well to be fair, the NHL did warn people way in advance that teams that gave out these contracts were going to be punished strictly in the next CBA.

i hate to say it but it almost makes sense to use that 2nd buyout on richards.....
- rangerdanger94

Buyout Richards and lose 6 good years because of a few million in penalties if he retires 3 years before the end of his deal?

Thats a way way way long term problem we shouldnt even try to address now because who knows what thing will be like 6 years from now.

Edit: Way late to the party on this one. Well said, Pete and hattrick

Good blog Jan, I say we trade Redden even if it takes an A level prospect, except Miller and Krider. Would Thomas be considered an A level prospect?

Guys, seriously! The Rangers have built this team to try to win a Cup over the next 3-5 years. Richards was a prime acquisition in that strategy to try to shore up the center ice position. He is more than capable of giving us 5-6 good years, as many players play at high level until they are in their late 30s. Why on gods green earth would the Rangers diminish their chances of winning a Cup within the next few years, because they are worried about the salary cap effects of Richards contract in 2019 and 2020? The World can hit my a meteor by then. Let's just try to win a damn Cup within the next 3-4 years, and we can complain about Richards contract in 2019, when the salary cap might be approaching $100 million dollars anyway.
- Pete V

sorry if i came off like i wanted to buyout richards haha thats honestly that last thing i wanna do. i was just trying to inject some new ideas into the conversation as i keep seeing people bring up Gabby.

personally, i think if we just use one buyout on redden, then sather will work it out and we'll be fine.

sorry if i came off like i wanted to buyout richards haha thats honestly that last thing i wanna do. i was just trying to inject some new ideas into the conversation as i keep seeing people bring up Gabby.

personally, i think if we just use one buyout on redden, then sather will work it out and we'll be fine.
- rangerdanger94

Do we have to use both buyouts this summer, or can we save it for later? lol

the team will tire of torts by april and begin to tune him out
- Crimsoninja

serious question: who do you think your goalie is gonna be after the flyers buyout bryz?

Do we have to use both buyouts this summer, or can we save it for later? lol
- hockeypunk36

we can use one buyout this summer and another one in summer of 2014

the team will tire of torts by april and begin to tune him out
- Crimsoninja

Yeah, just like last year after playing over 100 games......NOT!

we can use one buyout this summer and another one in summer of 2014
- jimbro83

Okay so we buyout Redden this summer and I don't know who we would buy out the year after that, we're in pretty good shape.

sorry if i came off like i wanted to buyout richards haha thats honestly that last thing i wanna do. i was just trying to inject some new ideas into the conversation as i keep seeing people bring up Gabby.

personally, i think if we just use one buyout on redden, then sather will work it out and we'll be fine.
- rangerdanger94

I actually saw some projections that by the end of the CBA the salary cap could be up to 80 million or more.

I don't think anyone cares about what will happen with Richards cap hits at the end of this decade if he retires before his contract is up.

Lets win the Cup yo

Guys, seriously! The Rangers have built this team to try to win a Cup over the next 3-5 years. Richards was a prime acquisition in that strategy to try to shore up the center ice position. He is more than capable of giving us 5-6 good years, as many players play at high level until they are in their late 30s. Why on gods green earth would the Rangers diminish their chances of winning a Cup within the next few years, because they are worried about the salary cap effects of Richards contract in 2019 and 2020? The World can hit my a meteor by then. Let's just try to win a damn Cup within the next 3-4 years, and we can complain about Richards contract in 2019, when the salary cap might be approaching $100 million dollars anyway.
- Pete V

Very good point about the salary cap in 2019, Pete.

Also, the Rangers would have paid the bulk of his salary out prior to the 2017-2018 season where he would make a million a year for three seasons until his retirement in 2019-2020 season. So, if he were to retire and forfeit the last three seasons and 3 million, the Rangers would have already paid out 57 million of a 60 million dollar contract. I don't see how that warrants any severe type of cap hit.

Also, Brian Burke is a total dipstick trying to punish all the teams that went out and got good free agents that didn't want to play for him.

I actually saw some projections that by the end of the CBA the salary cap could be up to 80 million or more.

I don't think anyone cares about what will happen with Richards cap hits at the end of this decade if he retires before his contract is up.

Lets win the Cup yo
- jimbro83

How would you guys feel about winning the Cup in a shortened season. Is it the same? Not in a "would they have won if it was longer" but more in the sense that as a fan, when you invest in 82 game season and 16 wins, its just a lot more ups and downs and emotions that culminates in awesomeness, as opposed to only 48 game reg season.

How would you guys feel about winning the Cup in a shortened season. Is it the same? Not in a "would they have won if it was longer" but more in the sense that as a fan, when you invest in 82 game season and 16 wins, its just a lot more ups and downs and emotions that culminates in awesomeness, as opposed to only 48 game reg season.
- Rags2Riches

You think any Devils fan thinks that cup they won in 1995 wasn't legit? Is there an asterisk by it?

Who cares as long as I am sitting in Section 225 and watching hockey and a parade in June.

You think any Devils fan thinks that cup they won in 1995 wasn't legit? Is there an asterisk by it?

Who cares as long as I am sitting in Section 225 and watching hockey and a parade in June.
- Downeaster

I will probably feel the same way once we get rolling. But it just feels a little off to me at this point. Not the same long haul.

I guess we will just have to win it this year, and the year after.

How would you guys feel about winning the Cup in a shortened season. Is it the same? Not in a "would they have won if it was longer" but more in the sense that as a fan, when you invest in 82 game season and 16 wins, its just a lot more ups and downs and emotions that culminates in awesomeness, as opposed to only 48 game reg season.
- Rags2Riches

if we win the Cup I am running down my block naked, 48 game season or 82 game season. dont matter to me.

How would you guys feel about winning the Cup in a shortened season. Is it the same? Not in a "would they have won if it was longer" but more in the sense that as a fan, when you invest in 82 game season and 16 wins, its just a lot more ups and downs and emotions that culminates in awesomeness, as opposed to only 48 game reg season.
- Rags2Riches

For me it's as simple as if you are the best team for 16 games in the spring then you are a deserving champion whether you played 48 or 148 regular season games. Does anyone think the Kings don't deserve to be defending the Cup because the finished a lackluster 8th in the West in the regular season?

if we win the Cup I am running down my block naked, 48 game season or 82 game season. dont matter to me.
- jimbro83

Ok I am sold.

if we win the Cup I am running down my block naked, 48 game season or 82 game season. dont matter to me.
- jimbro83

Dust off the rollerblades

For me it's as simple as if you are the best team for 16 games in the spring then you are a deserving champion whether you played 48 or 148 regular season games. Does anyone think the Kings don't deserve to be defending the Cup because the finished a lackluster 8th in the West in the regular season?
- gkmkiller

i agree.

i think the reason people complain about a shorter season is because the teams that go into the playoffs 48 games deep might not be the same teams that would've gotten into the playoffs if the season were 34 games longer. teams have ups and downs over the course of a season and over an 82 game season, one would think that the top 8 teams really do make it in because it's such a large sample size while in 48 games, teams that are worse than others might get in just because other teams are slumping a little.

at the end of the day, the stanley cup is awarded to the best team of the season and whether the season is 48 or 82 games, if you win the cup, you were the best team for that season.

How would you guys feel about winning the Cup in a shortened season. Is it the same? Not in a "would they have won if it was longer" but more in the sense that as a fan, when you invest in 82 game season and 16 wins, its just a lot more ups and downs and emotions that culminates in awesomeness, as opposed to only 48 game reg season.
- Rags2Riches

The playoffs don't change at all in a shortened season. Doesn't matter to me whether the season is 82 or 48, getting through the playoff grind is what makes a champion

Dust off the rollerblades
- TPC

- Crimsoninja

Pronger will be your leading scorer!!!
Go get some JAM !!!

The more I think about it the more i entertain the idea of keeping Redden on the roster to start the season. He was pretty bad, but I his contract seemed to make him that much worse in the eyes of the fans and management. the two full seasons he played, his point totals were mediocre at best, but he was never really a defensive liability. Downsides being the $900K he would add to the cap and the subtraction of Bickel from the lineup some nights (which would take away some toughness and a proven fighter). But it would give him a chance to showcase him, maybe help us get him traded.

I actually saw some projections that by the end of the CBA the salary cap could be up to 80 million or more.

I don't think anyone cares about what will happen with Richards cap hits at the end of this decade if he retires before his contract is up.

Lets win the Cup yo
- jimbro83

Exactly. In terms of buyouts there is a more immediate question. Do you trade for a "rental" (Vinny Lecavalier for example),with th knowledge that you will buy him out in the summer? Or do you save that second buyout just in case?

The more I think about it the more i entertain the idea of keeping Redden on the roster to start the season. He was pretty bad, but I his contract seemed to make him that much worse in the eyes of the fans and management. the two full seasons he played, his point totals were mediocre at best, but he was never really a defensive liability. Downsides being the $900K he would add to the cap and the subtraction of Bickel from the lineup some nights (which would take away some toughness and a proven fighter). But it would give him a chance to showcase him, maybe help us get him traded.
- steponmytoe

Think that ship has sailed. I entertained that idea too but I think the organization just wants to fully move on from him.

The more I think about it the more i entertain the idea of keeping Redden on the roster to start the season. He was pretty bad, but I his contract seemed to make him that much worse in the eyes of the fans and management. the two full seasons he played, his point totals were mediocre at best, but he was never really a defensive liability. Downsides being the $900K he would add to the cap and the subtraction of Bickel from the lineup some nights (which would take away some toughness and a proven fighter). But it would give him a chance to showcase him, maybe help us get him traded.
- steponmytoe

he isn't skating with the team, so that's a pretty clear indication that keeping Redden is not the intention of the team