Larry Brooks: Rangers will be selling

[UAGoalieGuy]

I love Edge, he's by far the poster I most agree with here. But he's not immune to overvaluing a player due to NYR bias. Current GM's can do that with their own players or other teams players. Not even saying he;s doing it here. Just that I wouldn't use the condescending "You're new here" argument as an excuse to shut down someone's opinion on something like this.

It was more in the you don't know who Edge is since you just joined, that poster was condescending to him.

Ok though thank you for your thoughts on this matter.

 

[Edge]

I love Edge, he's by far the poster I most agree with here. But he's not immune to overvaluing a player due to NYR bias. Current GM's can do that with their own players or other teams players. Not even saying he;s doing it here. Just that I wouldn't use the condescending "You're new here" argument as an excuse to shut down someone's opinion on something like this.

Here's the thing for me - when there is a player some posters on here like, we often remind them that you have to give up talent to get talent and that if the deal doesn't make you uncomfortable, it's probably not a good enough deal for the other team.

In the case of McD, we're talking about a big minute defenseman, in his prime, who despite the flaws of our system and his partners, still manages to post 40+ points, put up solid numbers and hold down the fort. I truly believe the demand needs to be pretty high - a team gets another season and another playoff run beyond this season.

I really like Marner, but I would also be careful about over-projecting him. He doesn't project as a franchise forward, but he certainly projects as a legit top line player. He also has flaws and areas he needs to work on to become that player; he's far from a finished product and a guarantee.

For me, it comes down to a simple principle - we don't have to move McD. If he's worth so much as a free agent in 18 months, then I expect someone to come in and make me an offer that reflects that value based on his age, two playoff runs and his contract.

If they don't, I won't be heartbroken.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Here's the thing for me - when there is a player some posters on here like, we often remind them that you have to give up talent to get talent and that if the deal doesn't make you uncomfortable, it's probably not a good enough deal for the other team.

In the case of McD, we're talking about a big minute defenseman, in his prime, who despite the flaws of our system and his partners, still manages to post 40+ points, put up solid numbers and hold down the fort. I truly believe the demand needs to be pretty high - a team gets another season and another playoff run beyond this season.

I really like Marner, but I would also be careful about over-projecting him. He doesn't project as a franchise forward, but he certainly projects as a legit top line player. He also has flaws and areas he needs to work on to become that player; he's far from a finished product and a guarantee.

For me, it comes down to a simple principle - we don't have to move McD. If he's worth so much as a free agent in 18 months, then I expect someone to come in and make me an offer that reflects that value based on his age, two playoff runs and his contract.

If they don't, I won't be heartbroken.

Exactly it's actual proven performance by who is already an established top pairing Dman that can log 20+ minutes and net 40+ points who is in his prime. Not to mention his insanely cap friendly contract that can be made even more friendly with retention VS a young potential top line player who still has to take steps to reach that potential. With Marner he's under control for at least another 6 seasons I believe which is obviously a huge plus.

One of the biggest problems with rhis site as a whole. Potential is valued more than established talent because they aren't in their early 20s. Time and time again this thought process is proven wrong when actual NHL trades go down.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

It was more in the you don't know who Edge is since you just joined, that poster was condescending to him.

Not picking on just you. Your post sums up a lot of people’s feelings on here. If you are going to post Rangers trade ideas be realistic. Some of you need to take off your Rangers colored glasses.

I admit it I accidentally blew past the bolded line before. Guy was being a bit condescending there while simultaneously starting his post as if he was "Only civilly disagreeing". Screw that guy! I got lured in by the sweet honey in his opening (Which was extremely reasonable if he had stuck with it) and missed the venomous sting in the middle!

That said, call him out on being condescending instead of crapping on him specifically for being new. Plenty of "new HFers" know a helluva lot more then long tenured posters here bc being an HF poster is not any sort of barrier to being knowledgeable about hockey. Veteran poster elitism isn't exactly a new thing around here. Or don't . I can't compel you. But I have a habit of getting my prickly internet feathers raised when I see vet HF elitism. Now I see where you were coming from in this instance a little more though. I apologize for my misinformed thoughts on the matter. May I keep them to myself and thoroughly read all things before blindly hurling comments like a shot-putter blindly hurling a shot-put in a china shop, forever more

 

[The Crypto Guy]

You’d have to give me marner (who’s having an awful year by the way) and liligren or a first to get Mcdonagh from me if your Toronto. Rangers would laugh at marner for Mcdonagh straight up.

Don’t compare yandle to
Mcdonagh. Mcdonagh is a true top dman in this league on a sweet heart deal for 2 playoff runs.

Marner is having an “awful” year? 2nd year player, has 34 points which would be 2nd on our team.

Is he having a bit of a down year compared to his rookie year? A bit, but a lot of players have sophomore slumps, and that is hardly a slump but definitely not “awful”.

There is no way McD fetches you him and Liligren...the entire leaf organization would laugh at that proposal.

 

[Edge]

Exactly it's actual proven performance by who is already an established top pairing Dman that can log 20+ minutes and net 40+ points who is in his prime. Not to mention his insanely cap friendly contract that can be made even more friendly with retention VS a young potential top line player who still has to take steps to reach that potential. With Marner he's under control for at least another 6 seasons I believe which is obviously a huge plus.

One of the biggest problems with rhis site as a whole. Potential is valued more than established talent because they aren't in their early 20s. Time and time again this thought process is proven wrong when actual NHL trades go down.

Marner has a ton of potential, but a lot of it is exactly that - potential.

Obviously, he has high value and I would love for him or a player like him to be the centerpiece of a Rangers trade. But I also don't think he's a guy who projects as potentially the premier right wing or center of his generation. He's certainly in that higher category of young players who could be very good for the next decade - but it's also not exactly like he was the top pick in the 2015 draft and head and shoulders above some of his peers.

If we're being honest, even within his own (2015) draft class, there's arguably four players that project higher than him, and another four who he's right in the mix with. So, while I would love to add him, let's not pretend he's by far and away on a different level as a young player.

Marner had a great rookie season, an up and down sophomore season. I like his long-term potential a lot, but going by history I would be hestitant to conclude that roughly 20/60 as rookie automatically projects to 35/75 as his peak. We've seen plenty of guys who have very long and very productive NHL careers who basically maintain the same level of production they had when they broke in. That wouldn't be an insult or a disappointment, because Marner broke in scoring at a higher pace. We just have to be careful not to get too many stars in our eyes when considering it.

Obviously I threw out a higher price because that's where the Rangers should start. It's always easier to come down in negotiations, then to try and drive the value up after coming in too low.

Maybe the Rangers sweeten the deal to get the higher return, the truth is no one knows at this point.

But finding a player of McD's capability is more difficult than finding one with Marner's capability - and that's not a slight on Marner by any stretch. Maybe McD doesn't post 20 goals or 60 points, but he eats a ton of incredibly difficult minutes and excels. His skating also potentially means he is the type of player who could play for a very long time, even father time does knock him down to a second pairing, or eventually even a third pairing.

 

[Trxjw]

I dunno, @Edge. This bit from Brooks' article makes me think that the "we'll just keep McDonagh" angle has an expiration date:

Beyond the rentals, the Rangers are prepared to deal Ryan McDonagh and Mats Zuccarello, both of whom are 2019 free agent-eligible and neither of whom seems likely to get a long-term, pricey extension.

I'm all for extracting the most value out of teams, but this feels like something the Rangers probably want to facilitate between now and the draft. If you wait any longer than that, any picks you land in the deal are a long way off, and the Rangers can't let this get to the point where their key rebuilding chips are now fetching rental prices in market that might have guys like OEL or Karlsson on the table.

They need to get value for sure, but they also can't overplay their hand.

 

[kovazub94]

I dunno, @Edge. This bit from Brooks' article makes me think that the "we'll just keep McDonagh" angle has an expiration date:



I'm all for extracting the most value out of teams, but this feels like something the Rangers probably want to facilitate between now and the draft. If you wait any longer than that, any picks you land in the deal are a long way off, and the Rangers can't let this get to the point where their key rebuilding chips are now fetching rental prices in market that might have guys like OEL or Karlsson on the table.

They need to get value for sure, but they also can't overplay their hand.

Seems like Brooks musings to me, especially putting Zuke and McD in the same sentence. Zuke can’t be viewed in the same way as McD, not the same overall importance.

 

[Edge]

I dunno, @Edge. This bit from Brooks' article makes me think that the "we'll just keep McDonagh" angle has an expiration date:



I'm all for extracting the most value out of teams, but this feels like something the Rangers probably want to facilitate between now and the draft. If you wait any longer than that, any picks you land in the deal are a long way off, and the Rangers can't let this get to the point where their key rebuilding chips are now fetching rental prices in market that might have guys like OEL or Karlsson on the table.

They need to get value for sure, but they also can't overplay their hand.

I would agree. I don't think they can play this for another season. However, the better deals "might" be at the draft.

You'll have a team that maybe makes it to the Conference Finals, or whose defense implodes, or feels that it's now or never. Potentially, those teams might be a bit more willing to move pieces they weren't at the deadline. Conversely, you might have a scenario where the prospect of getting two playoff runs out of McD, and more than 100 games, drives up the value now.

Admittedly, I don't know which scenario will unfold. What I do know is that the Rangers need to be damn sure they are comfortable with that they get. Coming away with the top prize being a second pair defenseman or a second line winger is not going to be good enough.

 

[Nopuckluck]

I love Edge, he's by far the poster I most agree with here. But he's not immune to overvaluing a player due to NYR bias. Current GM's can do that with their own players or other teams players. Not even saying he;s doing it here. Just that I wouldn't use the condescending "You're new here" argument as an excuse to shut down someone's opinion on something like this.

No one shut me down but thank you. My point was Edge and many others on here are seriously overvaluing McD on this forum.

 

[Nopuckluck]

I would agree. I don't think they can play this for another season. However, the better deals "might" be at the draft.

You'll have a team that maybe makes it to the Conference Finals, or whose defense implodes, or feels that it's now or never. Potentially, those teams might be a bit more willing to move pieces they weren't at the deadline. Conversely, you might have a scenario where the prospect of getting two playoff runs out of McD, and more than 100 games, drives up the value now.

Admittedly, I don't know which scenario will unfold. What I do know is that the Rangers need to be damn sure they are comfortable with that they get. Coming away with the top prize being a second pair defenseman or a second line winger is not going to be good enough.

mcD is a top pair (number 2 imo) defenseman. The only way we get a top pair D back is if he is an unproven stud prospect, otherwise why would a team trade one top pair guy for another probably older onn in McD. Doesn’t make sense which is why I think we get a stud young offensive prospect and a number 1 pick

 

[Nopuckluck]

You’d have to give me marner (who’s having an awful year by the way) and liligren or a first to get Mcdonagh from me if your Toronto. Rangers would laugh at marner for Mcdonagh straight up.

Don’t compare yandle to
Mcdonagh. Mcdonagh is a true top dman in this league on a sweet heart deal for 2 playoff runs.

Marner > McD already in most people’s eyes (just not on this board) and substantially younger

 

[Nopuckluck]

It was more in the you don't know who Edge is since you just joined, that poster was condescending to him.

Ok though thank you for your thoughts on this matter.

How was I condescending to Edge?

 

[Nopuckluck]

I admit it I accidentally blew past the bolded line before. Guy was being a condescending ass while simultaneously starting his post as if he was "Only civilly disagreeing". Screw that guy, I got lured in by the sweet honey in his opening (Which was extremely reasonable if he had stuck with it) and missed the venomous sting in the middle.

That said, call him out on being condescending instead of crapping on him specifically for being new. Plenty of "new HFers" know a helluva lot more then long tenured posters here bc being an HF poster is not any sort of barrier to being knowledgeable about hockey. Veteran poster elitism isn't exactly a new thing around here. Or don't . I can't compel you. But I have a habit of getting my prickly internet feathers raised when I see vet HF elitism. Now I see where you were coming from in this instance a little more though. I apologize for my misinformed thoughts on the matter. May I keep them to myself and thoroughly read all things before blindly hurling comments like a shot-putter blindly hurling a shot-put in a china shop, forever more

Saying I don’t think the proposal was realistic makes me a condescending ass. Did I use threatening or nasty language that I missed. Wow you people are thin skinned. If someone disagrees they are rude or an ass. Must be nice to be so insulated!, I’ll just agree all the time from now on.

 

[Miamipuck]

I admit it I accidentally blew past the bolded line before. Guy was being a condescending ass while simultaneously starting his post as if he was "Only civilly disagreeing". Screw that guy, I got lured in by the sweet honey in his opening (Which was extremely reasonable if he had stuck with it) and missed the venomous sting in the middle.

That said, call him out on being condescending instead of crapping on him specifically for being new. Plenty of "new HFers" know a helluva lot more then long tenured posters here bc being an HF poster is not any sort of barrier to being knowledgeable about hockey. Veteran poster elitism isn't exactly a new thing around here. Or don't . I can't compel you. But I have a habit of getting my prickly internet feathers raised when I see vet HF elitism. Now I see where you were coming from in this instance a little more though. I apologize for my misinformed thoughts on the matter. May I keep them to myself and thoroughly read all things before blindly hurling comments like a shot-putter blindly hurling a shot-put in a china shop, forever more

Read his posts, if you're going to defend a new poster (which is fine) please pick a better one.

 

[Inferno]

Marner > McD already in most people’s eyes (just not on this board) and substantially younger

Based on what? Which general managers do you know?

 

[Thirty One]

Read his posts, if you're going to defend a new poster (which is fine) please pick a better one.

I agree with the sentiment that we should criticize nopuckluck because he's an assclown, not because he's a new poster. I agree that the veteran smugness of HFBoards can be an issue.

 

[Miamipuck]

I agree with the sentiment that we should criticize nopuckluck because he's an assclown, not because he's a new poster. I agree that the veteran smugness of HFBoards can be an issue.

I 100% agree with every point you made.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I agree with the sentiment that we should criticize nopuckluck because he's an assclown, not because he's a new poster. I agree that the veteran smugness of HFBoards can be an issue.

Most veterans wouldn't judge players based on nationality though. That, and other things he has said cause HFNYR vets to respond.

I was once new. I didn't post nonsense like that though

 

[Nopuckluck]

Nice job fellas. Based on the last 5 or so posts and the language you guys have used you are all exactly what I thought you were.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Nice job fellas. Based on the last 5 or so posts and the language you guys have used you are all exactly what I thought you were.

Knowledgeable Ranger fans? Thanks.

 

[Nopuckluck]

Ask the man Edge himself if he felt I was being condescending or rude. I’m curious

 

[Trxjw]

I would agree. I don't think they can play this for another season. However, the better deals "might" be at the draft.

You'll have a team that maybe makes it to the Conference Finals, or whose defense implodes, or feels that it's now or never. Potentially, those teams might be a bit more willing to move pieces they weren't at the deadline. Conversely, you might have a scenario where the prospect of getting two playoff runs out of McD, and more than 100 games, drives up the value now.

Admittedly, I don't know which scenario will unfold. What I do know is that the Rangers need to be damn sure they are comfortable with that they get. Coming away with the top prize being a second pair defenseman or a second line winger is not going to be good enough.

I can see the argument for both scenarios. I just worry that the market for McDonagh isn't quite what we all hope it will be. I don't see contenders giving up roster pieces, unless they're cap dumps, and I don't see teams that are just opening their window looking for a guy with only one and a half years left on his deal. I don't see any contenders right now who have that top defensive prospect to spare, and a need for a top LHD. Dallas is the only one who comes close, and they just don't strike me as a team who is going all in when they're only the 5th or 6th best team in the West.

 

[DundeeRanger]

I would agree. I don't think they can play this for another season. However, the better deals "might" be at the draft.

You'll have a team that maybe makes it to the Conference Finals, or whose defense implodes, or feels that it's now or never. Potentially, those teams might be a bit more willing to move pieces they weren't at the deadline. Conversely, you might have a scenario where the prospect of getting two playoff runs out of McD, and more than 100 games, drives up the value now.

Admittedly, I don't know which scenario will unfold. What I do know is that the Rangers need to be damn sure they are comfortable with that they get. Coming away with the top prize being a second pair defenseman or a second line winger is not going to be good enough.

New poster here.

I'd agree with you Edge. I think the value isn't currently there for McD and looking at the amount of shots Hank is seeing this season (more rubber than a Goodyear salesman) and with defence being a problem area (some of that system, some of that personnel). Why weaken that area for Marner? Good potential but I don't think the values there in a straight swap.

Top pair defencemen with 20+minute nights and 40+ point production don't grow on trees. McD going leaves with the big issue of who eats those minutes at the back.

The value may be there at the draft though.

 

[Thirty One]

Nope. Thin skinned baby’s who attack people instead of their points of view. Disagree like an adult. But I digress. Instead you attack the person Because it’s easier to fit in perfectly with a large segment of our society

No need for name calling. If you find the substance of a post too complex to respond to, you should ignore it, rather than resort to such tomfoolery.