Technically, The Rangers Can Get Nash And Be Safe Under The Cap.
by RichieToGabbySCORE on Feb 18, 2012 8:29 AM EST
Email
PrintI am not advocating for Nash at all again. The more and more I think about it though the more I can see the Rangers get out alive in the deal.
This is the deal I base it on:
Dubinsky, Sauer, 1st rounder. You can throw Kreider or any other prospect in there but it doesn't really matter. It's not really relevant for this post what the deal is as long as Dubinsky and Sauer are gone.
Next Years Cap Room- Getting rid of Dubinsky, Sauer, Wolski, Rupp (Trade Rupp or demote him), and Fedotenko would give the Rangers $12,150,000 relief in cap. Not to mention Drury's buyout cap hit is only $1,666,667. Obviously, Nash will take a huge chunk of that $7.8 million, but you can still have enough money to re-sign MDZ, Prust, Mitchell, and maybe keep Stralman on board another year, or Eminger. Hopefully Erixon and or Mcilrath can take their places. It's obviously not pretty but it can work cap wise. Rangers would also have to sign cheap forwards during free agency or call up some cheap guys in Hartford.
2 Years from Now- This is where it gets dicey. You have Hagelin, Anisimov, Stepan, Mcdonagh all due for their second contracts except Anisimov. Hagelin and Stepan will probably end up getting a million more dollars each, maybe less for Hagelin. Mcdonagh and Anisimov meanwhile, will be seeing more money. Maybe Mcdonagh ends up with a $2.5 million dollar deal for a couple years, and Anisimov if his production keeps up ends up at $3 million.
Probably at this time the Rangers end up trading a forward and a defenseman. The forward could be either Boyle or Anisimov, while the defenseman will have to be one of our bigger cap hits in Girardi or Staal.
3 years from now- The Rangers could have 3 pending ufa's in Lundqvist, Gabby, and Girardi (If he wasn't traded already). Lundqvist and Gabby will have to be forced to take a much more cap friendly contract. Henrik is looking for his retirement contract which should Have around $5 million dollars until he's like 37 or something like that. Gaborik on the other hand can definitely fetch some more money as a free agent. If he wants to stay a Ranger he'll probably have to take below market price. Girardi meanwhile gets a nice contract around $5 million. Hopefully at this time the Rangers can afford to let Girardi and Gaborik walk if they choose to because they will have some players waiting to break onto the Rangers.
Ok this is where I stop. Looking into the future is hard enough but 4 years down the line there are too many variables involved. Basically the Rangers can afford to get Rick Nash it will just be very unpleasant cap wise.
If Rick Nash can be a 70-80 point player on the Rangers (which isn't too unrealistic) and Richards performs to similar numbers as well the Rangers can be ok. If they don't however, well, they're simply screwed to put it into nice terms.
It's not perfect, but if the Rangers do end up trading for Nash which is scarily likely, they can make it work. If Sather and gang continue to draft well the Rangers can end up in good shape.
I'm still praying the Rangers don't get Nash.
67 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don’t think they can possibly trade Sauer when he is concused….also they really want mdz
by Prustyballs94 on Feb 18, 2012 8:44 AM EST via Android app reply actions
Fair points.
I can see Nash replacing Gabby in the future. When Gabby contract is up, no way do we resign him for similar numbers. If he wants money then we let him walk since we have Nash as a possible replacement. Nash and Gabby overlap for 2 years. It is during those 2 years that it will be tough but having just RFA makes it doable. But this gives up 3 years (including this one) to make a serious run with both Gabby and Nash.
Also you have to assume some of those RFA will be going in the trade so that would reduce that RFA issue.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 9:14 AM EST reply actions
good point.
I wouldn’t mind seeing that either. Gaborik will be 32, 33 when his contract is up. His game is predicated on speed, and his speed will only be decreasing with age. Nash is one of those guys I see being good until his late 30s (like our own Brad Richards). Their games aren’t based off of speed or anything like that.
LETS GO RANGERS
by sloppyseconds on Feb 21, 2012 10:19 AM EST up reply actions
I know, received, and thank you for the post. Well said.
Nash-BR-Cally
AA/Hags-Stepan-Gaby
AA/Hags-Boyle-Prust
WW-Mitchell-Rupp
Next year:
Nash-BR-Cally
Kreider-Stepan-Gaby
Hags-AA-??
?/Rupp-Boyle-Prust
i think ur insane like the person who put up this post
please, and help me out smart hockey fans. First, the gabby person who wrot ethis blog states to rid of dubi and sauer but keep eminger and mitchell…??? what is wrong with u?? why would rid ourselves of quality players but keep third tier talent…FOR MONEY…?what are you, did u watch too much MONEYBALL. if u want that, leave NYC. As a NYer, i spend to get a good product, A WHOLE PRODUCT! Not a cheap imtiation of something….people, didnt we have this issue in the past…Olli jokinen, wade redden, kaspiritis, pavel bure, and the wonderful defencman Brian McCabe…..i’ve seen what the rangers did in 94, ok, won a cup. just imagine what the rangers could have done with Amonte, Weight, and Turcotte, only to name a few. we wold have won the cup regardless and probably won another. Plus, there has to be another thing to discuss about than Nash.
Did you know the NHL has a salary cap?
Or did you just get out of a coma? What does Redden, Bure, and Jokinen among others have anything to do with this?
what are you, did u watch too much MONEYBALL. if u want that, leave NYC
I’m a human and presumably you are as well and if moneyball taught us anything it’s guys like Eminger and Mitchell that take low salaries but outperform them to help teams win.
If you don’t want to talk about Nash or anything else on this thread, then don’t comment. it’s as simple as that.
HENRIK LUNDQVIST OILS LIKE HE'S GETTING A HIMMER. DO YOU?
by RichieToGabbySCORE on Feb 20, 2012 8:23 PM EST up reply actions
Good post
On the ELC’s
You can pretty much pencil them all in for $2 mil per, 2 years deals. That’s what we’ve seen with everyone coming through so far. Each player might be a little above or below, but I think a $2 mil per avg cap hit per player is a pretty safe bet.
Cally’s Cap hit was $2.3, Dubi’s Cap hit was $1.85, AA’s cap hit was $1.875, Dan Girardi was $1.55. Coming off an ELC you don’t really have any room to negotiate. Your first trip into RFA is basically just an extension of your ELC, with a little raise.
Henrik is looking for his retirement contract which should Have around $5 million dollars until he’s like 37 or something like that.
Barring any huge change to the CBA, we should actually be able to tweak Hanks’s contract a bit next time around, and get some relief with a deal longer then we expect him to play. Even if it’s just enough to get him below 6 mil, it will help.I know they want to crack down on those contracts, but we were still able to make Richards cap friendly post Kovi.
Hopefully at this time the Rangers can afford to let Girardi and Gaborik walk if they choose to because they will have some players waiting to break onto the Rangers
We’ve got to be realistic with Gabby. He’s never but together more then 3 60 game seasons in his career. The odds that he is hurt and can’t play, or doesn’t produce because of an injury by the end of his contract are better then the odds of us bringing him back at 33.
As far as Girardi, if he keeps playing this way, the better option might be keep him and move Staal for cap relief. Staal’s situation isn’t that much different then Dubi’s. Yes, Staal has been hurt, but in his absense we’ve been able to survive and thrive with much cheaper options
Mostly in agreement
Personally as far as Hank’s next contract goes I think he’ll take a hometown discount especially if the Rangers are putting a winning team on the ice. I don’t care so much about the years so long that his cap hit comes down a more than a million dollars.
HENRIK LUNDQVIST OILS LIKE HE'S GETTING A HIMMER. DO YOU?
by RichieToGabbySCORE on Feb 18, 2012 11:10 AM EST up reply actions
and as for Staal and Girardi
too early to tell. I think Staal regains his form and surpasses Girardi again but we’ll find out. No need to rush a decision on either one because their contracts aren’t due for a while.
Maybe Gaborik at 33 might not be so great either. That’s a wait and see situation as well. At that point I wouldn’t want him back for more than 3 years which would make him 36.
HENRIK LUNDQVIST OILS LIKE HE'S GETTING A HIMMER. DO YOU?
by RichieToGabbySCORE on Feb 18, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
Does everyone who’s OK with trading Dubi, hate Dubi? I don’t “hate” Staal. I’ve said all along, I think that Hank makes our D look alot better then they are, and we saw that when our #1, greatest shutdown defenseman ever went down, and we didn’t miss a step. We’ve plugged the holes left by a $4 mil player with a bunch of guy making less then $1 mil. No sense paying a guy that much when someone can do the job cheaper.
by BuckarooClub on Feb 18, 2012 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
A lot of that “plugging” was covered by Henrik taking his game to another level. The impact of Staal would’ve certainly been seen if we even had last year’s Hank. That’s also why you don’t judge defense by goals allowed.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
"Oh, that sensible and sober* Rangers fan guy who is cool, actually" - Dominik, Lighthouse Hockey
*Statement has not been verified nor regressed
by George E. Ays on Feb 18, 2012 2:57 PM EST up reply actions
they hate dubi because he is doing his job. he is not required to put up goals as much as last year. he is doing what the coaches want, he changed from Center to LW. Remind u, he centered Jagr and Straka. Remember last year how everyone wanted Gaborik gone…Why…oh yeah, because he was not scoring. Be Fans, not nuggets!!
Or we can just not trade for Nash because it’s not even remotely worth it.
by KingHenrik on Feb 18, 2012 11:27 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
This
"It's a big game no matter where it's being played."-#19 B.Richards
by -19-AgainstAll on Feb 18, 2012 11:35 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I also dont like the contract but if he hit UFA status rmrw, what do you think the offers would be?
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
Probably not but you didn’t answer my question ;)
If BR got a 10yr $6.5m contract at the age of 31 what does a Nash at age 27 get?
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
Yep. I think we hit the definitive litmus test this week – would you sign Rick Nash to a 7 year $7.8m contract today as a free agent? The answer better be No, so you sure as hell shouldn’t give up pieces to do it. Period.
by BigB22 on Feb 18, 2012 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
So what do you think other teams would offer?
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 11:50 AM EST up reply actions
You were talking about FA.
Im not a GM. The question was what do you think he would get as offers as a FA?
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 12:04 PM EST up reply actions
I think he’d get $7m+ offers, but I do not think he is worth that. A 60-70 pt player who will most likely trend slowly lower over the following seasons. As far as what he is worth, I’d think maybe $6.5m.
But if that is what he gets as offers, then that is what he is worth. It might not be the best value, but it is most likely what he is worth.
But even $6.5 are we really going to get our panties in a bunch over $1.3m?
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 1:26 PM EST up reply actions
Why does nobody want to go for Carter?
why is Sather not having talks about Carter?
by rain-g-errs on Feb 18, 2012 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
Probably CBJ wants to get those select few to pay for Nash. Then who doesn’t get Nash will overpay for Carter.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 12:05 PM EST up reply actions
I do want to go for Carter, I do not think anyone will overpay for him, I think he definitely gets moved, and I am not so sure that Sather isn’t having talks about it. It is the media and “sources” who have been generating all of this Nash hype. It would not surprise me one bit if all that has happened is Sather has had 1-2 calls and asked about both players, to feel it out. If calls progress this coming week, I bet that the price for Nash is too high and Sather backs down, CBJ deals Nash to LA or something, and then Sather swoops in for Carter. Smart money would bet on that scenario.
It is worth noting, also, that this could be part of Darth Sather’s plan – drive up Nash’s price with feigned interest so that LA or some other team pays more. Then CBJ might take a lower price for Carter.
