Rumor: Trade Rumor Thread XIII
- Thread starter NYR Viper
- 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
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,300
- 21,901
I didn't say anything about those players.
I said Callahan isn't worth the money he's going to get.
I still trade Girardi. Unless Sather is sure Staal isn't going to resign.
We'll be small buyers if we hold the 5-6 playoff position or better, no one is going anywhere until the offseason. Right or wrong. I still advocate a retool however for some guys who we know can't or don't want to resign.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Making the playoffs every season except one since the lockout is waaaaay above average. Two teams have done better in the entire NHL.
The Preds have never been to the Conference Finals, have never finished 1st in the West, and were never really considered a real threat to win the Cup. The '11-12 Rangers had a lot of people believing.
broadwayblue
Registered User
BobMarleyNYR
Rangers future on D
BBKers
Registered User
I think the team is looking at adding more size. I heard, while watching another game but I don't remember which, one expert refering to the diffrence between the West and the East primarely being that the West-teams just are bigger than the Eastern teams. Harder to contain. This guy also referred to AV saying just this.
I had a discussion on size with RB a few weeks, maybe a month or more who remembers, back. I've tried to follow the topic a bit when watching other teams play. And I have changed my mind a bit.
A few thoughts:
- There is definitely room for smaller players in the game, no doubt.
- If you are to be able to carry bigger players, you more or less "need" smaller players. There are a bunch of big players and teams out there that are just very ineffective. The diffrence between the effective big players and ineffective big players are their environment. Hence why someone like S Gionta got a job in NJ. A team like ANA with a great transition game and a really mobile blueline get great use of their bigger forwards. And so forth. For the less teams, a bunch of bigger players can just be completely and utterly ineffective for long periods, several games etc. Mathias in FLA, Ladd in Winnipeg and so forth. Sometimes you don't see them at all.
- The good size, besides a few really rare exceptions, is found on the wing and not center ice.
- The bigger forwards really does not need to be able to fight nor be very punative to be effective. Its when they have the puck, can bulldose their way to the net, circle it around the boards, they are effective. It doesn't hurt to have hitting power up front too -- of course not -- but its definitely not like just a big factor. Boston get to use a punative side, but like Anaheim don't have it at all. Nor many other teams in the west. STL and so forth.
- Its always a balance. The bigger forwards are useful up ice, but a burden in the transition game. In a game between two good teams, if you end up on the back you are screwed. You end up on your back if you can't transit.
A bigger forwards that can make decision with the puck helps a ton if you don't have a world class transition game, and so forth. The balance is very delicat. For NJ its essential that their bigger forwards can play the game with the puck too so that they can get up, for example.
I had a discussion on size with RB a few weeks, maybe a month or more who remembers, back. I've tried to follow the topic a bit when watching other teams play. And I have changed my mind a bit.
A few thoughts:
- There is definitely room for smaller players in the game, no doubt.
- If you are to be able to carry bigger players, you more or less "need" smaller players. There are a bunch of big players and teams out there that are just very ineffective. The diffrence between the effective big players and ineffective big players are their environment. Hence why someone like S Gionta got a job in NJ. A team like ANA with a great transition game and a really mobile blueline get great use of their bigger forwards. And so forth. For the less teams, a bunch of bigger players can just be completely and utterly ineffective for long periods, several games etc. Mathias in FLA, Ladd in Winnipeg and so forth. Sometimes you don't see them at all.
- The good size, besides a few really rare exceptions, is found on the wing and not center ice.
- The bigger forwards really does not need to be able to fight nor be very punative to be effective. Its when they have the puck, can bulldose their way to the net, circle it around the boards, they are effective. It doesn't hurt to have hitting power up front too -- of course not -- but its definitely not like just a big factor. Boston get to use a punative side, but like Anaheim don't have it at all. Nor many other teams in the west. STL and so forth.
- Its always a balance. The bigger forwards are useful up ice, but a burden in the transition game. In a game between two good teams, if you end up on the back you are screwed. You end up on your back if you can't transit.
A bigger forwards that can make decision with the puck helps a ton if you don't have a world class transition game, and so forth. The balance is very delicat. For NJ its essential that their bigger forwards can play the game with the puck too so that they can get up, for example.
I like the moves NJ did for a while as some kind of measurestick rather than the the sell-off moves CHI and Boston did when all their players had great value after a ton of exposure after Cup-runs etc. Every move can be discussed, but in principle I like them.
Acquring:
Jamie Langenbrunner and Joe Nieuwendyk for Jason Arnott and Randy McKay.
Alexander Mogilny for Brendan Morrison and Denis Pederson.
Vladimir Malakhov for Josh DeWolf, Sheldon Souray and 2001 2nd round pick
Claude Lemieux for Brian Rolston 2001 conditional pick Devils option to swap 2000 1st round picks
Jason Arnott and Bryan Muir for Bill Guerin and Valeri Zelepukin
Dave Ellett, Doug Gilmour and 1998 4th round pick or 1999 3rd round pick for Jason Smith, Steve Sullivan and Alyn McCauley
Dave Andreychuk for 1996 2nd round pick option of 1998 4th round pick or 1999 3rd round pick
Phil Housley and Dan Keczmer for Tommy Albelin, Cale Hulse and Jocelyn Lemieux
Hockey trades. Made to fill actual needs in every instance. To build a team. Very few "gamble" trades, they are getting a player that isn't on the verge to break into the league, no lottery tickets, they are getting players that was more established. Some young and up coming, sure, but still known values. Every trade made to fill a need, the ability of a player to accomplish something in a very specific role is always premiered over intanglibles etc. Its very obvious that they think: "we know that we can provide X and Y for this player, can he provide Z for us? Ok lets do it." I don't care if the player we are getting has the intanglibles of Mike Green or Ales Hemsky on one side or Andrew Ladd or Chris Philips on the other, we should get the player that fills our need on the ice. IE, just for example of course, I think Andrew Ladd and Mike Green would fill a need on the ice, I think we could support them, while I do no think Chris Philips or Ales Hemsky fill a need for us at all and I don't think we could support either...
Acquring:
Jamie Langenbrunner and Joe Nieuwendyk for Jason Arnott and Randy McKay.
Alexander Mogilny for Brendan Morrison and Denis Pederson.
Vladimir Malakhov for Josh DeWolf, Sheldon Souray and 2001 2nd round pick
Claude Lemieux for Brian Rolston 2001 conditional pick Devils option to swap 2000 1st round picks
Jason Arnott and Bryan Muir for Bill Guerin and Valeri Zelepukin
Dave Ellett, Doug Gilmour and 1998 4th round pick or 1999 3rd round pick for Jason Smith, Steve Sullivan and Alyn McCauley
Dave Andreychuk for 1996 2nd round pick option of 1998 4th round pick or 1999 3rd round pick
Phil Housley and Dan Keczmer for Tommy Albelin, Cale Hulse and Jocelyn Lemieux
Hockey trades. Made to fill actual needs in every instance. To build a team. Very few "gamble" trades, they are getting a player that isn't on the verge to break into the league, no lottery tickets, they are getting players that was more established. Some young and up coming, sure, but still known values. Every trade made to fill a need, the ability of a player to accomplish something in a very specific role is always premiered over intanglibles etc. Its very obvious that they think: "we know that we can provide X and Y for this player, can he provide Z for us? Ok lets do it." I don't care if the player we are getting has the intanglibles of Mike Green or Ales Hemsky on one side or Andrew Ladd or Chris Philips on the other, we should get the player that fills our need on the ice. IE, just for example of course, I think Andrew Ladd and Mike Green would fill a need on the ice, I think we could support them, while I do no think Chris Philips or Ales Hemsky fill a need for us at all and I don't think we could support either...
Last edited:
The Rangers beat the Devils in an outdoor game and they're winning the Cup. 
The Rangers have tough choices to make. Pay or trade. It's not keep and let them leave as free agents in July.
If you trade Girardi and/or Callahan,you gets assets back in return. The alternative is paying them or letting them leave as free agents.
How are the Rangers getting the players to actually win something? The pro-keep Girardi and Callahan crowd will blame Vigneault for the team not winning when the reality is the Rangers will have $12M combined in them for the next 6-7 years.
Same thing with Staal. Be pro-active. Can the Rangers afford to keep him if they re-sign Girardi and/or Callahan if Staal wants to stay? The Rangers fans have trouble letting go.
Its a business. The Rangers have Girardi and Callahan as group IIIs along Stralman and Boyle this summer. Arbitration with Kreider,Zuccarello and Brassard. Moore is a group II. Next summer Staal is a group III. Stepan and Hagelin as the arb eligibles.
The Rangers have tough choices to make. Pay or trade. It's not keep and let them leave as free agents in July.
If you trade Girardi and/or Callahan,you gets assets back in return. The alternative is paying them or letting them leave as free agents.
How are the Rangers getting the players to actually win something? The pro-keep Girardi and Callahan crowd will blame Vigneault for the team not winning when the reality is the Rangers will have $12M combined in them for the next 6-7 years.
Same thing with Staal. Be pro-active. Can the Rangers afford to keep him if they re-sign Girardi and/or Callahan if Staal wants to stay? The Rangers fans have trouble letting go.
Its a business. The Rangers have Girardi and Callahan as group IIIs along Stralman and Boyle this summer. Arbitration with Kreider,Zuccarello and Brassard. Moore is a group II. Next summer Staal is a group III. Stepan and Hagelin as the arb eligibles.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
That's what I liked about the MDZ trade: Klein fills a need on the back end and the Rangers had too many L D and had to make a choice. I've always liked MDZ and feel like he's young enough to still have a good upside. Problem is that John Moore does, too, and he looked a lot more confident yesterday with a steady D on his pair.
eco's bones
Registered User
AV was asked the differences between the East and West a couple games ago. He said stylistically pretty much the same but that the West tended to have bigger teams. It's a question that's come up before between him and various beat writers.
Looking at yesterday's game. The Rangers had lots of problems getting the puck away from the Devils in the first period. The Devils are not a fast team but they have big forwards. They try to slow the game down by clogging the neutral zone--sticking it deep in our end and working the puck around the boards and corners. Get a line or defense pairing out to long and wear them down. They've done this before against us with some success and it's a style that lesser teams often use successfully against more talented teams in the playoffs.
I think what's missing here is the difference between squeaking into the playoffs and being a legitimate playoff team. One trip beyond the 2nd round since the lockout might be "way" above average to some, but I expect more out of this team. That 11-12 team rode it's good fortune as long as it could, but the playoffs proved that it was a very flawed group. Outside of the hot start, we were pretty much a bubble team all season long.
I'm just going to leave it at that. Agree to disagree.
NYR Viper
Registered User
The difference between the Devils and Western teams is that the Western teams have size AND speed. Not just size.
NYR Viper
Registered User
Not cheap, I'm sure. Probably looking at a 2nd + very good prospect at the very least, and they wouldn't deal him to the Rangers most likely.
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,300
- 21,901
I saw AV on the NHL Network on Saturday. He said the major difference btwn the east and west is size at center. Backes,Berglund,Thornton, Getzlaf,Kopitar,Richards,Kesler,etc. The Rangers have Stepan,Richards and Brassard. The Rangers really need more size at center. Miller has to be that guy because there's no one else. He is more than a point per game player in the AHL this season. Miller played well in his third stint at center before Callahan returned from his latest injury. The Rangers need more size on the wings too. Besides Kreider and Nash,where's the beef? If you look at players in the system such as Fast and Kristo,more small wingers. Now both of them are righties which the Rangers need. Fast had a great weekend. He needs to stay away from the injuries.
Something being kind of left behind - the knock on AV and his alleged inability to manage a game, during the game. I remember when we signed him we would hear stories of how stubborn he was and how ineffective he was to changing his game plan during the course of the actual game.
He's definitely managed in game this season and we've been better because of it. Think its worth praising. The guy may have his faults but i've been pleasantly surprised by him this season.
He's definitely managed in game this season and we've been better because of it. Think its worth praising. The guy may have his faults but i've been pleasantly surprised by him this season.
I wouldn't mind signing Jagr to a 1 year deal in the offseason and retiring him as a Ranger.
He's making 4 mill this year. 3.5 wouldn't be out of the picture. Trade Brassard, substitute with Jagr.
NYR Viper
Registered User
Agreed. But those big guys have to be able to skate well.
It's a big issue being so undersized at the center ice position. Speed is a strength of this team but come playoff time, the games get clogged up. You need the size and strength to break down defenses. I don't think the Rangers have that yet.
Miller will help. I actually think McIlrath will help dole out some punishment when he makes it as well. But besides them, and this has been a point I have been harping on for years, where is the size with any sort of nastiness to it? Someone who will go out there and make opposing defenses take notice because they are legitimately afraid of being steamrolled.
NYR Viper
Registered User
Brassard is a center. Jagr is a winger. Trade Brassard, buyout Richards, Moore and Boyle walk. That leaves Stepan and Miller, possibly Lindberg.
The only way to get those guys is in the draft or if you trade Simmonds and Schenn for Richards like LA did.
- Status
