Speculation: The future of Marc Staal

[NCRanger]

Staal is not better than Girardi, and Girardi is not better than Staal. They are both stay-at-home d-men who chip in with random offense.

Blame injuries, his brother, whatever. The kid has been in the league seven years and I just dont consider him a 6 million dollar d-man.

McDonagh has progressed perfectly -- his entire career. Staal has been up and down every season. He's hit or miss.

I hope Skjei is legit.

Girardi was an undrafted free agent who was never really expected to be anything other than a second pair at best. He's doing that, and in some ways, more.

Staal is not much better today than when he was a rookie. Not BAD, but he certainly has never progressed over a decent defenseman.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Staal is better than Girardi and it really isn't close.

Not since he got a puck to the face. He's just not the same.

 

[Doctyl]

Not since he got a puck to the face. He's just not the same.

Yes he is. Have you watched him play at all this year? He's been amazing.

 

[Crease]

I agree with Dactyl. If you rank based on entire body of play this season, Staal is #2 behind McDonagh.

 

[Doctyl]

Girardi was an undrafted free agent who was never really expected to be anything other than a second pair at best. He's doing that, and in some ways, more.

Staal is not much better today than when he was a rookie. Not BAD, but he certainly has never progressed over a decent defenseman.

Decent defenseman? He's a legitimate #1 dman. Easily top 30 in the NHL. Probably top 10 defensively. Between the rough game he had tonight and how spoiled we are having a top 10 dman in McDonagh, Staal is getting underrated.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

If I were trading Staal and Brassard I'd want a center that wasn't just drafted. There's a huge risk there. I'd much rather have a further along prospect who looks to have top 6 potential than an early draft pick at this point. Get someone who is a little less risky and a little closer to actually joining the team if you're giving up a year of Staal and a year of Brass.

Jordan Staal netted

Brandon Sutter
Brian Dumoulin
No. 8 Pick (Derrick Pouliot)

Why would we trade Staal AND Brassard for one prospect?

 

[jerseyjinx94]

Decent defenseman? He's a legitimate #1 dman. Easily top 30 in the NHL. Probably top 10 defensively. Between the rough game he had tonight and how spoiled we are having a top 10 dman in McDonagh, Staal is getting underrated.

I have to agree with this, and with injuries derailing his career, he could have been even better. Looks good as new now, though.

 

[qwertyaas]

So can Stastny, for 10 times the salary and cap hit

The choice isn't limited to either trading Staal or signing Stastny. I don't think either is the right move.

I agree to trade Staal if he goes the same route as Callahan did, or doesn't see the Rangers in the future.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

Staal has had a good year. Not great. Not average. Just a good, solid season. Lots of defensemen are having good, solid seasons.

Staal is a role player. I dont care where he was drafted or what tryout camp he was invited to. He's a role player.

Blame the injuries all day long. Focus on the now. Right now, Staal is a good defender on a mediocre team.

 

[smoneil]

Staal has had a good year. Not great. Not average. Just a good, solid season. Lots of defensemen are having good, solid seasons.

Staal is a role player. I dont care where he was drafted or what tryout camp he was invited to. He's a role player.

Blame the injuries all day long. Focus on the now. Right now, Staal is a good defender on a mediocre team.

See, posts like this make me question what you've been watching this year. Staal has not had a "great" season, a "good" season, an "average" season or a "lousy" season. From the start of the season until his concussion, he was one of, if not the worst defensemen on this team. He was brutal. He came back from the concussion, and after a couple of games, he has been phenomenal. The best defenseman on a couple of nights, a close second to McD on most nights. Yeah, he had a stinker against Carolina, but that's the first bad game he's had in months, after an extended string of very high quality play.

Anyone who tries to label Staal's season as totally great or average or poor just hasn't been watching IMO. He was putrid for a bit and then he just started dominating.

 

[broadwayblue]

See, posts like this make me question what you've been watching this year. Staal has not had a "great" season, a "good" season, an "average" season or a "lousy" season. From the start of the season until his concussion, he was one of, if not the worst defensemen on this team. He was brutal. He came back from the concussion, and after a couple of games, he has been phenomenal. The best defenseman on a couple of nights, a close second to McD on most nights. Yeah, he had a stinker against Carolina, but that's the first bad game he's had in months, after an extended string of very high quality play.

