8:41 PM: The NY Post says that there is a belief that San Jose will claim Goodrow. (NY Post)
2:29PM: The Rangers have placed Barclay Goodrow on waivers.
Goodrow has three years left on his contract at $3.6 million per season.
A potential buyout of Goodrow’s contract would leave the Rangers with the following cap hits:
- 2024-25: A credit of $247,000. The Rangers would have the ability to go above the cap by $247,000
- 2025-26: $1,002,778
- 2026-27: $3,502,778
- 2027-28: $1,111,111
- 2028-29: $1,111,111
- 2029-30: $1,111,111
The buyout window opens 48-hours after the end of the Stanley Cup Final.
Adam Rotter: This is both surprising and not that surprising. Goodrow was one of the Rangers best players for most of the playoffs, but he makes way too much money to just be the fourth line center. I thought that maybe he could have gotten a look next to Mika Zibanejad and Chris Kreider during the carousel of wingers next to them, but ultimately he’s a fourth line guy and the Rangers can’t and don’t want to keep committing that much money to that spot. He’s played a big part in helping the Rangers transform into the team they’ve become, but they need his cap space and roster spot for other players.
Placing him on waivers is a way of alerting the whole league that the Rangers are looking to move on/clear cap space. Despite his cap hit, Goodrow is still a valuable player and someone who I’m sure a number of teams would have interest in. Anyone looking for a veteran, a “pro,” a Stanley Cup winner can find that in Goodrow the same way that the Rangers did when they acquired him three years ago. But will he get claimed on waivers? That would be the Rangers preferred option as it would get his entire contract off the books. But would a team claim him on waivers if they thought they could get him for less after he’s been bought out or for a lower cap hit, though possibly at the cost of a draft pick, via a trade where the Rangers retain salary? A buyout is never ideal, but the dead cap hit will be absorbed easier as the cap is now going to start going up. Retaining salary could net the Rangers a potential asset, maybe a late round draft pick, but depending on how much is retained, the cap hit might be higher than it would be for the first two years of the buyout, but you wouldn’t get any of the extra years. You’d also lose one of your three retained salary spots for three seasons.
The Rangers could also put Goodrow in the minors and they would gain $1.15 million in cap space. That amount is probably as much as the Rangers will be willing to retain in a trade. There is also the chance that Goodrow remains with the Rangers, though my guess is that they will find some way to get him off the roster.
8:41 PM: San Jose makes sense as a potential spot for Goodrow. They are young, looking for veterans to help their young players, including upcoming #1 pick Macklin Celebrini, and they also need to get to the salary cap floor. Mike Grier was with the Rangers for Goodrow’s first season and he and Drury are good friends. So the question is why don’t the Rangers just trade Goodrow to San Jose? My guess is that even though Goodrow spent six years in San Jose that they are one of the teams on his 15-team no-trade list. Since he only has a partial no-trade and not a no-move, the Rangers can place him on waivers and anyone can pick him up. It’s not exactly great business or how you want the team to treat players, especially ones that you gave this exact contract to, but sometimes these moves and decisions have to be made to move the team forward. The worst part for Goodrow is that San Jose couldn’t even flip him somewhere by retaining salary until after next season since all three of their retained salary slots are filled until Brent Burns’ contract expires. But if this is true then it’s a tremendous win for the Rangers.