NHL's Proposed Redden Rule Could Negatively Affect Rangers in 2013-14
One interesting item in the NHL's new proposal is that teams can no longer bury a player in the AHL or in Europe without having that player's salary cap charge count against them. AKA "The Redden Rule."
Craig Custance at ESPN Insider discusses how charging Redden against the cap could negatively affect the Rangers...
"If this remains in effect, that means the Rangers will have to put Wade Redden's $6.5 million back on the books for this season and next season. They still have roughly $10 million in cap flexibility in 2012-13 thanks to the $70 million transition rule, but also have to sign restricted free agent Michael Del Zotto. Next season, when the cap could drop to $60 million, the Rangers may have more trouble fitting in Redden's $6.5 million.
Ryan McDonagh and Derek Stepan both are due for raises once their contracts expire after this season, although the league's attack on the second contract helps the Rangers."
...you have to wonder if the Rangers would actually give Redden a chance to make the team because of this rule. I mean, if he's going to count against the cap, you might as well see if he can help the team out as a 6th/7th defenseman.
...Del Zotto must be kicking himself, because under the NHL's proposal you'd have to assume Rangers will lower their original two to three year deal at $2.5 million per.
Speaking of Del Zotto, according to YorkRegion.com, the threat of being injured without a contract is enough to keep him from pursuing options overseas during the lockout.
...probably a smart decision.
Remember to follow me on Twitter & Facebook or e-mail me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Regarding MDZ, I don't think the Rangers could drop much more. As it is, it only costs a second rounder if a team wants him. That's not a big price at all for the upside he offers.
@BuckarooClub Even if it drops a little that's not good for MDZ as he thought $2.5 mil was not enough.
@KevinDeLury Yeah, but I don't think they can really come down much lower, and he's just looking to play these years out anyway, since the Rangers weren't looking to buy any other years from him. At least now he will know where he stands as far as hitting UFA status. I still think if they come down, he could be a pretty ripe target for an offer sheet. He'd be a good fit a lot of places, and it's not a big deal to make even a 2 year offer closer to $3 mil when you are only giving up a 2nd rounder for him.
Surely there will be a team near the salary floor willing to take him if we share the salary and cap hit? Experienced veteran with a good track record helping kids develop could help a few teams for a lower price
@craig_atherton If we share salary/hit I think he could be a pretty easy move. Redden has a $6.5 mil hit, but is only due to make $5 mil. If we picked up $2.5 mil of his hit/salary we'd gain $4 mil in cap (better then a buyout even) and some would be getting him for $2.5 mil, which isn't horrible.
1 Like
I think this could work just for this season. Put him in the six spot since it doesn't really count against the cap(kinda?) let him show that he's still serviceable(hopefully) and then trade him for draft picks before next draft.
@Douglas Peters BAHAHAHAHA I love this idea. Just sneak him into their training camp when it starts. Sather: "yep it was in the fine print, you guys agreed to it...you should really read these contracts better. YOU BIN SATHERED BEEEEEYOTCH!!!"
@TheNYRBlog Trade him and save the $3MM, only have half his cap on the books (under current Proposal). Someone will take a chance on him.
@TheNYRBlog I don't see why the wouldn't if they have to take the cap hit. Tort's would play him over Bickle for sure.
@TheNYRBlog in replace of who? We wouldn't have room for him as a top 6 defenseman...especially after resigning Gilroy
@TheNYRBlog Nope, if you read the fine print, its only for NEW contracts signed. Which means thankfully Waive Redden can stay in CT.
@TheNYRBlog @vkn714 I don't think that's correct. Everyone is saying Redden would count on cap. We could trade him but if in CT, he counts.
@TheNYRBlog @vkn714 @angelzeyes2521 otherwise it's a steep reduction of the current salary cap for several teams.
@TheNYRBlog @vkn714 @angelzeyes2521 I would imagine that when negotiating is done they settle on that, tho.
@vkn714 @angelzeyes2521 @new_guy1 No worries, I get stuff wrong all the time on the blog.
@angelzeyes2521 @thenyrblog @new_guy1. I would assume it couldnt be retroactive...anyway, my apologies.
@angelzeyes2521 @thenyrblog @new_guy1 Still unclear on exactly how the mechanics will work (with teams being allowed to be over cap)
@angelzeyes2521 @thenyrblog @new_guy1 Sorry for pulling an Eklund, in one of the blogs I read, i assumed that it meant in the future tense.
@TheNYRBlog From my understanding. Its only on new deals. still hurts the players because Gomez / Redden type deals will be harder to get
@TheNYRBlog he's not a terrible defenseman, he would be on the team if he didn't have such a terrible cap hit
