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

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I am in the boat of re-signing both. Fans have their feelings on the matter, and everyone wants to talk about how great their cupboard is on HF.

But any rebuild is a 3-4 year climb. Without those two, the Rangers are going to sink in the standings no matter what.

The problem is that by doing that you essentially become Columbus in 2009 with the core in the place right now, plus Henrik Lundqvist and McD and Step and prospects and draft picks.

Do you really want to build around a set of players? This combination isn't winning now, will it get better with the assurance of low-end minutes now and the near future?

The team finished a rebuild to tear it all down again like Florida? An economically deprived hockey market?

I don't know. Fan sentiment is one thing, and journalist's commentary is another. It will ultimately come down to the brass and what they decide.

Why exactly, as a fan, am I supposed to be in such love with Girardi and Callahan that it trumps a pragmatic business decision?

 

[pld459666]

This is the part I am just not sure about.

That is how little confidence I have that the organization actually cares about the on ice results, I think they are far more interested in the financial results.

According to Forbes the franchise value went from 282M in 2005, to 750M in 2012.

Revenue has gone from 118M in 2005 to 199M in 2012.

Richards buyout for example would cost 18M spread over 12 years.

On the other hand Franchise value the way Sather and company have been doing things has increased 468M over 7 years. Revenue (and you know they are only counting the least amount they are legally allowed to under the CBA) has gone up on average ~11.5M per year

Buyouts and such are a pittance compared to generating revenue by selling hope with "star" players yearly. As long as they get a couple years out of them, the return on investment is there.

I would assume no matter what they do, sell, keep, resign those player or new ones, we'll see a very similar process going forward, it's a proven financial winner in this market.

And while I agree with this POV (not in application, but rather your point only) what is a more proven financial winner in this market is to have an actual product winner in this market.

You put this Rangers team as currently constructed and performing and the financial gains they generate up against a Rangers team that is top 3-5 in the NHL that is constructed correctly and performing like a true and legit contender and the type of revenue THEY could generate and it's night and day.

Same market, you can double your money.

raise ticket prices and charge more for ad space from higher end companies.

Dolan is an idiot and Sather is worse.

 

[Ola]

Dealing Callahan and Girardi does not have to be a step backwards for next season if we target young talent on the cusp of playing in the NHL.

I always like to think a team in the playoffs has a chance at the cup, no matter how unlikely. I see our chances at a cup this year as very unlikely with Callahan and Girardi, I see them as equally unlikely without them. I will enjoy watching this team play in the playoffs either way. If you can get a good young NHLer or close NHLer plus a top pick for them, its hard to say no to.

We knew a change in coaches would see some players become more effective and others less. Zucc, Kreider, McDonagh have become more effective. Callahan, Girardi, and Staal have become less. And then there's the age and contracts to consider.

NYR have the assets to build a brand new young core. Question is whether they have the stones to pull a big change of roster.

I agree with this, but I think its essential to build that core with a strong support.

We are not 15 players away from a cup. We probably have 15 players that a team like Boston or Chicago would jump on if they could get them for free at least (not all 15 at one time, but you get my point).

We do not however have a team that is built to play the style we want to play. We lack puckmoving ability frome the blueline, and all our D's are still adjusting. Just look at how far McD have come in a short time. That development will keep going for quite some time. We do not have much puck skill up front nor puck possession ability. We have also for a long time lacked power-forwards. (Our coaches must also fix the defensive problems, but that is OT for this thread.)

I am sure Slats will listen aorund on Cally and Girardi. But lets say that he can't find someone willing to pay his price, I do not however think we are stiffled and can't shift direction with this team.

This is how I see our cap situation (status que just to illustrate my point);

2014/15

FORWARDS
Chris Kreider ($2.200m) / Derek Stepan ($3.075m) / Rick Nash ($7.800m)
Derick Brassard ($3.700m) / Brad Richards ($6.667m) / Mats Zuccarello ($3.000m)
Carl Hagelin ($2.250m) / J.T. Miller ($0.894m) / Ryan Callahan ($6.000m)
Benoit Pouliot ($2.200m) / Dominic Moore ($1.000m) / Derek Dorsett ($1.633m)
Jesper Fast ($0.805m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Ryan McDonagh ($4.700m) / Dan Girardi ($5.500m)
Marc Staal ($3.975m) / Anton Stralman ($3.000m)
Conor Allen ($0.925m) / John Moore ($1.500m)
Dylan McIlrath ($0.703m)
GOALTENDERS
Henrik Lundqvist ($8.500m)
Cameron Talbot ($0.563m)
------
TOTAL AAV: $70,590,000
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $510,000

