Speculation: Trade Rumors/Speculation Part X: Sather Falls Asleep on the Phone

[Beer League Sniper]

Trading valuable assets, especially players that play prime minutes, without replacing them is the dumbest move a team can make.

Unless they plan on losing for a few years of course. All a matter of perspective.

Giving either player a huge deal for max term would be just as bad. Girardi and Callahan have been warriors for us, but the backside of a 7 year contract is going to be terrible value. Callahan has already begun breaking down, and I shudder to think what he's going to look like in even year 3 of his next contract. Girardi, while he has been pretty much injury-free, and probably a better candidate for a long-term contract, still scares me. His mobility is limited, and I think his game will take a swan dive once he starts losing steps. Neither player is a good bet on a long-term contract. I'd easily pick Girardi if I had to choose though.

 

[Tawnos]

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/49761/nhl-with-katie-strang

The smart move is trading them. The Rangers don't usually make the smart move.

I would say that we have no idea what the Sather will do in this situation, since he's never been in it the entire time he's been with the Rangers.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

You know what's another dumb move? Giving big money, long term contracts to declining players. You know what's also dumb? Letting valuable players walk for nothing.

If we aren't prepared to pay Callahan and Girardi what they want, then we better be prepared to trade them, regardless of the short term impact to the team.

You can see it starting to happen already. The "OMG, we are in the playoff hunt! We can't trade these core players!!!" I expect this flawed thinking to only increase as we near the deadline.

This is how the team has operated - and where have they gotten because of it? Its the epitome of the short-sited thinking that some fans detest.

 

[BBKers]

Lots of cap space now

Going for Hemsky/Heatley /Havlat/Boyle now Glen?


FORWARDS
Chris Kreider ($0.800m) / Derek Stepan ($3.075m) / Rick Nash ($7.800m)
Brad Richards ($6.667m) / Derick Brassard ($3.200m) / Mats Zuccarello ($1.150m)
Carl Hagelin ($2.250m) / J.T. Miller ($0.894m) / Benoit Pouliot ($1.300m)
Brian Boyle ($1.700m) / Dominic Moore ($1.000m) / Derek Dorsett ($1.633m)

Injured: Ryan Callahan ($4.275m)

DEFENSEMEN
Ryan McDonagh ($4.700m) / Dan Girardi ($3.325m)
Marc Staal ($3.975m) / Anton Stralman ($1.700m)
John Moore ($0.840m) / Conor Allen ($0.925m)
Michael Del Zotto ($2.550m) / Justin Falk ($0.975m)

GOALTENDERS
Henrik Lundqvist ($6.875m)
Cameron Talbot ($0.563m)

BUYOUTS
Wade Redden ($0.000m)

BURIED
Arron Asham ($0.075m)
Darroll Powe ($0.142m)
------
TOTALS
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000
BONUSES: $1,850,000
CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $2,669,618

MDZ/Boyle trade coming up?
Or was signing Hank, trading Mashinter and waiving Pyatt what Sather thought were the necessary roster moves we have to make this season?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I would say that we have no idea what the Sather will do in this situation, since he's never been in it the entire time he's been with the Rangers.

Vinny Prospal is a good example from a few years ago. He was a pending free agent on a team going nowhere -- Could've gotten an asset or two for him.

Nope, hung onto him and let him walk for nothing.

We are talking 6-7 year deals with Girardi and Callahan, which means this situation could be far far worse if not dealt with properly.

 

[RangerBoy]

Trading valuable assets, especially players that play prime minutes, without replacing them is the dumbest move a team can make.

Unless they plan on losing for a few years of course. All a matter of perspective.

Give them long-term contracts.

 

[bernmeister]

Turnovers are a problem but the skill is undeniable. He has another half a season to limit mistakes. He's not going to get rid of them completely. But hell... a lot of our current NHL players are turn over machines. Richards and Brassard commit turn overs on a game to game basis.

The entire board wanted Kreider to stay on the 3rd line because he wasn't defensively responsible and was also a turnover machine. This team lacks goal scorers. Kristo puts the puck in the back of the net. If he even becomes remotely responsible with the puck he'll be an upgrade on our top 6. I'm not expecting him to come in this year and save the team... I do however expect him to get a cup of coffee by the end of the year. I do expect him to earn and solidify a top 6 spot on the team next year and put up a 25/30-25/30 season. I don't think that's out of the picture for him at all.

Almost the entire board.
some of us thought he would respond with enough minutes and no Torts in his face, and guess what?
..............................THAT HAPPENED.

 

[Tawnos]

Vinny Prospal is a good example from a few years ago. He was a pending free agent on a team going nowhere -- Could've gotten an asset or two for him.

Nope, hung onto him and let him walk for nothing.

We are talking 6-7 year deals with Girardi and Callahan, which means this situation could be far far worse if not dealt with properly.

There are a few ways in which this situation is different. First, Prospal wasn't a situation of "sign long-term or let him walk". Second, Prospal wasn't going to be one of the most sought-after players in the UFA market. Demand for him was generally lower. These two pieces both drove down the significance of any assets you would receive in return. And third, he wasn't a homegrown player hitting his first chance at UFA. Like I said, we've never seen Sather in this particular situation before.

 

[Mikos87]

Well some team is going to give them both 7 years. The price they would be traded for is that of a rental. Meaning a hockey trade midseason for Cally and G, to replace their minutes and productivity isn't going to happen. Nor what they bring to the team.

Detroit showed loyalty to their players and you see the result. This org, and it's fan boys want to be the Detroit of hockey. 22 seasons straight in the playoffs and few championships, hell it's easy to understand why.

You don't re-sign the player if you think he is going to dogg it after getting that big money and big term contract. With UFAs you don't know who that is. Thus the mercs that check out ala Gomez, Redden, Drury, Holik, etc etc.

With your own guys you do because you have years to see it. If the character isn't there then make the move. I am all for trading if they aren't going to be back. But I'd rather not see losing. Replace/upgrade their roles sure. Choose to lose?

No. Unacceptable.

 

[Mikos87]

Give them long-term contracts.

If you want them back; then yes that is what is going to take.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

The fire sale of 2004 was a **** show, but, it did yield Dubinsky, Staal, (the extra 2nd that was used to moved to select him was acquired in the Malakhov deal), Sauer and Korpikoski in terms of draft picks, and Betts and Sykora, ( acquired for Kondratiev), in terms of players. And, the book is still out on McIlrath, Kristo and Fast.

If anything, if marked the beginning of the end from a strategic standpoint, and for that I applaud Sather.

They could have gotten more when you consider 10 trades and 30 players. I'm not counting Jagr because that move was before the purges even though it was a massive steal on Sathers part.


Josef balej
Bruce graham
Dane Byers
Dwight Helminen
Steve Valiquette
Maxim Kondratiev
Jarkko Immonen
Jaime Mclellan
Blair Betts
Greg Moore
Rich Kozak
Billy Ryan
David Liffiton
Chris Mccallister
Karel Rachunek
Alexander Giroux
RJ Umberger ( never signed)
Martin Grenier
Zebek Bahensky


2nd rounder used to grab Staal
2nd rounder from Leetch trade used for Sauer, retired after 1.25 seasons
1st rounder from Leetch trade used for Korpikoski then traded for Lisin
2nd rounder via Barnaby trade used on Dubinsky, centered on Nash trade

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

There are a few ways in which this situation is different. First, Prospal wasn't a situation of "sign long-term or let him walk". Second, Prospal wasn't going to be one of the most sought-after players in the UFA market. Demand for him was generally lower. These two pieces both drove down the significance of any assets you would receive in return. And third, he wasn't a homegrown player hitting his first chance at UFA. Like I said, we've never seen Sather in this particular situation before.

Doesnt take a huge leap to assume what hes going to do.

...let the season play out and the chips fall where they may in the summer. He'll tell you its because his focus is squarely on winning a Stanley Cup this season when, in reality, its just another example of his cluster**** way of building a team

 

[Beer League Sniper]

There are a few ways in which this situation is different. First, Prospal wasn't a situation of "sign long-term or let him walk". Second, Prospal wasn't going to be one of the most sought-after players in the UFA market. Demand for him was generally lower. These two pieces both drove down the significance of any assets you would receive in return. And third, he wasn't a homegrown player hitting his first chance at UFA. Like I said, we've never seen Sather in this particular situation before.

Wasn't Prospal also the only C on our roster that had any chemistry with Gaborik? I agree with trying to get assets for an expiring contract, but it's not like he was a 3rd or 4th line plug, he was playing on the top line and we were trying to make the playoffs.

 

[Mikos87]

Why do you think Minnesota has only used Konopka for 239 faceoffs this season?

HINT: after the faceoff, hockey breaks out.

No kidding eh? Guy can take draw after draw and have someone come off the bench.

Hint: It gives a team with two sub 50% centers on faceoffs the puck for said break out.

 

[Ola]

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/49761/nhl-with-katie-strang

The smart move is trading them. The Rangers don't usually make the smart move.

Extremely tough moves to make. Smart moves? Maybe. But extremely tough moves to make non-the-less.

I also wonder what we could get in return for them. I mean, it don't seem like the market is that hot.

I'd want something really good in return if they are to get dealt. Its a heck of a message that you send to the locker-room if you deal them. For years to come.

I would never deal one of them for the typical good looking young player which name normally is thrown around (say a Tatar). Or someone like Voracek that Philly got in return for Carter. If I hear Kyle freakin Palmierei's name one more time I am gonna puke. Danny Fritche isn't available?

What is Ana supposed to give us for Girardi? I doubt they move Hampus Lindholm. He is a kid that I would look at despite him being a LD... Maybe Silvferberg is a start, but are they even dealing him? Are Boston moving Dougie Hamilton? If not, there is no way that I would have any interest what-so-ever in their supposed "good" prospects.

Are SJ giving up Logan Couture or Hertl? Doubt it.

Are Winnipeg giving up Ladd, Kane or Trouba? Why would they?

Are Montreal giving up Alex Galchenyuk?

Are Florida giving up Barkov or Jonathan Huberdeau?

Are Colorado giving up Landeskog, Duchene or MacKinnon?

Are LA giving up Voynov or STL Shattenkrik?

EDM any of the big 4?

Minny Brodin?

CBJ Johansen?

I mean, what are we trading these guys for? A borderline second line forward / avg 2nd pairing D, prospect (who probably is worth less than JT Miller) and a 1st around 25-30 so that we can draft antoher Skjei? In other words crap that never will help us one bit and before we know it take up more cap space than we would have spent on Callahan or Girardi to start with.

 

[Tawnos]

Well some team is going to give them both 7 years. The price they would be traded for is that of a rental. Meaning a hockey trade midseason for Cally and G, to replace their minutes and productivity isn't going to happen. Nor what they bring to the team.

If you make moves now, you increase the value of what they bring back. That being said, if Girardi is going to walk anyway, I look to make a deal like Calgary made with Bouwmeester last year. 1st round pick and 2 prospects. There was talk last year that Anaheim was going to move Perry if they couldn't get him locked up by a certain date. If Anaheim can consider that in the middle of a playoff race, the Rangers can consider dealing Girardi and Callahan.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Well some team is going to give them both 7 years. The price they would be traded for is that of a rental. Meaning a hockey trade midseason for Cally and G, to replace their minutes and productivity isn't going to happen. Nor what they bring to the team.

Detroit showed loyalty to their players and you see the result. This org, and it's fan boys want to be the Detroit of hockey. 22 seasons straight in the playoffs and few championships, hell it's easy to understand why.

You don't re-sign the player if you think he is going to dogg it after getting that big money and big term contract. With UFAs you don't know who that is. Thus the mercs that check out ala Gomez, Redden, Drury, Holik, etc etc.

With your own guys you do because you have years to see it. If the character isn't there then make the move. I am all for trading if they aren't going to be back. But I'd rather not see losing. Replace/upgrade their roles sure. Choose to lose?

No. Unacceptable.

I think that Girardi and Callahan are overvalued by this organization and the league in general in terms of importance. They are very good players that are going to get paid like great players.

Let some other team do that and recoup whatever assets you can from it. I'd be much more on board with your "respect" argument if they were better hockey players.

....hmm, kinda like what the Rangers did with Lundqvist.

 

[Ola]

We let Prust walk.

I thought it was the right thing to do.

In hindsight, one of the worst move we have made the last decade. We spent twice as much as it would have taken to resign him on a bunch of worthless players.

 

[Ola]

If you make moves now, you increase the value of what they bring back. That being said, if Girardi is going to walk anyway, I look to make a deal like Calgary made with Bouwmeester last year. 1st round pick and 2 prospects. There was talk last year that Anaheim was going to move Perry if they couldn't get him locked up by a certain date. If Anaheim can consider that in the middle of a playoff race, the Rangers can consider dealing Girardi and Callahan.

Ok, that's what 75% chance that we get nothing and maybe 20% chance that we get someone who hardly is an upgrade over anyone.

That's the first step.

Then what do we do with the cap space we save?

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

I know any "more Nash trades" answer after the last Nash trade isn't going to be too popular, but I hope we can do a package deal for a young player who has real bonafide top-end skill. I wouldn't be so quick to call adding org depth "crap," but with how boring the Rangers are in general it's very easy to get taken in by the paper talk regarding players like Kadri and Yakupov.

I am also very curious about the actual value of Rick Nash, I think we can do very well there.

 

[The Gloaming]

Lol at thinking that Girardi can get you Landeskog, Hamilton, or Couture. A Girardi with a .925 cap hit for the next 4 years wouldn't get you that, let alone a UFA Girardi who is set to make 6 million.

 

[NYR Viper]

Extremely tough moves to make. Smart moves? Maybe. But extremely tough moves to make non-the-less.

I also wonder what we could get in return for them. I mean, it don't seem like the market is that hot.

I'd want something really good in return if they are to get dealt. Its a heck of a message that you send to the locker-room if you deal them. For years to come.

I would never deal one of them for the typical good looking young player which name normally is thrown around (say a Tatar). Or someone like Voracek that Philly got in return for Carter. If I hear Kyle freakin Palmierei's name one more time I am gonna puke. Danny Fritche isn't available?

What is Ana supposed to give us for Girardi? I doubt they move Hampus Lindholm. He is a kid that I would look at despite him being a LD... Maybe Silvferberg is a start, but are they even dealing him? Are Boston moving Dougie Hamilton? If not, there is no way that I would have any interest what-so-ever in their supposed "good" prospects.

Are SJ giving up Logan Couture or Hertl? Doubt it.

Are Winnipeg giving up Ladd, Kane or Trouba? Why would they?

Are Montreal giving up Alex Galchenyuk?

Are Florida giving up Barkov or Jonathan Huberdeau?

Are Colorado giving up Landeskog, Duchene or MacKinnon?

Are LA giving up Voynov or STL Shattenkrik?

EDM any of the big 4?

Minny Brodin?

CBJ Johansen?

I mean, what are we trading these guys for? A borderline second line forward / avg 2nd pairing D, prospect (who probably is worth less than JT Miller) and a 1st around 25-30 so that we can draft antoher Skjei? In other words crap that never will help us one bit and before we know it take up more cap space than we would have spent on Callahan or Girardi to start with.

You don't get players like you mentioned for pending UFA's. You have to hope to get a very good young player + pick. Tatar + 1st. Palmieri + 1st. That type of package would be a coup if the Rangers don't believe they can get either player under contract for something reasonable.

 

[Thirty One]

Hint: It gives a team with two sub 50% centers on faceoffs the puck for said break out.

Not sure what this means.

 

[NYR Viper]

Ok, that's what 75% chance that we get nothing and maybe 20% chance that we get someone who hardly is an upgrade over anyone.

That's the first step.

Then what do we do with the cap space we save?

Better than letting him walk for nothing. Letting him walk for nothing is the dumbest move any organization can make for it's long term health. You aren't going to get Landeskog for a pending UFA in Callahan.

 

[GAGLine]

No kidding eh? Guy can take draw after draw and have someone come off the bench.

Hint: It gives a team with two sub 50% centers on faceoffs the puck for said break out.

Hint: Boyle is 56.2% on faceoffs. Moore is 55.4% on faceoffs.

Why do we need a 3rd faceoff guy who can't score?