team got future considerations and those considerations turned in to another player or pick switching teams in a year.

bsi
06-30-2013, 05:21 PM
A cap loophole is a bit different than a preplanned transaction agreed to by 2 teams and 2 players but hidden from the NHL office and the public. I believe that type of pre agreed but hidden transaction would be illegal even before the cap. The closest I could see is if a deal was made and 1 team got future considerations and those considerations turned in to another player or pick switching teams in a year.

There's nothing wrong with that transaction though. Two players get bought out, sign one year deals, deals expire and resign with old team. League can't say much after the two guys play in different cities for a year really. If Marian Hossa or Brad Richards want to resign with the teams that bought them out a year later they're within their rights to do it.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-30-2013, 05:37 PM
There's nothing wrong with that transaction though. Two players get bought out, sign one year deals, deals expire and resign with old team. League can't say much after the two guys play in different cities for a year really. If Marian Hossa or Brad Richards want to resign with the teams that bought them out a year later they're within their rights to do it.

If it was a total coincidence and not a preplanned move by 2 teams and 2 players it might be okay but that was not the impression I got from your original question.

bsi
06-30-2013, 05:42 PM
If it was a total coincidence and not a preplanned move by 2 teams and 2 players it might be okay but that was not the impression I got from your original question.

How does the league determine that though...hard to, and I'm not gonna tell them haha.

SLY WILLIAMS
06-30-2013, 05:54 PM
How does the league determine that though...hard to, and I'm not gonna tell them haha.

I'd be happy to take Hossa. Just do not see why the Rangers would try to trade him back to Chi for Brad after 1 year. I think Brad is gone no matter what next offseason based only on his contract. I wonder if Brad knows that as well.

bsi
06-30-2013, 06:18 PM
I'd be happy to take Hossa. Just do not see why the Rangers would try to trade him back to Chi for Brad after 1 year. I think Brad is gone no matter what next offseason based only on his contract. I wonder if Brad knows that as well.

I think he's gone at the deadline really. If he can string together a good season he'll be hard to resist from clubs with a lot of cap space that are still in a playoff run.

IAmARanger18
06-30-2013, 10:18 PM
I think he's gone at the deadline really. If he can string together a good season he'll be hard to resist from clubs with a lot of cap space that are still in a playoff run.

I don't know about that, salary cap goes up next season to 70M and if he performs well this season, why buy him out? If he doesn't get rejuvinated under AV after this year then you cut your losses with him. But if he does well, he will be here, and I think he will.

NYSPORTS98
07-01-2013, 09:52 PM
Islander buyout DiPietro

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/01/islanders-to-buyout-rick-dipietro/

Rangers in 7
07-02-2013, 11:27 AM
I don't know about that, salary cap goes up next season to 70M and if he performs well this season, why buy him out? If he doesn't get rejuvinated under AV after this year then you cut your losses with him. But if he does well, he will be here, and I think he will.

the issue is even if he does play well next season, hes not going to keep that play up until hes 40 when his contract runs out....whether he plays well next season or not he has to be gone

SLY WILLIAMS
07-02-2013, 12:37 PM
the issue is even if he does play well next season, hes not going to keep that play up until hes 40 when his contract runs out....whether he plays well next season or not he has to be gone

You explained it better than I have but that is what I have been trying to say. He basically is on a 1 year deal (barring injury) because no matter how he plays this season they will have to move/cut him by next season. I say that only based on his contract, his age and the cap implications.

Rangers in 7
07-02-2013, 03:02 PM
You explained it better than I have but that is what I have been trying to say. He basically is on a 1 year deal (barring injury) because no matter how he plays this season they will have to move/cut him by next season. I say that only based on his contract, his age and the cap implications.

hahah i know, it just seemed people werent getting what you were saying, so i figured id try to explain it another way

metswon69
07-02-2013, 04:27 PM
You explained it better than I have but that is what I have been trying to say. He basically is on a 1 year deal (barring injury) because no matter how he plays this season they will have to move/cut him by next season. I say that only based on his contract, his age and the cap implications.

I don't see Richards being an injury issue. Obviously no one can predict that but he's been an ironman for most of his career. He's played 95% of his team's games since starting in the league in 2000-2001. The guy is a smart player and like everyone mentioned it's a one year audition.

If he doesn't get the job done, he'll be bought out next year.

SLY WILLIAMS
07-02-2013, 05:56 PM
I don't see Richards being an injury issue. Obviously no one can predict that but he's been an ironman for most of his career. He's played 95% of his team's games since starting in the league in 2000-2001. The guy is a smart player and like everyone mentioned it's a one year audition.

If he doesn't get the job done, he'll be bought out next year.

Say Richards scores 65-80 points at 33 years of age this season. Are you willing to commit cap room to his contract 6.7 cap hit annually for the next 6 years ages 34-40?

metswon69
07-02-2013, 06:06 PM
Say Richards scores 65-80 points at 33 years of age this season. Are you willing to commit cap room to his contract 6.7 cap hit annually for the next 6 years ages 34-40?

Well no to be honest but i was against bringing him back before they decided to keep him.

I guess they look at it like well there is nobody in this FA class that can give you the type of impact scoring Richards can and they still have to perceive themselves as one of the favorites in the EC so lets give him one more year.

But another thing here is too is if he plays well and let's say the Rangers by happenstance don't, they can still trade him as well.

SLY WILLIAMS
07-02-2013, 06:09 PM
Well no to be honest but i was against bringing him back before they decided to keep him.

I guess they look at it like well there is nobody in this FA class that can give you the type of impact scoring Richards can and they still have to perceive themselves as one of the favorites in the EC so lets give him one more year.

But another thing here is too is if he plays well and let's say the Rangers by happenstance don't, they can still trade him as well.

I understand why they kept him this year but I say it will only be this one year not the other 6 years.

Its possible he could be traded as a rental this season but I think he will definitely be bought out by June 2014. I think that is the only logical way to go since he will be 34-40 if he is kept for the remaining 6 years.

metswon69
07-02-2013, 06:12 PM
I understand why they kept him this year but I say it will only be this one year not the other 6 years.

Its possible he could be traded as a rental this season but I think he will definitely be bought out by June 2014. I think that is the only logical way to go since he will be 34-40 if he is kept for the remaining 6 years.

Well those are the only 2 reasons i can believe they kept him as they think he can be the catalyst of a run in the EC or trade him. Other than that, the financial implications and his age, suggested they should have dumped him this offseason.

So you're right, either trade him or hope he gets us where we want to go and buy him out next offseason.

SLY WILLIAMS
07-02-2013, 06:19 PM
Well those are the only 2 reasons i can believe they kept him to believe he can be the catalyst of a run in the EC or trade him. Other than that, the financial implications and his age, suggested they should have dumped him this offseason.

So you're right, either trade him or hope he gets us where we want to go and buy him out next offseason.

They might even let him go another year if they had a choice but for a compliance buyout it will be June 2014 or nothing.

Rangers in 7
07-03-2013, 12:00 PM
based on everything going on and the buyout only being available for one more season he has to be bought out after this upcoming season

IAmARanger18
07-03-2013, 12:27 PM
Thought you can do it anytime in the new CBA? There's a time limit to when you can use it?

SLY WILLIAMS
07-03-2013, 12:32 PM
Here’s what the CBA allows
Each NHL team has been awarded two compliance buyouts that can be used at the end of this season or following the 2013-14 season. The buyouts are meant to help teams adjust to the falling salary cap; the cap decreases to $64.3 million next season from $70.2 million this year.

Teams can use none, one or both of their buyouts after this season comes to a conclusion. The same goes for next summer. It’s up to each organization to decide whether and how buyouts are employed.

When a player is bought out, his salary will not count against his former team’s cap. He will, however, receive a salary worth either 1/3 or 2/3 of the original contract he signed, depending on his age. A player under the age of 26 at the time of his buyout is eligible to receive 1/3 of his salary, and a player over the age of 26 will receive 2/3 of the remaining value of his salary.
http://www.csnphilly.com/hockey-philadelphia-flyers/quick-guide-nhls-compliance-buyouts

fingerbang
07-03-2013, 01:00 PM
And they have to be bought out during the buyout window. So if Richards happens to be injured during that time frame the Rangers are screwed.

IAmARanger18
07-03-2013, 01:13 PM
So pretty much this is his last chance.

Rangers in 7
07-04-2013, 10:53 AM
So pretty much this is his last chance.

exactly

bsi
07-04-2013, 12:07 PM
Looks like I can guess what Slats and Nonis were talking about now, Grabovski just got bought out. Would be a good pickup but I'm sure other teams will inflate his price because of his age. Would love him around 2 mill.

SLY WILLIAMS
07-04-2013, 12:09 PM
Looks like I can guess what Slats and Nonis were talking about now, Grabovski just got bought out. Would be a good pickup but I'm sure other teams will inflate his price because of his age. Would love him around 2 mill.

16 points last year? He really dropped in production. Do you know why?

bsi
07-04-2013, 09:48 PM
16 points last year? He really dropped in production. Do you know why?

This pretty much sums it up. He wasn't used in the same way with Carlyle last year as he was the previous year with Wilson.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/mirtle-grabovski-never-fit-in-carlyles-system/article13006836/

Rangers in 7
07-08-2013, 12:39 AM
he played alot of 3rd and 4th line minutes last year which hurt his production