slipknottin
Registered User
Think Allen could for now. It's a drop off in talent to be sure. But letting staal walk at the end of the year is a loss of talent
Prospect Info: Rangers Development Camp 2014
- Thread starter Binary Code
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Think Allen could for now. It's a drop off in talent to be sure. But letting staal walk at the end of the year is a loss of talent
He's acquired a single first for a roster player in 14 years when he traded Leech
haveandare
Registered User
Signing Staal keeps the talent and doesn't rush and possibly ruin Allen.
If they ice a team with Allen, who has 3 games of nhl experiences, next to a deteriorating Boyle as the second pair, they'll be eaten alive consistently. That is a borderline third pair let alone second.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 17,197
- 9,207
Sather acquiring one 1st round pick and multiple 2nd round picks shows the statement that "Slats NEVER acquires first or second rounders" was not accurate.
slipknottin
Registered User
Signing staal long term also eliminates a place for Skjei to play.
Very doubtful he gets an extension.
Jim Morrison
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2009
- 3,647
- 49
Who decided that Skjei is already an NHL player? Are you saying do not extend Staal because of Skjei?
slipknottin
Registered User
No. I'm saying don't tie up a long term contract and big money for a LD position when they have younger players coming up at that position.
If they could get a new deal done that did not include a no trade clause, then fine. But I doubt staal would do that
haveandare
Registered User
No, it really doesn't. Skjei can take the third pair spot if and when he proves he's ready for the NHL. IF another rookie takes it this year, perhaps that rookie could then move up and then Staal could be traded. I personally think it'd be very dumb and risky to trade Staal, a "sure thing" in the sense that he's clearly a second pairing NHL d man, if not more, to make room for a prospect who is going back to school this year, and isn't even pro yet.
I'd say it's very doubtful that he doesn't get an extension. This D is a disaster without him. Hardly NHL grade IMO.
Also, Staal and/or Allen could move to the other side. I believe Allen plays both in the A, and Staal would be worth exploring on the other side in that situation IMO. Either way, it'd be a good problem to have, not the kind of problem you move players to avoid.
Jim Morrison
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2009
- 3,647
- 49
You trade Staal because of his value maybe, but you do not let him go because we have Skjei coming up in that position. That is just dumb since we have no idea what kind of player he will become. The kid is still in college!
New York Rangers hfboards, the place where you count your chickens before they hatch.
haveandare
Registered User
The place where you count arbitrarily selected chickens before they hatch.
Gotta trade for a C because Miller can't handle 3C duties, but it's totally cool to trade Staal and hope one of a few kids can take his spot.
Jim Morrison
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2009
- 3,647
- 49
If Skjei comes up and outplays Staal while playing on the same squad, then you look to trade him. As it almost always is with these cases. Hard to trade a player with one year left on his contract too. I bet you we will end up letting him walk for nothing though.
slipknottin
Registered User
Has nothing to do with counting chickens. You don't lock down everyone at one position to long term unmovable contracts. Especially when you have young guys coming up.
If you could resign staal for a year or two, sure. But he's going to want a 5+ year deal
slipknottin
Registered User
How do you look to trade staal when you just gave him a long term deal with a no trade clause?
Jim Morrison
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2009
- 3,647
- 49
Yeah, that's the thing. We can't know for sure what his next contract is gonna be like. Full NMC/NTC seems unlikely though.
slipknottin
Registered User
Like I said, if you can't get staal to sign a contract where he is trade able then I am fine with it. But he is going to ask for and probably get a full ntc
Jim Morrison
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2009
- 3,647
- 49
Look, I am all for trading Staal and would actually prefer it, but the way you worded it - it sounded like you were so sure Skjei was going to be the next best thing and you were letting Staal go for that reason.
I understand he is the odd man out.
Yeah, but is his game in those areas "that" good really? He is not Zherdev II, but his 2 way game is definitely way behind Korpikoskis and Fasths game away from the puck and so forth.
BTW, Staals contract situation is interesting but is this the right thread?
Joey Bones
***** 2k16
eco's bones
Registered User
I doubt Staal will re-sign with us unless it's a long term deal. That will complicate things for a team that figures Skjei will sometime soon move into the top 4. The Rangers are going to have to see how Marc plays this year and decide from there whether that is worthwhile and then what to offer him. If the Rangers do offer him a contract and he doesn't like the terms it will be another Callahan situation around next year's deadline. If we weren't going to lose Cally for nothing than I really wouldn't figure we'll lose Marc for nothing either.
My guess would be that the Rangers wind up trading him sometime during the year. He's not the No. 1 d-man on the team anymore--not even the top left side guy. His play has declined a bit since his injuries and I really don't think he's going to get back to where he was. He's still very good but.... And the thing is I think he'll want to be paid like he is a first pairing guy (and he would be on a lot if not most teams) and with our constant cap issues from year to year and Brady Skjei on the way and Marc would bring back a good return--there will be more than enough reasons for the Rangers to move him.
My guess would be that the Rangers wind up trading him sometime during the year. He's not the No. 1 d-man on the team anymore--not even the top left side guy. His play has declined a bit since his injuries and I really don't think he's going to get back to where he was. He's still very good but.... And the thing is I think he'll want to be paid like he is a first pairing guy (and he would be on a lot if not most teams) and with our constant cap issues from year to year and Brady Skjei on the way and Marc would bring back a good return--there will be more than enough reasons for the Rangers to move him.
All this BS about Miller can't play C. Let me remind everyone that when Mark Messier was the same age the same thing was being said. His first fee years he played LW. In fact his play almost led to his being traded to NYRs. So stop. The kid has the wheels and his hard to knock off the puck. If he doesn't make it as a center you slot him on the LW with Brassard & Zucc.
BLOCKERSAVE
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2013
- 189
- 50
Was there a scrimmage yesterday? I saw in the Bluenote section, there was a small video of a shootout. Anybody know what's going on?
Exactly. That is why you have to continually feed the prospect pipeline. Skjei reminds me of where McDonaugh was after 2 years of playing in college. He is doing the same thing McD, focusing on the defensive side of his game. With his wheels and big heavy shot the offense will come naturally. Like McD I do not think we can lose if he goes back for a third year.
