Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part VIII: Autumn in New York

[GAGLine]

Martin Hanzal, Ryan White and a 4th for 2017 1st, 2018 2nd, a conditional pick in 2019 and Grayson Downing.

Hanzal was on pace for 41.8 points. He was in the final year of his contract. White is currently on a PTO with Vancouver.

Antoine Vermette for 2015 1st and Klas Dahlbeck.

Vermette was on pace for 45.6 points. He was in the final year of his contract.

Eric Staal for 2016 2nd, 2017 2nd and Aleksi Saarela.

Staal was on pace for 43 points. He was in the final year of his contract.

You could argue that Hanzal, Vermette and Staal all bring more to the table than just points, but so does Nash.

Nash can absolutely get us at least a 1st round pick at the trade deadline. That's not to say that he will or even should be traded. It depends on his health, how he is playing and how the Rangers are playing. If Nash is healthy playing well but the Rangers are on the playoff bubble, I would absolutely trade him.

 

[Avery16]

I feel like Ive said it before, but I do think were a contender, and I know that Nash's play makes us a better team than we would be without it and without any other factor considered.

I just think that Gorton can do something with the cap room that we would free by moving Nash (and taking some picks/prospects in the process) that would actually bring more to our game than what Nash does.

 

[Avery16]

Martin Hanzal, Ryan White and a 4th for 2017 1st, 2018 2nd, a conditional pick in 2019 and Grayson Downing.

Hanzal was on pace for 41.8 points. He was in the final year of his contract. White is currently on a PTO with Vancouver.

Antoine Vermette for 2015 1st and Klas Dahlbeck.

Vermette was on pace for 45.6 points. He was in the final year of his contract.

Eric Staal for 2016 2nd, 2017 2nd and Aleksi Saarela.

Staal was on pace for 43 points. He was in the final year of his contract.

You could argue that Hanzal, Vermette and Staal all bring more to the table than just points, but so does Nash.

Nash can absolutely get us at least a 1st round pick at the trade deadline. That's not to say that he will or even should be traded. It depends on his health, how he is playing and how the Rangers are playing. If Nash is healthy playing well but the Rangers are on the playoff bubble, I would absolutely trade him.

I still wince when I recall this deal

 

[Gardner McKay]

Ziabnejad was a replacement for Brassard, not for Stepan. Hayes is being elevated to 2C despite the lack of knowledge as to whether he can hold that position. A hole was created in our top-2 C to address another, actually glaring hole, RHS PPQB. Nash likewise could be moved to free up cap room, and that cap room could facilitate another deal for someone we project as middle-six C.

I never told anyone to not criticize my posts. Criticize away. I haven't criticize anyone for being critical of what I post. But don't tell me what to post and what not to post (as long as IAW applicable rules) and expect me to take you seriously. And if a criticism isn't responsive to something I actually said, yeah I might not respond because it wouldn't really make sense to adopt another person's adaptation of my argument.

Two things:

1. What would the return be for Nash, who could that middle six C be and what is the cost for that middle six C?
2. More importantly, can an you articulate why it is better to trade Nash now instead of waiting until the TDL where more teams will be able to afford his cap hit which will drive up interest in him and potentially our return?

And if you can't answer both of those then I will continue to think that your line of thinking is absurd and wrong for the team.

I am a harsh critic of Bernmeister but at least when he proposes something he can explain the post with his rationale of thinking, produce an entire scenario as to why we should trade the player(s), what the return will be and how we will make it work.

 

[Levitate]

In theory he could do something with the cap space, but this is probably more an academic exercise than something we should be arguing specific details about. Could be that there's nothing currently out there worth spending the cap space on. Duchene? Rangers probably don't have the assets without making the team weaker. Not really worth going on about how the Rangers must do this or that when we don't know that there's anything worthwhile available.

At the deadline? Who knows but usually you aren't going to get game ready assets in exchange for a player like Nash at the deadline.

Rangers also don't need to carry $7.8 mill in cap space through the season in order to bank it for later, that's silly

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

I still wince when I recall this deal

Probably the only bad move that Gorton has made, and we all knew it was bad at the time

 

[Avery16]

Two things:

1. What would the return be for Nash, who could that middle six C be and what is the cost for that middle six C?
2. More importantly, can an you articulate why it is better to trade Nash now instead of waiting until the TDL where more teams will be able to afford his cap hit which will drive up interest in him and potentially our return?

And if you can't answer both of those then I will continue to think that your line of thinking is absurd and wrong for the team.

I am a harsh critic of Bernmeister but at least when he proposes something he can explain the post with his rationale of thinking, produce an entire scenario as to why we should trade the player(s), what the return will be and how we will make it work.

1) I just think its too speculative. Who would have predicted any of the deals Gorton has made, and yet most of them have benefitted the team tremendously. It shouldn't be so controversial a point that moving Nash frees up cap space and that a good GM (like Gorton) can potentially do a lot with cap space. That takes no speculation, and that's the realm I'm staying in.

2) Im not against moving Nash at the deadline, but there's less of a hurdle in dealing with the cap at the deadline, so less of a reason to move him. Also, Im not a huge fan of adding pieces we intend to count on at the deadline. It didnt really work with Staal, it didn't work with Jokinen, etc. The team needs time to gel. There's also the argument that we get less for Nash at the deadline than earlier in the season.

 

[Avery16]

Jesus. Ryan Clowe

 

[SA16]

Trading Nash is a bad idea.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

I feel like Ive said it before, but I do think were a contender, and I know that Nash's play makes us a better team than we would be without it and without any other factor considered.

I just think that Gorton can do something with the cap room that we would free by moving Nash (and taking some picks/prospects in the process) that would actually bring more to our game than what Nash does.

The only issue I have with this take is that now is probably the least sensible time to adopt it. Last TDL or at the draft it would make sense to push this agenda harder because then multiple means of utilizing the freed cap space would exist. Right now, the only way to utilize it is through subsequent trade.

Okay, you don't want to get into speculation, so I won't ask you to. Let's agree that after trading Nash, unless you have the next deal already waiting for the ink to dry, you have opened a hole there is no guarantee you will be able to fill. So you start shopping pretty hard. We are not an asset rich team. Would you want to part with Andersson, Chytil, Beargloves, Shestyorkin? I assume not, so we're already looking at lesser prospects. Okay, let's throw in either our 1st or the 1st we got back for Nash. What else? Are we comfortable moving Miller or Zucc? That just opens another hole.

Forget who you are targeting. What is a realistic package of assets the Rangers can offer, after moving Nash, to acquire this player that utilizes Nash's cap space and makes us better. That's all I want to know. It doesn't have to be a specific proposal. Just a list of assets we would be willing to go shopping with. If we're moving roster players, are we able to replace them as well? I just want to see the list of movable assets we would have to work with after moving Nash and opening a hole on the roster.

 

[Gardner McKay]

1) I just think its too speculative. Who would have predicted any of the deals Gorton has made, and yet most of them have benefitted the team tremendously. It shouldn't be so controversial a point that moving Nash frees up cap space and that a good GM (like Gorton) can potentially do a lot with cap space. That takes no speculation, and that's the realm I'm staying in.

2) Im not against moving Nash at the deadline, but there's less of a hurdle in dealing with the cap at the deadline, so less of a reason to move him. Also, Im not a huge fan of adding pieces we intend to count on at the deadline. It didnt really work with Staal, it didn't work with Jokinen, etc. The team needs time to gel. There's also the argument that we get less for Nash at the deadline than earlier in the season.

There we go! The way I see it, more teams will be able to fit Nash in at the deadline therefore we would get more for him but I can see why you think the other way.

When I talk about trading Nash at the deadline, I am not just saying for win now pieces. If that is the case then you might as well just keep Nash and let him be your rental. See where the team is positioned, see what the needs are and then make the deal. If we are a bubble team then you can absolutely trade him with 50% retained for a 1st + and I am fine with that.

If we are a playoff team, you keep him and use him as the rental. I think all around it just makes more sense to assess the situation then. I think most teams will feel that way and the teams that really are doing well that are pressured for a cup may pay more at the TDL then they would at the beginning of the season.

 

[Avery16]

The only issue I have with this take is that now is probably the least sensible time to adopt it. Last TDL or at the draft it would make sense to push this agenda harder because then multiple means of utilizing the freed cap space would exist. Right now, the only way to utilize it is through subsequent trade.

Okay, you don't want to get into speculation, so I won't ask you to. Let's agree that after trading Nash, unless you have the next deal already waiting for the ink to dry, you have opened a hole there is no guarantee you will be able to fill. So you start shopping pretty hard. We are not an asset rich team. Would you want to part with Andersson, Chytil, Beargloves, Shestyorkin? I assume not, so we're already looking at lesser prospects. Okay, let's throw in either our 1st or the 1st we got back for Nash. What else? Are we comfortable moving Miller or Zucc? That just opens another hole.

Forget who you are targeting. What is a realistic package of assets the Rangers can offer, after moving Nash, to acquire this player that utilizes Nash's cap space and makes us better. That's all I want to know. It doesn't have to be a specific proposal. Just a list of assets we would be willing to go shopping with. If we're moving roster players, are we able to replace them as well? I just want to see the list of movable assets we would have to work with after moving Nash and opening a hole on the roster.

I would have agreed to moving Nash sooner, but we didn't. Im not going to spend a lot of time talking about why we should have already done something we didn't do.

Again, I go back to my original premise. IF Chytil and Andersson can make third line, THEN you move Nash. So there isn't a hole, or if there is because one understandably falters, you still aren't dealing from a perceived position of weakness.

Look- Gorton traded a top C in Brassard straight up for another top C in Zibanejad. He then traded another top C and a very good backup for a high pick and cusp prospect. There is a lot a GM can do. Its pretty much impossible to try to predict what Gorton can or cannot do. I am not going to try. I advocate for giving him the tools to do what he has already demonstrated he can do quite well.

 

[Avery16]

There we go! The way I see it, more teams will be able to fit Nash in at the deadline therefore we would get more for him but I can see why you think the other way.

When I talk about trading Nash at the deadline, I am not just saying for win now pieces. If that is the case then you might as well just keep Nash and let him be your rental. See where the team is positioned, see what the needs are and then make the deal. If we are a bubble team then you can absolutely trade him with 50% retained for a 1st + and I am fine with that.

If we are a playoff team, you keep him and use him as the rental. I think all around it just makes more sense to assess the situation then. I think most teams will feel that way and the teams that really are doing well that are pressured for a cup may pay more at the TDL then they would at the beginning of the season.

I understand all that, and its a logical assessment. Sure, we should be open to trading Nash at the deadline for future assets, but we can do better earlier on in the season. Not all teams are against the cap, and some teams are pretty bare on scoring depth. That, with his partial NTC means youre threading a needle, but Gorton seems pretty good at threading needles.

I have never said get rid of Nash for nothing, and I have consistently said move Nash if we have depth and can make the team better both right now and in the future.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

I would have agreed to moving Nash sooner, but we didn't. Im not going to spend a lot of time talking about why we should have already done something we didn't do.

Again, I go back to my original premise. IF Chytil and Andersson can make third line, THEN you move Nash. So there isn't a hole, or if there is because one understandably falters, you still aren't dealing from a perceived position of weakness.

Look- Gorton traded a top C in Brassard straight up for another top C in Zibanejad. He then traded another top C and a very good backup for a high pick and cusp prospect. There is a lot a GM can do. Its pretty much impossible to try to predict what Gorton can or cannot do. I am not going to try. I advocate for giving him the tools to do what he has already demonstrated he can do quite well.

The unwillingness to entertain anyone's questions really makes this a dull conversation, so I'm going to follow NYR2k2 and excuse myself at this point, but I still maintain that gaining cap space from moving Nash is about the least of the reasons to move him *at this point*. An off-season trade for a pick and a prospect and a one for one swap of similar centers doesn't really have any pertinence to what we could use Nash's money on to fill the spot he opens. As someone else just said, if you're in competition, you just view Nash as your rental. If you're not, well, you're moving Nash anyhow and improving for the remainder of the season is a moot point.

 

[TheTakedown]

He's been hurt three of the past four seasons. Why do you think his body will get more durable over time and not less?

That's one thing that Nash defenders don't understand.

"The ability is there, he just got hurt"... Meanwhile the ability is apparently mutually exclusive to the fact that Nash gets hurt therefore has no relation to him getting hurt, and him getting hurt is essentially the same as Nash taking a vacation for 20 games a year

 

[TheTakedown]

And yeah he's overpaid. So what. Say we magically replace him and save 4 mill. Where we spending that? FO doesn't want Jagr and haven't for years.

Then again if you can trade Nash @ 50% right now for a 1st rounder and Grade A prospect then sign Jagr @ $3.5M to replace him, you've accomplished:

a) Filling the wing hole left by Nash
b) Replenishing the Farm Further
c) Have not taken on any additional significant cap space

That's a retool move, absolutely, and it is one Gorton should be considering

 

[Samuel Culper III]

I'll also just throw out, in general, that I was against ever acquiring Nash and wanted to move him for most of his tenure here. I've always felt he was an overrated passenger. Now that he is in a contract year however, I anticipate him showing up more than usual and securing that next pay day, so the incentivs for me to move him is at an all time low, unless we're not looking competitive.

 

[Avery16]

The unwillingness to entertain anyone's questions really makes this a dull conversation, so I'm going to follow NYR2k2 and excuse myself at this point, but I still maintain that gaining cap space from moving Nash is about the least of the reasons to move him *at this point*. An off-season trade for a pick and a prospect and a one for one swap of similar centers doesn't really have any pertinence to what we could use Nash's money on to fill the spot he opens. As someone else just said, if you're in competition, you just view Nash as your rental. If you're not, well, you're moving Nash anyhow and improving for the remainder of the season is a moot point.

I think the false choice of 'keep Nash and remain competitive or move Nash and suffer' is the crux of our disagreement. I have entertained many questions from many users for days now, but youre basically asking me how many angels can fit on the head of a pin and I am not going down that rabbit hole.

 

[LORDE]

If you eat contract $$$, you will get a first. I have no problem eating some of that money to secure a pick.

I would hope Gorton was open to that.

I fear that if that were true it would've happened... maybe it still will

 

[Levitate]

FYI the Rangers currently would have $14 mill in cap space to add someone at the deadline if they DON'T move Nash.

 

[Avery16]

FYI the Rangers currently would have $14 mill in cap space to add someone at the deadline if they DON'T move Nash.

Deadline adds more often than not do not work well for us

 

[eco's bones]

Trading Nash probably would be problematic right now. It always depends on what you get back....but anyhow come trade deadline you have to seriously think about it. We're looking at a potentially big time draft and if we can get back a decently placed 1st rounder for a player that very likely won't be back next year I think you have to do it.

 

[NickyFotiu]

The only issue I have with this take is that now is probably the least sensible time to adopt it. Last TDL or at the draft it would make sense to push this agenda harder because then multiple means of utilizing the freed cap space would exist. Right now, the only way to utilize it is through subsequent trade.

Okay, you don't want to get into speculation, so I won't ask you to. Let's agree that after trading Nash, unless you have the next deal already waiting for the ink to dry, you have opened a hole there is no guarantee you will be able to fill. So you start shopping pretty hard. We are not an asset rich team. Would you want to part with Andersson, Chytil, Beargloves, Shestyorkin? I assume not, so we're already looking at lesser prospects. Okay, let's throw in either our 1st or the 1st we got back for Nash. What else? Are we comfortable moving Miller or Zucc? That just opens another hole.

Forget who you are targeting. What is a realistic package of assets the Rangers can offer, after moving Nash, to acquire this player that utilizes Nash's cap space and makes us better. That's all I want to know. It doesn't have to be a specific proposal. Just a list of assets we would be willing to go shopping with. If we're moving roster players, are we able to replace them as well? I just want to see the list of movable assets we would have to work with after moving Nash and opening a hole on the roster.

One of those things is not like the other.

 

[Gardner McKay]

I understand all that, and its a logical assessment. Sure, we should be open to trading Nash at the deadline for future assets, but we can do better earlier on in the season. Not all teams are against the cap, and some teams are pretty bare on scoring depth. That, with his partial NTC means youre threading a needle, but Gorton seems pretty good at threading needles.

I have never said get rid of Nash for nothing, and I have consistently said move Nash if we have depth and can make the team better both right now and in the future.

Fair enough. We can agree to disagree on that.

I do have one question. If Gorton can't find a deal for Nash early on in the season and are a top-2 team in the East come the TDL, do you still trade Nash?

 

[Avery16]

Fair enough. We can agree to disagree on that.

I do have one question. If Gorton can't find a deal for Nash early on in the season and are a top-2 team in the East come the TDL, do you still trade Nash?

I guess that depends how Nash is performing and where Hayes and Miller are playing and what -if any- kids like Chytil, Andersson, Nieves, Lettieri are still with the team, if there are any injuries, etc. I'd be open to dealing him as long as we have depth and the depth is healthy and performing well.