Toggle sidebar

Rumor: Trade Rumor Thread III: "Trade 40 goal scorer for picks= Cup contenders" edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
RangerBoy said:
Its February 18. Trade deadline is April 3. O'Reilly has not played since when? How long is it going to take to get O'Reilly in game shape and get him acclimated into the team? Who is he playing with? Summer time deal.
Click to expand...

Played with Zuccarello in Metallurg Magnitogorsk until a few weeks ago. 5 + 5 in 12 games i believe
 
I was just thinking. If ROR has a good (not necessarily great) chance of becoming a 60-65 point guy that plays a good 2 way game I'd do it. Not like Richards will put up numbers better than that anyway. Plus ROR is 10 years younger. We really don't have any organizational depth at center. Richards is old, Stepan is probably a #2 at best, Miller is a question mark, Nieves is an even bigger question mark. A #1 center is more important than a guy that likely will never be better than our 3rd best D-man (though a lack of PMD in our system is hard to swallow). However, I don't want to trade for a guy whose 55 points was an outlier and will be more of a 40-45 point guy. Which would probably make him an ok #2.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
I was just thinking. If ROR has a good (not necessarily great) chance of becoming a 60-65 point guy that plays a good 2 way game I'd do it. Not like Richards will put up numbers better than that anyway. Plus ROR is 10 years younger. We really don't have any organizational depth at center. Richards is old, Stepan is probably a #2 at best, Miller is a question mark, Nieves is an even bigger question mark. A #1 center is more important than a guy that likely will never be better than our 3rd best D-man (though a lack of PMD in our system is hard to swallow). However, I don't want to trade for a guy whose 55 points was an outlier and will be more of a 40-45 point guy. Which would probably make him an ok #2.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.

Would you trade Del Zotto, who seems to me like a Phaneuf type for a guy who realistically compares to Mike Fisher?

That's trading a #1 all-around defender with some flaws in hockey IQ for a good shutdown guy, but 2C player.

I would laugh at the suggestion.
 
Kershaw said:
I completely agree.

Would you trade Del Zotto, who seems to me like a Phaneuf type for a guy who realistically compares to Mike Fisher?

That's trading a #1 all-around defender with some flaws in hockey IQ for a good shutdown guy, but 2C player.

I would laugh at the suggestion.
Click to expand...

But if 55 points was part of his progression and he scores in that range or hopefully higher he'd be more valuable than DZ. Our organizational center depth is scary bad and Richards is over 30 and seems to be on the decline.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
But if 55 points was part of his progression and he scores in that range or hopefully higher he'd be more valuable than DZ. Our organizational center depth is scary bad and Richards is over 30 and seems to be on the decline.
Click to expand...

I doubt ROR consistently hits 60+. Look at his production in Jr hockey. Wasn't even PPG. He benefited a lot from having a stud Langeskog on his line. Who IMO is going to be the best winger in the NHL soon.
 
Kershaw said:
I doubt ROR consistently hits 60+. Look at his production in Jr hockey. Wasn't even PPG. He benefited a lot from having a stud Langeskog on his line. Who IMO is going to be the best winger in the NHL soon.
Click to expand...

Well then I'd probably not do it. Not because DZ is such a great defenseman but because we have no PMDs on the Rangers or in the system. I don't count Stralman.
 
BTW, hate to be that guy but for a supposedly shutdown player with offensive skill that played with Landeskog his -1 is a bit of a head scratcher, no?
 
SnowblindNYR said:
BTW, hate to be that guy but for a supposedly shutdown player with offensive skill that played with Landeskog his -1 is a bit of a head scratcher, no?
Click to expand...

No.

Ryan Kesler was a -1 the year he won the Selke. Lidstrom was a -1 the last time he won the Norris.

Look at the Avs' defense. Bob Gainey would have been a minue player on that team.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
BTW, hate to be that guy but for a supposedly shutdown player with offensive skill that played with Landeskog his -1 is a bit of a head scratcher, no?
Click to expand...

Not really. The Avalanche were one of the lowest scoring teams last season, and mediocre defensively. One or two guys can't do everything. -1 was better than most of their team last season.
 
Anyone care to comment on how good of a chance ROR has of becoming a 60 point two way shutdown guy consistently capable of being a #1 on a good team? If he will I'd be willing to part with DZ for him.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
BTW, hate to be that guy but for a supposedly shutdown player with offensive skill that played with Landeskog his -1 is a bit of a head scratcher, no?
Click to expand...

No problem with that. He has a +/- of only -1 despite going out against other team's top lines. I wouldn't put too moch stock into it.

O'Reilly is definitely a legitimate shutdown player, I just question if his offensive progression last year was anamoly.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
Anyone care to comment on how good of a chance ROR has of becoming a 60 point two way shutdown guy consistently capable of being a #1 on a good team? If he will I'd be willing to part with DZ for him.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't be. First, let's look at the red flags here. O'Reilly didn't show "progression" in his offense. His offense more than doubled from the previous year. You can attribute that to something magical "clicking" in his head, or perhaps you can attribute it to the fact that he rode shotgun on the Landeskog gravy train. Yes, O'Reilly brings more than JUST offense, but there's a reason you don't pay big money or trade valuable pieces for defensive specialists--they aren't hard to find.

Next, let's look at the story that surrounds O'Reilly. He has ONE good season as a complete (offense and defense) player, and then immediately holds out for a contract north of 4 million dollars. He's touted as a heart and soul guy. He defends well. He may have benefitted from playing with a more talented winger. There is speculation that he might be sulking because his line-mate got the C over him. Is any of this sounding familar? It should. It's the Brandon Dubinsky story to a T with three slight differences--Dubi didn't hold out of any actual games, he had multiple high-production seasons before asking to be paid, and oh yeah--you guys HATED him. Now you want to throw OTHER valuable pieces to replace him!?

Finally, let's put all of that aside. We'll pretend that O'Reilly has demonstrated consistent 50+ point scoring over multiple years. We'll pretend that last year was all him and that Landeskog had nothing to do with it. We'll pretend that he's not a contractual nightmare. Guess what? It's STILL stupid to entertain trading Del Zotto for O'Reilly, and here's why:

Earlier in the thread, someone said that they would make the trade because we could go out and replace Del Zotto via trade or FA. Since Leetch left (ten years ago), how many 40+ point defensemen do you think we've had on this team? Though not for lack of trying (Redden, Poti, Rachunek, Ozo, etc), the Rangers have only had TWO defensemen score 40 or more points. Michael Del Zotto and Rozsival (who scored 40 even in 06-07, when scoring was still way up). Granted, some guys have come close (Rozsival with 30, Girardi with 31, Staal with 29, McD with 32), but ONLY those two guys have done it (over the last 10 years, MDZ has the best and third best offensive seasons from the blueline).

How many 50+ point forwards have we had in that same time frame? Fifteen (Callahan, Stepan, Dubinsky, Prospal, Gaborik, Richards, Gomez, Zherdev, Drury, Jagr, Nylander, Straka, Shanahan, Rucinsky, Holik) and most of those guys have done it more than once.

I know there's a segment of this fan base that irrationally hates this kid, but you need to wake up and realize just how rare an asset he is. Use your heads. The Rangers have developed three guys in the last ten years who can do what O'Reilly can do (and Hags would have had a chance to get there as well if he'd played the full season last year). They've signed 12 other guys that did the same. Despite trying to develop guys (Staal, Girardi, Pock, Tyutin) or sign guys (Rach, Poti, Ozo, Redden), only two guys ever did what MDZ has done once (and nearly done before).

There are no words strong enough to vilify the idea of trading something we've spent ten years trying to find in exchange for a guy who IS easy to find elsewhere. I'm completely baffled by the RO'R love in this thread.
 
I don't irrationally hate Del Zotto, but I'd trade him for ROR. DZ is a favorite of mine, actually, I just don't think he's going to reach his full potential playing behind Staal/Girardi/McD. For me, I'm more concerned about the center depth on this team than our defense. Trading for O'Reilly gives us 3 high quality lines.

That's just from my POV. I'm not going to drag your opinion down, because it's not a bad one. It's just a matter of the way one will look at this team, and what they believe the team needs. That said, you are really not realizing how good of a play ROR is. Trading DZ for him is a fair argument, but you don't need to knock on ROR to make that point. He's not just a 50+ point scorer. He's a two-way beast, very Mike Richards-like.

We'll see what happens.
 
smoneil said:
You shouldn't be. First, let's look at the red flags here. O'Reilly didn't show "progression" in his offense. His offense more than doubled from the previous year. You can attribute that to something magical "clicking" in his head, or perhaps you can attribute it to the fact that he rode shotgun on the Landeskog gravy train. Yes, O'Reilly brings more than JUST offense, but there's a reason you don't pay big money or trade valuable pieces for defensive specialists--they aren't hard to find.

Next, let's look at the story that surrounds O'Reilly. He has ONE good season as a complete (offense and defense) player, and then immediately holds out for a contract north of 4 million dollars. He's touted as a heart and soul guy. He defends well. He may have benefitted from playing with a more talented winger. There is speculation that he might be sulking because his line-mate got the C over him. Is any of this sounding familar? It should. It's the Brandon Dubinsky story to a T with three slight differences--Dubi didn't hold out of any actual games, he had multiple high-production seasons before asking to be paid, and oh yeah--you guys HATED him. Now you want to throw OTHER valuable pieces to replace him!?

Finally, let's put all of that aside. We'll pretend that O'Reilly has demonstrated consistent 50+ point scoring over multiple years. We'll pretend that last year was all him and that Landeskog had nothing to do with it. We'll pretend that he's not a contractual nightmare. Guess what? It's STILL stupid to entertain trading Del Zotto for O'Reilly, and here's why:

Earlier in the thread, someone said that they would make the trade because we could go out and replace Del Zotto via trade or FA. Since Leetch left (ten years ago), how many 40+ point defensemen do you think we've had on this team? Though not for lack of trying (Redden, Poti, Rachunek, Ozo, etc), the Rangers have only had TWO defensemen score 40 or more points. Michael Del Zotto and Rozsival (who scored 40 even in 06-07, when scoring was still way up). Granted, some guys have come close (Rozsival with 30, Girardi with 31, Staal with 29, McD with 32), but ONLY those two guys have done it (over the last 10 years, MDZ has the best and third best offensive seasons from the blueline).

How many 50+ point forwards have we had in that same time frame? Fifteen (Callahan, Stepan, Dubinsky, Prospal, Gaborik, Richards, Gomez, Zherdev, Drury, Jagr, Nylander, Straka, Shanahan, Rucinsky, Holik) and most of those guys have done it more than once.

I know there's a segment of this fan base that irrationally hates this kid, but you need to wake up and realize just how rare an asset he is. Use your heads. The Rangers have developed three guys in the last ten years who can do what O'Reilly can do (and Hags would have had a chance to get there as well if he'd played the full season last year). They've signed 12 other guys that did the same. Despite trying to develop guys (Staal, Girardi, Pock, Tyutin) or sign guys (Rach, Poti, Ozo, Redden), only two guys ever did what MDZ has done once (and nearly done before).

There are no words strong enough to vilify the idea of trading something we've spent ten years trying to find in exchange for a guy who IS easy to find elsewhere. I'm completely baffled by the RO'R love in this thread.
Click to expand...

Well spoken sir :handclap::handclap::handclap:
 
Who cares about awards and stats?

We have a good PMD.
We have two good Top 6 centers.

If we trade MDZ for ROR?

We have no good PMD.
We have three Top 6 centers.

How is that a forward move?
 
Panfork said:
Who cares about awards and stats?

We have a good PMD.
We have two good Top 6 centers.

If we trade MDZ for ROR?

We have no good PMD.
We have three Top 6 centers.

How is that a forward move?
Click to expand...

Center depth is arguably more important than having a good PMD, especially when there's McD, Staal, and Girardi to start off our defensive depth.

Richards is only getting older, Stepan looks like a solid #2, Miller's a question mark, and then there's Boyle. ROR makes the spine of the team very solid.

I'm so 50/50 on a MDZ/ROR move.
 
Zenith said:
I don't irrationally hate Del Zotto, but I'd trade him for ROR. DZ is a favorite of mine, actually, I just don't think he's going to reach his full potential playing behind Staal/Girardi/McD. For me, I'm more concerned about the center depth on this team than our defense. Trading for O'Reilly gives us 3 high quality lines.

That's just from my POV. I'm not going to drag your opinion down, because it's not a bad one. It's just a matter of the way one will look at this team, and what they believe the team needs. That said, you are really not realizing how good of a play ROR is. Trading DZ for him is a fair argument, but you don't need to knock on ROR to make that point. He's not just a 50+ point scorer. He's a two-way beast, very Mike Richards-like.

We'll see what happens.
Click to expand...

:banghead: last year all you guys were complaining that we should depart with our depth (dubi, anisimov) for high-end talent (nash), now we need to get that forward depth back again at the expense of our D? all the ****ing time last year the *****ing line of the year was we need high end talent we need high end talent we need high end talent. Now we get that and now the line is forward depth forward depth forward depth. Do you see where this is going? ****ing circles.

Don't rob Peter to pay Paul. Paul is a pretty cool guy and Peter is kind of a dick anyway.

Why do we need a "shutdown center" all of a sudden anyway? Because he's the shiny new toy for sale perhaps?
 
Zenith said:
I don't irrationally hate Del Zotto, but I'd trade him for ROR. DZ is a favorite of mine, actually, I just don't think he's going to reach his full potential playing behind Staal/Girardi/McD. For me, I'm more concerned about the center depth on this team than our defense. Trading for O'Reilly gives us 3 high quality lines.

That's just from my POV. I'm not going to drag your opinion down, because it's not a bad one. It's just a matter of the way one will look at this team, and what they believe the team needs. That said, you are really not realizing how good of a play ROR is. Trading DZ for him is a fair argument, but you don't need to knock on ROR to make that point. He's not just a 50+ point scorer. He's a two-way beast, very Mike Richards-like.

We'll see what happens.
Click to expand...

I'm not knocking O'Reilly. I'm not sold on his last season form being his new norm yet (and I won't be until I see him put up similar production without Landeskog). I think he's a very good player, and I would LOVE to have him center the 3rd line for this team. That doesn't mean I think that would be worth a guy like Del Zotto.

Six of the dozen plus guys I listed in my previous post are (were) ALSO "two-way beasts." I'm not trying to knock RO'R, and I'm not even saying that a player like him is easy to acquire--I'm just saying that it's significantly easier to acquire a guy like RO'R than it is to get a guy like MDZ, and the last decade of Ranger rosters backs me up on that point. It's not the pursuit of O'Reilly that baffles me. It's this fanbases willingness to trade a diamond (granted, one with a few rough edges still to smooth out) for a guy who may be a gem, but not such a rare one.
 
NY Lito said:
Center depth is arguably more important than having a good PMD, especially when there's McD, Staal, and Girardi to start off our defensive depth.

Richards is only getting older, Stepan looks like a solid #2, Miller's a question mark, and then there's Boyle. ROR makes the spine of the team very solid.

I'm so 50/50 on a MDZ/ROR move.
Click to expand...

And instead of logging 25+ minutes in the playoffs, the big 3 will log 30+ minutes.
As it is, we are thin on the backline, if anyone gets hurt, guess who will have to step up? That's right, Eminger or Bickel.
If they send back another PMD in the deal, then it is worth considering.
RoR is a luxury, MDZ is a need.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom