OT: 2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part XI: The "Please make it stop" edition.
- Thread starter Bleed Ranger Blue
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
The 60 million dollar figure isn't agreed upon yet. Let's also not forget that you will be able to trade for cap space (3 or 4 million MAX I believe) in the new CBA.
And before we dont forget that, lets also not forget that this is total fiction.
Flexibility? You have a 20 man roster. Where's the room for a spare forward and spare d-man? Hell, even if you wanted to have Bickel play the role of both, that still leaves you with only $113k to sign another d-man, which of course is impossible.
haveandare
Registered User
Losing Gaborik would be a HUGE blow to this team. I don't see how anyone can honestly disagree with that. We can argue over whether or not it is a "dismantling" but losing him for a salary dump would undoubtedly be a tremendous problem going forward. For a few years now, NYR has been the team that's got solid D and solid goaltending but falls just short in the offense department. Gaborik has, except for some spells, been the backbone of that "almost good enough" offense. His goal scoring numbers here have been nothing short of incredible. To lose him at this point, effectively replacing him with Nash, a guy who might be able to do what Gaborik has been doing for a few years now, more or less sets this team back the entire Nash trade. Good D, great goaltending, just short on offense.
Also, I think that people need to realize that Sather is the one making the roster decisions. What we'd do isn't terribly important - what Sather would/will do is really what matters. I don't think he'd trade any of the big name guys who sell tickets and win games unless he absolutely had to. He loves big names. He loves players that have that game breaking potential. As much as I might not agree with it, I'm very, very confident that one of Girardi, Staal or McD will be sacrificed to keep Gaborik if it comes down to that. Most likely Girardi or Staal. Girardi has less star power but he's shown that he and McD make a solid NHL first pair. You can't keep 3 first pairing guys and have a first line like Nash- Richards - Gaborik all at once in this league, especially with the cap going down. I don't see Sather losing any of those offensive guys unless he has to. I think he'll move one of those d-men and try to fleece some other GM into taking guys like Asham and Rupp, replacing them with cheaper utility guys.
Also, I think that people need to realize that Sather is the one making the roster decisions. What we'd do isn't terribly important - what Sather would/will do is really what matters. I don't think he'd trade any of the big name guys who sell tickets and win games unless he absolutely had to. He loves big names. He loves players that have that game breaking potential. As much as I might not agree with it, I'm very, very confident that one of Girardi, Staal or McD will be sacrificed to keep Gaborik if it comes down to that. Most likely Girardi or Staal. Girardi has less star power but he's shown that he and McD make a solid NHL first pair. You can't keep 3 first pairing guys and have a first line like Nash- Richards - Gaborik all at once in this league, especially with the cap going down. I don't see Sather losing any of those offensive guys unless he has to. I think he'll move one of those d-men and try to fleece some other GM into taking guys like Asham and Rupp, replacing them with cheaper utility guys.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Bonus cushion provides the flexibility, along with injuries (I believe they put into place some flexibility on how emergency recalls affect the cap). It's a 20-man roster and that sucks, but carrying a 20-man roster is preferable to losing either Gaborik or Del Zotto. Especially since it's only for one season.
Perhaps I missed something, but wasn't that part of the players proposal a few months back which was accepted?
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
3 bottom 6 guys, not 4-5. And I believe it's more likely than getting rid of MDZ or Gaborik.
And Pyatt. They'll be able to. Teams are constantly looking for bottom 6 players via trade.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
No proposals have been accepted, certainly not anything from a few months back. I think people are mistaking this for being able to trade guys and retain a portion of their contract. An example is what happened with Jagr just before the last CBA. The Rangers acquired him and the Capitals were paying part of his deal. The portion the Caps were paying for hit their salary cap number while the portion the Rangers were paying for hit ours.
Good points about the offense and how this team is constructed. Unless you've OD'd on Kreider kool aid, or think Hagelin has some untapped potential, its quite evident that the Rangers are not developing any pure goal scorers. Those have been, and will continually need to be imported via other means.
What is the point of splitting hairs about the definition of "dismantling" and saying its cool when the Rangers would only be losing 1 or 2 roster players - when that roster player is one of the top goal scorers in the NHL? This is a quality vs. quantity argument.
But I suppose that stance is better than putting on a tin foil hat and insisting that the Rangers can keep all of their high-paid imports and field a team with the cap coming in at $60M.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
I haven't seen anyone who has.
If Gaborik does need to moved, it will be a blow. But if he's traded for a cheap 2nd/3rd line tweener then the team will be in roughly the same spot as last season only with Nash instead of Gaborik (expect all the youngins will be 2 years older and wiser). And that team lost the President's trophy on the last day of the season and was six wins away from winning the Stanley Cup.
My own belief is that Slats is under the impression that Nash can replace Gaborik's 40 goals while being more of a "Torts guy" on the ice. Nash can kill penalties and brings a physical game that Gaborik could never hope to match. He fits the mold of this team better than Gabby does. Get one season of both, then ship off Gabby for a high-end prospect, picks and/or a 2nd line RW.
I don't love the idea, but that's my take.
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
Exactly how I view the situation. Like it or hate it I think the writings been on the wall for a while.
To be honest, I'd rather trade Gaborik than jump through such hoops just to field a 20 man roster with no extra pieces. Sure, I hate it, but at least that jettison's your offensive dynamo but keeps a foundation intact.
Your roster, while it works mathematically, would be rotting this team from the bottom up.
haveandare
Registered User
True. Being in the same situation as last season isn't a terrible fate, but it does pretty much negate the Nash trade in terms of being the move that really provided what almost everyone knew this team needed and put them "over the top." Also, we know how Gaborik can perform in this city and with this team while we're only pretty sure how Nash will do.
truebluegoalie
Registered User
It is also something of a new reality IF (and that is a big if) the cap was 60 million as proposed. You can't expect to have gaborik, nash, richards, lundqvist, etc. all on the roster with such a low cap. Just because people are willing to deal with that doesn't make them ignorant, or happy about it. But if that is the new landscape then it is what it is and you deal with it.
btw, 1k posts, looks like this won't be the last lockout thread, hopefully the next one will be, and I think that is something we can all agree on.
Last edited:
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
I fail to see how it's rotting the team from the bottom up considering that Boyle, Rupp, Asham and Pyatt all have deals what expire after next season. It's either bring in a bunch of new guys for the bottom 6 next year or the year after. Your choice. If it's going to happen, I'd rather do it when it gives the team a better chance to compete for the Cup in 2013-14.
By the way, that whole idea is why I didn't want Nash in the first place. This team has and will have forward depth problems for the next couple of years. I hated that idea.
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
Agreed but I mean the plan was always to take two runs with both. Now we're down to one (if we're lucky) thanks to Howson and the lockout uncertainty.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
It wouldn't be the same situation. You'd have Nash putting up similar production to Gaborik, hopefully. But you've lost Anisimov and Dubinsky. Unless they figure out a way to keep both Nash and Gaborik, the team has taken a significant step backwards.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
One of our top 3 guys will be a salary cap casualty. I think Sather's always been aware of that and I think it's a big part of why we took a defenseman in the draft (at #28, there isn't going to be huge difference on your draft board for BPA). Girardi's deal is up first, but he's a right D and the other two guys are left Ds (I'm not talking about handedness).
broadwayblue
Registered User
People arguing over what we can or can't fit with a hypothetical 60M cap. Reminds me of the good old days. 
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | 4 Nations Break Edition- Latest: bandwagonesque
-
-
Useless thread MMII: Eagles & Buckeyes championship appreciation thread- Latest: End of Line
-
