msweet Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 http://twitter.com/dchesnokov It's true that Frolov's agent said Alexander will sign a one year deal with the #NYR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grcenter47 Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 i think he would play better if he were on the Kings with Brown, Kopitar, and Doughty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 Let's see who do the Rags have down the middle? Christensen, Dubinsky, Drury? Not to mention Torts is not going to accept Frolov's lazy play. This will be a short stay in NY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 (edited) Frolov is going to fail on the Rangers IMO. He's a good player on the cusp of being really good. Exactly the kind of player that never lives up to the hype on the Rangers. I would usually say "Typical Ranger move" here but if it's really a one year deal then by all means: sign the guy! I just don't think he gets resigned. Edited July 26, 2010 by ben00rs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msweet Posted July 26, 2010 Author Share Posted July 26, 2010 DarrenDreger Discussions between the Rangers and Frolov (Newport), but the deal isn't done yet. half a minute ago via UberTwitter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grcenter47 Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 Frolov is going to fail on the Rangers IMO. He's a good player on the cusp of being really good. Exactly the kind of player that never lives up to the hype on the Rangers. I would usually say "Typical Ranger move" here but if it's really a one year deal then by all means: sign the guy! I just don't think he gets resigned. agreed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestevens Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 I'm calling that his production seriously drops, but on a one year deal its good for the Rangers because there is virtually no risk involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grcenter47 Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 I'm calling that his production seriously drops, but on a one year deal its good for the Rangers because there is virtually no risk involved. I would say he gets 40 points max Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestevens Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 I would say he gets 40 points max Probably more than that, he may end up around the 50-55 mark like he did this season (51) but you have to consider inflation from Gaborik and the fact his shooting percentage was below his regular for a season. I think his points total will not be a depiction of his play, he will be worth a 45 point player and may pick up 55 from inflation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grcenter47 Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 Probably more than that, he may end up around the 50-55 mark like he did this season (51) but you have to consider inflation from Gaborik and the fact his shooting percentage was below his regular for a season. I think his points total will not be a depiction of his play, he will be worth a 45 point player and may pick up 55 from inflation. I am wondering who the Rangers will pair him up with with. I just told my friend who is a Ranger fan about this deal and he wasnt too happy about it either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 it's probably fine for them as a one year deal. maybe they sign staal for one year and come back when staal is arbitration eligible. dubinsky and callahan will both be due for raises next summer as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 (edited) Zherdev 2.0. My guess is about 25 goals and just under 50 points, mediocre plus/minus (closer to "bad" than "good"), and plenty of articles ripping him for just not "doing more with his talent." That being said, he could put up career numbers playing alongside Gaborik; I hate Gaborik for being a Ranger, but he's a true gamebreaker and can create space for others... doesn't tend to get enough credit for that. Edited July 27, 2010 by insanity_gallops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Zherdev 2.0. My guess is about 25 goals and just under 50 points, mediocre plus/minus (closer to "bad" than "good"), and plenty of articles ripping him for just not "doing more with his talent." That being said, he could put up career numbers playing alongside Gaborik; I hate Gaborik for being a Ranger, but he's a true gamebreaker and can create space for others... doesn't tend to get enough credit for that. If he puts up 25 goals and 60 (not 50) points, he will have lived up to expectations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brickwall30 Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Zherdev 2.0. My guess is about 25 goals and just under 50 points, mediocre plus/minus (closer to "bad" than "good"), and plenty of articles ripping him for just not "doing more with his talent." That being said, he could put up career numbers playing alongside Gaborik; I hate Gaborik for being a Ranger, but he's a true gamebreaker and can create space for others... doesn't tend to get enough credit for that. agreed completely, especially with the Zherdev 2.0 bit. The very first thing I thought of when I heard about this was that it seemed like they might as well have brought back Zherdev. Frolov will be good only if he is playing with Gaborik and even then he will more likely just take away scoring chances from Gabby because he is more of a sniper than a playmaker like Gabby's las LW (Vinny Prospal). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 I'm not sure why he'd sign a one year deal though...why not go long term? Maybe he's keeping his options open for the KHL next season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 I'm not sure why he'd sign a one year deal though...why not go long term? Maybe he's keeping his options open for the KHL next season? His problem is that no one is going to take a long term risk on this guy with big money. If he signs a one year contract he can make the max amount of money that he's going to get and he'll have the chance to earn a big payday. If he fails to play well and live up to expectations then he can always sign with the KHL for the big money he wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 I'm not sure why he'd sign a one year deal though...why not go long term? Regardless of Frolov's personal wishes for a contract, it would be tricky for the Rangers to sign him long-term right now, mostly because of next season. The Rangers already have $43.5mil committed to contracts, with the following players becoming RFA: Callahan, Dubinsky, Anisimov, and Gilroy. Marc Staal could potentially be RFA again (think Tri mentioned that earlier). Even if the Rangers banish Redden and clear $6.5mil, that would put them at $37mil. Just from rough estimates of cap hits for raises for the RFAs (Callahan $2.75, Dubinsky $4, Anisimov $1, Gilroy $2, Staal $4) the Rangers would be close to $51mil. If Frolov signed for a decent cap hit of $3.5, that puts them at almost $54mil with only 6 defenders and a few holes up front. That's my take, anyway, for whatever it's worth. Might be a lot simpler than that... could just be Frolov wanting to keep his options open, either for KHL or to have a big season and turn it into a big contract