Sooooo...

Keith Keller wrote:
> On 2008-01-17, Doug Thompson <nospamthanks DeleteThis @na.com> wrote:
>> The question is: Are the Rangers a Stanley Cup contending team with
>> Jagr? It is a yes or no question.
>
> No. Even IommiHadOneLucidMoment agreed that the Rangers are at least
> one big defensive defenceman away from a Cup run. From the looks of
> things, they need a hell of a lot more than that, but that's certainly
> the bare minimum.

The Rangers are a couple of years from thinking about contending.

>
>> I don't think they are.
>
> That's not "yes" or "no". ;-)

Smart ass!

>
>> So, if they
>> aren't going to content for Stanley why keep Jagr when he could be
>> traded to a contending team? It would stabilize the dressing room AND
>> provide the Rangers with youds and cap space.
>
> I'm still skeptical that another team would pick him up, or that they'd
> be willing to give back something of even partially comparable value.
> Even now, I think that Jagr is still more valuable than a bag of pucks.
> Malik, OTOH.... They might get that defensive defenceman for Jagr, but
> then are they strong enough to be a serious Cup contender? Doubtful,
> but especially if this defenceman is young, it would be worth
> considering.
>
> I don't know how true this is, but I thought one of the Devils fans
> mentioned that, if Jagr is traded, the Caps are off the hook for their
> share of his salary. So the Rangers take the cap hit, plus any of his
> salary they agree to pay in exchange for bribing some team to take him.
>
> --keith

Jagr is in the last year of his contract. If he doesn't meet a few goals
(pun intended) the Rangers are not on the hook for his contract next year.