Confirmed with Link: TYLER MOTTE TO NYR

[Kovalev27]

How much of Kane have you watched this season?

Getting Kane isn't a 1994 scenario. It's a 1997-2004 scenario where we pay to get a name that does absolutely nothing for us. Kane needs a walker out there on the ice for that bad hip.

You want a 1994? Sell the farm for Meier or something. Kane is the equivalent of a fart in a hurricane. No one is going to notice.

You watch him last night? Very few people in the league can have a game like that. In their lives. He’s still got plenty left.

 

[Larrybiv]

You watch him last night? Very few people in the league can have a game like that. In their lives. He’s still got plenty left.

Maybe he's trying to prove to the Rangers that he "still got it"?

 

[tlk]

Should tell you how much I dislike this year

The calendar year when they are like THE best team in the league (yeah, better than the Broons). I think I saw some such stat around the Vancouver game.
Telling indeed.

 

[mas0764]

"Yes, I know lots of GMs do it, but they are wrong. They act on desperation not on what is sound and healthy for their franchises".

This arrogant statement is what I was referring to. The above sounds like it's based in fact and not just an opinion from an armchair GM.

It is based on fact. I keep hearing about how some of these trades are "good value," but they are not. What is meant is that the price paid isn't extravagant based on what other buyers are paying.

Renting with high end assets including first round picks at the deadline is proven almost always bad value, however. It's like buying a lottery ticket - it may be someone's opinion that they want to spend $2 on a ticket, but they aren't getting anything back for it almost to the point of certainty.

Statistically speaking, renting with higher end assets in hockey is bad value. For some reason it has become ingrained hockey culture that throwing your assets away for lottery tickets that are unlikely to pay off, is the preferred method of trying to win.

A GM's job is to win and it's perfectly acceptable to try to make the team better if there is a reasonable prospect of winning a cup. They owe it to the fans, the players, and the people that pay them. Obviously only 1 team wins the cup but that doesn't make every other GM wrong for trying to get better. Some do it better than others and yes GM's that have given up 1st round pick for players have actually benefitted from it. The Rangers played 20 playoff games and went to the ECF. They didn't win the cup but the experience could be important for the development of the young guys that could help them this year and beyond. The Rangers haven't mortgaged the future at all. They got better with additions of Tarasenko, Mikkola, and Motte and still retained all of their prospects and all important players on the roster, and have a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounders this draft. I would rather the GM take a shot at getting better within reason than possibly missing an opportunity by doing nothing. You never know what happens from year to year with injuries and other circumstances.

Speaking of opinion, this is opinion. ^

You like to waste your money on lottery tickets. Ok, but spending $2 on zero dollars back is still bad value.

I don't think he's washed. Last season was the best of his career. Even if he's not living up to that, he didn't fall off a cliff in a matter of months. As for his play here thus far, it's quite clear he's still not comfortable and getting used to his teammates and how they play. Once he's up to speed he's going to be dynamite and add an additional dynamic forward to the mix.

Maybe he will. I've heard this reasoning before, though. And sometimes (most of the times? For NYR anyway) the trade deadline acquisitions under perform.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Maybe he's trying to prove to the Rangers that he "still got it"?

This is probably it

Guy is desperate to come here.

 

[mas0764]

I’m ready to jump on the Kane train. This is 94. Go all in. What’s it going to cost us? Nothing. Is his hip bad? Yes. No doubt. But with a bad hip he’s better than most. I think in NYC going for a Cup on a good team. He’d step up.

Well spending nothing isn't like '94.

But it would have to literally be nothing. Kane isn't "better than most," with a bad hip, in fact he's been pretty bad this year and not even really what we need.

Can I do it for a third round pick? But of course he will cost far more than that. The Hawks will want the Tarasenko or ROR package and that's a flat no.

I'm more interested in what the free agent bidding looks like for some of these aging wingers in an offseason where no one will have any cap space.

