JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 79,463
- 16,898
Technically, but I think 3A/3B implies them splitting time which is dumb.At least he had him ahead of Pionk?
Technically, but I think 3A/3B implies them splitting time which is dumb.At least he had him ahead of Pionk?
You mean give up significant assets for a player, sign him to a very expensive contract and ask him to be something that he has not been before? Where have we seen this before?I have a sinking feeling that Trouba would end up in this board's dog house really quickly, or at the very least end up one of those players who quickly becomes polarizing.
You mean give up significant assets for a player, sign him to a very expensive contract and ask him to be something that he has not been before? Where have we seen this before?
Agreed. Panarin makes way more sense than trouba. I would rather lose games 8-7 next season than go for trouba. Need one more high pick then start going for it.And then include a career average of 68 games/a median of 65 games through six season, before wear and tear starts accumulating in the late 20s and early 30s.
Just have to tell you...I think the risk is greater than people realize, and the reward isn't nearly as high as they want to believe.
Big test for me is Pionk. Big extension is a big mistake in my eyes. The old regime does it without hesitation. Let’s see about now. It’s a big litmus test.
Sather was notably stingy particularly with RFAs... I don't think he ever went beyond 2 yrs in the last decade besides McDonagh. Giving Pionk more than 2 years wouldn't happen anyway.Big test for me is Pionk. Big extension is a big mistake in my eyes. The old regime does it without hesitation. Let’s see about now. It’s a big litmus test.
Even Jones didn’t return that much value...although it’s up to you to decide how much value Johansen had at the time of the trade.we're talking about Trouba and not Seth Jones right?
As it stands now in 2 years the Rangers will have one of the cheapest D corp in the whole league. I will give $7 to Trouba and won’t blink either from a perspective of giving this much to this particular player and in the contest of team’s salary cap.
Trouba injury concerns are also overblown (similar to how it was with Zibanejad). He’s not an overage veteran, this is not EK situation, not even close.
25 is only 5 years from 30, guy might as well retire now.I’m not gonna dive into the whole Trouba debate, although I like him a lot as a player.
However, if we’re saying a 25 year old player doesn’t fit our timeline, what in the actual **** are we doing here then?
I’m not gonna dive into the whole Trouba debate, although I like him a lot as a player.
However, if we’re saying a 25 year old player doesn’t fit our timeline, what in the actual **** are we doing here then?
No one said this. Not one person.25 is only 5 years from 30, guy might as well retire now.
Without an extension in place, why are the Rangers trading a ton for a player who can walk in a year?
With an extension in place, if that cap hit puts him in the top 10 among defenders league wide, is he really a top 10 defender league wide?
How much should a team trade for a player who carries a top 10 cap hit for his position, who may not be top 10 material?
The timeline fits, yet there is not any bargain to be had with Trouba and I'm not very confident he really is a top 10 defender league wide. In his own zone I do think he fits that category, he did well on the PP this past year, yet Buff and to a lesser extent Myers are likely taking some heat off of Trouba where if he were on the Rangers there is no such things.
This screams Shattenkirk part deux. But for 7 years, instead of 4 and more dollars.Just have to tell you...I think the risk is greater than people realize, and the reward isn't nearly as high as they want to believe.
Even with an extension in place, trouba isn’t going to require a massive package.
He’ll get some nice pieces, but not the roster player+ 1-2 top prospects + 1st rounder someone suggested.
Think roster player - decent prospect and a conditional pick or 2
I think that he fits the time line, but am very worried about bringing in someone who has trouble staying on the ice and paying him top dollars and a contract with NTC/NMC to be something he has never been is a recipe for disaster.I’m not gonna dive into the whole Trouba debate, although I like him a lot as a player.
However, if we’re saying a 25 year old player doesn’t fit our timeline, what in the actual **** are we doing here then?
This screams Shattenkirk part deux. But for 7 years, instead of 4 and more dollars.
That speaks to the personnel currently being run out as defensemen as opposed to Trouba actually being a top defenseman.trouba defensively is worlds better than any other defender on roster now.