I don’t want to keep Shattenkirk, why would anyone want to keep Shattenkirk? So what your saying is, it’s ok to sign bad players to bad contracts bc we didn’t think eventually we would need to sign good players to good contracts?
- nyrangers9479

Isn't that what happens every July 1st?
*Big name* signs with NYR
*Big name fails to live up to anything*
*repeat next July 1*

This is the first shiny FA the Rangers ever signed in his prime and that is elite. Normally they are old and goods but not great players
- nyrangers2

Not a FA but Rick Nash was 28 when we traded for him and was considered elite. Side note, his middle name is McLaren. Richard McLaren Nash.

Not a FA but Rick Nash was 28 when we traded for him and was considered elite. Side note, his middle name is McLaren. Richard McLaren Nash.
- picklerick

Nash was a great hockey player. Dominant most of the times. However, Panarin IMO is more skilled and has put up 70 plus points every year. Nash had only put up 70 points one time and had some injury concerns. That being said I loved Nash and his game

Nash was a great hockey player. Dominant most of the times. However, Panarin IMO is more skilled and has put up 70 plus points every year. Nash had only put up 70 points one time and had some injury concerns. That being said I loved Nash and his game
- nyrangers2

I wouldn't call him dominant, but I feel he was greatly undervalued here because of the whole playoff thing. If we don't blow multiple goal leads in the final, no one cares about that.

The only comparison to us getting Panarin was Richards, and Brad was older and had way more miles.

I wouldn't call him dominant, but I feel he was greatly undervalued here because of the whole playoff thing. If we don't blow multiple goal leads in the final, no one cares about that.

The only comparison to us getting Panarin was Richards, and Brad was older and had way more miles.
- 2sticks1puck

Nash was dominant with the puck. One man show, just could not finish 50% of the time.

I wouldn't call him dominant, but I feel he was greatly undervalued here because of the whole playoff thing. If we don't blow multiple goal leads in the final, no one cares about that.

The only comparison to us getting Panarin was Richards, and Brad was older and had way more miles.
- 2sticks1puck

Nash was dominant with the puck. One man show, just could not finish 50% of the time.

I wouldn't call him dominant, but I feel he was greatly undervalued here because of the whole playoff thing. If we don't blow multiple goal leads in the final, no one cares about that.

The only comparison to us getting Panarin was Richards, and Brad was older and had way more miles.
- 2sticks1puck

Gaborik was 28 as was Gomez I believe...maybe even Lindros but he was traded

Gaborik was 28 as was Gomez I believe...maybe even Lindros but he was traded
- Maskdman3

Gabby was probably the only successful high priced FA Rangers signed the last 12 years

Gaborik was 28 as was Gomez I believe...maybe even Lindros but he was traded
- Maskdman3

Gomez had way better numbers than I would have given him. He scored 70 pts his first season here. I bet most of the fanbase wouldn't have guessed he cracked 50.

Gomez had way better numbers than I would have given him. He scored 70 pts his first season here. I bet most of the fanbase wouldn't have guessed he cracked 50.
- 2sticks1puck

Its why I laugh when people talk about Gomez. Yeah his contract was high, but he wasn't nearly as bad a player as people try to say he was

Gomez had way better numbers than I would have given him. He scored 70 pts his first season here. I bet most of the fanbase wouldn't have guessed he cracked 50.
- 2sticks1puck

I would have been guilty of that. Though he still played better after he changed his name to Ryan McDonagh

I would have been guilty of that. Though he still played better after he changed his name to Ryan McDonagh
- Maskdman3

I'd imagine if he didn't fall off a cliff in Montreal, that would have been considered a lot more even trade. It's still funny that McD was the throw in. Had the Habs had any cursory knowledge on who he was, they would have ripped us off bad on that one. Higgins was a total stiff

Feels like the journalists are reaching because there is nothing to write about until arbitration or Traverse City
- Maskdman3

You are absolutely right. One of the reasons it's taking "sooo long" is that the rangers have more than a few options to shed space and are exploring the best avenues to do so. If their only choice was to buy out Shatty and Smith, they'd have done it already.

I'm not worried. This will all play out.

Gomez had way better numbers than I would have given him. He scored 70 pts his first season here. I bet most of the fanbase wouldn't have guessed he cracked 50.
- 2sticks1puck

I mean, there's a reason Montreal traded for him.

Larry Brooks on where the Rangers currently are with the cap management:
https://nypost.com/2019/0...still-trying-to-navigate/

Larry Brooks on where the Rangers currently are with the cap management:
https://nypost.com/2019/0...still-trying-to-navigate/
- airjan23

I know it would never happen, but I’m curious, what would the cap implications be if the Rangers buyout Lundqvist last two years. I’m not advocating it, so don’t jump down my throat, just curious. I know, as do they, and Lundqvist, that it would be a PR disaster.

I know it would never happen, but I’m curious, what would the cap implications be if the Rangers buyout Lundqvist last two years. I’m not advocating it, so don’t jump down my throat, just curious. I know, as do they, and Lundqvist, that it would be a PR disaster.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

$4.25m savings in 19/20 and a $2.750m in 20/21 and $1.7m5 for two years after that until 22/23

edit: i should have said a $1.75 cap hit until 22/23

$4.25m savings in 19/20 and a $2.750m in 20/21 and $1.7m5 for two years after that until 22/23
- NYRangers1124[/img]

I refuse to believe JD and company were unaware of the cap implications awaiting them on July 1st, as Brooks seems to indicate.

I have to believe they have/had different scenarios they're comfortable with, or not so comfortable with but are not pushing a panic button.

The notion they were unaware of all this is absurd.

I refuse to believe JD and company were unaware of the cap implications awaiting them on July 1st, as Brooks seems to indicate.

I have to believe they have/had different scenarios they're comfortable with, or not so comfortable with but are not pushing a panic button.

The notion they were unaware of all this is absurd.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

Why I let other people read Brooks. I can't get through 3/4's of his articles

I refuse to believe JD and company were unaware of the cap implications awaiting them on July 1st, as Brooks seems to indicate.

I have to believe they have/had different scenarios they're comfortable with, or not so comfortable with but are not pushing a panic button.

The notion they were unaware of all this is absurd.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

No way they would trade for Trouba and sign Panarin without knowing the Cap ramifications. Buyouts are the last option, most likely working on trades.

No way they would trade for Trouba and sign Panarin without knowing the Cap ramifications. Buyouts are the last option, most likely working on trades.
- Fenrir

Either the CHI or BUF GM said they talked about the Nylander/Jokiharju trade for weeks before they actually made it. I bet we see a trade before Trouba’s arbitration date.

new blog up