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

All Purpose Proposed Trade Thread (11/30 - Rangers kicking tires on Bobby Ryan)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-05-2011, 08:01 AM
  #126
Superstar Carwash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Where are the Rangers finding $7M to pay Suter? The cap is going down in the next CBA. Weber is going to receive his current salary in a long term deal in the near future. Where is that money coming from? The cap is not going to increase from $39M-$64.3M in the next CBA. You make the argument $64.3M is too high right now.

Gary Bettman is not going to open the doors to training camp with the players receiving 57% of the pie. The NBA players will get 50%-52% in their next deal.

The cap was set at $39M and then the system kicked in. The next upper limit could be set in the mid to upper $50M plus range. Brooks has written the current midpoint of $56M would be the upper limit in the first year of the new CBA. Pierre LeBrun has been writing for over 1 year about the cap being lowered.
Iirc, they cut the salaries by a certain percentage (I can't remember how much) when the cap was set. I would be quite suprised if they, for the next CBA, lowered the cap without cutting a percentage of the salaries again.

If Sather wants, he could fine space for $7 million. As I said in an earlier post, we let Wolski, Avery and MZA go, which will free more than $7,5 million, then we get another $2 million from Drury's cap hit going down, and according to capgeek we have another $0.5 million carryover (from whom I cant remember). That's $10 million right there. Add to that, we don't have that many RFA's/UFA's not already mentioned to sign, and especially none that would ask for a massive raise.

I don't see the cap or the upcoming CBA as an issue. If NHL wants to lower it, they will also lower the salaries by a certain percentage so teams won't sit with $10-15 million over the cap.

Superstar Carwash is offline  
Old
11-05-2011, 10:42 AM
  #127
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Valentenko didn't play at Traverse City, only in the big camp. Also, it was later revealed that he had an injury that he hid from the coaching staff in an effort to make the team.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he necessarily would have made the team otherwise (after recovering, he's had 5 games now in CT and they haven't called him up to replace Woywitka or Emenger), but that explains why he looked so much better in last year's camp than this.
Thanks, I stand corrected. My memory was as to preseason, got this detail wrong.

bernmeister is offline  
Old
11-05-2011, 10:46 AM
  #128
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuccarello Awesome View Post
Have to respectfully disagree.

A. Girardi can return more than Pajaarvi
....
For the record, not looking to rush Girardi out the door, or give him away for nothing.

That said,
what better offer is there than Pajaarvi + Edmonton 2nd?

Not saying there isn't one. Just saying it's not a bad offer for now, we could really use Paajarvi + the second is useful. So what are you holding out for...?

bernmeister is offline  
Old
11-05-2011, 12:16 PM
  #129
Superstar Carwash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
For the record, not looking to rush Girardi out the door, or give him away for nothing.

That said,
what better offer is there than Pajaarvi + Edmonton 2nd?

Not saying there isn't one. Just saying it's not a bad offer for now, we could really use Paajarvi + the second is useful. So what are you holding out for...?
Do you really think Edmonton would give up Paajarvi and a 2nd for Girardi? First of all, why would Edmonton give up on Paajarvi after 1 season, and second of all, why would they throw in a 2nd round pick at that?

I understand that you think that Girardi is a valuable player, and I agree, but he's not gonna fetch us Paajarvi for the simple reason that Edmonton value him (and their picks) higher than Girardi, and we wouldn't do it because we value Girardi higher than Paajarvi.

I honestly hope that Sather won't make any "major" trades because we have a great core. What we need to do now is develop our prospects and fill holes in the off-season. We should NOT try to jeopardize what we have by doing stupid trades that may plug a hole but open up another. Actually, the more I think of it, the less sense it makes. Paajarvi would not fill any top 6 role, and we'd trade away our best defenseman right now, with Staal on IR.

No way I'd do this trade, not a chance in hell, and neither would Edmonton.

Superstar Carwash is offline  
Old
11-05-2011, 12:29 PM
  #130
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,554
vCash: 500
Thinking the team wont make a move fora while.............when it comes down to the deadline Zuccarello plus a 2nd rounder is likely the offer to try and land a rental LW for the top line. Maybe a guy like Kundratek as well since they have D depth in the minors

Vitto79 is offline  
Old
11-05-2011, 01:38 PM
  #131
TigerJack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Norway
Posts: 850
vCash: 500
How about Brunnstrom for Zuccarello? Detroit was one of the clubs chasing Zuke before he signed for Rangers.... Brunnstrom, aged 26, LW, $600k.

TigerJack is offline  
Old
11-05-2011, 01:50 PM
  #132
Zuccarello Awesome*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
For the record, not looking to rush Girardi out the door, or give him away for nothing.

That said,
what better offer is there than Pajaarvi + Edmonton 2nd?

Not saying there isn't one. Just saying it's not a bad offer for now, we could really use Paajarvi + the second is useful. So what are you holding out for...?


There are about 15-20 teams that would love to have Girardi at his current cap-hit.

If we're trading our #2 playoff warrior, tough as nails, shot blocking machine, minute-devouring, pucks-to-the-face-ain't-no-thang shutdown defenseman, I'd want more than a completely unproven player with "potential." That is ALL pajaarvi is.

Girardi has a lot more value than that and no, that doesn't mean if they add a second round pick, it's fair. The Rangers aren't going to be making trades where a key returning piece is a draft pick. They are looking to add proven impact players who push us closer to being a contender immediately.

Pajaarvi would be a third liner on our depth chart. We're not trading Girardi for that, regardless of his draft position and projected potential. We're probably not trading Girardi, period. Especially since right now, he's actually our #1 defenseman.

Zuccarello Awesome* is offline  
Old
11-06-2011, 12:10 AM
  #133
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
now might be the time to talk to columbus about Tyutin, or another player that can help us. they're like 2-10... got steam rolled by philthy tonight. game up 5g in first 10m.

they're definetly going to be making moves...

come on Sather.

NikC is offline  
Old
11-06-2011, 12:12 AM
  #134
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,925
vCash: 500
Getting Tyutin could be huge for this team right now, but if they still want Del Zotto i'd have to say no.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline  
Old
11-06-2011, 12:23 AM
  #135
JeffMangum
#meatisbeat
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 56,854
vCash: 500
Tyutin just signed a $4.5M, 6 yr extension.

I'd stay away. Nice 2nd pair guy, but not interested in that commitment.

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline  
Old
11-06-2011, 12:20 PM
  #136
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,514
vCash: 500
I don't want youth for age. This team is not a single player away from winning the Cup. This is typical short-term myopic thinking. Yes, going to the second round instead of the first will make you temporarily feel better, but that high will go away quickly, we will forget what round we lost in and detract from our future Cup runs.

I want to see if we can sign either Parise or Suter over the summer, and how Kreider and Erixon will pan out before we start reading youth for age.

There may be a cheap (in terms of lost assets) or homegrown solutions available. There is no reason top rush things, we are not winning the Cup this year anyway.

Beacon is offline  
Old
11-06-2011, 12:30 PM
  #137
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuccarello Awesome View Post
There are about 15-20 teams that would love to have Girardi at his current cap-hit.

If we're trading our #2 playoff warrior, tough as nails, shot blocking machine, minute-devouring, pucks-to-the-face-ain't-no-thang shutdown defenseman, I'd want more than a completely unproven player with "potential." That is ALL pajaarvi is.

Girardi has a lot more value than that and no, that doesn't mean if they add a second round pick, it's fair. The Rangers aren't going to be making trades where a key returning piece is a draft pick. They are looking to add proven impact players who push us closer to being a contender immediately.

Pajaarvi would be a third liner on our depth chart. We're not trading Girardi for that, regardless of his draft position and projected potential. We're probably not trading Girardi, period. Especially since right now, he's actually our #1 defenseman.
Agree with this with regards to Girardi's value to the Rangers, especially concerning his cap hit. If people think our defense is shaky with Staal out, removing Girardi from the equation would have a similar effect even when Staal is back... Sauer has an extensive injury history too... Definitely not interested in trading one our best defenseman for forward with little NHL experience... Can't deplete the team's defensive depth like that...


Last edited by wolfgaze: 11-06-2011 at 05:22 PM.
wolfgaze is offline  
Old
11-06-2011, 12:43 PM
  #138
ThirdEye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 11,666
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerJack View Post
How about Brunnstrom for Zuccarello? Detroit was one of the clubs chasing Zuke before he signed for Rangers.... Brunnstrom, aged 26, LW, $600k.
That really makes no sense. Zuccarello is younger and much better than Bruunstrom.

ThirdEye is offline  
Old
11-07-2011, 11:29 AM
  #139
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dashiva View Post
Do you really think Edmonton would give up Paajarvi and a 2nd for Girardi? First of all, why would Edmonton give up on Paajarvi after 1 season, and second of all, why would they throw in a 2nd round pick at that?

I understand that you think that Girardi is a valuable player, and I agree, but he's not gonna fetch us Paajarvi for the simple reason that Edmonton value him (and their picks) higher than Girardi, and we wouldn't do it because we value Girardi higher than Paajarvi.

I honestly hope that Sather won't make any "major" trades because we have a great core. What we need to do now is develop our prospects and fill holes in the off-season. We should NOT try to jeopardize what we have by doing stupid trades that may plug a hole but open up another. Actually, the more I think of it, the less sense it makes. Paajarvi would not fill any top 6 role, and we'd trade away our best defenseman right now, with Staal on IR.

No way I'd do this trade, not a chance in hell, and neither would Edmonton.
At one of the Paajarvi threads, I believe the main board, this was a bonafide offer from an EO fan, if memory serves I think it was seconded, as well.

Grant you a few responses is not thunderous acclamation, but it you are the first one saying no to the deal --- and that's from our side.

If there was no bigger picture, I'd agree with you. But the NHL will not blow up after season's end. So if you strategize to the future, I think that's a difference maker.

If we could agree on an alternate D --- and that is what Oilers need --- ok, that's still one body only. But with MDZ etc playing well, I'm inclined to bite the bullet for now and grab a high pick instead of deal someone else and no pick.

bernmeister is offline  
Old
11-07-2011, 11:36 AM
  #140
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuccarello Awesome View Post
There are about 15-20 teams that would love to have Girardi at his current cap-hit.

If we're trading our #2 playoff warrior, tough as nails, shot blocking machine, minute-devouring, pucks-to-the-face-ain't-no-thang shutdown defenseman, I'd want more than a completely unproven player with "potential." That is ALL pajaarvi is.

Girardi has a lot more value than that and no, that doesn't mean if they add a second round pick, it's fair. The Rangers aren't going to be making trades where a key returning piece is a draft pick. They are looking to add proven impact players who push us closer to being a contender immediately.

Pajaarvi would be a third liner on our depth chart. We're not trading Girardi for that, regardless of his draft position and projected potential. We're probably not trading Girardi, period. Especially since right now, he's actually our #1 defenseman.
Bold: the fact is, we are not in the driver's seat to dictate these terms.
We need to take 5 steps back to get 8 steps ahead.
In the long run, we're better off taking the pick and the prospect.

Underline:
because of his speed and size and workhorse checking, Pajaarvi would be immediately dispatched with our top line as mates to Richards + Gaborik.

If we upgrade there again, some way, some how, we can add speedsters like Hagelin ASAP and Kreider (next year) and again a speed-across the board line has added benefit.

I AGREE with YOU.
There is a risk he may not develop a substantive offensive game.
But I think he has the tools to do it.

bernmeister is offline  
Old
11-07-2011, 11:42 AM
  #141
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Agree with this with regards to Girardi's value to the Rangers, especially concerning his cap hit. If people think our defense is shaky with Staal out, removing Girardi from the equation would have a similar effect even when Staal is back... Sauer has an extensive injury history too... Definitely not interested in trading one our best defenseman for forward with little NHL experience... Can't deplete the team's defensive depth like that...
Respectfully disagree.
We must trade some defense to address pitiful offense, or continue to suffer against teams that can press the offense upon us (see Edmonton game).

I'm entirely open to other Girardi trade suggestions, and other trade scenarios although I expect a D based suggestion will ultimately be necessary, with Vtank + others stepping in our bottom pairing, and everybody else moving up one.

bernmeister is offline  
Old
11-07-2011, 12:02 PM
  #142
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
I'm entirely open to other Girardi trade suggestions
How about the suggestion that we not trade him? You include him in every one of your awful trade proposals. You clearly can't see how important he is to this team.

We aren't trading for futures. The window is now. Hank, Gabby and Richards aren't going to be good forever. We need to strike while the iron is hot. Trading our best dman (with Staal out) for "potential" would be beyond stupid at this point. We aren't going to make trades in the hopes that we'll be better 3 years from now. We will make trades that make us better NOW.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
11-07-2011, 03:27 PM
  #143
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
How about the suggestion that we not trade him? You include him in every one of your awful trade proposals. You clearly can't see how important he is to this team.

We aren't trading for futures. The window is now. Hank, Gabby and Richards aren't going to be good forever. We need to strike while the iron is hot. Trading our best dman (with Staal out) for "potential" would be beyond stupid at this point. We aren't going to make trades in the hopes that we'll be better 3 years from now. We will make trades that make us better NOW.
We should be careful with best chance to win in 2 years.
We are good, but arguably, are we good enough to win it all now?
We are basically an entire Richards better than the team that got chewed up by the Caps, less Staal, which we are hoping is a temporary aberration.

We have limitations on what we can do to make us THAT MUCH better NOW.
You have to give to get, and any moves are mostly Coke for Pepsi, and we can't give up too much worthwhile at F and expect any kind of significant return.

Poising to play well this year, but set up with more assets for next year and the following ... that's the ticket.

bernmeister is offline  
Old
11-08-2011, 06:00 PM
  #144
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,817
vCash: 500
Rick Nash

Columbus is tanking, I firmly believe that to be a cup contender we need another top winger, and It's not too inconceivable that since it doesn't seem like they'll be in contention any time soon, they may want to unload their most expensive piece while rebuilding.

Nash is 27, his best years yet to come. I think he'd be a perfect fit on this team, talent, grit, fits the mold and identity of this team.

It would definitely be a steep price but I believe it would be worth what we are giving away.

Dubinsky/Kreider, Erixon, Zuccarello and a draft pick or just a few draft picks (1st and 2nd)?

I'm all for keeping the youth on this team, but what we do have is a surplus of young defenders. I'm very excited to see Erixon develop, he could be something very special, but we gave up next to nothing for him, and to get something good we need to give something good.

Kreider is lighting it up here at BC right now, but it's collegiate hockey. It's hard to gage how good he'll actually become. His speed and skill are undeniable but he has a ways to go. Again, another piece which would hurt to lose but I would think is worth losing for a player of Nash's caliber. Although Dubinsky is more likely to go because he's not only more expendable but has a higher cap hit.

Draft picks to offer them more for rebuilding.

We're looking at:

Nash-Richards-Callahan
Stepan-Anisimov-Gaborik
Fedetenko-Boyle-Prust
Avery-Christensen/Bourque-Rupp/Hagelin

Staal (fingers crossed)-Girardi
Sauer-McD
Stralman/Eminger/Woywitcka-Del Z

Hank
Biron

I think we have more dynamic scoring lines. If we keep Zuccarello we could potentially him and Wolski in the mix as well. Soon, McIlrath will also be ready to step in.

Nash is a cornerstone player. Either way, I think we need to address that legitimate top 3 winger position to be legitimate perennial contenders. I know we have Gabby, but while right now he's lighting it up, it doesn't mean he won't get injured or become inconsistent again. If Nash becomes available I think it'd be worth it to go after him, or hope that Parise hits the open market this offseason and go after him.

Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Old
11-08-2011, 06:04 PM
  #145
Bird Law
Daisy's back.
 
Bird Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Country Roads
Country: United States
Posts: 73,463
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Bird Law
Big pass on Nash at 8M.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
"Used to be only Twinkies and cockroaches could survive a nuke. I'd add Habs to that. I'm convinced the CH stands for Club du Hypocrisy." - Gee Wally
Bird Law is offline  
Old
11-08-2011, 06:06 PM
  #146
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
Big pass on Nash at 8M.
true. didn't realize his cap hit was that massive, but we still need to address that need.

Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Old
11-08-2011, 06:08 PM
  #147
DrSutton*
Given Up
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,093
vCash: 500
Howson came out recently and said teams have called about Nash, and that he hasn't asked to be traded and won't be traded.

Enough with the Nash proposals, it's not happening.

DrSutton* is offline  
Old
11-08-2011, 06:10 PM
  #148
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,758
vCash: 500
Guy has a full NMC... and seriously, how do you make a trade proposal without researching a guy's contract in this day and age?

I love Rick Nash, but I don't think he's necessary on this team.

Tawnos is offline  
Old
11-08-2011, 06:13 PM
  #149
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,592
vCash: 500
I wonder how much a player like Kulemin would be if the Leafs are out of it.

NYR Viper is offline  
Old
11-08-2011, 06:17 PM
  #150
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Guy has a full NMC... and seriously, how do you make a trade proposal without researching a guy's contract in this day and age?

I love Rick Nash, but I don't think he's necessary on this team.
So you're rick nash, you play in Ohio, on a team which has 5 points, and you pass up the opportunity to go to a up and coming championship contender (for a decently long time hopefully), in the biggest market America has to offer... Not happening.

I didn't research his cap because i'm not a GM and it's just an idea which floated around my head. I knew it was large, I was thinking around 6.5-7.

As for what their GM said will or will not happen. It's an industry. Everyone is expendable. If it is for the better of the franchise, if it will help them become better and thus become more marketable and profitable, then they will do it. Nothing is set in stone. Therefore, these rumors will continue to come out. Nash plays for a small market terrible team. What usually happens when stars land in small markets and their team consistently bombs? Soon enough, they leave, and go to larger markets. If the team was good and successful, then that is a different story... but let's be real, the Blue Jackets don't have any cup contention hopes in the next 5 years. By then Nash will have passed his prime.

Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Closed Thread

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 08:23 PM.

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.