Confirmed with Link: Rangers trade Ethan Werek to Phoenix for Oscar Lindberg

[RangerFan10]

I agree with you Sting, I liked Werek a lot and the nonsense of him not progressing is just dumb. Kid was hurt and when he came back and played, played well and showed tremendous heart...he took a couple of dumb penalties that led to his suspension, it was because he cares so much and hates losing.

I think Maloney wasn't very good for us but he has been very good at hosing Sather.

We got someone to take Roszival. It was Maloney.

 

[RangerFan10]

Lauri had a very good year...a two way player...kinda like the guy we just traded for and what all the experts on this board are craving, maybe we should have held on to him instead of unloading him and getting garbage in return. Sather and Torts seem to let emotions get in the way of evaluating what they have.

We traded Montaya away and now are desperate for goaltending...

Anyone that's craving a two way player is craving one that fits into the top 6.

How do you figure that we are desperate for goaltending when we have Lundqvist, Biron AND Johnson? On top of that, Montoya???? Seriously???? Talk about Hindsight....

 

[Clowes Line]

I like Lindberg, the end

 

[Gardner McKay]

Jess is just passing on info he read online. Not like he's really a reliable source for anything.

Im not really a fan of Jess when it comes to prospects at all.

Also, I am being dead serious when I say this, the reason Jess was so emphatic about Werek, is because Werek is Jewish. Werek was a good prospect, but when something along the lines of best in our system came out of his mouth... I had to wonder where some sort of bias was coming from.

You show me a kid born and raised out of Italy and I am sure I would have the same reaction as Rubenstein did with Werek. Its only natural. Same reason I am more partial to the young guns in golf like Ricky Fowler. I can relate to them more.

 

[bobbop]

Just last year I was hearing about how great the future was with Werek included in that. Which prospect do they change their mind on next year?

You constantly change your evaluation of players. Think the Rangers look at Ryan Callahan or The King the same way they did when they first came into the league?

As long as you own their rights, you don't bad mouth them. That doesn't help maintain value. It's enough of an indictment that you are willing to include them in a trade. No need to poison the well any further.

 

[RangerBoy]

"There was a message from (Coyotes GM) Don Maloney. I phoned him back and we talked for about an hour, stuff about my game and certain things that they think I can bring to the team. It was all very positive."

"I'm done in Kingston," said the rangy 6-foot-2 forward, who could show flashes of brilliance one night and frustrating indifference the next. He tallied 24 goals and 52 points in 47 games last season with the Fronts. In his three seasons at the K-Rock Centre, he totalled 86 goals and 180 points in 170 games.

He conceded his relationship with team officials was somewhat "strained" last season.

"It's a great city with great fans, but for me, at times, it was a real challenge," he noted without going into specifics.

"But that's all in the past," he added. "I'm excited about going to Phoenix and being part of that organization."

http://www.thewhig.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3114705

 

[RangerBoy]

The Rangers have 31 SPCs for next season. Dylan McIlrath's SPC will slide to 12-13 if he is assigned to Moose Jaw next season and it won't count next season. They're not approaching 50 SPCs. The Rangers didn't trade Werek to save the SPC. Just because Lindberg has a contract in Sweden for next season doesn't mean the Rangers can't sign him to a SPC. Transfer agreement allows the Rangers to sign Lindberg if they want.

The new agreement will run through the 2011-12 season and according to the deal, the NHL will compensate Elitserien teams $225,000 for players signing with an NHL club. The compensation is up $25,000 from the previous agreement. Players can sign before June 15 and players who’ve been drafted into the NHL the same year can sign until Aug. 15.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/32460-Eye-on-Europe-Playoff-report.html

 

[Samuel Culper III]

Bad trade, IMO. Werek WILL be a solid 3rd liner in this league one day. Lindberg likely will never be a top sixer and won't be as strong a defensive player. Werek, in my eyes, was going to be a strong Dominic Moore type, which is valuable in the NHL today. I don't know... I could be wrong, but I'm very surprised by this.

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

So are we expected to sign Lindberg?

It would be nice to get him to Connecticut and start adjusting to NA.

