HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Canes wanted Staal from the Rangers for Johnson (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=294812)

RangerBoy 09-30-2006 04:56 AM

Canes wanted Staal from the Rangers for Johnson
 
Quote:

The Rangers' discussions with Carolina about prized defense prospect Jack Johnson ended about a month ago when the Hurricanes asked for D Marc Staal in return. Johnson, the third overall pick in the 2005 draft, and D Oleg Tverdovsky were dealt to Los Angeles yesterday for D Tim Gleason and C Eric Belanger
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ho...p-384668c.html

This is for all of the Rangers fans who were crying yesterday about the Rangers not getting Jack Johnson.It's so annoying.They aren't privy to any negotiations but they still like to complain about nothing:shakehead

If Carolina wanted to see Johnson play in their conference the price would be higher for the east teams

Ranger35 09-30-2006 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy (Post 6615106)
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ho...p-384668c.html

This is for all of the Rangers fans who were crying yesterday about the Rangers not getting Jack Johnson.It's so annoying.They aren't privy to any negotiations but they still like to complain about nothing:shakehead

If Carolina wanted to see Johnson play in their conference the price would be higher for the east teams

Doesn't surprise me.

I didn't think we had enough or were willing to give what the 'Canes would want.

eco's bones 09-30-2006 06:29 AM

Doesn't surprise me either. Would have to figure that in a Johnson trade Staal and maybe something else would be going back the other way--but Staal for sure. The inclination for a more all around (offense-defense) player must have been tempting. It may be that the Rangers view them both as equals or are so happy with Staal's progression so far that they'd rather have him. Listening to Renney--he seems to see Staal as a Rangers future antidote (shutdown type of d-man) to the Crosby's and Ovechkin's. Anyhow to comment on the deal--maybe I don't know Gleason well enough but I'm thinking the Canes got robbed.

AJ1982 09-30-2006 08:27 AM

What a stupid stupid stupid move by the Canes. What are they thinking?? Actually I know what they're thinking... "WIN NOW" and in the new NHL that may not be the best approach, hell it NEVER worked for the Rangers except in 94'. I realize in part this is a move to dump Tverdovsky's salary, however, Carolina gives up a potential number 1 guy... a guy I really believe can do no worse than become a top 4 guy. In return they get Belanger, a third liner, and Gleason, a top 6 dman who could become a top 4 guy. Yes, Gleason did well in the NHL last season but his top side is certainly less than JJs. To tell you the truth I think Tverdovsky can still play in the NHL if he gets his head on straight defensively.

All that said, I'm glad JJ is out of our conference. He could really be a monster to play against in two years.

jcrangerno1 09-30-2006 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJ1982 (Post 6615406)
What a stupid stupid stupid move by the Canes. What are they thinking?? Actually I know what they're thinking... "WIN NOW" and in the new NHL that may not be the best approach, hell it NEVER worked for the Rangers except in 94'. I realize in part this is a move to dump Tverdovsky's salary, however, Carolina gives up a potential number 1 guy... a guy I really believe can do no worse than become a top 4 guy. In return they get Belanger, a third liner, and Gleason, a top 6 dman who could become a top 4 guy. Yes, Gleason did well in the NHL last season but his top side is certainly less than JJs. To tell you the truth I think Tverdovsky can still play in the NHL if he gets his head on straight defensively.

All that said, I'm glad JJ is out of our conference. He could really be a monster to play against in two years.

If you want some very funny "spin doctoring" on this - read the Canes board about this trade. Talk about drinking the Kool-aid!! Man they despise Tverdosky as much as we do Bozolinsh! Seriously - this reminds me of the dumb moves we used to make! I gotta say my opinion of Renney, Maloney and Sather just went up. I mean if it is true we were offering Immo, Tyuts and a 2nd rounder for JJ and they took this!! WOW :shakehead

RangerBoy 09-30-2006 08:47 AM

How much does Carolina regret passing up taking Marc Staal over Jack Johnson?Some members of the Canes scouting staff wanted Staal over Johnson but they were overruled by scouting director Sheldon Ferguson or Jim Rutherford who wanted Johnson

Where is the rumor of the Rangers supposed offer of Tyutin,Immonen and a pick coming from?:dunno:

Synergy27 09-30-2006 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJ1982 (Post 6615406)
What a stupid stupid stupid move by the Canes. What are they thinking?? Actually I know what they're thinking... "WIN NOW" and in the new NHL that may not be the best approach, hell it NEVER worked for the Rangers except in 94'. I realize in part this is a move to dump Tverdovsky's salary, however, Carolina gives up a potential number 1 guy... a guy I really believe can do no worse than become a top 4 guy. In return they get Belanger, a third liner, and Gleason, a top 6 dman who could become a top 4 guy. Yes, Gleason did well in the NHL last season but his top side is certainly less than JJs. To tell you the truth I think Tverdovsky can still play in the NHL if he gets his head on straight defensively.

All that said, I'm glad JJ is out of our conference. He could really be a monster to play against in two years.

Just out of curiosity, could you compose a trade for me that you would consider fair? Prospects are insanely overvalued on HF Boards. I will agree that JJ has enormous potential, but there is also a large probability that he tops out at the level that Gleason is at right now. He is also all of 23 years old, and stands to improve quite a bit as well, so, with the addition of Belanger and the cap relief (and the fact that Johnson clearly wanted out of Carolina):p: , this trade is not the horror show people around here are making it out to be.

You need to remember that outside of the Crosbys and Ovechkins of the world, we are dealing with unproven commodities. Sure the prospect of seeing a defenseman you drafted dominate for years and years is alluring, but that domination is by no means guaranteed. Your assessment of trades should be based more on actual NHL history than HFBoards Trade Rumor posts.

True Blue 09-30-2006 09:01 AM

This may not be what my fellow Ranger fans want to hear
 
But, IMO, Johnson is going to end up better than Staal. I think that at his zenith, Staal will be a #2 defenseman. Don't get me wrong, he will be an excellent player, but JJ is going to end up as someone special. Probably more "special" than Staal. JJ seems to be a lot like Phaneuf. Physical, yet with more than enough skill to be the pro-verbial # 1.

Levitate 09-30-2006 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue (Post 6615514)
But, IMO, Johnson is going to end up better than Staal. I think that at his zenith, Staal will be a #2 defenseman. Don't get me wrong, he will be an excellent player, but JJ is going to end up as someone special. Probably more "special" than Staal. JJ seems to be a lot like Phaneuf. Physical, yet with more than enough skill to be the pro-verbial # 1.

I agree. I also doubt the deal would have been Johnson for Staal straight up.

And I also think that Johnson is getting really underrated around here for some reason...maybe cuz he went and played college hockey.

NYR469 09-30-2006 09:11 AM

they got less value than they asked for from the rangers...but the question is where they simply willing to accept less from a team out west or did they have to lower their price after teams refused to give up their top guys??

RangerSteve 09-30-2006 09:16 AM

Canes fans are kidding themselves on this deal if they think this is great. For cryin out loud, I still haven't recovered from our dopey deal that sent Zubov to Pittsburgh. That deal was what...8-10 years ago?!?!?:shakehead

AJ1982 09-30-2006 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by synergy27 (Post 6615483)
Just out of curiosity, could you compose a trade for me that you would consider fair? Prospects are insanely overvalued on HF Boards. I will agree that JJ has enormous potential, but there is also a large probability that he tops out at the level that Gleason is at right now. He is also all of 23 years old, and stands to improve quite a bit as well, so, with the addition of Belanger and the cap relief (and the fact that Johnson clearly wanted out of Carolina):p: , this trade is not the horror show people around here are making it out to be.

You need to remember that outside of the Crosbys and Ovechkins of the world, we are dealing with unproven commodities. Sure the prospect of seeing a defenseman you drafted dominate for years and years is alluring, but that domination is by no means guaranteed. Your assessment of trades should be based more on actual NHL history than HFBoards Trade Rumor posts.

I just broke down the trade above... JJ will be a top 4 guy in the NHL at least (why do you think Carolina wanted him to sign NOW, they believe he can step right into the top 6), Tverdovsky is only 30 and put up 50 points in the pre lockout NHL he could do it again if he gets his defensive game straight enough to not be a huge liability, Belanger is a third liner and Gleason is a potential top 4 guy who is only a top 6 guy right now. Does the trade seem fair to you?

If you must have a fair trade here is what I think is fair in terms of value for JJ:

To LA: JJ

To Carolina: Gleason, a 2nd rounder in 07', and a 2nd rounder in 08'

LA gets a bluechipper dman prospect and Carolina gets a solid dman with some potential and two chances to find decent prospects to refill the coffers.

If you had the 3rd overall pick in a deep draft would you give it up for Gleason and Belanger and a salary dump (which could end up coming back to bite you if the salary dump finds his game again)? I wouldn't.

Larry Melnyk 09-30-2006 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue (Post 6615514)
But, IMO, Johnson is going to end up better than Staal. I think that at his zenith, Staal will be a #2 defenseman. Don't get me wrong, he will be an excellent player, but JJ is going to end up as someone special. Probably more "special" than Staal. JJ seems to be a lot like Phaneuf. Physical, yet with more than enough skill to be the pro-verbial # 1.

Wow, I agrree with BOTH Levitate and TB here...Johnson is getting uder-rated and Staal maybe even over-rated...I would have easily dealt Staal plus something throwawayable (i.e., Hossa---JK) for JOhnson...DOesn't mean I'm complaing because I don't think a Ranger deal with the Canes was very possible because of the Canes need for an NHL ready D-man..

Ola 09-30-2006 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerSteve (Post 6615570)
Canes fans are kidding themselves on this deal if they think this is great. For cryin out loud, I still haven't recovered from our dopey deal that sent Zubov to Pittsburgh. That deal was what...8-10 years ago?!?!?:shakehead

I haven't seen much of Johnson, to little to say anything for certain, but the little I've seen, this kid is not a sure fire top pairing D in the NHL. At this point I would trade Staal in a second for Eric Johnson, I wouldn't for Jack...

He is a still only a unproven prospect and I would wait a while before I compared him with Zubov.

Just look at guys like Zyuzin, Aki Berg and Phillips.

eco's bones 09-30-2006 10:30 AM

Well again on Staal and how the Rangers see him might be just a little bit different than how some Rangers fans see him. Renney has commented that he sees Staal as the shutdown d-man answer to the Crosby's, Malkin's, Ovechkin's etc. on the preseason preview the Rangers have been running before their telecasts. Perhaps they do rate him higher than Johnson--at least now. I'm not sure they would be correct if they are--but it seems to me in retrospect they could have easily made a deal because whether Gleason is more NHL ready than Staal or not Staal could IMO play this season depending on a teams expectations and Staal as it looks right now should be the better player (than Gleason) not only in the long term but in the relatively short term too--not to mention the fact that I think Carolina would prefer 2 Staal's to 1 Staal and 1 Gleason. And to go further--like Johnson it doesn't look like Marc is going to play in the NHL this year for us as I expect him to be one of the last cut--so if that trade was ever discussed I think the Rangers may have made the decision that they'd rather have Marc. FWIW.

Plato 09-30-2006 11:10 AM

i still cant beleive what they got in return

Lundqvist=Vezina 09-30-2006 11:27 AM

I think some of you guys are overrating Gleason a little bit. He really hasn't done anything so far. He has some potenial but Johnson should be much better.

Son of Steinbrenner 09-30-2006 12:54 PM

The longer Johnson goes unsigned the more levearage he has....

Staal might not end up being as good but we are still talking about a good young defenseman. The differance between a #1 and #2 defenseman is nill...

What, how can that be?

Well if they are both playing on a top pair aren't they both getting the same amount of minutes...

Trading a SIGNED good young defenseman for an unsigned good young defenseman is stupid. Contracts play a huge role in this process now because Johnson can easily play out his college years and the kings just traded for zip...

I'm not saying that's what's going to happen but it does weigh down the value of Johnson..

GarretJoseph* 09-30-2006 01:08 PM

If Staal is anything like his older brother in regards to skill wise and using his hockey "head" - I'd bet the farm that he'd be better than JJ.

in the hall 09-30-2006 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarretJoseph (Post 6616733)
If Staal is anything like his older brother in regards to skill wise and using his hockey "head" - I'd bet the farm that he'd be better than JJ.

clearly to this point and when comparing their stages, that is not the case

Edge 09-30-2006 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner (Post 6616647)
Staal might not end up being as good but we are still talking about a good young defenseman. The differance between a #1 and #2 defenseman is nill...

What, how can that be?

Well if they are both playing on a top pair aren't they both getting the same amount of minutes...

While they'd certainly be getting the same amount of minutes, what they do in those minutes to impact a game is what seperates them.

If that were the case, whoever was playing on Staal's junior team as his partner wouldn't be very far behind him.

Having said that, I just don't think trading Staal for Johnson makes sense. Not from a potential perspective but from their roles. I'll go into more detail on that below.

Edge 09-30-2006 02:00 PM

I agree with TB and Melnyk on this one.

I think Johnson's upside is superior, though I think Staal is the safer of the two.

Personally I would not have traded Staal for Johnson because I think the deal only makes the most sense if I can potentially pair both of them together.

To me Staal is the perfect guy I'd want to pair with Johnson and vice versa.

Having said that, making a deal for a player like this within the conference is extremely difficult and going to cost more so I can't blame the Rangers for not making the move.

On the other hand, I can't believe Carolina made the deal that they did. That one is just puzzling to me.

True Blue 09-30-2006 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge (Post 6617066)
On the other hand, I can't believe Carolina made the deal that they did. That one is just puzzling to me.

More than puzzling. The deal smacks of "I cannot believe that was just done".

ChrisKreider20 09-30-2006 02:56 PM

why'd they even trade Johnson?

AJ1982 09-30-2006 03:32 PM

Seriously, I have to think a package of some draft picks could have gotten Gleason


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:36 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.