Toggle sidebar

Rumor: Trade Rumors Thread Part 5: NYR Interested in Boyle, Gaborik Available (MOD: READ OP)

  • Thread starter Thread starter *Bob Richards*
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dethomas07 said:
depth guys we've been talking about for 40pgs+ now torres, clowe, ott etc... add toughness to the bottom 6, or a 3c, or another vet rd..
Click to expand...

I get that, but what are you really giving up for those guys?


dethomas07 said:
i am just saying sather has to be blown away with a trade package for gabs to be traded mid season when we're battling to get in the playoffs..
Click to expand...

Probably.

dethomas07 said:
just imagine if we have Gabs on scoring goals, richards playing the way he was intended to be, guys like kreider back being hungry and motivated to stay in the lineup and out of the ahl.. along with a healthy staal returning soon, and the potential of adding toughness in bottom 6 with a guy like torres/ott.. we'll be set for the playoffs..
Click to expand...

The best thing the Rangers could add is a productive Gaborik.
 
GWOW said:
No offense taken.

I don't need to watch games to realize its better to gamble that an established scorer like Gaborik breaks out than praying to God the guys he's traded for come even close to equalling his production, or by some miracle exceeding it.
Click to expand...

i think that's reasonable, and don't have a problem if that's the case. They do need a shot of venom though, so they wil have to make some kind of move that adds some bottom six punch.

thing with Gaborik, is when healthy he is an elite sniper, top 4 scorer, when he's not healthy he turns into glider. A totally ineffective player.

Gaborik is either:

1. healthy 2. healing 3. Injured

or in between any of 3 phases.
 
NYR Boyler87 said:
So you are good getting someone who has ~17 points in 29 games because that is what he has "produced" and we all know he provides nothing outside of scoring.
Click to expand...

Yup. Unless a guy like Marleau or Iginla or Pominville or MSL or Vanek or Weiss etc is the return package.

I don't have a problem trading him. My problem is with these Playstation proposals involving 2nd pair dmen, 3rd liners and late 1st rounders.

For every Colon or Herschel Walker trade, there are hundreds of Gretzky-Thornton-Rickey Henderson types where a star is traded and the GM who trades them is either fired or reassigned not long after.

Could you imagine if HFboards was around in 1996 with the Gretzky trade?

They would have thought Keenan was hosed trading Johnson, Tardiff and Vopat (and Zultek)

You rarely win those kinds of trades. sather knows that.

I'll side with Sather on this one.
 
GWOW said:
Pages and pages of Gaborik trade talk (and fan-generated proposals that will never happen in a thousand years BTW), and nobody seems to remember that the guy who makes the trades is old as balls and set in his ways.

When was the last time Sather traded a superstar/scoring forward for anything? (2004 fire sale notwithstanding)

Trading/signing for superstars is his motif, not trading them away.

Nash
Gaborik
lindros
Bure
Jagr
Kovalev

Sather loves skill. Duh. He's traded for guys five years removed from 30 goal seasons, yet according to some of you, he's magically going to ignore his tenets and trade away a guy 8 months removed from a 2nd 40-plus season in three years.

And when he did/forced to trade goal scorers (mainly on the Oilers) he always wanted established skill in return.

Guerin for Arnott
Tikkanen for Weight
Todd for Nicholls
Messier for Nicholls
Damphousse for Corson
Gretzky for Carson
Klima and Murphy for Carson
Damphousse for Anderson

I'm not Glen Sather, but like Patton says to Rommel, I read his ******* book.

There's no way Gaborik gets traded, and if the stars align and Sather's on acid, even then, he wont do it for 3rd liners, picks and prospects
Click to expand...

Whether or not Sather has a track record for these types of deals mean nothing. It's been reported that Sather is open to trading Gaborik. That doesn't mean he's going to trade him just to trade him. It has to be a deal that makes us better now and in the future.

The odds are against that happening by the trade deadline. But that doesn't mean that Sather isn't talking to people about it.
 
NYR Boyler87 said:
Are you saying you wouldn't take (2) good, young NHL forwards + a very good defensive prospect + 1st for Gaborik? I would.
Click to expand...

That depends. Do u HAVE to trade Gaborik bc he wants out like Nash did? If not, no and that honestly shouldn't have been accepted for Nash and we all know it
 
Shark Staal said:
If I'm sending Gaborik to LA I want Mike Richards as the center of the package. Gaborik for something around Mike Richards, and a defenseman like Muzzin or Voynov. Send them someone like Thomas maybe too.
Click to expand...

LOL, I wouldn't do Richards alone for Gabby....and I'm a Gabby fan.

Voynov is near untouchable.

Muzzin is having a great year on a defense that is depleted with injuries to Greene and Mitchell.

Don't think LA is remotely interested in Gaborik or what it would cost to bring him in and fit him under the cap.
 
I have some weird feeling gabby gets traded to Tampa in a big deal with obviously st Louis coming back to the rangers as one of the pieces... Hopefully Boyle goes to Tampa too.... Time will tell... St Louis still very productive at 37 with one more year on his contract with roughly the same salary as gabby...
 
Traderalways said:
I have some weird feeling gabby gets traded to Tampa in a big deal with obviously st Louis coming back to the rangers as one of the pieces... Hopefully Boyle goes to Tampa too.... Time will tell... St Louis still very productive at 37 with one more year on his contract with roughly the same salary as gabby...
Click to expand...

Must be one weird feeling because there is no way Tampa does such a thing. St. Louis will retire with that team.

Oh and he is 4th in the NHL in points + 2nd in assists. Tampa needs defense and goal tending. Trading their second best offensive player for a slumping offensive player makes no sense.
 
NYR Boyler87 said:
Are you saying you wouldn't take (2) good, young NHL forwards + a very good defensive prospect + 1st for Gaborik? I would.
Click to expand...

In the rangers case I say 2>1 because they lack balanced scoring , Gaboirk is being bounced all around the line up and not performing and they replaced him with Rick Nash . The NYR could use a 20 g three zone responsible true LW or a good 3 C right now . That depth would make Nash and the others even more effective .
 
Bob Richards said:
Must be one weird feeling because there is no way Tampa does such a thing. St. Louis will retire with that team.

Oh and he is 4th in the NHL in points + 2nd in assists. Tampa needs defense and goal tending. Trading their second best offensive player for a slumping offensive player makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Gain 6 years... Gabby away from torts.... The goals will multiply...lol....new ownership there has no ties to st Louis....and that GREAT HOCKEY base in the st. Pete/Tampa area will get over it. Lol. It could also be multiple players going both ways
 
Dorado said:
In the rangers case I say 2>1 because they lack balanced scoring , Gaboirk is being bounced all around the line up and not performing and they replaced him with Rick Nash . The NYR could use a 20 g three zone responsible true LW or a good 3 C right now . That depth would make Nash and the others even more effective .
Click to expand...

Kreider was just brought up, hopefully he's that LW we've needed since Torts refuses to put Nash on his natural side.
 
Lundsanity30 said:
Dubinsky + anisimov for a 40 goal scorer is not a "good return". The sum of its parts is not always greater.
Click to expand...

You just said that they would get more for Gaborik because of his lack of NMC. I said that if they could get (2) young NHL forwards + a top defensive prospect + 1st that it would be a good deal and you said it would not. I feel like you are arguing in circles.
 
Traderalways said:
Gain 6 years... Gabby away from torts.... The goals will multiply...lol....new ownership there has no ties to st Louis....and that GREAT HOCKEY base in the st. Pete/Tampa area will get over it. Lol. It could also be multiple players going both ways
Click to expand...

New ownership there clearly has ties to St. Louis considering that he is signed under them. His value is much higher than Gaborik's right now. Unless they are going full tank mode, there is no way they trade him and if they do, it won't be for Gaborik. You don't tank a season and then acquire a high priced player who is over 30 years old.

And he is impossible to acquire unless one of Gaborik, Nash, Richards goes back. This deal just has a 0% chance of happening.
 
Bob Richards said:
New ownership there clearly has ties to St. Louis considering that he is signed under them. His value is much higher than Gaborik's right now. Unless they are going full tank mode, there is no way they trade him and if they do, it won't be for Gaborik. You don't tank a season and then acquire a high priced player who is over 30 years old.

And he is impossible to acquire unless one of Gaborik, Nash, Richards goes back. This deal just has a 0% chance of happening.
Click to expand...
He signed the contract under prior ownership...That team is going no where fast...
 
NYR Boyler87 said:
You just said that they would get more for Gaborik because of his lack of NMC. I said that if they could get (2) young NHL forwards + a top defensive prospect + 1st that it would be a good deal and you said it would not. I feel like you are arguing in circles.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure my definition of good and your definition of good are the same. For instance, 2 people who are "good" but nothing more than 3rd liners? no thanks, thats redundant especially giving up a guy who has been our best goal scorer since he's been here.. Now if you can get me a Top 3 guy + a bottom 6 + pick + prospect. ok, but not interested in trading Gaborik for "depth guys".
 
Lundsanity30 said:
Kreider was just brought up, hopefully he's that LW we've needed since Torts refuses to put Nash on his natural side.
Click to expand...

Have you not seen Nash sniping the far post coming don the right side recently ? That is why he plays RW majority his career .
 
Lundsanity30 said:
I'm not sure my definition of good and your definition of good are the same. For instance, 2 people who are "good" but nothing more than 3rd liners? no thanks, thats redundant especially giving up a guy who has been our best goal scorer since he's been here.. Now if you can get me a Top 3 guy + a bottom 6 + pick + prospect. ok, but not interested in trading Gaborik for "depth guys".
Click to expand...

What if those "depth guys" are young? Would you trade for a Simmonds-like player when he was dealt? He was a 3rd liner in LA. It all depends on the player. I wouldn't take a 28 year old 3rd liner, but a player like Clifford? Absolutely.

You aren't going to get a top-line forward + a bottom-6 forward + prospect + pick for a top-line forward. Would you do that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom