Rumor: Trade Thread XVII: Callahan's Reckoning.

[Callagraves]

That's...what?

I don't understand your point.

There are teams that are in the top tier of the league, "contenders", there are solid playoff teams like us and Montreal/Toronto, for example, then bubble teams like Carolina/Columbus, and then there are the bottom dwellers.

Regardless of how they're labeled, there is a clear and distinct difference between a team like the Rangers and a team like Chicago or Boston. You really wouldn't call those teams more of a contender than a team like ours?

You obviously can't argue against the point that teams like Chicago or Boston are among the best the in the league, but so frequently I hear "They're not true contenders" or "We're 1 real piece away from contending" that I wonder if people believe that the so-called contenders are the only teams that are allowed to win in the playoffs.

Look at Boston-Toronto in last years playoffs. Boston would obviously qualify as a Contender, and yet they only got out of the 1st round against an obvious "bubble team" by the skin of their teeth.

Pittsburgh has been the most consistently competitive team in the league this decade, and they've wilted in the playoffs against "inferior" teams CONSISTENTLY.

2012 New Jersey Devils. Nobody, nobody described them as "legit contenders", yet they seemed to make the Finals with relative ease (except for the fact that they were 1 goal away from a first round exit against the Florida Panthers)

Look at the teams that are referred to as "contenders" Right now, they'd probably be Pitt, Boston, Chicago, LA, right? Recent cup winners. (Except Pitt, but when you have Crosby and Malkin yeah.)

My point is that people see teams with recent, or sustained success, and assume that it will continue, and are typically resistant to the idea that an unproven team will become proven. Teams become considered "Contenders" by contending. It's a retrospective label, so it really doesn't seem too significant discussing the future.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

You obviously can't argue against the point that teams like Chicago or Boston are among the best the in the league, but so frequently I hear "They're not true contenders" or "We're 1 real piece away from contending" that I wonder if people believe that the so-called contenders are the only teams that are allowed to win in the playoffs.

Look at Boston-Toronto in last years playoffs. Boston would obviously qualify as a Contender, and yet they only got out of the 1st round against an obvious "bubble team" by the skin of their teeth.

Pittsburgh has been the most consistently competitive team in the league this decade, and they've wilted in the playoffs against "inferior" teams CONSISTENTLY.

2012 New Jersey Devils. Nobody, nobody described them as "legit contenders", yet they seemed to make the Finals with relative ease (except for the fact that they were 1 goal away from a first round exit against the Florida Panthers)

Look at the teams that are referred to as "contenders" Right now, they'd probably be Pitt, Boston, Chicago, LA, right? Recent cup winners. (Except Pitt, but when you have Crosby and Malkin yeah.)

My point is that people see teams with recent, or sustained success, and assume that it will continue, and are typically resistant to the idea that an unproven team will become proven. Teams become considered "Contenders" by contending. It's a retrospective label, so it really doesn't seem too significant discussing the future.

I feel like people thinking we have some sort of chance will deprive them of their pleasure of being miserable and saying Sather sucks.

 

[Callagraves]

I feel like people thinking we have some sort of chance will deprive them of their pleasure of being miserable and saying Sather sucks.

I don't mean to argue that our odds are even with Boston or Chicago, but that doesn't mean there's not a decent chance.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Looking ahead, who is the next potential franchise player who could hit the market or be available on the trade market in a season or two?

 

[Hire Sather]

if Chris Stewart, at 4.2 mill (and only under contract for one more year.. if he is even worth that) is the type of of player that is the main cog of a deal, I may be content with just letting him walk.

Yeah they could get a pick back too. Meh.

Would have to be a nice package

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

You obviously can't argue against the point that teams like Chicago or Boston are among the best the in the league, but so frequently I hear "They're not true contenders" or "We're 1 real piece away from contending" that I wonder if people believe that the so-called contenders are the only teams that are allowed to win in the playoffs.

I don't disagree.

Look at Boston-Toronto in last years playoffs. Boston would obviously qualify as a Contender, and yet they only got out of the 1st round against an obvious "bubble team" by the skin of their teeth.

I'd call Toronto a "playoff contender" (I liked their team last season, more than most, it seemed), but that's nit picking, really.

Pittsburgh has been the most consistently competitive team in the league this decade, and they've wilted in the playoffs against "inferior" teams CONSISTENTLY.

You could also say the same of the St. Louis Blues (now and in the early 2000s), but those teams are generally the exception to the rule. Also, Pittsburgh won the cup in 2009.

Regarding Pittsburgh, their demise was surprising, but not too shocking with the way Fleury and some of their vets were playing. Also, they need to fire Bylsma.

2012 New Jersey Devils. Nobody, nobody described them as "legit contenders", yet they seemed to make the Finals with relative ease (except for the fact that they were 1 goal away from a first round exit against the Florida Panthers)

That was a legitimately good team. They had 100+ points and actually had a better record than the Panthers. Their forechecking was relentless, their D stepped up, and Brodeur was playing some of the best hockey of his career. The Panthers, IMO, were a really solid team that season, too (although playing in the crappy division they played in helped their playoff chances). Pesky, hard working team.

Look at the teams that are referred to as "contenders" Right now, they'd probably be Pitt, Boston, Chicago, LA, right? Recent cup winners. (Except Pitt, but when you have Crosby and Malkin yeah.)

Boston was a high seed when they won the cup, and Chicago, too. LA won as an 8 seed, but so far in history, they are the exception to the rule.

My point is that people see teams with recent, or sustained success, and assume that it will continue, and are typically resistant to the idea that an unproven team will become proven. Teams become considered "Contenders" by contending. It's a retrospective label, so it really doesn't seem too significant discussing the future.

That's fair, but my point is that management shouldn't be aiming to finish 6th/7th every season and "hope" for everything to fall together. The favorites generally are the ones that end up winning, but I don't need to point out the obvious. The goal should be to build a favorite, not an "anything can happen!" team.

 

[Gardner McKay]

That's...what?

I don't understand your point.

There are teams that are in the top tier of the league, "contenders", there are solid playoff teams like us and Montreal/Toronto, for example, then bubble teams like Carolina/Columbus, and then there are the bottom dwellers.

Regardless of how they're labeled, there is a clear and distinct difference between a team like the Rangers and a team like Chicago or Boston. You really wouldn't call those teams more of a contender than a team like ours?

Was LA a contender when they won the cup? Were the Devils when they went to the ECF? I know what you are saying and I agree we aren't in that top tier of contenders. It doesn't change the fact that it still is possible for us to make it far.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Was LA a contender when they won the cup? Were the Devils when they went to the ECF? I know what you are saying and I agree we aren't in that top tier of contenders. It doesn't change the fact that it still is possible for us to make it far.

While LA didn't finish a favorite, most people had them pegged as a potential cup winner before the season started - and they didn't start to get hot until they acquired Carter. Their forward depth overall was more impressive than ours is now.

 

[Inferno]

i think this game proves that speed and tenacity wins.

i hope whatever player we get back can skate...

 

[Leonardo87]

A good win over a tired Avs team doesnt prove anything, this team isn't contending, I would hope sathers judgement isn't swayed by a couple of wins like people's opinions here are. This team has talent no doubt, but were not contending, trade Callahan and make upgrades through free agency/trade and well see about next season.

Wow you are just a buzzkill at any party aren't you?

Cally now has 11 points (4 G , 7 A) in his last 15 games, with a + 8 rating since being back from his last injury, and while being starved for points since AV has not put him back on one of the PP units, and how great has the PP been as of late? Not too good. So, It's not just one game, it's about a quarter of a season of games.

 

[Inferno]

the kings also went into rampage mode.

they didnt just win games, the frikkin demolished the opposition.

that team, like the Bruins during their run to the cup finals last year, was unstoppable for a period of time.

it happens to most teams, but not always as long as it did for those guys. an amazing run.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Wow you are just a buzzkill at any party aren't you?

Cally now has 11 points (4 G , 7 A) in his last 15 games, with a + 8 rating since being back from his last injury, and while being starved for points since AV has not put him back on one of the PP units, and how great has the PP been as of late? Not too good. So, It's not just one game, it's about a quarter of a season of games debbie downers.

Excluding tonight, eight points (2 G, 6 A) in his last 14 games is far from impressive, specifically the two goals. Yes, he had a great game, and it was a vintage performance. No, it doesn't make him worth the ridiculous contract he's asking for.

Do people honestly think letting an asset as valuable as Callahan walk a good idea?

 

[Callagraves]

I don't disagree.

I'd call Toronto a "playoff contender" (I liked their team last season, more than most, it seemed), but that's nit picking, really.

You could also say the same of the St. Louis Blues (now and in the early 2000s), but those teams are generally the exception to the rule. Also, Pittsburgh won the cup in 2009.

Regarding Pittsburgh, their demise was surprising, but not too shocking with the way Fleury and some of their vets were playing. Also, they need to fire Bylsma.

That was a legitimately good team. They had 100+ points and actually had a better record than the Panthers. Their forechecking was relentless, their D stepped up, and Brodeur was playing some of the best hockey of his career. The Panthers, IMO, were a really solid team that season, too (although playing in the crappy division they played in helped their playoff chances). Pesky, hard working team.

Boston was a high seed when they won the cup, and Chicago, too. LA won as an 8 seed, but so far in history, they are the exception to the rule.

That's fair, but my point is that management shouldn't be aiming to finish 6th/7th every season and "hope" for everything to fall together. The favorites generally are the ones that end up winning, but I don't need to point out the obvious. The goal should be to build a favorite, not an "anything can happen!" team.

I don't disagree on any particular point. I'd hope to make the playoffs as a 3rd-5th seed, and declare our odds as good as any other. Maybe I'm a little wary of being declared a contender, as the last time that happened Gaborik and Richards forgot how to hockey and we spent most of the season embarrassed.

 

[frozenrubber]

Looking ahead, who is the next potential franchise player who could hit the market or be available on the trade market in a season or two?

Free Agency (UFAs only):

Toews (2 yrs)
Kane (2 yrs)
Ryan (2 yrs)
Spezza (2 yrs)
Stamkos (3 yrs)
E Staal (3 yrs)
Kopitar (3 yrs)

Most likely, none of the above ever reach the free agent market. Trade or draft is the way forward in the new NHL.

 

[Leonardo87]

Excluding tonight, eight points (2 G, 6 A) in his last 14 games is far from impressive, specifically the two goals. Yes, he had a great game, and it was a vintage performance. No, it doesn't make him worth the ridiculous contract he's asking for.

Do people honestly think letting an asset as valuable as Callahan walk a good idea?

While not getting PP time? That is still good. It's also the other things he does on and off the ice that make him an all around player.

As per trading him, you risk removing an important piece of a machine that is crusing along here.

I don't think he should be getting 7 million, that is crazy, but he has to start high. Rangers have already offered 6 million. I think 6 million and 6 years gets a deal done and it is not too crazy money.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I don't disagree on any particular point. I'd hope to make the playoffs as a 3rd-5th seed, and declare our odds as good as any other. Maybe I'm a little wary of being declared a contender, as the last time that happened Gaborik and Richards forgot how to hockey and we spent most of the season embarrassed.

With hindsight, you can see that the '13 Rangers team severely lacked depth. Getting players like Kreider, Brassard, Zuccarello, Pouliot, and Moore into the lineup has added to the depth. Getting back a healthy Staal, and adding Klein and J. Moore (who looks rejuvenated with Klein as his partner).

 

[Cake or Death]

if Chris Stewart, at 4.2 mill (and only under contract for one more year.. if he is even worth that) is the type of of player that is the main cog of a deal, I may be content with just letting him walk.

Yeah they could get a pick back too. Meh.

Would have to be a nice package

Stewart can score (his career .61 PPG would be up there on this team), a big body at 230, and a better scorer than Callahan, especially at ES. Not saying it's ideal, as Callahan is the better player. But Stewart's salary is solid for his output, and considering Cally is a UFA next season who's seeking an obscenely ridiculous contract, it's a very decent return IMO.

 

[mti79]

Free Agency (UFAs only):

Toews (2 yrs)
Kane (2 yrs)
Ryan (2 yrs)
Spezza (2 yrs)
Stamkos (3 yrs)
E Staal (3 yrs)
Kopitar (3 yrs)

Most likely, none of the above ever reach the free agent market. Trade or draft is the way forward in the new NHL.

Screw Carolina.... let's get the Staals in New York. Although I wouldn't say no to that Stamkos guy. Or Kane, if it's Patrick... I want no part of Evander

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

So is the consensus on this board that this was Callahan's Rangers swan song?

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

So is the consensus on this board that this was Callahan's Rangers swan song?

I hope not.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

So is the consensus on this board that this was Callahan's Rangers swan song?

Eh, I doubt he's traded tomorrow. I don't even know if he's traded before the deadline. He could be re-signed, for all we know. There is a decent chance it happens by Firday, though.

 

[stan the caddy]

Lundqvist signed his deal the day after Talbot had a bad game so maybe Cally's re-signed tomorrow...

 

[RGY]

Lundqvist signed his deal the day after Talbot had a bad game so maybe Cally's re-signed tomorrow...

That logic does not make any sense.

 

[theFiGS]

Screw Carolina.... let's get the Staals in New York. Although I wouldn't say no to that Stamkos guy. Or Kane, if it's Patrick... I want no part of Evander

I can see Marc try and convince Eric to play here with him but then Carolina would fleece us for Jordan.. I think bobby Ryan ends up a ranger out of that list.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Do people honestly think letting an asset as valuable as Callahan walk a good idea?

I don't want to get into the argument of whether or not we are a contender, however, let's think about it this way. The ultimate goal is to win a Stanley Cup. Asset management is an important part of building a cup winner, but getting a maximum return for your assets is not the goal.

Let's say we can look into the future. It's a warm morning in June and millions of people line city streets. The Rangers parade turns to corner and heads down the canyon of heroes. We won the Stanley Cup. Callahan walks in free agency a month later. Would you be mad we let him walk for nothing then?

Personally, I think the way we have been playing for the last month and continuing to trend upwards we are looking more and more like a serious team. Get into the playoffs, team flying, if Hank goes god mode on a mission to finally prove himself as a champion in the NHL, you're telling me we couldn't win a 7 game series against even the best teams? I tend to think a hot goalie is the great equalizer. I know we've been saying that for years and it's yet to happen, but just because it hasn't happened already doesn't mean it won't.

I personally hope Cally comes to his senses and realizes what he has here, a team that is on the cusp which he is the captain of, will out weigh the money lost and sign the 6x5 deal.

I know my post sounds overly optimistic about this team and we probably aren't real contenders on the level of Chicago or Boston. But crazier things have happened. I like this team, I like how they're playing. I don't know if I want to get rid of an important piece of the team if it's only for a marginal roster player and a draft pick. I want to win.