Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Trade Rumors/Speculation Part IX: Dubinsky, Rozsival and a 2nd

  • Thread starter Thread starter *Bob Richards*
  • Start date 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
Not open for further replies.
eco's bones said:
If the Rangers could draft a d-man with their 1st who had good size, wheels and could run a pwp I'd be all for that. Rangers have lacked a legit pwp qb pretty much since Brian Leetch. Leetch was not that big--neither is Erik Karlsson but they're top of the charts talents. Rangers need a legit threat from the blueline. Del Zotto's not it and Moore's not likely to be it either.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Supposedly we shouldn't take a D because "defense" isn't a problem.

In 94', 50% of our offensive game was Leetch and Zubov. All high scoring teams has good PMDs. I love the player McD is turning into. But he is not a player that makes the world class offensive play from the blueline on a regular basis. We really need that.

Some of the young PMDs coming into this league right now are fantastic. Karlsson but also Jonas Brodin and Hampus Lindholm in Anaheim, fantastic puck moving ability on those kids. Some other kids too.

I'd definitely would think twice to pick a forward short of elite potential before a kid like that.
 
Ola said:
Agreed. Supposedly we shouldn't take a D because "defense" isn't a problem.

In 94', 50% of our offensive game was Leetch and Zubov. All high scoring teams has good PMDs. I love the player McD is turning into. But he is not a player that makes the world class offensive play from the blueline on a regular basis. We really need that.

Some of the young PMDs coming into this league right now are fantastic. Karlsson but also Jonas Brodin and Hampus Lindholm in Anaheim, fantastic puck moving ability on those kids. Some other kids too.

I'd definitely would think twice to pick a forward short of elite potential before a kid like that.
Click to expand...


94 has nothing to do with now. We are lots and lots of moves away from a cup. Keep trying tho.

Defense isnt a problem imo, scoring is. PMD's are a must, but over a young top 6 forward right now? Can we please draft our young forward for once instead of people making up trades for other teams young guys? 1994 is over with man, its long gone
 
RangersHank said:
94 has nothing to do with now. We are lots and lots of moves away from a cup. Keep trying tho.

Defense isnt a problem imo, scoring is. PMD's are a must, but over a young top 6 forward right now? Can we please draft our young forward for once instead of people making up trades for other teams young guys? 1994 is over with man, its long gone
Click to expand...

BPA - as long as it's not a goaltender. They should put a premium on talent - especially on the offensive side of the puck. I don't care if that's a forward or defenseman. Take the best player.
 
BrianBoyle said:
If we're picking top ten, I'd prefer a C, but a legit playmaker from the blueline would be my #2 priority.
Click to expand...

I really think it comes down to which player they believe is better. I think looking at specific positions is a mistake. You want to select the best player. Who knows what your needs will be down the road. In a perfect world it would be a stud offensive PP QB or top center, but whichever player they pick - it had better be the player they believe will be the best NHL'er.
 
Ola said:
I love the player McD is turning into. But he is not a player that makes the world class offensive play from the blueline on a regular basis. We really need that.

.
Click to expand...

i think hes going to get there.. elite offensive player on a regular basis..
 
I don't believe in BPA when you're drafting top 10. It gives you a huge opportunity to fill a glaring organizational hole, why waste it on somebody you might have a lot of already?
 
JoeGarelli said:
i think hes going to get there.. elite offensive player on a regular basis..
Click to expand...

Don't agree with this. His offensive instincts are very good but not elite. I think he tops out as a 50 point player, which is still amazing.
 
Raspewtin said:
I don't believe in BPA when you're drafting top 10. It gives you a huge opportunity to fill a glaring organizational hole, why waste it on somebody you might have a lot of already?
Click to expand...

So you could draft a Paul Stastny & pass on Paul Coffey just cuz u needed a center
 
BrianBoyle said:
If we're picking top ten, I'd prefer a C, but a legit playmaker from the blueline would be my #2 priority.
Click to expand...

RH puck-moving D-man with excellent offensive skills would be ideal. I am always fond of taking centers, but, if a quality RH blueliner is there, I'd be thrilled. Another PF at LW would also be nice.
 
Raspewtin said:
I don't believe in BPA when you're drafting top 10. It gives you a huge opportunity to fill a glaring organizational hole, why waste it on somebody you might have a lot of already?
Click to expand...
Always BPA, because you're dealing with young players that do not immediately fill current holes, and you want players with the highest potential trade value. It's about accumulating assets.
 
Raspewtin said:
I don't believe in BPA when you're drafting top 10. It gives you a huge opportunity to fill a glaring organizational hole, why waste it on somebody you might have a lot of already?
Click to expand...

I could not disagree more. I'm not passing on a guy who I believe could be a top pairing defenseman in favor of a center because that's a bigger need. I just picked an arbitrary year 2009 - you could have theoretically taken Scott Glennie over OEL because you feel scoring is a major issue. Fast forward to 2013 and one in a perennial All Star while the other is a complete bust. You have to take the BEST PLAYER.
 
RangersHank said:
94 has nothing to do with now. We are lots and lots of moves away from a cup. Keep trying tho.

Defense isnt a problem imo, scoring is. PMD's are a must, but over a young top 6 forward right now? Can we please draft our young forward for once instead of people making up trades for other teams young guys? 1994 is over with man, its long gone
Click to expand...

Don't expect a goal scoring forward to consistently put up 40 goal seasons without his team having a legit threat from the point on the pwp. It ain't going to happen. The kind of defenseman who can do that will consistently pad the goal scoring of forwards who know how to finish. It's an essential for the higher scoring teams--almost as important as having a legit 1st line center. Erik Karlsson is an elite player. He would be in my top 5 players in the league. Find a Beukeboom to pair him with and you'd really have something.

You can never have enough good d-men.
 
Raspewtin said:
I don't believe in BPA when you're drafting top 10. It gives you a huge opportunity to fill a glaring organizational hole, why waste it on somebody you might have a lot of already?
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. Always draft BPA when your drafting high.
 
How about taking the best player at the position of need instead of taking the best player available?? Would this plan work at the draft??
 
"BPA" is the biggest fallacy in sports. Different teams have different opinions about the level and potential of prospects in the draft.
 
Barnaby said:
I could not disagree more. I'm not passing on a guy who I believe could be a top pairing defenseman in favor of a center because that's a bigger need. I just picked an arbitrary year 2009 - you could have theoretically taken Scott Glennie over OEL because you feel scoring is a major issue. Fast forward to 2013 and one in a perennial All Star while the other is a complete bust. You have to take the BEST PLAYER.
Click to expand...

Okay but that's one example. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong but there's instances where BPA and drafting on need is superior.

Not for nothing but looking back at it now........wow that 2009 1st round sucked so far.
 
On top of that, he gives Ryan McDonagh a real capable partner to work with, which he hasn't had in a long time. He won't have to drag him around the ice like he has with Girardi.


get gryba plays20+ mins cost 7,000,000 usd lessAND IS still ready to grow into a top 3 hitter. best of all he is not being used as much with ceci/corvo/borowiecki eating up valuable time. should cost maybe a pick/kristo/fast


as for getting more speed/shot power either postma or z.redmond/j.trouba from jets should be available for the right price,
 
Ace2008 said:
On top of that, he gives Ryan McDonagh a real capable partner to work with, which he hasn't had in a long time. He won't have to drag him around the ice like he has with Girardi.


get gryba plays20+ mins cost 7,000,000 usd lessAND IS still ready to grow into a top 3 hitter. best of all he is not being used as much with ceci/corvo/borowiecki eating up valuable time. should cost maybe a pick/kristo/fast


as for getting more speed/shot power either postma or z.redmond/j.trouba from jets should be available for the right price,
Click to expand...

Dear lord I hope you're joking.

Gryba is a slightly better Bickel.
 
You draft the player you think will be the best out of all of the available players at the point when u r picking. That's not a fallacy at all. It's what I always think of when I think of the BPA philosophy. The fallacy would be you pick what other people agree is the BPA.

For example the mario williams over reggie bush pick. Everyone thought MW was a horrible pick b/c Bush was the consensus BPA. Guess what? The consensus could be and was wrong. Good on Houston for picking who they felt was BPA and being right. With hockey you always take who you think will be the BP of those still available. The kids will take 2-4 years to be ready after drafting them and another 2 after making the NHL usually before hitting their stride. So you've got 4-6 years after the draft before they really start hitting their primes. Trades and FA signings are for addressing immediate needs.
 
Raspewtin said:
I don't believe in BPA when you're drafting top 10. It gives you a huge opportunity to fill a glaring organizational hole, why waste it on somebody you might have a lot of already?
Click to expand...

Because you trade from positions of strength. The best players have the most value, and if you already have a position filled, you make a trade. It's only a waste if your management has **** for brains.

Look how much teams can change in 1-2 years. You could trade a higher valued player to fill a need more adequately than if you just originally drafted to fill that need.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom