McDonagh trade

[iamitter]

I wish we had asked for Cirelli.

 

[Boris Zubov]

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



"Howden or Hajek were nowhere near the top 50 affiliated prospects TSN released earlier this month.

Foote, Katchouk and Raddysh were though."

So I got it wrong. It was not a center. Both Katchouk and Raddysh were wingers.

Funny to read a couple of pages in that old tread. The reactions to the trade was mixed to put it mildly.. Some very disappointed, some were OK with it.

Reading that thread is pretty funny to see all the hot takes that say "Miller & Namestnikov cancel each other out". Ouch, talk about misreading player values.

 

[Boris Zubov]

1) I'm going to ask again....do the Rangers sign Panarin if we gave McDonagh a contract?

At the time, or now with hindsight, did the Rangers or beat writers associated with the team give any indication that extending McDonagh was a possibility? Because I don't recall that was ever a thing. To the contrary, it was quite obvious (The Letter) to all that his run as a Ranger was all but over.

Regardless, this is a complete non factor when measuring his trade value or the assets he returned. 2 1/2 years later & we're no closer to knowing if this deal will ever prove fruitful. So far it's not looking so great and unfortunately that's the real issue.

 

[usekakkorightquinn]

Actually the deal looks incredible for us. Are your eyes closed? McDonagh is signed to a horrific contract, continues to be constantly hurt and is on an obvious decline. Miller broke out in Vancouver because there are no distractions there for him. He was an underachiever here. An underachiever in Tampa. Howden has a chance to be a very solid third line player. Lundkvist IMO will be a star on defense. He's that good. Henriksson has a lot of potential. Hajek is going to play in the NHL for us or somebody else. He could be a chip. I had little interest in paying Miller and McDonagh a combined 15 million. That makes for a losing hockey club going forward.

 

[Leetch3]

along with it being way too early to judge the return...we also can't forget that miller and mcdonagh weren't going to be here long term. they weren't going to re-sign them. so we can speculate about hypothetical alternate returns (which no idea if those players were available) but keeping miller and mcdonagh was never really in the cards. you could have kept them for another year but all that would have done really is delay the rebuild big time cause if you don't make that trade you might not have unloaded other guys at the deadline either

 

[ETTER DE]

along with it being way too early to judge the return...we also can't forget that miller and mcdonagh weren't going to be here long term. they weren't going to re-sign them. so we can speculate about hypothetical alternate returns (which no idea if those players were available) but keeping miller and mcdonagh was never really in the cards. you could have kept them for another year but all that would have done really is delay the rebuild big time cause if you don't make that trade you might not have unloaded other guys at the deadline either

I think the trade was bad. But this is a valid argument.

 

[OrlandK]

along with it being way too early to judge the return...we also can't forget that miller and mcdonagh weren't going to be here long term. they weren't going to re-sign them. so we can speculate about hypothetical alternate returns (which no idea if those players were available) but keeping miller and mcdonagh was never really in the cards. you could have kept them for another year but all that would have done really is delay the rebuild big time cause if you don't make that trade you might not have unloaded other guys at the deadline either

That's mostly true which is why the Rangers made the trade but realistically it has been a totally one sided failed trade. McDonagh is a near superstar. Miller has turned out to be the best version of himself and a bargain at his salary, a first line forward with both grit and scoring ability. Too early to say for sure but both Howden and Hajek are trending towards being either busts or back of the rotation fodder. Hopefully Nils will make this trade less than a legendary one sided trade.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

This poor horse....

 

[Edge]

It begs the question, who exactly do people think was on the table instead of the package we got from Tampa?

I think that's part of the issue. People have a vision of a return in their mind, even if it's little fuzzy on exact details. But if that deal isn't on the table, and that's not the market value, then you're probably not going to find it anywhere.

You can go walk onto a car lot and demand whatever price you want for a vehicle, but you're not getting a brand new Escalade for $15,000 no matter how much you insist that's what its worth.

 

[Edge]

That's mostly true which is why the Rangers made the trade but realistically it has been a totally one sided failed trade. McDonagh is a near superstar. Miller has turned out to be the best version of himself and a bargain at his salary, a first line forward with both grit and scoring ability. Too early to say for sure but both Howden and Hajek are trending towards being either busts or back of the rotation fodder. Hopefully Nils will make this trade less than a legendary one sided trade.

I don't think anyone outside a small portion of this board considers McD a near superstar at this point. Nor have I ever heard one person in the industry every even joke that this was a legendary one-sided trade.

 

[Edge]

This poor horse....

Sometimes I feel like a few members of this board are doing an impression of Jon Lovitz pathological liar skit from back in the day:

Yeah, we could've had Sergachev instead. Wait, did I say Sergachev? I meant Sergachev and Foote. No wait, it was Sergavhev and Foote and 2 firsts. Yeah, that's the ticket.

But then Toronto called. Yeah, and they offered Kapenen. No wait, it was Kapenen and a first. No wait, it Kapenen, a first, and two seconds. Yeah, that's right. All of them!

And Gorton turned them down. He preferred the Tampa package. And then he insisted they take Miller. And Tampa offered Point in return to even things out. But Gorton said no and asked for Namestnikov. Yeah, that's it. He demanded it. Or else the trade was going to be called off.

Yeah, I read it online back in the day. No, it was online and from my friend's cousin. Wait, it was online, my friends cousin, and 6 or 7 other sources. I'd show them to you, but they were taken offline. Yeah, that's the ticket. Offline because the Rangers were upset about the reporting. Jim Dolan called the sites directly. Yeah, and he yelled at them. For six hours!

 

[OrlandK]

I don't think anyone outside a small portion of this board considers McD a near superstar at this point. Nor have I ever heard one person in the industry every even joke that this was a legendary one-sided trade.

Well "near superstar" is an undefined term. McD usually makes the list of top 10 dmen in the league and is certainly considered a solid top pair dman (except if on a team with Hedman). That is good enough for me.

Too early for sure to now be considered a one-sided trade since it remains to be seen how the young "prospects" develop, as I indicated, just that it is trending in that direction.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Sometimes I feel like a few members of this board are doing an impression of Jon Lovitz pathological liar skit from back in the day:

Yeah, we could've had Sergachev instead. Wait, did I say Sergachev? I meant Sergachev and Foote. No wait, it was Sergavhev and Foote and 2 firsts. Yeah, that's the ticket.

But then Toronto called. Yeah, and they offered Kapenen. No wait, it was Kapenen and a first. No wait, it Kapened, a first, and two seconds. Yeah, that's right.

And Gorton turned them down. He preferred the Tampa package. And then he insisted they take Miller. And Tampa offered Point in return to even things out. But Gorton said no and asked for Namestnikov. Yeah, that's it. He demanded it. Or else the trade was going to be called off.

Yeah, I read it online back in the day. No, it was online and from my friend's cousin. Wait, it was online, my friends cousin, and 6 or 7 other sources. I'd show them to you, but they were taken offline. Yeah, that's the ticket. Offline because the Rangers were upset about the reporting. Jim Dolan called the sites directly. Yeah, and he yelled at them. For six hours!

That's the mindset.

McDonagh was hardly a "blank check" guy. He was a good player, but he was going to need a contract that had a strong possibility of being bad/troublesome sooner, rather than later.

I do think Ranger thought — as a lot of people did — that Tampa would win the Cup and make the deal 2 firsts. They might have gambled on that part and loss.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Was even any reporting on other packages that could have been on the table for McDonagh at that deadline?

and I'm not referring to that Edmonton deal that fell through at the 2016 draft for #4 overall. There was obviously other teams interested.

I remember there being a lot of conjecture around here that Boston and Toronto wanted him, but who knows what was actually being offered

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

McD usually makes the list of top 10 dmen in the league.

I don't think this is true at all.

 

[Edge]

Well "near superstar" is an undefined term. McD usually makes the list of top 10 dmen in the league and is certainly considered a solid top pair dman (except if on a team with Hedman). That is good enough for me.

Too early for sure to now be considered a one-sided trade since it remains to be seen how the young "prospects" develop, as I indicated, just that it is trending in that direction.

A peak McD was on those lists. A 29 year old McD, with his mileage, and injuries, and his contract coming up in 15 months, was not commanding that price tag.

If anything, Tampa was the ideal situation for him. He could slide into a second pair role, behind a superstar defenseman, not have to take quite as much punishment or draw every tough assignment, and he could play on a team that was hyper offensive.

But, as he's continued to prove, by the time the playoffs roll around he's usually pretty shot. That was especially proven last year. This year, his decline continued even more, partially as a result of him having to play above his role the year prior. The end result? 50 games played, 1 goal and 13 points. And that's with him recording his lowest ice time totals since his rookie season a decade ago.

The trade wasn't just about 2018 or even 2019 for the Rangers. It was about 2020 and beyond, as well as diminishing returns on a player who was going to command a significant chunk of salary, for a significant amount of time.

 

[Leetch3]

This poor horse....

can I like this more than once? LOL

 

[Chytilmania]

At the time, or now with hindsight, did the Rangers or beat writers associated with the team give any indication that extending McDonagh was a possibility? Because I don't recall that was ever a thing. To the contrary, it was quite obvious (The Letter) to all that his run as a Ranger was all but over.

Regardless, this is a complete non factor when measuring his trade value or the assets he returned. 2 1/2 years later & we're no closer to knowing if this deal will ever prove fruitful. So far it's not looking so great and unfortunately that's the real issue.

Everyone is grading the trade with hindsight so why can't we factor in we had money to land Panarin?

 

[OrlandK]

McD was 8th in Norris voting in 2019. Probably will be not much lower this season, if it ever ends, even with lower production. I think you underrate him to support your POV.

I don't disagree that it was a good time to trade McD, just that the return seems low. One can always assert, for any bad trade, that it was the best return available. It is almost impossible to get the better of Yzerman in a trade. We probably should have waited until after the season if that was the best offer on the table.

 

[True Blue]

This poor horse....

Not even sure it is a horse at this point

 

[True Blue]

can I like this more than once? LOL

That is why I think that, for a fresh start, we should start to re-litigate the Mike Ridley & Kelly Miller trade.

 

[ETTER DE]

Some times I feel like some members here are nothing but spokesmen for the organisation. There may be different reasons why they post that way. And I think we all enjoy to hear their views. But by defending everything this organisation does, it could easily reach Comical Ali levels.

 

[UnSandvich]

McD was 8th in Norris voting in 2019. Probably will be not much lower this season, if it ever ends, even with lower production. I think you underrate him to support your POV.

I don't disagree that it was a good time to trade McD, just that the return seems low. One can always assert, for any bad trade, that it was the best return available. It is almost impossible to get the better of Yzerman in a trade. We probably should have waited until after the season if that was the best offer on the table.

And in 2018 he didn't make the ballot. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he doesn't make it this year either.

Waiting til the end of the season doesn't increase what we'd have gotten for him. If anything it'd lower it, possibly substantially if he got injured, because the team we were trading him to would only get 1 playoff run with him instead of 2. Furthermore, Erik Karlsson was the top Dman on the trade board that offseason, and McDonagh wasn't even close to his value. So that could've dropped his return even further.

 

[Edge]

Some times I feel like some members here are nothing but spokesmen for the organisation. There may be different reasons why they post that way. And I think we all enjoy to hear their views. But by defending everything this organisation does, it could easily reach Comical Ali levels.

I'll speak for myself on this one.

I worked for the Rangers for 7 years. I've worked for the NHL, or with the NHL on projects, in some capacity for a good chink of the last 17 years.

As a result, you start to see a difference between what fans perceive, and what actually takes place. This includes scouting, trades, player personalities, etc.

Sometimes I agree with the Rangers, sometimes I don't.

The problem often is that people don't like a case-by-case approach. We live in a world where people want definitive, unwavering points of view that either predominately "for" or "against" a particular issue. As a result, sometimes you find yourself in a situation where you don't "dislike" something enough for the people who've made it their cross to bear, but you also don't "like" something enough for the people who are "all-in" on the concept.

So applying this to the McD trade, I find that depending on how the question is framed, my answer changes with it.

Do I believe the Rangers received fair market value for McD in 2018? Yes, I do. I think they got a good return for what McD was at that point, and the circumstances surrounding him.

Do I believe the trade assets will be a "win" for the Rangers long-term? Maybe/maybe not. I don't know the answer to that because the parts are still moving. There's an entire spectrum of grades this can fall upon based on what happens to any of the near half-dozen pieces the Rangers acquired as part of the deal. This includes their progress, how they're utilized (on the ice or via trade), etc. etc. That's a sliding scale based on results that haven't fully come in yet.

There are many topics to which this approach can apply.

For example, do I think Kakko was the right pick at second overall? Yes, I do. I can't say with a straight face that there was a more obvious choice there.

Will Kakko become the star player he was projected to be? Maybe/maybe not. I don't know the answer to that. I certainly think he will, but I can't say that with certainty. What if Dach turns out better? Does that mean we screwed up? What if Kakko is the fifth most successful player in the 2019 draft? That's still a success, but was it ultimately the right choice with the second pick?

Filip Chytil was a good pick at 21. But how does that change if he never takes the next step? What happens if Kailer Yamamoto picks up right where he left off this season?

Point being, there are different variables and framing mechanisms at work that can give you completely different answers.

It's not a matter of endorsing everything the Rangers do. It's a matter of trying to look at things objectively without having to embellish points to make them stick. And yes, I try really hard to avoid doing that.

There are plenty of other people who can provide hot takes, or make questionable accusations, or make bold proclamations that may or may not fully utilize proper context. But I really try not to duplicate those efforts.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Some times I feel like some members here are nothing but spokesmen for the organisation. There may be different reasons why they post that way. And I think we all enjoy to hear their views. But by defending everything this organisation does, it could easily reach Comical Ali levels.

Comical Ali?