Gnredwing 10 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 The Rangers signed Derek Boogard, who scored not one goal last year, to a 4 year deal paying him 1.65 million a year. Does anyone else think this is perhaps the worst deal of the year. Sure Boogard can fight, but thats not going to help win any games. I hate the Rangers! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown0001 7,652 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Pretty nice overpayment if you ask me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miller76 463 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 The guys on xm, were like wtf, about that deal. They were also saying the same thing about the Malhotra deal, but not to extremes like the Boogard deal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rage 24 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 It's never a suprise with the Rangers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown0001 7,652 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 I also view the Marty Biron signing as a bit odd. For some reason, I don't see him liking being a backup. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Original-Six 254 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 umm this is the Rangers we are talking about here. Is anyone really surprised? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hockeytown0001 7,652 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 NOpe. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wingsfan4life19 26 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 I agree it's an overpayment, and I also think players that are one-dimensional with regards to fighting don't belong in hockey. However, I think he is the best fighter in the game, and that people will pay to go see him play and get in a scrap. The Rangers are realistically in no position for a cup run, so signing him brings a different level of excitement to the waning Rangers faithful. An overpayment, for sure; Completely without merit, I don't think so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wings4Life19 150 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 every year i want the wings to make a big splash in free agency like they did in the pre-cap NHL, but then a team goes and does something like this and it makes me appreciate Mr. Holland even more 4 Branton87, Frozen-Man, mjlegend and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BruiseBrother 2 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 I would have LOVED to see the Boogyman in Detroit, but @ 1.6 mil? He's great an all but... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 His numbers came up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 First they make one HELL of a signing, but adding Biron to lighten Lundqvist's work load and add a LEGIT NHL netminder as a backup and at a VERY reasonable price at that... and then they follow it up by WAY overpaying for a one-dimensional player and at WAY too long of a term to boot... odd to say the least... They also re-signed Prospal who was very good for them, as well as Christensen and added some good depth (AHL) guys in Newbury and Byers... All and all, they would have got about a B for their off season thus far, but that Boogard signing drops it WAY down to a C- so far for them in my book... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Valas19 50 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 (edited) This may be the biggest shocker since the Leafs signed Jeff Finger for a ridiculous amount of money...or the T-Wolves signing Darko Milicic for $40 million if we want to cross sports. LOL...had to look this up about Finger: "Finger Money -noun 1. Being paid an amount that is not commensurate with one's value. 2. $14 million dollars over 4 years. ex. I wanted the team to sign him, but then I found out he wanted Finger Money. Following his first full season in the NHL, Finger was signed to a 4 year, 14 million dollar contract by the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1st, 2008, on which day the term "Finger Money" was added to the public lexicon of Leaf bashing." Edited July 2, 2010 by Valas19 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 This may be the biggest shocker since the Leafs signed Jeff Finger for a ridiculous amount of money...or the T-Wolves signing Darko Milicic for $40 million if we want to cross sports. LOL...had to look this up about Finger: "Finger Money -noun 1. Being paid an amount that is not commensurate with one's value. 2. $14 million dollars over 4 years. ex. I wanted the team to sign him, but then I found out he wanted Finger Money. Following his first full season in the NHL, Finger was signed to a 4 year, 14 million dollar contract by the Toronto Maple Leafs on July 1st, 2008, on which day the term "Finger Money" was added to the public lexicon of Leaf bashing." I can't believe I'm talking a sport I couldn't care less about here on LGW, but the Darko signing actually makes more sense... he was actually an 11pt, 6rb a game player last year on a HORRIBLE team that is going to have a hard time just making the salary floor and they had to give SOMEONE their money (when no one wants it) and there is still SOME potential there... The Boogard signing was HORRIBLE Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Maybe they had to outbid the Islanders, who probably wanted to sign him to a 20 year $30 million deal?? I guess the good news is, his lost salary will be a nice contribution to the Player's Emergency Fund when he get suspended. I'm just thankful he didn't end up on the Wings at any price. 1 stevkrause reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dropkickshanahans 463 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Well when you play in the East, you can afford to do things like these. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Maybe they had to outbid the Islanders, who probably wanted to sign him to a 20 year $30 million deal?? I guess the good news is, his lost salary will be a nice contribution to the Player's Emergency Fund when he get suspended. I'm just thankful he didn't end up on the Wings at any price. Agreed - as much fun as he is to watch fight, you simply can't waste a roster spot on a one-dimensional goon in today's NHL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WorkingOvertime 536 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Agreed - as much fun as he is to watch fight, you simply can't waste a roster spot on a one-dimensional goon in today's NHL A lot of NHL GM's would disagree with you. In addition to all of the enforcers currently under contract, Boogaard, Shelley, Ivanans, Scott (debatable if he's an enforcer, but he'll be Chicago's heavy), and Fritz were all signed yesterday. The Boogaard signing is a bit ridiculous. It was reported that the Rangers offered ~850k to Shelley, which he turned down. I don't see how they went from that price, to almost double for Boogaard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 A lot of NHL GM's would disagree with you. In addition to all of the enforcers currently under contract, Boogaard, Shelley, Ivanans, Scott (debatable if he's an enforcer, but he'll be Chicago's heavy), and Fritz were all signed yesterday. The Boogaard signing is a bit ridiculous. It was reported that the Rangers offered ~850k to Shelley, which he turned down. I don't see how they went from that price, to almost double for Boogaard. Scott is a filler for a min contract, because they just need bodies at this point with the turnover there and he can play both D or forward and fill a role... As for the rest of them, short of Philadelphia (which barely made the playoffs, mind you), what have any of those teams won, or even made the playoffs???? Even going back to last year, looking at teams that overpaid for enforcers (Rangers - AGAIN, Toronto, Minnesota) - what have ANY of those teams won? These types of players are wastes of roster spots and cap space in today's NHL... period. Don't get me wrong, I think it's an important role, but you can get a guy for cheap if he's one dimensional, if not - then he gets PAID Also, there are guys who will fight anyone and do it well, that can still at least play decent D and are fast skaters - Boll, Konopka, Rypien, etc... I'd rather spend on these guys if anything... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragonballgtz 273 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 This was a ridiculous overpayment. All other enforcers better not get it in their head that they are worth this amount. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WorkingOvertime 536 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Scott is a filler for a min contract, because they just need bodies at this point with the turnover there and he can play both D or forward and fill a role... As for the rest of them, short of Philadelphia (which barely made the playoffs, mind you), what have any of those teams won, or even made the playoffs???? Even going back to last year, looking at teams that overpaid for enforcers (Rangers - AGAIN, Toronto, Minnesota) - what have ANY of those teams won? These types of players are wastes of roster spots and cap space in today's NHL... period. Don't get me wrong, I think it's an important role, but you can get a guy for cheap if he's one dimensional, if not - then he gets PAID Also, there are guys who will fight anyone and do it well, that can still at least play decent D and are fast skaters - Boll, Konopka, Rypien, etc... I'd rather spend on these guys if anything... Can you correlate the presence of an enforcer to a team's success? I'm not sure this relationship would be negative, if it exists. The Flyers had Riley Cote this year, who only played in 15 games and only made 550k. Therefore, they spent most of the season without a true heavyweight, and it showed in their games against the Leafs. Colton Orr (who is not overpaid after these signings IMO), was not the reason the Leafs underachieved this year. The teams you mentioned above would not be cup contenders with the addition of another player (at the same price point) instead of the signed enforcers. The Rags may be the exception as 1.65m is enough for a decent player, but I am not sure what their needs were on offense. As most can tell you, there have been plenty of teams who've won the cup recently with a pure enforcer. The Wings had Downey, Pens had Godard, Ducks had Parros, etc. I'm not saying that every team needs a player like this (I'd rather have Boll than any of the above other than Orr), but they are not the reason teams fail to succeed. Would you rather sign Maltby or McGrattan? I'd rather have Boll, Konopka, etc instead, but they would come at a higher price. Which ~600k guy would you rather sign? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crymson Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Use this example as a reason why we should be grateful to have a GM who is not a moron. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Can you correlate the presence of an enforcer to a team's success? I'm not sure this relationship would be negative, if it exists. The Flyers had Riley Cote this year, who only played in 15 games and only made 550k. Therefore, they spent most of the season without a true heavyweight, and it showed in their games against the Leafs. Colton Orr (who is not overpaid after these signings IMO), was not the reason the Leafs underachieved this year. The teams you mentioned above would not be cup contenders with the addition of another player (at the same price point) instead of the signed enforcers. The Rags may be the exception as 1.65m is enough for a decent player, but I am not sure what their needs were on offense. As most can tell you, there have been plenty of teams who've won the cup recently with a pure enforcer. The Wings had Downey, Pens had Godard, Ducks had Parros, etc. I'm not saying that every team needs a player like this (I'd rather have Boll than any of the above other than Orr), but they are not the reason teams fail to succeed. Would you rather sign Maltby or McGrattan? I'd rather have Boll, Konopka, etc instead, but they would come at a higher price. Which ~600k guy would you rather sign? Both Parros and Godard can skate and forecheck as well and create energy, not just fight... also, Godard didn't play in the playoff's and all three of your examples were cheap signings - You're actually arguing FOR my whole point... it's not a matter of carrying a guy who makes the team tougher - it's about overpaying... For the record, I think Boll, Konopka and Winchester could all be had for less than a million and actually play 70+ games at 7+ minutes a night without being a liabilty. THAT'S the point. Use this example as a reason why we should be grateful to have a GM who is not a moron. dead on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WorkingOvertime 536 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 Both Parros and Godard can skate and forecheck as well and create energy, not just fight... also, Godard didn't play in the playoff's and all three of your examples were cheap signings - You're actually arguing FOR my whole point... it's not a matter of carrying a guy who makes the team tougher - it's about overpaying... For the record, I think Boll, Konopka and Winchester could all be had for less than a million and actually play 70+ games at 7+ minutes a night without being a liabilty. THAT'S the point. dead on. I certainly agree, as do most people, that the Boll, Konopka, Asham type players are more effective and preferable to McGrattan, Boogy, etc. However, I am also arguing that the pure enforcer like Orr, Boogy (at a lower price), and McGrattan are not a waste of a roster spot as you said in your first post. For 1.65m they are, but at a lower price they can be of use. I would also be cautious in saying that Godard and Parros are better players than the enforcers signed yesterday. I would never advise the Wings spend 1m+ on a pure enforcer when there are Boll types out there, but if they only had 600k to spend I'd be more than happy with someone like McGrattan as the 13th forward. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted July 2, 2010 I certainly agree, as do most people, that the Boll, Konopka, Asham type players are more effective and preferable to McGrattan, Boogy, etc. However, I am also arguing that the pure enforcer like Orr, Boogy (at a lower price), and McGrattan are not a waste of a roster spot as you said in your first post. For 1.65m they are, but at a lower price they can be of use. I would also be cautious in saying that Godard and Parros are better players than the enforcers signed yesterday. I would never advise the Wings spend 1m+ on a pure enforcer when there are Boll types out there, but if they only had 600k to spend I'd be more than happy with someone like McGrattan as the 13th forward. I still don't see spending a roster spot on a guy that is nothing more than a pure enforcer... it just doesn't make sense in today's league, because even at 500k or so, you can find a guy that can do more than just fight (just look at May) and to me, spending even 1 million, let alone more, on a guy that will not play 70+ games and will be a healthy scratch many nights(not counting veterans who are on the back end of their deals) is ridiculous... With what's left out there - I still want to see us get one of (in this order): Asham Winchester Boll Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
