Trade Rumor/Speculation Thread XIX: The Olympic Freeze
View Single Post
02-11-2014, 04:39 PM
Join Date: Nov 2009
Originally Posted by
Son of Steinbrenner
Did the Rangers trade Girardi and Callahan, yet? Ypu might be awfully disappoint in a few weeks.
Context is important, which is why posters brought up standings.
I won't be, unless they are signed to horrible deals. Girardi is worth the contract they will hopefully give him. I want them to keep Girardi, my point was that, unlike the "look at the standings" crowd Glen Sather will deal people if the right price is in place for them. A first and good prospect is exactly what people here were saying Girardi is worth, and exactly what Sather supposedly asked for. It's a deal worth making, if he can get it. IF.
The standings are the best way to judge a team.
No, they are ONE way to judge a team. They're not the ultimate guideline to roster moves.
Nobody said Glen Sather wants to trade players to see a trade. It's some posters that want that. YOU know exactly what I'm talking about. Other posters see it too. You still don't believe it. You talk in these absolutes like we don't have a gray area in between.
I honestly do not know what you are talking about. There are people here who want to see trades, want to see signings, and want to see people walk, but it is not simply for the fact of some entertainment they get from it. They all have reasons for wanting to see these moves made, and while you may not agree with them, or think they are logical, (and many of them are not, I do not dispute that at all) THAT IS NOT TO SAY, that they only want to see it happen because it's exciting. Why can't you just accept the fact that most people do not see this team the same way and sometimes think things that are ridiculous to you, are actually good ideas to them.
You bring up grey areas, but in your mind it is either the way you, and others like you, view the team, or trades for the sake of trades.
Why would he trade Girardi without a replacement? Girardi is worth his reported demands.
If the right deal is there, you trade him. He isn't easy to replace, but if Glen Sather trades him I am going to assume they have a plan (good or bad) to replace him. Yes he is worth his demands. They should sign him.
Yes, the shiny new toy syndrome is in effect. Just look at the posters who want to pay Stastny $7M a year!
While I disagree with them vehemently, the hole created at C next season with the pending Richards buyout will need to be filled. Stastny would fill a need. I understand why some people think he should be signed even though I disagree with them about it. It's not "shiny new toy." How is signing Stastny anymore "shiny new toy" than filling that same C spot with Miller, or even Lindberg who people are penciling in to the line-up? There will be a vacant top-9 C role this summer. Someone has to fill it. Stastny, unfortunately, is a candidate.
I'll ask this of you again. If on March 5th the Rangers don't have a fair offer for Callahan would you still trade him?
As someone else said, define fair offer.
It would have to be pretty bad for me to rather ride it out to the summer with him. I don't see any situation where Callahan cannot at least get either a younger roster player, good prospect, or a 1st, more likely something closer to two of those, so I doubt I would be faced with that choice realistically. If the best offer on the table is a 3rd, then yeah, I keep Callahan and hope for the best in the playoffs.
Last edited by Ail: 02-11-2014 at
View Public Profile
Visit Ail's homepage!
Find More Posts by Ail