HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Wolski + 15th Overall

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-09-2011, 04:00 PM
  #26
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
 
Chalfdiggity3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Chalfdiggity3, I've noticed in a lot of Ranger threads that you vastly overrate the value of Rangers assets. And you are doing it again here.

He is on his third team in two years. He is vastly overpaid for what he brings. He has all the skill in the world and lower compete level than a arthritic castrated dog. He has now reached the full O'Sullivan and pretty much everyone knows that what you see is what you get.

Any team possibly interested in the services of Wolski will just wait for the Rangers to buy him out and throw him a last-chance-pity-contract. If Rangers don't buy him out, no one will trade for him, unless its one of those negative value for negative value deals.
Freudian dont be mad bc im right and your wrong. You were one of the posters stating the exact same thing about our other players such as Gomez, Kotalik, and Higgins.. Yet look how that turned out. I think you and other posters vastly underrate rangers players such as Staal, Girardi and others.

I get what your saying but you also have to see that he is 25yo and a 45pt player. Yes he is overpaid by about 1-2m but still doesnt mean he has negative value or no value. Yes we wont get full value back in return for him but that doesnt mean we shouldnt expect a decent return for the kid. For the 3rd time if you read what is going on now, the rangers are NOT buying out Wolski. Plus with his buyout cap hit there is NO reason at all to take back a back contract. He is only signed for 1 more year and then he is gone.

Therefor if you look at what im stating there is NO way that the rangers would get negative value back if they gave up the 15th and Wolski. It would be able to move us up a couple of spots or it would get us another 2nd round pick ontop of what a team would be willing to give up to move up 5 spots or so, which if you look would be their 1st and a 2nd round pick

Chalfdiggity3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 04:08 PM
  #27
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
Its funny to see everyone come in here and say he has no value or negative value.. Ill bet it was the same people who came in here and told us that Kotalik, Higgins, and Gomez had negative value, yet we traded them for valuable peices in Prust and Mcdonagh along with the capspace in order to sign gaborik.

.
so what exactly are Bob Gainey and Darryl Sutter doing these days?

Mr Sakich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 04:08 PM
  #28
jmart21
MISC!!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: All Over The Place
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,033
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
Freudian dont be mad bc im right and your wrong. You were one of the posters stating the exact same thing about our other players such as Gomez, Kotalik, and Higgins.. Yet look how that turned out. I think you and other posters vastly underrate rangers players such as Staal, Girardi and others.

I get what your saying but you also have to see that he is 25yo and a 45pt player. Yes he is overpaid by about 1-2m but still doesnt mean he has negative value or no value. Yes we wont get full value back in return for him but that doesnt mean we shouldnt expect a decent return for the kid. For the 3rd time if you read what is going on now, the rangers are NOT buying out Wolski. Plus with his buyout cap hit there is NO reason at all to take back a back contract. He is only signed for 1 more year and then he is gone.

Therefor if you look at what im stating there is NO way that the rangers would get negative value back if they gave up the 15th and Wolski. It would be able to move us up a couple of spots or it would get us another 2nd round pick ontop of what a team would be willing to give up to move up 5 spots or so, which if you look would be their 1st and a 2nd round pick

I have a question for you; in all those Ranger cap space discussions/arguments, one of the key points Rangers fans were instilling was that they would have cap space for richards, especially when Drury and Wolski are bought out.

It's been touted as an enevitability by rangers fans around here that he'll be bought out. If it's nearly certain that he will be, why would any GM give up assets to aquire him?

jmart21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 04:09 PM
  #29
Zetterberg4Captain
Registered User
 
Zetterberg4Captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,575
vCash: 500
no not a chance

Zetterberg4Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 04:09 PM
  #30
Freudian
Deja vu again?
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
Freudian dont be mad bc im right and your wrong. You were one of the posters stating the exact same thing about our other players such as Gomez, Kotalik, and Higgins.. Yet look how that turned out. I think you and other posters vastly underrate rangers players such as Staal, Girardi and others.

I get what your saying but you also have to see that he is 25yo and a 45pt player. Yes he is overpaid by about 1-2m but still doesnt mean he has negative value or no value. Yes we wont get full value back in return for him but that doesnt mean we shouldnt expect a decent return for the kid. For the 3rd time if you read what is going on now, the rangers are NOT buying out Wolski. Plus with his buyout cap hit there is NO reason at all to take back a back contract. He is only signed for 1 more year and then he is gone.

Therefor if you look at what im stating there is NO way that the rangers would get negative value back if they gave up the 15th and Wolski. It would be able to move us up a couple of spots or it would get us another 2nd round pick ontop of what a team would be willing to give up to move up 5 spots or so, which if you look would be their 1st and a 2nd round pick
I know you think I underrate Girardi, because you consider him a #1 defender. Which is an absurd view.

And for 15th overall + Wolski should move you up to 9th-11th overall, like you think, it would mean Wolskis value would be something like 20th overall. Do you really think Wolski is worth that much? If you do, you really need to take off your Rangers-must-come-out-ahead glasses.

But crazy views is 90% of the entertainment value of this forum, so don't let me stop you.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 05:45 PM
  #31
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
 
Chalfdiggity3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
I know you think I underrate Girardi, because you consider him a #1 defender. Which is an absurd view.

And for 15th overall + Wolski should move you up to 9th-11th overall, like you think, it would mean Wolskis value would be something like 20th overall. Do you really think Wolski is worth that much? If you do, you really need to take off your Rangers-must-come-out-ahead glasses.

But crazy views is 90% of the entertainment value of this forum, so don't let me stop you.
I never said i think hes a #1 defender lol. I think he has filled in as a top pairing defender very well.. But he is an outstanding #3 defensman, and a capable #2.

I do believe the 15th + Wolski should be able to move us up a couple of spots. It doesnt mean i believe he is worth the 20th overall, although he could prob end up being better than half of the players selected in the 1st round of this years draft considering its a very weak draft class.

My reasoning to think that if we were to move back by trading Wolski + 15th overall i do believe it should bring us back something along the lines of a pick 18-22 and 2 2nd round picks. Normally if a team owning the a pick around 20 and wants to move up 5 spots to get the 15th pick, they would need to package the 20th overall and a mid round 2nd round pick, so why wouldnt we expect more than the pathetic packages being offered around here?

I dont believe that Wolski should get us a great return but he should be able to get the rangers a 2nd round pick. Im not looking through this with homerism eyes, im looking at it, as wolski is a 25yo 50pt winger who yes is signed for more than he is worth but its only for 1 year remaining. Hes a player that im sure other gms wouldnt mind taking a chance on by giving up a late 2nd rounder in a weak draft. Besides if you look at all the trades made by sather, im sorry but he is godly with his trading and when all of you thought gomez, kotalik, and higgins would bring nothing but a terrible contract in return, he ended up pulling Mcdonagh and Prust and the ability to get Gaborik.

Yes i know those gms dont have jobs anymore but im pretty sure we just fleeced Calgary again with the trade we just made for Erixon.

Jmart-

If you go and look at our salary cap board you will see that we can actually fit Richards in without buying either player out by offering him a 6m per year contract. With Drury bought out we can now offer him up to 7m.. If we bought out Wolski as well, we could even sign Richards for 7m and have a couple million left over for another forward. But if you read the other reports after the confirmation that drury will be bought out, you will see that wolski and avery are NOT being bought out.

Chalfdiggity3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 05:49 PM
  #32
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
 
Chalfdiggity3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
I know you think I underrate Girardi, because you consider him a #1 defender. Which is an absurd view.

And for 15th overall + Wolski should move you up to 9th-11th overall, like you think, it would mean Wolskis value would be something like 20th overall. Do you really think Wolski is worth that much? If you do, you really need to take off your Rangers-must-come-out-ahead glasses.

But crazy views is 90% of the entertainment value of this forum, so don't let me stop you.
Like i stated in another thread, a trade to say Toronto would be...

Rangers Trade:
Wolski
15th Overall

Leafs Trade:
25th Overall
29th Overall

That is the type of deal that im talking about.

Otherwise i have no problem just buying him out and dealing with the miniscule cap hit that it will cost us (avg of $500,000 per year) and drafting at 15

Chalfdiggity3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 06:03 PM
  #33
Freudian
Deja vu again?
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
I never said i think hes a #1 defender lol. I think he has filled in as a top pairing defender very well.. But he is an outstanding #3 defensman, and a capable #2.

I do believe the 15th + Wolski should be able to move us up a couple of spots. It doesnt mean i believe he is worth the 20th overall, although he could prob end up being better than half of the players selected in the 1st round of this years draft considering its a very weak draft class.

My reasoning to think that if we were to move back by trading Wolski + 15th overall i do believe it should bring us back something along the lines of a pick 18-22 and 2 2nd round picks. Normally if a team owning the a pick around 20 and wants to move up 5 spots to get the 15th pick, they would need to package the 20th overall and a mid round 2nd round pick, so why wouldnt we expect more than the pathetic packages being offered around here?

I dont believe that Wolski should get us a great return but he should be able to get the rangers a 2nd round pick. Im not looking through this with homerism eyes, im looking at it, as wolski is a 25yo 50pt winger who yes is signed for more than he is worth but its only for 1 year remaining. Hes a player that im sure other gms wouldnt mind taking a chance on by giving up a late 2nd rounder in a weak draft. Besides if you look at all the trades made by sather, im sorry but he is godly with his trading and when all of you thought gomez, kotalik, and higgins would bring nothing but a terrible contract in return, he ended up pulling Mcdonagh and Prust and the ability to get Gaborik.

Yes i know those gms dont have jobs anymore but im pretty sure we just fleeced Calgary again with the trade we just made for Erixon.

Jmart-

If you go and look at our salary cap board you will see that we can actually fit Richards in without buying either player out by offering him a 6m per year contract. With Drury bought out we can now offer him up to 7m.. If we bought out Wolski as well, we could even sign Richards for 7m and have a couple million left over for another forward. But if you read the other reports after the confirmation that drury will be bought out, you will see that wolski and avery are NOT being bought out.
You said "I think you and other posters vastly underrate rangers players such as Staal, Girardi and others." and since I feel Girardi is a low end #2 defender and haven't expressed any other view I assumed you consider him a #1.

Wolski's non-value can't be measured in how many points he gets or not. Patrick O'Sullivan usually is on pace for 40-50 points and no one wants to touch him. Guys without compete are team killers and line killers. Others don't want to play with them. There is a reason fans and teams sour on Wolski so fast. Wolski was even more productive on the Avs than he has been since leaving and no sane Avs fan want him back. You simply don't win stuff with players like that.

As for

Rangers Trade:
Wolski
15th Overall

Leafs Trade:
25th Overall
29th Overall

That's pretty much what I have been saying. Those two Leafs picks would normally get them to perhaps #18th-20th overall. So when you find that deal ok, you acknowledge that Wolski has negative value. Or you overrate how much 25th+29th overall would allow you trade up.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 06:03 PM
  #34
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,680
vCash: 500
An organization like Devils or Wings who are well run and well coached might be able to rehabilitate him.

But first we heard how Tippett was a no nonsense defense first coach who would get the best out of Wolski.

Then we heard how Tortorella was a great rehabilitator who demands performance from his players and would get the best out of Wolski.

3 different organizations, 4 different coaches, a multitude of chances to succeed. And he's never shown a drive to compete. Sure he's shown skills but what team wants a known lazy player?

Rangers should keep him or buy him out. I can't see a team trading much for him.

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 06:10 PM
  #35
voxel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 10,980
vCash: 500
Wolski at $4M cash, $3.8M cap is crazy. Rangers should buy him out cause even if he is a player that is a ridiculous amount for an underperformer.

voxel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 06:17 PM
  #36
Drij
Registered User
 
Drij's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,777
vCash: 500
Wolski is a bum.

Drij is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 06:18 PM
  #37
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
 
Chalfdiggity3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
You said "I think you and other posters vastly underrate rangers players such as Staal, Girardi and others." and since I feel Girardi is a low end #2 defender and haven't expressed any other view I assumed you consider him a #1.

