TSN: Gaborik, Delisle, Parlett to CBJ for Brassard, Dorsett, Moore and 6th Round Pick

[major major]

And if this trade propels the Rangers from 9th place into a deep playoff run, will it still be?

For several months, quite a few people on this board have said that it's better to be able to pick up assets than to embark on a late-season tear that ultimately, in the grand scheme of things, means little. Am I the only one to still hold that opinion?

Yes, you are the only one who holds that opinion because people don't agree that it "means little".

I didn't like the deal, but I didn't hate it either. The only thing that could make me loathe it is if Moore turns into a top-pair guy. What the Rangers do with Brass, or whether they win or lose is irrelevant to me.

For what it's worth, the instant reaction to the trade was largely negative, and if you ever mentioned the prospect of giving up real assets for Gaborik to CBJ fans prior to the trade, the typical reaction was "Do not want". I think folks had to really talk themselves into liking it.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Yes, you are the only one who holds that opinion because people don't agree that it "means little".

Having been a Browns fan my entire life, I'm familiar with the cycle. Start out slow, win some games, fall short of the playoffs (or make it and get bounced early), and miss out on the franchise players.

In the grand scheme of things, what was gained in 2000-01? The first-year CBJ team fought and didn't finish in the basement as they were expected to. Instead of Ilya Kovalchuk or Jason Spezza or Mikko Koivu, we got Pascal Leclaire.

How about 2003-04? Snap out of a prolonged slump long enough to win four straight games late in the season, then in so doing getting the joy of Alexandre Picard instead of Alexander Ovechkin or Evgeni Malkin.

2005-06? 9-3-1 in the last 13 games, for the privilege of getting Derick Brassard over Nicklas Backstrom, Phil Kessel, Jordan Staal, or Jonathan Toews.

2007-08? Hang around just a little bit too long, and thus end up with Nikita Filatov instead of Steven Stamkos, Drew Doughty, or Alex Pietrangelo.

2008-09? Make the playoffs! Get hammered in four straight! Miss out on a top-6 that included John Tavares, Victor Hedman, Matt Duchene, Evander Kane, Brayden Schenn, and Oliver Ekman-Larsson.

2009-10? 3-3-3 in the last 9 games when making the playoffs was extremely unlikely, and miss on Hall and Seguin.

But we get to hear the same stuff over and over and over. "Send a message!" "Show your pride!" Every single one of us on this board is aware that this team, as currently constructed, is not a contender. The reason is lack of offensive talent on the top two lines. There are a ton of first-line forwards in this year's draft, and Columbus is likely to miss out on them all. And for what? A first-round sweep? Pride? "Sending a message"?

Having a team that is absolutely relentless is nice. Having a team that's absolutely relentless with a group of high-end scoring forwards on the horizon is a hell of a lot better.

 

[Dednimnepo]

The trade was a tangible indication to the players that management believed in them, the system and what they were doing. That alone is valuable. We have been at this new attitude/identity for a little over a year now. I won't believe we have removed the negative mentality of the past for another year and a half. Building a solid team identity can take as long as filling a farm system. The psychological aspect of the trade is a plus.

We traded guys we could spare for an elite goal scorer with a desire to play for contract next year. Brassard needed a change of scenery. Moore has the potential to be excellent but at this point it is potential. He is the part of the trade that hurts. Dorsett, although nice to have, was easily replaceable and it his not being in the room at the time made him available. At this point the skill aspect is a wash at worst.

It seems the problem is that this trade screws up two of our 3 first round picks. Helping the Rangers makes their pick not as valuable and helping us does the same. For our pick, play to win, every game, every shift -- anything less is not sport. For the Rangers pick was there something special about our trade that, if not made, left the Rangers with no other trading choices and inevitable out of the playoffs?

And the most important point, the playoff push has brought significantly more money into the CBJ organization. I think the trade was a good decision, that improved the team with minimal harm.

