HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Marc Staal resign, Willie Mitchell signing?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-29-2010, 12:05 AM
  #101
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
if Dubinsky scores 20 or more goals this year you can bet we'll reach another stalemate when it comes to negotiating a new contract... Wasn't there a report that him and his agent were seeking $4 mil per year last off-season? Guy will definitely ask for that if he posts back to back 20 goal seasons.... Not sure I like Dubinsky as much at anywhere close to $4 mil a year... $3-3.5 I can stomach.... We may have to trade him if contract talks reach another impasse....
I think he was looking for 4 mil total. Meaning 2 per year. Like what Callahan got.

If I remember this right, he wanted a similar deal to Callahan's.

Sather was trying to give him under 2 mil per, and that's what was holding them up.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 12:08 AM
  #102
TheRedressor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Country: United Nations
Posts: 3,675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I think he was looking for 4 mil total. Meaning 2 per year. Like what Callahan got.

If I remember this right, he wanted a similar deal to Callahan's.

Sather was trying to give him under 2 mil per, and that's what was holding them up.
His agent originally proposed a 4 year 16 million dollar deal.

TheRedressor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 12:21 AM
  #103
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,757
vCash: 500
Is that right? I don't remember the demand being that high.

If he scores 20 goals, 60 points this year I can see him getting 3+.

But if his points total is in the 50's, I can only see him getting a moderate raise.

I don't think this contract will be as much of an issue as the last one, they should have a better grasp on what he will become after this season. Whereas last contract negotiation was based on potential.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 12:29 AM
  #104
TheRedressor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Country: United Nations
Posts: 3,675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Is that right? I don't remember the demand being that high.

If he scores 20 goals, 60 points this year I can see him getting 3+.

But if his points total is in the 50's, I can only see him getting a moderate raise.

I don't think this contract will be as much of an issue as the last one, they should have a better grasp on what he will become after this season. Whereas last contract negotiation was based on potential.
That was the original contract requested when they began negotiations however later when they were a little more serious Dubinsky's camp wanted something closer to a Callahan type deal.

TheRedressor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 12:33 AM
  #105
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Is that right? I don't remember the demand being that high.
Brooks reported the $4 mil per year from his camp...

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 06:05 AM
  #106
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,871
vCash: 500
if they resign Staal for say 4.25 do they have room to sign Mitchell for say 2 (taking a chance on him) and then moving Rozy for Ribiero?


http://www.snyrangersblog.com/

Dallas gains a year on the contract and Rozy makes 7 million in actual dollars

it hurts the Ranger D but helps the C's

Vitto79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 06:59 AM
  #107
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 12,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitto79 View Post
if they resign Staal for say 4.25 do they have room to sign Mitchell for say 2 (taking a chance on him) and then moving Rozy for Ribiero?


http://www.snyrangersblog.com/

Dallas gains a year on the contract and Rozy makes 7 million in actual dollars

it hurts the Ranger D but helps the C's
Dallas isn't taking back money.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 08:40 AM
  #108
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,571
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
GAG, I don't know why you started this back-and-forth off on such a hostile note. It's simple. I like Dubi - a lot. My personal opinion is that he could be a second liner on a playoff team for many years. But I don't think that he'll ever be a first liner, because I don't think he processes the game quickly enough (frankly I think that's part of the reason he does better at LW than C).

So, if you can trade that player for a legit FIRST liner, either alone or in a package, you do it. Given the perpetual interest in him from around the league, I think there's a chance you might be able to do just that. If we can, I think we should.
The hostility is because I'm tired of seeing people suggest that we should trade Dubinsky. It's like no matter what he does, it's never enough for some people.

So what if he doesn't become a 1st liner? Teams need 2nd liners too, and it's not like we've got a lot of those either. Callahan may never be a legit 2nd liner. Should we trade him too? What about Artie, he may never be better than a 3rd liner. Should we trade him now in a package to get a top 6 guy? Hell, Kreider may never even play in the NHL. Let's trade him for a vet.

Dubinsky is not part of the problem. He's a top 6 player on a team short on top 6 players. You're naive if you think we can trade him for someone better without giving up other significant assets. Bobby Ryan? Even if we could fit him under the cap, it would take a lot more than Dubi to get him.

GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 08:51 AM
  #109
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 15,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Dallas isn't taking back money.
They're not. They'd be saving a considerable amount actually.

Rozsival makes $7MM in actual dollars over the next two years. Ribeiro makes $15MM over the next 3. Pretty significant savings there.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 08:57 AM
  #110
Carlos Ranger
Zucc-a-Rella
 
Carlos Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,091
vCash: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitto79 View Post
if they resign Staal for say 4.25 do they have room to sign Mitchell for say 2 (taking a chance on him) and then moving Rozy for Ribiero?


http://www.snyrangersblog.com/

Dallas gains a year on the contract and Rozy makes 7 million in actual dollars

it hurts the Ranger D but helps the C's
We're not getting either of Dallas' top centers without giving up one of our top young defensemen. (Staal, DZ, McD)

Carlos Ranger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 08:57 AM
  #111
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
 
UAGoalieGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,371
vCash: 500
I think a Ribiero for Roszival swap would be fair if Dallas was looking to save actual dollars as opposed to cap hit. Ribiero was on pace for 65 points last season (And over 20 goals). He's had 78 and 83 point seasons the two years before last with 22 and 27 goal seasons.

Any deal for a center pretty much means Christiansen will either be in the AHL or traded, unless the Rangers move Drury to the wing on the 3rd line, Avery drops to the 4th line, and Boogard is either scratched or the 13th forward.

UAGoalieGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 08:59 AM
  #112
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,289
vCash: 500
No to Ribiero, especially if it takes getting rid of Rozsival who is extraordinarily underrated around here. The guy is a second-tier center with a longer-term deal than Roszival and it just doesnt make sense considering the team's situation. We shouldnt be taking on commitments past the 2 years when Drury and Rozsival are off the books.

Not to mention, Im extremely skeptical of any players that have had issues with their coaches considering the sociopath we have behind the bench

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 09:15 AM
  #113
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 15,792
vCash: 500
I dunno, BRB. I think he's better than a 2nd tier center. However, I loathe the guy's attitude and the way he plays the game. I'd want to puke if I had to watch that guy taking dives in Ranger blue.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 09:16 AM
  #114
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 12,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
They're not. They'd be saving a considerable amount actually.

Rozsival makes $7MM in actual dollars over the next two years. Ribeiro makes $15MM over the next 3. Pretty significant savings there.
My point is that I don't see Dallas wanting to take back even a contract like Roszival. Hicks has cash-flow issues. Look at what happened with the Texas Rangers.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 09:50 AM
  #115
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 9,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
The hostility is because I'm tired of seeing people suggest that we should trade Dubinsky. It's like no matter what he does, it's never enough for some people.

So what if he doesn't become a 1st liner? Teams need 2nd liners too, and it's not like we've got a lot of those either. Callahan may never be a legit 2nd liner. Should we trade him too? What about Artie, he may never be better than a 3rd liner. Should we trade him now in a package to get a top 6 guy? Hell, Kreider may never even play in the NHL. Let's trade him for a vet.

Dubinsky is not part of the problem. He's a top 6 player on a team short on top 6 players. You're naive if you think we can trade him for someone better without giving up other significant assets. Bobby Ryan? Even if we could fit him under the cap, it would take a lot more than Dubi to get him.
See and I'm tired of the opposite approach - it seems to me that you and a large percentage of the fanbase have illogical blinders on when it comes to guys drafted by the Rangers. They came up through the system. They play the game the "right" way. blah, blah, blah. So ****ing what? If they're 2nd, 3rd liners, etc. and someone else is willing to give you back 1st liners for them, you do it. Period. Then go have a beer and remember the fond memories.

The point is when it comes to differing evaluations. As regards AA, Cally and others - I value them the way I think the team values them, I see upside the way I think the team and others around the league see upside. Dubi is a particular case where I personally don't think he's going to be as good as many others appear to think he'll be. Therefore, if we can capitalize on this disparity to trade him (with or without other assets) for a player I consider to be better, I think we'd be well advised to do it.

This opinion of mine is specific to Dubi. I think he won't be as good as others seem to think. The only other player where this may be true is Gilroy - by the time last season was half over, I was seeing him as no more than Mike Mottau and was hoping that we could trade him for more value than that. That ship may have sailed now - I hope not. As regards Cally, Anisimov, Kreider, Grachev, Staal, MDZ, and all the others, I am very high on them and would be hoping to hold on to them under most circumstances. (Grachev, as you can tell by my avatar, is likely someone where I take the opposite view from the majority - I get the sense that I think his potential may be higher than many others do.)

But having said that, you know what? They're available for the right offer too. You want to offer me the James Neal + a 4th in exchange for Cally + WSH's 2nd that another poster suggested a while back? Done - no backsies. (I just don't think that Dallas would ever make such an offer.)

Every case is individual - we shouldn't be making blanket statements simply based on who drafted the player or how long he's been in the organization. It seems to me that you and I disagree on Dubi's potential. That's fine - as I've said repeatedly, if we wind up hanging on to him, I hope I turn out to be wrong. But that doesn't mean that the principle behind my position is wrong.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 10:28 AM
  #116
N9Y4R
Bleed Blue
 
N9Y4R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Gold Coast
Country: United States
Posts: 936
vCash: 500
For a Staal/Mitchell thread there is sure a whole lot of other BS getting thrown around in here, it makes my head hurt.

For Staal we will probably see

6yrs 27mil 4.5per

I would rather see

8yrs 36mil 4.5per

Just get it done already.

N9Y4R is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 10:34 AM
  #117
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,871
vCash: 500
yea, the team is doing nothing until Staal is signed. They need to lock him up and see what they have left

I do think Mitchell is going to be signed as long as there is say 2 million left or so which i think their should be. It means Redden is gondie for sure

Vitto79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 11:00 AM
  #118
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 9,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by N9Y4R View Post
For a Staal/Mitchell thread there is sure a whole lot of other BS getting thrown around in here, it makes my head hurt.

For Staal we will probably see

6yrs 27mil 4.5per

I would rather see

8yrs 36mil 4.5per

Just get it done already.
Fair enough regarding the OT stuff. On topic, I'd rather see your second option too, but it's way out of the ballpark IMO. No way Staal is giving up FOUR years of UFA at that price. And I can't blame him.

If you read between the lines of what's been reported, the first offer you mentioned is probably close to what the Rangers are offering. Staal's camp is probably looking for the same AAV but over fewer years. The question becomes: 1) do the Rangers have enough leverage to get the deal they want? 2) Do they compromise and go down to five years/up the AAV by a quarter milllion or so? Or 3) do they postpone the whole thing by doing a 2 year deal at an AAV that begins with a 3 and then go through the whole process again in 2 years?

All are viable options and honestly at this point your guess is as good as mine. It almost comes down to Marc's personal preference (certainly as regards options 1 and 3) and there's really no way to know that. Unfortunately, there's nothing to do but wait at this point...

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 12:24 PM
  #119
Bird Law
Daisy's back.
 
Bird Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NoVA / NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 67,435
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Bird Law
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shat Scar View Post
We're not getting either of Dallas' top centers without giving up one of our top young defensemen. (Staal, DZ, McD)
I don't know if I agree with that. Everything I've heard has said they are trying to shed money badly. Saving 7M in actual dollars is a huge thing.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
Sestito still on the make a wish tour. - rholt168
"Okay, Joel. You've had your fun. Give your brother his pads back." - Trxjw
Bird Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 02:50 PM
  #120
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Brooks reported the $4 mil per year from his camp...
That's a little ridiculous. He isn't going to get that from anyone, though. Not just the Rangers. No team in the league will give him that.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 03:30 PM
  #121
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
That's a little ridiculous. He isn't going to get that from anyone, though. Not just the Rangers. No team in the league will give him that.
I know I agree... That's why I'm a bit nervous to see what their negotiation demands are if he has two 20 goal seasons under his belt after asking for $4 mil a year when he didn't....


Last edited by wolfgaze: 07-29-2010 at 03:36 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2010, 04:23 PM
  #122
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by DontStaal View Post
Rangers have a plethora of defensemen at the moment and it seems like the coaching staff is willing to go young, don't see why we'd need Mitchell unless Redden is getting waived.
Lots of sheep, no lions.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2010, 04:36 PM
  #123
Panfork
Pacioretty Hater
 
Panfork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,377
vCash: 500
Back to the Ribeiro thing, Rozsival + 2nd sounds fair, but I probably wouldn't do it because it'd be opening up a hole on our defense.

Panfork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2010, 05:07 PM
  #124
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
My point is that I don't see Dallas wanting to take back even a contract like Roszival. Hicks has cash-flow issues. Look at what happened with the Texas Rangers.
He has cash issues but he still must maintain the cap floor. Roszival is actually pretty valuable considering he'll bring a $5m cap hit while only making $3.5m per over the next two seasons.

DutchShamrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2010, 10:37 AM
  #125
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,871
vCash: 500
booooo trade rumors board has sportsnet saying Mitchell down to 4 teams and Rangers not on that list

Vitto79 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 09:20 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.