Proposal: Nyr-det
- Thread starter bfaust30
- Start date
JT Kreider
FIRE GORDIE CLARK
Never gonna happen awful this is stupid
(I'd definitely do this from a NYR POV, but Detroit fans have already declined a Staal/Eriksson swap and probably don't want to trade Tatar)
LordNeverLose
Registered User
SpookyTsuki
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2014
- 15,919
- 675
Martyros
Allow me to retort
How does this "make sense for both teams" exactly? NYR trade TWO bad contracts for one half bad contract, a good top 6 fwd, a good prospect, and a pick.
R.Nash+M.Staal at 2.85(50%)
vs
T.Jurco+T.Pulk+J.Ericsson+Cond 2nd 2017
Condition: If Detroit makes it past second round it is a 2nd other wise a 3rd in 2017
vs
T.Jurco+T.Pulk+J.Ericsson+Cond 2nd 2017
Condition: If Detroit makes it past second round it is a 2nd other wise a 3rd in 2017
BStinson
Registered User
- Nov 11, 2013
- 2,365
- 558
I'd take Mcdonagh but no way is NY trading him.
I wouldn't do the OP deal. I like getting rid of Ericsson but I don't want to touch Staal.
Doriva
Registered User
Is there a who can make the most ridiculous comment competition going on today or something ?
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
Is there a who can make the most ridiculous comment competition going on today or something ?
The OP is asking Detroit to take on over 13 million in cap...and Staal is not worth near his contract. Both of those statements are fair.
Doriva
Registered User
Nash is 7th in goals/60 since he joined the Rangers, plays elite two way hockey and chips in well in all special teams situations. A first round pick does not need to be added to move Rick Nash especially not at 50% as has been evidenced in other threads.
Adding Marc Staal, who is still a serviceable albeit overpaid defensman in my opinion does not plunge the value of Rick Nash all that much. Maybe Detroit cant afford to take on that much salary, but the statement was that the pair hold "negative value" not that Detroit cant afford them.
For the record I wouldn't do the OP as we've had much better offers for Nash in one of the other 10000 Rick Nash threads that have been created.
Is there a who can make the most ridiculous comment competition going on today or something ?
They're a hell of a lot closer to correct that the absolutely terrible original trade proposal, and I'm not a Wings fan.
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
Staal's contract makes the OP "negative value". How does 1 year of Nash make taking Staal at full pop positive? And ya, you would have to retain...or take a good chunk of salary to move Nash.
Is there a who can make the most ridiculous comment competition going on today or something ?
$13M in cap space for two declining players probably is negative value. Ericsson would definitely be going back, and a piece like Tatar would not be added.
Doriva
Registered User
Nash has two years remaining.
Other posters have offers 1st + Prospect for Nash with no retention, obviously with the caliber of prospect raising with the retention % so na we wouldnt have to retain.
Doriva
Registered User
Nash is 1 year removed from his best scoring season of his entire career, last year he struggled with a nagging injury and had his lowest TOI of his career, that fact combined with our poor overall team play led to his drop in numbers. I'm confident that he hits at least 30G's this season along with his excellent two way play.
I think from what I can remember in another Nash to Detroit thread the offer was something around Tatar + Pulkinnen + 2nd rounder + Cap dump for Nash with like 20%, I'd be happy with that if we were to move Nash ( I dont think we should ).
I think we could easily ship Staal off in another smaller deal.
Number1RedWingsFan52
Registered User
The Wings aren't contending any time soon, So this deal makes absolutely no sense for us. We need to start looking into the future and start rebuilding this franchise. Should've started the rebuild once Lidstrom retired. This team can't keep floundering like they're doing.
RangerGuru
Registered User
- May 14, 2013
- 1,189
- 6
Rangers pass. The sell low mentality on Nash is ridiculous makes no sense to sell this low - as other posters have mentioned he's one year removed from good numbers. Whatever happened to buy low sell high 
JT Kreider
FIRE GORDIE CLARK
Rangers pass. The sell low mentality on Nash is ridiculous makes no sense to sell this low - as other posters have mentioned he's one year removed from good numbers. Whatever happened to buy low sell high
I think we're stuck with Nash. For better or worse.
For one not many contenders can fit him under their cap without us retaining. And which non-contender is going to offer anything worthwhile? He'll be old/gone by the time they'd realistically hit their window.
and what good is trading him for lesser pieces or even futures? Management still apparently thinks this roster can be a contender. So Nash, for all his faults, helps us be that contender. More so than said lesser pieces or futures anyway.
We're going to have to lose this trade for Nash in the present if we want a long term gain.
Something like Nash to Nash for Arvidsson, one of Fiala, Kamenev or Daughtery and a 1st or a 2nd depending on how much we retain is the most likely deal, IMO.
Nash is on the wrong side of 30 to be assuming he is worth acquiring for Detroit unless it was a TDL deal or something as an additional contender piece.
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
Wow...you're right, so now Detroit is taking 2 years of 7.8 cap and over 16 million in actual salary on Nash....and Staal's 5.7 million in cap until 2021? Somehow that makes the OP even worse.
To OP, the financials just don't work, even if Detroit would accept (I doubt they would). You'd have to retain 20-30% on Nash just to make this plausible.
Id take any of Kreider, McDonagh, Stepan & Buchnevich in a... New York Minute
Id take any of Kreider, McDonagh, Stepan & Buchnevich in a... New York Minute
Last edited:
