Confirmed with Link: McDonagh + Miller to Tampa Bay for Namestnikov + Howden + Hajek + 2018 1st + conditional 2019 1st

[Mikos87]

https://nypost.com/2018/02/27/breaking-down-why-rangers-chose-to-move-mcdonagh-miller/

Great article. Covers my thoughts on McDonagh as a captain and what this city needs.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

So a coach who is known for being unable to motivate his team and communicate with his players is then cursed onto the captain for not having a confrontational personality.

Miller deemed uncoachable in one capacity or another which lead to the trade.

Hmm.......

In any case, this is a subtle hit piece by Larry on Vigneault.

Sounds more like a hit piece on McDonagh and Miller more than anything. But hey all other roads lead to AV so why not this one.

 

[will1066]

That Ranger fan he quoted is from here I bet haha

 

[Gardner McKay]

Great article. Covers my thoughts on McDonagh as a captain and what this city needs.

5. Rangers fan at 3:30 Monday afternoon: “I’m in for the rebuild.”
Rangers fan at 8:30 Monday night: “Maybe we can sign John Tavares as a free agent and trade two first-rounders plus a couple of younger guys to Ottawa for Erik Karlsson and get this rebuilding process moving more quickly.”

OH MY GOD. Brooks just skewered half of our fanbase here on HF.

And I know most of you don't want to hear it but... he is 100% right. This rebuild may not be quick. And the very people clamoring for a rebuild will be the first ones to run out of patience because they don't realize how hard a rebuild actually is. They don't realize that sucking for 8 months out of the year only to get a high draft pick as your consolation prize isn't quite that fun.

I watched my Thrashers do it year after year. It sucks.

 

[Tob]

Yes it is and I just don't see any way the clown is still here next year. I like Gorton but that would be a major fail if AV is still here.

It's weird to see. He's lost the room, he's not a coach for a young rebuilding team, so why is he still here?

Management does not see him as a failure so they're not keeping him around hoping he would continue losing and prevent a new coach from winning pointless games.

Perhaps there are no legitimate replacements in the system right now but this is still very.... patient of management.

Some veteran coaches are let go in the off season instead of mid season out of respect but to think we didn't try to reinvigorate the team with a coaching change or try out an interim coach to start the coaching staff assessment and clean house sooner is.... worrying.

 

[nyr2k2]

Wyshynski over in an ESPN column gave the Rangers an A- for the deadline as a whole. Regarding the McDonagh/Miller deal, his take is that "I think they did really well here."

Grading every NHL team's trade deadline moves, non-moves

 

[Tob]

Sounds more like a hit piece on McDonagh and Miller more than anything. But hey all other roads lead to AV so why not this one.

McDonagh and Miller are gone. It's proper journalism to shed light on the dynamics that led to their rushed exodus. It's an article about the deadline deal a day after the deadline. It's going to be about McDonagh and Miller. The inclusion of Vigneault three separate times including a commentary on his future viability is not a necessary part of the deadline article.

The half dozen articles and commentaries on Vigneault' firing in Vancouver in 2012 was also heavily to the theme of "lost the room, unable to motivate the team".

 

[Ghost of jas]

OH MY GOD. Brooks just skewered half of our fanbase here on HF.

And I know most of you don't want to hear it but... he is 100% right. This rebuild may not be quick. And the very people clamoring for a rebuild will be the first ones to run out of patience because they don't realize how hard a rebuild actually is. They don't realize that sucking for 8 months out of the year only to get a high draft pick as your consolation prize isn't quite that fun.

I watched my Thrashers do it year after year. It sucks.

I watched this team suck for seven years and not even get the full benefit from a high draft pick. I’m more than prepared for what’s to come. I say, bring it on.

 

[LeetchisGod]

Wyshynski over in an ESPN column gave the Rangers an A- for the deadline as a whole. Regarding the McDonagh/Miller deal, his take is that "I think they did really well here."

Grading every NHL team's trade deadline moves, non-moves

Namestnikov was playing on the first line but is nowhere close to a first line talent.

 

[Irishguy42]

AV is still here to lose games. Also I don't think Gorton is one to fire someone mid-season. Just doesnt feel like that kind of guy.

 

[JT Kreider]

AV is still here to lose games. Also I don't think Gorton is one to fire someone mid-season. Just doesnt feel like that kind of guy.

He had his chance to fire AV after the Ottawa debacle. And debacle is an understatement

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

He had his chance to fire AV after the Ottawa debacle. And debacle is an understatement

A few months after signing him to an extension?

Try explaining that to your boss. I know it happened with Torts, but Hank forced that one.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

That Ranger fan he quoted is from here I bet haha

guaranteed it is

Brooks lurks here. Probably has an account too

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Wyshynski over in an ESPN column gave the Rangers an A- for the deadline as a whole. Regarding the McDonagh/Miller deal, his take is that "I think they did really well here."

Grading every NHL team's trade deadline moves, non-moves

I listened to his ESPN on Ice podcast today and him and his co-host basically said the same stuff, just expanded what they liked about it a little more

 

[Edge]

What’s interesting about the article is that it touches on what was, at one time, a heated topic on these boards.

There was a very controversial opinion that the roster was a little too chummy with one another. Not that you didn’t want them friendly, but there was the feeling that they were too unwilling to confront one another, or didn’t seem as angry about their failures as they should be.

 

[Ghost of jas]

What’s interesting about the article is that it touches on what was, at one time, a heated topic on these boards.

There was a very controversial opinion that the roster was a little too chummy with one another. Not that you didn’t want them friendly, but there was the feeling that they were too unwilling to confront one another, or didn’t seem as angry about their failures as they should be.

That was the debate here right after the loss in Game 7 to TB.

 

[Beacon]

Wolf Pack is going to be stacked AF next year.

We say that every year, and they always miss the playoffs except when they were riding Talbot. You win in the AHL with AAAA players, not with good prospects who are still rookies in the pros. Plus, the loss of Chytil will be brutal for the Pack.

 

[DutchShamrock]

Namestnikov was playing on the first line but is nowhere close to a first line talent.

His true value is somewhere between 1st liner and "nowhere close to first line talent".

And I'm not trying to throw your words back in your face or anything. It just sums up the extremes. I think it takes at least a level of talent and hockey sense beyond being a mere lucky passenger to successfully play on a good top line. Mike knuble comes to mind who did it amazingly well on more than 1 top line over a handful of years.

Namestnikov at least has proven he has the chops to hang there which is more than Miller has shown us. It's a start. Maybe Miller will mesh with kuch and stamkos, but he couldn't do it here. At the end of the day we have to swap out what doesn't work and find what will.

 

[Beacon]

I think this was a reasonable trade. I have no issue with someone who characterizes it as a poor trade; I disagree, but you know, opinions and all. I just take issue with posters that make declarations like, "Gorton could have gotten Player X," or, "If Gorton had done XYZ we could have held onto ABC." Stuff like that. No one KNOWS that. No one KNOWS what could have been gotten.

Part of my job currently, and over the past 12 years, has been either participating in or leading negotiations on labor contracts (and other miscellaneous contracts). So yes, I am very, very familiar with how deals work, how initial positions move, and so forth. For six years, it was literally all I did. Which is why the stuff I elaborated on above infuriates me. "We could have had X!" PROBABLY NOT! I go into a negotiation with a list of areas where I'll concede, and by what degree. I also go into negotiations knowing what I absolutely will not give in on. For example, I'll start with an offer of a 2% raise for bargaining unit employees, and I know I'm going to come off that. Financial conditions, similar contracts that have been signed recently, the health of the municipality/company/whatever, I know I'm gonna have to go up to at least 3.5%. I can live with that--it's in the budget. Now, if the other side offers some unexpected concessions looking to drive that number higher? I can probably go to 4%. Maybe, MAYBE 4.25%. If they want more than that? NOT. GOING. TO. HAPPEN. It's not in my budget, there is literally no way I can go that high, and I went into these negotiations knowing that realistically anything more than 4% was where I walked out the door. Barring some sort of completely unrealistic scenario ("2k2, we'll give up our healthcare and you don't need to match on our pension anymore if you go to 5%!"), there's just an absolute limit to where you can go sometimes.

So that lengthy example is why I get annoyed when people presume that if we did something different in negotiations, that we could have gotten a different result. Yeah, MAYBE. There's also a really good chance we couldn't have. Sergachev will probably be as or more valuable than McDonagh when McDonagh's current deal is up. I have no doubt that Yzerman went into the negotiations thinking to himself, "Unless Gorton does something stupid like offers to include Chytil, there is NO WAY I'm giving up Sergachev in this deal. That's my limit." Again, I don't know this--no one knows. No one ****ing knows whether we could have pried away Sergachev. So let's not pretend like it's fact that we could have. Which, when we declare, "We could have had Sergachev," that's what we're doing.

You are right up to a point, but there's a skill to negotiating. Sometimes being nice, sometimes rude, sometimes you offer something you don't even want, sometimes you "forget" to mention something because you realize the other side doesn't know it.

 

[Beacon]

For what it's worth, The Hockey News has us as the biggest winner this deadline and they made a list of the top-10 prospects moved and the Rangers have 4 of the 10 prospects.

THN knows less than nothing about prospects. Look at any of their rankings of NYR prospects vs the poll results on this forum. Review any year you like. When the results come in, our rankings are always vastly more accurate because THN throws stuff at random or with very little research or understanding. Their rankings are utter crap. I stopped reading the Future Watch maybe 20 years ago because if I throw darts at random prospect names, my results will be just as good.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

It does make sense assuming the Russian kids look up to Kovalchuk

Going by social media, it seems like Shestyorkin and Kovalchuk are good friends.

 

[Alluckks]

What’s interesting about the article is that it touches on what was, at one time, a heated topic on these boards.

There was a very controversial opinion that the roster was a little too chummy with one another. Not that you didn’t want them friendly, but there was the feeling that they were too unwilling to confront one another, or didn’t seem as angry about their failures as they should be.

I don't think it was those things, but I get your gist.

The word I would use is accountability. Not just for your teammates, but for yourself as well. Leaders project that on themselves and each other. Guys who get inspired by the playoffs rather than just the "I'm gonna go out there and play my game" shtick.

 

[Beacon]

On the up side, the Cats won and are now 4 points ahead with 3 more games to play, and a tiebreaker advantage for them. We were way ahead of them, but they are doing a great job winning. 7-3 in the last 10, keep it up kitties.

The Oilers are also up 1-0. If they win, they are ahead of us on tiebreaker (tied points in the same number of games). That's pretty incredible, I remember just recently looking down on them thinking it may be impossible for them to catch up, but then we lost 7 straight and they won 3 in a row, would be 4 in they win tonight. If we beat out the Oilers, we most likely pick at #7 with a 23.4% chance to get a top-3 pick.

 

[One Winged Angel]

4. Of. 10.

That's like saying I am among the skinniest fat guys at Golden Corral.

How so? That's a pretty good haul then.

I don't understand the negativity.

I've gone on record saying the return wasn't enough but I'm trying to have a positive outlook on it.

 

[One Winged Angel]

THN knows less than nothing about prospects. Look at any of their rankings of NYR prospects vs the poll results on this forum. Review any year you like. When the results come in, our rankings are always vastly more accurate because THN throws stuff at random or with very little research or understanding. Their rankings are utter crap. I stopped reading the Future Watch maybe 20 years ago because if I throw darts at random prospect names, my results will be just as good.

Like I said, for what it's worth.