HFBoards

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

Stamkos

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-13-2011, 09:05 PM
  #201
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
I'm not going to let the moment and allure of getting a player like stamkos to cloud my reasoning and judgement. I'm not going to make a counter proposal because I am not willing to pay any hefty price to get him. Our organization is in good position right now to keep moving forward. Stay the course, don't deviate. I have hardly posted in this thread because getting Stamkos is unrealistic. I'm not sure how "I call your bluff" applies maybe you need to rethink that part of your post. I never made a proposal in this thread and dont intend to. But I will pick apart the idiocy of other proposals to shed some light of sensibility in this thread.

This is where you're proposal leaves us (and I dont care about the line combinations):

________- Richards - Stamkos
Dubinsky - Anisimov - Callahan
Wolski - _______ - MZA
Prust - Boyle - Fedotenko

Extra's: Avery, Rupp, EC.

_______ - ________
McDonagh - Sauer
Erixon - MDZ/Valentenko



You dont have Thomas anymore who could be a future top 6 forward. You've dealt Stepan who could also be a top 6 forward.

You have no legitimate LWer. Now yes you could move Dubinsky up to the 1st line. But that means then you have to move Wolski or Avery into the 2nd line LW. You weaken the depth. Then who plays 3rd line LW? You can not assume Hagelin makes the team out of camp. You also can not assume you find something via Free Agency because there is not a lot left. Also can't just make another trade because you've already exploited a lot of your assets in the stamkos trade.

But forget the forward group. The defense is the most glaring of problems. Staal-Girardi are irreplaceable. There is no one in free agency. There is no one in our system who are ready to step in and play the game that Staal does. Erixon might be that guy a few years down the line but not right now. And again you cant afford to make another big trade.

But go ahead put your trade proposal on the trade board. I'm sure it'll get a warm reception by not just Lightning fans but other fans seeing as they will view us as idiots for making such a proposal. Lightning fans would be licking their chops to get a deal like yours, it'd be highway robbery and a travesty.

EDIT: Not to mention what wolfgaze already pointed out, TBL would not be able to take on all that salary.
1. I agree we should TRY to pay way, way less. The point was, IF Stamkos was available on the open market, all teams bidding, and the Rangers did not want to give up say, just Dubi - AA - Cally, Hank, etc., this is what's left.

Whether this is what should actually be paid to actually get Stamkos is another question, and I acknowledge your legitimate concern it is a valid one.

The first question is if Stamkos were available, what would we have to give up to not be outbid?

Then when you have an idea at the size of the ransom do you decide if you want to overpay.


2. Regardless of whether or not it is this package, or some other ransom, you make a value judgement. Not only must you ask is Stamkos worth this, based on expectations of his performance, but can you/do you accept the risk of injury.
That's a bonafide reason to say no.
But that's another question. The immediate question is IF you agree he is worth it, ASSUMING MAYBE he becomes available, what is the highest ransom you have to expect to pay --- which I gave without surrendering our most prized players at our thinnest spots (Fs).
[I actually think the negotiated price will be a little lower --- perhaps as much less as being able to pull back Staal for something else. BUT THIS IS THE HIGHEST PRICE YOU HAVE TO BE PREPARED TO OFFER IF YOU CHOOSE TO MAKE THE OFFER.}

3. I agree the roster is immediately thin, temporarily. The question is, is it worth it GOING FORWARD?
Here I think people of good conscience can disagree.

4. As to what you specifically said about the roster, Fs:
Avery, EC and Wolski's lazy ass are close enough to deadwood.
Rupp can play.
Weise deserves a shot.
I would manipulate the lines, Boyle to W.
See Weise making the club.
Kreider is 1-2 years away, mostly not on how much farming he needs, but how much he wants.
Disagree, see Hagelin deserving every chance to make it short of falling flat on his face, and he's actually more ready, IMO, than Thomas was, to step in right now.

I think we can get by on F.

5. OK, you got me on D. No body can replace Staal, he's the best shutdown D in the league. Still:
a) Stamkos is worth the price of such depletion paid only for the short term.
b) We have enough guys, no doubt. The question is, how fast do they get here.
I agree with you there may be growing pains, but I disagree, with all the added firepower, barring injury.
Expect good things from Pashnin, Parlett,

So basically we do get by on D also.

6. Depleted assets. We don't need that much, barring injury. But if we need a serviceable W to give depth, and we don't want to overpay a 3rd rounder like Slats did for McCabel, we have just enouh depth here and there to put together a deal. For example, we have Chad Johnson. Anything premium for Chad Johnson? No. But a serviceable W? Why not? Even if more is added. Again, wny not?