 

[Byrral]

I wish Moore wasn't part of this deal. But I will never, EVER, support the idea that somehow our team would be better off not winning games, any game, because of the presumed assumption that somehow we are going to be a better team immediately by selecting an 18 year old kid in a draft. There are other options to get better players than by tanking for a better draft pick. This trade did just that.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I wish Moore wasn't part of this deal. But I will never, EVER, support the idea that somehow our team would be better off not winning games, any game, because of the presumed assumption that somehow we are going to be a better team immediately by selecting an 18 year old kid in a draft. There are other options to get better players than by tanking for a better draft pick. This trade did just that.

Tanking? Who said anything about tanking?

Here's what the Western Conference standings looked like on deadline day.

Chicago - 27-5-3 (57)
Anaheim - 24-7-5 (53)
Minnesota - 21-12-2 (44)
Vancouver - 19-11-6 (44)
Los Angeles - 20-13-3 (43)
San Jose - 18-11-6 (42)
Detroit - 18-13-5 (41)
St Louis - 18-14-2 (38)
Nashville - 15-14-8 (38)
Edmonton - 15-13-7 (37)
Columbus - 15-14-7 (37)
Phoenix - 15-15-6 (36)
Dallas - 16-16-3 (35)
Calgary - 13-17-4 (30)
Colorado - 12-20-4 (28)

Edmonton and Nashville have completely collapsed since this day. Dallas has gone 6-3-0 while trading two of their major pieces away. Phoenix has gone 3-2-2 with no additions.

But check that out: Columbus is above .500 when the trades were made. 6-3-0? Just like Dallas, who traded Jagr and Roy and Morrow and got no real immediate help for any of them.

Who's to say that Columbus wouldn't be 6-3-0 without trading with the Rangers? Would it have crippled the team to not make the trade?

 

[major major]

Mayor, I'm not altogether unsympathetic to your position on the trade. But leaving a side the trade for a moment, you did say that our current run "means nothing." This I don't understand. Meaning has been in no short supply this spring. It's also been quite heartening, entertaining, joyful, and all the other things that normally draw people to sport. In what sense do you mean it "means nothing?"

 

[EspenK]

And if this trade propels the Rangers from 9th place into a deep playoff run, will it still be?

For several months, quite a few people on this board have said that it's better to be able to pick up assets than to embark on a late-season tear that ultimately, in the grand scheme of things, means little. Am I the only one to still hold that opinion?

I'm not sure this trade has made the Rangers that much better. Yeah, Brass has put up a few points, the Rangers D wasn't the problem so Moore while a good add is not the reason they are still in contention and Dorse is still out.

Gabby has helped us but again I'm not sure he is the reason we are still in it.

Truth be known, I am happy that the team is making a run at the playoffs but I see a very disappointing miss (the worst possible and most likely scenario) or a quick exit against the Hawks should they make it. I would prefer a better draft position over either of those scenarios because in the long run that is what will make this team better, not a good finish this year. But without going back and looking at the standings we were already in the 10th spot draft wise so we haven't lost that much. If we make a deep run in the playoffs, well that wouldn't be so bad either but it looks like 2 picks in the 14-18 range is a pretty good bet as both the Jackets & Rangers miss or make quick exits.

 

[Samkow]

And if this trade propels the Rangers from 9th place into a deep playoff run, will it still be?

For several months, quite a few people on this board have said that it's better to be able to pick up assets than to embark on a late-season tear that ultimately, in the grand scheme of things, means little. Am I the only one to still hold that opinion?

I get what you're saying, but this late season tear is meaningful enough that nobody should roll their eyes and think "same old jackets"

 

[blahblah]

Who's to say that Columbus wouldn't be 6-3-0 without trading with the Rangers? Would it have crippled the team to not make the trade?

Thanks for playing alternate history.

We'll never know, so your straw man is safe. You can make hypotheticals all day, not sure what they accomplish. Not even sure it's interesting conversation.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Who's to say that Columbus wouldn't be 6-3-0 without trading with the Rangers? Would it have crippled the team to not make the trade?

Team might have won three cups if it had hired a better GM to replace McLean.

This game is fun!

 

[cbjgirl]

I don't see this as a "late season tear". I see this as a team with a bunch of new players, a new coaching staff, and goalie questions who, due to the lockout and only having a week before being tossed into meaningful games, took awhile to gel.

Of all the teams in the league, this is one that could have used a longer training camp and/or a longer season.

I don't see why what we are seeing won't carry over to next season. The year they made the playoffs, had that season been about 2 weeks longer, they would have missed. They were looking like crap coming down the stretch.

A large part of this is mental and attitude. Collectively, I think they finally have the "right" attitude. I don't see that changing back overnight (or over the summer).

 

[Mayor Bee]

Mayor, I'm not altogether unsympathetic to your position on the trade. But leaving a side the trade for a moment, you did say that our current run "means nothing." This I don't understand. Meaning has been in no short supply this spring. It's also been quite heartening, entertaining, joyful, and all the other things that normally draw people to sport. In what sense do you mean it "means nothing?"

The legendary relief pitcher Goose Gossage struggled early in his career with the White Sox. He said that one day, he was out on the mound trying to protect a late lead, and realized that there were only two places that he could go. One was the penthouse (by mowing down the opposing hitters and getting the save), and the other was the ****house (by blowing the save). There was no middle ground, and there was no point in pursuing the middle ground.

He said his entire outlook changed at that moment; that's how he became one of the greatest and most intimidating relief pitchers in history. His WHIP with Chicago was over 1.40; the rest of his career (including the late years past his prime, starting with the Cubs) was 1.15.

That's what I grew weary of years ago with the Browns. Can't come close to contending, can't get the best players. The CBJ 8-0-4 streak came before the deadline moves were made; the team was 10-2-5 leading up to the deadline.

Thanks for playing alternate history.

We'll never know, so your straw man is safe. You can make hypotheticals all day, not sure what they accomplish. Not even sure it's interesting conversation.

Team might have won three cups if it had hired a better GM to replace McLean.

This game is fun!

The team had gone 10-2-5 in the previous 17 games leading up to the trade deadline. That was without a single move being made at the NHL level. Is it unreasonable to suggest that 6-3-0 in the ensuing 9 games would have happened without moves being made?

 

[FANonymous]

Team might have won three cups if it had hired a better GM to replace McLean.

This game is fun!

Only 3?

 

[blahblah]

The team had gone 10-2-5 in the previous 17 games leading up to the trade deadline. That was without a single move being made at the NHL level. Is it unreasonable to suggest that 6-3-0 in the ensuing 9 games would have happened without moves being made?

It was also done at mostly home with a crap record on the road. Based on previous road record, one could suggest that under .500 would have been likely. What's your point? The move is done, you'll have plenty of time to critique it down the road.

 

[Mayor Bee]

It was also done at mostly home with a crap record on the road. Based on previous road record, one could suggest that under .500 would have been likely. What's your point?

That's exactly my point. Whether ending up in the playoffs or outside of them, the situations wouldn't really be any different. This team is not ready to contend, and even with the deadline moves, still isn't.

The basic facts are as follows:
- Columbus, outside of the playoffs at the time that the deals were made, still do not control their destiny in the playoff hunt
- New York, outside of the playoff picture when the deals were made, has surged. When the Gaborik trade was made, they were 17-15-3 and had been outscored on the season by an 86-84 margin. Since then, they've gone 6-2-0, outscored their opponents 32-19, and have gone from floundering to legitimate contenders. Not just into the playoff picture, but actually contending.
- A player making $7.5 mil a year with a questionable injury history was added to the roster, and he can become a UFA after next year.
- The deal may well have been there in the offseason, particularly as the heat in New York was turned up for either missing the playoffs or getting bounced in the first round.
- If a certain former GM had made this deal, he'd have been universally blasted for "a job-saving trade", for trading future pieces for a big name. (That's not necessarily a fact, but I can say it with 90% confidence anyway)

My question is simple. What was gained? Was the biggest gain something about "sending a message", which is something I despise in all forms since I find it illogical?