This place is so weird. Almost everyone has wanted Motte to return since the day he signed with Ottawa. Today we get him back, yet everyone is still so bitter toward one another. I guess it's just another divisive segment of the world. I should know better by now.

And this renewed talk of adding Kane is just madness. Even if we forget about the massive overpayment it will take to acquire him, or assets we'll need to send to a 2nd team to eat salary....is the fact that he's both injured & washed, completely lost on you guys?

His hat trick has everyone thinking that he's just been resting up and is ready to be a 90 point player the second he reaches Broadway, despite the fact that every rental we've ever acquired other than Copp last year ends up performing worse once they get here.

 

[Gardner McKay]

You watch him last night? Very few people in the league can have a game like that. In their lives. He’s still got plenty left.

No. But sample size matters and he has been dogshit wrapped in catshit for most of this year.

 

[Gardner McKay]

It is based on fact. I keep hearing about how some of these trades are "good value," but they are not. What is meant is that the price paid isn't extravagant based on what other buyers are paying.

Renting with high end assets including first round picks at the deadline is proven almost always bad value, however. It's like buying a lottery ticket - it may be someone's opinion that they want to spend $2 on a ticket, but they aren't getting anything back for it almost to the point of certainty.

Statistically speaking, renting with higher end assets in hockey is bad value. For some reason it has become ingrained hockey culture that throwing your assets away for lottery tickets that are unlikely to pay off, is the preferred method of trying to win.



Speaking of opinion, this is opinion. ^

You like to waste your money on lottery tickets. Ok, but spending $2 on zero dollars back is still bad value.



Maybe he will. I've heard this reasoning before, though. And sometimes (most of the times? For NYR anyway) the trade deadline acquisitions under perform.

It is based on fact. I keep hearing about how some of these trades are "good value," but they are not. What is meant is that the price paid isn't extravagant based on what other buyers are paying.

Renting with high end assets including first round picks at the deadline is proven almost always bad value, however. It's like buying a lottery ticket - it may be someone's opinion that they want to spend $2 on a ticket, but they aren't getting anything back for it almost to the point of certainty.

Statistically speaking, renting with higher end assets in hockey is bad value. For some reason it has become ingrained hockey culture that throwing your assets away for lottery tickets that are unlikely to pay off, is the preferred method of trying to win.



Speaking of opinion, this is opinion. ^

You like to waste your money on lottery tickets. Ok, but spending $2 on zero dollars back is still bad value.



Maybe he will. I've heard this reasoning before, though. And sometimes (most of the times? For NYR anyway) the trade deadline acquisitions under perform.

Can you figure out the glaring flaw in your logic?

 

[haohmaru]

You like to waste your money on lottery tickets. Ok, but spending $2 on zero dollars back is still bad value.

Late 1st round draft picks are lottery tickets as well.

Yeah, TDL adding assets doesn't guarantee you a Cup. Nothing does. 3% of teams win the Cup every year and 97% don't. I'm in the camp of adding players that have a future with the team but the Rangers clearly aren't in that position given the people they need to sign and the cap that they have. So far, I give Drury an "A" for this deadline. He hasn't given up much.

 

[mas0764]

Late 1st round draft picks are lottery tickets as well.

Better value than rentals, sadly.

Yeah, TDL adding assets doesn't guarantee you a Cup. Nothing does. 3% of teams win the Cup every year and 97% don't. I'm in the camp of adding players that have a future with the team but the Rangers clearly aren't in that position given the people they need to sign and the cap that they have. So far, I give Drury an "A" for this deadline. He hasn't given up much.

I think the Rangers are absolutely in a position where they can and should be adding players with a future. If there is no one that fits that criteria available for an affordable price they should stand pat.

They won't, because, again, it's ingrained hockey culture to spend assets on players who have a very small chance of helping them win a Cup.

The better play is long term asset accumulation. You will come out way further ahead that way. GMs need to protect their jobs, though, not do what's best for the franchise, and that means they have to cater to ignorant owners and show them the revenue from a playoff round or two.

