Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread DCLXXV: Marc Staal... Come on Down!!!

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
gump116 said:
Very interesting chart. Question for people here. Would you rather have the Rangers last 12 years since the first lockout (make the playoffs 11/12 years, some long playoff runs, but no cup) or the Hurricanes (playoffs 2/12 years, lot of terrible years, but 1 cup)?
Click to expand...

Yesterday I would have said the 1 cup but I think I changed my mind overnight. I'd rather have 11 enjoyable seasons than 1 great season and 10 boring seasons.
 
NickyFotiu said:
Yesterday I would have said the 1 cup but I think I changed my mind overnight. I'd rather have 11 enjoyable seasons than 1 great season and 10 boring seasons.
Click to expand...

Yep, I've thought about this before. Actually, didn't really take much thought. 1 cup isn't worth a decade of ****.
 
True Blue said:
Again, from the perspective of most NHL professionals, he was a legit top pairing shut down defenseman. Trying to justify your standards by utilizing the so-called advanced stats is fine, but there are times it does not allow you to see the forest through the trees. There are many factors that are needed to be looked at. Including, like it or not, what it actually happening on the ice.
Click to expand...

For instance, we have always employed the strategy of going into a shell with a lead, which leads to a ton of shots against and as we have seen in these playoffs, goals against. Girardi goes up against the top lines who put up points against anyone. The stats don't tell the whole story.

Or go into a lundqvist thread. The stats have been used to prove he's a product of the d. Girardi threads say he's a product of the goalies.
 
I think Girardi "suffered" from being always deployed against top offensive players and the Rangers throughout his years having a mindset of needing to be able to defend without the puck rather than a philosophy if getting the puck back quickly so you don't have to defend.

Dunno, he's been a good pplayer at points in his career but I guess my point is that his job as dictated by coaches was basically "go out and play in your own zone against the other teams top players" and it's probably a combination of him never being a great puck mover (though I feel like he used to be much better than he is now) and, again, his role basically being "go play in your own end and try not to let in a goal"

On the other hand it's pretty irrelevant now because the Rangers need to move on and get new blood on the right side. I'd love to see McDonagh not saddled with a huge anchor for once.
 
I can't wait till Girardi is gone so we can stop talking about him

Also if Zibanejad isn't signed long term, it would be a massive mistake
 
Did they sign another forward to expose yet, or are they still going to have to expose two of Stepan, Zucc, Kreider, Hayes, Miller, Grabner?

What are the options, sign Puempel or Pirri to something way over their heads, or give Glass a no AHL clause in a new contract, or trade for a forward that fits the bill while every GM knows they can rake them over the coals?
 
Off Sides said:
Did the sign another forward to expose yet, or are they still going to have to expose two of Stepan, Zucc, Kreider, Hayes, Miller, Grabner?

What are the options, sign Puempel or Pirri to something way over their heads, or give Glass a no AHL clause in a new contract, or trade for a forward that fits the bill while every GM knows they can rake them over the coals?
Click to expand...

Glass doesn't fill the 40/70 requirement and the reports out there are that they won't be looking to resign Pirri.

Puempel is the answer. Honestly, I wouldn't hesitate to give him a 2-year, one-way contract for $900k.

Grabner will be exposed. It's why we signed him to a 2-year deal.
 
Oscar Lindberg said:
Also if Zibanejad isn't signed long term, it would be a massive mistake
Click to expand...

Yeah this might be a good time to try to take advantage of signing a young player to a long term contract for a lower overall cap hit rather than doing a bridge and paying more later.
 
Levitate said:
Yeah this might be a good time to try to take advantage of signing a young player to a long term contract for a lower overall cap hit rather than doing a bridge and paying more later.
Click to expand...

Good idea, how about we also give him a NTC that kicks in in 2 years so we can have half the board panic and try to trade him all the time because they are scared that he is just a very good but not great center.

:laugh:
 
Levitate said:
Yeah this might be a good time to try to take advantage of signing a young player to a long term contract for a lower overall cap hit rather than doing a bridge and paying more later.
Click to expand...

He's a UFA in 3 more years. How long of a deal do we want to sign him to? There aren't that many UFA years to eat up there. We're not signing him to a 6 year deal.
 
Tawnos said:
He's a UFA in 3 more years. How long of a deal do we want to sign him to? There aren't that many UFA years to eat up there. We're not signing him to a 6 year deal.
Click to expand...

Why not? Sign him through the prime of his career, let him walk when he hits 30

I mean that is the entire point of getting guys on longer contracts...give him a 2 year bridge deal and he puts up 60-70 points per year and then asks for a lot more on a long deal that takes him past 30 so you're stuck with a higher cap hit and the inevitable decline at the end of his contract.

I'm not saying throw all the money at him now but if the Rangers think "young guy who will be a big part of the team for years to come" then lock him up to a decent contract.

That said I'm sure they're not "sold" on him yet and he has to "make a decision about how good he wants to be" and that kind of stuff and they'll end up signing him to a 6 year $7 mill per contract in 3 years

e: sure the player also has to want to make that deal but it does make a certain sense for players to lock in their money now rather than run the risk of not getting a good contract later.
 
Tawnos said:
He's a UFA in 3 more years. How long of a deal do we want to sign him to? There aren't that many UFA years to eat up there. We're not signing him to a 6 year deal.
Click to expand...

2 more years. He has played 5 years in the NHL.

At his age, a 6 year deal isn't a bad idea. He just turned 24. A 6 year deal takes him to 30. If we sign him for only 4 years, then he'll be UFA at age 28 and wanting a long term contract that takes him to 34/35.

There's risk either way, and a lot will depend on the cap hit.
 
GAGLine said:
2 more years. He has played 5 years in the NHL.

At his age, a 6 year deal isn't a bad idea. He just turned 24. A 6 year deal takes him to 30. If we sign him for only 4 years, then he'll be UFA at age 28 and wanting a long term contract that takes him to 34/35.

There's risk either way, and a lot will depend on the cap hit.
Click to expand...

Yeah that was a typo. Damn.

Anyway... it's less about what we're doing and more about Zibanejad. Being a UFA at 28 sounds pretty lucrative to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom