Larry Brooks: Sather must decide: Is dealing Girardi best for Rangers?

[Tawnos]

I also don't want to be stuck in a position where Girardi and Callahan leave for nothing or we get into a ridiculous bidding war.

Look at the ****show thats happening with Del Zotto. The asking price is all out of whack. I don't think the Rangers get a king's ransom for Callahan/Girardi, but recouping some assets and the cap flexibility look awfully appetizing considering this team isnt going anywhere anytime soon.

Maybe. Would it really be that big of a deal if we lost these guys for nothing instead of trading them for assets that weren't worth anything in the end? To me, the deal still has to be worth it. If the deal is similar to, but slightly smaller than, the Hossa/Kovalchuk trades, than I would say keep the players. Losing them for nothing amounts to the same thing.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Agreed. Although even if you get (2) of their b-level guys like Friberg and Kerdiles, that's a good deal.

Honestly I would take Kerdilles over Etem.

 

[CH2]

Build up picks and you have the potential to trade up into the top-3 of the draft. It's been a long time since the rangers have been able to get top-3 talent. Remember, any team that trades for Girardi or Callahan is likely to have a first round pick in the 20-30 range for 2014. Also, you have to look at sign ability for each player. Does Girardi want to stay in NY enough to take a home team discount? Same with Callahan because no matter what, you'll be overpaying for their services if they hit the free agent market.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

I am not relying on HF top 50, I know half the board hates me for not joining the love-fest of a bunch of very avg prospects. HF top 50 is at least not me.

Its just that the "grade A prospect" talk leads the thought the wrong way for many. There is a bunch of prospects out there that I would love to get. We are talking of a bunch of kids here that wasn't even close to making it to the U20 WJC's and if they did, was very avg there. That wasn't even close to being ranked in the top 50 among prospects outside the NHL.

That's fine - then, your disagreement with Viper and others is over which prospects to acquire in a deal for Girardi/Callahan, not whether to deal Girardi/Callahan.

Who are the guys that are not playing in the NHL right now that you WOULD want to get? Target them. Get picks and draft a few more of your own.

The team isn't winning the cup with them in the near future - and signing them to Redden contracts would actually work against winning the cup in the longer term future. So, deal them for the best assets you can acquire.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I swear, SBoB, BRB and TB... you guys would make great politicians. Do you have the talking points in front of you all the time or is it all off the cuff? Every post.

Its common sense. Nearly every issue with this team stems from a absent long-term team philosophy. We are in this thread having a collaborative conversation about the pro's and con's of trading these 2 players. Is this going on within the Ranger organization right now?

I fear that the decision already has been made, and its the dumbest one possible. "Push for the playoffs, buy at the deadline, and deal with the free agents in the summer"

 

[NYR Viper]

Etem had 23 pts in 14 games in the AHL. Have you seen him in the NHL?

And I am sorry, you can call the above grade A prospects and what not, they are just not going to come to NY and be difference makers.

How old is Etem? What happened to Kreider last year?

Very few young players are going to come in and be difference makers right away. You have to develop them. But while they develop, they are cost-controlled. That's a huge plus.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Its common sense. Nearly every issue with this team stems from a absent long-term team philosophy. We are in this thread having a collaborative conversation about the pro's and con's of trading these 2 players. Is this going on within the Ranger organization right now?

I fear that the decision already has been made, and its the dumbest one possible. "Push for the playoffs, buy at the deadline, and deal with the free agents in the summer"

Sadly, I fear you are spot on here, BRB.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Build up picks and you have the potential to trade up into the top-3 of the draft. It's been a long time since the rangers have been able to get top-3 talent. Remember, any team that trades for Girardi or Callahan is likely to have a first round pick in the 20-30 range for 2014. Also, you have to look at sign ability for each player. Does Girardi want to stay in NY enough to take a home team discount? Same with Callahan because no matter what, you'll be overpaying for their services if they hit the free agent market.

When was the last time a team traded into the top 3? It doesn't happen. Top picks are too valuable.

 

[NYR Viper]

Its common sense. Nearly every issue with this team stems from a absent long-term team philosophy. We are in this thread having a collaborative conversation about the pro's and con's of trading these 2 players. Is this going on within the Ranger organization right now?

I fear that the decision already has been made, and its the dumbest one possible. "Push for the playoffs, buy at the deadline, and deal with the free agents in the summer"

I agree. 'But we won't be good next year!" Who cares? I want to win a Cup in the next 5 years, not be mediocre.

