Rumor: Trade Rumor Thread IV - "What's all the roar over RoR?"
- Thread starter Ail
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Or it just means that I actually watch the games
Hagelin has been one of our best. Nash has been one of our best. Defensively Halpern has been one of our best. Stepan? Don't see it. Would love to give the kid the props but it's not there
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Stepan has played well. It's nice to see him maturing from the last few years. This may just be one of those awkward growing years for him so he might have some off nights.
NYR Viper
Registered User
I can do the same thing:
Nash
Richards
Gaborik
Stepan
Hagelin
Callahan
On paeper they are easily just as good as what you just mentioned.
Also, Getzlaf and Perry were VERY young when they won. Same for Staal.
BBKers
Registered User
Value for the dollar so far (only looking at stats/play vs $$)
YES
Staal - 1st rounder
Hagelin - Draft pick
Stepan - Draft pick
Girardi - Own product
McD - Acquired via Trade
Powe - Acquired via Trade
Stralman - UFA
Halpern - UFA
Biron - UFA
Gilroy - UFA/own
NO
Callahan - Draft pick
Lundqvist - Draft pick
Boyle - Acquired via Trade
Richards - UFA
Gaborik - UFA
Eminger - UFA
Asham (almost though) - UFA
Rupp - UFA but got traded
MAYBE
MDZ - 1st rounder
Miller - NYR 1st rounder
Kreider - NYR 1st rounder
Nash - Acquired via Trade
Ferriero - Acquired via Trade
Bickel - Acquired via Trade
Mashinter - Acquired via Trade
Pyatt - UFA
Last edited:
I forgot you couldn't be young to be an elite contributing player on a cup winning team? Staal scored 100 points that year..
If you honestly believe our top 6 is as good as CARs was then I'm at a loss. Am I the only one here that can look at our roster objectively?
Barnaby
Registered User
It's comparable in my opinion, but I could see this team adding another top 6 player in a perfect world... You're making it sound like you're comparing Gretzky's Oilers to the current Islander team...
Edit: Objective? This might be the most cynical hockey fan group in the NHL..
Maybe our top 6 isn't as good, but our Defense and Goaltending certainly matches/is better than some of these teams.
This post is directed at those, mostly smoneil, who feel that O'Reilly had a career year as a 21 year-old due to being on the same line as Landeskog.
To disprove this let's look at some examples of players who took sudden jumps in their production, like O'Reilly did last year. Listed below are players I found in about 15 minutes of searching (there are obviously more but the list below is sufficient for it's purpose) who took huge leaps (doubling their production) from one year to another.
Henrik Zetterbrg – doubled in 3rd season
Mikael Samuelsson – doubled in 3rd season
Henrik Sedin – nearly doubled in 5th season
Lubomir Vishnovsky – doubled in 5th season
Patrick Sharp – nearly doubled in 4th-5th full season
Stamkos – doubled in 2nd year
St Louis – doubled in 4th year
Seguin – tripled in 2nd year
Brian Boyle – sextupled previous production in 3rd year
Marian Gaborik – doubled in 2nd year
Mason Raymond – more than doubled production in 3rd year
Alex Burrows – tripled in 3rd year, nearly doubled in 4th year
Loui Eriksson – doubled in 3rd year
Dustin Byfuglin – nearly doubled in 4th year despite moving from forward to defense
Zdeno Chara – nearly doubled in 5th-6th full season
In addition, even despite the huge jumps in production listed above, nearly all the players did not have a career year during their breakout season. Also, many of the players were actually older than O'Reilly.
Taking into consideration that O'Reilly's age, physical development, improvement as a player, increased role on the team resulting in improved power play time and the overwhelming evidence that his rapid development is not nearly as unusual as you make it seem, I think we do not need to worry we are getting a player who peaked due to playing one season with Landeskog.
Development is not nearly always incremental. It can come in stops and starts, huge leaps, or some smooth sort of trajectory, but there is no evidence showing that O'Reilly is unique in his development as you seem to believe.
To disprove this let's look at some examples of players who took sudden jumps in their production, like O'Reilly did last year. Listed below are players I found in about 15 minutes of searching (there are obviously more but the list below is sufficient for it's purpose) who took huge leaps (doubling their production) from one year to another.
Henrik Zetterbrg – doubled in 3rd season
Mikael Samuelsson – doubled in 3rd season
Henrik Sedin – nearly doubled in 5th season
Lubomir Vishnovsky – doubled in 5th season
Patrick Sharp – nearly doubled in 4th-5th full season
Stamkos – doubled in 2nd year
St Louis – doubled in 4th year
Seguin – tripled in 2nd year
Brian Boyle – sextupled previous production in 3rd year
Marian Gaborik – doubled in 2nd year
Mason Raymond – more than doubled production in 3rd year
Alex Burrows – tripled in 3rd year, nearly doubled in 4th year
Loui Eriksson – doubled in 3rd year
Dustin Byfuglin – nearly doubled in 4th year despite moving from forward to defense
Zdeno Chara – nearly doubled in 5th-6th full season
In addition, even despite the huge jumps in production listed above, nearly all the players did not have a career year during their breakout season. Also, many of the players were actually older than O'Reilly.
Taking into consideration that O'Reilly's age, physical development, improvement as a player, increased role on the team resulting in improved power play time and the overwhelming evidence that his rapid development is not nearly as unusual as you make it seem, I think we do not need to worry we are getting a player who peaked due to playing one season with Landeskog.
Last edited:
Barnaby
Registered User
If you look at recent Stanley Cup winners then I wouldn't even look at the top 6 as a whole. I'd look at the center position first. Your recent winners all have one very important thing in common (aside from timely goaltending..) - strength and depth up the middle. Right now Richards is struggling and Stepan is solid and gaining steam. After that you have Boyle? Halpern? A 19 year old Miller? If anything, I think this goes to show that the Rangers currently have a weakness here. RoR may or may not be the answer, but I think something is missing...
2006 Carolina Hurricanes
2007 Anaheim Ducks
2008 Detroit Red Wings
2009 Pittsburgh Penguins
2010 Chicago Blackhawks
2011 Boston Bruins
2012 Los Angeles Kings
2006 Carolina Hurricanes
2007 Anaheim Ducks
2008 Detroit Red Wings
2009 Pittsburgh Penguins
2010 Chicago Blackhawks
2011 Boston Bruins
2012 Los Angeles Kings
NYR Viper
Registered User
Agreed. However many would argue that the Rangers didn't go the distance last season because of trouble scoring goals. Inserting Nash/Powe/Pyatt and removing Dubinsky/Anisimov/Prust/Mitchell will not be enough IMO. UNLESS Stepan and Richards begin to wow. And when I say wow I mean take over a game every once in a while(see: Gaborik vs. Bruins, Nash vs TB, Hagelin the past few games etc) which neither has done for a single game this year IMO
So everyone would be totally against trading a 3rd for Antropov? Chances are good he re-signs on the cheap and could give us another weapon in the top 6. I've seen him play this year and he hasn't been nearly as bad as people are making him out to be. I'm sure this applies to the rest of the league as well, but he's been better than Richards. And please, spare me the stats argument. Richards has been disgusting this year in all facets of the game including being a defensive liability with his 3000 turnovers at the blueline and no look passes
I call a spade a spade. If you want to blow smoke up this teams *** and avoid obvious deficiencies, by all means enjoy fantasy land
There you go Boyler I bleeped it out for you
Last edited:
Barnaby
Registered User
I don't want to trade for him. I REALLY don't want to resign him. If anything, the Rangers need speed up the middle. They don't need another plodder who makes Brian Boyle look like Pavel Bure. Another weapon in the top 6? This team could use some forward help, but just adding any random player isn't likely to be an instant success.
I find it interesting that you think so highly of your opinion that it means that if we disagree with you we're not looking at the roster objectively.
What makes you think Antropov will want to sign for significantly less than what he's signed to now? 1) He's 33 now and was slow as molasses during his first stint here, age is only going to make him even slower; 2) He's signed to a contract that averages out to about $4mil/yr. How does the word "cheap" play in to him signing here? Where are these "good signs" that he would take <$2mil? Because that's all he's honestly worth for his production, age, etc. And in what world would be be in our top-6..?
He would be on the 3rd line, nothing more. I'd rather save the pick and have it be useful as a pick itself or getting someone who isn't Antropov. I don't think he's bad, but he's not worth trading anything remotely of worth for at this point.
Barnaby
Registered User
What makes you think Antropov will want to sign for significantly less than what he's signed to now? 1) He's 33 now and was slow as molasses during his first stint here, age is only going to make him even slower; 2) He's signed to a contract that averages out to about $4mil/yr. How does the word "cheap" play in to him signing here? Where are these "good signs" that he would take <$2mil? Because that's all he's honestly worth for his production, age, etc. And in what world would be be in our top-6..?
I concur... keep the picks... choose more Swedes - for a small country, they sure know how to develop talent.
How is a player that played here and did well "some random player?" I think he would be alright as an interchangeable 2/3C here or even on the wing. Loved him in his first stint here, wicked shot which he still possesses. Agree to disagree.
It's like saying the sky is yellow. Obviously it's not, if you believe it is than enjoy fantasy land. That's essentially all I said. I find it interesting how this post brings nothing of value to the thread. Let's hear your trade proposals to upgrade this deficient top 6?
What makes you think Antropov will want to sign for significantly less than what he's signed to now? 1) He's 33 now and was slow as molasses during his first stint here, age is only going to make him even slower; 2) He's signed to a contract that averages out to about $4mil/yr. How does the word "cheap" play in to him signing here? Where are these "good signs" that he would take <$2mil? Because that's all he's honestly worth for his production, age, etc. And in what world would be be in our top-6..?
Nik is a UFA after this season. What do you think he's gonna get on the open market coming off what will likely be a statistically poor season on a bad WPG team? We could resign him for peanuts which for a guy with offensive upside I have no problem with it
People complain about this team being too "north american" and having too many "American college players." I propose Antropov (which several others have proposed as well) and everyone's up in arms. Hfboards at its finest
It's funny you seem to think that your OPINION is as objective as the color of the sky. Then you bring up old ass slow ass Antropov, who isn't better than anyone in our top 6 when they're playing average hockey.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly.. just like the majority of the rest of your posts
I'd do Antropov for a 4th at the deadline in a heartbeat. Glen Sather would too. You heard it here first
Our top 6 has underperforming players. All of our players when Tom Pyatt is not in the top 6 and Rick Nash is playing are better than Antropov. They're just underperforming right now.
Last edited by a moderator:
smoneil
Registered User
Did you think I wouldn't check or something? Let's take a look at your list. I've rearranged them into five groups--
The Gang of 2005/2006: The first year after the last lockout produced career years for most of the league. Did you not think it was kind of odd that half the guys on your list (Zetterberg, Samuelsson, Sedin, Vishnovsky, Sharp) ALL had such a huge jump in the same season? Doubling your previous career high WAS fairly "normal" in 2005-2006. Since that's not when O'Reilly did it, these guys are completely irrelevant.
Elite Prospects: Seguin (2nd overall) and Stamkos (1st overall) aren't expected to follow a "normal development." They are elite prospects. The only reason their second season stands out is because they didn't do it in their first season. People were calling Stamkos a bust in his first year. Their second years MET the expectations for the player/ceiling.
Guys that Actually Prove My Point For Me: You really included Boyle, Raymond and Burrows?! Boyle was a one year wonder. Raymond was a product of Kesler and the Sedins that year, and he's never come close to those numbers since. Burrows is pretty much ONLY effective with the Sedins.
Guys You Were Just Wrong About: Byfuglien did not actually double his production. Not even close really. He did see a jump in production, but it wasn't massive and it also came with a SEVEN MINUTE increase in ice-time. You are also the only person who seems to think he played defense that year. He was marked as a D on the roster, but he was basically a 4th forward the whole season. Dude made Green look defensively responsible.
You were also off on Gaborik. He saw an increase, but it wasn't double and he played 7 more games than the previous year.
Leftover Guys Who Don't Fit Into an Obvious Category:
Loui Eriksson IS a case of a player who doubled his production without being an elite prospect at the time. Even with that, he played 10+ more games than he did the previous season. Eriksson progressed to be sure, but it's not the exact same situation.
St. Louis is pretty much the same story--yeah, he did it, but he had also never played a full season before the one where he broke out.
As for Chara, yes, he doubled his numbers, but there's a bit of a difference between going from ~10 points to ~20 points and going from 26 points to 55. Also, if you look at Chara's line, he DOES develop incrementally.
I'm not arguing that a player never doubles his production. I'm arguing that it's not common. Out of your list, only a couple actually fit the bill, and they have mitigating circumstances. My entire point is that when a player starts putting up points well beyond what has always been his projected ceiling, it's likely got more to due with the elite guy who suddenly lined up next to him.
any chance Dallas would be willing to move Eriksson with say Goligoski for a package around DZ, Boyle, prospect/picks?
Killem Dafoe
Hold my baby, man.
No way in Hell. It would be nice though. I don't even think they trade Eriksson for MDZ + Boyle honestly.
yea i figured
Just thinking of players that Richards did well with in Dallas. At the same time if he cant click with Nash or Gaborik I dont know what will work
Killem Dafoe
Hold my baby, man.
yea i figured
Yeah I would give almost anyone not named McDonagh, Lundqvist, or Nash for him. It would be pretty amazing to see Sather pull off one of his miracle trades to bring in a top 6 player though.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
USA vs Canada- Centre Bell, MontréalWagers: 4Staked: $2,414.00Event closes - 2 days from now
- Updated:
-