Wanna blog? Start your own hockey blog with My HockeyBuzz. Register for free today!
 

My Take on Larry Brooks' Post Column Today - Update 5/27/16 - Stamkos/Vesey

May 26, 2016, 7:49 AM ET [595 Comments]
Jan Levine
New York Rangers Blogger • RSSArchiveCONTACT
Larry Brooks had several interesting nuggets in his column today (http://nypost.com/2016/05/25/you-might-not-recognize-anyone-on-the-rangers-next-season/). Under each component, I have put my view. With a month to go until the open negotiating period begins before free agency, settle in for what should be a very busy 30 or so days for the Blueshirts. I will post my views on the various pieces of the column throughout the day, adding my most recent above the prior ones.

Update May 27 - 12:30pm:

Chances are extremely remote that the Blueshirts will get in on the bidding for Steven Stamkos, who is expected to command $70 million over seven years when the idled Tampa Bay captain reaches free agency.

Aside from the matter of being unable to insure Stamkos’ contract against a recurrence of the blood-clot condition that has sidelined him (though it is not likely to be an aside for teams pursuing No. 91), the Rangers essentially would have to clear $16 million of space in order to sign No. 91 and fill in the remainder of the roster.

And even if Nash’s $7.8 million comes off the books, it is unlikely to be accomplished in a trade through which the Rangers don’t either have to take a relatively pricey contract in return or retain a significant portion of No. 61’s cap charge. So dealing Nash is not going to represent a $7.8 million savings.

The Rangers — who by the way are 3-8 in their last 11 playoff games against the conference finalist Lightning and Penguins while allowing at least five goals in five of them — don’t have a difference-maker on the roster, but even though Stamkos is expected to be the only elite option on the free-agent market, management is expected to renovate through trades rather than splashy free-agent signings.


I am a huge Stamkos fan, but to expend that much money on one player who while he is very good may no longer be the truly elite talent of a few years ago seems like an unwise strategy. The Rangers have historically, and in many cases mistakenly, chased the big name. Going after Stamkos might be falling into that same pattern.

Stamkos could very well get 40 goals but will he get the 50+ along with 40 or so assists to warrant that salary and cap outlay? My view is that he won't. New York would be better served using the available cap space to worry about re-signing their RFAs and then supplementing the team with multiple pieces rather than one.

Moving Nash would free up $7.8 mil, but the usage of that cap space is dependent on what comes back with him, as Brooks noted. If Girardi isn't deal, that's $5.5 mil staying on the books. Same with Marc Staal's $5.7 mi, so from where is the cash coming to make room for Stamkos? In addition, to make a space of him, that means Stepan or Brassard have to go. It's possible either bring back a big return, maybe Coyle/Tuch and a pick or Dumba, highly unlikely, for Stepan, creating that top-center spot for Stamkos. Because if not and someone how you make room for Stamkos without dealing one of those two, then either Brass or Stepan becomes a highly-overpaid third line center.

As Brooks wrote, the health issue can't be ignored. Blood clots, as we have seen lately with Chris Bosh, is extremely scary and dangerous. Add in the contact within hockey and it grows exponentially. The potentially inability to get insurance to cover in case Stamkos is sidelined by this condition makes the possibility of him coming here even more remote,

But there is this exception:

Expect the Rangers to be in big-time on pending free-agent winger Jimmy Vesey of Harvard, who will become available on Aug. 15 when the Predators lose the rights to the 66th overall selection of the 2012 entry draft.

Common wisdom has the North Redding, Mass., native signing with either the Maple Leafs (for whom his father works) or the hometown Bruins, but there is every reason to believe the Blueshirts will be serious players on this one.


As others have written, adding college undrafted free agents and those who don't sign with their team is a way NY has tried to make up for the lack of draft picks. They did so with Kevin Hayes and benefitted from the move in his rookie season; less so last year. Vesey is probably a top-25 prospect, who would bring good size and skill to the Rangers, like he would any team. a no-brainer to pursue this option, though I would put the likelihood of him signing with the team as somewhat remote.

Update 5pm:

Of course Rick Nash is available — as is everyone in the organization other than Henrik Lundqvist, Brady Skjei and Pavel Buchnevich. The Rangers, we’re told, are prepared to listen to offers for everyone.

That includes Ryan McDonagh, Derek Stepan, Derick Brassard, Chris Kreider and Kevin Hayes, each player’s availability, of course, will be dependent upon the exchange rate in return. But nothing is off the table. And the Wild are believed to have serious interest in native Minnesotan Stepan.


To be somewhat crass, well duh. Nothing within reason should be off the table. But to quote Ek, dominoes, meaning each move will need to have at least of maybe two moves associated with it. So if move a center, you better get one back or have one lined up in free agency. In addition, are you willing to make a massive overhaul knowing that Henrik Lundqvist's window to win a cup is slightly changing? Plus, would dealing any of the players listed above adversely change the chemistry and/or identity of the team? If yes to the latter, as long as helping to better create and develop that identity, sign me up for it.

The required return for each might be markedly different. Dealing McDonagh removed your captain, top line d-man and best offensive blueliner outside of Yandle as well as one who is signed to a more than friendly deal. Stepan has a NMC starting July 1, 2017. As noted in the blog, with the expansion draft coming and with the ways NMC's have hampered the team recently, coupled with Stepan's 6.5 million cap hit, dealing him might make sense. But remember, if you deal Stepan, you remove a consistent 50+ point scorer, a 1a or 1b and player whose defensive ability makes up for the lack of that in his line mates. Plus he is one of those who raises his game in the playoffs.

Moving Brassard has somewhat of the same issues as Stepan. While he is particularly good defensively, other than this year, he is known as Big Game Brass for a reason. In addition, at $5 mil per year, his contract is fairly cap friendly for the role he fills. Moving him wood require a substantive return.

Kreider is the girl with the curl. When he is good, he is very good, when bad, he is very bad. But his speed is a major weapon and an area NY lacks with Carl Hagelin and to an extent Martin St. Louis gone. He too is one that usually is better in he playoffs but can be extremely streaky. Also, as Brooks pointed out and as we saw with Hagelin, could the fanbase deal with another player who initially or if moved elsewhere reaches his potential and comes back to haunt New York repeatedly?

Hayes is a million dollar arm, ten cent head. Do you believe in what we saw two years or his play last season? If two years ago, that skill coupled with a minimal raise due to his RFA status means that no way should be dealt without a huge return back. If feel that last year was a better representation of his future production, then get out now while you can.

Update 1pm:

Communication remains open between the Blueshirts and Keith Yandle, still far more likely to depart than to remain. But even as The Post has learned No. 93 is not committed to getting to July 1 at the exclusion of negotiating with general manager Jeff Gorton, the price tag — expected to be a minimum $45 million over seven years — is likely to be too expensive for the Rangers.


I would like not love Yandle to come back. Right now, he is by far the best offensive defenseman and despite his defensive liabilities, the skill set he brings would be sorely missed. The hope has to be that Brady Skjei continues his rise, building off his strong playoff and World Championships performance. While it's not wise to place too much pressure on Skjei, what we have seen so far seems to indicate he will be up to the task. In addition, if Shattenkirk somehow is added, it would make moving on from Yandle a bit easier. But at the expected current asking price, there is no way NY could afford and/or pay that.

Now for all the talk that Yandle should have been moved at the deadline, pardon the cliche, but hindsight is 20/20. I know many had the foresight to say move him. But the run just before the trading deadline changed GM Jeff Gorton's and management's view, resulting in the mistaken acquisition of Eric Staal as well as the retention of Yandle.

For the arguments that Yandle would have brought back a huge haul, it's hard to say no seeing what trading Staal, Andrew Ladd and Kris Russell went for before the deadline. Whether Valeri Nichushkin was really in play is unknown despite the speculation of him being available in a possible deal. But to play Devils Advocate, if NY drew Florida in round one, could they have beaten them? Same for Tampa Bay in round two. If the answer is yes to each, would you still have wanted Yandle dealt or is that view largely driven off how and in what round the playoffs ended? If that is the case, then Gorton made the right move keeping him and seeing how it all played out, despite the end result.

The Post has learned the Blueshirts do not intend to buy out the remainder of Dan Girardi’s contract, which has four years remaining at an annual $5.5 million cap charge.

In addition, sources report management has not requested the alternate captain to waive his no-move clause (which will be replaced by a modified no-trade following 2016-17). Further, no such request is expected.

The series of injures the 32-year-old played through last season was a factor in his stark decline. A summer of rest should prove beneficial.

That said, it is difficult to envision the Rangers going into training camp with Girardi penciled in as their first-pair right defenseman, even as the club anticipates what is likely to become the “new normal” from No. 5.

If not Girardi, it is unclear who would inherit the assignment, but sources indicate the Blueshirts are extremely unlikely to pursue St. Louis’ Kevin Shattenkirk in a trade. With only one year at a reasonable $4.25 million remaining on his contract, it likely would take a six-year commitment at upward of $6.5 million per to keep Shattenkirk off the 2017 open market. That’s an investment the Rangers are not going to be willing to make.


I would say this decision is mildly but not overly surprising. But, the final decision on Girardi could and should also depend on if any of those below are moved and what the possible return for Girardi. Nothing within reason should be off the table, even when dealing with a player who has given heart and soul and body to the team. So while there is a certain sense of loyalty, that shouldn't come at the expense of improving the team and clearing cap space.

A possible buyout would result in a cap hit for eight years. Year 1 isn't horrible, while year 2 is at $2.75 mil and it spikes to $3.75 mil for a few years before dropping back down to $1.75 mil the last few years of the deal. If the view is - and I believe this is true to a small but not large extent - that the regression was spurred by the injuries impacting his ability to train this offseason and then fractured knee cap this year, then seeing what he has this year makes a semblance of sense. However, the increasing frequency of Girardi's injuries coupled with my view that a good to decent part of his decline is not injury related, means that a decision will have to be made by at worst next year.

As Brooks points out, G is no longer a top-two d-man. At a $5.5 mil cap hit, it would appear that he must be a second pair d-man, because there is no way you can pay a third pair defenseman that kind of money. If the team's view is that G is that third pair d-men, then not trading or buy him out is a failure by the organization to really recognize and appropriately deal with the situation.

St. Louis' loss in the Western Conference Finals could spur some changes, despite the run. Vladimir Tarasenko came up really small in this past round, prompting St. Louis to add offense. That offense may be why the Rangers and Blues are able to find a common ground involving Rick Nash and Shattenkirk, as has been discussed in the past. However, as Brooks points out, Shattenkirk might be just a one season rental, which may make him less attractive to New York, even though adding him to the D would enable the team to move on from Yandle, as noted below. While Nash has notoriously had his playoff issues, he would bring another veteran presence to the Blues' locker room and one with just two years left off on his deal, albeit at $7.8 mil per. The Rangers would get a top-four d-man while saving $3.3 mil on cap room between the two players, enabling the usage of that money to either re-sign several RFAs or pursue UFAs in free agency.
Join the Discussion: » 595 Comments » Post New Comment
More from Jan Levine
» Rangers face Avalanche as Ryan Lindgren returns to the lineup
» Rangers clinch playoff berth with barn burner 6-5 OT win over the Flyers
» Rangers face Flyers with chance to clinch playoff berth
» Rangers rally twice to defeat Panthers 4-3 in a shootout
» Rangers ride hat trick from Panarin and play of Quick to 5-2 win over B’s