Value of: REALISTIC landing spots for Marc Staal

[bernmeister]

So the Rangers will pay more money (between retention and Ericsson's salary) to have a defenseman who's older and significantly worse. Makes sense.

Ericsson would be an exception, unless some one could show how if he is w/modified NTC, theoretically NY moves an NMC for a NTC, I get that is an upgrade, but a partner would have to be found, one who needs to reach cap floor, to follow through and take the contract.

I'm listening, but I'm not optimistic on that front.

 

[is the answer jesus]

Please keep it coming and thank you.
Applause all around, this was very constructive.

At this point, I see MAYBE Girardi reduced with sweeteners to Buf for EKane.
and
it looks like Staal to LV may be the best option.

I don't think either of your scenarios are plausible. Staal has a NMC so he can't be picked by Las Vegas in the expansion draft (maybe Vegas entertains trading a mid round pick or something of that nature for him, but I doubt Staal waives his NMC to play for an expansion team anyways) his contract also makes him fairly undesirable. As far as the Girardi + sweeteners for Kane idea it's also wishful thinking especially with the impending expansion draft. Buffalo isn't taking on a contract like that just to get rid of 2 years of Kane and also lose Jake McCabe as a result of doing that deal. Multiple Sabres fans have explained to you why it's completely unfeasible.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

From what I've read, This isn't true entirely, if the player agrees to waive his clause, the team aquiring said player can choose to not have the clause "travel" with him to the new team. If that's the case, and the team doesn't sign off on it, the clause can be voided

I'm not sure where that comes from, because from what I can tell, the CBA doesn't say anything like that (unless I'm missing it). Where is the website you took that image from? The only thing the CBA says about an acquiring team not having to honor a NTC/NMC is the one I posted, where IF they acquire the player BEFORE his NTC/NMC goes into effect. Feel free to look for yourself as maybe I missed it.

http://cdn.agilitycms.com/nhlpacom/PDF/NHL_NHLPA_2013_CBA.pdf

Now, that said, I have no idea what the NHL Standard Players Contracts say, but unless there is something in there, the CBA clearly does not say that a NTC/NMC is "null and void" if a player waives it once.

 

[Homesick]

I'm sure Mike Richards and Jeff Carter thought the same thing when they signed their deals with Philly. Rick Nash signed long term with Columbus. He had an NMC. 2 years later, he was a Ranger, and it almost happened the deadline prior.

Things change. That's realistic.

As to whether we can find a deal that works for both Staal and whichever team we are trading him to, I don't know. Time will tell.

I dont think using good hockey players is the right comparable for Marc Staal

 

[PensPlz]

Staal for Dustin Brown?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Staal (decent amount retained) + Buch
For
7th in 2018?

Even if Staal was one of the worst players in the NHL, which he isn't, I don't understand how this could realistically be close to a fair trade.

Lets say Staal was the absolute worst player in the NHL.

Lets say 1/3 of his contract is a "decent amount.". The team that traded for Staal would be paying around 3.75.

Braydon Coburn who most would say is a pretty similar player to Staal makes 3.7, so 3.75 for Staal is a fair contract. You probably don't want him signed for 5 years, but unless you think Staal won't be an NHL player in a few seasons, paying an extra million or two for a 6D the last year or two of his contract isn't that bad.

Even if you don't like Staal at 3.75 for 5 years, he's not offset by Buchnevich. The worst player in the NHL at 3.75 at 5 years is not offset by a top 10 prospect in hockey.

 

[TOGuy14]

Even if Staal was one of the worst players in the NHL, which he isn't, I don't understand how this could realistically be close to a fair trade.

Lets say Staal was the absolute worst player in the NHL.

Lets say 1/3 of his contract is a "decent amount.". The team that traded for Staal would be paying around 3.75.

Braydon Coburn who most would say is a pretty similar player to Staal makes 3.7, so 3.75 for Staal is a fair contract. You probably don't want him signed for 5 years, but unless you think Staal won't be an NHL player in a few seasons, paying an extra million or two for a 6D the last year or two of his contract isn't that bad.

Even if you don't like Staal at 3.75 for 5 years, he's not offset by Buchnevich. The worst player in the NHL at 3.75 at 5 years is not offset by a top 10 prospect in hockey.

Agree that Staal at 3.75 has value, I'd probably take him in Toronto at that price

Buch isn't a top 10 prospect though, not even a top 20 prospect

 

[KingsFan7824]

It's like the Kings with Brown. The contract just isn't going to go anywhere. Staal is at $5.7m until 2021. Even at half that, it's still half a decade at almost $3m on the cap. The other team would still be doing the Rangers a massive favor to take him at 50%. What could the Rangers add to Stall at whatever % to make it worth it? It took Teravainen for 1 year of Bickell, and Carolina is nowhere near the cap. Even at 50%, Staal is not a defenseman any team needs for 4 or 5 years. GM's can get a guy for a year if they really need one.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Buch isn't a top 10 prospect though, not even a top 20 prospect

Corey Pronman had Buchnevich at #7 in his most recent rankings.

This always happens with players playing in the KHL.

You watch a worse prospect playing in NA, and since you are able to watch them play a lot, you rate them higher than you should, and since you don't want KHL games, you underrate the KHL prospect.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Please keep it coming and thank you.
Applause all around, this was very constructive.

At this point, I see MAYBE Girardi reduced with sweeteners to Buf for EKane.
and
it looks like Staal to LV may be the best option.

Not happening.

If you want to move Girardi, you need to attach him to a premium piece like a McDonagh or Lundqvist to get anything of value back......and if you do that, you might as well tear the entire team down and rebuild from scratch.

 

[Dijock94]

I dont think using good hockey players is the right comparable for Marc Staal

Marc Staal is still a solid top 4. Is he overpaid? Yea, but he is a good second pair dman.

 

[Beacon]

Even at half that, it's still half a decade at almost $3m on the cap. The other team would still be doing the Rangers a massive favor to take him at 50%.

Why do people feel the need to express their mind when they clearly have no clue? At 50% off, Staal will bring back a first rounder, and not one of the later ones. No, he's not nearly as bad as this forum makes him out to be, he's a legit #3 on a Cup contender, legit #2 on a borderline playoff team.

Look what Wsh paid to get rid of Laich (and you cant say "well none of us are GMs, that's a tangible, recent trade) and that was less salary and for basically only 1 year. Laich was also still a useful player but his role was diminished by advanced age and diminishing play (sound familiar).

Laich is not qualified to shine Staal's shoes in real life, though on this forum Staal's name is trashed to the point where the two are seen as comparable players. Laich is also the same age now that Staal will be in his last year of the current contract. One guy is in his 20s, the other in his mid-30s. What's next, comparing Staal to the value Tie Domi has today?

 

[LeapOnOver]

Immediately count out these teams (due to expansion and/or cap space):

PIT, LA, MTL, SJS, CHI, WSH, NYI, FLA, CBJ, STL, MIN, COL, TBL, CAL, OTT, WIN, ANA, EDM, NSH, VAN.

You're left with TOR, DET, PHI, BOS, DAL, BUF, NJ, ARI, CAR.

Then count out teams who need cap flexibility long term, which they would lose by acquiring Staal:

PHI, BOS, BUF, DAL, DET.

You're left with TOR, NJ, ARI, CAR.

Then, count out those teams who just simply don't have any kind of need for Staal:

ARI, CAR.

You're left with Toronto and New Jersey.

Now, count out teams who have just cleaned their house from overpaid contracts and guaranteedly don't want to take one back:

TOR.

You're left with New Jersey.

Now count out the team who is a young, up-and-coming team and doesn't need Staal because of that:

NJ.

You'll keep him.

Nicely done!

 

[Machinehead]

Vegas if not for his contract.

Don't think Vegas would even take Girardi if they could.

 

[Dijock94]

Realistically? He stays with the Rangers at least until his NMC changes to a NTC. And by that point it's even less likely that you find a trading partner for him, unless by some off chance the cap goes through the roof in the next couple of years making his cap hit less of a burden.

 

[Satastic]

With that contract? The sun

 

[McSuper]

Staal has 5 yrs at 5.75 left. rangers can eat up to half.
He will never be the best pure shutdown D in NHL he once was, but continues to improve since eye injury coupla years back. AV system is part of the problem, and AVs personnel decisions are not a help.

If not for the NMC, I'd ride Staal out. It's not as though he brings nothing.

As for to Buf for EKane, that is a no, cause I have already set that aside for Girardi +, to move that NMC.

Not clear where he would agree to move.
Return is not critical, looking for moving his NMC want flexibility going forward including the expansion draft.

Thanks in advance, catch ya later....

No team is taking on him and his contract and the NYR is not retaining enough to make it worth a team acquiring him to give up assets . I see it as he is worth about 1/2 his salary meaning he is an average 4 or 5 D and they are a dime a dozen . Realistic his landing place is Hartford Wolf Pack AHL

 

[Bhurak]

I would say the Flames would look at it if there was retention of $1.5M+, with around $2M being what would entice them to be actively interested as long as the Rangers were willing to take on a contract for this year. Preferably Wideman, but Smid as well likely, or Stajan for the next 2 seasons would do it.

 

[SprDaVE]

He'll be bought out at some point, unless they can find someone to take him along with a top prospect or pick(s).

 

[Chan790]

It's like the Kings with Brown. The contract just isn't going to go anywhere. Staal is at $5.7m until 2021. Even at half that, it's still half a decade at almost $3m on the cap. The other team would still be doing the Rangers a massive favor to take him at 50%. What could the Rangers add to Stall at whatever % to make it worth it? It took Teravainen for 1 year of Bickell, and Carolina is nowhere near the cap. Even at 50%, Staal is not a defenseman any team needs for 4 or 5 years. GM's can get a guy for a year if they really need one.

Worse for Rangers fans trying to move Staal, the Canes actually have use for a guy like Bickell in their bottom-6 even if he is overpaid. If they did not, the price to move him would have probably been higher than TT, at-least slightly.

Who needs a Marc Staal signed long-term to bad salary that they need to protect in the exp. draft?

That's going to go way worse for NY than the TT deal did for Chicago. I don't think the Rangers can move him short of moving him for another equally bad deal at a position of need or packaging him with an exceptional asset. Even at max retention, I don't see him as being valuable to anybody.

I wouldn't hamstring my future and measurably damage my team long-term if I was an NHL GM for just a (likely late) 1st or lesser assets.

 

[sheriff bart]

MStaal's NMC is probably the kiss of death for moving him before the expansion draft, even at maximum retained.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Why do people feel the need to express their mind when they clearly have no clue? At 50% off, Staal will bring back a first rounder, and not one of the later ones. No, he's not nearly as bad as this forum makes him out to be, he's a legit #3 on a Cup contender, legit #2 on a borderline playoff team.

As they say these days, it's not the player, it's the contract. What team needs Staal, even at about $3m, until 2021? You really think the Rangers would get a 1st round pick back? Free up almost $3m under the cap, and get a 1st round pick for doing it? Give Gorton GM of the Year for the next 3 seasons if he can pull that off.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Why do people feel the need to express their mind when they clearly have no clue? At 50% off, Staal will bring back a first rounder, and not one of the later ones. No, he's not nearly as bad as this forum makes him out to be, he's a legit #3 on a Cup contender, legit #2 on a borderline playoff team.

Question. In this scenario, would you see Marc Staal waiving his NMC to go to a bottom feeder team? Because those are the teams that will have a 1st round pick that is "not one of the later ones". I suppose anything can happen, but I find it hard to believe that Marc would waive his NMC to go to a bad/marginal team vs. just staying with the Rangers.

 

[ManofSteel55]

I don't see any team bringing in a questionable player with a NMC before next summers expansion draft.

 

[bernmeister]

I don't think either of your scenarios are plausible. Staal has a NMC so he can't be picked by Las Vegas in the expansion draft (maybe Vegas entertains trading a mid round pick or something of that nature for him, but I doubt Staal waives his NMC to play for an expansion team anyways) his contract also makes him fairly undesirable. As far as the Girardi + sweeteners for Kane idea it's also wishful thinking especially with the impending expansion draft. Buffalo isn't taking on a contract like that just to get rid of 2 years of Kane and also lose Jake McCabe as a result of doing that deal. Multiple Sabres fans have explained to you why it's completely unfeasible.

That would be a difference maker, would appreciate a second opinion to verify from someone sure.

If so, what a screw job!
I get how you have to use a slot on a NMC, even though I think that should not apply --- too long a discussion for now; but then the player, and not the expansion club, has the trump card.

It is intrinsically unfair. Why should we have to do this if there is no chance he can be drafted by LV?