elsewhere. Next year's UFA LWs are relatively weak... Semin, Gagne, Jokinen are his biggest competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Regardless of Frolov's personal wishes for a contract, it would be tricky for the Rangers to sign him long-term right now, mostly because of next season. The Rangers already have $43.5mil committed to contracts, with the following players becoming RFA: Callahan, Dubinsky, Anisimov, and Gilroy. Marc Staal could potentially be RFA again (think Tri mentioned that earlier). Even if the Rangers banish Redden and clear $6.5mil, that would put them at $37mil. Just from rough estimates of cap hits for raises for the RFAs (Callahan $2.75, Dubinsky $4, Anisimov $1, Gilroy $2, Staal $4) the Rangers would be close to $51mil. If Frolov signed for a decent cap hit of $3.5, that puts them at almost $54mil with only 6 defenders and a few holes up front. That's my take, anyway, for whatever it's worth. Might be a lot simpler than that... could just be Frolov wanting to keep his options open, either for KHL or to have a big season and turn it into a big contract elsewhere. Next year's UFA LWs are relatively weak... Semin, Gagne, Jokinen are his biggest competition. If the Rangers wanted to make room for Frolov long term, they could. They have players they can move and they have contracts that will soon leave the books. As a matter of fact, most of their players come off the books in the next 1-2 years. The situation is as my last post explains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 If the Rangers wanted to make room for Frolov long term, they could. Yeah, I pointed out that the best option is demoting Redden... but that's still $6.5mil they'd be paying even if it's off the cap. That's a lot of money for an AHLer, so it's not even a given that they'd do it. They have players they can move and they have contracts that will soon leave the books. As a matter of fact, most of their players come off the books in the next 1-2 years. Who exactly can they move? They have players with terrible contracts that nobody wants to take on (Drury, Redden, Roszival) or players with manageable contracts that they'd be foolish to move (Girardi, Avery). Only player I can see with trade value is Girardi, but I doubt they want to give up on him just yet and his cap hit is only $1.75mil The situation is as my last post explains. No, your opinion of the situation is as your last post explains. Don't get all SD on us and declare something outright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amberite Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Yeah, I pointed out that the best option is demoting Redden... Why do people keep bringing this up? This is NOT going to happen. They have had plenty of chances / reasons to send him down, and there is a reason why it hasn't happened. The NHLPA would throw a fit and it will also hurt the NYR's ability to sign big free agents in the future. Redden is still very capable of playing in the NHL, and it's the Rangers's fault for giving him an immovable, grossly-overpaid contract, not Redden's. You can't bury a fully NHL-capable player in the AHL just because you can't negotiate a deal worth a damn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Why do people keep bringing this up? This is NOT going to happen. They have had plenty of chances / reasons to send him down, and there is a reason why it hasn't happened. The NHLPA would throw a fit and it will also hurt the NYR's ability to sign big free agents in the future. Redden is still very capable of playing in the NHL, and it's the Rangers's fault for giving him an immovable, grossly-overpaid contract, not Redden's. You can't bury a fully NHL-capable player in the AHL just because you can't negotiate a deal worth a damn. Easy there... all I'm saying is from a pure "cap-clearing" standpoint, it's their best move. I don't expect it to happen, I really don't. I think there's a better chance of them figuring out a way to trade him to a team that has tons of cap space and doesn't mind taking a higher cap hit than salary for two of the last three years. It's more likely that they find a way to pawn off Roszival. It's even more likely that they don't do anything with either player. I was just trying to point out that the Rangers clearly don't have the cap space next season to take on Frolov for more than one year, and that even if they cleared Redden's salary, it would still be tricky to pull off for anything more than $3.5mil/season, which I'm sure is far below Frolov's asking price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 (edited) Who exactly can they move? They have players with terrible contracts that nobody wants to take on (Drury, Redden, Roszival) or players with manageable contracts that they'd be foolish to move (Girardi, Avery). Only player I can see with trade value is Girardi, but I doubt they want to give up on him just yet and his cap hit is only $1.75mil The point is that most of their players come off the books in the next 1-2 years. If they wanted Frolov long term then they could start with his signing and then do the rest of the players. No, your opinion of the situation is as your last post explains. Don't get all SD on us and declare something outright. I don't mean to state it as unequivocal. The points in the post I was referring to are obvious to me and I would think obvious to many other people. You even stated that might be the case in the second part of one of your last posts. I didn't feel an IMO was necessary here. I'm apologize if you thought it rude that I didn't throw one in...seriously. Edited July 27, 2010 by ben00rs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 (edited) most of their players do not come off the books in 1-2 years, that is a falsehood. redden, gaborik, and lundqvist don't, for starters. drury and rozsival come off in 2 years. that's about all the cap relief they get. next off-season, prospal and eminger come off the books, and they have to give out raises to dubinsky, callahan, and probably anisimov. the season after that, del zotto will be RFA and will be eligible for a large raise, and zuccarello-aasen will also be an RFA, and he may be due a raise as well. Edited July 27, 2010 by Triumph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 (edited) most of their players do not come off the books in 1-2 years, that is a falsehood. redden, gaborik, and lundqvist don't, for starters. drury and rozsival come off in 2 years. that's about all the cap relief they get. next off-season, prospal and eminger come off the books, and they have to give out raises to dubinsky, callahan, and probably anisimov. That's exectly my point. Drury and Rozsival come off. Prospal and Eminger come off. Dubinsky, Callahan and Anisimov all need new deals. If they want Frolov long term, they could start with his contract and then do the rest. Also, Brashear and Christensen come off the books and Del Zotto and Gilroy will need new deals. And Drury coming off the books is a biggy. Again, the Rangers DO NOT want Frolov long-term unless he is a star next year. Edited July 27, 2010 by ben00rs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevil26 Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 It's official according to A.Gross and the Rangers' Twitters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.