7. You consider this massiver overpay, bordering on travesty. Fair enough. Again, I said this is the highest end of the ransom you have to expect to pay to get in and cover projections from other teams also willing to overpay. I expect once the frenzy calms, all bids will competitively flatten out somewhat. To be virtually certain to prevail, this is the highest NYR would have to expect to cough up. A bit less may still get the job done.

If you think he's worth the price.
Fair question, no problem if you disagree with those who say pay it.

I'm inclined to pay something in this ballpark, reserving right to see what the final price would actually be.

Peace out...

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2011, 09:12 PM
  #202
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
... We are sending at least 4, maybe 5 NHL players to tampa. Where are they going to play? You think tampa has that many open roster spots? You think they're willing to spend that much money for a bunch of players they don't need? ...
As explained earlier. TB has the summer to juggle, to cut the wheat from the chaff, to decide who to keep and who to move.

Sure, TB would probably love Dubi -- AA -- Cally for Stamkos instead of the larger number of players I came up with. But THAT would devastate our depth.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2011, 09:18 PM
  #203
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by f2d View Post
I'm gonna say trading for stamkos is NOT realistic, period. Unless stamkos refuses to play for tampa it's not happening.
Again, I expect him to push the envelope, and TBL to match it, and move others (LeCavalier?) to get it done. Never said this would actually happen. It's just a theoretical exercise about what's the max he would worth.

We'd all love to get him for 4 firsts.
But that has unacceptable retaliation/poaching payback.
So if at all, it would have to be a trade.

As noted, TB will not give itself no other options.
But if it did come a knockin, what MAXIMUM overpayment would you be prepared to give. That's all.
If the overpayment is not worth it, that's a valid position too.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2011, 09:21 PM
  #204
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gravey94 View Post
If this trade was to occur I would never watch the Rangers ever again. I'm sorry but this has to be the worst proposal I have ever seen. You might as well add MSG, The shield emblem, and the Statue of Liberty's head because this proposal drops our team from a contender to 14th in the conference while destroying our depth.
Respect your opinion to this much overpayment being a win the battle, lose the war conclusion. Many will agree, others will say Stamkos at almost any price, even if high.

How high would you go?
What would be your top offer?

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2011, 09:33 PM
  #205
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJBergy86 View Post
He is a Restricted Free Agent, and there is no way that he is going to be getting 12.8 million per year. He is going to get anywhere between 6-8 million per, probably for 4-6 years so he will either be arbitration eligible or a UFA.

I will tell you one thing, Yzerman wants to keep it shorter than 6 years because if Stamkos hits the wire as a UFA in his prime, he is going to get one of those pretty little lifetime contracts worth 100 million by some other team
Thanks for the input and clarification.

Where I'm coming from here is
IF Yzerman can accommodate Stamkos on the club's terms, he'll do so, and your 6-8 million is the case.
But I don't see Stamkos having to capitulate, not entirely.
So he gets a deal, more along the lines of more $$$, not less, which is what he probably wants TO SOME EXTENT if for no other reason than to keep the NHLPA happy. [But agreed, $$$ is not the only factor].

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as an RFA, if they don't go to arbitration, he can then be offer sheeted by any club, and then TBL has to match not only total $ but payout terms of package. And Stamkos is not yet, as of this moment, in arbitration? So theoretically it could happen?

Yeah, they'll meet in the middle, but if Yzerman pulls arbitration, Stamkos may opt for alternatives that force him out of TB sooner than later.

So yeah, TB will make it happen, mostly on Stamkos' terms, and the # may not be 13m, but it will be more than 6-8m, IMO.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 12:00 PM
  #206
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
1. I agree we should TRY to pay way, way less. The point was, IF Stamkos was available on the open market, all teams bidding, and the Rangers did not want to give up say, just Dubi - AA - Cally, Hank, etc., this is what's left.

Whether this is what should actually be paid to actually get Stamkos is another question, and I acknowledge your legitimate concern it is a valid one.

The first question is if Stamkos were available, what would we have to give up to not be outbid?

Then when you have an idea at the size of the ransom do you decide if you want to overpay.


2. Regardless of whether or not it is this package, or some other ransom, you make a value judgement. Not only must you ask is Stamkos worth this, based on expectations of his performance, but can you/do you accept the risk of injury.
That's a bonafide reason to say no.
But that's another question. The immediate question is IF you agree he is worth it, ASSUMING MAYBE he becomes available, what is the highest ransom you have to expect to pay --- which I gave without surrendering our most prized players at our thinnest spots (Fs).
[I actually think the negotiated price will be a little lower --- perhaps as much less as being able to pull back Staal for something else. BUT THIS IS THE HIGHEST PRICE YOU HAVE TO BE PREPARED TO OFFER IF YOU CHOOSE TO MAKE THE OFFER.}

3. I agree the roster is immediately thin, temporarily. The question is, is it worth it GOING FORWARD?
Here I think people of good conscience can disagree.

4. As to what you specifically said about the roster, Fs:
Avery, EC and Wolski's lazy ass are close enough to deadwood.
Rupp can play.
Weise deserves a shot.
I would manipulate the lines, Boyle to W.
See Weise making the club.
Kreider is 1-2 years away, mostly not on how much farming he needs, but how much he wants.
Disagree, see Hagelin deserving every chance to make it short of falling flat on his face, and he's actually more ready, IMO, than Thomas was, to step in right now.


I think we can get by on F.

5. OK, you got me on D. No body can replace Staal, he's the best shutdown D in the league. Still:
a) Stamkos is worth the price of such depletion paid only for the short term.
b) We have enough guys, no doubt. The question is, how fast do they get here.
I agree with you there may be growing pains, but I disagree, with all the added firepower, barring injury.
Expect good things from Pashnin, Parlett,

So basically we do get by on D also.

6. Depleted assets. We don't need that much, barring injury. But if we need a serviceable W to give depth, and we don't want to overpay a 3rd rounder like Slats did for McCabel, we have just enouh depth here and there to put together a deal. For example, we have Chad Johnson. Anything premium for Chad Johnson? No. But a serviceable W? Why not? Even if more is added. Again, wny not?

7. You consider this massiver overpay, bordering on travesty. Fair enough. Again, I said this is the highest end of the ransom you have to expect to pay to get in and cover projections from other teams also willing to overpay. I expect once the frenzy calms, all bids will competitively flatten out somewhat. To be virtually certain to prevail, this is the highest NYR would have to expect to cough up. A bit less may still get the job done.

If you think he's worth the price.
Fair question, no problem if you disagree with those who say pay it.

I'm inclined to pay something in this ballpark, reserving right to see what the final price would actually be.

Peace out...
You are so far off it's almost unrealistic to believe someone seriously thinks like this.

First off Sather has changed his ways clearly. He is not going to get into a bidding war for Stamkos. He didnt with Brad Richards and he didnt with Kaberle when he was available on the trade block; instead he acquired McCabe.

For the forwards you're just penciling in players based on assumptions; assumptions that are not even correct. In what way is Hagelin as ready as you say? He isn't a guarantee. Just because he was great for Michigan doesnt mean he's ready for the jump to the NHL yet.

Kreider and Thomas are probably 1-2 years away but I don't see them putting up big numbers in their first year. And what about this year? We're not at a stage where we can call it a rebuilding year; we're past that. The past 4-5 years was the buildup to the point we're at. Sather has a plan and he's following it. The farm system has developed, he got the right coach, and he's added the right players in the past couple years to fit the style Torts plays. They're not going to throw in the towel on the 2011-2012 season for one player.

Also you cant automatically move Boyle to wing. For one, a guy is size is better suited to be C and continue to work on his faceoffs. Plus Boyle should play on the 4th line. Unless he can go out this year and prove he can put up 20 goals again, that isnt changing.

I'm not quite sure what the hate is for Wolski. The guy barely had any ice time down the stretch. It's hard for a player to get into a groove if he's getting 8 minutes per game. Give the fricken guy a chance, he has the talent.

I'm sorry but your argument for the defense is PATHETIC. You're absolutely wrong in every way with this. First of all no matter what you try and say, you can't replace Staal. You can't even replace Girardi right now.

Again you make ASSUMPTIONS and throw out names like PASHNIN and PARLETT? Really? C'mon. Pashnin is not ready for the NHL. Yeah it's nice he's very physical but he needs to fine tune the rest of his game. And why the hell does Parlett get a look over Valentenko and Kundratek??? The fact that you dont even mention those names is even more laughable. Either way even if Valentenko and/or Kundratek made the team that is still going to be the weakest and youngest defense in the NHL. Teams will be chomping at the bit to play the rangers with that defense. They will walk all over their inexperienced *****.

This isn't some fantasy/video game scenario. You need to have chemistry, you need to have experience, and you need to have a plan. You just want stamkos because he's a great player. But how does that effect the rest of the organization? I'll tell you it severely handicaps us after all the scouting and transactions that have been made to get to this point and put us on the right path towards an eventual stanley cup. You just ASSUME sather will be able to go out and add somebody if need be. It doesnt work that way. The guys he got were in-season trades. McCabe was a deadline move. We wont be buyers at the deadline when we spent the whole season getting our ***** handed to us because our defense is pathetic.

Sather did not sign brad richards to take 2 steps back for this upcoming season.

And lastly, don't even mention the highest ransom, dont mention any trade proposal. The majority of yours, if not all, have been downright terrible.

Stamkos isn't getting traded. There are no sweepstakes. Lock this thread until he demands a trade or theres a legitimate source saying there are rumors of a trade. Otherwise let any stamkos news appear in the "Around the NHL" thread

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 12:25 PM
  #207
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
You are so far off it's almost unrealistic to believe someone seriously thinks like this.

First off Sather has changed his ways clearly. He is not going to get into a bidding war for Stamkos. He didnt with Brad Richards and he didnt with Kaberle when he was available on the trade block; instead he acquired McCabe.

For the forwards you're just penciling in players based on assumptions; assumptions that are not even correct. In what way is Hagelin as ready as you say? He isn't a guarantee. Just because he was great for Michigan doesnt mean he's ready for the jump to the NHL yet.

Kreider and Thomas are probably 1-2 years away but I don't see them putting up big numbers in their first year. And what about this year? We're not at a stage where we can call it a rebuilding year; we're past that. The past 4-5 years was the buildup to the point we're at. Sather has a plan and he's following it. The farm system has developed, he got the right coach, and he's added the right players in the past couple years to fit the style Torts plays. They're not going to throw in the towel on the 2011-2012 season for one player.

Also you cant automatically move Boyle to wing. For one, a guy is size is better suited to be C and continue to work on his faceoffs. Plus Boyle should play on the 4th line. Unless he can go out this year and prove he can put up 20 goals again, that isnt changing.

I'm not quite sure what the hate is for Wolski. The guy barely had any ice time down the stretch. It's hard for a player to get into a groove if he's getting 8 minutes per game. Give the fricken guy a chance, he has the talent.

I'm sorry but your argument for the defense is PATHETIC. You're absolutely wrong in every way with this. First of all no matter what you try and say, you can't replace Staal. You can't even replace Girardi right now.

Again you make ASSUMPTIONS and throw out names like PASHNIN and PARLETT? Really? C'mon. Pashnin is not ready for the NHL. Yeah it's nice he's very physical but he needs to fine tune the rest of his game. And why the hell does Parlett get a look over Valentenko and Kundratek??? The fact that you dont even mention those names is even more laughable. Either way even if Valentenko and/or Kundratek made the team that is still going to be the weakest and youngest defense in the NHL. Teams will be chomping at the bit to play the rangers with that defense. They will walk all over their inexperienced *****.

This isn't some fantasy/video game scenario. You need to have chemistry, you need to have experience, and you need to have a plan. You just want stamkos because he's a great player. But how does that effect the rest of the organization? I'll tell you it severely handicaps us after all the scouting and transactions that have been made to get to this point and put us on the right path towards an eventual stanley cup. You just ASSUME sather will be able to go out and add somebody if need be. It doesnt work that way. The guys he got were in-season trades. McCabe was a deadline move. We wont be buyers at the deadline when we spent the whole season getting our ***** handed to us because our defense is pathetic.

Sather did not sign brad richards to take 2 steps back for this upcoming season.

And lastly, don't even mention the highest ransom, dont mention any trade proposal. The majority of yours, if not all, have been downright terrible.

Stamkos isn't getting traded. There are no sweepstakes. Lock this thread until he demands a trade or theres a legitimate source saying there are rumors of a trade. Otherwise let any stamkos news appear in the "Around the NHL" thread
We clearly agree to disagree, big time.

I'm too busy to address all this in one shot now, but just to get it started, as to
"First off Sather has changed his ways clearly. He is not going to get into a bidding war for Stamkos. He didnt with Brad Richards and he didnt with Kaberle when he was available on the trade block; instead he acquired McCabe."

I wouldn't assume an uber-elite player like Stamkos gets the same consideration of other possible trade acquisitions. He'll try prudently, as evidenced by Erixon, to get the asset for less if possible, but that type of opportunity rarely knocks. The better the player, the more he is likely to command, all things being equal (no disclaimer "I only want to play in _________").

Slats was smart about Richards. I was never for giving up Anisimov for him, especially when it was clear HE WAS GOING TO BE A UFA. This is not the case w/Stamkos. Either he will consider offer sheets and sign one (not likely, and it was a given we shouldn't to avoid the backlash) or he remains w/TB.

If he remains w/TB, they have to decide if they will swallow the financial package it takes to keep him. I think they do, and worse case scenario say thanks Vinnie LaCav, buh-bye. But for some unforeseen reason, they MAY consider trading him depending upon the contract and other factors. It is clear that in the short term they either make him happy or piss him off, which does not seem smart for long term.

So the point remains IF Lightning decide to remove him only if Stamkos yields a ransom, and the given is the whole league will bid, assuming you want to pay that ransom, how high would that offer be? When the price gets too high, enough clubs may reduce their bids, which may allow Rangers to reduce their bid as well. But again, the focus is how high would you be prepared to go, not what do want to give up.

Kaberle is barely one dimensional, and McCabe was a waste of a third round pick. I wouldn't underscore them as benchmarks for being bold to consider acquiring an all world talent like SS.

more to follow later..

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:01 PM
  #208
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,993
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
more to follow later..
Please don't. Do you even read what other people are writing? Even if you are right that it would take all those players to make Stamkos a Rangers, the point you are repeatedly missing is that that deal would make the Rangers signficantly worse.

You can't gut half your team for 1 player and expect to win. You can't expect rookies to not only make the team, but contribute as well as established players.

Your ideas are so far off I can't even understand how you can believe them, let alone continue to defend them.

But please, show me the lineup you would have after this deal. It should be good for a laugh.

GAGLine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:02 PM
  #209
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
...
For the forwards you're just penciling in players based on assumptions; assumptions that are not even correct. In what way is Hagelin as ready as you say? He isn't a guarantee. Just because he was great for Michigan doesnt mean he's ready for the jump to the NHL yet.

Kreider and Thomas are probably 1-2 years away but I don't see them putting up big numbers in their first year. And what about this year? We're not at a stage where we can call it a rebuilding year; we're past that. The past 4-5 years was the buildup to the point we're at. Sather has a plan and he's following it. The farm system has developed, he got the right coach, and he's added the right players in the past couple years to fit the style Torts plays. They're not going to throw in the towel on the 2011-2012 season for one player. ...
Hagelin deserves a shot. I never guaranteed he would do anything with it, but if he has more opportunity to get more minutes that is a plus, IMO. You talk about love for Wolski. He's not worth the cap space. Wolski is not Alexei Kovalev in his early years and he's got world class talent and trying to make a better chemistry for him with wingers might be worthwhile.
I feel sorry for Borque, who's tried hard and been concussed and probably won't make it as a lightweight. But Hagelin is not such an against the odds, against the grain candidate. Get 20 goals in his first season like Stepan? That might be pushing it. But make a meaningful contribution for meaningful minutes? I say yes, as long as some deadwood like Avery doesn't eat significantly into his minutes.

Kreider has the physical presence to step in with the big boys, although agreed he needs more farming and shouldn't be rushed. He is basically around the corner, though agreed not immediately available.
Thomas is a boom-bust option. If TBL think he's worth grooming as possible heir to St, Louis, and he serves his purpose providing some value towards getting Stamkos, great. If he stays, great. If he goes ok. Kreider is the next Dave Keon barring injury, that's why I excluded him. Thomas is not a sure thing.

I don't consider Stamkos' acquisition sacrificing now for the future. Stamkos is a huge number of goals and scoring presence effective immediately, and continuing, which is more than I can say for the impotent offense we had last year, to which basically all we've really added is Richards, who I kept.

I agree there is some thinness while waiting for Kreider to replace Stepan. Look at it this way. Stamkos alone exceeds loss of Gaborik + Stepan in scoring, plus we have one other player adding whatever against that total. Within 2 years, another other player (now replacing Avery, etc.) will be Kreider.

We're not screwed short term, and we have more firepower long term, because short term adjustments and minor growing pains aside, we got Stamkos.

Again, we're not screwed as to next year.
More to follow...

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:09 PM
  #210
RidinwitdaKING
Registered User
 
RidinwitdaKING's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 263
vCash: 500
why don't you send yourself some PM's so you can feel like this is going to happen.

RidinwitdaKING is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:26 PM
  #211
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
Please don't. Do you even read what other people are writing? Even if you are right that it would take all those players to make Stamkos a Rangers, the point you are repeatedly missing is that that deal would make the Rangers signficantly worse.

You can't gut half your team for 1 player and expect to win. You can't expect rookies to not only make the team, but contribute as well as established players.

Your ideas are so far off I can't even understand how you can believe them, let alone continue to defend them.

But please, show me the lineup you would have after this deal. It should be good for a laugh.
GAG, I give up. I tried to explain it to him be he just keeps coming back with another response to show that hes right when hes not. Everything you just said is what I tried to explain to him in a shortened version. I laid it all out for him and he still does not get it. You cant just throw rookies out there and expect them to not only hold their own but produce as well. In his mind he's just gona throw whatever **** he has at the wall and see what sticks. You don't run a team like that.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:32 PM
  #212
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
Y...
Also you cant automatically move Boyle to wing. For one, a guy is size is better suited to be C and continue to work on his faceoffs. Plus Boyle should play on the 4th line. Unless he can go out this year and prove he can put up 20 goals again, that isnt changing.

I'm not quite sure what the hate is for Wolski. The guy barely had any ice time down the stretch. It's hard for a player to get into a groove if he's getting 8 minutes per game. Give the fricken guy a chance, he has the talent.

I'm sorry but your argument for the defense is PATHETIC. You're absolutely wrong in every way with this. First of all no matter what you try and say, you can't replace Staal. You can't even replace Girardi right now.

Again you make ASSUMPTIONS and throw out names like PASHNIN and PARLETT? Really? C'mon. Pashnin is not ready for the NHL. Yeah it's nice he's very physical but he needs to fine tune the rest of his game. And why the hell does Parlett get a look over Valentenko and Kundratek??? The fact that you dont even mention those names is even more laughable. Either way even if Valentenko and/or Kundratek made the team that is still going to be the weakest and youngest defense in the NHL. Teams will be chomping at the bit to play the rangers with that defense. They will walk all over their inexperienced *****.

This isn't some fantasy/video game scenario. You need to have chemistry, you need to have experience, and you need to have a plan. You just want stamkos because he's a great player. But how does that effect the rest of the organization? I'll tell you it severely handicaps us after all the scouting and transactions that have been made to get to this point and put us on the right path towards an eventual stanley cup. You just ASSUME sather will be able to go out and add somebody if need be. It doesnt work that way. The guys he got were in-season trades. McCabe was a deadline move. We wont be buyers at the deadline when we spent the whole season getting our ***** handed to us because our defense is pathetic.

Sather did not sign brad richards to take 2 steps back for this upcoming season.

And lastly, don't even mention the highest ransom, dont mention any trade proposal. The majority of yours, if not all, have been downright terrible.

Stamkos isn't getting traded. There are no sweepstakes. Lock this thread until he demands a trade or theres a legitimate source saying there are rumors of a trade. Otherwise let any stamkos news appear in the "Around the NHL" thread
Boyle = disagree.
Wolski = addressed
Girardi = disagree, he can be replaced, and more importantly, the increase in offense is worth the risk.
Staal = agree, he can't be replaced, but that might have to be part of the maximum price paid.
Pashnin = disagree, we need PMD, he competes w/MDZ in that regard, should make team as 6th, 7th D. Agree not a lock, but has ability and fills a need. We may disagree as to how much ability. When he gets the chance, then let's talk.
Valentenko = You mentioned him, so I didn't repeat his name. He's a less poised, possibly more physical version of Girardi as shot blocker, and we should use him before we lose him.
Kundratek = he can compete, and if he doesn't cut it then he becomes injury insurance for depth at D or gets traded for another asset we need. No sinister plot in not bringing him up.
Parlett = does not make team now, getting seasoning on the farm, but if this deal went through, could compete for 7th D.

... you just want stamkos because he's a great player. But how does that effect the rest of the organization?...
He's either a prima donna, or not.
If he's not, and IMO I don't think he is, then he makes everybody else he plays with better up to a certain degree because he is so dominant offensively, where we are weakest, that he takes a lot of the pressure off.

Surely, you're not saying Stamkos would not be a plus? Surely, you're just speaking as to the price and if it's a cost worth bearing?
I know, stop calling you Surely.

"... You just ASSUME...".
We are all making what each of us considers an educated guess. No one is certain, but it is reasonable that someone will turn up. It's too much to ask they have the same chemistry as Hadfield Ratelle Gilbert, but two of those three could adequately work with a third if competent or better (Ted Irvine), And occasionally you do get lucky and get a Steve Vickers.

Stamkos is a hot topic, and deserves it's own thread on that basis alone.

Disagree generally with the balance of your other comments.
But thanks for sharing.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:35 PM
  #213
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
GAG, I give up. I tried to explain it to him be he just keeps coming back with another response to show that hes right when hes not. Everything you just said is what I tried to explain to him in a shortened version. I laid it all out for him and he still does not get it. You cant just throw rookies out there and expect them to not only hold their own but produce as well. In his mind he's just gona throw whatever **** he has at the wall and see what sticks. You don't run a team like that.
As said, agree to disagree.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:45 PM
  #214
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,047
vCash: 500
Disagree to agree!

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:52 PM
  #215
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,993
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Pashnin = disagree, we need PMD, he competes w/MDZ in that regard, should make team as 6th, 7th D.
It's stuff like this that shows you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Pashnin is NOT a PMD and will never approach the offensive numbers that MDZ will. He's not even under contract yet and the Rangers haven't decided whether they will offer him one. Yet you are penciling him in to our defense.

I'll say it one more time, really loud so maybe you'll hear it.

YOU CAN'T EXPECT ROOKIES TO MAKE THE TEAM AND PLAY AS WELL AS ESTABLISHED PLAYERS.

GAGLine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:52 PM
  #216
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
...
But please, show me the lineup you would have after this deal. It should be good for a laugh.
The core of your critique is as to the D not being able to step up and fill in what we have now.

Yes, of course, if to fullest conclusion this scenario has Staal out of the picture, that's very big. But admit it, adding Stamkos would be colossal.

Staal notwithstanding you guys with mancrush on Girardi want, IMO to discount our prospects too much.
It's that simple.
I'm not being a homer about it.
Guys like Klassen have not demonstrated they deserve consideration, and I have not suggested same.
But guys like Erixon, V-tank, etc, all moving up one notch appears reasonable.
Use that depth. Use it or lose it. Don't give it away, but let's get some offense for some of it.

Will try to have that lineup for you first chance, possibly tomorrow.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 01:58 PM
  #217
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,047
vCash: 500
Bern, I think your issue is assessing player value accurately and using past history as a precedent... For instance, you proposed a 6 or 7 player trade for Stamkos, that will not happen between the Lightning and any team in the league. When has that ever happened in recent memory?

If TB was looking to trade Stamkos, and cap space and salary were not an issue on TB's end, and other teams were driving up the asking price, you would probably be looking at a package more along the lines of:

Gaborik
Staal
1st
2nd
Kreider OR Thomas (one of our best offensive prospects)

Not implying we would do that, or that I would even do that, but just hypothetically, I think that is fair value.

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 02:05 PM
  #218
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Boyle = disagree.
Wolski = addressed
Girardi = disagree, he can be replaced, and more importantly, the increase in offense is worth the risk.
Staal = agree, he can't be replaced, but that might have to be part of the maximum price paid.
Pashnin = disagree, we need PMD, he competes w/MDZ in that regard, should make team as 6th, 7th D. Agree not a lock, but has ability and fills a need. We may disagree as to how much ability. When he gets the chance, then let's talk.
Valentenko = You mentioned him, so I didn't repeat his name. He's a less poised, possibly more physical version of Girardi as shot blocker, and we should use him before we lose him.
Kundratek = he can compete, and if he doesn't cut it then he becomes injury insurance for depth at D or gets traded for another asset we need. No sinister plot in not bringing him up.
Parlett = does not make team now, getting seasoning on the farm, but if this deal went through, could compete for 7th D.

... you just want stamkos because he's a great player. But how does that effect the rest of the organization?...
He's either a prima donna, or not.
If he's not, and IMO I don't think he is, then he makes everybody else he plays with better up to a certain degree because he is so dominant offensively, where we are weakest, that he takes a lot of the pressure off.

Surely, you're not saying Stamkos would not be a plus? Surely, you're just speaking as to the price and if it's a cost worth bearing?
I know, stop calling you Surely.

"... You just ASSUME...".
We are all making what each of us considers an educated guess. No one is certain, but it is reasonable that someone will turn up. It's too much to ask they have the same chemistry as Hadfield Ratelle Gilbert, but two of those three could adequately work with a third if competent or better (Ted Irvine), And occasionally you do get lucky and get a Steve Vickers.

Stamkos is a hot topic, and deserves it's own thread on that basis alone.

Disagree generally with the balance of your other comments.
But thanks for sharing.
you. are. clueless. You don't know what you are talking about. Pashnin a puck moving defenseman? WTF? Just stop. Stop with your completely wrong analysis.

WTF is there to disagree on with Boyle. He is a C. Not a winger nor should he be. A big body such as his should be playing C. He played center the majority of last season and had 20 goals. He has been a C his whole career. Now we're gona move him to wing? So we can accommodate the awful proposal you put together that decimates the organization? God stop already you sound ridiculous and you dont even realize it.

Parlett as the 7th? That right there is why you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Parlett over Eminger/Vtank/Kundratek. I'm getting dumber reading your posts. The guy has been with the organization for one year, was undrafted and was average. He shouldnt even be mentioned as the 7th for the 2012-2013 season.

Please enlighten all of us who you're replacing Girardi with? The leading shot blocker in the league last season. A stalwart back there. He was great all season for us. You're severely underrating his value just like everyone else.

Wolski wasnt addressed. Dont feed me your BS about the guy. He is a good player with good talent who was not given any ice time down the stretch. Before callahan and others returned from injury he played well with MZA and Stepan. But obviously with your stupid proposal Stepan wouldnt even be here so...

And you still have jack **** to address the hole left by your idiocy that hands TBL Marc Staal. Do you ****ing think? I dont think so because if you had half a brain you'd realize Staal lines up against the Ovechkin's/Crosby's/etc's of the world and he shuts them all down because he is that good. You're giving away a No.12 overall pick when he was drafted who has become our best defender and is STILL so young. He made the all star team this past season because of how GREAT his defense is.

No I dont want stamkos because he will cost too much. We do not need to go that route. We can get other players at the deadline who probably wont be as good as stamkos but will do the job and sure as hell wont cost so much.

This is only a "hot topic" because some idiots have convinced themselves in their little heads that he is either going to get offer sheeted or that he is on the trade block; NEITHER OF WHICH IS TRUE OR HAS HAPPENED.

Lock this thread before the New York Rangers board becomes the laughing stock of HF.

Oh and btw bern, THANKS FOR SHARING STUPIDITY. While you're at it why dont you take the time and show us what your lines would look like so we can get a good laugh on this hot summer day.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 02:17 PM
  #219
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
I apologize to the mods for the frustration but this is by FAR the worst thing i;ve seen on HF in years. You should have to pass a test to propose trades on these boards.


Dan Girardi; 9th in hits, 1st in blocked shots, top 15 in TOI this season.

But yeah he's easily replaceable.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 02:19 PM
  #220
Puckface NYR*
R.I.P. Boogyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
How the **** is Dan Girardi easily replaced. By who, with what, through which means, trade, fa?

Bern i'm so used to your awful proposals that this isn't that surprising, but even for you this is bad.

How in the world do you think our prospects can just move up and play #2 minutes is beyond me.

We have two spots open on D this year. You're acting like the Rangers are stunting our prospects. 2 sophomores will be on our d-core, possibly 3 and for sure 1 rookie.

Unbelievable. Pashinin, gtfo!

Puckface NYR* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 02:20 PM
  #221
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
I apologize to the mods for the frustration but this is by FAR the worst thing i;ve seen on HF in years. You should have to pass a test to propose trades on these boards.


Dan Girardi; 9th in hits, 1st in blocked shots, top 15 in TOI this season.

But yeah he's easily replaceable.
In fairness if you want to trade for Stamkos you don't bat an eye if the other side asks for Girardi as part of the package.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 02:24 PM
  #222
Puckface NYR*
R.I.P. Boogyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
In fairness if you want to trade for Stamkos you don't bat an eye if the other side asks for Girardi as part of the package.
You bat an eye when its Gaborik, Girardi, Staal, etc.

Puckface NYR* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 02:50 PM
  #223
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface NYR View Post
You bat an eye when its Gaborik, Girardi, Staal, etc.
Absolutely...but at the end of the day you still trade any of those guys for Steven Stamkos as well. It really all comes down to who else they want too.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 03:54 PM
  #224
Puckface NYR*
R.I.P. Boogyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
Absolutely...but at the end of the day you still trade any of those guys for Steven Stamkos as well. It really all comes down to who else they want too.
Personally, I don't give those three up in a package for Stamkos.

Point is, it would cost more than that and completely deplete our team of both prospects and valuable NHL'rs.

There is no way we can afford him with how our current team is structured. Would he be a boost, sure. But to trade away our 1st pair for him, along with our best scorer and likely multiple prospects/picks.

Just not worth it.

Additionally, I don't see a trade going down that doesn't include 2 of Anisimov, Stepan, Dubi or Cally.

Puckface NYR* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2011, 06:37 PM
  #225
howztheglass
Registered User
 
howztheglass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Bern, I think your issue is assessing player value accurately and using past history as a precedent... For instance, you proposed a 6 or 7 player trade for Stamkos, that will not happen between the Lightning and any team in the league. When has that ever happened in recent memory? If TB was looking to trade Stamkos, and cap space and salary were not an issue on TB's end, and other teams were driving up the asking price, you would probably be looking at a package more along the lines of:

Gaborik
Staal
1st
2nd
Kreider OR Thomas (one of our best offensive prospects)

Not implying we would do that, or that I would even do that, but just hypothetically, I think that is fair value.
Funny I was just writing a reply in another threand and happened to read your reply--I have the answer to your question--The E.Lindros trade from Quebec to Phil was for 6 players and 2 first round picks.That might be the kind of trade it would take to get Stamkos from Tampa Bay.

Now if Lindros got 6 players(2 first round picks) from Phil in the first trade from Quebec and 3 players from the Ranger's is there any other player that has been traded for more active NHL players in 2 different trades.

howztheglass 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 10:55 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.