Value of: REALISTIC landing spots for Marc Staal

[Off Sides]

Though I don't absolutely hate Staal, he is grossly overpaid for what he brings, and has way too much term on his contract, and as we've seen, cap-strapped teams are having to pay premiums to remove their dead-weight. Its why attaching Buch doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.

Hell, we paid Teravainen to move Bickel, and he only had one year left on his deal. Think about that.

Rangers have the cap space to keep Staal and not lose anything because of it (at least for now, although one could argue they lost Yandle because of it) Plus he has a NMC which he may not be willing to waive.

Seems to me as if Chicago pretty had to move Bickel so they could keep the other players that they really wanted to (the Kruger signing, and the Ansimov extension kicking in added to their cap structure)

 

[QJL]

What about Bolland (Fla) or Howard (Det) for Staal? They have roughly similar cap hits, but their deals are 3 years. NYR's get less useful players, but get out of the deal earlier. Those teams get a more useful player to them, but take on the last two years.

Because buying out Girardi would create enough cap space to sign or trade for a player better than Bolland or Howard.

 

[playasRus]

Would the team trading for him have the option of annulling the NMC a la Subban? Or is it only nullifyable if it hasn't kicked in yet?

 

[bernmeister]

Would the team trading for him have the option of annulling the NMC a la Subban? Or is it only nullifyable if it hasn't kicked in yet?

to my understanding only if it hasn't kicked in yet.

But we think that, while nothing can be done for this upcoming season, immediately --- days after the expansion draft --- the new NHL year begins, and then Girardi has an NTC, which presumably means HIS deal can be subject to trade.

Staal has NMC active, would have to approve, not sure where he would approve to, which is one point for why this thread, and no such Girardi workaround seems available, or if one is hidden, is not anytime soon.

 

[Off Sides]

The work around is to wait, my pure speculation,

Girardi will be bought out before the expansion draft (and it's not really pretty). Or perhaps he ends up on permanent LTIR if his injuries are degenerative. He makes more money by not being bought out at 2/3rd his remaining as it's unlikely he gets another contract after other than something like Carle(700K) and even that may be a stretch.

Staal I think he is on their LD for the foreseeable future, like for years, His contract even without the NMC is tough to move. The actual salary does not go down by much and he has a 3M signing bonus in the last year of it. It's not buyout friendly or attractive to lower spending teams. If he plays somewhat well this season perhaps some team show a bit of interest but not without a sweetener added, and even then the sweetener would be something the Rangers are better off not giving up just to get out of the Staal contract. Or maybe they can find a acceptable cap dump equivalent to Staal (no not Moulson) but someone serviceable that is just also carrying a much higher cap hit than he should, yet still NMC.


Rangers are stuck for a while with those two cap hits (or similar) one way or the other. It's why trying to add in larger contracts to this team does not make sense, they are not going to improve much by doing so and they have other players to extend, so they stayed out of UFA for the most part, signed short deals, and why they SHOULD not be moving assets for contracts like the next Shattenkirk deal.

Ranger fans, we have to hope that Sather is out, like for reals, everything he did since their Cinderella cup run has been poorly thought out. Stralman, Hagelin, Duclair, the 1sts, 2nds,... Rangers need to basically do the opposite, sell for 3 or so years just to maybe get back towards trending up. They are not winning anything with like ~12M (~13M if we include Glass) in basic cap dumps within their cap structure.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Could see the Sens being interested in Staal if Methot gets picked up in the expansion draft.

Staal's front loaded contract definitely makes him more attractive to a budget team like the Sens. Could be a good partner for Karlsson.

 

[Mikos87]

Staal is a top 4 defenseman if and only if he's partnered with a guy that can beat the forecheck.

It's one of the reasons why he loved playing with Stralman, Staal could do his thing and be super effective.

The Ranger rotated McDonagh Girardi and Staal and Stralman on a couple of deep runs.

Staal is exposed with the puck on his stick because he doesn't handle it well under pressure, having a guy on the right side that can off set that, gives you a real deal top 4 pair that can go up against any line.

 

[vipernsx]

Could see the Sens being interested in Staal if Methot gets picked up in the expansion draft.

Staal's front loaded contract definitely makes him more attractive to a budget team like the Sens. Could be a good partner for Karlsson.

I like the idea of the Rangers hanging onto him for another year then visit trading him. This would give Skjei a full NHL season to prove he can be a top4 guy.

I also agree that he could be a great LD partner for Karlsson.

 

[bernmeister]

The work around is to wait, my pure speculation,

Girardi will be bought out before the expansion draft (and it's not really pretty). Or perhaps he ends up on permanent LTIR if his injuries are degenerative. He makes more money by not being bought out at 2/3rd his remaining as it's unlikely he gets another contract after other than something like Carle(700K) and even that may be a stretch.

Staal I think he is on their LD for the foreseeable future, like for years, His contract even without the NMC is tough to move. The actual salary does not go down by much and he has a 3M signing bonus in the last year of it. It's not buyout friendly or attractive to lower spending teams. If he plays somewhat well this season perhaps some team show a bit of interest but not without a sweetener added, and even then the sweetener would be something the Rangers are better off not giving up just to get out of the Staal contract. Or maybe they can find a acceptable cap dump equivalent to Staal (no not Moulson) but someone serviceable that is just also carrying a much higher cap hit than he should, yet still NMC.


Rangers are stuck for a while with those two cap hits (or similar) one way or the other. It's why trying to add in larger contracts to this team does not make sense, they are not going to improve much by doing so and they have other players to extend, so they stayed out of UFA for the most part, signed short deals, and why they SHOULD not be moving assets for contracts like the next Shattenkirk deal.

Ranger fans, we have to hope that Sather is out, like for reals, everything he did since their Cinderella cup run has been poorly thought out. Stralman, Hagelin, Duclair, the 1sts, 2nds,... Rangers need to basically do the opposite, sell for 3 or so years just to maybe get back towards trending up. They are not winning anything with like ~12M (~13M if we include Glass) in basic cap dumps within their cap structure.

The buy out of G like you said is not pretty. That's why, it's down to numbers.

At a certain point, it's cheaper to just keep and pay these guys.

But under certain conditions, to the right team, if they can extract a price from NY which is less than the cap hit, it makes sense to see if there is mutually profitable middle ground. So far this is very hard to see. And the expansion draft is what makes it difficult.

 

[bernmeister]

Could see the Sens being interested in Staal if Methot gets picked up in the expansion draft.

Staal's front loaded contract definitely makes him more attractive to a budget team like the Sens. Could be a good partner for Karlsson.

Tell you what.
Marc would have to waive, but let's say he see's writing on the wall w/AV, etc., and let's say we but his CT property and flip it so he has no headaches/issues.

I don't know if Methot has NMC, and if LV would want either, but bottom line, if you take Staal NOW, and put him w/his NMC that comes with him on your roster and you are responsible for that for the expansion draft, then...

I offer
a 5th round NYR pick for every year remaining on Staal's contract
PLUS return of the Ott 2nd from the Bras-Zib deal
plus Staal, obviously

for future Ott 7th
small cap dump ok if no NMC/NTC attachments

whaddaya say?

I like the idea of the Rangers hanging onto him for another year then visit trading him. This would give Skjei a full NHL season to prove he can be a top4 guy.

I also agree that he could be a great LD partner for Karlsson.

Agree he looks good w/Karlsson, and I am willing to take a chance on both Skjei and Graves.

Whatever rookie/post rookie mistakes/growing pains they have, worth it to not only make the cap space but bypass the exp draft.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Despite what their fans will say, teams I could see having an interest in Staal would be Buffalo, Vancouver, Montreal, Edmonton, Colorado.

These would be the teams I see either having a need at LHD, or just make stupid trades and value guys for their character more then their actual skill.

For whatever reason the Staal name still has value in the league, so he isn't untradeable. It's about finding the package that works for both teams.

Also you can reply to this and say "My team will never trade for him", but guess what, you don't run the team, so you have no idea

Sorry you're stuck with him. Feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[mgd525]

The Rangers are stuck with Staal for the most part. He's turned into a 4 or most likely 5 D man on a contender and is signed for 5 more years at 5.7m cap hit. He's still an NHL caliber d man but who the hell wants a number 5 D man for that contract ? I think a few teams would take Staal if you retained a few million. The contracts of Staal and Girardi are going to handicap the Rangers for a number of years in one fashion or the other. You are looking at giving away good assets for someone to take either of them, being stuck with them or having a big buyout against the cap for 8 or 10 years. I think Staal could be moveable in the right situation but it's going to cost the Rangers to move him imo. Girardi is the one that really hurts. He Probably isn't an NHL d man anymore. Nash is over paid as well but atleast it's only for 2 seasons.

 

[Sens]

Tell you what.
Marc would have to waive, but let's say he see's writing on the wall w/AV, etc., and let's say we but his CT property and flip it so he has no headaches/issues.

I don't know if Methot has NMC, and if LV would want either, but bottom line, if you take Staal NOW, and put him w/his NMC that comes with him on your roster and you are responsible for that for the expansion draft, then...

I offer
a 5th round NYR pick for every year remaining on Staal's contract
PLUS return of the Ott 2nd from the Bras-Zib deal
plus Staal, obviously

for future Ott 7th
small cap dump ok if no NMC/NTC attachments

whaddaya say?



Agree he looks good w/Karlsson, and I am willing to take a chance on both Skjei and Graves.

Whatever rookie/post rookie mistakes/growing pains they have, worth it to not only make the cap space but bypass the exp draft.

Could not do it till after expansion
EK, Phanuef and Ceci need to be protected... We got no spot for Staal till after that

 

[Ivan13]

Despite what their fans will say, teams I could see having an interest in Staal would be Buffalo, Vancouver, Montreal, Edmonton, Colorado.

These would be the teams I see either having a need at LHD, or just make stupid trades and value guys for their character more then their actual skill.

For whatever reason the Staal name still has value in the league, so he isn't untradeable. It's about finding the package that works for both teams.

Also you can reply to this and say "My team will never trade for him", but guess what, you don't run the team, so you have no idea

Why would Colorado be interested in him?

 

[kilowatt]

Honestly, Staal for Brown wouldn't be the worst trade in the world. The Rangers' offense might reinvigorate Brown, and LA's solid defensive structure could allow Staal to thrive. You can throw in picks or retention as necessary to balance it out, but I think there could be a fit.

 

[Off Sides]

Honestly, Staal for Brown wouldn't be the worst trade in the world. The Rangers' offense might reinvigorate Brown, and LA's solid defensive structure could allow Staal to thrive. You can throw in picks or retention as necessary to balance it out, but I think there could be a fit.

Rangers already have enough wings, Staal makes more sense to the Rangers. Plus Browns contract is just as bad if not worse.

Rangers should go towards a solid defensive structure. They lost their best offensive puck moving D, they traded away their best offensive center. Boyle, the rover, is gone. They added bottom 6 motor / quickness. Letting the D-men take care of net front and having the wings chase would make sense for them.

 

[Raspewtin]

Why would Colorado be interested in him?

Because Colorado are run by total buffoons in Roy and Sakic.

Honestly, Staal for Brown wouldn't be the worst trade in the world. The Rangers' offense might reinvigorate Brown, and LA's solid defensive structure could allow Staal to thrive. You can throw in picks or retention as necessary to balance it out, but I think there could be a fit.

If Brown didn't have so much term left I'd agree with this.

 

[KreiderHouseRules*]

Staal is a top 4 defenseman if and only if he's partnered with a guy that can beat the forecheck.

It's one of the reasons why he loved playing with Stralman, Staal could do his thing and be super effective.

The Ranger rotated McDonagh Girardi and Staal and Stralman on a couple of deep runs.

Staal is exposed with the puck on his stick because he doesn't handle it well under pressure, having a guy on the right side that can off set that, gives you a real deal top 4 pair that can go up against any line.

Stralman was only a part of 1 deep run, but I agree with everything else 200%.

 

[ThatSaid]

Rangers have the cap space to keep Staal and not lose anything because of it (at least for now, although one could argue they lost Yandle because of it) Plus he has a NMC which he may not be willing to waive.

Seems to me as if Chicago pretty had to move Bickel so they could keep the other players that they really wanted to (the Kruger signing, and the Ansimov extension kicking in added to their cap structure)

Right, and I get it. But at some point, you have to jettison him on order to make room for impact players. Lundqvist isn't getting any younger. I would be in the camp that argues he cost you Yandle, but frankly, Yandle may have been another ill-advised contract.

I'm not necessarily saying you guys should look to move Buch in order to get rid of Staal. But you should be looking. If Staal's contract looks ugly this year, imagine trying to move him two years down the road when you actually need the cap to remain competitive. I say its better for you guys to swallow your medicine now.

NHL is always better when the Rangers are contenders.

 

[Off Sides]

Right, and I get it. But at some point, you have to jettison him on order to make room for impact players. Lundqvist isn't getting any younger. I would be in the camp that argues he cost you Yandle, but frankly, Yandle may have been another ill-advised contract.

I'm not necessarily saying you guys should look to move Buch in order to get rid of Staal. But you should be looking. If Staal's contract looks ugly this year, imagine trying to move him two years down the road when you actually need the cap to remain competitive. I say its better for you guys to swallow your medicine now.

NHL is always better when the Rangers are contenders.

I am sure they are looking, but I just can not think of any team that is going to want the Staal contract pre-expansion so he takes up one of their protection slots, and even post expansion it seems like a long shot. So it would be either take back another teams overpaid, or add a sweetener they just can not afford to give up.

Rangers did not draft any elite skaters, it difficult to continue to contend when they have not even drafted in the 1st round for 4 straight years and missed a couple 2nds in there too.

They are taking their medicine, by having to deal with these less than stellar contracts on their team that look as if a nefarious timeshare company crafted them.

 

[ThatSaid]

I am sure they are looking, but I just can not think of any team that is going to want the Staal contract pre-expansion so he takes up one of their protection slots, and even post expansion it seems like a long shot. So it would be either take back another teams overpaid, or add a sweetener they just can not afford to give up.

Rangers did not draft any elite skaters, it difficult to continue to contend when they have not even drafted in the 1st round for 4 straight years and missed a couple 2nds in there too.

They are taking their medicine, by having to deal with these less than stellar contracts on their team that look as if a nefarious timeshare company crafted them.

Maybe I don't understand it correctly, but doesn't Staal need to waive his NMC in order to be traded anyways? I could be totally incorrect, but that would mean that the receiving team would not need to protect him. I don't think NMC transfer.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Ahead of expansion I am not sure it makes sense to acquire him for the Sens.

 

[Blue Goose]

Maybe I don't understand it correctly, but doesn't Staal need to waive his NMC in order to be traded anyways? I could be totally incorrect, but that would mean that the receiving team would not need to protect him. I don't think NMC transfer.

But that's the biggest issue here: Staal has a NMC. As Off Sides has (correctly) stated, you can't really compare this to the Hawks/Bickell situation, since Bickell didn't have a NMC and the Hawks were in a much worse spot cap-wise.

Staal has a NMC, a house in Connecticut, and a spot in the Rangers top 4 - while another team *may* be interested in him, what are the odds he'd be willing to waive to go there AND also have the Rangers be willing to eat a bad contract in return? He should just stay put.

The only contract extensions of any consequence the Rangers need to worry about for 2017-18 are Fast, Lindberg and Zibanejad. Tanner Glass will come off the books, and they should be able to get some extra money by buying out Girardi next summer - plus, there's a good chance they'll lose Fast/Lindberg in the expansion draft anyway. If they need money to go after Shattenkirk, then they can just trade Nash going into the final year of his deal.

The one thing they DEFINITELY should not be doing is adding picks/prospects as sweeteners to get rid of unwanted contracts.

 

[bernmeister]

But that's the biggest issue here: Staal has a NMC. As Off Sides has (correctly) stated, you can't really compare this to the Hawks/Bickell situation, since Bickell didn't have a NMC and the Hawks were in a much worse spot cap-wise.

Staal has a NMC, a house in Connecticut, and a spot in the Rangers top 4 - while another team *may* be interested in him, what are the odds he'd be willing to waive to go there AND also have the Rangers be willing to eat a bad contract in return? He should just stay put.

The only contract extensions of any consequence the Rangers need to worry about for 2017-18 are Fast, Lindberg and Zibanejad. Tanner Glass will come off the books, and they should be able to get some extra money by buying out Girardi next summer - plus, there's a good chance they'll lose Fast/Lindberg in the expansion draft anyway. If they need money to go after Shattenkirk, then they can just trade Nash going into the final year of his deal.

The one thing they DEFINITELY should not be doing is adding picks/prospects as sweeteners to get rid of unwanted contracts.

Agreed.
The idea here is to find a club who needs the $$ more than they need to have the expansion draft slot, which club is ALSO acceptable to Staal who must waive.

If those 2 things can be found, then it is just a matter of numbers and moveable assets. But that is prerequisite.

 

[Off Sides]

But that's the biggest issue here: Staal has a NMC. As Off Sides has (correctly) stated, you can't really compare this to the Hawks/Bickell situation, since Bickell didn't have a NMC and the Hawks were in a much worse spot cap-wise.

Staal has a NMC, a house in Connecticut, and a spot in the Rangers top 4 - while another team *may* be interested in him, what are the odds he'd be willing to waive to go there AND also have the Rangers be willing to eat a bad contract in return? He should just stay put.

The only contract extensions of any consequence the Rangers need to worry about for 2017-18 are Fast, Lindberg and Zibanejad. Tanner Glass will come off the books, and they should be able to get some extra money by buying out Girardi next summer - plus, there's a good chance they'll lose Fast/Lindberg in the expansion draft anyway. If they need money to go after Shattenkirk, then they can just trade Nash going into the final year of his deal.

The one thing they DEFINITELY should not be doing is adding picks/prospects as sweeteners to get rid of unwanted contracts.

Bear with me it's early,

They should be looking to move Nash and Klein out pre expansion draft (like between right now and the trade deadline) for futures and youth that would not need to be protected.

If they do that, they can protect more players from the Fast/Lindberg group.

If they don't, they are protecting players that only have a year left on their contracts, thus either self renting them or selling them for rental returns in that last year and also losing one from that Fast/Lindberg/etc group in the process to expansion.

I think they made the Holden trade with the intentions of exposing him. So if they need to take back a similar player/contract along with those picks and prospects for Nash/Klein to make the cap/salary work better, it's okay because they got the picks/prospects, they also added a player that they can expose that they'd value less than someone out of the Fast/Lindberg/etc group.

Or something like that, will have some coffee