View Single Post
Old
02-27-2006, 08:20 PM
  #63
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge

He better's Lundqvist by playoff success potentially. It's like anything else really. Either guy is only going to be as valued as his playoff performance.

Let's say Lundqvist establishes himself as a top 5 goalie in the league, what happens if Montoya is even a little better. What if he steals a few more wins or even an extra round.
That's the question... "what if". I can play that game, too. What if Montoya becomes just a serviceable goalie, clearly a starter, but of the Chris Osgood variety? Yes, you've still got Lundqvist as your number, but, now you lost the value you may have in June 2006 when a team was willing to give up a top ten pick for him.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
You could argue Mike Richter was a darn good goalie, a cup winning goalie. But would you take him over Roy? Hasek? Not as clear cut when presented with those options.

Frankly the Rangers don't know. It's also a value gamble. Is Montoya's value peaked now? Or does it go up if the kid puts up some impressive numbers as a back-up? Are you willing to risk an injury or something to Lundqvist with no real depth at the position? All questions that have no real answer.
Again, it depends on what opportunity the Rangers are afforded. If my scouting staff is telling my Jonathan Toews (just as an example) could be something special, Henke has just taken the Rangers to the Cup Finals and in the process was brilliant in the POs, and Florida is offering me the #4 pick and Toews is available, then maybe I thinking I've got a chance to trade down in the 2nd round, get myself another pick and grab another goaltending prospect who might not be as good as Montoya, but could be a good goalie in the future, and I make the deal.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
But you're trading for an unknown and if that player goes bust, you potentially just traded someone on a Lunqvist like level for nothing. Kind of like 1999 when the Rangers traded a future 90-100 point center for Jamie Lundmark.

At the end of the day, you want your team to have the best goalie. The trade value of the runner-up is secondary to making sure you keep the best player.

Now I like Staal, Toews and Mueller, but they aren't the end all be all. The Rangers have to be careful they're not rushing a trade now for a similar player they might be able to grab in a few years at a lower cost.

It's very easy to be tempted now because Lundqvist has been successful and there happen to be 3 big centers who fit a need in this draft, but the team has to be careful not to get swept up in the "new car syndrome" that previals as draft day draws near.
Again, the assumption is what if something happens to Lundqvist? What if something happens to Montoya? I realize there's no cut and dry answer. Just to clarify my position, I'm for trading Montoya at any cost. To be honest I think he currently has more value than any play we could draft in June. He's won a gold medal at the WJCs, has two years of development and was named an All Star his first year in professional hockey. I just believe in maximizing the value of your assets, and building up areas of weakness by dealing from areas of strentgh.

jas is offline