Rumor: Trade Rumours Thread Part V: Gaborik "available"; LeBrun: NYR interested in D. Boyle

[Ola]

The key question with Hornqvist is can he play the left side?

Still not as worried about the blueline of a team that can't score as much as others are here. I know Sather wants to add some prospect for future there, but our defense doesn't really need immediate help except to add offense on the power play.

No to Hörnqvist or any player like him.

We need creativity up front. Scoring from the blueline. Another center to bump back Boyle wouldn't hurt.

We do not need players who can't create offense by themselves.

 

[Kwayry]

Because you've addressed 3 key needs in a trade?
- Improved the 3rd line center spot immensely
- Added a RH, PPQB defensemen on an ELC.
- Recouped a lost 1st round pick

Bonus:
- Carrie Underwood will be a regular fixture on MSG cameras.

I can address that with a pick for a rental. Miller/Lindberg can fill that spot next season or the season after at the latest, then what am I going to do with a 35 year old center with 1 more year at 4.2M caphit?
And as Rangerboy likes to point out, Sather doesn't take terms back in a trade.

 

[iamitter]

@iammitter
And you keep taking credit for the Zibby + Greening deal when it was clearly proposed by a Sens fan after a little push from I8islanders.

NYR Boyler87 was actually the first on the Rangers board way before the topic even went off on trade rumors

I wonder if the Sens would do Greening + Zib + RD +

Greening would look great as a Ranger.

I don't think I saw his post here (it wasn't quoted or really discussed) and I didn't go on the trade boards at all.

My post of

Zibanejad+Greening+?
I don't see a deal without an NHL player coming back.

was actually a few minutes after it was mentioned on the trade boards.


I'm still pretty sure I was the first/one of the first to do Zib+Greening+1st though I can't really be sure as I don't have the time to search every combination of all their names shortened.

And Fisher is 33 in June with a 4.2Mil caphit until 2015, how is that a good deal for the Rangers?

Whether you like or hate Gabby is irrelevant. You should want the best deal for the Rangers.
Let the other team decide what is reasonable and what is not.
To claim that you know their needs and bottom line more than them is unreasonable at best.

It's a realistic deal. Fisher is a good 20/20 guy who can improve our 3rd line a lot. We're going to have cap coming back. Erat doesn't make sense, neither does SK. Hornqvist I just can't see them parting with, especially with that many additions for what may be 1.5 years of Gaborik. And I never claimed to know their needs or bottom line better than them. You've done nothing but call me out for things that aren't true. If you're going to put words in my mouth like that, at least find where I said that (and I didn't).


And of course I want the best deal for the Rangers. I would absolutely love

Jarnkrok+Tatar+Helm+1st
for
Gaborik+Boyle+3rd

Fixes our third line quite a bit, gives us a 1st in a deep draft (let's hope they miss the playoffs) and two future second liners.


And for what its worth, I like Gaborik and if it was up to me, I wouldn't part with him until the draft.

 

[Kwayry]

NYR Boyler87 was actually the first on the Rangers board way before the topic even went off on trade rumors



I don't think I saw his post here (it wasn't quoted or really discussed) and I didn't go on the trade boards at all.

My post of

was actually a few minutes after it was mentioned on the trade boards.


I'm still pretty sure I was the first/one of the first to do Zib+Greening+1st though I can't really be sure as I don't have the time to search every combination of all their names shortened.




It's a realistic deal. Fisher is a good 20/20 guy who can improve our 3rd line a lot. We're going to have cap coming back. Erat doesn't make sense, neither does SK. Hornqvist I just can't see them parting with, especially with that many additions for what may be 1.5 years of Gaborik. And I never claimed to know their needs or bottom line better than them. You've done nothing but call me out for things that aren't true. If you're going to put words in my mouth like that, at least find where I said that (and I didn't).


And of course I want the best deal for the Rangers. I would absolutely love

Jarnkrok+Tatar+Helm+1st
for
Gaborik+Boyle+3rd

Fixes our third line quite a bit, gives us a 1st in a deep draft (let's hope they miss the playoffs) and two future second liners.

