View Single Post
Old
08-20-2011, 04:32 PM
  #125
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New York RKY View Post
This trade makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

AS Brian Boyle mentioned, the Devils just drafted, and signed, Larsson to try to get him a roster spot this season. They drafted Larsson as a potential Niedermeyer/Stevens/Rafalski replacement, why exactly would they trade him a mere 3 months after just drafting him?

On top of that why would each team help each other out exactly. We'd be giving the Devils their center they need, and swapping d-men, while our top 4 defense is pretty much set.

As for part 2, the Devils could do much better than that offer, and why would they deal him to a division rival? And why would they deal him now after they signed him to a 1 year deal, they want to try to resign him, they haven't given up on it just yet.

It just doesn't really make sense all around.
Answered in prior posts on this thread.

Devs and Rangers don't trade this thread seeks value of feedback, to establish if either/each should do it not giving dominant weight to the rivalry factor.

The question is do they hold out to see how really good Larsson is, or do they consider this a tempting enough offer. Stepan + MDZ who already have experience and should thus develop faster are not chopped liver for a guy who hasn't played a single NHL game yet.
The only reason Rangers consider it is the possibility of borderline special, possibly elite ability for Larsson. If he demonstrates this faster than Stepan + MDZ grow, then it made sense not to move him. If he doesn't then the answer is not so clear cut.

We don't give the Devs anything to help them out. They acknowledge they could use both these guys as solid building blocks, and the cost is Larsson, who MIGHT be special enough to be worth it.

As for part 2, it remains to be seen how much better deal they would get, mindful that this is Parise, 1 year rental, and he can walk.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote