It doesn't make sense that we would have to pay half of $4.5M (2.25M) to a player that we already paid 59/82 game checks to. That would man retaining 50% would end paying more than $4.5M for lindgren. He has already cost the Rangers ~72% of his cap hit or ~$3.25M and would pay $2.25M more. It must mean that the Rangers are on the hook for half of the $~1.25M still owed on his contract no? Why would you trade him with 50% retain to have to pay double of what you owe him? you could have just let him walk at the end of the season.Fox's butt buddy is gone.... Maybe Fox will go with him...
Does retaining 50% mean that 50% of his remaining salary for '24/'25?
His contract is worth $4.5M worth of Cap Hit, so the NYR retain $2.25M of that value...in terms of the actual dollars paid out, not sure exactly, but believe Colorado would just pay him what ever he's owed, or at worst the dollar costs are split between the two clubs.
He is a UFA in the Summer, so there's no retention beyond this year. As an aside, teams can only have up to 3 active salary retentions, so Drury could potentially retain more on two more contracts. Also, an individual player contract can only have salary retention done twice (like what happened with Patrick Kane where CHI retained 50%, and then Arizona retained 50% of the remainder, meaning the NYR only paid Kane 1/4 of his contract cap value).
Also worth noting, players who have salary retained, can't be traded back to the team that is retaining salary...not clear on all the details there though.
Well no, because players are paid twice a month, so in terms of actual dollars, it'll be a fraction. But the Cap number isn't the money that is necessarily paid to the player, especially where bonuses are in place, as they will be either paid up front, on a schedule or as the result of certain achievements. The amount of money the NYR actually pay Lindgren will be the majority of the season's cost, because they've already paid a majority.
At this point in the season the actual money has mostly been paid by the Rangers. Its pretty much a on paper transaction for recording cap.
Based on what de Haan has done this year in Colorado, I'd say he's mostly a nonentity. Doesn't play great defense, not very good offensively, just sort of...there. Had a great game against the Islanders I see but that's probably due to the Isles just being a bad team. I honestly couldn't stand watching him on most nights, one of those blueliners who practically backs into his own goalie without challenging opposing puck carriers.
Parssinen admittedly wasn't given much of a chance in Colorado, was put on the "2nd" line but that line with Mittelstadt and Drouin on it had very, very limited minutes. He otherwise did nothing as a 4th liner. A big body with some decent hands and hockey sense but hasn't put it together at the NHL level yet.
This feels like a win for the Rangers, they get something for a couple expiring assets they weren't going to retain anyway.
Based on what de Haan has done this year in Colorado, I'd say he's mostly a nonentity. Doesn't play great defense, not very good offensively, just sort of...there. Had a great game against the Islanders I see but that's probably due to the Isles just being a bad team. I honestly couldn't stand watching him on most nights, one of those blueliners who practically backs into his own goalie without challenging opposing puck carriers.
Parssinen admittedly wasn't given much of a chance in Colorado, was put on the "2nd" line but that line with Mittelstadt and Drouin on it had very, very limited minutes. He otherwise did nothing as a 4th liner. A big body with some decent hands and hockey sense but hasn't put it together at the NHL level yet.
This feels like a win for the Rangers, they get something for a couple expiring assets they weren't going to retain anyway.
That was my impression of de Haan before he joined the NYR, that he was really a 6/7 guy, who is a better version of Ruhwedel. He was probably better against the Predators to be honest, and he did look he handled the puck well and a solid first pass, which is pretty golden for the Rangers, but I don't expect him to be here longer term.
He has better underlying stats (by some way) than Lindgren did, though he was also probably seeing lower quality opposition given their respective roles. I do wonder how Lindgren will do as a 3rd pairing guy with others taking the prime match-ups.
On Parssinen, he really looks like he isn't playing with a lot of confidence right now, though he does seem to be comfortable standing in front of the net. He's the kind of guy that the Rangers would love to get going, only time will tell if he figures it out, and it's probably less likely than more likely. I like the idea of taking a chance on guys like him and Kaliyev because they cost next to nothing and maybe you find a guy who can provide something, rather than chasing after guys who have already hit their peak or near to it like Goodrow and Reaves...or Bonino for that matter.