So Alexei Yashin and his agent are not happy with the offers a couple of clubs have given them. I am fairly sure this money horny Russian will return home to Russia next season. How can he be so stupid as to think he is worth more than he's been offered. I don't know which clubs wanted him, but I'm sure the offers were fair, based on his poor performance lately. Wouldn't surprise me if Toronto, Nashville and Boston made him offers. No, I think the time has come for him to go back home, where they are still willing to overpay this former great player.
Look out for the blueshirts of Broadway next season! With Lundquist and Shanahan secured the Rangers are looking mighty strong.
4 comments:
The Blueshirts made an off-season splash this summer for sure. Gomez and especially Drury are two great additions. Re-upping Shanny was wise and signing Lundquist again solidifies their goaltending after he rebounded with a strong second half last year.
On the other hand, the New York blue line is not looking too steady. Marc Staal is a blue-chip prospect but, although close, he's at least one year away from cracking the line-up. Defencemen simply take longer to groom in this sport. A pending Souray purchase will help the PP but not the Ranger's GAA!
To that end, I see the Rangers making the post-season but Lundquist will end up facing a little too much vulcanized rubber for the team to make it past more than two rounds.
Don't look now, but with the cap now hitting the $50m-mark, we are slowly but surely going back to seeing the same six teams from the pre-lock-out NHL over-spending and out-bidding their remaining twenty-four counterparts. Enter 'have-lots' v. 'have-nots' part deux.
I agree, the Rangers do need to muscle up their D, especially the defensive part of it. This was painfuly clear in the playoffs, with Lundquist getting way too little support.
And to comment on the $50m-mark; What did you expect? This is a pro sport where the owners and directors of the NHL are trying to make huge profits. It will never be about giving all the teams an equal opportunity. The rich get richer, like in any sport or league.
The point about the $50 million salary cap has nothing to do with fairness or absolute justice. Of course there are profits to be made. That's not even an issue. The point simply highlights a paradox worth delving into.
Commissioner Gary Bettman, Jeremy Jacobs, et al., locked out the entire 2005 season because each franchise was spending on average just below the $50m-mark and running up deficits in doing so. Now, with the elevated cap in 2007, we're back on square one, in other words, pre-lock-out territory. Question: Where did 2005 go?
So I guess my question is; Who wanted to raise the cap?
Post a Comment