New York Rangers Would Be Stupid to Not Sign Marc Staal at Rumored Asking Price

Since joining the team as a rookie back in 2007-08, Marc Staal has been one of the New York Rangers’ top defenders. The 27-year-old alternate captain is heading into the last year of his contract, and if both sides fail to reach an agreement, he will become one of the most sought after free-agent defenders in recent memory.

Larry Brooks of the New York Post reported that both sides have been in talks, and Staal is seeking a deal worth $6 million or more per season for the next six or seven seasons.

"

Staal, who will turn 28 in January, is believed to be seeking a six- or seven-year deal in the neighborhood of $6 million per — perhaps somewhat more. The Rangers are believed to be offering the same deal to which they signed Girardi, six years at $5.5 million per — perhaps somewhat less.

"

Staal is currently making just under $4 million, and a raise of about $2 million is in line under market value. With Staal’s price finally out in the open, the Rangers would be horrendously stupid to not retain him at his rumored asking price.

There are a lot of reasons why many people would be wary of committing both big money and term to Staal, but there are more positives than negatives associated with this situation.

For starters, there is no defender currently in the system that could step into a top-four role with comfort for the start of the 2015-16 season. In addition, there isn’t exactly an upcoming defender that could replace Staal; and furthermore, why go on a search for a replacement if you already have a known commodity at a reasonable price?

Injuries aside, and we will address those shortly, $6 million a season isn’t an absurd ask from Staal. This past summer Matt Niskanen, a career 0.34 points-per-game defender, cashed in after a career year in which he tallied 0.57 points-per-game while Kris Letang was limited to 37 games.

In addition, an aging, gradually less mobile and soon-to-be 34-year-old Brooks Orpik was able to acquire a contract that will pay him $5.5 million a season. The deal was deemed to be an overpayment by many, and Russian Machine Never Breaks, a popular Washington Capitals blog, had this breakdown on the horrendous deal.

"Orpik has been on a steady offensive decline for years. It probably would have been more noticeable had he not played with two of the best players in the world. Orpik will be 38 at the end of this contract. Orpik is known as a poor skater and his contract with the Caps almost takes him over the hill."

Staal will be 28 in January and was in good health during the 2013-14 season. If you asked all 30 general managers in the NHL, I would venture to say that at least 16, or more than 50 percent, would choose Staal because of everything he brings to the table.

That and he has a more consistent track record than Niskanen, plus he is younger and more agile than Orpik.

By now it should be clear that the major concern most people have with re-signing Staal is not how much he makes per year, but how long the contract is. For those reading that may not see why a $6 million-per-year salary is fair, consider the following.

We are living in a world in which the NHL is finding ways to increase its earnings year after year, and the result is an ever growing salary cap.

Multiple outlets, including Chris Botta of the Sports Business Journal, have reported that the salary cap could increase to $76 million for the 2015-16 tilt, and James Mirtle of the Globe and Mail reported that a $90 million salary cap isn’t too far away.

With that in mind, a $6 million ticket per year for Staal is a steal, and a salary cap of that nature would enable the Rangers to re-sign players such as Derek Stepan, Mats Zuccarello, Carl Hagelin and potentially Martin St. Louis, among others.

Staal’s increase with this example would be just under $2 million, and that money could appear if St. Louis decided to go the Teemu Selanne route by taking a minimal deal until finally retiring.

So once again we come back to the notion that the tricky part when it comes to keeping Staal seems to pertain to the term of a new deal.

As mentioned above, Staal has a black eye, no pun intended, on his dossier when it comes to injuries. He missed time because of a concussion and because of a puck he took to the eye. Since taking a puck to the face, Staal has worn a protective visor, and there has been nothing to prove that his past injuries are inhibiting his play.

Staal told Pierre LeBrun of ESPN.com that his vision is fine, and there is no reason to take him at his word.

"

I have no limitations at all. It's been a great summer of training. Physically from the time I was cleared to start working out, there wasn't anything I couldn't do as far as physically getting ready. So that part of it has been really good this summer, just getting into shape, getting stronger and getting ready for the season.

"

Ultimately, based on Brooks’ initial report, it appears that Staal wants some long-term security, and given his injury history no one could blame him.

One more blow to the head or a tipped puck to the face could end his career, and he needs to do what is necessary to protect his future. While locking him into a long-term deal could be perceived as a negative after considering the above, there is some potential upside to keep Staal around for a few more years.

As stated earlier, Staal turns 28 in January. A six-year deal would take him to age 35, and a seven-year deal would take him to 36.

Just because he would be on the roster until he is 35 or 36 doesn’t mean he would be locked into his current role. The Rangers have an abundance of young defenders in their system, and over the next few years they will be ready for full-time NHL duty.

LD	RD
Brady Skjei (20)	Dylan McIlrath (22)
Conor Allen (24)	Petr Zamorsky (22)
Mat Bodie (24)	Ryan Mantha (18)
Ryan Graves (19)	Calle Andersson (20)

They aren’t ready now, so keeping Staal on the roster for the next six to seven years would enable him to fill a top-four role while he is up to it, and it would give the youngsters such as Brady Skjei, Conor Allen and John Moore a chance to develop until they are ready for top-four action.

In theory, Staal could be a solid mentor and top-four defender until he is between 32 and 34. At that point he could slide down to the third pairing, and a 24- or 26-year-old Skjei and a 28- or 30-year-old Allen or Moore could slide into that role.

So far we have been looking at things from a positive scope, so for the sake of fairness the potential negatives will be addressed and examined. For the sake of ease let’s say that Staal signs his six-year deal worth $30 million in total with an annual cap hit of $6 million.

The ink becomes dry and filed within the NHL’s central registry, and during game five of the 2016-17 regular season Staal is blindsided by a player, and his career is ended.

Panic would set in immediately because the Rangers would be losing a player they just committed a ton of money to, and his career is over. In this situation, Staal effectively would become the Blueshirts’ version of Chris Pronger, and his entire contract would be expunged from the books if the Rangers were up against the salary cap.

For more clarification, here's Cap Geek's explanation. 

"

Placing a player on LTIR only provides relief if the team's cap payroll or "Averaged Club Salary" begins to exceed the upper limit. The amount of LTI relief is limited to the amount by which the team has exceeded the upper limit — less the amount of cap space the team had at the time the LTIR transaction took place. That means the amount of LTI relief is not the entire amount of the injured player's salary, although teams often make small transactions to ensure it is close.

"

The most important part of this would be in terms of committing long-term money to Staal. The only risk from an injury perspective would be if he suffered minimal injuries that wouldn’t allow the Rangers to put him on LTIR.

Other than that, there is no reason to be concerned from an injury perspective, because any major injury would take his salary out of the equation. The problem then would be replacing him, and in that case the Blueshirts would either have to find a stopgap, or they would move up their time table with the youths.

In short, Staal is a damn good second-pairing defender. He is more than worth his asking price, and there are multiple pluses for keeping him around for the next few years.

While there is a concern when it comes to his injury history, there really aren't a lot of ways the Rangers could get burned, so keeping him is the best decision the Blueshirts can make in this situation.

All stats via Hockey-Reference unless noted. Financial terms via Cap Geek.