This is the statement you made

Fisher+Ellis+1st is a realistic package. Hornqvist+Blum+1st isn't, really.

At least I called you out here instead of the trade boards. I'd rather settle our differences among us than in front of all those Ranger haters.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Remember with Nashville that if things stay status quo in the standings, that first would be a top 10 pick, possibly top 5-8 in a deep draft. Then again they are only 2 pts out of 8th, playing one more game then San Jose.

That pick alone would hold a lot of value especially if it was in the 5-8 range.

 

[iamitter]

This is the statement you made


At least I called you out here instead of the trade boards. I'd rather settle our differences among us than in front of all those Ranger haters.

And I backed it up with quotes from tons of them that Hornqvist isn't in play, let alone Hornqvist+?
Regardless, I don't see how that statement

To claim that you know their needs and bottom line more than them is unreasonable at best.

is true based on that comment. Saying that a cost controllable RFA 25-30 G scorer + a 1st + a good D prospect for 1.5 years of a slumping 35-40 G scorer isn't realistic is not claiming that I "know their needs and bottom line more than them". It's simply common sense.

 

[Fitzy]

One question I often find myself asking is that if Gretzky, and so many other great players were traded, is it possible that an immensely struggling Alexander Ovechkin could be?

The main reason I hear "no" is because his contract and recent performance limit his value, and Washington would rather just keep him around and hope he returns to his old form rather than trade him for very little in return.

Still, since we're on a cold streak and its silly season with the trade talk...

 

[Thirty One]

One question I often find myself asking is that if Gretzky, and so many other great players were traded, is it possible that an immensely struggling Alexander Ovechkin could be?

The main reason I hear "no" is because his contract and recent performance limit his value, and Washington would rather just keep him around and hope he returns to his old form rather than trade him for very little in return.

Still, since we're on a cold streak and its silly season with the trade talk...

I see where you're going and I do not like it.

 

[iamitter]

Remember with Nashville that if things stay status quo in the standings, that first would be a top 10 pick, possibly top 5-8 in a deep draft. Then again they are only 2 pts out of 8th, playing one more game then San Jose.

That pick alone would hold a lot of value especially if it was in the 5-8 range.

I think every team we would trade Gaborik to assumes that his addition pushes them further into the playoffs.

If we could be assured a top 6 pick in the upcoming draft, I would be highly tempted to trade Gaborik straight up for it. We'd almost be guaranteed a very, very good player.

Jones, MacKinnon, Drouin, Barkov, Lindholm, Nichuskin (Russian factor could make him drop a lot).
However, I think there's a pretty clear top 5 in this draft.
I'm not that high on Monahan.

If we get a mid round pick, I'd love Pulock.

 

[iamitter]

One question I often find myself asking is that if Gretzky, and so many other great players were traded, is it possible that an immensely struggling Alexander Ovechkin could be?

The main reason I hear "no" is because his contract and recent performance limit his value, and Washington would rather just keep him around and hope he returns to his old form rather than trade him for very little in return.

Still, since we're on a cold streak and its silly season with the trade talk...

I think the main reason it would be no would be because of marketing value rather than trade value. Even people who don't follow hockey in DC know the name Ovechkin. Everybody and their mother has his jersey.

 

[Fitzy]

I see where you're going and I do not like it.

Who wants to do a Brendan Shanahan and photoshop AO wearing a rangers jersey? Lol. Unlikely. But still a fun thing to discuss amidst all of the negativity.

 

[Trxjw]

I can address that with a pick for a rental. Miller/Lindberg can fill that spot next season or the season after at the latest, then what am I going to do with a 35 year old center with 1 more year at 4.2M caphit?
And as Rangerboy likes to point out, Sather doesn't take terms back in a trade.

