HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Proposal: Trade with Dallas that goes beyond Richards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=928590)

freewheeler 06-20-2011 11:45 AM

Trade with Dallas that goes beyond Richards
 
My first thread. I apologize in advance for any broken etiquette/rules.

Trade proposal with Dallas:

To NYR: Richards, Eriksson

To Dallas: McIlrath, DZ, Anisimov

Maybe make a player conditional on Richards signing, but he'd have to waive his NTC anyway.

ogie 06-20-2011 11:51 AM

why would the rangers trade for the rights to a guy, who has said he won't sign with Dallas. when they can just wait for July 1? So basically you are trading three guys for a left winger and the rights to negotiate with Richards for 10 more days, and he will still test the open market.

broadwayblue 06-20-2011 11:53 AM

So Eriksson for McIlrath, MDZ, and Anisimov??? Please, step away from the computer. lol

SERE 24 06-20-2011 11:53 AM

So your proposal is McIlrath, Del Zotto and Anisimov for Eriksson and 10 days of private negotiations with Richards, who we can have for free in 10 days?

freewheeler 06-20-2011 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zetterqvist24 (Post 33756081)
So your proposal is McIlrath, Del Zotto and Anisimov for Eriksson and 10 days of private negotiations with Richards, who we can have for free in 10 days?

Well that was quick...

Like I added, maybe a player conditional on Richards signing. You don't think Eriksson is worth it?

Orr Nightmare 06-20-2011 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freewheeler (Post 33756173)
Well that was quick...

Like I added, maybe a player conditional on Richards signing. You don't think Eriksson is worth it?

Maybe we should just cut McIlrath already, according to all the experts, kid sucks and wont amount to anything...why would Dallas want that.

wolfgaze 06-20-2011 12:00 PM

Why is everyone looking over the Eriksson part of the trade? 27+ goals and 60+ points each of the last 3 seasons.... 70+ points each of the last 2 seasons... McIlrath is a project and unproven at this point, MDZ coming off sophomore slump, and AA is progressing but has yet to show he has high end potential.

I would probably do this trade. Not sure Dallas would concerning Eriksson.....

freewheeler 06-20-2011 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfgaze (Post 33756213)
Why is everyone looking over the Eriksson part of the trade? 27+ goals and 60+ points each of the last 3 seasons.... 70+ points each of the last 2 seasons... McIlrath is a project and unproven at this point, MDZ coming off sophomore slump, and AA is progressing but has yet to show he has high end potential.

I would probably do this trade. Not sure Dallas would concerning Eriksson.....

Maybe its a situation where neither team is interested, but rumors were that Dal was going to take McIlrath after the Rangers, and while they have Goligoski now, they have been looking to bolster the back end. Eriksson is obviously not someone they are looking to move, but hey - come aggressive. It's tough to jump from middle to bottom 6 talent to top 3. This does that.

SERE 24 06-20-2011 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freewheeler (Post 33756173)
Well that was quick...

Like I added, maybe a player conditional on Richards signing. You don't think Eriksson is worth it?

I love Eriksson, he has undeniable chemistry with Richards, which would be great to bring them both over and I would pay a pretty steep price to get him, but I think that Anisimov, Del Zotto and McIlrath is a little too steep (in a couple years AA + MDZ combined are almost definitely outproducing Eriksson with McI being our recent #10 overall... just a bit too much on our end, IMO), but any combination of just two of them is too little to make Dallas deal him - fair value maybe, but not enough to sway the Stars. Meanwhile, making one of the players conditional upon Richards re-signing balances it a bit for us, but the fact still remains that we have 99.9% as much chance of signing Richards with or without this deal and all three of Anisimov, Del Zotto and McIlrath for Eriksson is still a bit steep. It's not as far off as it looks at first, I guess, but it needs some tuning.

nyr2k2 06-20-2011 12:17 PM

Why is Dallas moving Eriksson? They're probably going to lose Richards, due mainly to a murky ownership situation. They're not having a fire sale, or looking to rebuild as far as I know. Losing Richards and Eriksson would really gut their team, which is especially problematic given their mediocre prospect depth.

Acquiring Eriksson makes a ton of sense for us, but does dealing Eriksson make sense for Dallas? I don't think it does.

bobbop 06-20-2011 12:23 PM

I. on the other hand, like it.

SERE 24 06-20-2011 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emma Royd (Post 33756576)
Why is Dallas moving Eriksson? They're probably going to lose Richards, due mainly to a murky ownership situation. They're not having a fire sale, or looking to rebuild as far as I know. Losing Richards and Eriksson would really gut their team, which is especially problematic given their mediocre prospect depth.

Dallas probably doesn't move Eriksson, even if it's overpayment on our end, but at the same time, I think that it shakes out like this, even making modest predictions for AA, MDZ and McI over the next couple of years:

Eriksson: ~30 goals/70 points 27 years old
Anisimov: ~20 goals/45-50 points 23 years old
Del Zotto: ~5 goals/30 points 20 years old
McIlrath: ~2 goals/15 points 19 years old

Over the next couple of years our guys should hit these numbers and possibly exceed them. They fill three roster spots while Eriksson fills one. McIlrath brings that big body presence we drafted him for as well. Eriksson is the best player in the deal (not counting Richards, of course, because I think the chances of signing him stay the same with or without the deal), but filling three spots, keeping the young, family of homegrown players together and having McI's size and physicality, it just seems like too much to give up.

Bluenote13 06-20-2011 12:29 PM

I think they'd ask for Christian Thomas rather than Del Z in that deal, which I think they'd say no to anyway;)

NYRangers16 06-20-2011 12:35 PM

I'd probably do this deal, because Eriksson puts us over the top with Richards.

Taking names out, would you trade a 3C and 6D for a 1LW? Cause I would every single time.

nyr2k2 06-20-2011 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zetterqvist24 (Post 33756729)
Dallas probably doesn't move Eriksson, even if it's overpayment on our end, but at the same time, I think that it shakes out like this, even making modest predictions for AA, MDZ and McI over the next couple of years:

Eriksson: ~30 goals/70 points 27 years old
Anisimov: ~20 goals/45-50 points 23 years old
Del Zotto: ~5 goals/30 points 20 years old
McIlrath: ~2 goals/15 points 19 years old

Over the next couple of years our guys should hit these numbers and possibly exceed them. They fill three roster spots while Eriksson fills one. McIlrath brings that big body presence we drafted him for as well. Eriksson is the best player in the deal (not counting Richards, of course, because I think the chances of signing him stay the same with or without the deal), but filling three spots, keeping the young, family of homegrown players together and having McI's size and physicality, it just seems like too much to give up.

I'll say this--I would do the deal. Eriksson is a terrific player, hasn't yet hit his prime, and is under contract for what, 6 more years? At a reasonable number, too--just over $4MM.

We have wonderful prospect depth, though one weakness in on our pool is a dearth of legitimate top line offensive talent. Eriksson is top line talent. At some point, we need to turn this franchise into a winner, rather than a decent team with excellent depth. Moving a couple of pieces for a guy like Eriksson, in my mind, is a definite step in that direction.

Again though, Dallas isn't going to move him. If they had designs on moving him, I don't know why they would have extended him long term.

NYRangers16 06-20-2011 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broadwayblue (Post 33758831)
I agree that it is likely moves will be made at some point. But it's still too soon to know what we have in some of our guys. If MDZ and McIlrath pan out we have a sick defense. If they don't, it's still certainly quite solid, but by no means spectacular. Heck, we haven't even seen Erixon play a single game in the NHL. No doubt the organization will take stock of where the team is and make moves as they see fit. But we still have quite a few question marks, even on defense.

But this is why you would do this trade now. Dallas only does this because of the potential of MDZ and McIlrath...by the time we figure out whether they are worthanything or not, Dallas or whatever other team we'd do something like this ith would also know if they are good or not. Reality is only so many prospects make it - I think if you have a chance to get a 1st line LW on a good contract, you do it, especially if it costs you only potential.

eco's bones 06-20-2011 03:56 PM

I get it that a lot of Rangers fans did not like the McIlrath pick.

What some of them don't get however is that the Rangers don't appear to be even an iota dissatisfied with McIlrath--and so we can hardly have a speculative trade made here in which McIlrath is not included by some of those who were not happy about drafting him. The same could almost be said for Del Zotto.

I seriously doubt the Rangers are in any hurry at all to move McIlrath. I even think they'd be more inclined to move Christian Thomas or Evgeni Grachev because I think they can see a day when McIlrath will be every bit as valuable as Louie Eriksson. That may be hard to see now. To get all of Anisimov, MDZ and McIlrath the Stars would have to give up more than Eriksson.

kovazub94 06-20-2011 04:04 PM

Forget even McIlrath or MDZ, the Rangers would lose in any trade (mid- to long-term timeframe) involving Anisimov that is not for a legitimate superstar (obviously in a package with other pieces) on a verge or already in his prime. Eriksson is not in this category.

Garfinkel1 06-20-2011 04:28 PM

I can already hear the chants from the Garden..

"Fire Freewheeler! Fire Freewheeler"

New York RKY 06-20-2011 04:35 PM

I would LOVE to do this trade.

Eriksson is an absolute beast who I would be thrilled to have on the team.

Dallas on the other hand, laughs in our face.

DrSutton* 06-20-2011 04:43 PM

Kreider would have to be going the other way in any Ericsson trade

Garfinkel1 06-20-2011 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by New York RKY (Post 33761089)
I would LOVE to do this trade.

Eriksson is an absolute beast who I would be thrilled to have on the team.

Dallas on the other hand, laughs in our face.

Your in favor for trading away three players that all have the potential to be top line guys in their respective position for Eriksson (who is beastworthy.. I'll give you that) and negotiation rights to a guy who wants to see what he's worth on the free market (slight exaggeration). I really don't think it's worth it. I can see AA making the big jump this coming season and MDZ has the offensive skills and they can teach him to play D.

McIlrath was a #10 overall pick for a reason. The book is still WIDE open for him but he can even be extremely effective as a 3rd pairing intimidating force.

Lion Hound 06-20-2011 04:46 PM

Tradign for Richards now makes no sense. Not anymore. Rangers missed the boat last year with Neal. Should have locked it up then. And they gad the assets to do it.

New York RKY 06-20-2011 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garfinkel1 (Post 33761519)
Your in favor for trading away three players that all have the potential to be top line guys in their respective position for Eriksson (who is beastworthy.. I'll give you that) and negotiation rights to a guy who wants to see what he's worth on the free market (slight exaggeration). I really don't think it's worth it. I can see AA making the big jump this coming season and MDZ has the offensive skills and they can teach him to play D.

McIlrath was a #10 overall pick for a reason. The book is still WIDE open for him but he can even be extremely effective as a 3rd pairing intimidating force.

Yea I am in favor of it completely.

It may be because I have confidence that Richards will sign with us, and if he does it looks like a steal.

To me the only piece that hurts giving up is Artem. I can live with giving up MDZ and I won't cry myself to sleep at night if we lost McIlrath (as you said the book is still wide open on him.

Even if we don't land Richards, Eriksson would be incredible on our top line LW spot.

Otherwise if we get both players this is a steal of epic proportions.

I would do this trade everyday of the week and twice on Sundays.

Eriksson will be an 80 point player in this league, and he is still very young. I can live with giving up the two d-men, but it may hurt to give up AA. If we get Richards that blow will be less painful though.

n8 06-20-2011 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare (Post 33756202)
Maybe we should just cut McIlrath already, according to all the experts, kid sucks and wont amount to anything...why would Dallas want that.

lolwut? You actually don't like a giant D-man with fists of steel? Or is this an attempt at what the kids call 'sarcasm?' I think the rational of including McIlrath is that Dallas supposed really wanted him the spot after us.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:29 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.