Proposal: Dallas Stars/New York Rangers

[NateB19]

I've seen a Rangers blog poster present this idea. I don't see how it works with Dallas' left-handed defense situation but here's the idea and I modified it a bit.

:

Kari Lehtonen

:

Marc Staal ($1,700,000 retained -> $4,000,000 cap hit)

I don't see how Dallas accepts with the log jam they have on the left side but the Rangers acquire Lehtonen with the intention of buying him out. Saving around 3 million in space.

Not my idea so don't burn me at the stake.

Click to read more...

 

[dechire]

I considered this for exactly as long as it took me to look up Staal's contract and wow no

 

[Ogi1Kenobi]

Kari has 2 years left on his contract and will be easier to buyout/trade next summer. Whereas Staal will be on the books for another 5 years. Especially since Staal's play has regressed (which is the reason you are dumping him in the first place), I'd rather have Kari with the hope that he will be bought out next summer.

 

[Trxjw]

God no.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Ehh value might be fair, but I doubt the Rangers want Lehtonen on the books until next summer (they can't buy him out in August), and the Stars reportedly didn't want Staal at the deadline, so I doubt they want him now.

 

[Magic Mittens]

Staal wouldn't be terrible at 4M, but yeah his contract is abit to long. The worst part is that he has a NMC, so we'd risk losing one of Johns or Lindell

 

[Srsly]

As an outsider looking in with a need at both positions, I'd be annoyed if my team acquired Lehtonen and meh on them acquiring Staal. I don't think NY would have to retain either.

 

[LordNeverLose]

As an outsider looking in with a need at both positions, I'd be annoyed if my team acquired Lehtonen and meh on them acquiring Staal. I don't think NY would have to retain either.

Look at the term of the contracts and re-evaluate

 

[Mr Misty]

Teams get killed by bad contracts with term, Dallas doesn't have any of those. We can wait out Kari, I don't think we can wait out Staal.

 

[serp]

Stars rather buy out Lehtonen next year if they have to than aquire Staal , before the expansion draft. After the expansion draft i could see a retained Staal as an option.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Nope.

Nope, nope, nope.

 

[hairylikebear]

Staal wouldn't be terrible at 4M, but yeah his contract is abit to long. The worst part is that he has a NMC, so we'd risk losing one of Johns or Lindell

The Stars don't have to honor the NMC which means they could leave him unprotected. This is risky but potentially a great way to get rid of Kari.

 

[FLYLine27*]

Um...why the **** do we want Kari Lehtonen?

Sorry but Staal if moved can bring back something better than a "buy out" player. He's still a top 4 defenseman even if he doesn't have the greatest contract.

 

[LordNeverLose]

Um...why the **** do we want Kari Lehtonen?

Sorry but Staal if moved can bring back something better than a "buy out" player. He's still a top 4 defenseman even if he doesn't have the greatest contract.

Staal absolutely, positively has 100% negative value.

 

[StevenDean]

Kari has 2 years left on his contract and will be easier to buyout/trade next summer. Whereas Staal will be on the books for another 5 years. Especially since Staal's play has regressed (which is the reason you are dumping him in the first place), I'd rather have Kari with the hope that he will be bought out next summer.

Funny thing is my first instinct was to say how bad that was for NY, an overpaid backup goalie AND salary retention for Staal. He is underperforming but $4M is a good number........ For 2-3 years. This deal has the making of backfire on Dallas and something they could regret for the next 4-5 years.

I think it is more likely Staal could be moved for Brown. Though Staal's NMC vs. Brown's NTC might be the kicker. Staal must be protected in expansion which makes his contract that much more toxic.

 

[StevenDean]

The Stars don't have to honor the NMC which means they could leave him unprotected. This is risky but potentially a great way to get rid of Kari.

Are you sure that is the way that works? I know Subban's clause was nullified but that was due to his clause no yet being in effect when he was traded. (Stupid rule though) Pretty sure his NMC stays. Could be wrong though.

 

[serp]

Are you sure that is the way that works? I know Subban's clause was nullified but that was due to his clause no yet being in effect when he was traded. (Stupid rule though) Pretty sure his NMC stays. Could be wrong though.

Pretty sure as well that the NMC would stay even if Staal was traded .

 

[go4hockey]

Are you sure that is the way that works? I know Subban's clause was nullified but that was due to his clause no yet being in effect when he was traded. (Stupid rule though) Pretty sure his NMC stays. Could be wrong though.

It may be different in some situations but I have seen where it's up to the team trading for the player if they choose to honor it or not. And most don't honor it as it gives the team flexablity down the road.

 

[go4hockey]

I think it is more likely Staal could be moved for Brown. Though Staal's NMC vs. Brown's NTC might be the kicker. Staal must be protected in expansion which makes his contract that much more toxic.

Actually it's very very unlikely that the Kings would make a Brown/Staal swap as you stated Staal would need to be protected and LA would lose a defenseman better than Staal as we already have Doughty, Muzzin and Martinez to protect and may have a fourth in McNabb if his game steps up a bit this season. So how in the world is that "more likely"?

 

[WhatWhat]

No interest in Staal term and NMC, and yes we would need to honor it since it has already begun. The Subban deal was different because it had yet to start

 

[Machinehead]

We're retaining on Staal to take an even worse contract? No thanks.

 

[serp]

We're retaining on Staal to take an even worse contract? No thanks.

2 years left vs 5 years left . I don't consider either player worth their contract so i rather have the 2 years.

 

[Mr Misty]

Stupid, untrue statement.

Oh right, I remember, you are just an Islander fan.

Yes, valuable comment. Why don't you run back to the Tavares to Toronto Thread and cry.

What?

Of course he has negative value. He has the 22nd highest defenseman cap hit, is he a #1? No. Is he a middle of the pack #2? No, and that player makes about 1m less. Is he the best #3 in the NHL? No, and that player makes about 1.5m less. Maybe he is the best #4, in which case he is overpaid by 2.2m and he is way past the age where we can hope players get better. The NMC is a major factor as well.

Nobody is going to offer anything for him, he's one of the 10 clearest cases of negative value contracts in the NHL.

 

[Skobel24]

Staal is still a serviceable #4/5 dman, but that contract and NMC will make it very difficult to move him. I hope Ranger fans like him, because there is a good chance he'll be on that team for a while yet.

 

[Dave Karp]

I'm a big Marc Staal fan but his contract is really an anchor. He would be serviceable on Dallas' defense but it's not worth it for his price/term.