Speculation: Roster Building Thread LVIII: At part 58, I am out of titles.

[Gardner McKay]

Go.

Click to read more...

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

What a soft Euro effort at title-making.

 

[Bob Richards]

Embarrassing, shameful title.

 

[Gardner McKay]

@Tawnos

I don't understand, you are writing a lot of words and fancy ones to essentially say Staal provides leadership and intangibles, right? I Agree with you that those things do exist. Thing is, you can find a player that provides those things every offseason for exponentially less than Staal's cost, no?

Yeah? Your point? What do you do with Staal? You saw what it cost to dump a decent player in Marleau. Buying him out is not feasible either.

They don't keep Staal because of those things. They keep him because his contract is impossible to move and not feasible to buy out. The plus side of being stuck with Staal is that he provides those things and no team/company/organization is successful without them.

 

[Raspewtin]

No offense, but Staal would be lucky to get a 1 year, 1 mil deal when his contract ends lol

doubtful
this league loves terrible defensemen that are gritty and bring intangibles.

Yeah? Your point? What do you do with Staal? You saw what it cost to dump a decent player in Marleau. Buying him out is not feasible either.

They don't keep Staal because of those things. They keep him because his contract is impossible to move and not feasible to buy out. The plus side of being stuck with Staal is that he provides those things and no team/company/organization is successful without them.

Has there ever actually been a report that says this or is this speculation? Just asking.

 

[Gardner McKay]

doubtful
this league loves terrible defensemen that are gritty and bring intangibles.



Has there ever actually been a report that says this or is this speculation? Just asking.

Yes. I know Brooks has talked about it a few times and if you look at what Toronto just paid to dump a semi-decent player in Marleau, the cost to move Staal is a non starter.

 

[LaffyTaffy]

11 away from part 69. Nice.

 

[Tawnos]

The expansion draft in an interesting consideration in all of this.

In terms of most likely to be around and need protection:
The D they'll have eligible for the expansion draft are Trouba, Skjei, DeAngelo, Hajek, Lindgren.
The F they'll have eligible are Panarin, Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Buchnevich, Lemieux.

I'm assuming that Kreider, Namestnikov, Strome, and Fast will all be gone by then. Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Rykov, Shesterkin, Reunanen, among others will all be exempt.

So they're set on forwards. They will need to bring someone in specifically to expose. On D... they can only protect 3. That's going to end up leading to some maneuvering. @brians1128 could easily be right. They could end up deciding TDA is redundant and that would factor in the maneuvering.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Yeah? Your point? What do you do with Staal? You saw what it cost to dump a decent player in Marleau. Buying him out is not feasible either.

They don't keep Staal because of those things. They keep him because his contract is impossible to move and not feasible to buy out. The plus side of being stuck with Staal is that he provides those things and no team/company/organization is successful without them.

Never said they could or will look to move him.

I was responding to a poster who said Staal has value because of those traits. I merely pointed out that you can find a much cheaper player with those traits in the offseason....so he's really not valuable to any NHL team including the Rangers. Any value his leadership provides is negated by the salary cap implications comes with.

 

[Gardner McKay]

doubtful
this league loves terrible defensemen that are gritty and bring intangibles.



Has there ever actually been a report that says this or is this speculation? Just asking.

Between his age, cap hit he isn't going anywhere. Even if the Rangers wanted to move him and found a dance partner, he has a full NMC.

https://nypost.com/2019/01/31/marc-staal-is-in-control-of-his-uncertain-rangers-fate/

Staal, though, has control over his fate, owning a full no-move clause for the life of his contract that runs through 2020-21. Teams are not believed to be beating down the door to acquire a rather immobile 32-year-old defenseman with two full seasons at a $5.7 million cap hit per, but serious contenders are always pursuing blue-line depth. That is what Staal, who is having a commendable season playing up on the first pair against the opposition’s top guns just about every single night, would provide.
If, that is, he were to waive his no-trade.

Chances are the combination of Staal’s age, style and contract would mitigate against a trade, though, who knows, maybe the Lightning are up for sending third-line winger JT Miller to Broadway in order to reunite Staal and Dan Girardi for the Cup drive.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Never said they could or will look to move him.

I was responding to a poster who said Staal has value because of those traits. I merely pointed out that you can find a much cheaper player with those traits in the offseason....so he's really not valuable to any NHL team including the Rangers. Any value his leadership provides is negated by the salary cap implications comes with.

That is not correct. Finding a cheaper player with those traits while Staal is on the roster does what exactly? After his contract runs out, by all means go for one of those cheaper players. But when you have a player that can't be moved, adding a cheaper version of him is completely redundant.

There is value in what he brings. Would I prefer Staal to be traded and find someone else to bring those traits? Yes. But I realized a while ago, and everyone else here needs to as well, that isn't happening. Barring a miracle, he can't/won't be moved (NMC). So if you are going to be stuck with him, at least utilize what he does have - experience and leadership.

 

[NYR Viper]

The expansion draft in an interesting consideration in all of this.

In terms of most likely to be around and need protection:
The D they'll have eligible for the expansion draft are Trouba, Skjei, DeAngelo, Hajek, Lindgren.
The F they'll have eligible are Panarin, Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Buchnevich, Lemieux.

I'm assuming that Kreider, Namestnikov, Strome, and Fast will all be gone by then. Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Rykov, Shesterkin, Reunanen, among others will all be exempt.

So they're set on forwards. They will need to bring someone in specifically to expose. On D... they can only protect 3. That's going to end up leading to some maneuvering. @brians1128 could easily be right. They could end up deciding TDA is redundant and that would factor in the maneuvering.

If they continue to keep Nieves, I believe he would be able to be exposed at forward.

I REALLY don't think Skjei will be around by then

 

[broadwayblue]

The expansion draft in an interesting consideration in all of this.

In terms of most likely to be around and need protection:
The D they'll have eligible for the expansion draft are Trouba, Skjei, DeAngelo, Hajek, Lindgren.
The F they'll have eligible are Panarin, Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Buchnevich, Lemieux.

I'm assuming that Kreider, Namestnikov, Strome, and Fast will all be gone by then. Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Rykov, Shesterkin, Reunanen, among others will all be exempt.

So they're set on forwards. They will need to bring someone in specifically to expose. On D... they can only protect 3. That's going to end up leading to some maneuvering. @brians1128 could easily be right. They could end up deciding TDA is redundant and that would factor in the maneuvering.

So which 3 dmen will they protect? Trouba and who?

I guess they can protect Georgiev since Hank's contract will be up...and that's assuming Georgiev is still on the team then.

 

[LORDE]

11 away from part 69. Nice.

...and there's the new title

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

The expansion draft in an interesting consideration in all of this.

In terms of most likely to be around and need protection:
The D they'll have eligible for the expansion draft are Trouba, Skjei, DeAngelo, Hajek, Lindgren.
The F they'll have eligible are Panarin, Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Buchnevich, Lemieux.

I'm assuming that Kreider, Namestnikov, Strome, and Fast will all be gone by then. Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, Rykov, Shesterkin, Reunanen, among others will all be exempt.

So they're set on forwards. They will need to bring someone in specifically to expose. On D... they can only protect 3. That's going to end up leading to some maneuvering. @brians1128 could easily be right. They could end up deciding TDA is redundant and that would factor in the maneuvering.

Say both TDA and Fox pan out to be top 4 d-men with Trouba. Something will have to give at some point you'd think?

 

[NYR Viper]

Say both TDA and Fox pan out to be top 4 d-men with Trouba. Something will have to give at some point you'd think?

The better option would be to trade one of those guys, not lose them in expansion

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Staal is actually a really good positional player.

He really isn't. Hes commonly caught out of position, especially on the PP.

He's still pretty good with his stick (not as good as he used to be... that skill was once elite level).

Yeah this is his one "strength", but this is easily negated by teams who choose to dump the puck into his corner. He gets beat to most pucks and the ones he doesn't, he usually gets bottled up which results in a turnover or three before he eventually panic clears the puck, gets stopped by the goalie or ends up in the net.

He reads plays well. I could go on about this kind of stuff, but these things are all subjective eye test analyses.

This is so subjective. I've seen him make some good reads, but the amount of terrible reads that resulted in him being caught up ice in no mans land which led to odd man rushes the other way were astronomical.

I thought I already mentioned that "execution" isn't the same thing as "playing well."

And yes, I do think the guys on the bench are paying close attention to what happens on the ice. They might not be actively saying to themselves "look at Staal and how consistent he is"... it's something that's more passive than that.

AVs stubbornness to change the team's style based on their roster is what led to his downfall. It's laughable to think that it was Tanner Glass. That point of view SCREAMS confirmation bias.

I don't know that we do have better options yet. Maybe we do. And maybe two (because it'd have to be two) of those options are enough better on the ice to outweigh the other things Staal provides. But until that time comes, Staal is best option to hold onto of the 3 buyout options.

Rapid fire time:


Then what is execution? Surely it isn't failure to do things properly.

I hate to pull this card, but it's clear you've never been on a bench before.

AV's stubbornness to adjust his style was part of it, so was overplaying horrible hockey players.

Staal is not the best option of the 3 to hold onto. Cleanest buy out and weakest player.

 

[Tawnos]

That is not correct. Finding a cheaper player with those traits while Staal is on the roster does what exactly? After his contract runs out, by all means go for one of those cheaper players. But when you have a player that can't be moved, adding a cheaper version of him is completely redundant.

There is value in what he brings. Would I prefer Staal to be traded and find someone else to bring those traits? Yes. But I realized a while ago, and everyone else here needs to as well, that isn't happening. Barring a miracle, he can't/won't be moved (NMC). So if you are going to be stuck with him, at least utilize what he does have - experience and leadership.

The topic, though, is whether you buy him out rather than Shattenkirk or Smith. Not trade.

That being said, I don't think the Rangers will be buying him out because they value the traits you're talking about.

 

[Tob]

He really isn't. Hes commonly caught out of position, especially on the PP.



Yeah this is his one "strength", but this is easily negated by teams who choose to dump the puck into his corner. He gets beat to most pucks and the ones he doesn't, he usually gets bottled up which results in a turnover or three before he eventually panic clears the puck, gets stopped by the goalie or ends up in the net.



This is so subjective. I've seen him make some good reads, but the amount of terrible reads that resulted in him being caught up ice in no mans land which led to odd man rushes the other way were astronomical.




Rapid fire time:


Then what is execution? Surely it isn't failure to do things properly.

I hate to pull this card, but it's clear you've never been on a bench before.

AV's stubbornness to adjust his style was part of it, so was overplaying horrible hockey players.

Staal is not the best option of the 3 to hold onto. Cleanest buy out and weakest player.

Sometimes I forget you're GoAwayStaal

 

[Gardner McKay]

The topic, though, is whether you buy him out rather than Shattenkirk or Smith. Not trade.

That being said, I don't think the Rangers will be buying him out because they value the traits you're talking about.

IIRC, his buyout is worse than Smith?

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Woah.

Clear win for Buff.

 

[NYR Viper]

 

[Machinehead]

Isn't Jokiharju like really good?

Don't get that for Chicago.

 

[NYR Viper]

So Nylander hasn't really proven much at the NHL yet but he returns Jokiharju who has ad plays the premier position of RD? That seems lopsided