E-Train
Registered User
He can be moved to 15 teams(I believe) beginning on July 1st. Retain rather than buyout.
Confirmed with Link: McDonagh + Miller to Tampa Bay for Namestnikov + Howden + Hajek + 2018 1st + conditional 2019 1st
- Thread starter nevesis
- Start date
highandwide
It's gold Jerry.
You do understand what a rebuild is right? Honestly, when you start listening to your wife like McDonagh did and your manhood falls off, you're basically done in my book as a player I want on my team.
All these young players mean that the Rangers will have them cheap for at least 5-6 years. That means they can be aggressive in FA if they choose to go that route. I would not unless it was for Tavares. Kovalchuk has wanted to play for the Rangers for years. Even at 35, he'll be a way better player than Miller for 2-3 years.
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
tampa was never going to part with serg. that was a pipe dream. their top prospects were not going anywhere.
lets be honest. we over value here. as much as mcd27 has been a warrior and a top pair matchup guy, the other gms watch games too. he handles the puck like a hand grenade and his shot is way below average. he cant play the pp point. he's just awful there. he's a 1st pair defensive shutdown guy with alot of miles who's do a huge 2nd deal. he's been beat up and has a ton of miles on him and he's trending the wrong way. perhaps the market didnt allow for much leverage. plus and this matters, no $$ retained. we have to consider that too.
what we got back was a roster player for jtm. i like vlady better than jtm. more talent, better smarts, better defensively and a better consistent point producer. i like that one for one swap. millers time had come.
mcd27 brought back to very good prospects and 2 picks. about what we expected.
its a deal that isnt perfect but like you said, works for both sides. dont kid yourself, tampa gave up alot. the just didnt give up one of their top 3 kids but then again, they never were going to.
lets be honest. we over value here. as much as mcd27 has been a warrior and a top pair matchup guy, the other gms watch games too. he handles the puck like a hand grenade and his shot is way below average. he cant play the pp point. he's just awful there. he's a 1st pair defensive shutdown guy with alot of miles who's do a huge 2nd deal. he's been beat up and has a ton of miles on him and he's trending the wrong way. perhaps the market didnt allow for much leverage. plus and this matters, no $$ retained. we have to consider that too.
what we got back was a roster player for jtm. i like vlady better than jtm. more talent, better smarts, better defensively and a better consistent point producer. i like that one for one swap. millers time had come.
mcd27 brought back to very good prospects and 2 picks. about what we expected.
its a deal that isnt perfect but like you said, works for both sides. dont kid yourself, tampa gave up alot. the just didnt give up one of their top 3 kids but then again, they never were going to.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 17,385
- 9,498
Unless the Rangers luck in to a McDavid like super stud in the draft lottery I fear this team became the NY Knicks on ice for the next 5-10 years. People that love losing season after season for more draft picks will be happy.
You do understand that trading our best positional player should probably bring back a roster player with more upside even in the throngs of a rebuild right? Ill ignore the needless cheapshot at McDonagh.
I'll also question if you understand what a rebuild is when, in the next sentence, you are frothing at the mouth to jump into the UFA pool.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
Lightning lands Ryan McDonagh at the deadline
Interesting things:
Interesting things:
- Gorton was the one who asked for Namestnikov in a swap for Miller
- Yzerman thought he gave up a lot for McDonagh.
E-Train
Registered User
After making the playoffs, 11 out of the previous 12 seasons, I can take a few down years to rebuild what was crumbling. I trust Gorton.
FireGerardGallant
The Artist Formerly known as FireDavidQuinn
- Mar 19, 2016
- 6,656
- 7,576
Knicks didn't build correctly. Yes they got Zinger, but they've done nothing outside of that. A rebuild could take 3-4 years if done correctly. To use another basketball example look at the T-Wolves this year.
I guess my biggest concern is that you NEED star power. You need that big 1-2 punch. You have to have guys that scare the other team. I feel like as 'good' as any of these prospects turn out to be, whether that be the picks from TB or the Anderssons or Chytils, where are the Rangers going to get the true stars from? Are they banking on who they draft? They're not going to land a McDavid, Matthews, etc. Chances are they are going to have to acquire them. Is that possible? Do they even have anything left to give? Because as someone else mentioned, we'll just end up where we were without the big bombers.
- Nov 2, 2011
- 8,057
- 8,475
You can't even read the one sentence trade properly and have written literally a 40 page diary entry that reads like a sad monologue
Come on man, you're better than this
charliemurphy
Registered User
By swing do yo mean by trading up or swinging on someone that isn't on anyone's radar? With 3 picks in the 1st round I can't say what they'll do. Part of me wants them to go all out for Dahlin... part of me wants them to keep all 3 and get BPA.
LeetchisGod
This is a bad hockey team.
Simply not true. His career high was 35 points before this year. He's a product of Stamkos and Kucherov, nothing more.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
So, some aggregate thoughts now that the dust has settled, we've all had some time to think, and the boards are working again:
1) I, like most was underwhelmed by the return when I initially heard it, especially when we heard it had been expanded to include Miller, because a) I thought that was the extra piece added to get the very top of the TB young personnel and b) frankly, I freely admit I don't know that much about other team's prospects, except for what I read on here, and everyone was so adamant that the only player(s) worth getting from TB were Sergachev (and maybe Foote). But in retrospect, it's clear that none of Sergachev, Point, Nylander, or Marner were coming here – not because they were their teams best prospects, and their GMs outplayed ours by keeping them out of the deal, but because they're key, contributing players on Stanley Cup contenders. No GM would have ripped such an important component from a contending team just to acquire another – it's a lateral move that messes with your chemistry. In future, I need to remind myself of this fact.
2) In the history of big name players being traded for futures, who has brought back surefire superstar prospects? Aren't the deals almost always like this? Isn't the key to get guys trending in the right direction rather than can't-miss prospects, since the latter are always held out? Aren't top prospects/young players almost never dealt in this league except in deals that bring a comparable player in return (e.g. Sergachev-Drouin) or in deals where their own management has so clearly undervalued their own asset, it generally leads to the GM's subsequent firing (e.g. McDonagh, Forsberg)? The last deals I can recall where top prospects were purposefully included with management knowing their full value was the two competing deals for Lindros (Forsberg from PHI, Kovalev from NYR).
3) I'm loving what I read from Edge, Jonathan and our other more knowledgeable posters prospect-wise when it comes to both Howden and Hájek. Steady development from year to year. Check. Continued good play with better players and against better competition. Check. Best play most recently. Check. Standouts at major tournaments. Check. When I read the negative (#3C, bottom 4-6D ceilings), they read a lot like the where folks like Button had them pegged as of their draft day, without credit for the progress they've made since.
4) It is very much possible that SY would not part with Foote and that the Rangers preferred Hájek anyway. The two are not mutually exclusive.
5) Based on the comments from SY in the TB papers, it sounds like this very much was a McD for Howden, Hájek, 1st, conditional 1st/2nd + then, let's expand it to Miller for Namestnikov. The way SY tells it, they were working on the McD deal, and he asked what it would take to get Miller as well. GMJG then brought up Namestnikov's name.
6) Miller: I think those who love him judge him based on his best moments where he plays with physicality, drive, and talent. But there have been far too many bad – disappearing in the POs, taking shifts off, and the giveaways in his own end that continued even from his rookie days – and they haven't gone away. There are a component of his game just as ADA's lapses in his defensive end have to be taken into account along with his rushes, and they offset his other positives. I also can't help feeling based on what I've seen of his demeanor in interviews and the implications in GMJG's interviews that he was not viewed as a positive in the room. (I mean, how many people are so pissy-tempered it actually comes across in their between-period sit-downs with Al in a game that the team is wining?)
7) Namestnikov: I like him better than Miller. Plays a more complete game, plays a faster game, has better hands. Does not have the size, strength, or FO ability, but is more balanced, and I think is a player better suited to build around long-term. Love the Russian bloodlines/primarily US born and raised combo, which could be very useful given the mix of nationalities we now have in our younger assets. Unlike Miller, considered a great guy in the room. Could likely be locked up in a longer term deal for less AAV than Miller to provide some stability in the middle six during the rebuild. Or... could be flipped if the return is right.
8) Both McD and Miller may go on to thrive in TB. But by no stretch does that mean they would've thrived here. McD was clearly a different player after the Burrows hit/receiving the captaincy. Does he rebound under less pressure and playing with better players in TB? Miller got away with a lot of shit here, because he was counted on to be part of the next wave. In TB, he's a complementary piece who slots in behind a minimum of five better forwards, and 9-10 players, most of whom have seniority there. He'll be accountable to them/Cooper in a way that he wasn't here. So, if that works out better for them both, great – but it likely wouldn't have here.
All of which is to say I'm not going to pretend I didn't want more from the deal; I did. But I may have been wrong in that estimation. And more importantly, I'm not hung up on it now. At this point, the deal's in the rearview mirror, I'm excited by the improvment to the Rangers' cupboard and I'm looking forward to following the guys who now make up the current organization.
1) I, like most was underwhelmed by the return when I initially heard it, especially when we heard it had been expanded to include Miller, because a) I thought that was the extra piece added to get the very top of the TB young personnel and b) frankly, I freely admit I don't know that much about other team's prospects, except for what I read on here, and everyone was so adamant that the only player(s) worth getting from TB were Sergachev (and maybe Foote). But in retrospect, it's clear that none of Sergachev, Point, Nylander, or Marner were coming here – not because they were their teams best prospects, and their GMs outplayed ours by keeping them out of the deal, but because they're key, contributing players on Stanley Cup contenders. No GM would have ripped such an important component from a contending team just to acquire another – it's a lateral move that messes with your chemistry. In future, I need to remind myself of this fact.
2) In the history of big name players being traded for futures, who has brought back surefire superstar prospects? Aren't the deals almost always like this? Isn't the key to get guys trending in the right direction rather than can't-miss prospects, since the latter are always held out? Aren't top prospects/young players almost never dealt in this league except in deals that bring a comparable player in return (e.g. Sergachev-Drouin) or in deals where their own management has so clearly undervalued their own asset, it generally leads to the GM's subsequent firing (e.g. McDonagh, Forsberg)? The last deals I can recall where top prospects were purposefully included with management knowing their full value was the two competing deals for Lindros (Forsberg from PHI, Kovalev from NYR).
3) I'm loving what I read from Edge, Jonathan and our other more knowledgeable posters prospect-wise when it comes to both Howden and Hájek. Steady development from year to year. Check. Continued good play with better players and against better competition. Check. Best play most recently. Check. Standouts at major tournaments. Check. When I read the negative (#3C, bottom 4-6D ceilings), they read a lot like the where folks like Button had them pegged as of their draft day, without credit for the progress they've made since.
4) It is very much possible that SY would not part with Foote and that the Rangers preferred Hájek anyway. The two are not mutually exclusive.
5) Based on the comments from SY in the TB papers, it sounds like this very much was a McD for Howden, Hájek, 1st, conditional 1st/2nd + then, let's expand it to Miller for Namestnikov. The way SY tells it, they were working on the McD deal, and he asked what it would take to get Miller as well. GMJG then brought up Namestnikov's name.
6) Miller: I think those who love him judge him based on his best moments where he plays with physicality, drive, and talent. But there have been far too many bad – disappearing in the POs, taking shifts off, and the giveaways in his own end that continued even from his rookie days – and they haven't gone away. There are a component of his game just as ADA's lapses in his defensive end have to be taken into account along with his rushes, and they offset his other positives. I also can't help feeling based on what I've seen of his demeanor in interviews and the implications in GMJG's interviews that he was not viewed as a positive in the room. (I mean, how many people are so pissy-tempered it actually comes across in their between-period sit-downs with Al in a game that the team is wining?)
7) Namestnikov: I like him better than Miller. Plays a more complete game, plays a faster game, has better hands. Does not have the size, strength, or FO ability, but is more balanced, and I think is a player better suited to build around long-term. Love the Russian bloodlines/primarily US born and raised combo, which could be very useful given the mix of nationalities we now have in our younger assets. Unlike Miller, considered a great guy in the room. Could likely be locked up in a longer term deal for less AAV than Miller to provide some stability in the middle six during the rebuild. Or... could be flipped if the return is right.
8) Both McD and Miller may go on to thrive in TB. But by no stretch does that mean they would've thrived here. McD was clearly a different player after the Burrows hit/receiving the captaincy. Does he rebound under less pressure and playing with better players in TB? Miller got away with a lot of shit here, because he was counted on to be part of the next wave. In TB, he's a complementary piece who slots in behind a minimum of five better forwards, and 9-10 players, most of whom have seniority there. He'll be accountable to them/Cooper in a way that he wasn't here. So, if that works out better for them both, great – but it likely wouldn't have here.
All of which is to say I'm not going to pretend I didn't want more from the deal; I did. But I may have been wrong in that estimation. And more importantly, I'm not hung up on it now. At this point, the deal's in the rearview mirror, I'm excited by the improvment to the Rangers' cupboard and I'm looking forward to following the guys who now make up the current organization.
Made Dan
Registered User
Possibly. At the same time, I think it makes Mac's extremely affordable contract a much more valuable asset.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 17,385
- 9,498
Gorton was not responsible for much of that 11 year run and its going to be way longer than 3 years before this team sniffs a conference or cup final again.
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
Trading is up a real possibility, but I think of it more as going off the radar or "reaching" a bit, and going for some boom/bust prospects.
Dahilin defines this draft. I don't think there's any way a team trades down, even for a bonanza.
It's still FAR too early to make an informed analysis but, at the very least, the Rangers have dealt with their depth problem and secured a ton of assets. It sort of reminds me of some ways of what they did in the mid-2000's when they started obtaining assets and drafting the Callahan/Dubinsky/Anisimovs of the world.
Thats a good thing, but my fear is the challenge to find more top end talent will be even more pronounced without a consistent Hall of Fame level goalie behind the team for years to come like those players/teams had.
Cheapshot
Registered User
- May 23, 2012
- 714
- 314
Yeah first reaction from me was shit not good. But im going to wait until after the draft as to see what they are going to do with these picks. Even then it's still too early to judge a trade with furtures because you never know how those futures will pan out. I think they'll be more wheeling and dealing with the picks but I would like to see them keep two of the three first rounders. Wether we win the lotto or not. Some really really good players are available in the first round, but we've done a decent job finding NHL players in the 2/3 so let's see. Hopefully we get some good talent.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 17,385
- 9,498
If a correct rebuild takes 3-4 years wouldn't all these perennial doormats do it correctly? The Twolves have been rebuilding forever. When have they made a championship? I think they got out of the first round 1-2 times ever. This team is going nowhere fast unless we luck in to a McDavid like super stud in the draft. If the move was to trade McD and JT in a huge package you have to get a top line prospect of draft pick back. 2nd and 3rd liners and #30 draft picks are not going to do it. We just traded a quality 1st pairing Dman for quantity not quality.
Captain Monglobster
Registered User
- Nov 9, 2005
- 2,044
- 1,576
This is sports you cant contend forever. The devils did for a long time in a different era, chicago blew their team up two times, but sucked for a decade first. The rangers had a very good team from the end of the torts era til now, they had their shots and missed. Time for a new team. If they can find a young gamebreaker they will have the complimentary pieces.
Change the leadership group. Change the coach. Change the culture. New team.
Change the leadership group. Change the coach. Change the culture. New team.
E-Train
Registered User
I like this approach better than perpetual mediocrity. Enough with the can kicking, they blew it up. Time to move on.
Hoping they use one of the 1sts to trade up. They second will by a Chytil like pick of going off the board as you said.
But yeah, trading up seems like it'll take an overpayment, but each team has their own board and you never know how they value the board. This is a huge draft for the Rangers, and is a must-win. That's why I'm still a little unsure on these pics as they are lower end 1sts other than their own pick.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
LeetchisGod
This is a bad hockey team.
That was going to be the case anyway if they didn't rebuild.