Anyone who tries to label Staal's season as totally great or average or poor just hasn't been watching IMO. He was putrid for a bit and then he just started dominating.

People are too quick to judge based on one game or one streak. It's just silly. Role player. Right.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

See, posts like this make me question what you've been watching this year. Staal has not had a "great" season, a "good" season, an "average" season or a "lousy" season. From the start of the season until his concussion, he was one of, if not the worst defensemen on this team. He was brutal. He came back from the concussion, and after a couple of games, he has been phenomenal. The best defenseman on a couple of nights, a close second to McD on most nights. Yeah, he had a stinker against Carolina, but that's the first bad game he's had in months, after an extended string of very high quality play.

Anyone who tries to label Staal's season as totally great or average or poor just hasn't been watching IMO. He was putrid for a bit and then he just started dominating.

People are too quick to judge based on one game or one streak. It's just silly. Role player. Right.

It's not 2011. Staal is no longer a top-pairing defensemen. He doesnt play the power play. He's having his worst season production-wise (not counting 2012) since 2009, and he's playing almost six minutes a game less than he did before the concussion in 2011.

Fans who call Staal "phenomenal" and think he's been "dominating" are the same ones who thought Dubinsky didnt really struggle in 2012 and Del Zotto's lack of production was because of the coaching staff.

 

[Boom Boom Geoffrion*]

Staal is not better than Girardi, and Girardi is not better than Staal. They are both stay-at-home d-men who chip in with random offense.

Blame injuries, his brother, whatever. The kid has been in the league seven years and I just dont consider him a 6 million dollar d-man.

McDonagh has progressed perfectly -- his entire career. Staal has been up and down every season. He's hit or miss.

I hope Skjei is legit.

It's not 2011. Staal is no longer a top-pairing defensemen. He doesnt play the power play. He's having his worst season production-wise (not counting 2012) since 2009, and he's playing almost six minutes a game less than he did before the concussion in 2011.

Fans who call Staal "phenomenal" and think he's been "dominating" are the same ones who thought Dubinsky didnt really struggle in 2012 and Del Zotto's lack of production was because of the coaching staff.

Staal is a better skater. He's better with the puck. Better breakout pass. Better gap control. Larger wingspan. Better stick-checker.

The only thing Girardi does better than Staal is he's managed to stay healthy, is a little more physical, and blocks more shots. Those few pro's don't make him a better player.

 

[TheTakedown]

If you don't think Staal is a better dmen and hockey player than Girardi, then I don't think I can ever take your opinion seriously ever again. Staal is a better skater. He's better with the puck. Better breakout pass. Better gap control. Larger wingspan. Better stick-checker.

The only thing Girardi does better than Staal is he's managed to stay healthy, is a little more physical, and blocks more shots. Those few pro's don't make him a better player.

Girardi is a bigger hitter, by the NHL standards anyway...

Girardi is more durable, but Staal is the more skilled, productive player by far

 

[haveandare]

Jordan Staal netted

Brandon Sutter
Brian Dumoulin
No. 8 Pick (Derrick Pouliot)

Why would we trade Staal AND Brassard for one prospect?

Well, if you read the post that I was responding to, that poster suggested moving them both for a high pick. I was saying that would be silly, as there is way more risk to a pick than to a prospect who is further along.

I didn't say it would be one prospect only, but a deal around a good center prospect would be preferable to a deal around a first round pick.

I don't even want to trade either of them, personally. If Staal doesn't want to resign, then that has to be dealt with, but I think Brass is a fine 3C.

 

[Emptyvoid]

I wonder what we could get with a package of Staal + Stepan/Miller. I certainly think we could pry a number one center with that package.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

If you don't think Staal is a better dmen and hockey player than Girardi, then I don't think I can ever take your opinion seriously ever again. Staal is a better skater. He's better with the puck. Better breakout pass. Better gap control. Larger wingspan. Better stick-checker.

The only thing Girardi does better than Staal is he's managed to stay healthy, is a little more physical, and blocks more shots. Those few pro's don't make him a better player.

Better at blocking shots, more physical, durable.


Check, please.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

So what if Staal is a better skater and better with the puck. He doesnt do anything with those skills. Hes essentially become a stay-at-home defensive defensemen who has one role - defend. Hes good at that one role.

Hes not worth more or less than Girardi. But who cares about durability, right. Its way more fun to talk about upside and skill when the guy isnt playing than the boring guy who never gets hurt but is there every night.

 

[smoneil]

Yeah, that was probably a bit of an overstatement. It was a reaction to your label of "role player" to our clear second best defenseman. I think of role players, and I think of guys like Eminger, Ward, or Mara. Guys who can play a dozen odd minutes on the third pair while the important guys get a breather. Klein is a role player. These are guys who would be in the top 6 of most teams. They would be 3rd pair on good teams. 2nd pair on mediocre teams. They wouldn't be top pair on any teams. Marc Staal would be top pair on more than half the teams in the league. He would instantly become the best defenseman on a few teams as well. To me, when you call a player like that a "role player" is signifies that you don't think too much of him.

In fairness, "Role player" is a term with a fairly wide range of possible definitions. Regardless, unless one of those definitions is "elite shut-down D" then you are still wrong on him, just as you were about the rest of the things I addressed in my post that you largely ignored.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Girardi was an undrafted free agent who was never really expected to be anything other than a second pair at best. He's doing that, and in some ways, more.

Staal is not much better today than when he was a rookie. Not BAD, but he certainly has never progressed over a decent defenseman.

Decent defenseman? Yeah, okay. He's a high end defensive defenseman with a great reach and great skating ability. Not a #1 guy, but an amazing anchor on the 2nd pairing. When healthy.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

Yeah, that was probably a bit of an overstatement. It was a reaction to your label of "role player" to our clear second best defenseman. I think of role players, and I think of guys like Eminger, Ward, or Mara. Guys who can play a dozen odd minutes on the third pair while the important guys get a breather. Klein is a role player. These are guys who would be in the top 6 of most teams. They would be 3rd pair on good teams. 2nd pair on mediocre teams. They wouldn't be top pair on any teams. Marc Staal would be top pair on more than half the teams in the league. He would instantly become the best defenseman on a few teams as well. To me, when you call a player like that a "role player" is signifies that you don't think too much of him.

In fairness, "Role player" is a term with a fairly wide range of possible definitions. Regardless, unless one of those definitions is "elite shut-down D" then you are still wrong on him, just as you were about the rest of the things I addressed in my post that you largely ignored.

The Rangers went 15-10-2 without Staal last year. They also won a playoff round without him.

In 2012, they were 23-9-4 before Staal returned from injury.

38-19-6 the last two seasons without Staal.

He's a good player. He's not elite. He was one of the best defensive defensemen in the game a few seasons ago.

There are 12 teams with a better record than the Rangers this year. You would think the top-12 teams in the league would have good to very good defensive defensemen. In fact, all teams have at least one guy who is solid at defending.

What the topic of this thread again? The future of Marc Staal.

If he wants more than 6 million, he should be traded. He simply isn't worth 6 million a season no matter what woulda-coulda-shoulda scenarios fans want to depict.

 

[Megustaelhockey]

Guys, there is a little too much flaming happening here. Please be sure to address the facts directly and avoid the temptation to make things personal.

 

[broadwayblue]

The Rangers went 15-10-2 without Staal last year. They also won a playoff round without him.

In 2012, they were 23-9-4 before Staal returned from injury.

38-19-6 the last two seasons without Staal.

He's a good player. He's not elite. He was one of the best defensive defensemen in the game a few seasons ago.

There are 12 teams with a better record than the Rangers this year. You would think the top-12 teams in the league would have good to very good defensive defensemen. In fact, all teams have at least one guy who is solid at defending.

What the topic of this thread again? The future of Marc Staal.

If he wants more than 6 million, he should be traded. He simply isn't worth 6 million a season no matter what woulda-coulda-shoulda scenarios fans want to depict.

The Penguins won games without Crosby and Malkin...does that make either of those players less talented than they are?

Marc Staal is absolutely worth 6M/season, and that's what he'll get. There are no scenarios to depict other than that.

 

[smoneil]

The Rangers went 15-10-2 without Staal last year. They also won a playoff round without him.

In 2012, they were 23-9-4 before Staal returned from injury.

38-19-6 the last two seasons without Staal.

He's a good player. He's not elite. He was one of the best defensive defensemen in the game a few seasons ago.

There are 12 teams with a better record than the Rangers this year. You would think the top-12 teams in the league would have good to very good defensive defensemen. In fact, all teams have at least one guy who is solid at defending.

What the topic of this thread again? The future of Marc Staal.

If he wants more than 6 million, he should be traded. He simply isn't worth 6 million a season no matter what woulda-coulda-shoulda scenarios fans want to depict.

The time period you refer to, the Rangers had three top four LD's (McD, Staal and MDZ). That is no longer the case. As much as people love to re-write MDZ's history because of his play this season, we don't win as many of those games without him in Staal's spot.

Again, you aren't talking to some fanboy Staal apologist here. The first few months of the season, I repeatedly called him the worst defenseman on the roster based on his play. I was vocally worried that the eye injury was something he wouldn't be able to come back from. I didn't want to trade him quite then (I thought he deserved the chance to have the time to figure things out). After he came back from that concussion this year, he's been as good as I've ever seen him. Pro-Staal fanboys refuse to acknowledge his putrid play for the first couple months of the season. People on the opposite end of that spectrum refuse to acknowledge the very high level of his play over the last couple months.

At the end of the day, Staal is worth the money for two reasons:

1- He's playing at a VERY high level, and has put the fear of his eye injury behind him.

2- We have nobody behind him even remotely ready for top-4 NHL duty. Anyone we sign in FA will be almost as expensive and probably not nearly as good. He's going to be more expensive than Girardi partly because he's the better player (though G is an excellent D as well), but mostly because the Rangers need him more than they needed Girardi.

Frankly, I think we should have tried a top 4 of MDZ/McD and Staal/Girardi before we shipped anybody out. It might have solved a LOT of problems.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

The time period you refer to, the Rangers had three top four LD's (McD, Staal and MDZ). That is no longer the case. As much as people love to re-write MDZ's history because of his play this season, we don't win as many of those games without him in Staal's spot.

Again, you aren't talking to some fanboy Staal apologist here. The first few months of the season, I repeatedly called him the worst defenseman on the roster based on his play. I was vocally worried that the eye injury was something he wouldn't be able to come back from. I didn't want to trade him quite then (I thought he deserved the chance to have the time to figure things out). After he came back from that concussion this year, he's been as good as I've ever seen him. Pro-Staal fanboys refuse to acknowledge his putrid play for the first couple months of the season. People on the opposite end of that spectrum refuse to acknowledge the very high level of his play over the last couple months.

At the end of the day, Staal is worth the money for two reasons:

1- He's playing at a VERY high level, and has put the fear of his eye injury behind him.

2- We have nobody behind him even remotely ready for top-4 NHL duty. Anyone we sign in FA will be almost as expensive and probably not nearly as good. He's going to be more expensive than Girardi partly because he's the better player (though G is an excellent D as well), but mostly because the Rangers need him more than they needed Girardi.

Frankly, I think we should have tried a top 4 of MDZ/McD and Staal/Girardi before we shipped anybody out. It might have solved a LOT of problems.

I said he had a very good season. I'm not knocking him because of one game.

It's what he's going to command. It's his first time at UFA, and he's had two very serious injuries. Look at 2015-16. Six players committed to 36 million bucks (if no Richards buyout). MSL is a UFA. Stepan and Hagelin will get bridge contracts. Staal is a UFA. Say they give Staal six million. Swap him with Richards following a buyout.

35 million bucks for six players (Nash, Henrik, Girardi, Staal, Klein, McDonagh). 40 million for the remaining 15-16 skaters. MSL, Stepan and Hagelin will combine for 12-14 million.

It will be more the same mediocrity. 6-9 seed. 15-22nd pick. Rinse, repeat.

The only three people who are absolutely untouchable are McDonagh, Kreider and Henrik. Maybe Stepan.

Everybody else will continue to do what Sather and Dolan want -- average season, a couple of playoff home dates, continue the cycle.