It's all terrible for your odds of actually building a Cup winner but that's how hockey operates sadly.

The prime example from another sport should be the Philadelphia Eagles - they are a team that thinks outside the box and constantly makes trades too early rather than too late and they find other teams willing to overpay for their assets. They take short term hits for long terms gains and they've profited to the extent of 2 Super Bowl appearances and 1 win in the last 5 years.

 

[haohmaru]

The prime example from another sport should be the Philadelphia Eagles - they are a team that thinks outside the box and constantly makes trades too early rather than too late and they find other teams willing to overpay for their assets. They take short term hits for long terms gains and they've profited to the extent of 2 Super Bowl appearances and 1 win in the last 5 years.

Tarasenko and Mikkola are good adds/fits for this team. Had they given up a similar package for Kane, I would've been a lot more upset as Kane is one wrong turn/hit away from being on IR. Motte, too. And, honestly, I think the Rangers once again try to figure out a way to make Motte fit next year.

 

[McRanger92]

It is based on fact. I keep hearing about how some of these trades are "good value," but they are not. What is meant is that the price paid isn't extravagant based on what other buyers are paying.

Renting with high end assets including first round picks at the deadline is proven almost always bad value, however. It's like buying a lottery ticket - it may be someone's opinion that they want to spend $2 on a ticket, but they aren't getting anything back for it almost to the point of certainty.

Statistically speaking, renting with higher end assets in hockey is bad value. For some reason it has become ingrained hockey culture that throwing your assets away for lottery tickets that are unlikely to pay off, is the preferred method of trying to win.



Speaking of opinion, this is opinion. ^

You like to waste your money on lottery tickets. Ok, but spending $2 on zero dollars back is still bad value.



Maybe he will. I've heard this reasoning before, though. And sometimes (most of the times? For NYR anyway) the trade deadline acquisitions under perform.

We are all wise to your agenda at this point. You say rentals are lotto tickets so we should keep our draft picks, which are just lottery tickets that will take 3-5 years to pay off. None of the rental trades by Drury have been anything but good moves for the team. I also like have you gave Tarasenko like 2 games before you decided he was washed and the Rangers lost the trade.

 

[NYROrtsFan]

Yeah, I do wonder if Kane was just going through the motions on a bad team that has no chance at anything. Then he gets slighted with these teams not giving much trade interest. Now he has something to prove and is turning it on.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

Running an organization is not a mathematical or statistical analysis. There are a lot of factors in play, including triaging assets after accumulating too many, cost/benefit, and chemistry.

Tarasenko and Mikkola fit both on the ice and in the locker room. Tarasenko has won a Cup. He’s rejuvenated Panarin. Mikkola can help Kakko. They both happen to play positions of need for us.

The team is 23-4-3 or whatever and you are complaining about trading pick 29 for two players who can really solidify our roster? I tend to agree that 1st round picks should be kept, generally. But to argue that the players are not tailor made for this roster as constructed, is just plain obtuse. They literally plug two of our biggest holes going into a playoffs where we are ranked 6th in the NHL or whatever. Or should the team only go for it when they are 1st overall in the league and every other year just stand pat or sell?

I’m not sure why anyone would be complaining about trading Blais, Skinner, Gauthier, 2023 1st, 2024 3rd, 2023 6th for Tarasenko, Mikkola, Motte. That’s really good value. Only one asset with any real value. And it’s the one everyone complains about

 

[haohmaru]

The narrative that teams don't add is just patently false anyway. Every Cup winner adds something at the deadline. Tampa traded 3 1st's in two years to win two Cups. Some Cup winners made their trades over the summer to bolster their lineup (ROR, Kessel, etc...) and sacrificed picks and players.

This "solely through the draft" bullshit is just that. Bullshit.

 

[McRanger92]

I wonder if Motte goes back to #64. He was wearing #14 in Ottawa and McKegg had the number with the NYR when he got here last year.

Running an organization is not a mathematical or statistical analysis. There are a lot of factors in play, including triaging assets after accumulating too many, cost/benefit, and chemistry.

Tarasenko and Mikkola fit both on the ice and in the locker room. Tarasenko has won a Cup. He’s rejuvenated Panarin. Mikkola can help Kakko. They both happen to play positions of need for us.

The team is 23-4-3 or whatever and you are complaining about trading pick 29 for two players who can really solidify our roster? I tend to agree that 1st round picks should be kept, generally. But to argue that the players are not tailor made for this roster as constructed, is just plain obtuse. They literally plug two of our biggest holes going into a playoffs where we are ranked 6th in the NHL or whatever. Or should the team only go for it when they are 1st overall in the league and every other year just stand pat or sell?

I’m not sure why anyone would be complaining about trading Blais, Skinner, Gauthier, 2023 1st, 2024 3rd, 2023 6th for Tarasenko, Mikkola, Motte. That’s really good value. Only one asset with any real value. And it’s the one everyone complains about

If Drury can add another forward without dealing the 2023 1st or 2nd, he will have pulled off a deadline that no one should be unhappy about.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Motte! Love it.

Wasnt expecting to bring him back because they need a center. Kinda of bittersweet with Gauthier going, although im a big Motte fan and its a definite upgrade for the 4th line. He plays a very smart defensive game, great active stick and a hell of a PK guy.

Motte's familiarity with the team and the system makes it a quick fit too. Hopefully they find a way to retain him on the cheap for next year, regardless of this run. He is best suited in that 4th line role.

Drury has his bookends in Goodrow and Motte on the 4th line. Just need a center. Something tells me they want Bonino and his Cups. I'd rather go Bjugstad of the two. But neither hasnt been great in the circle and both have their warts which is why I wanted Acciari who does a lot more for that role and has some playoff experience.

Maybe Drury will wait for a few more teams to fall out of it but there arent many options out there, so he might just pull the tigger when he finds the deal he wants.

Assembling the 4th line as soon as possible allows them to hopefully cement the lines in place and start rolling them over in tune for the postseason

 

[jerseyjinx94]

The narrative that teams don't add is just patently false anyway. Every Cup winner adds something at the deadline. Tampa traded 3 1st's in two years to win two Cups. Some Cup winners made their trades over the summer to bolster their lineup (ROR, Kessel, etc...) and sacrificed picks and players.

This "solely through the draft" bullshit is just that. Bullshit.

Well I think the argument is the type of players targeted by some teams are good fits with term. Hagel, Goodrow, etc. Rentals have a finite lifespan to contribute for your organization and that’s not worth the cost of the long term value of a player drafted in the 1st round (prospect years + 5-7 years of team control).

But it is the cost of doing business. And we had two of them, so I could understand the logic in moving 1 for 2 assets. We will still pick in the 1st round. Now if we trade another 1st for Kane or whatever, I’ll agree with mas - that would be completely stupid.

But this team is a Cup contender. There’s as good of a chance the Rangers win the Cup as almost any other team.

 

[McRanger92]

Well I think the argument is the type of players targeted by some teams are good fits with term. Hagel, Goodrow, etc. Rentals have a finite lifespan to contribute for your organization and that’s not worth the cost of the long term value of a player drafted in the 1st round (prospect years + 5-7 years of team control).

But it is the cost of doing business. And we had two of them, so I could understand the logic in moving 1 for 2 assets. We will still pick in the 1st round. Now if we trade another 1st for Kane or whatever, I’ll agree with mas - that would be completely stupid.

But this team is a Cup contender. There’s as good of a chance the Rangers win the Cup as almost any other team.

It's up to puck luck and health for us and about 7-8 teams league wide who can see winning a Cup. Boston, New York, Toronto, Tampa Bay, New Jersey (begrudgingly) in the East and Dallas, Colorado & Edmonton in the West. It's in the Hockey Gods hands now.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

In the end its all gonna be about Igor.