 

[pete goegan]

That's exactly my point. Whether ending up in the playoffs or outside of them, the situations wouldn't really be any different. This team is not ready to contend, and even with the deadline moves, still isn't.

The basic facts are as follows:
- Columbus, outside of the playoffs at the time that the deals were made, still do not control their destiny in the playoff hunt
- New York, outside of the playoff picture when the deals were made, has surged. When the Gaborik trade was made, they were 17-15-3 and had been outscored on the season by an 86-84 margin. Since then, they've gone 6-2-0, outscored their opponents 32-19, and have gone from floundering to legitimate contenders. Not just into the playoff picture, but actually contending.
- A player making $7.5 mil a year with a questionable injury history was added to the roster, and he can become a UFA after next year.
- The deal may well have been there in the offseason, particularly as the heat in New York was turned up for either missing the playoffs or getting bounced in the first round.
- If a certain former GM had made this deal, he'd have been universally blasted for "a job-saving trade", for trading future pieces for a big name. (That's not necessarily a fact, but I can say it with 90% confidence anyway)

My question is simple. What was gained? Was the biggest gain something about "sending a message", which is something I despise in all forms since I find it illogical?

Your position now becomes clearer.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Your position now becomes clearer.

The position that there would undoubtedly be a large segment of our fanbase that would have perceived it that way? I agree.

I think there's a certain myopia that's existed for the last couple of months. The simple fact is that trading Dorsett (mostly a spare part), Brassard (a second-line center), and Moore (generally regarded as a future first-pairing defenseman) would have been regarded as a desperate move. Plenty believe that the trade for Jeff Carter (four years younger, no injury history, a much lower cap hit, better all-around game, no risk of losing as a UFA) was a desperation move; how could this not be?

And just so we're clear, I'd have been critical of the move regardless of who made it. I'm not Boxer from "Animal Farm", simply lowering his head and saying "If Comrade So-and-So says it, it must be right."

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

That's exactly my point. Whether ending up in the playoffs or outside of them, the situations wouldn't really be any different. This team is not ready to contend, and even with the deadline moves, still isn't.

The basic facts are as follows:
- Columbus, outside of the playoffs at the time that the deals were made, still do not control their destiny in the playoff hunt
- New York, outside of the playoff picture when the deals were made, has surged. When the Gaborik trade was made, they were 17-15-3 and had been outscored on the season by an 86-84 margin. Since then, they've gone 6-2-0, outscored their opponents 32-19, and have gone from floundering to legitimate contenders. Not just into the playoff picture, but actually contending.
- A player making $7.5 mil a year with a questionable injury history was added to the roster, and he can become a UFA after next year.
- The deal may well have been there in the offseason, particularly as the heat in New York was turned up for either missing the playoffs or getting bounced in the first round.
- If a certain former GM had made this deal, he'd have been universally blasted for "a job-saving trade", for trading future pieces for a big name. (That's not necessarily a fact, but I can say it with 90% confidence anyway)

My question is simple. What was gained? Was the biggest gain something about "sending a message", which is something I despise in all forms since I find it illogical?

*snore*

1) One only makes a job-saving move if one has done an up-to-that-point poor job.
2) Suggesting that some posters might pan a particular personnel move is like suggesting water might be wet.
3) I feel confident in saying that if you reviewed every personnel move by a certain former GM, you'd also fing posters expressing support and perhaps even excitement. (And, given my point 2, I'd say that would hold regardless of your chosen "certain former GM" for just about any team.)
4) Attempting to hide one's bias/agenda by surrouning it with a bunch of distracting information is worse than plain old unfiltered bias.