Another name that I think would be a good fit is Brett Connolly from TB. They also have some very intriguing Russian prospects. Kucherov, Namestnikov, etc.

I think TB would be looking to improve their defense. Girardi fits the bill.

 

[NYR Viper]

When was the last time a team traded into the top 3? It's doesn't happen. Top picks are too valuable.

Even being able to pick a boom-or-bust pick with a second 1st rounder or second 2nd rounder is a big deal. That is when you can take a risk on a player like a Tarasenko or Kuznetsov in the past, etc.

 

[Tawnos]

I think it all depends on how well we play over the next month. If we're still sitting in the same spot, or worse at the Olympic break, maybe there will be some moves. If we have a good month, then we won't. As it stands, the team is 4 points out of 5th place in the conference, which would actually be in line with expectations going into this season. I can't see them making any moves while this close. Should they? Sure, I agree with that to some extent. Will they? I just don't see it. I also don't really consider that to be poor management, though.

Honestly, with the inconsistency this team has shown thus far this season, I can't believe that I'm still in a state where any of the three outcomes (slide, status quo, jump) would not surprise me.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I think it all depends on how well we play over the next month. If we're still sitting in the same spot, or worse at the Olympic break, maybe there will be some moves. If we have a good month, then we won't. As it stands, the team is 4 points out of 5th place in the conference, which would actually be in line with expectations going into this season. I can't see them making any moves while this close. Should they? Sure, I agree with that to some extent. Will they? I just don't see it. I also don't really consider that to be poor management, though.

"We'll see what happens" isn't poor management?

...Ok.

 

[KreiMeARiver*]

I'd say move them both, and Nash if we can....

move Staal, also.

buy out Richards in offseason

then make McDonagh the Captain

anyone have problems with this?

 

[Tawnos]

"We'll see what happens" isn't poor management?

...Ok.

If it is, then every team in the league is poorly managed.

 

[True Blue]

Sadly, I fear you are spot on here, BRB.

The problem is lack of a real game plan and really a lack of understanding your own team. Edge summed it up properly a few weeks ago. Player A becomes a free agent. Rangers decide that the player is not worth the money that he is looking for. Player A finds several teams willing to meet his price. Rangers find that they are lacking exactly what Player A had and spend several years trying to replace it.........Player B becomes a free agent..........

Sather made a fatal miscalculation when overlooking the team chemistry aspect. The Dubinsky/Prust locker room was better than the sum of their parts as they players played for each other and the name on the front of the jersey. That locker room was torn apart to get the crowning jewel, Nash. Now we discover (AGAIN!) that Nash needs someone. And that the Rangers miscalculated Dubinsky's value and what Prust brought to the team. Now the chase begins for what player can replace what those players brought. And what top line player can be brought in to play with Nash.....

Haven't we seen all this before?

Lack of vision and lack of plan. And mismanagement of assets. Some of the hallmarks of Sather's caretaking.

 

[RangerBoy]

Girardi isn't an offensive defenseman. He plays a lot of minutes is the argument for keeping him and who replaces him? How many more years will he be playing those top minutes? Do you want him playing top minutes for you? This contract will take him to 36-37 at major dollars. Good luck moving that contract. There won't be other players? The Rangers have to keep Girardi and Callahan because Lundqvist is signed. Really? The Rangers aren't winning anything with all three of those players signed long-term in their thirties. They haven't won by now. Take a step back and change the mix of the team. Callahan isn't a player like Sharp or Backes. He doesn't score like Sharp and he is as big as Backes. Kreider should keep getting get the PP minutes as the net presence. What is Callahan's role? Zuccarello is a better option as the 2nd line RW. A $6M plus third liner? Captain Callahan. Let other teams give them retirement contracts.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I don't think anyone is going to pay the price for Girardi and I don't think its in the Rangers best interest to trade him.

He is a top ten RHD in the league. RHD are what LHP's are to the MLB. There is a lot of less of them in the league, so when you have a good one, it will take a ton to get them in a trade.

If Sather is smart, he should ask for two "A" prospects and a first round draft pick. I don't know if that is Girardi's value, but that is what he should be asking for. I don't think any team out there would even consider Girardi for that price.

Girardi will sign a deal with the Rangers. He isn't going to get traded because no one will pay the price that it will take to trade for him and Sather isn't going to let him walk in free agency. I have a feeling that a deal will be done within the next month.

 

[True Blue]

Not saying that trading either is the right answer, I will however put this thought in. From what I am seeing, I am getting a feeling that Girardi was a Tortarella creation. Or maybe he is only able to play in such a system that Torts installed. Really, aside from Zucc & Krieder, most of the team is not playing as well. But Girardi's best days may either be behind him or his play may have been masked by Torts.

 

[KreiMeARiver*]

Girardi isn't an offensive defenseman. He plays a lot of minutes is the argument for keeping him and who replaces him? How many more years will he be playing those top minutes? Do you want him playing top minutes for you? This contract will take him to 36-37 at major dollars. Good luck moving that contract. There won't be other players? The Rangers have to keep Girardi and Callahan because Lundqvist is signed. Really? The Rangers aren't winning anything with all three of those players signed long-term in their thirties. They haven't won by now. Take a step back and change the mix of the team. Callahan isn't a player like Sharp or Backes. He doesn't score like Sharp and he is as big as Backes. Kreider should keep getting get the PP minutes as the net presence. What is Callahan's role? Zuccarello is a better option as the 2nd line RW. A $6M plus third liner? Captain Callahan. Let other teams give them retirement contracts.

I completely agree with every word of this.

We need to be SMART, and not be nostalgic about these guys. I want a cup, and these guys will be overpaid for what they are (and what they will become in a few years).

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

If it is, then every team in the league is poorly managed.

My problem is how I get the impression that the same type of vague platitudes is whats going on inside Ranger management right now. "If we play poorly over the next month, we'll examine some trades"

What the hell does that mean? Management should be meeting every day to define what playing well vs. what not playing well means, what players they will be targeting in the event of a trade, etc.

Foresight.

Sather uses the "our goal is to win the Stanley Cup" crap as cover to fly by the seat of his pants.

 

[True Blue]

He is a top ten RHD in the league.

Halfway through the season, that is not what he is

 

[NYR Viper]

Girardi isn't an offensive defenseman. He plays a lot of minutes is the argument for keeping him and who replaces him? How many more years will he be playing those top minutes? Do you want him playing top minutes for you? This contract will take him to 36-37 at major dollars. Good luck moving that contract. There won't be other players? The Rangers have to keep Girardi and Callahan because Lundqvist is signed. Really? The Rangers aren't winning anything with all three of those players signed long-term in their thirties. They haven't won by now. Take a step back and change the mix of the team. Callahan isn't a player like Sharp or Backes. He doesn't score like Sharp and he is as big as Backes. Kreider should keep getting get the PP minutes as the net presence. What is Callahan's role? Zuccarello is a better option as the 2nd line RW. A $6M plus third liner? Captain Callahan. Let other teams give them retirement contracts.

This pretty much reflects how I feel on this subject.

 

[Trxjw]

The discussion of trading Girardi always seems to boil down to two points being made by the "keep them" crowd:

1) They make us a better team.
2) They'll only net us mediocre prospects in return.

To the first point: Will they? Because right now they're both on the roster and we're a perennially mediocre hockey club. Basically all you can definitively say is that they'll put us right where we are now: A .500, playoff bubble team.

Now, you can argue that we can build around them and have a better jumping off point than if they're moved for other players, but until you know who those players are, you can't argue that conclusively either. You never know what a team will play for a guy like Girardi or Callahan. When the post-season runs around, the top items on the shopping list of every team are always the same; They want grit, defense, and scoring. Both of these players cover at least two of those items. We could very well fetch a ransom for each, and while there are certainly risks involved with prospects, you're never going to land that "Wow!" prospect if you refuse to trade for him when you had the chance.

I have a very, very hard time believing that this team couldn't move Callahan, Girardi and Del Zotto and not net at least two very important pieces for this team. Amateur scouting is a strength of this organization. It's time to start letting them lay the ground work for a new team.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Halfway through the season, that is not what he is

If we are going by half seasons, Talbot is the best goalie in the league.

I think when you consider Girardi's last few seasons, he is definitely a Top 10 RHD.

 

[TollefsenFan]

Girardi eats ice time, plays against the other team's best players, and is rarely injured. Dealing him for two "A" prospects or a couple of high draft picks doesn't necessarily help this organization short OR long term. You still have to replace him and those minutes. Not easily done. I sign him to a lengthy deal. If we don't, someone will.

Bingo! Trading Girardi would be a big mistake.