 

[NHRangerfan]

For all of the whiners and confused people about this trade, this article will help you out. It explains why it is a good deal for us, Lindberg is a good player, u need to look past the points. SEL is a hard league, read this article and you'll see he is a good player

http://bluelinestation.com/2011/05/08/rangers-trade-ethan-werek-to-coyotes-for-oscar-lindberg/

How can you not like a guy who is related to Jan Erixon

 

[NYR Viper]

So are we expected to sign Lindberg?

It would be nice to get him to Connecticut and start adjusting to NA.

I would HIGHLY doubt he gets signed this off-season. He is a regular player in the SEL at 19, one year after his draft year. Let him get more minutes at home and look to sign him next season when he is 20, like most junior players.

I truly believe the Rangers will at least try to sign both Fasth and Lindberg next off-season. Both players have looked very good in there one year from the draft AND they both will be at the U-20's again this upcoming year.

I truly feel that people aren't giving Linberg the credit he deserves.....

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

Don't think Lindberg will be eligible for the U-20 next winter? He turns 20 in October.

 

[Clowes Line]

I truly feel that people aren't giving Linberg the credit he deserves.....

Exactly, people look at the points and what they think Werek could've been if they didn't trade him. I really like him and people are looking at his 14 points but they don't understand that is really good for a 19 year old. He is a great player and I look forward to watching him play. I gotta get SEL Center Ice

 

[Kaizen]

The Rangers have 31 SPCs for next season. Dylan McIlrath's SPC will slide to 12-13 if he is assigned to Moose Jaw next season and it won't count next season. They're not approaching 50 SPCs. The Rangers didn't trade Werek to save the SPC. Just because Lindberg has a contract in Sweden for next season doesn't mean the Rangers can't sign him to a SPC. Transfer agreement allows the Rangers to sign Lindberg if they want.



http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/32460-Eye-on-Europe-Playoff-report.html

I count 48 contracts on the reserve list for this season - Werek would have to be signed before NHL's "fiscal" year turns over at the beginning of July.

I can't say whether those last to SPC's are spoken for but I would think it might have been a factor in the decision. Sather buys himself time and replaces the asset with one of a similar value.

 

[pld459666]

I'd have prefered that we include Werek in a larger deal for a more impactful player than just another prospect, similar or not.

Sign him to the ELC, then include him in a trade that actually makes sense and makes the Rangers better.

to me, this deal makes no sense

 

[Janerixon]

Bad trade, IMO. Werek WILL be a solid 3rd liner in this league one day. Lindberg likely will never be a top sixer and won't be as strong a defensive player. Werek, in my eyes, was going to be a strong Dominic Moore type, which is valuable in the NHL today. I don't know... I could be wrong, but I'm very surprised by this.

I am pretty excited about getting a relative of Erixon for obvious reasons With that being said, there was a lot of hype for Werek, I would say about as much hype as there is for Thomas now. I am guessing Ranger management saw something they really didn't like and wanted to get something for him, which I can't say anything about because I am not sure what the particular issue was that made us move away from him.

What I can say is Lindberg sounds like a Dom Moore/Peca/Drury type player and I loved Moore when he was here and was extremely bummed we flipped him for Adam Hall. If Lindberg can play like Moore/Peca if he ever comes here, chipping in some occasional offense, killing penalties, and being a monster in the faceoff circle than I will not have an issue with this trade.

As others have mentioned Werek is not a sure-fire NHL player, he is boom or bust, so will he turn into a consistent top 6 forward or be more of a Pavel Brendl? Lindberg sounds like he could be a 4th line center today based on his hockey smarts, faceoff ability, and wheels alone. I understand this trade as Sather is building this team to be very deep at the center position, something that has been an issue with this organization for years.
we now have
Anisimov
Stepan
Boyle
Horak
Grachev
Lindberg
Bourque

Besides our young defense, center is our next biggest strength and we added a centerman that does something that only really Boyle is better than average at.

Unfortunately no team employs a player to specifically shadow a key opponent the way Erixon did when he was a Ranger, most specifically with Mario Lemieux, so we won't be seeing Lindberg following Crosby or Ovie anytime soon, but we really lack a guy who can dominate the faceoff circle and Lindberg will hopefully solve that problem for us in the future.

 

[Orr Nightmare]

I mean hindsight is 20/20. The trade made perfect sense at the time. I don't know why everyone gets so hung up when we lose a small trade like that. Korpi probably would've been out of NY by now...at least we got SOMETHING for him

small trades add up...plus Lauri was a first round pick...so, it is Sather acknowledging another mistake.

We traded a former first round pick for a guy that is not even in the NHL anymore...that is straight pathetic but I am suppossed to be ok with it.

Just to get back to the goaltending thing for a second.

Mike Richter got hurt and the Rangers were doomed.

Just think if Hank were to suffer a concussion and need to miss more that a few weeks...what happens then...you bring Johnson and Talbot up to save the day? We would be the worst team in the NHL.

The Pens have Fluery as there number 1 for years to come but have Brad Thiessen in the minors in case something happens.

That is what good teams do...they have a plan, you have to prepare for the unexpected.

 

[BlueshirtBlitz]

small trades add up...plus Lauri was a first round pick...so, it is Sather acknowledging another mistake.

We traded a former first round pick for a guy that is not even in the NHL anymore...that is straight pathetic but I am suppossed to be ok with it.

Just to get back to the goaltending thing for a second.

Mike Richter got hurt and the Rangers were doomed.

Just think if Hank were to suffer a concussion and need to miss more that a few weeks...what happens then...you bring Johnson and Talbot up to save the day? We would be the worst team in the NHL.

The Pens have Fluery as there number 1 for years to come but have Brad Thiessen in the minors in case something happens.

That is what good teams do...they have a plan, you have to prepare for the unexpected.

We have Martin Biron, who is a very solid goaltender.

If both of our NHL goalies went down we'd be screwed. So would most other teams.

 

[broadwayblue]

small trades add up...plus Lauri was a first round pick...so, it is Sather acknowledging another mistake.

We traded a former first round pick for a guy that is not even in the NHL anymore...that is straight pathetic but I am suppossed to be ok with it.

Just to get back to the goaltending thing for a second.

Mike Richter got hurt and the Rangers were doomed.

Just think if Hank were to suffer a concussion and need to miss more that a few weeks...what happens then...you bring Johnson and Talbot up to save the day? We would be the worst team in the NHL.

The Pens have Fluery as there number 1 for years to come but have Brad Thiessen in the minors in case something happens.

That is what good teams do...they have a plan, you have to prepare for the unexpected.

I'm pretty sure Biron is under contract for one more year. That's sufficient for backup purposes.

 

[Clowes Line]

OT: A friend of mine just said one of the funnier quotes I've heard in a while. Thought you guys might wanna hear it and get a good chuckle out of it.

"The Rangers don't need Stamkos or Ovechkin, they need hard workers, preferably with big pen1ses, it adds confidence to their game, like Hank."

 

[NYR Viper]

small trades add up...plus Lauri was a first round pick...so, it is Sather acknowledging another mistake.

We traded a former first round pick for a guy that is not even in the NHL anymore...that is straight pathetic but I am suppossed to be ok with it.

Just to get back to the goaltending thing for a second.

Mike Richter got hurt and the Rangers were doomed.

Just think if Hank were to suffer a concussion and need to miss more that a few weeks...what happens then...you bring Johnson and Talbot up to save the day? We would be the worst team in the NHL.

The Pens have Fluery as there number 1 for years to come but have Brad Thiessen in the minors in case something happens.

That is what good teams do...they have a plan, you have to prepare for the unexpected.

I normally agree with most of what you say here because I like good, tough hockey, but here's a couple things:

1) We should make a new thread to discuss goaltending instead of in the trade thread

2) The Rangers are taking chances on Free Agent goalies and late round picks. They got Talbot for nothing and Johnson for a late rounder. Biron was gotten for nothing. Missaien for nothing. Stajcer for a late round pick. When you have an elite goalie in his prime there is no need to use a high pick on a goalie. Try for a late round steal and if it works out, great. If not, who cares? That pick most likely wouldnt have amounted to anything.

3) Expect to see more trades like the Korpikoski for Lisin deal in the coming years. The Rangers lack top-end talent. They have an abundant number of 3rd/4th liners. Trading a few of them for a home-run swing, while not a sure-thing, is what teams do when they have a surplus of that certain type of player. No team will trade a sure-fire top-6 player for a bunch of borderline 3rd liners. Most teams have there fair share of 3rd/4th line grinders.

Does it suck looking back? Of course. Will I fault the Rangers management for trying that type of move given their circumstances? Absolutely not.

