because you would do a better job?

Since the Sens are reportedly in on Ryan Strome, I'm hoping the answer is really dumb.

Buch trade was great asset management.. certainly don’t want him at that contract if he is blocking Kakko and Kravs. Considering he might have got more in arbitration this was the better path. Also only 2 teams had any interest in the guy, we took the best offer since no other teams valued him enough to make a better offer, let alone an offer at all. Goodrow, Blais and nemeth are all guys we need and want. He hasn’t made a bad move yet. Drafting was actually better in hindsight, yes we all demanded a C in the 1st round but we did good and got a C in the 3rd round who will be a 2/3C guy in 3-4 years when needed.

In a year where the Rangers had tons of Cap space, they could have brought back Buchnevich for 1 year. Waited until more suitors arrived at the Trade Deadline, and then moved him for greater return. I like Blais, but there are more Blais' than Buch's out there to choose from.

Since it sounds like Nemeth is getting a 3 year deal, that makes 2 Free Agent signings of bottom tier Roster players that were way longer than they should have been.

I agree about the cap space point. But in the same argument I don’t want him as 1RW when the 2 more important kids could be there, then Buch as 3RW will lose value at 6M cap hit. Better to have Blais as 3RW or Goodrow or sign someone to a 1yr deal with cap space we have. But I get that we have the cap space

3 years for Nemeth is fine and moveable if need be. Def not gonna worry about it, he is a solid bottom pair vet D and can be flipped at any point in the deal if need be.

Goodrow wasn't an overpay. Got him at market price. Goodrow and Blais are players the Rangers need. Enough with having 3 lines of high skilled players and the 4th line of undersized forward with "potential". They are building this team the right way.

You know why Tampa wins? Because they get as many skill players as possible and surround them with Goodrow and Blais and Coleman type players all under $4m total on the cap. Paying Goodrow that much for that long kills all the value of a Goodrow. The point is to find these guys cheap, and take flyers on depth guys. The upgrade from a Goodrow over similiar but lesser players making less than $1m is a heck of a lot smaller than you think.

you say it like paying market price against most NHL GM's for a 28 year old bottom 6 forward for 6 years is a good thing. If market price deals for bottom 6 forwards led to Cups, Vancouver and Edmonton would win the cup every year.