Rumor: Trade Rumour Thread II: TraDe for Every111!!
- Thread starter JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
- Start date
- Status
NYR Viper
Registered User
You feel Gaborik is better than Nash?
I feel Gaborik is a better scorer than Callahan, overall player? Probably not.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,356
Nash>Gaborik>Callahan in my opinion.
Although Callahan is the only one that brings any sort of intangibles.
Marian Gaborik is NOT a "better" hockey player than Ryan Callahan.
Gaborik has more skill. But it doesn't matter when Gaborik is a lazy piece of **** and is only a factor once every 5 games. Callahan is "better" at every aspect of the game in all three zones, other then shooting the puck. He's a factor on every shift in some capacity.
For anyone who stat surfs, Gaborik looks "better".
There is a reason why coaches will put a player like Callahan on the ice in every situation.
Nash is by far and away this team's "best" forward. McDonagh is this team's "best" defenseman. Lundqvist is this team's "best" player.
Gaborik has more skill. But it doesn't matter when Gaborik is a lazy piece of **** and is only a factor once every 5 games. Callahan is "better" at every aspect of the game in all three zones, other then shooting the puck. He's a factor on every shift in some capacity.
For anyone who stat surfs, Gaborik looks "better".
There is a reason why coaches will put a player like Callahan on the ice in every situation.
Nash is by far and away this team's "best" forward. McDonagh is this team's "best" defenseman. Lundqvist is this team's "best" player.
Rangers ftw
Registered User
- May 8, 2007
- 2,389
- 460
Gaborik is a better scorer, that is without a doubt true. And I'm not sure what overall means, if we are to count all skills and divide them a la NHL 13, I'd say Gaborik is still better. Of course Callahan is a better forechecker and hitter and an awesome leader, but better overall, no. And don't get me wrong, I love what Callahan brings to this team, and to us he is extremely valuable. What I'm saying I'd that the skills he got, can be easier replaced than those +40 goals that Gaborik provide.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,356
I hate every aspect of Gaborik's game except his ability to score goals. However, he is elite in that regard, and it's a crucial part of the game.
K. Do you think Callahan will get more money than Gaborik on their next contracts?
Fitzy
Very Stable Genius
- Jan 29, 2009
- 35,724
- 23,008
This is comical.
If ever there was a juvenile conceptualization of the "perfect" hockey player, it is one who will make you "ooh" and "aah"on every shift. Its why that bum Zherdev got so much love.
When you're taking about a player who has given us two 40 goals seasons in 3 years, and will lead the team in goal scoring again this year, to suggest that somehow he is a lazy player is laughable. Gaborik isn't Brendl. He is one of the league's most dangerous players and will likely end his career with around 500 goals, much like Petr Bondra.
If I asked any of you would you want a 32 year old Petr Bondra on the team, you
d all be salivating. Because the grass is always greener.
If ever there was a juvenile conceptualization of the "perfect" hockey player, it is one who will make you "ooh" and "aah"on every shift. Its why that bum Zherdev got so much love.
When you're taking about a player who has given us two 40 goals seasons in 3 years, and will lead the team in goal scoring again this year, to suggest that somehow he is a lazy player is laughable. Gaborik isn't Brendl. He is one of the league's most dangerous players and will likely end his career with around 500 goals, much like Petr Bondra.
If I asked any of you would you want a 32 year old Petr Bondra on the team, you
d all be salivating. Because the grass is always greener.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,356
If you asked us if we would want a 32 year old Gaborik, the answer would be a resounding yes.
No way I would take a 32 year old Bondra ahead of Rick Nash, either.
Gaborik isn't lazy?
LOL
What do you call floating around, not engaging, avoiding contact, not moving your feet? Working hard?
NYR Viper
Registered User
Here's a crazy thought:
What if the Rangers traded Gaborik at the draft for futures. Say to Detroit for their 1st '13 + 1st '14 + prospect or something like that.
That opens up 7.5 million for next year. If the Rangers were to pursue Getzlaf in free agency, who would fit in this system MUCH better than Gaborik and with the overall team identity. Getzlaf plays with Nash. Richards with Callahan. Stepan is the 3rd line center.
After the 2013-2014 season if Richards hasn't picked it up buy him out without the fear of not having a #1 center.
I know it seems a little crazy and I am not saying I am totally for it, but it makes for an interesting discussion IMO as Getzlaf is much more suited to this Rangers style of play AND he adds much needed size and skill to the top-6.
What if the Rangers traded Gaborik at the draft for futures. Say to Detroit for their 1st '13 + 1st '14 + prospect or something like that.
That opens up 7.5 million for next year. If the Rangers were to pursue Getzlaf in free agency, who would fit in this system MUCH better than Gaborik and with the overall team identity. Getzlaf plays with Nash. Richards with Callahan. Stepan is the 3rd line center.
After the 2013-2014 season if Richards hasn't picked it up buy him out without the fear of not having a #1 center.
I know it seems a little crazy and I am not saying I am totally for it, but it makes for an interesting discussion IMO as Getzlaf is much more suited to this Rangers style of play AND he adds much needed size and skill to the top-6.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,356
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,356
Removing Gaborik and adding Getzlaf leaves the team with a lot more playmakers than goalscorers.
haveandare
Registered User
I'm just throwing this out there, but it seems to me like every UFA we want is going to be "MUCH better" than whoever is on the team now until we get them, then they're underwhelming, and we start salivating about the next one who is DEFINITELY going to fit better. I'm not sure Getzlaf is the answer. I think a lot of the desire for him comes from the fact that we don't have him.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,356
OverTheCap
Registered User
- Jan 3, 2009
- 10,454
- 184
The criticisms regarding Gaborik's work ethic, or lack thereof, are somewhat valid. Seems like Torts has to bench him during games a few times a season just to light a fire under his ass. He's a talented player but would be even better if he had more drive and determination.
I call it leading the team in goal scoring, he is there to receive the pass and bury it.
And he is getting goals from "the hard working areas".
RangerBoy
Dolan sucks!!!
Callahan is more important in the Rangers lexicon than Gaborik. Nash has five years remaining on his contracts. Richards was supposed to the center for Nash. Nothing happened. Richards hasn't shown that he is worth the contract. Inconsistent last season. He said he will be better in his 2nd year. The lockout took care of the 2nd year. 6 day camp. 99 day season. Give Richards another season. 20 day camp. The NHL will probably go to Sochi. Full season.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,356
I didn't know there were such things. I'm going to have to make sure to sit in those areas when my boss is watching.
NYR Viper
Registered User
Very possible. I just meant in terms of adding depth to the center ice position, adding size and strength which Torts apparently likes in his players and adding a player who is far more physically dominating than Gaborik.
We see the difference with Nash and Gaborik. Getzlaf is a similar type of player. A bit more cerebral than Nash as he is a center but physically he can be just as dominating.
That is a very good point. I guess it just depends on if you think Getzlaf, Richards and Stepan can raise the game of the players around them.
Nash
Callahan
Hagelin
Pyatt
Kreider
Young players like Fasth, Hrivik, Miller, Thomas, etc.
I guess I would rather be overly deep down the middle than have goal scoring depth on the wings but that is just the way I would build a team.
Like I said, just an interesting discussion.
Fitzy
Very Stable Genius
- Jan 29, 2009
- 35,724
- 23,008
This doesn't explain selling our top scorer for bit pieces. If the choice was between flipping Richards or Gaborik this offseason, the easy answer is Richards. Especially if Gaborik stays healthy all year and leads the team in goals again, which it looks like he will.
Finally, I bring this up like a month and a half ago, emphasizing it is not hate, just numbers, and we would have to trade him or more likely buy-out.
I got vilified
for even bringing it up, like Richards was another St. Brad of Park.Now finally, I am glad to see the truth being spoken.
It must have been the way I said it.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Ken Holland named consultant to NHL Hockey Operations.- Latest: ItWasJustified
-
Players who passed on greatness/improved teammates- Latest: Luigi Lemieux
