Sam Rosen was right (Historical impact of Rangers' roster moves)

[Thirty One]

Their 2006 draft was obviously huge.
1: Phil Kessel
2: Milan Lucic
3: Brad Marchand

And also trading Raycroft for Rask.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

So would I but we don't all live in fantasy land. The reality of the situation makes what you want almost as likely to happen as me making billions of dollars breeding unicorns. You know this, I know you know this, but you for whatever reason would rather discuss hypothetical scenarios that no one in their right mind actually believe would happen than what is most likely to happen.

My memory is a little fuzzy, but I'm not sure not getting Tkachuk was an instance of Sather self-control.

Given the Rangers track record over the last 20 years none of this is shocking. It's actually improved recently, we didn't trade these assets for Keith Tkachuk at the end of his career but believe me if Sather had the chance he would have. Of all the names we've been linked to Martin St. Louis is probably the least likely to bite us in the ass.

I don't anyone would be saying a word if the trade was St. Louis for Callahan and, say, a 2nd. But its the disturbingly familiar behavior of being too willing to trade draft picks (especially after not having a 1 or 2 last summer) that has me annoyed. I mean, the team trading the UFA was the team that up the first. And St. Louis came out and said, he wanted to go the Rangers.

 

[aufheben]

It took me a while to realize you weren't talking about Mark Stuart.....

Well they did use him to acquire Peverley. Shrewd, well-time moves. Not magic.

 

[JimmyG89]

I think he's saying the 2nds effectively wash out.

Canceling out it is not. Our 2nd can become a 1st.

 

[Thirty One]

Canceling out it is not. Our 2nd can become a 1st.

Yes, but if it doesn't become a 1st, and Tampa re-signs Callahan, it subtracts a 7th and adds a 2nd. Net effect: the 2nd given becomes a 7th. But that's meeting him halfway.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

My memory is a little fuzzy, but I'm not sure not getting Tkachuk was an instance of Sather self-control.




I don't anyone would be saying a word if the trade was St. Louis for Callahan and, say, a 2nd. But its the disturbingly familiar behavior of being too willing to trade draft picks (especially after not having a 1 or 2 last summer) that has me annoyed. I mean, the team trading the UFA was the team that up the first. And St. Louis came out and said, he wanted to go the Rangers.

All I meant by the Tkachuk reference is we're lucky it didn't play out the way Sather would have liked.

I agree the price was steeper than expected, but all along I knew it was likely to happen. Sather zeroed in on him and right or wrong was going to get him. Hopefully it doesn't bite us in the ass. But looking at in as part of a long list of potentially crippling Sather trades or signings it's near the lower end for me.

I know this team (barring something terrible) shouldn't pick in the top 10 next year, outside of the surefire prospects it's extremely hard to guess what we gave up. So far I am ok with CBJ taking Kerby Rychel with our 1st from the Nash trade. I don't see him reaching the same level. Would he be a nice prospect to have? Sure, but we're not exactly in a terrible spot right now. Obviously if we lose 2 more 1sts it's going to hurt, hopefully they have a plan to recoup one of those picks.

I see this as a move to make a run next year more than this year, so it will be interesting to see what happens this offseason.

 

[Gardner McKay]

In my opinion, he's the least talented 1st overall pick in years.

Yet you had half of this board ready to mortgage our entire future for him as a #1 overall (they won't admit it now of course). That was " the type of move this team needs". How is he working out now? Hindsight is 20-20. Making that type of decision at the juncture this organization is at can prove costly and devastating. For every Hall and Toews there is a Yakupov, Stefan and Daigle. There is no guarantee. It is the classic known vs. unknown argument between a known player and a unknown prospect with high upside. People say that Sather lacks that vision. I would argue he was using caution.

 

[haohmaru]

I don't anyone would be saying a word if the trade was St. Louis for Callahan and, say, a 2nd. But its the disturbingly familiar behavior of being too willing to trade draft picks (especially after not having a 1 or 2 last summer) that has me annoyed. I mean, the team trading the UFA was the team that up the first. And St. Louis came out and said, he wanted to go the Rangers.

TB didn't have to oblige.

And, you can look at OMG HE'S 38 all you want, but the guy is and has been a top 10 forward in the league for forever and still is.

I wish the 1st was 2014 and 2nd was 2015, but Yzerman is no idiot, either. St. Louis isn't Vanek, Gaborik or Moulson. He's at another level, or two, above any of them when you look at his complete game. He's instantly the best forward on the team and with that comes a price.

Based on what Vanek and the like returned, you'd have to think Callahan would've brought a 3rd and 5th or something like that. I think that would've pissed me off even more.

 

[Gardner McKay]

TB didn't have to oblige.

And, you can look at OMG HE'S 38 all you want, but the guy is and has been a top 10 forward in the league for forever and still is.

I wish the 1st was 2014 and 2nd was 2015, but Yzerman is no idiot, either. St. Louis isn't Vanek, Gaborik or Moulson. He's at another level, or two, above any of them when you look at his complete game. He's instantly the best forward on the team and with that comes a price.

Based on what Vanek and the like returned, you'd have to think Callahan would've brought a 3rd and 5th or something like that. I think that would've pissed me off even more.

Although I agree with the premise of the point, remember that Garth Snow is the General Manager. That alone cuts Vanek's value about 50% considering how terrible he is

 

[haveandare]

Is the way Boston built their team really that magical? They got one of their most important players (as did a lot of teams) from the 2003 draft. Who did we take? They signed Chara instead of Redden.

I don't know about magical, but they definitely did get a lot of great forwards in later rounds. Krejci, Lucic, Marchand, Bergeron - not one first round pick in that bunch. NYR have/had Callahan, Dubi, Stepan, Hagelin and Anisimov who were NHL forwards picked out of the first round, but it's pretty obvious that the Bruins group is on another level.

 

[Trxjw]

Yet you had half of this board ready to mortgage our entire future for him as a #1 overall (they won't admit it now of course). That was " the type of move this team needs". How is he working out now? Hindsight is 20-20. Making that type of decision at the juncture this organization is at can prove costly and devastating. For every Hall and Toews there is a Yakupov, Stefan and Daigle. There is no guarantee. It is the classic known vs. unknown argument between a known player and a unknown prospect with high upside. People say that Sather lacks that vision. I would argue he was using caution.

If we're being honest, the truth is that for every Yakupov (way to early to even put him in this category, but I'll oblige you here), Stefan or Daigle, there are at least a few Hall's, Kane's, and Stamkos'. The fact of the matter is that, especially in the modern era, most first overall picks become stars in this league.

I don't think it's far fetched to say that in two years Yakupov could very well be every bit as good as St. Louis offensively. Let's also not act as if there is any certainty surrounding MSL's ability to remain an elite talent into his 40's. Very, very few players have ever achieved that. People are playing hope off as a guarantee, and that's just not the case.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

TB didn't have to oblige.

You're right, they didn't. But, Sather made it pretty easy for them to oblige

I wish the 1st was 2014 and 2nd was 2015, but Yzerman is no idiot, either. St. Louis isn't Vanek, Gaborik or Moulson. He's at another level, or two, above any of them when you look at his complete game. He's instantly the best forward on the team and with that comes a price.

You can't compare St. Louis to the Moulson and Vanek situation. He's not a UFA to be and he was forcing his way out of town.

Based on what Vanek and the like returned, you'd have to think Callahan would've brought a 3rd and 5th or something like that. I think that would've pissed me off even more.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: sign him or get something for him were not the only options.

There was value in keeping Callahan for a playoff run.

There was value in having more time to negotiate with Callahan. Maybe the fact that he wasn't traded makes him re-evaluate his worth to other teams.

There was value in keeping him for a playoff run and then potentially trying to get a pick from a team who would want that exclusive negotiating window leading up to free agency starting.

They could have revisited a St. Louis at the draft.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

If we're being honest, the truth is that for every Yakupov (way to early to even put him in this category, but I'll oblige you here), Stefan or Daigle, there are at least a few Hall's, Kane's, and Stamkos'. The fact of the matter is that, especially in the modern era, most first overall picks become stars in this league.

I don't think it's far fetched to say that in two years Yakupov could very well be every bit as good as St. Louis offensively. Let's also not act as if there is any certainty surrounding MSL's ability to remain an elite talent into his 40's. Very, very few players have ever achieved that. People are playing hope off as a guarantee, and that's just not the case.

Yes. One of my favorite arguments of this saga. Callahan was a broken down piece of trash already at 28 years old, and St. Louis has 3-4 elite years left at 38 years old.

 

[Trxjw]

I don't know about magical, but they definitely did get a lot of great forwards in later rounds. Krejci, Lucic, Marchand, Bergeron - not one first round pick in that bunch. NYR have/had Callahan, Dubi, Stepan, Hagelin and Anisimov who were NHL forwards picked out of the first round, but it's pretty obvious that the Bruins group is on another level.

The difference is that the Bruins chose to primarily build around those players. The Rangers, on the other hand, have made it more of a point to use those players as trade chips to find the talent that they were unable to otherwise acquire.

The Bruins added to a very good core of players with some key trades and FA signings. The Rangers tried to use their core to build a better group of players, but failed to identify the right ones.

 

[haveandare]

The difference is that the Bruins chose to primarily build around those players. The Rangers, on the other hand, have made it more of a point to use those players as trade chips to find the talent that they were unable to otherwise acquire.

The Bruins added to a very good core of players with some key trades and FA signings. The Rangers tried to use their core to build a better group of players, but failed to identify the right ones.

The Bruins players are also better across the board. It's easier to decide who to build around when the players make it easy. But yeah, I agree with your point.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

The Bruins players are also better across the board. It's easier to decide who to build around when the players make it easy. But yeah, I agree with your point.

Is this considered a valid counterpoint? Whose job is it to draft and develop better players?

 

[haohmaru]

You're right, they didn't. But, Sather made it pretty easy for them to oblige

Disagree. Surest sign of that is by how disappointed the TB fan base is. The trade is actually pretty fair considering St. Louis has another year on his contract and will likely sign here for another year or two after that.

You can't compare St. Louis to the Moulson and Vanek situation. He's not a UFA to be and he was forcing his way out of town.

I was using that to lead in to my point about Callahan and to point out that we got the best player on deadline day.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: sign him or get something for him were not the only options.

There was value in keeping Callahan for a playoff run.

There was value in having more time to negotiate with Callahan. Maybe the fact that he wasn't traded makes him re-evaluate his worth to other teams.

There was value in keeping him for a playoff run and then potentially trying to get a pick from a team who would want that exclusive negotiating window leading up to free agency starting.

They could have revisited a St. Louis at the draft.

Problem with that logic is that St. Louis > Callahan. By a significant margin. If you're okay with "keeping Callahan for a playoff run" why wouldn't you be okay with getting a far better player for a "playoff run". Makes little sense. And you can't deal with "maybe this" and "maybe that". The Rangers offered Callahan a very, VERY fair deal and he told them to get lost.

St. Louis at the draft would've been maybe a little cheaper, but still would've cost. He's the leading scorer over the last 5 years at a cap hit that's beyond reasonable. Would you rather have 50-60 games from Callahan at 6.5M or 80 from St. Louis at 5.3M?

Love Cally, but he overplayed his hand here.

 

[haveandare]

Is this considered a valid counterpoint? Whose job is it to draft and develop better players?

It's not a counterpoint at all, it's an explanation. Boston built around their guys because they were the quality of player you can build around. Of that Rangers group, let's be honest, there's no Bergeron, there's no Lucic - there's pretty good two-way players, not one of whom became an obvious first line talent at any point in their careers so far.

 

[Doctyl]

Keeping Cally for a playoff run makes absolutely no sense. Look at his playoff history. Cally would not make a difference. In fact I would say he has a better chance at getting injured and being a complete non factor than he does at being a difference maker in the playoffs.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Disagree. Surest sign of that is by how disappointed the TB fan base is. The trade is actually pretty fair considering St. Louis has another year on his contract and will likely sign here for another year or two after that.

Maybe that's one of the biggest differences between Yzerman and Sather. Yzerman knows that he needs to make moves that will make his hockey team better. Sather makes moves that will appeal to the fan base (who's plunked down for a #26 jersey?).

