Speculation: Trade Rumor/Speculation Thread XXIII: Getcha' pitchforks ready.

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

Or maybe we can look at the young pieces we have, say wow, this is a great core to build around and try to continue to build around it with younger guys.

Did we inquire about Seguin, how about F.Forsberg who was gotten for a complete steal in Erat.

All i hear from the Rangers is rumors about acquiring old and/or overpaid players. MSL, Nash, Richards, etc. Guys who are expensive and not young. Look at the good teams, they are all built around younger guys, outside of maybe San Jose (who have been living off the success of the shrewd trade for Thornton years ago).

We are incapable of doing that. What even happens five years down the road? Lundqvist, MSL, Nash, Girardi, Lundqvist, etc.

You can't think about just one year anymore, especially when you're a Rangers team that is not up there with Boston or Pittsburgh yet.

Honestly, even those teams seem to think longer term then the Rangers and they're extremely competative!

Or we can continue to revert back to the norm, signing or trading for the typical shiny new toy and do what we've been doing since Sather took over.

It's an approach that's been rinsed and repeated a million times with this Rangers management and yet, people still seem to miss out on the fact that it's never going to work.

Who exactly are we moving from our core?.. which is Nash, Lundqvist, Mcdonagh, Kreider, Stepan maybe, and possibly Girardi..? we're not moving any of those guys for MSL. Weré talking about trading Ryan Fkin Callahan who is walking anyway, a prospect and a draft pick. If the Rangers aren't including any of Miller,Skejl, Duclair, Buchenevich, Kristo.. whats the big real risk here?

 

[NYGBleedBlueNYR]

Vatanen, Karlsson, & cond pick for Girardi would make me very happy

 

[AHB*]

What futures plan? When he acquired Antropov? Jokinen? Clowe? When he signed Drury? Redden? Gomez?

As I was mentioning to Mikos, Slats has committed to the future exactly one time - in 2004. Other than that, it's always been about the current season.

And the funny thing is, just because I'm not on board with "anything can happen" doesn't mean I'm pessimistic about the future of this team or that I'm advocating a full-on tank job. I (and I think most who agree with me, like GAG and Swayze) am not advocating ripping out the core pieces and selling them off for parts. All we're saying is that when you haven't yet reached contender status, you should:

a) avoid spending assets for short-term improvements; and
b) use your own fringe and/or expiring assets to acquire long-term parts.

Show a little patience and vision for a year or two. Then, once you've got a proper core, I'm absolutely on board with bringing in rentals and older guys to fill in around the edges.

Like I posted over the weekend, follow the blueprint of the 90s Yankees - not the 80s.

Completely agree and not that it was a wrong move, but in 2004 Slats made all those moves that gutted the team (properly so) but then got Jagr, who was able to lead the team to mediocrity they hadn't seen in a decade and it made Slats revert right back to his old ways.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Everyone worries about assets for the 'future'....3 to 4 years from now Lundqvist and Nash are a lot older. I think the window for this team to go all the way is these next couple years IMO

Yeah, kinda when Sather made that ridiculous trade for McDonagh four years ago. Guy was two years away from playing in the NHL, three years away from being a really good contributor, but Sather made the trade anyway. Flies in the face of your logic.

Sadly, the McDonagh trade is an aberration for Sather. Usually we're doing the opposite.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

What futures plan? When he acquired Antropov? Jokinen? Clowe? When he signed Drury? Redden? Gomez?

As I was mentioning to Mikos, Slats has committed to the future exactly one time - in 2004. Other than that, it's always been about the current season.

And the funny thing is, just because I'm not on board with "anything can happen" doesn't mean I'm pessimistic about the future of this team or that I'm advocating a full-on tank job. I (and I think most who agree with me, like GAG and Swayze) am not advocating ripping out the core pieces and selling them off for parts. All we're saying is that when you haven't yet reached contender status, you should:

a) avoid spending assets for short-term improvements; and
b) use your own fringe and/or expiring assets to acquire long-term parts.

Show a little patience and vision for a year or two. Then, once you've got a proper core, I'm absolutely on board with bringing in rentals and older guys to fill in around the edges.

Like I posted over the weekend, follow the blueprint of the 90s Yankees - not the 80s.

Ok. Please tell me who the futures you want for Callahan are.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

Yeah, kinda when Sather made that ridiculous trade for McDonagh four years ago. Guy was two years away from playing in the NHL, three years away from being a really good contributor, but Sather made the trade anyway. Flies in the face of your logic.

Sadly, the McDonagh trade is an aberration for Sather. Usually we're doing the opposite.

and the Rangers have are starting to put a core together in place right now.. Nash, Kreider, Mcdonah, Hank, Stepan, Zucc?. Girardi? etc. They have a core in place, they aren't good enough to win with the current team they have but as long as they aren't moving any of those core players, or their very good prospects, I dont see the big freaking deal.

 

[AHB*]

Who exactly are we moving from our core?.. which is Nash, Lundqvist, Mcdonagh, Kreider, Stepan maybe, and possibly Girardi..? we're not moving any of those guys for MSL. Weré talking about trading Ryan Fkin Callahan who is walking anyway, a prospect and a draft pick. If the Rangers aren't including any of Miller,Skejl, Duclair, Buchenevich, Kristo.. whats the big real risk here?

So you're going to trade away yet another decent pick (likely a 1st), a prospect (you take out basically all of ours, so who's going) and Callahan, who can return surely, a decent grouping of picks and prospects for a 38 year old man.

I'm not saying we're moving anyone, I"m saying, like was said above me, it's not impossible to build around a good core while sacrificing older players on there way out for younger picks and prospects.

It's not a full on tank job by any means, it's called smart asset management. The good teams that are consisntely competative always do this. Miller comes up, replaces Callahan, Callahan traded for picks and prospects. Those picks and prospects come up and hopefully replace Nash, Hags, etc in a couple years. Trade them for other guys, etc.

It's actually somewhat simple, just longer term and not a quick fix.

Teams are businesses, they are LONG TERM investments. Have you ever heard of short term investments that have returns which are insanely high, because that's a farce. The rangers have been in the business of short term fixes since Sather took over and it has netted us one fantastic ECF appearance.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I'm usually a "preach patience" person. But, frankly, the only assets I would not be willing to add to a deal for MSL are Miller, McIlrath, Skjei and any #1. (Yes, that means I add either Lindberg or Fast with Callahan to get MSL for the next few years.) I think adding a dynamic offensive weapon like MSL to this current squad could take it to another level, including the playoffs. Adding a career PPG player usually has that effect on a team.

 

[E-Train]

Or we can continue to revert back to the norm, signing or trading for the typical shiny new toy and do what we've been doing since Sather took over.

It's an approach that's been rinsed and repeated a million times with this Rangers management and yet, people still seem to miss out on the fact that it's never going to work.

I would prefer to continue building with youth but the shiny new toy syndrome isn't Sather's alone. Who was the last GM not to subscribe to this theory? Craig Patrick? From trader Phil to today it seems to be the ongoing philosophy.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Ok. Please tell me who the futures you want for Callahan are.

2 (3 if you can get 'em) good quality picks/prospects/young players plus a conditional pick.

 

[Doctyl]

I can't believe how many people are against MSL.

 

[Jim Ramsay]

Yeah, kinda when Sather made that ridiculous trade for McDonagh four years ago. Guy was two years away from playing in the NHL, three years away from being a really good contributor, but Sather made the trade anyway. Flies in the face of your logic.

Sadly, the McDonagh trade is an aberration for Sather. Usually we're doing the opposite.

yeah pick the one trade that was so ridiculously lopsided according to everyone in the hockey world....Bob Gainey was an idiot and this is why he is no longer a GM.

We have a very solid team of young homegrown players with a good group of veterans....

Only on hfboards do people believe a team full of rookies win a Stanley cup

 

[AHB*]

Ok. Please tell me who the futures you want for Callahan are.

None of us are GM. Did you know Erat was going to be traded for Forsberg last year? HOw about Seguin for Eriksson? The trades are out there, especially for valuable pieces like Callahan. What exactly they are, no one knows. But every year we see them and every year i wonder why the heck the Rangers aren't in on them.

As said above by JG, the McDonagh trade was the pinnacle move of Sather's career as a Ranger GM. At the time, he was a high end prospect. The fact that we've done it with a complete lug in Gomez, means we can do it with other players as well, especially valuable rentals like Cally.

 

[NYR Sting]

I could be completely off - but in Fall 2011 wasn't there a post on here about Ron Greschner emphatically stating that Rick Nash would be a Ranger? NMC + wanting to come to NY. That was pretty much all she wrote and it was a matter of if not when.

The Boomer leak via the "friends of the NYR" circle feels the same. I expect MSL to be a Ranger. Just my gut feeling. I am not overly happy about it (thought it would be fun as hell to watch him) but all signs are pointing that way, deadline or summer.

**** Boomer. I said this would happen 2 years ago.

I firmly believe the Rangers will attempt to pry him out of Tampa sometime during the 2013-2014 season

I just didn't think it would come at the expense of losing Callahan.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

2 (3 if you can get 'em) good quality picks/prospects/young players plus a conditional pick.

And risk giving up on this year, a year where our defense is starting to play as cohesively as it did during our ECF run, our offense is outperforming any offense we've had under Torts, and our goalie is playing as lights out as he has.

Ok. Again. Don't count your chickens before they hatch. There is a tangible chance of us going far this year. The prospects may or may not turn out.

edit: I'm making a bunch of mental farts today with "there", "their", and "they're". No idea why. I apologize.

 

[AHB*]

I would prefer to continue building with youth but the shiny new toy syndrome isn't Sather's alone. Who was the last GM not to subscribe to this theory? Craig Patrick? From trader Phil to today it seems to be the ongoing philosophy.

It's a major problem with New York sports and one of the reasons you see our teams fail time and time again.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

if Sather can get a better return than MSL for Callahan than more power to him, but if all he can get from other teams is prospects/picks I'll take the chance on MSL because the Rangers can't draft worth didly.

 

[NernieBichols]

This may go down to the deadline. Or a day or two before. And I think there may be couple more moves made.

I was just listening to AV's post-practice audio on Carp's site and something stuck out at me. And thats when AV is answering whether he needs to wait until after the trade deadline to assess the team's chances going forward into the playoffs. And AV says' After the next three games, we're gonna have (pause) team after we play Toronto next week, we're gonna have the team we finish with'

AV paused because he was about to say 'different' team. And he stopped himself, and then continued to answer the question. Begins around the 3:35 minute mark if you want to hear.

Im posting this for everything, but I thought the folks who are worried the Rangers will stand pat may find that reassuring.

http://rangers.lohudblogs.com

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

What futures plan? When he acquired Antropov? Jokinen? Clowe? When he signed Drury? Redden? Gomez?

As I was mentioning to Mikos, Slats has committed to the future, exactly one time - in 2004. Other than that, it's always been about the current season.

And the funny thing is, just because I'm not on board with "anything can happen" doesn't mean I'm pessimistic about the future of this team or that I'm advocating a full-on tank job. I (and I think most who agree with me, like GAG and Swayze) am not advocating ripping out the core pieces and selling them off for parts. All we're saying is that when you haven't yet reached contender status, you should:

a) avoid spending assets for short term improvements; and
b) use your own fringe and/or expiring assets to acquire long-term parts.

Show a little patience and vision for a year or two. Then, once you've got a proper core, I'm absolutely on board with bringing in rentals and older guys to fill in around the edges.

Like I posted over the weekend, follow the blueprint of the 90s Yankees - not the 80s.

I think Lundqvist, McDonagh, Nash, Girardi, Staal, Kreider, Stepan and Zuccarello is a proper core. Only the first three are stars but they're all very good players and they'll stay around for a while (well, assuming we keep Girardi). It's not about getting older or younger, it's about adding on to what we have intelligently. If they're 20 and they're undervalued, bring 'em in. If they're 40 and they're undervalued, bring 'em in. We have room to go both ways.

I find it hard to believe that people who would turn down an expiring Callahan and medium assets for three or four years of Marty St. Louis are looking at this with a flexible approach.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

I can't believe how many people are against MSL.

the same people were against signing Jagr... who has 50 points and still going very strong. MSL keeps himself in tip top shape and has shown no signs at all of slowing down.

 

[Infinitum Vitae*]

I can't believe how many people are against MSL.

Can't believe it either

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

**** Boomer. I said this would happen 2 years ago.




I just didn't think it would come at the expense of losing Callahan.

Nice call.

 

[E-Train]

It's a major problem with New York sports and one of the reasons you see our teams fail time and time again.

Agreed. Being a Yankee fan from 82-92 was a nightmare.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

And risk giving up on this year, a year where our defense is starting to play as cohesively as it did during our ECF run, our offense is outperforming any offense we've had under Torts, and our goalie is playing as lights out as he has.

Ok. Again. Don't count your chickens before they hatch. They're is a tangible chance of us going far this year. The prospects may or may not turn out.

1) It's not giving up - if Hank, McD, Nash, MZA, Kreider and Co. can go on a run, bless 'em. I'll be rooting my ass off for it.

2) Under what scenario would you be willing to not sell assets to prop up the team's chances? (Again, I didn't say actively tank, I said simply avoid making moves focused on bolstering the team in the short run.) How far out do they have to be? Half the teams in the league can make the same arguments about their chances that the Rangers can.

3) Chicken counting? The guy who wants to roll the dice on one playoff run is the one who's counting chickens. Not the guy who wants to add young assets - the whole point of building a base of them is that it increases your odds of success.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

This may go down to the deadline. Or a day or two before. And I think there may be couple more moves made.

I was just listening to AV's post-practice audio on Carp's site and something stuck out at me. And thats when AV is answering whether he needs to wait until after the trade deadline to assess the team's chances going forward into the playoffs. And AV says' After the next three games, we're gonna have (pause) team after we play Toronto next week, we're gonna have the team we finish with'

AV paused because he was about to say 'different' team. And he stopped himself, and then continued to answer the question. Begins around the 3:35 minute mark if you want to hear.

Im posting this for everything, but I thought the folks who are worried the Rangers will stand pat may find that reassuring.

http://rangers.lohudblogs.com

Totally agree. He said "obviously" - like things will be different then. Somethings going down, its just a matter of when.