Toggle sidebar

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would think his NTC has **** small market teams on it.

Buffalo, Winnipeg, Edmonton, etc.
 
Beardacus said:
Nash is playing at PPG pace right now. Who else on the team is? He also got injured and came back just as hot if not better.

He proved enough for me. He is consistent. He is not Cally but he puts in work on both ends. He hustles.

Gaborik is a lazy turd and I really can't say what happened to Richards. I dislike both but would be willing to give Richards another chance if he gets his **** back together soon. Gabby on the other hand needs a serious beating. He is just down right lazy and disrespectful to the entire team playing the way he is.
Click to expand...

That last paragraph is wrong on so many levels I don't even know what to say.

Nash has done his fair share of cherrypicking this year. Gaborik has been the more reliable backchecker of the two.
 
I Eat Crow said:
St. Louis as I mentioned would make sense.

I could also see Winnipeg, LA, and Nashville making sense. Question is, are these teams on Gaborik's no move list?

I think Rangerboy is trying to point out that with the return Gaborik would fetch, i.e. the Rangers won't be getting back just picks and prospects. They'd take back a top 4 D and top 9 forward with a salary.
Click to expand...

I don't see St Louis as a match - they have more than enough wingers as it is.
 
iamitter said:
I don't see St Louis as a match - they have more than enough wingers as it is.
Click to expand...

That's true, I figured they'd make sense if St. Louis felt they could make a run and feel comfortable giving up Shattenkirk in the process.

Steen is actually a center by trade playing the wing. The team is overloaded with centers. Backes, Berglund, Oshie, Steen, McDonald, Porter, all natural centers. Someone has to move.
 
I Eat Crow said:
That's true, I figured they'd make sense if St. Louis felt they could make a run and feel comfortable giving up Shattenkirk in the process.

Steen is actually a center by trade playing the wing. The team is overloaded with centers. Backes, Berglund, Oshie, Steen, McDonald, Porter, all natural centers. Someone has to move.
Click to expand...

id love Backes on this team. a legit power forward.. Oshie is a underrated player..
 
Don't know why we'd be interested in Boyle when we are penciling in McIlrath next year.
 
-31- said:
Have to imagine if we get Boyle, Gaborik is on his way out.

Hamrlik killed any chance of adding a player with a 5M+ cap hit.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure I said this about Hamrlik when we picked him up and I got people saying that was a ridiculous concern, that he'd be a solid 5/6 D man, and that he would help the PP a lot with his "blistering" shot.

Sounds about right for this board. Helped the PP a ton with all those PP minutes he's getting, and that sick nasty fluttering shot he's got. :sarcasm:


... And if the Boyle trade rumors are true, Sather is clearly stuck in win now mode; otherwise wtf. But then again, its Sather... so, **** it.
 
dan boyles got 3 even strength points on the year. only eminger and gilroy have fewer points even strength on our team than that.
 
iamitter said:
That last paragraph is wrong on so many levels I don't even know what to say.

Nash has done his fair share of cherrypicking this year. Gaborik has been the more reliable backchecker of the two.
Click to expand...

Uhhhh, what? Have you even watched the games? I think I've seen Gabby backcheck twice all year (granted there was one in a recent game that was actually a good play and broke up a good scoring chance). I have trouble keeping track of the number of times in a single game I see Gabby coasting on a backcheck or defensive zone coverage/assignment. Not saying Nash is ten times better or anything (especially recently he's seemed to make a few more poor defensive decisions and been coasting some), but he's been consistently a lot better than Gabby defensively. It's just not Gabby's game.
 
Richter Scale said:
Uhhhh, what? Have you even watched the games? I think I've seen Gabby backcheck twice all year (granted there was one in a recent game that was actually a good play and broke up a good scoring chance). I have trouble keeping track of the number of times in a single game I see Gabby coasting on a backcheck or defensive zone coverage/assignment. Not saying Nash is ten times better or anything (especially recently he's seemed to make a few more poor defensive decisions and been coasting some), but he's been consistently a lot better than Gabby defensively. It's just not Gabby's game.
Click to expand...

selective memory. Gabbys been fine in the defensive zone..hes backchecked just as hard as Nash...difference is in teh offensive zone, outside of tonight, and a handful of other games, Gaborik has been MIA.
 
gaboriks defensive problems arent backchecking. its being strong on the puck and getting it out of the defensive zone when puck comes up the boards.
 
Richter Scale said:
Uhhhh, what? Have you even watched the games? I think I've seen Gabby backcheck twice all year (granted there was one in a recent game that was actually a good play and broke up a good scoring chance). I have trouble keeping track of the number of times in a single game I see Gabby coasting on a backcheck or defensive zone coverage/assignment. Not saying Nash is ten times better or anything (especially recently he's seemed to make a few more poor defensive decisions and been coasting some), but he's been consistently a lot better than Gabby defensively. It's just not Gabby's game.
Click to expand...

Nash has been a nightmare in his own zone, especially over the past two games. He's reaching for pucks, getting beaten positionally, and turns over the puck in the neutral zone at least two or three times a game. Isn't a huge factor in and of itself, but when paired with two other weak defensive players in Gaborik and Richards, the line is just unable to exit the zone when they give up possession of the puck. Frankly, Nash-Richards-Gaborik has been the Rangers' worst line defensively, by far. They're so bad in their own end, they can hardly control the puck when they're on the ice. Not really a fan of that line. They're good on the rush, but aside from that, it just doesn't work.

In short, it doesn't really matter which of these players have been "worse" defensively. They've both been terrible in that facet.
 
Pizza said:
For some reason Mike Gartner's name just popped into my head....
Click to expand...

Favorite player of all time for me. Was so bittersweet winning the cup in 94, knowing he was moved before then. Not even like he had a bad year, had 52 points in 71 games before he was moved, 28 of them were goals. He was the jersey i wore playing street hockey growing up. SUch an underrated player in my opinion.
 
Trxjw said:
Why? Because Fisher would immensely improve our 3C position. That's not even remotely debatable. You stated that I "think trading for Fisher is a better solution" when I never said anything remotely close to that. I've said it's a more realistic solution and that the return addressed 3 current team needs. Pretty simple concept
Click to expand...

:huh:

Here is the way I see it.
When 2 proposals, 1 and 2, are being discussed and you say that
A - proposal 1 is unrealistic.
B - proposal 2 would immensely help the team and it's not even remotely debatable
C - proposal 2 is more realistic.

That implies that you like proposal 2 more than proposal 1.
I don't know of any other way to explain it.

As to Fisher coming to the Rangers, I think it's more unrealistic actually. He has a NTC and his wife is a big star country singer from Nashville, he ain't moving to NYC.
And his 4.2M contract running until he is 35 makes his short term value a pretty expensive proposition long term.
Besides the fact that Sather rarely takes back more terms in a trade.

I don't wanna make this a long running feud, so I will agree to disagree and move on.

But I am still right :laugh:
 
St. Louis may be a good idea. The team is absolutely loaded with depth. If we could acquire a top six and a top four d for Gaborik + one minor, it may be be a win/win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom