Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part X — Active Roster in OP (09/28)

[Off Sides]

Tampa.

That is about the only one I can come up with. Not sure they are going to be willing to give up the good futures though instead of using them on something else, yet the Rangers holding that conditional pick may come into play.

 

[bobbop]

If teams were fighting over each other to get Shattenkirk, why are we having to retain money on him in a trade...

Doesn't follow unless the argument is that his value has tanked big time over the last 18 months.

You take back money to get a better return.

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

nobody is getting traded yet.

They've played 3 games for Christ's sake

 

[East Coast Bias]

All these posts about trading guys who have sucked so far... Kirk, Names...

Who wants them if they blow????

The same fictitious GMs that are making major trades 3 games into the regular season...

 

[Webster]

Zucc you suck!

(I hope he doesn't read this)

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Redden got sent to Hartford smith sent to Hartford girardi bought out

Brad Richards healthy scratched in playoffs.

It’s very doable. We’ve done worse to veterans than making them a healthy scratch as the 7th dman. Especially when it’s obvious their play warrants it

Redden was before the bury-rule, Girardi's buy out was linked to the expansion draft, Smith was sent down because he looked like he ate the Stanley Cup. Staal can't be buried, there's no expansion draft coming up next year and for all his flaws, Staal is at least in good shape.

 

[Matt Rentfree]

Redden was before the bury-rule, Girardi's buy out was linked to the expansion draft, Smith was sent down because he looked like he ate the Stanley Cup. Staal can't be buried, there's no expansion draft coming up next year and for all his flaws, Staal is at least in good shape.

Here's a question - not trying to be a smart *** or anything but does Staal "know" he's bad? You would think so wouldn't you? I mean, he clearly knows good hockey when he sees it - he's been playing his whole life. IF that's the case, wouldn't you think he'd have some self respect and be ok with being benched?

I'm not saying he should voluntarily retire - leaving that much money on the table would be stupid. But you would think he has to, on some level, realize that he's not the player he used to be and would accept the consequences that arise from that.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Here's a question - not trying to be a smart *** or anything but does Staal "know" he's bad? You would think so wouldn't you? I mean, he clearly knows good hockey when he sees it - he's been playing his whole life. IF that's the case, wouldn't you think he'd have some self respect and be ok with being benched?

I'm not saying he should voluntarily retire - leaving that much money on the table would be stupid. But you would think he has to, on some level, realize that he's not the player he used to be and would accept the consequences that arise from that.

People who don't perform usually have an idea but don't know the full extent of it. Even if he's fully aware, it's hard to just accept being benched. When I was playing rugby and my performance wasn't up to standard, I was subbed and I agreed with the coach. I thought I had great carries, but I felt when I had a bad day. That's different from declining over time. And even if you're aware, you're too proud to admit it.

 

[haohmaru]

Here's a question - not trying to be a smart *** or anything but does Staal "know" he's bad? You would think so wouldn't you? I mean, he clearly knows good hockey when he sees it - he's been playing his whole life. IF that's the case, wouldn't you think he'd have some self respect and be ok with being benched?

I'm not saying he should voluntarily retire - leaving that much money on the table would be stupid. But you would think he has to, on some level, realize that he's not the player he used to be and would accept the consequences that arise from that.

Athletes have egos - they almost have to to be successful. Can't be easy to look at that guy in the mirror and say "You Suck" and believe you can't play as good as you once did ever again.

 

[Webster]

Cool video...they met back in August to shoot this. In pretty good company there..

 

[Tawnos]

Here's a question - not trying to be a smart *** or anything but does Staal "know" he's bad? You would think so wouldn't you? I mean, he clearly knows good hockey when he sees it - he's been playing his whole life. IF that's the case, wouldn't you think he'd have some self respect and be ok with being benched?

I'm not saying he should voluntarily retire - leaving that much money on the table would be stupid. But you would think he has to, on some level, realize that he's not the player he used to be and would accept the consequences that arise from that.

Of course he realizes his play has diminished, but I'm sure to him, the coaching staff, the GM, and the rest of the league, he isn't as bad as you (and the rest of this board) thinks he is. That's not to say they're right or wrong. It's to say that he's not coming out of the lineup or being forced into retirement or anything else.

 

[Edge]

I think we also have to understand that HF's take on things probably isn't even representative of most Rangers fans.

We have a very specific and unique culture around here, even by social media and message board standards.

It's not meant as a compliment, or as an insult. It is what it is.

 

[Machinehead]

If teams were fighting over each other to get Shattenkirk, why are we having to retain money on him in a trade...

Doesn't follow unless the argument is that his value has tanked big time over the last 18 months.

Retention doesn't imply that the player's value is low at all. Retention simply gets you more in a trade.

 

[Kovalev27]

Redden was before the bury-rule, Girardi's buy out was linked to the expansion draft, Smith was sent down because he looked like he ate the Stanley Cup. Staal can't be buried, there's no expansion draft coming up next year and for all his flaws, Staal is at least in good shape.

The reasons why are not the point based off your reasoning. The point iwas we have no problem blowing out vets if they don’t perform.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

The reasons why are not the point based off your reasoning. The point iwas we have no problem blowing out vets if they don’t perform.

We are talking about sitting a player, right? So only Richards applies then

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Of course he realizes his play has diminished, but I'm sure to him, the coaching staff, the GM, and the rest of the league, he isn't as bad as you (and the rest of this board) thinks he is. That's not to say they're right or wrong. It's to say that he's not coming out of the lineup or being forced into retirement or anything else.

Good points. The narrative is fully entrenched with Staal. It has been for years. His play has slipped for that long.

But with all of that said, Im still not convinced he isn't one of the 7 best defensemen on this roster. Thats a testament to how bad things are, and not Staal being particularly good. But thats looking at this in a vacuum of game to game performance. Considering where this team is, and with a long road ahead filled with losing anyway, it sure seems like it would make sense to cut bait as soon as possible.

 

[Fitzy]

Retention doesn't imply that the player's value is low at all. Retention simply gets you more in a trade.

Sure. RB's wording was that NYR would 'probably need' to retain some of the money. That implied to me that he meant for anything of value at all, unless the deal was to a team with cap constraints.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Retention doesn't imply that the player's value is low at all. Retention simply gets you more in a trade.

This is true. But, in Shattenkirk's case, he is coming off a major knee issue and looks like an absolute shell of his former self....so....value being low is a part of it in this instance.

 

[bobbop]

nobody is getting traded yet.

They've played 3 games for Christ's sake

20 games. American Thanksgiving. Check the number of deal made around this time.

 

[alkurtz]

Re: Staal. When the young Ranger D start to carve put places on the team later this year and next year (Hayek and others), Staal’s role as a mentor and example becomes of immense importance. He is universally respected and admired for all he has overcome in his career. His example is one that even hot shot rookies aspire to. And I don’t want to hear that “all he can teach them is how to play bad hockey.” Even with diminishing skills, he is an asset. In fact, he is more of an asset on a rebuilding team than he would be on a contender. Less ice time? Certainly. But to discard him after all he has done, how important he has been to this team for so long, for his place in Ranger history, and the grievous injuries he has suffered and overcome? No way. Let him play out his contract as he embraces a new role late in his career. He has been a gallant Ranger, a life-long Ranger, one of the best 1st round draft picks we have ever made, a long time “A” wearer, and someone I have been proud to root, and continue to root, for.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

HE shouldn't play.

Not when we have young capable players who are much better than he is.

 

[Kovalev27]

We are talking about sitting a player, right? So only Richards applies then

Not really just sitting. I considering bussing them to Hartford as worse.

We can pressbox Marc Staal at some point. Not today but soon and no one would blame management for it.

 

[bobbop]

Keep in mind that teams can retain $ on three players at any given time. If you are planning ahead for the trade deadline, probably best to save a slot for MZA and Hayes to help maximize return. The best positioned teams will be tightest to the cap. That leaves one wild card for another potential move. Plenty of suspects available.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

I think Rangers need to eat part of the salary and trade Shattenkirk ASAP, followed by Smith (probably will also need to retain part of his salary). Zucc seems to be declining, better trade him now. Why does it take so long to trade Namestnikov? I think this season is pretty much done in terms of making the playoffs, might as well properly develop some young players in NHL. Maybe even Lundqvist changes his tune by the end of the year.

 

[bobbop]

I think Rangers need to eat part of the salary and trade Shattenkirk ASAP, followed by Smith (probably will also need to retain part of his salary). Zucc seems to be declining, better trade him now. Why does it take so long to trade Namestnikov? I think this season is pretty much done in terms of making the playoffs, might as well properly develop some young players in NHL. Maybe even Lundqvist changes his tune by the end of the year.

It’s going to be a while — maybe years — before you have buyers lined up for all of those pieces. If a team was scouting Shattenkirk on Sunday, think they would be dealing today? Perhaps for pennies on the dollar.