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

Alexander Radulov

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-09-2011, 10:20 AM
  #26
NYRangers16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Westchester
Posts: 1,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
I mean both sides could use some more quality depth, but the Rangers are much better off on the LW then the RW.
I see your point..but I look at it like this:

On the right:
Gabby/Cally/Thomas....but Gabby and Cally are one hell of a 1-2...we might need some more potential guys for when Gabby gets older, but for the next few years RW isn't a need.

On the left:
Dubi/Krieder/Miller...That's it. And Krieder/Miller aren't ready. So this is why LW is more of an immediate need, though we might be fine in a few years depending on how the 2 prospects do.

So right now we need LWs...moving forward that'll probably change to needing RWs(next few drafts should plan for this).

NYRangers16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 10:25 AM
  #27
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,917
vCash: 50
This is simply just ever going to happen...

Radulov does not fit the mold of players we are going for on this team. I don't think management would take him for any assets. At all.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 11:37 AM
  #28
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers16 View Post
I see your point..but I look at it like this:

On the right:
Gabby/Cally/Thomas....but Gabby and Cally are one hell of a 1-2...we might need some more potential guys for when Gabby gets older, but for the next few years RW isn't a need.

On the left:
Dubi/Krieder/Miller...That's it. And Krieder/Miller aren't ready. So this is why LW is more of an immediate need, though we might be fine in a few years depending on how the 2 prospects do.

So right now we need LWs...moving forward that'll probably change to needing RWs(next few drafts should plan for this).
gabs can play LW so can MZA if he makes it. Cally may need to take less minutes soon and may be a 3rd line guy. He proved he can play a 2nd line role not that he HAS to especially not if a better talent comes along. Radulov would likely be that. Let's face it 2nd and 3rd are just numbers and dont have much meaning anyway when Torts is your coach.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 11:42 AM
  #29
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,818
vCash: 500
He is, from what little I know of him, the polar opposite of the archetypal Ranger that Torts and Sather are trying to promote. Hard working, fiercely dedicated to their teammates and their franchise, willing to do whatever it takes to win even if they're up against it regarding skill. Look at recent draftees - how many are super skill players with personality question marks and how many are hard working heart and soul guys who already appear to be natural leaders? He straight up broke a contract, I don't care what team it was with, "I don't like it here" isn't a reason to break a binding agreement with a franchise. Also the guy had one good NHL year - I'm not ready to trade away the future for him even if he wasn't a questionable character.

haveandare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 11:45 AM
  #30
NYRangers16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Westchester
Posts: 1,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
gabs can play LW so can MZA if he makes it. Cally may need to take less minutes soon and may be a 3rd line guy. He proved he can play a 2nd line role not that he HAS to especially not if a better talent comes along. Radulov would likely be that. Let's face it 2nd and 3rd are just numbers and dont have much meaning anyway when Torts is your coach.
Gabby has played RW his whole career.

And putting line numbers aside, Cally's gonna get 20 minutes a night...if you can find the minutes to put Gabby and Cally a 20 each and given how much Torts plays the 4th line, that leaves 10 minutes for the "second" line if you structure it like that. Essentially, given the minutes breakdown Cally is your 2nd line RW no matter what.

And given that, what's more important to fill right now?; 12-15 minutes of a 3rd line RW or 20 minutes of a 1st/2nd LW?

P.S. MZA is a potential option though I'd like to see him prove that he's a top 6 guy before we pencil him in on either side.

NYRangers16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 11:55 AM
  #31
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers16 View Post
Gabby has played RW his whole career.

And putting line numbers aside, Cally's gonna get 20 minutes a night...if you can find the minutes to put Gabby and Cally a 20 each and given how much Torts plays the 4th line, that leaves 10 minutes for the "second" line if you structure it like that. Essentially, given the minutes breakdown Cally is your 2nd line RW no matter what.

And given that, what's more important to fill right now?; 12-15 minutes of a 3rd line RW or 20 minutes of a 1st/2nd LW?

P.S. MZA is a potential option though I'd like to see him prove that he's a top 6 guy before we pencil him in on either side.
Again I said he COULD not that he will. Cally COULD be a 3rd line guy soon...this one i think actually will happen and sooner than later simply because I'm worried body needs less minutes it's not a skill issue with the guy hence why i clearly said he's proven he can be a 2nd line guy. What's more important to fill now? Well seeing as how this is a HYPOTHETICAL FUTURE I wouldn't think I'd have to base my opinion solely on right thius moment lol

P.S. did you read anything at all that i said b/c I clearly said "if he ever makes it". I have no problem if you disagree with stuff but geez guy at least make it seem like you read what I wrote first

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 12:38 PM
  #32
NYRangers16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Westchester
Posts: 1,047
vCash: 500
My point is Radulov for 12 minutes a night isn't a need. A LW who can play 20 good ones is. Saying Cally can play 3rd line doesn't change our LW situation. And MZA is like Krieder/Miller/Thomas in that we're still seeing what we have.

I absolutely read what you wrote, but none of it makes Radulov worth getting, nor does it give us a 20 minute LW.

NYRangers16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 01:04 PM
  #33
Brendan Shanahan
I suspend people
 
Brendan Shanahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Boyle View Post
?

Not quite sure what you're implying, here.
Uh that Nashville is not really a hockey town? Thought it was pretty clear, bud.

Brendan Shanahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 01:04 PM
  #34
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
I would think the opposite. The top 6 players (Or players with top 6 potential in the system) on the RW are Gaborik, Callahan, Thomas, and may be Fasth. MZA prefers the LW and Weise/Prust are more fit for the bottom 6.

Top 6 players on the LW (Or those with top 6 potential in the system) are Dubinsky, Wolski, Kreider, Miller, and MZA. Avery, Rupp, Wilson, and probably Hagelin are more fit for the bottom six.

I mean both sides could use some more quality depth, but the Rangers are much better off on the LW then the RW.

Considering that Gaborik likely won't be here in three years, it would make a great deal of sense to acquire a star RW if we can get him cheap.

Given Gaborik's history of injuries, we cannot rely on him producing on at first line level beyond the age of 32. Once his contract is up, the Rangers will cut their ties with him.

The question is: can we acquire Radulov cheap?

The truth is that if we can get him for Kreider and a second, we should do it, both for the future and for today. An addition of a star player will make us Cup favorites even with the less than stellar LW (though who knows if Wolski or Zuccarello will break through). Our centers, right wings and goalie would be tremendous, and our defense either great (if MDZ breaks through) or good (if he will not).

Radulov for Kreider and #2 is something you do every day.


Last edited by Beacon: 07-09-2011 at 01:12 PM.
Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 03:00 PM
  #35
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,148
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
Considering that Gaborik likely won't be here in three years, it would make a great deal of sense to acquire a star RW if we can get him cheap.

Given Gaborik's history of injuries, we cannot rely on him producing on at first line level beyond the age of 32. Once his contract is up, the Rangers will cut their ties with him.

The question is: can we acquire Radulov cheap?

The truth is that if we can get him for Kreider and a second, we should do it, both for the future and for today. An addition of a star player will make us Cup favorites even with the less than stellar LW (though who knows if Wolski or Zuccarello will break through). Our centers, right wings and goalie would be tremendous, and our defense either great (if MDZ breaks through) or good (if he will not).

Radulov for Kreider and #2 is something you do every day.
You guys know who Wolski is? Break out? The guy is a season removed from a 65 point year, thats better than ANYTHING Radulov ever put up in the NHL. You wanna trade our top prospect and a pick for a headcase. Buy out a guy who is the same age who has had better success scoring in the NHL that we have under contract, all to acquire Radulov?

If that isn't trading for the sake of trading I don't know what is because the scenario your putting is

Buy out Wolski
Trade Kreider and a 2nd for Radulov

Wolski + Kreider + 2nd for Radulov just looks terrible.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 03:54 PM
  #36
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
I know it isn't this year, but isn't next season Radulov's last year on his ELC? If he wanted to couldn't he sign as a Free Agent with anyone he wanted or would he be considered an RFA still? Bottom line, we have to trade no matter what because he is an RFA? Is that correct?

Clowes Line is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 03:56 PM
  #37
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
You guys know who Wolski is? Break out? The guy is a season removed from a 65 point year, thats better than ANYTHING Radulov ever put up in the NHL. You wanna trade our top prospect and a pick for a headcase. Buy out a guy who is the same age who has had better success scoring in the NHL that we have under contract, all to acquire Radulov?

If that isn't trading for the sake of trading I don't know what is because the scenario your putting is

Buy out Wolski
Trade Kreider and a 2nd for Radulov

Wolski + Kreider + 2nd for Radulov just looks terrible.
Not that I don't agree with you, I would not want to trade Kreider for him. But he is not a headcase. At the time, he was just a young Russian lad who was homesick and wanted to go back home for better playing conditions as well. I wouldn't call him homesick. I think being older now and having more pro experience, he wouldn't depart for the KHL again. I think he can be a solid NHLer.

Clowes Line is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 04:11 PM
  #38
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
You guys know who Wolski is? Break out? The guy is a season removed from a 65 point year, thats better than ANYTHING Radulov ever put up in the NHL. You wanna trade our top prospect and a pick for a headcase. Buy out a guy who is the same age who has had better success scoring in the NHL that we have under contract, all to acquire Radulov?

If that isn't trading for the sake of trading I don't know what is because the scenario your putting is

Buy out Wolski
Trade Kreider and a 2nd for Radulov

Wolski + Kreider + 2nd for Radulov just looks terrible.
Why is he a headcase?

Because he took 6m over 400k?

He is a very good hockeyplayer, and much more compareable to Datsyuk than a Kovalchuk.

Ola is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 04:30 PM
  #39
gotmonte
Registered User
 
gotmonte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,545
vCash: 500
Yes if you can get him to agree ahead of time to play for us, than absolutely. You got yourself a trade.

But we would need that "window" of what? 48 hours? 72 hours? I dont think the league gives more time than that. And talking to him without permission is tampering.

So if you can get him to agree within that time limit, SEE YA to the people you asked us to trade

gotmonte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 06:02 PM
  #40
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
I know it isn't this year, but isn't next season Radulov's last year on his ELC? If he wanted to couldn't he sign as a Free Agent with anyone he wanted or would he be considered an RFA still? Bottom line, we have to trade no matter what because he is an RFA? Is that correct?
he'd be a RFA

CM PUNK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 11:23 PM
  #41
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,148
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Why is he a headcase?

Because he took 6m over 400k?

He is a very good hockeyplayer, and much more compareable to Datsyuk than a Kovalchuk.
Okay maybe headcase was a bad choice of words but i'm not a fan of players who break their contracts ala Yashin. It's just so the opposite of what we are trying to build here.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 11:25 PM
  #42
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,148
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM PUNK View Post
he'd be a RFA
I'm not sure how he can be any kind of FA if he comes back, he still has a contract owed that he signed and hasn't finshed.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2011, 11:27 PM
  #43
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
I'm not sure how he can be any kind of FA if he comes back, he still has a contract owed that he signed and hasn't finshed.
he'd have to come back and play this year to complete his ELC, and then he'd be a RFA at the end of the deal cause he'd be 26

CM PUNK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 12:30 AM
  #44
bobbop
Henrik's Pop
 
bobbop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Suburban Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 4,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
You guys know who Wolski is? Break out? The guy is a season removed from a 65 point year, thats better than ANYTHING Radulov ever put up in the NHL. You wanna trade our top prospect and a pick for a headcase. Buy out a guy who is the same age who has had better success scoring in the NHL that we have under contract, all to acquire Radulov?

If that isn't trading for the sake of trading I don't know what is because the scenario your putting is

Buy out Wolski
Trade Kreider and a 2nd for Radulov

Wolski + Kreider + 2nd for Radulov just looks terrible.
Only two things wrong with this post.

1. Radulov is not a headcase.

2. Wolski has the trade value of a 4th round draft choice. He's already been shipped out of Denver and Phoienix. He's got one slim chance left here. Yeah he's got talent. It's just not on display 82 nights a year.

bobbop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 01:21 AM
  #45
donpaulo
Capt Barry Beck
 
donpaulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: nihon
Country: Japan
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
I just don't think Nashville accepts the offer for a number of reasons.

1. Wolski is RFA this year which means he is line for arbitration/negotiations. Nashville is well known for playing at or near the salary basement. Why do they want to pick up wolski when they can have Radulov back ?

2. Nashville appears to have a need on the backline not up front. They need an affordable 4/5 kind of guy to clear the net and keep things simple. The team is already very deep in 50 point forwards. So in this regard a Michael Sauer probably holds more interest than say a Wolski.

3. Barry Trotz has been coach there since forever so anyone the rangers offer have to fit his system. Nashville does not need pluggers they are already drowning in those kinds of guys. I could see Del Zotto holding interest despite the fact that they already have Suter and Weber. But honestly I would prefer to keep MDZ than have Radulov despite his upside. Believe me I know about Rad's game as he is on 4 of my sim/roto hockey teams as I wait for him to return to the NHL

donpaulo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 09:46 AM
  #46
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,781
vCash: 500
What's wrong with you people?

What is the ****ing fascination with the enigmatic Russians? After Zherdev and Grachev plus not getting the full medical history on Cherepanov,its more Russians???????

This player bolted from his contract to the play in the KHL. Even IF he returned to the NHL,who is to say he doesn't go back there again. You can't trust him. Not a bad kid. BS.

The Russian players are the dinosaurs of the players. Fewer and fewer every year. Give me the North American kids and the European kids who WANT to play here.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 10:00 AM
  #47
Ruotsalainen29
Zhoo-Zhitsu!
 
Ruotsalainen29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
What's wrong with you people?

What is the ****ing fascination with the enigmatic Russians? After Zherdev and Grachev plus not getting the full medical history on Cherepanov,its more Russians???????

This player bolted from his contract to the play in the KHL. Even IF he returned to the NHL,who is to say he doesn't go back there again. You can't trust him. Not a bad kid. BS.

The Russian players are the dinosaurs of the players. Fewer and fewer every year. Give me the North American kids and the European kids who WANT to play here.
Hypothetically, if the Rangers had one of the top 2 picks in the 2012 draft, you wouldn't take Yakupov (been playing in the OHL) or Grigorenko (will be playing in the Q this season) just because they are Russian? Even though they are considered to be the 2 best forwards in the draft? Not all Russian people are the same.

Ruotsalainen29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 11:07 AM
  #48
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,818
vCash: 500
We can speculate all we want the point is that he isn't the kind of player that this franchise is looking to add to their team. They aren't going to sign him no matter how many hypothetically good deals we can throw out on this board.

IMO, the draft is the time that it is most obvious what kind of players a team wants to add. Look at who NYR has been drafting. North Americans and Europeans who are hard workers and leaders. I don't mean to imply that Russians can't be or aren't hard working or leaders I'm just stating the fact that they haven't been drafting them. Its fun to talk about what we want but the real team isn't interested in a young guy who almost put up 60 points once and then ditched his contractual obligation to his team - especially not at the cost of a guy like Kreider. Trading a guy like him, debatably our top prospect, a guy who WANTS to play NHL hockey and is waiting until he feels ready, a guy who has pages and pages of scouting reports praising his skating ability as being near elite even in an NHL sense, for a guy who broke a contract becuause he was homesick is literally insane.

Being homesick isn't a good reason to ditch your team like that, I'm sorry - neither is the money. If a player did that to NYR we would all be up in arms. People still get on Dubi for missing a handful of games years ago for money - this guy is going to miss all of Nashville's games from here on out after they spent a first on him. Some people want to say its okay because he was young and homesick - these people seem to just want a new toy more than anything else. If he, or anybody, did that to our team it would be condemned across the board but because there is even the slightest chance of him maybe being available its okay that he did that and we're sure that he's a different, more grown up guy now even though nobody here knows him at all. Its actually pretty hilarious to read some of this stuff.

EDIT: Also, I forgot to mention that since he plays RW people are okay limiting Callahan's minutes so this guy can get them? The future captain, the all around player who does everything and has always been absolutely dedicated to the team should play less so that a guy who scored 10 more points then he did in 20 more games one year can play more? Great idea.

haveandare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 12:32 PM
  #49
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,297
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
We can speculate all we want the point is that he isn't the kind of player that this franchise is looking to add to their team. They aren't going to sign him no matter how many hypothetically good deals we can throw out on this board.

IMO, the draft is the time that it is most obvious what kind of players a team wants to add. Look at who NYR has been drafting. North Americans and Europeans who are hard workers and leaders. I don't mean to imply that Russians can't be or aren't hard working or leaders I'm just stating the fact that they haven't been drafting them. Its fun to talk about what we want but the real team isn't interested in a young guy who almost put up 60 points once and then ditched his contractual obligation to his team - especially not at the cost of a guy like Kreider. Trading a guy like him, debatably our top prospect, a guy who WANTS to play NHL hockey and is waiting until he feels ready, a guy who has pages and pages of scouting reports praising his skating ability as being near elite even in an NHL sense, for a guy who broke a contract becuause he was homesick is literally insane.

Being homesick isn't a good reason to ditch your team like that, I'm sorry - neither is the money. If a player did that to NYR we would all be up in arms. People still get on Dubi for missing a handful of games years ago for money - this guy is going to miss all of Nashville's games from here on out after they spent a first on him. Some people want to say its okay because he was young and homesick - these people seem to just want a new toy more than anything else. If he, or anybody, did that to our team it would be condemned across the board but because there is even the slightest chance of him maybe being available its okay that he did that and we're sure that he's a different, more grown up guy now even though nobody here knows him at all. Its actually pretty hilarious to read some of this stuff.

EDIT: Also, I forgot to mention that since he plays RW people are okay limiting Callahan's minutes so this guy can get them? The future captain, the all around player who does everything and has always been absolutely dedicated to the team should play less so that a guy who scored 10 more points then he did in 20 more games one year can play more? Great idea.
Great post.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 05:45 PM
  #50
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,148
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbop View Post
Only two things wrong with this post.

1. Radulov is not a headcase.

2. Wolski has the trade value of a 4th round draft choice. He's already been shipped out of Denver and Phoienix. He's got one slim chance left here. Yeah he's got talent. It's just not on display 82 nights a year.
I already stated headcase may have been a poor choice of wording but he's not the kind of guy we want. Why does anyone want a player who doesn't keep his end of a deal? Your other point, if Wolski who has been in the league and honoring his contract is worth a 4th rounder and has had more success in the NHL why would Radulov cost us Kreider and picks? If Wolski value is that low I can't see how Radulov's would be any higher.

If Wolski is worth a 4th Radulov should be worth less.

Radek27 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 04:10 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.