Yeah I mentioned that before as a tactic but I think whoever is left out of the Nash deal might be willing to overpay for Carter. Suppy and demand.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 1:27 PM EST up reply actions
I really hope so
very nervous about tomorrow’s game, if Sather was really interested in Nash, then I could see using that game as an outlet for the announcement and having him play for us while god knows who we put on the other side, ughh..
Please no Nash Sather
If anything it would be the opposite. Waiting until the game is over to do the deal. I am sure CBJ does not want to see Nash playing against them so soon.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
"3 years from now- The Rangers could have 3 pending ufa's in Lundqvist, Gabby, and Girardi"
So now I know this wouldn’t work three years from now.
What have you done with the captain, Ryan Callahan? Did he magically disappear? Or did he somewhere in some fashion receive an extension with monopoly money?
It COULD work. You’re right about that. But it’s not worth the loss of all the current players from the team. Especially since you’ve somehow cut Ryan Callahan from the team.
It could work pretty easily if you cut just one $4m contract, say, Dubinsky’s.
3 years is a lifetime in the development of our prospects and the performance of our current roster players. Young cheap prospects certainly could push 1-2 “core” guys off of our roster.
This contract is around the same as what we could afford to pay Parise in the off-season, but Parise is imho a MUCH better player and more worth the future cap risk.
True about Parise but not guarantees you get him. And we lose a year of that 3 year window by not adding somebody now.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 18, 2012 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
parise is gonna want more than 6 years and of similar age. yes nash would require pieces in return but ultimately parise would as well… but at that point what would the rangers needs be?
Parise wouldn’t require pieces in return, and those assets saved could be used for another move.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
Callahan won’t be making much more than he currently is. He’s our heart and soul, our favorite player along with Hank, but he’s not worth much more than 4.5
LETS GO RANGERS
by sloppyseconds on Feb 21, 2012 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
If he maintains a 30 goal pace until his contract runs out, he’ll get more…
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
All of this presumes that we do not win a cup. The idea of bringing Nash into the fold now is that he helps us win a cup this year or next year or both. The question is, do we go for the cup now or gamble that we’ll be in this position again for the next five or six years. If we do win a cup, all of your numbers are off and we’ll lose half the guys we’re so worried about right now anyway.
If we don’t win a cup this year or in 2013, each of their values decrease exponentially.
Aren't you forgetting something?
The salary cap ceiling WILL go up!
"Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while...you'll miss it." Ferris Bueller (1985)
by Danz10 on Feb 19, 2012 6:39 AM EST via mobile reply actions
So…
everyone is intent of flipping prospects/dubi/mdz/whatever for a big name player. FINE.
But why does it have to be a guy who will never perform to his contract?
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
by Moshe52792 on Feb 19, 2012 1:20 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
After Redden, Drury; Gomez, etc… I understand why everyone is so focused on performance to their contract.
But really Gabby isn’t performing to his contract. Richards isn’t and most likely wont ever. Why is that not a huge issue?
To me it is also important that the player perform to their role, to the team. Like I said, Richards will most likely never produce to his contract but we had a need and the market it such that you just cant go out and get players like that everyday for cheap. You will always pay a premium for players such as that because that is how the market works.
The best value for the contract players and most often not available because of that, they are a great value.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 19, 2012 5:48 PM EST up reply actions
Gaborik has what, 27 goals this year? He’s doing his job.
Also, just because we have one or two guys not performing to their contract doesn’t mean we should get more.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
But you have said multiple times that 35g 30a 65p is not worth $7.5m+ when it comes to Nash. Which is it?
That was my point, players playing to their roles, doing their job. Do he need to hit some arbitrary point threshold to be considered successful? I don’t think so, he is contributing as he should. Sure we are not getting the best points/goals per dollar but that in-itself doesn’t necessarily win games.
.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 20, 2012 4:12 AM EST up reply actions
It’s not worth it. But just because Gaborik isn’t performing up to his contract doesn’t mean we should bring in another guy that isn’t.
You can hide a few guys underperforming, but you can’t hide 3-4 bigger contracts underperforming. Just ask the Rangers of 4 years ago.
Look at Boston and Vancouver and even Pitt. They are constantly convincing players to sign with them for less than market value. They are able to have such deep teams because their entire roster is outperforming their contracts.
If your team is full of guys who deserve 5 million, but are making 3, you are maximizing the possible output of the team. Sure, we could have Nash and Rupp, or we could have two players, both making 4+ mil outplaying their contracts.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
I get that, I really do. But even underperforming with 35g is still 35g. Who is going to make those us when Gabby leaves? You can say our depth but now teams don’t have to focus on bonafide goalscorer.
Look, I feel we have the cap room and I also think when Gabby’s contract is up we are not signing hi or we will sign him more reasonable cap hit. I would rather have Nash and Gabby for an extra 2m then Carter and Gabby.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 20, 2012 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
It that’s your position thats fine.
35 goals is 35 goals for sure, but there’s a big difference if a guy is making 5mil and doing it or if a guy is making 8 mil and doing it.
The difference between Carter and Nash is the difference between having Rupp or Kreicji/Lucic/Horton/Sharp. That’s why a team like Boston is so good.
The difference between Carter and Nash is the difference between having Dubi or Marleau/Towes/Kane/Hossa
I can go on in on. You build good competitive teams by having a group of players outperform their contracts. The best way to have players outperform their contracts is to develop them yourself, so that’s why my position is what it is.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
Who is going to make those us when Gabby leaves?
You can address that in 2 seasons.
There’s the argument that these guys are ‘never’ available, and then you look at 30-goal guys like Kovalchuk, Gaborik, Heatley, Carter, Kessel, not to mention the constant rumors of availability of Ryan, Parise, Nash or even Semin, and the opportunity isn’t as rare as one thinks. Not to mention you have more information on guys that are already around, Stepan, Anisimov, Callahan (is he 30 every year now, or is this just running hot?)
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
"Oh, that sensible and sober* Rangers fan guy who is cool, actually" - Dominik, Lighthouse Hockey
*Statement has not been verified nor regressed
by George E. Ays on Feb 20, 2012 12:25 PM EST up reply actions
I know but I think the org is past just getting someone for the sake of getting someone. We have a team concept that we are preaching top to bottom. If the Org feels they want Nash over a Kovalcuck, Semin; Kessel, Carter, etc.. I respect that. If they feel he is the right person and this is the right time I would be ok with it. If they truly feel that Nash, because of his fit is worth that premium over better scorers and point producers, I can understand.
I know we all like to play armchair GM, I do as well. But at some point we have to defer that they know better about cap hits, future CBA, future contract, backgrounds of players, development of prospects, etc. Given some of the history I agree, it is hard to do. But things seem different now.
We have spoken many times about the window of opportunity This team has a good window of opportunity for the next 3 years. . I am not of the mind we must win now at any cost. If you can land a top LW which is a hole right now to add to the team for that window and also be an insurance for when/if Gabby leaves I think it is the right move…of course cost is a consideration.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 20, 2012 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
But at some point we have to defer that they know better about cap hits,
Given what Sather has paid in UFA, I’m not sure I’ll ever be ready for that.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
"Oh, that sensible and sober* Rangers fan guy who is cool, actually" - Dominik, Lighthouse Hockey
*Statement has not been verified nor regressed
by George E. Ays on Feb 20, 2012 1:06 PM EST up reply actions
Fair enough… but we should acknowledge that was the market value for those players. He just had the highest offer.
The worst decision was they were the wrong players at the wrong time. Trying to cover up our lack of depth from drafting. I hate to give credit to someone for being able to fix their mistakes since the real credit should be saved for not making them in the first place. But if there were ways to get out from under Redden, Gomez, Drury you have to believe there would be a way out of Nash/Carter/etc…
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 20, 2012 2:01 PM EST up reply actions
Fair enough… but we should acknowledge that was the market value for those players. He just had the highest offer.
Not even talking about the high end guys. No way you’ll convince me Rupp/Boogaard/Brash signed at market.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
"Oh, that sensible and sober* Rangers fan guy who is cool, actually" - Dominik, Lighthouse Hockey
*Statement has not been verified nor regressed
by George E. Ays on Feb 20, 2012 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
Well I guy I wont try then.
But I did remember hearing that there was a similar offer(s), obviously not as high as Slats, for Boogard and Rupp.
But you are right, when it comes to UFA negotiations he has issues. I wonder if the player and agent disclose true offers or can they exaggerate a bit. But I would think Slats would have a decent network to find out if those are true offers. Maybe not, maybe he is just a guy that likes to get what he wants and blows them out of the water. Yet he doesn’t do that with trades. Doesn’t make sense.
Aucune clause de Mouvement
by Blueshirt in Paris on Feb 20, 2012 3:06 PM EST up reply actions
So…
everyone is intent of flipping prospects/dubi/mdz/whatever for a big name player. FINE.
No. I don’t want Dubi traded. I would rather to see Wolski and MZA dealt along with Eminger (which is the first proposal I heard Super Bowl weekend). The Rangers can survivie and circumvent the salary cap issue regarding next season, by using the proposed amnesty in the offseason, in addition to the $16 million in cap space plus the cap space made by the cap ceiling going up (which by all accounts, it will when the new CBA is completed).
The cap issue will not be an issue, because if this offseason didn’t teach us anything, it taught us as fans to be patient and let Sather show us what he’s really learned how to do regarding the salary cap.
"Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while...you'll miss it." Ferris Bueller (1985)
Because outside of the WC he has literally done nothing productive for this club this season.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
no nash!!!!!!!!
dont like his style not a complete skilled player the rangers are looking for….
like, malikn, parise, etc… e need elite superstars at 8 mil plus not a tree trunk that has a good shot……
he didnt impress we that much.. hes worth 6 mill. per year at best
by Stuart Pinnetti on Feb 20, 2012 1:35 PM EST reply actions
id rather have kovalchuk.. all along like i said or parise.
nash isnt them so no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hes a big dorf
by Stuart Pinnetti on Feb 20, 2012 1:39 PM EST reply actions
Disagreed
There’s already enough cap space coming off the books next year for this proposed scenario to even seem remotely reasonable. No disrespect, but they needn’t make any drastic moves so early when the potential line up next year provides better promise than a quick fix now. Add that with more experience leading into next season with a hot rookie prospect all other teams are drooling over with four full years of college experience with a winning pedigree in Kreider… patience is virtue kind sir.
by Dehumanizing Sounds on Feb 22, 2012 8:05 AM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Blueshirt Banter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Rangers Schedule
Next 5 Games
New Jersey
|
Sun 05/27 | TBA |
Last 5 Games
|
@
New Jersey
|
Fri 05/25 | OT - L 2 - 3 |
|
New Jersey
|
Wed 05/23 | L 3 - 5 |
|
@
New Jersey
|
Mon 05/21 | L 1 - 4 |
|
@
New Jersey
|
Sat 05/19 | W 3 - 0 |
|
New Jersey
|
Wed 05/16 | L 2 - 3 |
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Who are the Non-Smythe candidates for the Devils, Kings?
- End is near for Rick Nash, Blue Jackets as trade discussions set to resume
- Why the Devils and the Kings are evidence the Capitals shouldn’t trade Alex Ovechkin
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Driven DeBoer delivers Devils back to NHL's elite
- Driven DeBoer, fired by Panthers, delivers Devils back to the land of elite in just one year
- Bruins acquire son of Hall of Famer Ray Bourque
- Bruins add a Bourque: Chris Bourque, son of Hall of Famer Ray Bourque, acquired from Capitals
- Shinnimin named CHL's Player of the Year
