HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sather on Staal, More Moves, Voros + More

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-13-2010, 08:41 AM
  #101
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
 
UAGoalieGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbop View Post
Trading Sharp isn't going to solve the Hawks problems. They are going to have to move Campbell or Hossa. Good luck with that.
This was proposed by a Hawks fan on the main trade board:

Redden and Gilroy for Campbell, CHI 2011 1st, and ATL 2011 2nd.


Campbell makes about $700K move then Redden and his deal extends one year longer. Campbell averaged 23 minutes a game and put up 38 points with 7 goals (Also was a +18). 11 of those 38 points were on the PP. It would also give the Rangers 2 first round picks in 2011 and 3 second round picks in 2011 as well.

Would you guys do it? I'd consider it but the extra year is killer in my eyes.

UAGoalieGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 09:02 AM
  #102
LetsGoBlueshirts
Registered User
 
LetsGoBlueshirts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New Joisey
Country: United States
Posts: 499
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
This was proposed by a Hawks fan on the main trade board:

Redden and Gilroy for Campbell, CHI 2011 1st, and ATL 2011 2nd.


Campbell makes about $700K move then Redden and his deal extends one year longer. Campbell averaged 23 minutes a game and put up 38 points with 7 goals (Also was a +18). 11 of those 38 points were on the PP. It would also give the Rangers 2 first round picks in 2011 and 3 second round picks in 2011 as well.

Would you guys do it? I'd consider it but the extra year is killer in my eyes.
That is a tough one, but I would probably do it. Campbell can still play top 4 minutes while Redden is a bottom pairing Dman.

LetsGoBlueshirts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 09:03 AM
  #103
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 20,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoBlueshirts View Post
That is a tough one, but I would probably do it. Campbell can still play top 4 minutes while Redden is a bottom pairing Dman.
Absolutely. This is a no brainer for the Rangers. Chicago fans would be outraged and it doesnt even really seem to help them.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 09:05 AM
  #104
pwoz
Registered User
 
pwoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
This was proposed by a Hawks fan on the main trade board:

Redden and Gilroy for Campbell, CHI 2011 1st, and ATL 2011 2nd.


Campbell makes about $700K move then Redden and his deal extends one year longer. Campbell averaged 23 minutes a game and put up 38 points with 7 goals (Also was a +18). 11 of those 38 points were on the PP. It would also give the Rangers 2 first round picks in 2011 and 3 second round picks in 2011 as well.

Would you guys do it? I'd consider it but the extra year is killer in my eyes.
I'd do it in a heartbeat, but CHI would laugh at the offer, IMO.

pwoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 09:10 AM
  #105
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
 
UAGoalieGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzy Duke of NY View Post
Absolutely. This is a no brainer for the Rangers. Chicago fans would be outraged and it doesnt even really seem to help them.
I think then the poster said the Hawks would buy out Redden. I think it's like $1.9 million in dead salary cap space for eight years. And it was a Hawks fan that proposed it lol.

UAGoalieGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 09:27 AM
  #106
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
This was proposed by a Hawks fan on the main trade board:

Redden and Gilroy for Campbell, CHI 2011 1st, and ATL 2011 2nd.


Campbell makes about $700K move then Redden and his deal extends one year longer. Campbell averaged 23 minutes a game and put up 38 points with 7 goals (Also was a +18). 11 of those 38 points were on the PP. It would also give the Rangers 2 first round picks in 2011 and 3 second round picks in 2011 as well.

Would you guys do it? I'd consider it but the extra year is killer in my eyes.
If I were to evaluate the different pieces of this deal it would be liket this (the ratings are all relative):

Redden = -10
Gilroy = +1
Total = -9

Campbell = -5
1st round pick = +2
2nd round pick + 1
Total = -2

Explanation: Redden is beyond atrocious guys. He has such negative value its scary. Gilroy was really bad last year. If that play carries over he and his 1.75 mil should be off the team next year. I dont consider him much of an asset because his play was just not top 6 caliber at all and hes not that cheap.

Campbell obviously is overpaid but the guy is still an impactful player. All you have to do is look at the points, time on ice, and power play numbers to know that he is nowhere near Redden incompetent. However (even though he just won a cup) you dont build your team with a 7 mil dman who is good but not a superstar. As for the draft picks, they are nice picks but not enough to counteract Campbells negative value. If Chicago came to us and said we'll give you Campbell and the two picks for a box of donuts I would decline the offer (as evidence by the -2 total rating).

Overall, Ill just say whoever came up with this proposal does not understand just how big of an albatross Wade Redden is. Good job Sather. Hallelujah!

MSG the place to be* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 10:20 AM
  #107
Celestial Black
Registered User
 
Celestial Black's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 6,824
vCash: 500
I think the Rangers would say hell yes to this deal, while the Hawks are left wondering why they did such a thing.

Celestial Black is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 10:31 AM
  #108
GAGLine
HFBoards Sponsor
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerFan10 View Post
It's still a pretty abysmal year for a guy that's supposed to pan out to be a top 6 goalscorer.

And I'm pretty high on Grachev, but he's starting to raise questions and doubts.
One of the youngest players in the league, playing against men for the first time, on a bad team. Don't be so quick to judge a player based on points.

GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 10:39 AM
  #109
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,473
vCash: 500
we'd all like to see results immediately in prospects, including seeing a 19 year old score 25 goals in his rookie pro season...but, it doesn't always happen that way. I saw zero HFD games this season so I cannot personally comment on his development or his skillset at the pro level. Further, I cannot comment on how he was used or what the coaching staff stressed for him to do, nor can I say who he was on his line. For me, I look for improvement. If he plays in HFD and scored 15 goals this season, then I'd start to worry about his ability to be a top six NHLer. Look at Anisimov - he didn't have great numbers last season, but they were pretty good - his HFD numbers in his rookie season weren't all that great either. We need to have a little patience and if guys show they're not developing as they gain experience at new levels, then we worry.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:02 AM
  #110
alkurtz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mahopac, NY
Posts: 906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
we'd all like to see results immediately in prospects, including seeing a 19 year old score 25 goals in his rookie pro season...but, it doesn't always happen that way. I saw zero HFD games this season so I cannot personally comment on his development or his skillset at the pro level. Further, I cannot comment on how he was used or what the coaching staff stressed for him to do, nor can I say who he was on his line. For me, I look for improvement. If he plays in HFD and scored 15 goals this season, then I'd start to worry about his ability to be a top six NHLer. Look at Anisimov - he didn't have great numbers last season, but they were pretty good - his HFD numbers in his rookie season weren't all that great either. We need to have a little patience and if guys show they're not developing as they gain experience at new levels, then we worry.
I think that many (and I include myself among them) fell victim to the hype surrounding Grachev coming out of juniors: they he was truly a special player who could come right out of juniors and make the NHL or, at minimum, need just one year in the AHL. I always remember that one comment to the effect that we was so good that not even the Rangers could mess him up.

So there is some understandable disappointment, in the short term, that he has proven no different from hundreds of other prospects who just need time to develop before going on to star in the NHL. So unrealistic expectations have been tempered and realistically replaced with patience. Agreed, if he struggles again in the AHL, I will begin to worry. Until then, I still have hope that he will eventually become what we all hope he will.

alkurtz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:13 AM
  #111
satrabyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike14 View Post
Maybe he feels that the reason the defense looked horrible is because we had very few forwards who could hold onto the puck and maintain possession. If he can somehow rectify that before the season starts the defense should look okay.
Ya our D was bad last season, one was Girardi who we went and signed to a big contract, lol. Eminger is better than Girardi and will get much less, im sure are young guys are better players as well. Once again a stupid signing that goes unnoticed by many. For now that is, once he plays like last year but with a much bigger contract it will become Girardi, Redden and Rozi hating.

satrabyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:17 AM
  #112
satrabyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
One of the youngest players in the league, playing against men for the first time, on a bad team. Don't be so quick to judge a player based on points.
One of the youngest players in the league?? Grachev is a '90' and i think very close to an '89. Many young players his age have played already 2 seasons in the league and have been successful. He will not be one of the youngest in the league and its about time we start putting pressure on are prospects to make the next level and score goals.

satrabyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:22 AM
  #113
satrabyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoBlueshirts View Post
That is a tough one, but I would probably do it. Campbell can still play top 4 minutes while Redden is a bottom pairing Dman.
Ya this is such a tough one trading the the most overpaid player in the league plus a mediocore prospect for Campbell and 2 first rounders lol. This is a trade you make the million times over and take less thought than what Sather did when he signed Drury.

satrabyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:22 AM
  #114
mullichicken25
Registered User
 
mullichicken25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
This was proposed by a Hawks fan on the main trade board:

Redden and Gilroy for Campbell, CHI 2011 1st, and ATL 2011 2nd.


Campbell makes about $700K move then Redden and his deal extends one year longer. Campbell averaged 23 minutes a game and put up 38 points with 7 goals (Also was a +18). 11 of those 38 points were on the PP. It would also give the Rangers 2 first round picks in 2011 and 3 second round picks in 2011 as well.

Would you guys do it? I'd consider it but the extra year is killer in my eyes.
hahaahahahahhahahahaha

^ that would be Chicago's reaction to that proposal

mullichicken25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:37 AM
  #115
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by satrabyk View Post
Ya our D was bad last season, one was Girardi who we went and signed to a big contract, lol. Eminger is better than Girardi and will get much less, im sure are young guys are better players as well. Once again a stupid signing that goes unnoticed by many. For now that is, once he plays like last year but with a much bigger contract it will become Girardi, Redden and Rozi hating.



I guess the Ducks declined our Girardi for Eminger offer straight up.

Had to settle for Voros. Damn.


Quote:
Originally Posted by satrabyk View Post
One of the youngest players in the league?? Grachev is a '90' and i think very close to an '89. Many young players his age have played already 2 seasons in the league and have been successful. He will not be one of the youngest in the league and its about time we start putting pressure on are prospects to make the next level and score goals.
He's talking about the AHL. You're on fire today.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:40 AM
  #116
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 20,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by satrabyk View Post
Ya our D was bad last season, one was Girardi who we went and signed to a big contract, lol. Eminger is better than Girardi and will get much less, im sure are young guys are better players as well. Once again a stupid signing that goes unnoticed by many. For now that is, once he plays like last year but with a much bigger contract it will become Girardi, Redden and Rozi hating.

Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 11:40 AM
  #117
clmetsfan
Registered User
 
clmetsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 3,894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
I think then the poster said the Hawks would buy out Redden. I think it's like $1.9 million in dead salary cap space for eight years. And it was a Hawks fan that proposed it lol.
Well why would they want to just buy out Campbell when they can buy out Redden and give up a first and second in the process?

clmetsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 12:01 PM
  #118
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
 
UAGoalieGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by clmetsfan View Post
Well why would they want to just buy out Campbell when they can buy out Redden and give up a first and second in the process?
Because Campbell's buyout is almost $2.4 million and it's for an extra 4 years (12 years total).

And again, this was proposed on the main trade board by a Hawk's fan. Just put it here for some discussion.

UAGoalieGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 01:26 PM
  #119
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,473
vCash: 500
Grachev turned 20 in February. He began his AHL season at the age of 19 1/2. I think that qualifies as pretty young for that league.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 01:33 PM
  #120
TreeSapLlama
Registered User
 
TreeSapLlama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 713
vCash: 500
The only way i could see that Campbell for Redden buyout deal is because of real money implications. Cap hit aside, Redden is due 23 million for the length of his contract while Brian Campbell still has 43 million remaining on his.

TreeSapLlama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 09:47 PM
  #121
darko
Registered User
 
darko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Country: Australia
Posts: 37,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
This was proposed by a Hawks fan on the main trade board:

Redden and Gilroy for Campbell, CHI 2011 1st, and ATL 2011 2nd.


Campbell makes about $700K move then Redden and his deal extends one year longer. Campbell averaged 23 minutes a game and put up 38 points with 7 goals (Also was a +18). 11 of those 38 points were on the PP. It would also give the Rangers 2 first round picks in 2011 and 3 second round picks in 2011 as well.

Would you guys do it? I'd consider it but the extra year is killer in my eyes.

I too would do this in a heartbeat. Campbell has that extra year but at least the guy still produces. Say what you want about Campbell but he's still good for 40 points a season. I would do Redden and Gilroy for Campbell straight up. Getting Hawks 1st rounder and Thrashers 2nd rounder is just gravy...

darko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2010, 10:10 PM
  #122
RangerFan10
Registered User
 
RangerFan10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Long Island/Plattsbu
Country: United States
Posts: 5,328
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to RangerFan10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoBlueshirts View Post
That is a tough one, but I would probably do it. Campbell can still play top 4 minutes while Redden is a bottom pairing Dman.
We already have two top 4 defenseman in Del Zotto and Staal, just signed Girardi for 4 years, and hopefully McDonagh, Valentenko, McIlrath, etc. can fill that other spot. Campbell ends up on the third pairing in a year or two just like he ended up on the third pair in Chicago.

RangerFan10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2010, 01:10 PM
  #123
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,448
vCash: 500
The last peice to the puzzle for this off-season...

we made minimal moves (which many have said over the past few off-seasons is the better move) We are leaving it up to our young guns to improve and make this their team...

Staal is left to be signed and with the signing of Kovy to a 17 year deal, Sather is in a position to dish out a ******** contact as well...
Why not sign Staal to a 19 year, 95 mill (5mill cap hit)... Front loaded the first 10 years... Plays till he's 42 like Kovy.
Since it's front loaded it offers many advantages.
A) The buyout at the end if he's not worth 5mill is minimal..
B) Gives Marc incentive to just retire when he can't play at an elite level without worrying about loosing a good deal of money..
C) Locks him up at a reasonable Cap hit... (will be an underpayment through his prime)

If the NHL is going to allow this loophole to be used it's either use it to our advantage or be left behind in this Salary cap era where it's all about Bargin Cap hits on players...

Garfinkel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2010, 01:24 PM
  #124
Chief
Registered User
 
Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by darko View Post
Campbell has that extra year...
Campbell's contract is two seasons longer than Redden's, not one.

Chief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2010, 01:28 PM
  #125
Chief
Registered User
 
Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfinkel1 View Post
Why not sign Staal to a 19 year, 95 mill (5mill cap hit)...
I'd rather sign Staal to a 3 or 4 year contract, now, with a $4MM cap hit...and then sign him to a longterm deal if he's earned it. You can just as easily fudge the cap numbers later. No need to enter into an albatross of a contract at this point in time.

Chief is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:59 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.