2015/16

FORWARDS
Chris Kreider ($2.200m) / Derek Stepan ($6.000m) / Rick Nash ($7.800m)
Derick Brassard ($3.700m) / Brad Richards ($6.667m) / Mats Zuccarello ($3.000m)
Carl Hagelin ($3.250m) / J.T. Miller ($2.000m) / Ryan Callahan ($6.000m)
Benoit Pouliot ($2.200m) / Dominic Moore ($1.000m) / Derek Dorsett ($1.800m)
Jesper Fast ($0.805m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Ryan McDonagh ($4.700m) / Dan Girardi ($5.500m)
Marc Staal ($6.000m) / Anton Stralman ($3.000m)
Conor Allen ($1.600m) / John Moore ($1.500m)
Dylan McIlrath ($0.703m)
GOALTENDERS
Henrik Lundqvist ($8.500m)
Cameron Talbot ($0.563m)
------
CAP: $78,000,000
TOTAL AAV: $77,800,000
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $200,000 (a little rough numbers)

There is a lot of mobility on that roster and changes that can be made. And even if some players have NMC's or NTC's, it only mean that the player and team must agree on a trade not that they never will be traded. Everyone is aware of that nowadays.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

That roster is guaranteed mediocrity, only it costs more. Changes must be made. That doesn't mean they will be Cally/G (honestly who can predict what this team will do?) but this roster is not adequate.

 

[CharlieCharleschuk]

...Girardi ...Say you move him to Detroit,...

This makes a lot of sense. Detroit has a reputation for picking up undervalued, canny, dependable veterans. Girardi in red and white would be a good look for years.

For that reason he should stay right here.

 

[pld459666]

I am in the boat of re-signing both. Fans have their feelings on the matter, and everyone wants to talk about how great their cupboard is on HF.

But any rebuild is a 3-4 year climb. Without those two, the Rangers are going to sink in the standings no matter what.

The problem is that by doing that you essentially become Columbus in 2009 with the core in the place right now, plus Henrik Lundqvist and McD and Step and prospects and draft picks.

Do you really want to build around a set of players? This combination isn't winning now, will it get better with the assurance of low-end minutes now and the near future?

The team finished a rebuild to tear it all down again like Florida? An economically deprived hockey market?

I don't know. Fan sentiment is one thing, and journalist's commentary is another. It will ultimately come down to the brass and what they decide.

I'm willing to wait.

I'm willing to build around the following guys:

Lundqvist Talbot (GOOD back up goalies are essential), McDonagh. Kreider, Miller, Hagelin and Stepan.

What I am not interested in doing is keeping the same guys that have been here for the last 5-6 years all the while the team has been better then mediocre just once during that time frame and that was watching every break that could go their way, go theri way only to be exposed as the offensively paper thin team they were.

The team is not fast, the team is not very skilled, the team is soft with a capital SOFT, they lack intensity and the overall team IQ is disturbingly low.

Fact is that while I have Stepan in my core, I would even entertain moving him. But as it is, he's a solid 2nd line center that can play well defensively.

There's alot about this Rangers team that I actually dispise.

So yeah, I would be willing to wait 3-4 years.

Absolutely.

 

[UlfSamuelsson]

Surprised at the number of people who want to trade them both. Thought there would be more of a fight to keep the homegrown fan favorites. Agree, it is the right move to sell. 95% sure Sather will try to add an 'Evander Kane type' if we are close to .500 at deadline, further depleting resources.

5% of me says Sather may actually see writing on wall. Wild inconsistency, injuries, roster turnover, star players under performing, it's all there. A year ago I would have said no way, but trading Gaborik for depth stunned me last year. Although a potential 40 goal scorer, he was at odds with coach, there was impending cap crunch, general underperformance and coming off injury....it was the right move.
I'm clinging to the fact that Sather understands that the last 5 or so Cup winners are mostly home grown, high end talent.

I do believe there will be a bidding war for Girardi. Between now and deadline, there will be a team that has an above average January, a below average January, and a bubble team with an average January, and all three will be looking for that extra something. While having decent power behind his RH shot, there isn't much accuracy (G even admits this) and no team is really bringing him in for offense. His minutes are first pairing no doubt. Plays a ton of top PK minutes against some lethal PP lines and helps team have respectable PK unit for years now. What team on a run wouldn't want that? Guy dives for every puck, rarely makes a stupid penalty, and plays a pure shutdown game.
Teams will be salivating for him. Find the worst taker that you think won't make it far that has the prospects you want. This way picks will be higher.


And am I missing something? Maybe there is rule I'm forgetting, but isn't outbidding Sathers thing?
Outbid for him in free agency if he fits the plan going forward. I probably wouldnt, due to demands and general wear and year on his body. Listen, Girardi is my guy, would love to see him as a Ranger forever, but that's unrealistic and the returns in February will be unwise to pass up.

 

[CharlieCharleschuk]

Same market, you can double your money.

raise ticket prices and charge more for ad space from higher end companies.

Dolan is an idiot and Sather is worse.

This financial angle is interesting.

If we're in the midst of a rebuild in two years when the Islanders move into the Barclay's center, I bet a lot of NYC hockey attention, including advertising dollars, will be focused on Brooklyn instead of MSG.

 

[Inferno]

Just because the Rangers trade Cally and Girardi (And a few other useless pieces) doesnt mean they are going into tank mode.

Rangers STILL would have Ryan McDonagh, Derek Stepan, Chris Kreider, MZA, Carl Hagelin, Brassard, Nash and Henrik Lundqvist.

Thats a team that is a good outline for a playoff/cup capable team.

They need to get more pieces that can play the kinda game that AV wants to play.

If you could trade some combination of Pouliot, Cally, Girardi, Boyle, Moore, Staal, MDZ, and net back 5-10 great prospects/picks...why wouldnt you.

even with all those guys in the lineup we've looked terrible.

in fact, i'd argue, we've looked better, at points, with their replacements than with them.

 

[Trxjw]

This makes a lot of sense. Detroit has a reputation for picking up undervalued, canny, dependable veterans. Girardi in red and white would be a good look for years.

For that reason he should stay right here.

Your reasoning for keeping him is a fear of what success he might find elsewhere?

 

[pld459666]

This financial angle is interesting.

If we're in the midst of a rebuild in two years when the Islanders move into the Barclay's center, I bet a lot of NYC hockey attention, including advertising dollars, will be focused on Brooklyn instead of MSG.

that's going to happen regardless.

new things in general spike interest. Islanders in Brooklyn is new, as such it will spike interest.

It's not about the short term gains of the novelty of a new building.

It's about the long-term gains that are sustainable when things are done the right way.

 

[aufheben]

AV isn't going anywhere unless this team is playing at the same level 12 months from now, IMO.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

And am I missing something? Maybe there is rule I'm forgetting, but isn't outbidding Sathers thing?
Outbid for him in free agency if he fits the plan going forward. I probably wouldnt, due to demands and general wear and year on his body. Listen, Girardi is my guy, would love to see him as a Ranger forever, but that's unrealistic and the returns in February will be unwise to pass up.

He overpays for free agents without a plan going forward, considering that changes every couple of years at most.

But lets say the Vigneault style of play is the plan going forward. Callahan and Girardi's games are almost the complete antithesis of what hes looking for.

 

[Off Sides]

And while I agree with this POV (not in application, but rather your point only) what is a more proven financial winner in this market is to have an actual product winner in this market.

You put this Rangers team as currently constructed and performing and the financial gains they generate up against a Rangers team that is top 3-5 in the NHL that is constructed correctly and performing like a true and legit contender and the type of revenue THEY could generate and it's night and day.

Same market, you can double your money.

raise ticket prices and charge more for ad space from higher end companies.

Dolan is an idiot and Sather is worse.

But building a winner is difficult, it takes a long timne to bear fruit, and in the end it may go poorly, even more so than it has. Rehashing a proven financial strategy is easy and it works as evidenced by the numbers.

 

[CharlieCharleschuk]

Your reasoning for keeping him is a fear of what success he might find elsewhere?

No. If they want him, considering their track record, it's a reason to second-guess the urge to trade him away.

It means you're undervaluing him.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

But building a winner is difficult, it takes a long timne to bear fruit, and in the end it may go poorly, even more so than it has. Rehashing a proven financial strategy is easy and it works as evidenced by the numbers.

Picking off the rotten fruit is just as important as bearing new fruit.

 

[CharlieCharleschuk]

that's going to happen regardless.

new things in general spike interest. Islanders in Brooklyn is new, as such it will spike interest.

It's not about the short term gains of the novelty of a new building.

It's about the long-term gains that are sustainable when things are done the right way.

Well, that spike will be much more acute if the Rangers are in the midst of a two to five year "rebuilding process". MSG would take this into account making personnel moves at this time, you'd have to guess.

 

[CharlieCharleschuk]

AV isn't going anywhere unless this team is playing at the same level 12 months from now, IMO.

I agree. He's here, he's going to get a chance to implement his system and will get some input into new personnel before he's let go.

 

[Off Sides]

Picking off the rotten fruit is just as important as bearing new fruit.

Right, it's almost as effective in terms of money.

I'll be honest I don't care one bit about basketball. If I owned the Knicks I would be doing the same thing Dolan does with the Rangers. Hire someone with some street cred, let him do whatever he wants and as long as the numbers all look good, point the right direction with the percentages going up at a semi constant rate, I'd just leave them alone. What do I really care, I am not a basketball fan. I would just see it as an asset that is increasing in value while also making me money.

 

[profchaos2001]

Your reasoning for keeping him is a fear of what success he might find elsewhere?

Its perplexing how many people take this view. When Pyatt got picked up off waivers, the main argument people had was "well now hes going to score hat tricks against us with the Penguins, we should've kept him!". Well that didnt happen.

By his logic we'd have a top line of Gaborik, Dupuis and Pyatt. With 2 Kevin Weekeses in goal.

 

[Machinehead]

Should we trade a 2nd pairing D-man who has the reputation of a #1, will get the return of a #1, and will make #1 money in the summer?

Gee that's a tough one.

 

[Raspewtin]

Should we trade a 2nd pairing D-man who has the reputation of a #1, will get the return of a #1, and will make #1 money in the summer?

Gee that's a tough one.

Obviously we're going to trade Del Zotto .

 

[Trxjw]

No. If they want him, considering their track record, it's a reason to second-guess the urge to trade him away.

It means you're undervaluing him.

Does that mean we want Kyle Quincey too? They gave up a first for him, but last I checked, he's trash.

Man, a few great draft picks and suddenly Detroit can do no wrong.

 

[Fitzy]

Callahan is our capain and I appreciate everything he has done, but we need to consider whether or not he is worth 6 years at 6 million.

Lets look at our right wings. We have Nash, Zuccarello, Callahan. Only 2 of those guys can play in the top 6.

Evaluation: Nash is here to stay, no matter how poorly he plays. NYR need him to be a 30+ goal guy. Zuccarello is our present leading scorer, on the uprise and is still in for an RFA contract that should see him paid at an acceptable level. Callahan is a great special teams player, but will be 30 next season and has a long history of injuries.

Decision- Loosing Callahan saves us 5-6.5 million on the cap for a player who probably wouldn't be in the top 6 with out current assortment. Maybe we deal Nash and keep Cally, but I'm not sure thats a preferable option, nor is moving one of them to the left wing.

Center- Richards is playing at about the best level he can at this stage in his career. Losing him will hurt a bit but, like with the right wings, we have two centers in Stepan and Brassard that are there to fill the top 6.

Evaluation- Each center has their own strengths and weaknesses. But if you look at the stat sheet their offensive production is very similar this year. Richards has a boost because of PP time, but Brassard has been linking nicely with Zucc on the PP.

Decision- Stepan as a first line center takes care of the defensive side of the game. Brassard at second line requires less defense, and he has the skill for it. Miller and Lindberg (Or Miller and rent-a-forth can fill in the bottom 6. Goodbye Richards.

Left Wing- Kreider's energence has shored up this position.

Evaluation- Hagelin is a 2nd-third line tweener, but playing him on the 2nd is the least of our concerns. I wouldn't count on Pouliot playing like this consistently, but if he does he'll be back. The Rangers need Kreider to keep playing like this, and there is no indication that he can't. Left wing is a weaker position in the NHL, so having your gunners there is good allocation.

Decision- NYR could look to add a scoring left wing to push Hagelin to the third line. Matt Moulson, Cammalleri, Greg Carey are options.

Defense- Everyone's most concerned position. Until we got Stralman it was pretty much Girardi and no one at right defense.

Evaluation- I think Girardi has been back to average this year. He had a few great seasons. He could get us a great return (Oilers, anybody?) in a deal. The question becomes who fills his spot. I think Del Zotto could be moved for a similar right sided defenseman, but a right sided Del Zotto isn't as good or as steady as Girardi.

Decision- If we deal Girardi, we can sign a very solid defensive defenseman on the right side who is less of a household name. Matt Greene can play the right side.

Of all of this, if Girardi agrees to reasonable terms, we should keep him. Callahan has become almost redundant and should be considered for a trade to Buffalo, possibly for Moulson and a good prospect/pick.

 

[LORDE]

I don't think they will get what Brooks assumes the return value should be. However if someone is going to pony up two "A" prospects and a pick then you take that deal. It's time to think about tomorrow Glen, not today.

This.

Brooks is more than way off if he thinks we're getting that for a rental of Girardi.

Like you said, IF that's what's out there then pull the damn trigger.