Truth & Rumors > NHL

Rangers look for rentals now, Richards later

Views
10330
Comments
98

08:39 AM ET 02.14 | The Rangers do not appear willing to sacrifice any "valuable piece" via trade. In other words, you bet the Blueshirts will inquire about Florida's Bryan McCabe, who may return this week from the broken jaw that has sidelined him for approximately a month, but they won't yield a first-rounder and a top prospect, let alone a young roster player, for the privilege of getting him. The same is true as it applies to the Maple Leafs' Tomas Kaberle. ... The Rangers won't be in on Stephen Weiss or Jason Spezza, or any center with a contract that extends beyond this season, for that matter, given that there is every reason to believe they will sign Brad Richards as a free agent this summer.

New York Post

Brad Richards, Getty Images Brad Richards, Getty Images
February 14, 2011  08:48 AM ET

Every reason but two: Dallas wants to keep him, and who says Richards wants the Rangers? I know he'll be reunited with Torts, but there has to be a few better options out there for the top FA in the market (if he's not re-signed before then).

Personally, I'd rather hit LA than NY. It seems a fair assumption Boston will looking for a new #1 centre too, and I'd rather join the Bruins than the Rangers - no offence Rags fans.

February 14, 2011  08:52 AM ET

Nice Picture- looks like his Momma used to feed him with a slingshot.

February 14, 2011  08:53 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Every reason but two: Dallas wants to keep him, and who says Richards wants the Rangers? I know he'll be reunited with Torts, but there has to be a few better options out there for the top FA in the market (if he's not re-signed before then).Personally, I'd rather hit LA than NY. It seems a fair assumption Boston will looking for a new #1 centre too, and I'd rather join the Bruins than the Rangers - no offence Rags fans.

exactly - did it occur to anyone that maybe players do not want to flock to NY?

but I have to note this is a much more controlled Sather, than the "trade everything, and overpay for everything" GM of the recent past. did something happen him?

February 14, 2011  08:56 AM ET

I like Richards but is he really worth a huge free agent deal of say 7.5 a year? These huge contracts really handcuff a team.

February 14, 2011  09:06 AM ET
QUOTE(#4):

I like Richards but is he really worth a huge free agent deal of say 7.5 a year? These huge contracts really handcuff a team.

I do not think anyone will make that same mistake with Richards again.
Look at his best seasons - both contract years.

Comment #6 has been removed
February 14, 2011  09:18 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

I do not think anyone will make that same mistake with Richards again.Look at his best seasons - both contract years.

I agree but think its more coincidence in this case - but maybe my being a fan is clouding my judgement. TB took a major fall right after signing the Big 3 to their big contracts. Richards became the guy who got blamed because of a lack of production, but he was stuck playing the point on PPs, centring the 2nd line nobodies, and playing something like 28 minutes a game, which are d-man numbers. Last year he had a great season, and this year, thanks to a developed chemistry with his line - and Ericsson in particular - he's having an even better year.

I think he can pull down another $6 a year, easy. And if he wants to make more, he can go to some low level team that HAS to pay more for him to sign there - like CBJ for instance - though I don't see that happening. IF he hits the market, and Toronto wants him as bad as Toronto papers make it sound like they do, he gets the best of both worlds: a big market team with big money that is desperate to sign a first line centre. That'll be pretty near $7 there, just to prevent an auction, if you ask me.

February 14, 2011  09:20 AM ET

And the reason I say Toronto works and NY may not is because TO won't have Cap issues to dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge around to sign him, like the Rags would likely have to.

February 14, 2011  09:29 AM ET

"The Rangers do not appear willing to sacrifice what Glen Sather refers to as "a valuable piece" via trade."

In other words, Sather wants a few "Rent-A-Wrecks."

February 14, 2011  09:35 AM ET
QUOTE(#7):

I agree but think its more coincidence in this case - but maybe my being a fan is clouding my judgement. TB took a major fall right after signing the Big 3 to their big contracts. Richards became the guy who got blamed because of a lack of production, but he was stuck playing the point on PPs, centring the 2nd line nobodies, and playing something like 28 minutes a game, which are d-man numbers. Last year he had a great season, and this year, thanks to a developed chemistry with his line - and Ericsson in particular - he's having an even better year.I think he can pull down another $6 a year, easy. And if he wants to make more, he can go to some low level team that HAS to pay more for him to sign there - like CBJ for instance - though I don't see that happening. IF he hits the market, and Toronto wants him as bad as Toronto papers make it sound like they do, he gets the best of both worlds: a big market team with big money that is desperate to sign a first line centre. That'll be pretty near $7 there, just to prevent an auction, if you ask me.

I'm a fan of Richards - I watched quite a few games in Tampa Bay on their run to Cup, and I honestly wish they should have found a way to keep him, but they had too much money tied up the big 3 as you noted, and Richards was not "playing up to expectations". (but look at Lecavalier now)

I wish the Jackets would have found a way to get him from TB instead of him going to Dallas, but that is whole other complaint :)

February 14, 2011  10:21 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

"The Rangers do not appear willing to sacrifice what Glen Sather refers to as "a valuable piece" via trade."In other words, Sather wants a few "Rent-A-Wrecks."

As a Ranger fan, I have no complaints with Sather when it comes to trades. It's the possible free agent signings that worry me.

Comment #12 has been removed
February 14, 2011  10:43 AM ET
QUOTE(#11):

As a Ranger fan, I have no complaints with Sather when it comes to trades. It's the possible free agent signings that worry me.

Same here on all counts. I was happy to read in yesterday's newspaper that Sather wasn't selling out for Kaberle.

And LOVE the Bootsy picture.

February 14, 2011  10:45 AM ET
QUOTE(#11):

As a Ranger fan, I have no complaints with Sather when it comes to trades. It's the possible free agent signings that worry me.

Even as a Devil fan, I have to agree with that statement. He does find a way to make some decent trades, obviously there are some exceptions, but aren't there always. However his UFA signings well he hits on about 5% of those.

February 14, 2011  10:59 AM ET
QUOTE(#14):

Even as a Devil fan, I have to agree with that statement. He does find a way to make some decent trades, obviously there are some exceptions, but aren't there always. However his UFA signings well he hits on about 5% of those.

Crazy eh? How can he be so adept at trades and so pathetic with FA signings?

The Gomez deal was an all-time move, in my opinion. Usually the guy stealing the player gets the credit, but dumping Gomez on ANYONE should be considered one of the greatest GM moves of all time.

Comment #16 has been removed
Comment #17 has been removed
Comment #18 has been removed
February 14, 2011  11:40 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Every reason but two: Dallas wants to keep him, and who says Richards wants the Rangers? I know he'll be reunited with Torts, but there has to be a few better options out there for the top FA in the market (if he's not re-signed before then).Personally, I'd rather hit LA than NY. It seems a fair assumption Boston will looking for a new #1 centre too, and I'd rather join the Bruins than the Rangers - no offence Rags fans.

Dallas has said they would like to keep him, but that may not be the most financially savy move for them at this point. As for him not wanting to be a Ranger, he's made no statement suggesting otherwise. The Rangers need a #1 Center, Richards is a UFA July 1st. If Glenn wants him that bad, he'll pay a boat load. I'd rather sign an expensive center as a FA than give away youth/draft picks for an expensive center via trade.

 
February 14, 2011  11:42 AM ET
QUOTE(#17):

Right up there with Vernon Wells by AA.

Indeed, sir, indeed.

Not so sure you're right about the Vinny/Richards thing. Lec had a 40 goal season going into that contract year and was/is the face of the team. He's beloved there for his charitable efforts...if I remember right there's even a children's wing in the hospital named after him because of all his time and money donations. He looked like he was primed to be the game's best player, especially after the World Cup MVP performance.

Also, realistically, the team is better off since trading Richards, as is evidenced by their position in the standings. We all thought the Bruins were as dumb as possible when they traded Joe Thornton - does anyone think that way now? The team's better, built more smartly for a stretch run...even though the pieces they got in return have not produced. Sounding more and more similar eh? Now the Bruins and Lightning are both Cup contenders...SJ hasn't taken that next step Thornton was supposed to take them to, and Dallas could very well lose Richards at season's end for nothing. To me, those 2 trades look smarter and smarter every day.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Kerr 'absolutely expects' Knicks offer
    Views
    1041
    Comments
    992
  2. 2
    Bryant headed back to Germany
    Views
    4119
    Comments
    930
  3. 3
    Shakeup looms for White Sox
    Views
    5891
    Comments
    336
  4. 4
    Yankees, Mets, Red Sox among Hanrahan hopefuls
    Views
    692
    Comments
    166
  5. 5
    Lightning may be swept aside
    Views
    1317
    Comments
    100

SI.com

SI Photos