Wolski's non-value can't be measured in how many points he gets or not. Patrick O'Sullivan usually is on pace for 40-50 points and no one wants to touch him. Guys without compete are team killers and line killers. Others don't want to play with them. There is a reason fans and teams sour on Wolski so fast. Wolski was even more productive on the Avs than he has been since leaving and no sane Avs fan want him back. You simply don't win stuff with players like that.

As for

Rangers Trade:
Wolski
15th Overall

Leafs Trade:
25th Overall
29th Overall

That's pretty much what I have been saying. Those two Leafs picks would normally get them to perhaps #18th-20th overall. So when you find that deal ok, you acknowledge that Wolski has negative value. Or you overrate how much 25th+29th overall would allow you trade up.
I get what you are saying but i think with him going and getting skating help and hanging out with Boyle and others i feel like he has found a place that he could actually be good in. He played well for us in the playoffs when he was given a chance on an actual line that can create offense and i think he was our leading scorer lol. With this comradeship that he seemed to have formed with some players, finally feeling at home, a full training camp under torts, put him on a line that will create offense (1st line with possibly richards n gaborik.. or put him with stepan and someone else-when he was on that line he had 12pts in 18g) id like to see what he can do next season with us. Its only for 1 more year and having him, avery, and ec coming off the books itl give us 7m to use during the free agency next year get a guy like Brent Burns or Patrick Sharp, then trade Girardi ++ for a top line player.

Well **** thats what ive been trying to say the entire time lol. No idea why the hell we are arguing on this anymore ha.

As to Girardi i think he is a rock on defense, will do anything to help your team win and is decent on offense too. Hes a decent #2dman or outstanding #3. Staal on the other hand i firmly believe he is a #1dman.

With those two picks i would take Puempel @25 and Grimaldi @29


Last edited by Chalfdiggity3: 06-09-2011 at 06:28 PM.
Chalfdiggity3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 06:40 PM
  #38
davebenj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOOMUCHBREWER View Post
An organization like Devils or Wings who are well run and well coached might be able to rehabilitate him.

But first we heard how Tippett was a no nonsense defense first coach who would get the best out of Wolski.

Then we heard how Tortorella was a great rehabilitator who demands performance from his players and would get the best out of Wolski.

3 different organizations, 4 different coaches, a multitude of chances to succeed. And he's never shown a drive to compete. Sure he's shown skills but what team wants a known lazy player?

Rangers should keep him or buy him out. I can't see a team trading much for him.
If the Devils signed Wolski, I'd be in tears. He's so bad, neither the Devils or Red Wings could get anything out of him.

davebenj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2011, 07:33 PM
  #39
SERE 24
LGR
 
SERE 24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 9,863
vCash: 500
Honestly, I think Wolski's value is at an all-time low, but that we're thinking of buying him out has more to do with his cap-hit and our cap situation than whether or not he can still be a player. Here's his career numbers, by year:

06-07: 50 points
07-08: 48 points
08-09: 42 points
09-10: 65 points
10-11: 35 points

So, one bad season in his career, at age 25, in a year where he saw a majority of third line minutes split between two teams where he struggled to find his groove and he's now "so bad you'd be in tears" if he was on your team?

Remember, I was the one saying #15 overall + Wolski for #18 overall + 4th rounder, so even I realize that he has negative value right now, but don't fool yourself, it's because of his CONTRACT, not because of him as a player. Wolski is a young-ish, highly skilled player with an inconsistent work ethic that is still good for almost a guaranteed 40+ points (one off year is a deviation from the norm, not the new rule) and who could still easily be a consistent 50 point player in this league if he can find some stability. The problem here is 100% that, right now, with inconsistency being an issue, Wolski's not worth 3.8M on a team's cap space. He still has potential and on a better contract, whether he's bought out and signs one this summer, or next summer, he can be a decent player. He also has 17 points in 27 playoff games, which isn't bad production with raised stakes either.

Make no mistake. I like Wolski and always have. I just like my Rangers more and realize that we have enough players who can provide 35-50 points but not enough cap space to sign players who can contribute the 70+ that we need to take the next step. He's going to be a casualty of his contract.

SERE 24 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 03:36 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.