If he can rediscover his magic from last season this team will be very hard to beat. And dont forget he completely melted down against Pitt in the first series last year. Maybe this year it will be the reverse

Tarasenko, Mikkola and Motte all address defense and physicality, Tarasenko not as much - but hes a bigger body and hits more than Kane who was the obvious target and wouldve costed more. This is the focus and it needs to be considering the teams they will need to get through to win it all.

And all 3 of them fit in like a glove, similar to the moves made at the deadline last year. And its essentially Gauthier, Blais and 1st removed. With Ottmann and Cuylle on their way up that opens up space for them. Thats the youth you invested in. Wouldnt mind seeing both of them as black aces this year

They need to get Leschyshyn out of the lineup/off the roster. He is the weakest link as of now. Anything will be an upgrade over him, even Bonino (even though I cringe writing that).

 

[mas0764]

We are all wise to your agenda at this point. You say rentals are lotto tickets so we should keep our draft picks, which are just lottery tickets that will take 3-5 years to pay off. None of the rental trades by Drury have been anything but good moves for the team. I also like have you gave Tarasenko like 2 games before you decided he was washed and the Rangers lost the trade.

We are all wise to your "agenda" too, spare me. Continuing to build organically is a much wiser strategy than high end renting year after year, which is the equivalent to throwing a hail mary again and again.

I haven't "decided" that Tarasenko is washed. I am concerned he is and I'm not going to laud the move prematurely like some have. We all know why, here on a NYR forum, the move gets universally applauded.

Maybe it will turn out well, we will see.

The Rangers lost the trade the moment they gave up a first round pick in the exchange.

 

[McRanger92]

We are all wise to your agenda too, spare me.

I haven't "decided" that Tarasenko is washed. I am concerned he is and I'm not going to laud the move prematurely like some have. We all know why, here on a NYR forum, the move gets universally applauded.

Maybe it will turn out well, we will see.

If it does work out, I'll buy you a beer. If it doesn't I'll be on the lookout for the "I told you so" that you probably already have in your drafts.



Looks thrilled to be back and a new #

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Maybe Motte signs a 2 year deal for contract certainty at a bit less then he's making this year. 2 years $1.1MM.

Have a 4th line combination of Motte/Goodrow/Cuylle next season.

 

[mas0764]

Tarasenko and Mikkola are good adds/fits for this team. Had they given up a similar package for Kane, I would've been a lot more upset as Kane is one wrong turn/hit away from being on IR. Motte, too. And, honestly, I think the Rangers once again try to figure out a way to make Motte fit next year.

In theory I agree.

I just can't ignore how awful it is to give up a first, especially in back to back years and especially in this loaded draft. They have to stop fooling themselves and stop doing that. So far it doesn't really look to me like Tarasenko is going to be the difference in this team winning the Cup versus not winning, and I have to question whether a cheaper addition would have been just as sufficient.

To be clear I don't really mind the Motte trade, I was just commenting mostly that I think giving up Gauthier is actually probably more value than the, what, fourth round pick that we sent for Motte last year?

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

In theory I agree.

I just can't ignore how awful it is to give up a first, especially in back to back years and especially in this loaded draft. They have to stop fooling themselves and stop doing that. So far it doesn't really look to me like Tarasenko is going to be the difference in this team winning the Cup versus not winning, and I have to question whether a cheaper addition would have been just as sufficient.

To be clear I don't really mind the Motte trade, I was just commenting mostly that I think giving up Gauthier is actually probably more value than the, what, fourth round pick that we sent for Motte last year?

Rangers likely have an idea what Gauthier will get in arbitration and it wasn't something they wanted to pay with the cap situation.

May be it was a knee jerk reaction by Drury but benching him and Leschyshyn for the entire 3rd shows that in the playoffs GG/Drury won't want either of them in the lineup.

There is going to be one more trade so that Leschyshyn isn't in the lineup either while everyone is healthy.