Oh? You can fix a position the Rangers have been trying to address all season simply by flipping a pick? Players can fix it next year? Yeah, I remember this time last year when nobody wanted secondary scoring because Kreider was going to fill that role this season.

He's taken on term when necessary. He also hasn't had to deal with a season where the cap is decreasing by over $5M. He's going to have to take a contract back in the deal. Teams aren't giving up cap-controllable assets for a $7.5M contract.

If you think Nashville is trading a guy who can pot 30 goals and is an RFA, a top-tier PMD prospect, and a 1st round pick for Gaborik who is a UFA in one year, you're delusional.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

I think every team we would trade Gaborik to assumes that his addition pushes them further into the playoffs.

If we could be assured a top 6 pick in the upcoming draft, I would be highly tempted to trade Gaborik straight up for it. We'd almost be guaranteed a very, very good player.

If the pick was in the 5-8 range and the Rangers got say Blum or Ellis back in the trade, they could theoretically have the assets to move into the top 3 if they included MDZ as part of the package.

 

[Thirty One]

Who wants to do a Brendan Shanahan and photoshop AO wearing a rangers jersey? Lol. Unlikely. But still a fun thing to discuss amidst all of the negativity.

That reminds me of the official Rangers site picture of Shanahan photoshopped on Strudwick's body. Who cares if Strudwick is a left handed shot?

Besides, this would never work. Powe is #8.

 

[Fitzy]

That reminds me of the official Rangers site picture of Shanahan photoshopped on Strudwick's body. Who cares if Strudwick is a left handed shot?

Besides, this would never work. Powe is #8.

Then we have something to go on.

Glad somebody remembered that. One of the most hilarious post lockout moments in NYR media.

 

[iamitter]

If the pick was in the 5-8 range and the Rangers got say Blum or Ellis back in the trade, they could theoretically have the assets to move into the top 3 if they included MDZ as part of the package.

That's very true. However, something drastic would have to happen (ie. a goalie injury) for us to get that. I don't see Nashville or Detroit or Vancouver dropping below 10th.

I wouldn't even care to go below 5th. As far as I'm concerned, all the players 1-5 are so good, we could very well end up with the guy we want at 5th.

 

[qwertyaas]

On a more serious note, you could be alot worse off than having a good team in a tough cap position.

I mean, what is the downside if we in the summer of 15' is forced to trade Marc Staal? What do we stand to loose?

Boston got into cap-hell [sic] and got Seguin and Hamilton out of it.

They also lucked out with Toronto still finishing at the bottom of the standings which they did not think would happen after trading for Kessel.

 

[Kwayry]

And I backed it up with quotes from tons of them that Hornqvist isn't in play, let alone Hornqvist+?
Regardless, I don't see how that statement

is true based on that comment. Saying that a cost controllable RFA 25-30 G scorer + a 1st + a good D prospect for 1.5 years of a slumping 35-40 G scorer isn't realistic is not claiming that I "know their needs and bottom line more than them". It's simply common sense.

Thanks for making my point.
Slumping huh?
How do you know they look at Gaborik as "slumping"?
I look at him as a misused 40 goal scorer that should return a young roster player + top prospect + first. Which is what Katie Strang reported as to what would be the asking price, and which is what the "idiotic" Preds fans agreed to.
But you know better.

 

[Kwayry]

Oh? You can fix a position the Rangers have been trying to address all season simply by flipping a pick? Players can fix it next year? Yeah, I remember this time last year when nobody wanted secondary scoring because Kreider was going to fill that role this season.

He's taken on term when necessary. He also hasn't had to deal with a season where the cap is decreasing by over $5M. He's going to have to take a contract back in the deal. Teams aren't giving up cap-controllable assets for a $7.5M contract.

If you think Nashville is trading a guy who can pot 30 goals and is an RFA, a top-tier PMD prospect, and a 1st round pick for Gaborik who is a UFA in one year, you're delusional.

I don't understand this phobia you have with Kids filling in roles. It happens all the time in Hockey, actually in any sport.
But you think the better solution is to trade for Fisher a soon to be 33 year old center with a horrible contract.

Let me return the favor, if you think Sather is taking back Fisher, you are more delusional.

 

[iamitter]

Thanks for making my point.
Slumping huh?
How do you know they look at Gaborik as "slumping"?
I look at him as a misused 40 goal scorer that should return a young roster player + top prospect + first. Which is what Katie Strang reported as to what would be the asking price, and which is what the "idiotic" Preds fans agreed to.
But you know better.

I don't know why you're quoting idiotic as that word was never used. And following your own standards you should say Pred fan. Because there was 1.

And yes, Katie Strang reported that. And LeBrun reported we want a couple grinders and a RH D. We need to take everything said with a grain of salt, look at deals done previously, look at the way Gaborik is currently playing and look at the cap next season.

But if you continue to insist Hornqvist+Blum+1st is a viable deal, then yes, I'll say I think I know better. The improvement from Hornqvist to Gaborik is (generously) 15 goals a year. Say 20-25 goals since we have time this year. This is assuming a 40G Gaborik (not who we currently have). Is 20-25 goals worth an extra 3-4 million, a young PMD and a 1st? Not to mention Hornqvist is still an RFA after this and controllable for the foreseeable future.

 

[iamitter]

I don't understand this phobia you have with Kids filling in roles. It happens all the time in Hockey, actually in any sport.
But you think the better solution is to trade for Fisher a soon to be 33 year old center with a horrible contract.

Let me return the favor, if you think Sather is taking back Fisher, you are more delusional.

Fisher's been a consistent 20-25 G, 45-50 point two-way center. How is his contract terrible?

Gaborik's currently on pace for 23 goals, 50 point season in 82 games. For 7.5 million. And he's no standout defensively. What does that make him?

 

[Kwayry]

I don't know why you're quoting idiotic as that word was never used. And following your own standards you should say Pred fan. Because there was 1.

And yes, Katie Strang reported that. And LeBrun reported we want a couple grinders and a RH D. We need to take everything said with a grain of salt, look at deals done previously, look at the way Gaborik is currently playing and look at the cap next season.

But if you continue to insist Hornqvist+Blum+1st is a viable deal, then yes, I'll say I think I know better. The improvement from Hornqvist to Gaborik is (generously) 15 goals a year. Say 20-25 goals since we have time this year. This is assuming a 40G Gaborik (not who we currently have). Is 20-25 goals worth an extra 3-4 million, a young PMD and a 1st? Not to mention Hornqvist is still an RFA after this and controllable for the foreseeable future.

I stand corrected on the fan vs fans.

I continue to insist that is the better deal for the Rangers. Whether it is viable or not for the Preds, is up to the Preds not me.

 

[Thirty One]

Who wants to do a Brendan Shanahan and photoshop AO wearing a rangers jersey? Lol. Unlikely. But still a fun thing to discuss amidst all of the negativity.

I could totally work for the NYR.com graphics department.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I don't understand this phobia you have with Kids filling in roles. It happens all the time in Hockey, actually in any sport.
But you think the better solution is to trade for Fisher a soon to be 33 year old center with a horrible contract.

Let me return the favor, if you think Sather is taking back Fisher, you are more delusional.

Phobia?

Its based on reality. The Rangers havent had much luck at all filling the bottom 6 forwards from internal options/prospects. In fact, glossing over that issue with "Oh, (insert 20 year old kid here) can take over that spot" is a very big reason we are currently in this position to begin with.

 

[Gardner McKay]

I don't understand this phobia you have with Kids filling in roles. It happens all the time in Hockey, actually in any sport.
But you think the better solution is to trade for Fisher a soon to be 33 year old center with a horrible contract.

Let me return the favor, if you think Sather is taking back Fisher, you are more delusional.

Chris Kreider is where right now? Not on the Rangers 2nd line Ill tell you that much. Thats where the phobia comes in. With an established player you have a pretty good idea of their floor and ceiling. Kids are way too much of an unknown.