Rumor: Trade Rumor/Speculation Thread XIX: The Olympic Freeze

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

As long as an NHL player near Callahan's caliber is coming back its not a problem. There's no reason why we shouldn't be able to get:

1 x 2nd/3rd line NHL Player
1 x Middling AHL Prospect
1 x 1st/2nd Round Draft Pick

Not sure why people are hung up on getting a player back. If offered the choice, I'd much rather obtain a grade A prospect + a 1st, or two 1sts + a 2nd, as opposed to a 3rd liner + a grade C prospect + a 1st/2nd. I mean, if the player has upside, then great, I'll definitely take the guy who's playing in the NHL now, but I have no interest in a generic third liner to slot in for Cally.

Cally's role has been diminished, he hasn't been that effective (outside of one game) and we have at least 2, maybe as many as 4, players in HFD who are ready to step up and play on the 3rd line right now. Situations like this are precisely why you develop players on the farm.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

The other thing to remember about picks is that they are the most fungible of all trade assets. So, you need not necessarily use them to draft players - you can also flip them in part of a trade package for another player.

(Although I personally wouldn't mind for once actually stocking up over these next two drafts rather than coming away with only 4-5 guys as we have each of the last few years.)

 

[Thirty One]

Not sure why people are hung up on getting a player back. If offered the choice, I'd much rather obtain a grade A prospect + a 1st, or two 1sts + a 2nd, as opposed to a 3rd liner + a grade C prospect + a 1st/2nd. I mean, if the player has upside, then great, I'll definitely take the guy who's playing in the NHL now, but I have no interest in a generic third liner to slot in for Cally.

Cally's role has been diminished, he hasn't been that effective (outside of one game) and we have at least 2, maybe as many as 4, players in HFD who are ready to step up and play on the 3rd line right now. Situations like this are precisely why you develop players on the farm.

His role was been diminished but replacing him with either Miller or Fast, who have a combined 8 points in 59 NHL games, is a definite downgrade. If they show they are ready to take on a full-time 3rd line role next season, then you could trade the winger you get, but it wouldn't make sense to do it right before the playoff run, IMO.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

His role was been diminished but replacing him with either Miller or Fast, who have a combined 8 points in 59 NHL games, is a definite downgrade. If they show they are ready to take on a full-time 3rd line role next season, then you could trade the winger you get, but it wouldn't make sense to do it right before the playoff run, IMO.

I'm more open to promoting a player in season without being forced to do so by injuries. Especially when you have multiple options that could work.

 

[NGgator60]

A large part of that for me is that the east is sooo amazingly weak right now. Pittsburg is beatable. They are every season, and their defense and goaltending has not gotten better. That leaves Boston. When have you ever seen the East so incredibly weak? The NYR have been playing outstanding hockey, eye test, advanced stats, etc the team is playing well with the best goaltender in the world back to playing it. That's one hurdle to the SC, Boston. Boston is not immune to an upset. That's all we need is one upset. With the way they played the last month plus, we should beat any of the other EC teams, and Lundqvist only needs to steal a game or two for Boston. Anaheim, LA, SJ, they're all one injury from being beatable.

So with three sentences you completely dismiss the top-ranked team in the conference that actually has won a Stanley Cup with a roster of similar consistency. Also no mention of three other teams, in addition to Boston, that also happen to have accrued more points than the Rangers thus far. So everything is supposed to fall into place for the Rangers while these other teams just tread water and fade into the background? You dont think that they assume they'll too pick up their play after the break?

And lets not even discuss what would happen if the Rangers did actually make the SCFs. I am constantly amazed that fans act as if the end goal is the make the Finals and then, "anything can happen, YOLO " Well, no. This attitude is the carpe diem for the perennially mediocre. Not only are you banking on beating tremendous odds to reach the Finals but now you also compound the unlikelihood by competing against teams also possessing probable advantages over the Rangers.

Let's face the facts and not be constrained by such Ranger-biased tunnel vision; this is not a two horse race with the Rangers possessing a puncher's chance. At the moment, Vegas would be glad to take the other side of your bet if you happen to think the Rangers have even a 5% chance to win the Cup this season.

 

[haveandare]

So with three sentences you completely dismiss the top-ranked team in the conference that actually has won a Stanley Cup with a roster of similar consistency. Also no mention of three other teams, in addition to Boston, that also happen to have accrued more points than the Rangers thus far. So everything is supposed to fall into place for the Rangers while these other teams just tread water and fade into the background? You dont think that they assume they'll too pick up their play after the break?

And lets not even discuss what would happen if the Rangers did actually make the SCFs. I am constantly amazed that fans act as if the end goal is the make the Finals and then, "anything can happen, YOLO " Well, no. This attitude is the carpe diem for the perennially mediocre. Not only are you banking on beating tremendous odds to reach the Finals but now you also compound the unlikelihood by competing against teams also possessing probable advantages over the Rangers.

Let's face the facts and not be constrained by such Ranger-biased tunnel vision; this is not a two horse race with the Rangers possessing a puncher's chance. At the moment, Vegas would be glad to take the other side of your bet if you happen to think the Rangers have even a 5% chance to win the Cup this season.

Pitt won a cup 5 years ago now, and since then they've made it past the second round once, when they got swept in the conference finals. I don't mean to imply that the Rangers could beat them or shouldn't worry about them, but as the other poster is talking them down, I think you're talking them up. They have struggled in the post season for a while now.

Also, as for the teams in front of the Rangers in points - this Rangers team has turned it around pretty seriously since they had a very poor start that lasted a good long time. I think they're a bit better than they're numbers on the year. Again, not so much better that they're a lock for anything, but everything is falling in place for them now, it's not an issue of what is "supposed to" happen.

 

[NGgator60]

Pitt won a cup 5 years ago now, and since then they've made it past the second round once, when they got swept in the conference finals. I don't mean to imply that the Rangers could beat them or shouldn't worry about them, but as the other poster is talking them down, I think you're talking them up. They have struggled in the post season for a while now.

Also, as for the teams in front of the Rangers in points - this Rangers team has turned it around pretty seriously since they had a very poor start that lasted a good long time. I think they're a bit better than they're numbers on the year. Again, not so much better that they're a lock for anything, but everything is falling in place for them now, it's not an issue of what is "supposed to" happen.

Much of what you said is very fair and I agree with you to some extent. I think we'd both agree that for all of their post-season troubles (much of which I'd attribute to the meltdown of MAF, which shouldn't be expected again) the Penguins still have a much better chance of making it out of the East than the Rangers.

As for the other teams in the East, I dont think that the Rangers are the only team capable of surging or continuing to surge. Toronto has played great as of late, the Lightning will get back their best player, the Flyers now have their best player playing back up to form, etc.

And then we get to the SCFs and have to face the Hawks/Blues/Sharks/etc over a 7 game series.

My main point is that my greatest fear as a fan is that we are sitting here in five years with an aged core and perhaps another ECF appearance and a few first or second-round exits to show for our efforts. Trading Cally does not ensure the alternative but IMO keeping Cally helps to substantiate the status quo.

Or maybe Glen trades Cally and the Rangers hoist the Cup this Spring..then we all are giddy and can meet up for drinks at Avery's bar after the parade.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

As long as an NHL player near Callahan's caliber is coming back its not a problem. There's no reason why we shouldn't be able to get:

1 x 2nd/3rd line NHL Player
1 x Middling AHL Prospect
1 x 1st/2nd Round Draft Pick

I think if the trading team intends to keep him, yes. If the team views him as a rental then not as much or on the low end of your scale.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

I think if the trading team intends to keep him, yes. If the team views him as a rental then not as much or on the low end of your scale.

I've come to the conclusion that the key to happiness is to set the bar as low as possible.

 

[Thirty One]

http://nypost.com/2014/02/13/ranger...ak/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

There has been no dialogue over the Olympic break between the Rangers and pending free agent defenseman Dan Girardi. Discussions and negotiations are expected to resume next week prior to the Blueshirts’ first practice session on Feb. 20.

 

[haveandare]

Much of what you said is very fair and I agree with you to some extent. I think we'd both agree that for all of their post-season troubles (much of which I'd attribute to the meltdown of MAF, which shouldn't be expected again) the Penguins still have a much better chance of making it out of the East than the Rangers.

As for the other teams in the East, I dont think that the Rangers are the only team capable of surging or continuing to surge. Toronto has played great as of late, the Lightning will get back their best player, the Flyers now have their best player playing back up to form, etc.

And then we get to the SCFs and have to face the Hawks/Blues/Sharks/etc over a 7 game series.

My main point is that my greatest fear as a fan is that we are sitting here in five years with an aged core and perhaps another ECF appearance and a few first or second-round exits to show for our efforts. Trading Cally does not ensure the alternative but IMO keeping Cally helps to substantiate the status quo.

Or maybe Glen trades Cally and the Rangers hoist the Cup this Spring..then we all are giddy and can meet up for drinks at Avery's bar after the parade.

Yeah I can't disagree with too much of that, just wanted to add in some of my thoughts.

I think Pitt has a team D problem that goes a bit beyond MAF, especially when it comes to the slightly different style NHL hockey takes in the post season, but yes, they're way more likely to make it out of the east than the Rangers.

I don't think the Rangers are the only team capable of contenting to surge either. Something about Toronto doesn't inspire confidence in that team for me, but that's entirely subjective and based on relatively little in all honesty. TB is a dangerous team for sure. It's just a matter of time until Stamkos completely kills a post season. Philly has a huge hole in the goal, but they are very deep up front, so maybe they could make some noise anyway.

I don't worry too much about having an aged core, as one thing that the office has been on top of recently is injecting youth at the right times for the team and for the young players themselves, and they're seemingly showing with the Callahan negotiations (or lack thereof) that they have developed something like a realistic grasp on what to pay veteran players. However, I share the worry that the team just never gets beyond this second tear of competitive teams. That'd be awful. I think trading Callahan can help put that off if the return is geared toward the future. If they're going to take a step back, I say, take a full step back in order to take a full step forward. Don't take Stewart and a 1st if you can get an A prospect and a first, for example.

 

[RGY]

Give me Jagr at the deadline.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

I've come to the conclusion that the key to happiness is to set the bar as low as possible.

You got that one right.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

Give me Jagr at the deadline.

Have Devs made a trade with us in the last decade?

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

http://nypost.com/2014/02/13/ranger...ak/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

Was hoping that they'd use the time to lock him up. Having both him and Cally dangling makes me nervous.

 

[Oak]

Was hoping that they'd use the time to lock him up. Having both him and Cally dangling makes me nervous.

Maybe Danny boy is teaming up with Cally and they're trying to muscle Sather out of a few extra bucks.

 

[Ola]

Yeah I can't disagree with too much of that, just wanted to add in some of my thoughts.

I think Pitt has a team D problem that goes a bit beyond MAF, especially when it comes to the slightly different style NHL hockey takes in the post season, but yes, they're way more likely to make it out of the east than the Rangers.

I don't think the Rangers are the only team capable of contenting to surge either. Something about Toronto doesn't inspire confidence in that team for me, but that's entirely subjective and based on relatively little in all honesty. TB is a dangerous team for sure. It's just a matter of time until Stamkos completely kills a post season. Philly has a huge hole in the goal, but they are very deep up front, so maybe they could make some noise anyway.

I don't worry too much about having an aged core, as one thing that the office has been on top of recently is injecting youth at the right times for the team and for the young players themselves, and they're seemingly showing with the Callahan negotiations (or lack thereof) that they have developed something like a realistic grasp on what to pay veteran players. However, I share the worry that the team just never gets beyond this second tear of competitive teams. That'd be awful. I think trading Callahan can help put that off if the return is geared toward the future. If they're going to take a step back, I say, take a full step back in order to take a full step forward. Don't take Stewart and a 1st if you can get an A prospect and a first, for example.

You make a lot of sense, before the "I think trading Callahan can help put that off if the return is geared toward the future"-part.

There is absolutely no connection in your argument between Stamkos and the top tier contenders and the possible return for Cally, at least it seems if one are to believe the rumors.

I am not saying Cally should be kept at all cost. But I am a bit fed up with the talk that trading him will make us a contender, preferably in the near future too.

It's a loss if we have to move him. It's as simple as that.

 

[BroadwayHustle]

Guy on main board says NYR would be lucky to get a 2nd round pick for Marc Staal what the hell is wrong with people

 

[iamitter]

My drunk ass just noticed the initials of Nail Yakupov?


Is it a sign? Maybe.

 

[Jacques Strap]

My drunk ass just noticed the initials of Nail Yakupov?


Is it a sign? Maybe.

Maybe you got it from Yakupov thread on the trade forum?

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

You make a lot of sense, before the "I think trading Callahan can help put that off if the return is geared toward the future"-part.

There is absolutely no connection in your argument between Stamkos and the top tier contenders and the possible return for Cally, at least it seems if one are to believe the rumors.

I am not saying Cally should be kept at all cost. But I am a bit fed up with the talk that trading him will make us a contender, preferably in the near future too.

It's a loss if we have to move him. It's as simple as that.

And I would argue that this is exactly the sort of near-term, shortsighted thinking that has prevented this team from ever being a consistent contender.

"Does the return help this year or, at the very worst, next year? Nope? Well then, that's it, I don't want to hear another word. It's a failure. Better to keep the player and marginally improve our poor odds this year, long-term consequences be damned."

I don't get it. I really don't.

First of all, you may well be able to get assets that are in, or close to, the NHL that can help this/next year.

Secondly, even if you don't, the longer-term assets (e.g. draft picks) you do acquire (or other assets currently in the organization made more available due to the addition of new assets) may be usable to make a second trade that brings in help this/next year.

Thirdly, so what if it takes a couple of years?!? The goal is the cup. Better to build methodically towards a team that has multiple shots with good odds - even if it takes a couple of years to get there - rather than keep the player simply to increase your odds from 2% to 2.5% this year. (And, by the way, in so doing, leaving the team worse the following year when the player has walked and the organization has received nothing in return.)

 

[RangerBoy]

And I would argue that this is exactly the sort of near-term, shortsighted thinking that has prevented this team from ever being a consistent contender.

"Does the return help this year or, at the very worst, next year? Nope? Well then, that's it, I don't want to hear another word. It's a failure. Better to keep the player and marginally improve our poor odds this year."

I don't get it. I really don't.

First of all, you may well be able to get assets that are in, or close to, the NHL that can help this/next year.

Secondly, even if you don't, the longer-term assets (e.g. draft picks) you do acquire (or other assets currently in the organization made more available due to the addition of new assets) may be usable to make a second trade that brings in help this/next year.

Thirdly, so what if it takes a couple of years?!? The goal is the cup. Better to build methodically towards a team that has multiple shots with good odds - even if it takes a couple of years to get there - rather than keep the player simply to increase your odds from 2% to 2.5% this year. (Which, by the way, would then leave the team to be WORSE next year when the player has walked and the team has received nothing in return.)

Too many people on this board have no vision. Its all about yesterday,today and tomorrow. The NY Lottery slogan of "You've got to be in it to win it" can't be the way to operate the team.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

And I would argue that this is exactly the sort of near-term, shortsighted thinking that has prevented this team from ever being a consistent contender.

"Does the return help this year or, at the very worst, next year? Nope? Well then, that's it, I don't want to hear another word. It's a failure. Better to keep the player and marginally improve our poor odds this year, long-term consequences be damned."

I don't get it. I really don't.

First of all, you may well be able to get assets that are in, or close to, the NHL that can help this/next year.

Secondly, even if you don't, the longer-term assets (e.g. draft picks) you do acquire (or other assets currently in the organization made more available due to the addition of new assets) may be usable to make a second trade that brings in help this/next year.

Thirdly, so what if it takes a couple of years?!? The goal is the cup. Better to build methodically towards a team that has multiple shots with good odds - even if it takes a couple of years to get there - rather than keep the player simply to increase your odds from 2% to 2.5% this year. (And, by the way, in so doing, leaving the team worse the following year when the player has walked and the organization has received nothing in return.)

Too many people on this board have no vision. Its all about yesterday,today and tomorrow. The NY Lottery slogan of "You've got to be in it to win it" can't be the way to operate the team.

You guys make is sound so simple... planning for the future.

Nothing is certain. I understand BRFs point about stockpiling on picks increasing your likelihood of finding players that make a difference on the NHL team. I understand the need to prepare for the future through trading assets that don't fit in our future for ones that will.

I don't think anyone can sit on here with a straight face and tell us a certain move will benefit us for the future. Future = uncertainty.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

You guys make is sound so simple... planning for the future.

Nothing is certain. I understand BRFs point about stockpiling on picks increasing your likelihood of finding players that make a difference on the NHL team. I understand the need to prepare for the future through trading assets that don't fit in our future for ones that will.

I don't think anyone can sit on here with a straight face and tell us a certain move will benefit us for the future. Future = uncertainty.

The reason its not simple for the Rangers is because they buy into the bolded every year. Most successful operations have a long-term roadmap and an overarching set of principles on how to get there.

The Rangers dont. They never have, and they likely never will.

 

[94now]

Future = uncertainty.

I suggest we rename this site to Hockey Uncertainty Boards