4) Every season there are a couple of goalies on the waiver-wire who become available. Leighton. Ellis. Mcilhenny. Montoya was waived. Are the great goalies? No. Could they get the job done for a 10 game stretch? Probably.

 

[NYR Sting]

That's a fair point of course, and I don't dissagree...

...My point is just, if you compare the overall talent level of Ethan Werek with the overall skill level of like a Artem Anisimov -- you have to agree with me that Werek is substansially behind Anisimov. And then when you see Anisimov, you see that why he is good at the NHL level, if he was a lot less talented he would have to be helluva good in other areas to make up for that. And while -- like you said -- Werek is tough to play against, clutch, aggressive and what-not, in the end, my impression of him was that he was pretty far from a good NHL player.

Like I said, I've not seen a lot of him, but just from the little I've seen of him, the wibe I got was that his attribute didn't add up to a NHL-caliber player. You need to remember that if you do not skate well in the NHL, its not enough to be very good, you have to be extremely good in other areas. And Werek wasn't even very good. If you can't skate, games will go by between you get a chance. Thats really the difference between the NHL, heck even the AHL these days, and junior hockey.

Yeah, I really disagree. Not about the fact that skating is important in this league, because it is VERY important, but you can't say that no players can make it if they aren't phenomenal skaters.

If Werek was a better skater, he would have, without a doubt, been a first round pick in 2009, IMO. And as far as other areas, for his role, I think Werek IS very good. He's very good defensively, he's very good at decision making. He isn't very good offensively, but 40-50 points with great two-way play, physicality and leadership is not a bad combo to have.

And there is little reason to believe that his skating can't, at the very least, be improved upon somewhat.

I think you're being a little overly dramatic.

We traded a second round pick for another second round pick. Yes, it would have been great were Werek to work out here, but it didn't happen. That happens to every team. About 25% of second round picks turn into career NHL players, the rest bust. 3 out of 4 picks fail, across the NHL.

What bothers me about his trade is that it is ridiculous to take the stance now that Werek didn't work out or isn't going to work out. That's the problem. This isn't Bobby Sanguinetti 4 years after he was drafted. One season has gone by and all that happened was that his point totals didn't increase. He was hurt, and he was still over a PPG. And this guy played for a team in Kingston that, IMO, is not very well put together. Just a couple of years removed from being downright dreadful.

It's not that Lindberg is a bad player. I love Swedes, and from what I've seen of Lindberg, I'd take him on my team any day. But why give up on a guy that was a steal of a pick? Werek was a steal at #47, IMO.

Let's say the team has evaluated Werek since we drafted him, and now feels that he has a lower ceiling or higher bust potential than previously thought. Should we sit on our hands, and hold onto Werek, just because we drafted him? If they've soured on him as a player, I'd much rather they go and get a comparably valued player than sit back allow Werek to renter the draft. What if HE didn't want to sign with us? Again, do we sit back? I like that the team is constantly evaluating and reevaluating players.

But what if the problem is their evaluation? What if they aren't properly evaluating? Isn't giving up way too early on a prospect one of the biggest mistakes you can make when evaluating players and assets? Considering that, as you mentioned, this team struggles with their first round draft picks, it's pretty reasonable to question their ability to evaluate (especially for me, considering how much I hate the McIlrath pick, and how relatively unenthusiastic I was about picks like Del Zotto and Sanguinetti). I wonder how long I have to wait to feel like the people that run this team actually watch hockey, or if that will ever happen at all.

Also, anything is possible, but I just can't think of a reason why Werek would not want to sign with us, although at least, if there was evidence to show that this indeed was the case, I could stomach this move a lot more.

Lindberg is great, and I'm glad he'll be a Ranger. I just don't think they should have given up Werek to make that happen. And if Werek was the only way to make it happen, then you live without Lindberg.

 

[NYR Viper]

Yeah, I really disagree. Not about the fact that skating is important in this league, because it is VERY important, but you can't say that no players can make it if they aren't phenomenal skaters.

If Werek was a better skater, he would have, without a doubt, been a first round pick in 2009, IMO. And as far as other areas, for his role, I think Werek IS very good. He's very good defensively, he's very good at decision making. He isn't very good offensively, but 40-50 points with great two-way play, physicality and leadership is not a bad combo to have.

And there is little reason to believe that his skating can't, at the very least, be improved upon somewhat.



What bothers me about his trade is that it is ridiculous to take the stance now that Werek didn't work out or isn't going to work out. That's the problem. This isn't Bobby Sanguinetti 4 years after he was drafted. One season has gone by and all that happened was that his point totals didn't increase. He was hurt, and he was still over a PPG.

It's not that Lindberg is a bad player. I love Swedes, and from what I've seen of Lindberg, I'd take him on my team any day. But why give up on a guy that was a steal of a pick? Werek was a steal at #47, IMO.



But what if the problem is their evaluation? What if they aren't properly evaluating? Isn't giving up way too early on a prospect one of the biggest mistakes you can make when evaluating players and assets? Considering that, as you mentioned, this team struggles with their first round draft picks, it's pretty reasonable to question their ability to evaluate (especially for me, considering how much I hate the McIlrath pick, and how relatively unenthusiastic I was about picks like Del Zotto and Sanguinetti). I wonder how long I have to wait to feel like the people that run this team actually watch hockey, or if that will ever happen at all.

Also, anything is possible, but I just can't think of a reason why Werek would not want to sign with us, although at least, if there was evidence to show that this indeed was the case, I could stomach this move a lot more.

Lindberg is great, and I'm glad he'll be a Ranger. I just don't think they should have given up Werek to make that happen. And if Werek was the only way to make it happen, then you live without Lindberg.

When Werek was drafted, I thought he could be a Laich-like player. Maybe Knuble. However, when he was drafted, he was touted as an offensive player. He is a solid all-around forward who can play on the wing and at center, and I think he will make the NHL still. But I don't see him making it as a top-6 player.

I believe Lindberg has that potential. But I seem to be in the minority.

 

[NYR Sting]

When Werek was drafted, I thought he could be a Laich-like player. Maybe Knuble. However, when he was drafted, he was touted as an offensive player. He is a solid all-around forward who can play on the wing and at center, and I think he will make the NHL still. But I don't see him making it as a top-6 player.

I believe Lindberg has that potential. But I seem to be in the minority.

I don't know who touted Werek as a top six player. I always saw him as a more physical Drury, (which makes these comparisons of Lindberg to Drury all the more amusing to me) so that pretty much means I saw him as an excellent third liner with the ability to score 20-25 goals and add 20-30 assists.

If he had a better skating, I would have little doubt that he's a 60 point player. But I was fine with him as he was because I like having players like that, and this team would have needed that on 2-3 years. I also think this team would have needed a personality like this in 2-3 years.

 

[nyr2k2]

small trades add up...plus Lauri was a first round pick...so, it is Sather acknowledging another mistake.

We traded a former first round pick for a guy that is not even in the NHL anymore...that is straight pathetic but I am suppossed to be ok with it.

Just to get back to the goaltending thing for a second.

Mike Richter got hurt and the Rangers were doomed.

Just think if Hank were to suffer a concussion and need to miss more that a few weeks...what happens then...you bring Johnson and Talbot up to save the day? We would be the worst team in the NHL.

The Pens have Fluery as there number 1 for years to come but have Brad Thiessen in the minors in case something happens.

That is what good teams do...they have a plan, you have to prepare for the unexpected.

First, we still have Martin Biron. If he is healthy, he's one of the best backups in the game. If we don't feel he's healthy, there are always a plethora of veteran free agents to sign for short and cheap each summer. I provided a list of examples in a post on the previous page.

Brad Thiessen is the insurance policy if something happens to Fleury? I disagree; I think their backup, Brent Johnson, is the insurance policy. A team that plans to contend shouldn't/wouldn't rely on a guy with no NHL experience to replace their star goalie. Brad Thiessen may be the long-term safety net, but he wasn't this year. Or the year before. If something happened to Lundqvist, we'd look to Biron to carry the load. I think there are very few competitive teams in the league that would consider a zero-experience rookie the backup plan if something happened to their regular starter.

I don't think anyone is disputing the need to address goaltending depth in the near future. But I don't think it's urgent, or the dire situation you're suggesting. If Lundqvist is out, we turn to Biron. If Biron is out, then we're screwed. 90% of the teams in the league would find themselves in a similar situation if their top two went down. It's not poor planning, it's prioritizing needs.