It's fine to me. If Kovalchuk retired 5 years from now the cap hit would have been much higher. Teams like Chicago, Minnesota, Detroit and Vacouver could all be in the same position as the Rangers when it comes to recapture penalties.
- tomburton99

They are (frank)ED. They are not buying out Parise and Suter. This was an anti-Minny ruling not an anti-Sather ruling oddly enough

That's after this season. But a few years further down the line, that number grows shockingly high.

Again, if the Rangers get hit with a few million cap hit on Richards retiring early, then why does the Devs only get a 250k hit from Lily retiring?
- mames11

it's just the way the formula works. it's not like the nhl just gets to decide what a cap recapture penalty will be once a player retires. i think the hit is something to do with the amount of dollars on the cap saved compared to their salary.

it's just the way the formula works. it's not like the nhl just gets to decide what a cap recapture penalty will be once a player retires. i think the hit is something to do with the amount of dollars on the cap saved compared to their salary.
- RAGSareDANGERus

totes

A few points discussed in the previous posts:

As explained in an earlier post, Cap Recapture is based on Actual dollars paid to the player vs. what the team is charged vs the Cap. If a player retires before his contract ends, the recapture ensures that every cent paid to the player in real dollars = every cent taken off the teams Cap. So Kovalchuk was paid only a tiny amount over the actual cap hit, so the recapture is small. If Richards retires early, he already was paid a ton more than his actual cap hit, therefore, the team gets penalized a ton of cap dollars to equal his actual pay. It fixed cap circumvention by not allowing teams to pay a player a high amount and only get a small cap hit.

Richards will never be traded, his cap recapture penalty follows his contract structure. No team will take on that liability of early retirement.

The extra buyout period that opens up for the Rangers because of Zucc's arbitration is NOT and amnesty buyout. The amnesty buyout period is a special buyout that was created for the teams to remove 2 contracts that could have been disastrous under the new rules. The buyout period the Rangers get is due to arbitration in the event the team is unable to fit the awarded salary under the cap but cannot walkaway from the decision. This is a standard buyout that was always available every summer. These buyouts only relieve a portion of the contracts cap hit, not the whole thing.

Well, he's never hit 45 points in a season... that's a good place to start. I understand he's produced at a 0.5 ppg pace for portions of seasons, but 45 points is not "something he's already done."

He's a 5'7 offensive winger with a combined (reg season and playoffs) 80 games NHL experience... calling him a "good defensively + player" would mean looking at his plus minus stat and saying he's good defensively because he doesn't go minus, when the fact is he's a plus player (except this year's playoffs) because he produces offensively.

I think he's a good player, but those comments, along with "always makes his linemates better" made it seem like you were wearing homer glasses.

Please note that I don't mean any disrespect. I respect your opinion and I don't necessarily disagree with you.
- Coburns_Nose

In regards to the 45 point statement: Zuccarello has played at a .5PPG pace the 3 seasons he was in the NHL. This pace is a much more "real" pace because its not spread out over a massive amount of time with the possibility of him scoring in certain years, and not in others. The reason why I believe its a "real" pace is because in 3 separate occasions, in 3 groups of smaller sample size, he has produced at this pace. So I don't see any irregularities in his scoring pace that would "slide" his .5PPG pace higher than it really is. So don't call me a "homer" when my statements have pretty well thought out reasoning.

Zuccarello's defensive game has nothing to do with his size. He has been a consistent + player on the 3rd lines even when his past years scoring has come frequently on the powerplay because he plays defense well with speed, and his stick abilities. In terms on natural stick handling, Zucc may be one of the best on the team. He has an extremely long reach playing with a stick thats about 2 feet longer than it should be. His stick handling is the reason why he's so good in the shoot out. He routinely uses his speed and stick to create takeaways and turnovers in the defensive zone, and he is credited with almost NO giveaways. This is why I said he is good defensive player.

I know you didn't mean to insult, but calling someone who is pretty good at player evaluation and pays attention to advanced statistics a homer glass wearing fool is pretty insulting.

the only buyout options I can see the Rangers using in August if they are truly that desperate to create cap space are Pyatt and maybe Boyle, but I think they could trade Boyle if they had to.

the Rangers cap management is annoying me right now

Penner only 2 million

Penner only 2 million
- Slimtj100

he'd be a healthy scratch 10 games into the season anyway. the dude is a total bum.

he'd be a healthy scratch 10 games into the season anyway. the dude is a total bum.
- rangerdanger94

yeah, I am not really sure about TJ's liking Penner so much. Yes, he'd add size, but he is very arguably not among the top 12 forwards on this team, and would just block a kid.

He scored 2 goals last year

Most of the comments are very reasonable and I agree with the rationale behind them.
In light of this, I know what I'm about to say sounds outlandish, especially in light of managements (read Sather's) insistance that Richards will play for the Rangers during the 13/14 season. I see it differently (BTW, my view is shared by several other pro-hockey writers/bloggers) so here it goes.
If MZA arbitration hearing goes through (not settled beforehand) then the player to be moved will be Brad Richards.
I've been told that a hearing will mean another shot at the compliance buyout and BR will either be bought out then or possibly traded before the season begins.
And yes, I know it sounds far-fetched, but it is not out of the realm of possibility.
- howiehockey

I don't believe this is true. They do have a second window for buyouts this summer however I believe it is for normal buyouts and not compliance buyouts. If the Rangers already passed on buying him out under the compliance buyout they won't exercise the regular buyout later this summer.

A trade I suppose is possible but I also don't think the Rangers would just give him away either. They would want some real value in return. If they simply wanted to rid themselves of the cap hit then the compliance buyout would have been exercised.

Honestly I don't see any trades until training camp. I think the Rangers, and most clubs, will want to see how some of their young players look in camp. Once teams conclude that a young player or two isn't ready for the NHL they will look at relatively cheap options like Boyle and Pyatt and show interest.

The Rangers will also have a much better idea of how close Fast, Lindberg, etc. are to contributing while also seeing if Miller is prepared to be a regular this season. That will help them determine which of Boyle or Pyatt they are more willing to deal.

he'd be a healthy scratch 10 games into the season anyway. the dude is a total bum.
- rangerdanger94

I'm sure the the two cup teams he was on felt the same way

Listen I'm not gonna make a big deal over it but its not like he got a monster deal here. We could certainly use him and plant his fat ass on the pp in front of a goalie at least. (Something we don't have)

yeah, I am not really sure about TJ's liking Penner so much. Yes, he'd add size, but he is very arguably not among the top 12 forwards on this team, and would just block a kid.

He scored 2 goals last year
- jimbro83

He's a s.o.b. in the playoffs and he's not as bad as the perception is on him. Certainly not as bad as it is here on this board

That's after this season. But a few years further down the line, that number grows shockingly high.

Again, if the Rangers get hit with a few million cap hit on Richards retiring early, then why does the Devs only get a 250k hit from Lily retiring?
- mames11

Because shockingly, unlike a vast majority of front-loaded contracts, Kovalchuk's actual salary through the first three years of his Devils contract exceeded his cap hit by three million. The league calls that a "benefit" and that is the amount they are trying to recapture. Thus, that "benefit" of $3MM is recaptured over the remaining term on his contract; in this case 12 years. The big years of his deal began this season ($11MM per I believe)

A guy like Richards earned $12MM in each of the first two years of his contract. With a cap hit of $6.67MM that means the Rangers received a "benefit" of about $10.6MM. If Richards retired today that $10.6MM would be "recaptured" to the tune of about $1.5MM per season ($10.6MM divided by the 7 years left on his deal).

He's a s.o.b. in the playoffs and he's not as bad as the perception is on him. Certainly not as bad as it is here on this board
- Slimtj100

I said last week that I wondered whether Penner was entering bargain territory, which he obviously has making only $2 million on a one year deal. With that said, he had a terrible year last year, and has only scored 9 goals in the last two years. At 6'4 almost 250, you have to wonder whether that body frame is catching up with him -- i.e., is he just too big and out of shape to be effective anymore.

I certaintly think that he was worth a flyer at $2 million a year for some team, and that at that money and term level, he is worth the risk. But, the Rangers simply didn't have the space to be the team to take a chance on him, unless they wanted to cut bait with a player to make room.

That makes no sense. A cap hit is the AAV on the deal, regardless of what the player makes each season. Richards deal is similiar, is it not where he makes less near the end of the contract? I thought his deal was front-loaded in the first few years.

All I say is that the Kovalchuk "retirement" needs to be looked into more. A 250k cap penalty is highway robbery.
- mames11

I agree and that is precisely why I think Lou had a good idea that Kovy would retire this year. Maybe it was the lockout; perhaps it's because of the Winter Olympics. But the structure of Kovy's deal is suspicious in that the high dollar seasons didn't really kick in until this year and coincidentally that is when he retired.

I said last week that I wondered whether Penner was entering bargain territory, which he obviously has making only $2 million on a one year deal. With that said, he had a terrible year last year, and has only scored 9 goals in the last two years. At 6'4 almost 250, you have to wonder whether that body frame is catching up with him -- i.e., is he just too big and out of shape to be effective anymore.

I certaintly think that he was worth a flyer at $2 million a year for some team, and that at that money and term level, he is worth the risk. But, the Rangers simply didn't have the space to be the team to take a chance on him, unless they wanted to cut bait with a player to make room.
- Pete V

I actully watched a game 7 LA vs San Jose this year and he may have been the best player in that game. Again none of you ever include intangibles when rating players. When he hits you it hurts. When Nash gets drilled we have no one to stand up to that player. We are weak physically and in meanness as a forward group is concerned and he's at least strong and mean

I can think of 4 guys (pyatt, boyle, moore, etc) on this team that make about the same or close to his 2 mill salary who'd I'd rather have Penner over. That's we're my beef is, pun intended

I actully watched a game 7 LA vs San Jose this year and he may have been the best player in that game. Again none of you ever include intangibles when rating players. When he hits you it hurts. When Nash gets drilled we have no one to stand up to that player. We are weak physically and in meanness as a forward group is concerned and he's at least strong and mean

I can think of 4 guys (pyatt, boyle, moore, etc) on this team that make about the same or close to his 2 mill salary who'd I'd rather have Penner over. That's we're my beef is, pun intended
- Slimtj100

Why are you busting my balls? I would have been fine with Penner at $2 million for one year if the Rangers could make it work from a salary cap perspective.

Would I like him over Pyatt? Yes. Would I like him over Moore? Yes, but Moore comes at a $1 million cheaper. Would I like him over Boyle? That is a tough one for me. Maybe, but Boyle arguably does more at this point of his career -- kills penalties, block shots, et.

Would I have liked him Moore tha Pouliot? Maybe, but again Pouliat was cheaper, and arguable has more upside.

I didn't create these cap constraints.

Why are you busting my balls? I would have been fine with Penner at $2 million for one year if the Rangers could make it work from a salary cap perspective.

Would I like him over Pyatt? Yes. Would I like him over Moore? Yes, but Moore comes at a $1 million cheaper. Would I like him over Boyle? That is a tough one for me. Maybe, but Boyle arguably does more at this point of his career -- kills penalties, block shots, et.

Would I have liked him Moore tha Pouliot? Maybe, but again Pouliat was cheaper, and arguable has more upside.

I didn't create these cap constraints.
- Pete V

If Zucc signs for $2M I can't wait to see TJ flip is lid

I didn't create these cap constraints.
- Pete V

Yes you did, its ALL YOUR FAULT!!!

Yes you did, its ALL YOUR FAULT!!!
- aecliptic

God damn Pete with is unreasonable roster decisions.

I actully watched a game 7 LA vs San Jose this year and he may have been the best player in that game. Again none of you ever include intangibles when rating players. When he hits you it hurts. When Nash gets drilled we have no one to stand up to that player. We are weak physically and in meanness as a forward group is concerned and he's at least strong and mean

I can think of 4 guys (pyatt, boyle, moore, etc) on this team that make about the same or close to his 2 mill salary who'd I'd rather have Penner over. That's we're my beef is, pun intended
- Slimtj100

stop busting Pete's balls

Why are you busting my balls? I would have been fine with Penner at $2 million for one year if the Rangers could make it work from a salary cap perspective.

Would I like him over Pyatt? Yes. Would I like him over Moore? Yes, but Moore comes at a $1 million cheaper. Would I like him over Boyle? That is a tough one for me. Maybe, but Boyle arguably does more at this point of his career -- kills penalties, block shots, et.

Would I have liked him Moore tha Pouliot? Maybe, but again Pouliat was cheaper, and arguable has more upside.

I didn't create these cap constraints.
- Pete V

Not busting yours specifically. Just saying when ever a player gets brought up here, it's only his stats people focus on in relation to his salary. Penner, prust, etc fall in tht category where his money made in other ways

Put it this way, I was happy with pouliet and Moore, but now seeing what Penner got and the need we have for a little nastiness I'm kind of pissed it went the way it did. Now if Penner wanted no part of ny and wanted to stay west that's a different story.

If Zucc signs for $2M I can't wait to see TJ flip is lid
- mrhattrick27

I will be a bit miffed that's for sure

We need more moores on this team, im not confused enough yet.

I actully watched a game 7 LA vs San Jose this year and he may have been the best player in that game. Again none of you ever include intangibles when rating players. When he hits you it hurts. When Nash gets drilled we have no one to stand up to that player. We are weak physically and in meanness as a forward group is concerned and he's at least strong and mean

I can think of 4 guys (pyatt, boyle, moore, etc) on this team that make about the same or close to his 2 mill salary who'd I'd rather have Penner over. That's we're my beef is, pun intended
- Slimtj100

unfortunately nothing has been done to address that and now they're even weaker with Clowe gone. I was hoping they would have picked up at least one nasty/tough guy.