 

[major major]

The position that there would undoubtedly be a large segment of our fanbase that would have perceived it that way? I agree.

I think there's a certain myopia that's existed for the last couple of months. The simple fact is that trading Dorsett (mostly a spare part), Brassard (a second-line center), and Moore (generally regarded as a future first-pairing defenseman) would have been regarded as a desperate move. Plenty believe that the trade for Jeff Carter (four years younger, no injury history, a much lower cap hit, better all-around game, no risk of losing as a UFA) was a desperation move; how could this not be?

And just so we're clear, I'd have been critical of the move regardless of who made it. I'm not Boxer from "Animal Farm", simply lowering his head and saying "If Comrade So-and-So says it, it must be right."

I would describe the general reaction to the trade as uncomfortable. It's not a stretch to guess that it would be outright negative if people had already a disliking for the GM.

 

[Mayor Bee]

*snore*

1) One only makes a job-saving move if one has done an up-to-that-point poor job.
2) Suggesting that some posters might pan a particular personnel move is like suggesting water might be wet.
3) I feel confident in saying that if you reviewed every personnel move by a certain former GM, you'd also fing posters expressing support and perhaps even excitement. (And, given my point 2, I'd say that would hold regardless of your chosen "certain former GM" for just about any team.)
4) Attempting to hide one's bias/agenda by surrouning it with a bunch of distracting information is worse than plain old unfiltered bias.

How typical. One flippant (speculative) comment, that becomes the focal point, but somehow I'm the one with the agenda.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I would describe the general reaction to the trade as uncomfortable. It's not a stretch to guess that it would be outright negative if people had already a disliking for the GM.

I don't believe I ever welcomed you to the boards. If not, I welcome you; I enjoy your posting.

 

[JACKETfan]

Shorts in a wad on both sides.

Each team had its own reasons for the trade.

I have no doubt that the reports are true that Brass HAS been on the block for some time. The anti trade faction overstates Gaborik's slump. You have to look at his stats several years and his age. In those respects, it was a good trade. (Within reason, the money is practically irrelevant)

----------
@cbjgirl: awesome post. Where you been?

 

[Xoggz22]

I think this was a pretty good hockey trade. CBJ moved pieces considered expendible and got a top line RW - something we didn't have - that should be relied upon for 30-40 goals next season. Nothing in the CBJ system that would have remedied that.

Good trade.

 

[Crede777]

I really like Moore, Mayor Bee, but I would not say he is expected to be a top pairing defenseman. That would have been a surprise, not expectation.

Further, can someone put up our goals per game since the trade? I feel it has increased but am not sure.

Either way, the only thing I am concerned about right now is Gaborik's shot. I haven't seen him rip a wrist shot on goal yet. All of his goals have been from about a half foot out. He does draw the defense though which certainly is nice for our other 2 lines. If I were Richards, I would swap Letestu off that line for either Johansen or Dubinsky depending on how far away Anisimov is.

 

[major major]

I think this was a pretty good hockey trade. CBJ moved pieces considered expendible and got a top line RW - something we didn't have - that should be relied upon for 30-40 goals next season. Nothing in the CBJ system that would have remedied that.

Good trade.

By those standards, it will probably be a good hockey trade, though I won't get too worked up expecting 40 or anything close to it from Gaborik (maybe the offseason will improve his health and he'll surprise me, we'll see).

I have a couple different criteria for assessing the trade I want to bring in here: value management, and timing. We traded what was expendable, redundant and fat to us, but there was considerable value in those three players. We traded three RFA aged players for a high-priced, and most would say overpaid, UFA. This brings me to the timing: New York was considering buying out Gaborik, which leads me to believe we could have traded for him in the summer and acquired him for a much smaller price. That perhaps would have left Moore in the system, enabling us to move him or another D in a package for an even better asset, perhaps Bobby Ryan. If we now want to acquire a Ryan level player, we will have to part with mostly muscle and bone, we have little fat left.