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

Brad Richards/Mike Ribeiro Are They Options?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-21-2010, 04:14 PM
  #51
FromTheSide
Registered User
 
FromTheSide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 23,790
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FromTheSide Send a message via MSN to FromTheSide
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpNYR View Post
You watch and see how far the Canucks are going to go in the playoffs. I have them slotted as coming out of the west.

Their d-men are beyond solid: Edler, Bieksa, Hamhuis , Ehroff, Ballard.
Bieksa? Solid?

You have to watch a few more canuck games

FromTheSide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:15 PM
  #52
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpNYR View Post
Especially when you won't have any cap space to address the defense issue & will probably be forced to play rookies.

These were the same reasons I was against getting Kovalchuk. It doesn't allow you to address other areas of concern.
Look at the Rangers defense and their prospects though.

Staal-Girardi
MDZ-Rozsival
Eminger-Sauer
Gilroy

Valentenko
McDonagh
Kundratek

They probably won't re-sign Eminger or Gilroy, leaving one Left-Defense spot open for one of Valentenko or McDonagh. Both of those players should be more than ready to step in and play on the 3rd pairing.

Sauer will be in his 2nd season and if he continues to play well then I see no reason why he shouldnt be leaned on heavier in terms of playing time. Hell, I wouldnt even be that opposed to resigning Eminger and letting him play on his natural side for 1 more season.

Staal-Eminger
MDZ-Girardi
Valentenko/McDonagh-Sauer

Say Eminger gets the same exact salary he is making this season, that is a savings of around 5-5.5 million dollars right there.

I like Rozsival, but he isn't irreplaceable for next season. After that the Rangers would have one of Valentenko/McDonagh, Kundratek and McIlrath all most likely pushing for spots in the NHL. They are fine on defense.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:25 PM
  #53
hpNYR
HF Forecaster
 
hpNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Burbank, CA
Country: Armenia
Posts: 7,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AOWRanger View Post
Bieksa? Solid?

You have to watch a few more canuck games
He would easily be our 3rd best d-men.

hpNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:30 PM
  #54
hpNYR
HF Forecaster
 
hpNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Burbank, CA
Country: Armenia
Posts: 7,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyviper87 View Post
Look at the Rangers defense and their prospects though.

Staal-Girardi
MDZ-Rozsival
Eminger-Sauer
Gilroy

Valentenko
McDonagh
Kundratek

They probably won't re-sign Eminger or Gilroy, leaving one Left-Defense spot open for one of Valentenko or McDonagh. Both of those players should be more than ready to step in and play on the 3rd pairing.

Sauer will be in his 2nd season and if he continues to play well then I see no reason why he shouldnt be leaned on heavier in terms of playing time. Hell, I wouldnt even be that opposed to resigning Eminger and letting him play on his natural side for 1 more season.

Staal-Eminger
MDZ-Girardi
Valentenko/McDonagh-Sauer

Say Eminger gets the same exact salary he is making this season, that is a savings of around 5-5.5 million dollars right there.

I like Rozsival, but he isn't irreplaceable for next season. After that the Rangers would have one of Valentenko/McDonagh, Kundratek and McIlrath all most likely pushing for spots in the NHL. They are fine on defense.
You're expecting a rookie to fill in a veterans shoes? There are a lot of question marks as to how a Valentenko or McDonagh perform in a 82 game nhl season.

The only way I sign Richards and trade Rozsival is if you can replace Rozsival with a similar type of player who costs less. A player that has an all around game, where not one part of his game is better than the other. A elevated game.

As far as the Devils not having cap issues after signing Kovachuk, let's not kid our selves. They were forced to roll/dress 3 lines as a result of the signing.

hpNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:30 PM
  #55
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbop View Post
Drudy has already missed a quarter of the season. By the time he gets back it will be a third. I like Drury better than most here but I've got to think that his role in the leadership dynamic of the team has changed and this is becoming the Callahan/Dubinsky Rangers. As it should be.

NMC clause aside, I think it's very possible the Rangers work with Drury to move him to a place this summer where cap issues are of less concern and he can finish his career with dignity. Could be a deal like the White-Brashear-Rissmillier trade where there's cap benefit for both teams. Colorado might be possible.
Colorado is spending to the floor. Stan Kroenke won't spend money on the Nuggets. He's going to add $5 million in salary? Why would any team trade for Drury?

The White trade hasn't benefitted the Rangers because he's still on the roster.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:37 PM
  #56
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nrf83 View Post
[/COLOR]

Because as of July 1 Redden's salary goes back on NYR cap; this effectively eliminates any major free agent signing/trade; even with 10% rule we are stymied.
Not **** really? You're going to educate me on the summer cap! Get a clue before you press respond.

I'm not surprised you missed the point. Unless you move more salary,it does not matter if Redden is on the summer cap.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:40 PM
  #57
BrandNewDream
Registered User
 
BrandNewDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bayonne, NJ
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbop View Post
Drudy has already missed a quarter of the season. By the time he gets back it will be a third. I like Drury better than most here but I've got to think that his role in the leadership dynamic of the team has changed and this is becoming the Callahan/Dubinsky Rangers. As it should be.

NMC clause aside, I think it's very possible the Rangers work with Drury to move him to a place this summer where cap issues are of less concern and he can finish his career with dignity. Could be a deal like the White-Brashear-Rissmillier trade where there's cap benefit for both teams. Colorado might be possible.
Yet another reason/example of why teams should be able to absorb some cap space in trades. Drury would be much easier to move if we could shave $1.5m off his salary/cap hit. Cheaper than a buyout for the Rangers, as well.

Obviously, that would limit the appeal of trading him for the Rangers, but it would also clear $5m+ off our cap.

BrandNewDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:41 PM
  #58
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Umm...signing Kovalchuk did not prevent the Debbies from attempting bolster their D. They still signed Volchenkov and Tallinder. The Debbies problems are much bigger than what can be attriburted to the Kovalchuk signing. Plus, Richards would fill an actual need. The two situations are completely dissimilar.
You're still defending the Kovalchuk signing? They bolstered their D? They didn't fulfill their needs on D.

Richards will be 31 years this spring. How long will Richards fill the Rangers need? How long before his game slips and the Rangers are stuck with him? God forbid the CBA changes to allow ALL ONE WAY contracts to count against the cap AND/OR the cap is lowered in exchange for a cap on escrow. Players receive less than 57%.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 04:46 PM
  #59
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpNYR View Post
He would easily be our 3rd best d-men.
For once,we're on the same side but Bieksa does suck.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 05:16 PM
  #60
Tony D63
Tortsless Rangers
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 4,255
vCash: 500
oh my god I hope to god we get richards. him and gabby together = hardcore sex

Tony D63 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 05:19 PM
  #61
nyr2417
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,905
vCash: 500
I wouldn't trade for either but I'd love to sign Richards this off-season and buy-out Drury. That'd make my day.

nyr2417 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 05:42 PM
  #62
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
You're still defending the Kovalchuk signing? They bolstered their D? They didn't fulfill their needs on D.

Richards will be 31 years this spring. How long will Richards fill the Rangers need? How long before his game slips and the Rangers are stuck with him? God forbid the CBA changes to allow ALL ONE WAY contracts to count against the cap AND/OR the cap is lowered in exchange for a cap on escrow. Players receive less than 57%.
Creating strawman arguments, I see. 1). I discussed the possibilty of acquiring Richards for THIS season, and admitted not being sure of how the Rangers would be able to re-sign him. 2). I did not "defend" the Debbies re-signing Kovalcuk. Rather, I pointed out that the Debbies did spend money on D. I also pointed out that comparing the Rangers trading for Richards. Was not comparable to the Debbies trading for Kovalchuk. If anything, the Iginla rumors were a more apt comparison.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 05:49 PM
  #63
nyranger61494
YNWA
 
nyranger61494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Creating strawman arguments, I see. 1). I discussed the possibilty of acquiring Richards for THIS season, and admitted not being sure of how the Rangers would be able to re-sign him. 2). I did not "defend" the Debbies re-signing Kovalcuk. Rather, I pointed out that the Debbies did spend money on D. I also pointed out that comparing the Rangers trading for Richards. Was not comparable to the Debbies trading for Kovalchuk. If anything, the Iginla rumors were a more apt comparison.
Agree with that. However, regarding the Devils, yes, they added Volchenkov and Tallinder but they could have added more depth as the rest of their unit is a marginal NHL/AHL talent level at best. It further complicates their ability to re-sign Parise, something you are aware of as well.

nyranger61494 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 06:18 PM
  #64
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyranger61494 View Post
Agree with that. However, regarding the Devils, yes, they added Volchenkov and Tallinder but they could have added more depth as the rest of their unit is a marginal NHL/AHL talent level at best. It further complicates their ability to re-sign Parise, something you are aware of as well.
Again, different arguments, which I am not disputing. My point was that signing Kovalchuk did not pull money away from the Debbies addressing their defense. Yes, signing Volchenkov and Tallinder could be the Debbies' version of Ulanov and Karpa. Doesn't it say more about the Debbies' ability to draft and develop young D-men, as opposed to the signing of Kovalchuk?

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 06:39 PM
  #65
bobbop
Henrik's Pop
 
bobbop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Suburban Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 4,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Colorado is spending to the floor. Stan Kroenke won't spend money on the Nuggets. He's going to add $5 million in salary? Why would any team trade for Drury?

The White trade hasn't benefitted the Rangers because he's still on the roster.
A team might trade for Drury if they can unload some of their own freight. And for the Rangers, contracts without an NMC (that can be buried in the minors) may be preferable to contracts with a NMC.

Keoenke's not spending $ right now for a couple of reasons. The team isn't drawing that well and he is still trying to finalize the transfer his Colorado holdings to his son. He may have to sell to others if the NBA and NHL doesn't accept his plan. It ain't like he doesn't have the money.

The reason I noted the Brashear/White/Rissmiller trade as a reference point is that the Rangers got a contract they can still bury if they want to for one they couldn't. At some point, White will perform or be gone. More likely the later.

Of course, this all depends on the Rangers finding a landing place agreeable to Drury. Lots of stars would need to align. But I don't think it's a given that he is here next year.

bobbop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 06:45 PM
  #66
Esa 10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 598
vCash: 500
If they include Frolov and Gilroy in the deal, then waive White, trading for Richards is doable. That's 7 million. They'd probably have to dip into the bonus cushion even further though. In the summer they could buy out Drury or move Rozy to re-sign Richards. The question is what else would Dallas want included in the deal?

BTW, there was a Q&A posted on TSN last week with McKenzie, Ferraro, and Peca. They were asked who's the likeliest player to be moved this year out of Richards, Iginla, Penner and Connolly. Both McKenzie and Ferraro chose Richards. Neither feel that the Stars will be able to re-sign him by trade deadline. Just their opinions though.

Esa 10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 06:55 PM
  #67
jiveseed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 97
vCash: 500
Rozi is so underestimated on these boards its not even funny.

jiveseed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:15 PM
  #68
Miller Time NYR
Wrong^
 
Miller Time NYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,981
vCash: 500
There's no way the stars downgrade to drury an move Richards unless their offered a good bounty of prospects
There's no way the stars in their right minds trade for redden ever.
There's no way the rangers can trade roszival for Richards, del zotto is defensively incapable of playing top four minutes which he does now unfortunately, eminger has been good in rozis abscense but there's no telling he'll keep it up, and I don't want my teams defensive game hinging on emigrate success or failure. This defense would not hold up without rozi, their barely doing it now.
Therefore theres no way the rangers can trade for Richards right now, at the trade deadline? Maybe things could change bit I dont see it happening.

Could sather wiggle his way into a trade for riberio, eah maybe but he's a guy even for dallas you've gotta give alot to get and I don't think were in a position to do that as in take away from the core.

Miller Time NYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:21 PM
  #69
Miller Time NYR
Wrong^
 
Miller Time NYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esa 10 View Post
If they include Frolov and Gilroy in the deal, then waive White, trading for Richards is doable. That's 7 million. They'd probably have to dip into the bonus cushion even further though. In the summer they could buy out Drury or move Rozy to re-sign Richards. The question is what else would Dallas want included in the deal?
That all works yea but why in the world would Dallas trade Richards for frolov and girlroy(assuming they keep up pace) its not like Dallas has to trade Richards.

Miller Time NYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:26 PM
  #70
GregNYR19
agitator
 
GregNYR19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fair Lawn, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,059
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to GregNYR19
well brad richards as a bonafide #1 center...ill take it. i dont think he will be expensive this summer either, if it can be done...either as a rental or for next yr, both prospal and fro can take a hike unless fro wants a paycut or he just retires

GregNYR19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:27 PM
  #71
nyranger61494
YNWA
 
nyranger61494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Again, different arguments, which I am not disputing. My point was that signing Kovalchuk did not pull money away from the Debbies addressing their defense. Yes, signing Volchenkov and Tallinder could be the Debbies' version of Ulanov and Karpa. Doesn't it say more about the Debbies' ability to draft and develop young D-men, as opposed to the signing of Kovalchuk?
Fair points as usual jas. They screwed themselves in more ways than one. Had they developed the young depth defensemen, then as I point out, Kovalchuk would have had no bearing on that. However, they didn't and were then unable to address their blue line through free agency. I think we actually agree here.

nyranger61494 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:32 PM
  #72
MetalGodAOD
Moderator
Star Rangers
 
MetalGodAOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 12,897
vCash: 500
As a Stars fan I can tell you guys Richards will probably take something like V-tank/McD and a 1st. Stop proposing dumping the **** we as Rangers fans don't want like Gilroy and Frolov. We'll need to give up assets.

MetalGodAOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:33 PM
  #73
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,044
vCash: 500
Grachev and a 1st?

BlueshirtBlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:34 PM
  #74
nyr2417
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,905
vCash: 500
do the stars want to get rid of ribeiro? Because if they want to get rid of him to clear space to rationalize signing richards to a big deal would they do something along the lines of werek gilroy, 2nd?

nyr2417 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2010, 07:37 PM
  #75
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyranger61494 View Post
Fair points as usual jas. They screwed themselves in more ways than one. Had they developed the young depth defensemen, then as I point out, Kovalchuk would have had no bearing on that. However, they didn't and were then unable to address their blue line through free agency. I think we actually agree here.
I think so, too. And, personally, I'd love to see the Rangers get Richards, because I have long thought he was a good fit on the Rangers. I wanted the Rangers to trade for him instead of spending money on Gomez. And, now, he makes perfect sense for his abilities...superb playmaker, can play the point on the PP, and Torts would feel very comfortable with him. But, the Rangers would have to go through quite a few machinations to bring him in.

jas 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 03:17 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.