HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Is it time to move Montoya? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=261470)

OldBlueSeats 06-20-2006 08:39 PM

Is it time to move Montoya?
 
Is it time to move Al Montoya or do the Rangers hold on to him? With Henrik around why would you chance Montoya not playing well this year and drop in value? I know it was only one season for Henrik but I think if they could swing a deal to move up to draft Stal they should do it and if it take Montoya to start you do it. If Stal were to fall to #4 the Caps dont have a Top goalie in the system and they are rumored to want to deal there pick... :dunno:

BobMarleyNYR 06-20-2006 08:58 PM

Montoya's performance is not likely to dip very much. I don't see why we'd deal him yet, as his value is nowhere near maximized. We can start thinking about this next summer after he's played a ccouple NHL games.

And Staal should be gone by the time the Caps pick. To get into the top 3 in this draft would take the jaws of life. You'd be looking at more than Montoya and 21st overall for a top 3 pick. I hope we stay put and may Stewart or Frolik will fall to 21.

Levitate 06-20-2006 08:58 PM

If the deal is right, then anyone is up for trade. Montoya for Staal though...eh, I doubt it, and I doubt that Montoya is going to take a nosedive next season

I think it's more likely that Montoya would get traded for an established NHL player, if he gets traded anytime soon

donpaulo 06-20-2006 08:59 PM

call me spoiled but I would love to see henke and montoya in nets for the rangers.

xander 06-20-2006 09:02 PM

::sigh::

round and round we go...

What value is Montoya going to lose? Until he proves himself at the NHL level he doesn't have much value. The only way you get a good return on montoya (whether he ends up playing for the rangers or not) is if you let him prove that he belongs in the big league. Then you decide who you like better and trade either Lundqvist or Montoya.

Right now Montoya is 21 and Lundquist is 24, neither one will reach UFA for another 3 years. You don't have to move either one of them for a few years, so why rush the decision? All your going to do is leave yourself vulnerable in goal and, in the case of montoya, probably get 50 cents on the dollar.

OldBlueSeats 06-20-2006 09:06 PM

Spoiled........ Montoya has to play all the time and Henrik will play at least 60 games this year.

xander 06-20-2006 09:21 PM

Montoya will spend the year in Hartford, we won't hve to deal with getting him playing time in the NHL for another year. However, when Richter came up room was made for him, despite the fact the Beezer was already established, I'm sure a way will be foind for both to play, atleast for a year or two until one gets moved.

xander 06-20-2006 09:28 PM

another point that is rarely brought up is that we are now playing in a capped league. How much money is Lundqvist going to demand when hits the magic age of 27? What it Montoya comes up and is just as good as Lundqvist (and he's been just as good, if not better, as a 20 year old than lundqvist was at the same age.) Wouldn't it be nice to be able to deal Lundqvist for a nice package and then not have to pay Montoya big money for another 3 years? Is that a situation tantalizing enough worth waiting (no I'm not projecting it, but it's definitely a possibility)?

I think so, especially when your not going to get full value for montoya right now anyway.

NYR469 06-20-2006 09:29 PM

depends on what you can get for him. if you can get the right deal that maximizes his value right now, then why wait to possibly get a worse deal later?? but at the same time there is no rush to deal him if its not the right deal without question...

my guess is that it is not the right time to trade him simply because coming off his surgery you aren't gonna get full value till he shows that he is healthy. so unless you get blown away by an offer i'm thinking he is still here when next season starts

Drake1588 06-20-2006 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBlueSeats
If Stal were to fall to #4 the Caps dont have a Top goalie in the system and they are rumored to want to deal there pick... :dunno:

Don't suppose you have a source for that or anything?

xander 06-20-2006 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR469
depends on what you can get for him. if you can get the right deal that maximizes his value right now, then why wait to possibly get a worse deal later?? but at the same time there is no rush to deal him if its not the right deal without question...

my guess is that it is not the right time to trade him simply because coming off his surgery you aren't gonna get full value till he shows that he is healthy. so unless you get blown away by an offer i'm thinking he is still here when next season starts


It's not the right time to trade him because goalies who havn't established themselves in the NHL have very little value. In the 4 or 5 months that we've been having this discussion no one has managed to dredge up an example of when a goalie prospect got moved for his full value, much less got a really good return.

Pizza 06-21-2006 12:28 AM

I wish this would stop....but it won't.

jBuds 06-21-2006 12:46 AM

You've got the same situation with Montoya and Lundqvist that the Sabres had with Miller and Biron (and Noronen).

There's absolutely nothing wrong with having Montoya play 2, even 3 full years in Hartford. At the time, I was upset that we were 'grooming' Miller in Rochester for so long, and I was screaming for him to stay up. But the patience of the organization stood pat, and Miller is becoming exactly what his original potential showed to be- a true #1.

And as good as Biron was, it just came to a point where Miller out-performed him, and earned the job outright. Who knows? Lundqvist could realistically be passed by Montoya down the road in terms of turning talent into production and consistency.

No reason to rush anything on Montoya, on top of the fact that many things could happen to King Henrik (salary explosion, drop in performance, trade, etc.)

BDubinskyNYR17* 06-21-2006 01:01 AM

Montoya, chad wiseman to Kings for Tim Gleason and first round?

then move 11th overall, hugh jessiman, 21th overall and Thomas Pock to the Caps for 4th overall

SML 06-21-2006 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOrtmeyer41
Montoya, chad wiseman to Kings for Tim Gleason and first round?

then move 11th overall, hugh jessiman, 21th overall and Thomas Pock to the Caps for 4th overall


Orts, step away from the hookah pipe, and put your hands where I can see them...

How many times have you seen a team trade up twice in the first round?

You're talking about giving up Montoya, Wiseman, Jessiman, and a first rounder for Gleason and the #4 pick. This isn't supposed to be THAT good of a draft. Just because theres a Staal brother out there doesnt mean we sell our future out to get him. Granted Wiseman may not be an "A" level prospect, and Jessiman hasn't killed it yet, but I don't like any deal where we give up 4 prospects for 2 unless they are bonafide stars.

xander 06-21-2006 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pizza
I wish this would stop....but it won't.


Draft day can't come soon enough. That will put a stop to it for a while, though it's really never gonna stop until the organization eventually chooses between Lundqvist and Montoya, which won't happen for years.

eco's bones 06-21-2006 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOrtmeyer41
Montoya, chad wiseman to Kings for Tim Gleason and first round?

then move 11th overall, hugh jessiman, 21th overall and Thomas Pock to the Caps for 4th overall

This is a terrible proposal. First off Wiseman is a UFA and no one is going to deal for him. Other than that we wind up with Gleason and whoever at No. 4 and we're out not only Montoya but Jessiman, our 21 st and Pock. We have no depth in goal. I'll repeat we have no depth in goal. Weekes will be going. He will very likely not be around for 07-08. So we'll have Lundqvist and Chris Holt and who or whatever.

FLYLine24* 06-21-2006 01:31 AM

My take, I would like them to hold onto him for one more season, raise his stock even more (I have no doubt he will play better his second year in pro..more consistent) and if Lundqvist doesnt turn injury prone next season then trade him for a nice pick or prospect next draft. BUT if a team is willing to make a trade for him this season for a future 1st line player then I wouldnt object making that trade.

Geogaddi 06-21-2006 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYLine88
My take, I would like them to hold onto him for one more season, raise his stock even more (I have no doubt he will play better his second year in pro..more consistent) and if Lundqvist doesnt turn injury prone next season then trade him for a nice pick or prospect next draft. BUT if a team is willing to make a trade for him this season for a future 1st line player then I wouldnt object making that trade.

I agree completely. I really would like to see the combo of Henke and Montoya for the Rangers for a year or so. That way we can see what he's going to pull in the NHL. I really don't like how were already writing him off, and that we dont need him. We have NOBODY after Montoya. Stick with him and see how he pans out.

As for the deal JOrts proposed... NO THANKS.

Also wondering if their is anything to back up the Caps wanting to "Deal" their pick. This makes no sense for them. or are we getting confused with Boston maybe?

Bacchus 06-21-2006 02:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOrtmeyer41
Montoya, chad wiseman to Kings for Tim Gleason and first round?

And the Kings would do that why?

Gleason AND a 1st for Montoya (who equals maybe Gleason OR the 1st) and Wiseman (a 1st or Gleason for a UFA? Yeah, sure).

DutchShamrock 06-21-2006 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xander
Right now Montoya is 21 and Lundquist is 24, neither one will reach UFA for another 3 years.

I believe they both hit UFA in another 6 seasons. They hit RFA status when their contracts expire, probably another 2 seasons.

Shadowtron 06-21-2006 07:22 AM

I think it would be foolhardy to drain our goaltending cupboard for a swing at the fences. Also how many teams would be willing to give up a very valuable top 5 draft pick for an unproven goaltender? Montoya had a solid season, but it's still just an AHL season. It's not like he awas the Crosby of goaltenders down there. He had a solid rookie season that was somewhat mired in injuries. We always throw the hypothetical: Would you make the move if someone offered their top 5 for Al? But we never flip the coin. Let's say the Rangers had the season everyone expected them to have, and now have the #4 or #5 pick. Would any of you guys trade that pick for Montoya?

GothamRanger 06-21-2006 07:58 AM

I've said this before, but in a world where Dwayne Rolosson, Cam Ward, and Jussi Markanen (former Ranger) rule supreme, why would anyone want to hold on to any type of "valued" goalie prospect when you have a shot of acquiring one of equal or better value on the open market?

Trade Al while his value is still decent, and let's finally get the foward prospect that this team so desparately needs.

pld459666 06-21-2006 08:03 AM

.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBlueSeats
Is it time to move Al Montoya or do the Rangers hold on to him? With Henrik around why would you chance Montoya not playing well this year and drop in value? I know it was only one season for Henrik but I think if they could swing a deal to move up to draft Stal they should do it and if it take Montoya to start you do it. If Stal were to fall to #4 the Caps dont have a Top goalie in the system and they are rumored to want to deal there pick... :dunno:

Simple, one word answer

No.

The Caps would probably want more than just Montoya and our 1st and while I love Lundqvist, one season does not make a career.

Trading Montoya would be a colassal blunder right now.

Let's continue to let him develope and call him up when he's ready and if Henrik continues to show that he is a legit #1 NHL goalie we have a good problem on our hands.

If Montoya develops into a legit #1 NHL goalie, then all the better for us.

I think that unless we get slapped in the head with an offer to good to turn down, we keep both Henrik and Al for the next year+ until the time comes where we HAVE to dea one or the other.

Fletch 06-21-2006 08:14 AM

Lundqvist has barely played...
 
a full NHL season and the Rangers are willing to give up their most promising backup goalie? Is that on the hopes that Chris Holt's run in the playoffs was for real and his entire season was just a warm-up?

Here's why you keep Montoya - you let him develop and have he and Lundqvist fight it out. In a year or two, either Montoya's a bust, or he's battling Lundqvist for a spot. Further, you don't want kill the depth at the position. Lundqvist could get hurt, he could struggle, a lot can happen at this point. It's risky to not trade Montoya, but that's the point you trade one of them. I honestly do not think Montoya has a heck of a lot of value right now. There are a lot of young goalies out there who haven't yet played in the NHL.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:31 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.