And St. Louis may re-sign here, but what reason is there to believe that he's going to come cheap?

I was using that to lead in to my point about Callahan and to point out that we got the best player on deadline day.

Winning deadline day doesn't do a lot for me.

Problem with that logic is that St. Louis > Callahan. By a significant margin. If you're okay with "keeping Callahan for a playoff run" why wouldn't you be okay with getting a far better player for a "playoff run". Makes little sense.

No, it makes perfect sense. I would be okay keeping Callahan for a playoff run because it costs the team nothing to do that. They keep picks and, at very least, they gain capspace if he goes somewhere else.

And you can't deal with "maybe this" and "maybe that". The Rangers offered Callahan a very, VERY fair deal and he told them to get lost.

Find me one post were I said they should have given in to his contract demands. Fine me one post where I said, he deserves what he was asking for.

St. Louis at the draft would've been maybe a little cheaper, but still would've cost[/QUOTE]

Neither you, nor I, know what the cost would have been.

He's the leading scorer over the last 5 years at a cap hit that's beyond reasonable.

Super. Will he be the leading scorer over the next three years?

Would you rather have 50-60 games from Callahan at 6.5M or 80 from St. Louis at 5.3M?.

I'm not sure I want either. But, again, please show me where I was an advocate for giving Callahan that contract.

Love Cally, but he overplayed his hand here.

Not terribly relevant, but, yes, he did.

 

[True Blue]

The Bruins players are also better across the board. It's easier to decide who to build around when the players make it easy. But yeah, I agree with your point.

Well then make it a point of drafting better players and finding ones that fit better. Instead, you have a so-called team who undergoes a facelift every 3 years or so.

 

[True Blue]

No, it makes perfect sense. I would be okay keeping Callahan for a playoff run because it costs the team nothing to do that. They keep picks and, at very least, they gain capspace if he goes somewhere else.

Exactly, Singin'. There are people who are trying to turn this into a Callahan vs. MSL debate. It is not. It always goes back to having a vision for a team and proper use of assets.

 

[haohmaru]

Maybe that's one of the biggest differences between Yzerman and Sather. Yzerman knows that he needs to make moves that will make his hockey team better. Sather makes moves that will appeal to the fan base (who's plunked down for a #26 jersey?).

Yeah, because trading your best playing player for a worse player and draft picks makes his hockey team "better". Yzerman hasn't accomplished anything yet. Not saying he won't, but you can't really nominate the guy as a great GM. Not yet.

And St. Louis may re-sign here, but what reason is there to believe that he's going to come cheap?

Nothing. Callahan isn't cheap either. If St. Louis plays like an elite player then he should be payed like one.

No, it makes perfect sense. I would be okay keeping Callahan for a playoff run because it costs the team nothing to do that. They keep picks and, at very least, they gain capspace if he goes somewhere else.

It costs them whatever value he has as a pending UFA and the risk of losing him for nothing. What if the Rangers held onto him and don't make the playoffs? You can make an argument about keeping picks (which you don't know what they will develop into - especially in this year's draft) vs. getting back an elite player

Find me one post were I said they should have given in to his contract demands. Fine me one post where I said, he deserves what he was asking for.

Okay. Find me the post where I said you said that... ?

Super. Will he be the leading scorer over the next three years?

We'll see.

 

[haveandare]

Well then make it a point of drafting better players and finding ones that fit better. Instead, you have a so-called team who undergoes a facelift every 3 years or so.

Do you honestly think they aren't trying to make a point of building the best team they can?

I agree all day long that someone else needs to be in charge, but I'm fairly certain that Sather is trying to do his best, he's just out of touch with the modern league.

 

[haohmaru]

Exactly, Singin'. There are people who are trying to turn this into a Callahan vs. MSL debate. It is not. It always goes back to having a vision for a team and proper use of assets.

Callahan, "the asset", was worth a 3rd and a 5th.

This is a weak draft year. 2015 is a strong draft year which is why I didn't like that part of the deal. Let's not lose sight of the fact that St. Louis is pretty significant asset, too.