If he plays center on our second line he should be able to pass to someone who can score and Melnyk here wants to move Prucha who is one of the only finishers on the team.
Real good idea.
We don't even have a RW to pair him with at this time.
And Melnyk, Prucha got hurt on a freak play, not because he's a weakling like you and everyone else thinks. The kid plays bigger than half the guys on our team.
I'm fully confident that Dawes will be a superior player to Mark Bell.
Immonen and Pock not likely. If that is what it took I'm okay with it, but including Dawes or trading Prucha straight up is one of the dumbest things I've heard all day.
Typical infantile HF BS..Who said Prucha was a weakiling and who said anything about how he got hurt? I really liike Prucha and I LOVE his style but I do have concerns that his small frame can handle his style of play in the long run...
ALl that being said, I like what Mark Bell could and can bring to this team even better when every thing is taken into consideration...Hey, you feel more comfortable with Prucha and three unknowns that have done nothing to covince me they will be successes in the nHL, that's fine by me..I cab see where you're coming fromUnlike others, I try not to stoop to sophmoric levels and call people's opinions or ideas dumb...But hey, you come to expect that around here since EVERYBODY;s opinion is right
Typical infantile HF BS..Who said Prucha was a weakiling and who said anything about how he got hurt? I really liike Prucha and I LOVE his style but I do have concerns that his small frame can handle his style of play in the long run...
ALl that being said, I like what Mark Bell could and can bring to this team even better when every thing is taken into consideration...Hey, you feel more comfortable with Prucha and three unknowns that have done nothing to covince me they will be successes in the nHL, that's fine by me..I cab see where you're coming fromUnlike others, I try not to stoop to sophmoric levels and call people's opinions or ideas dumb...But hey, you come to expect that around here since EVERYBODY;s opinion is right
I'm with you on this one, LM. Mark Bell should have been a Ranger. He was there for us at #7 in 1998. Blueshirt Bulletin expected us to take him. Hopefully, Maloney is ready to pounce once his arbitration case is settled. One quibble, though. I'm pretty sure he plays LW.
Might as well chime in with my 2 cents. I like Bell & I like what he brings. He is the kind of player that if you have him playing with better players he will play better. He is not going to make the players playing with him better.
Having said that I would not make a deal if it included Prucha or Dawes. Immonen, yes. Throw in a D. Moore, yes. Sub a Pock for D. Moore or Chicago comes back with a 4th round pick for all 3 and we have a deal. Those clowns throwing around a straight for Havlat or Gomez are far over stating Bell's value.
Don't get me wrong, he's a nice player and as others have said would do well in a structured system like Renney's. The object here is to do a proper analysis of your own prospects and trade to trade the ones who have a higher external value then you hold for them.
We have been down the road of trading a young scorer far too often. I think it is wiser at this point in time to stick with a Prucha and maybe over estimate his potential then it is to make the same old mistake again. The trend must be broken.
Sather is a wise trader. If a player like Bell is available I am sure that he will not over pay. If someone is truly offering a Gomez Chicago would be wise to jump on it.
If that is the price tag, pass and move on. Another player of similar statute will come on the market eventually for nothing but MSG $s.
I've seen Bell play, and I've liked what I've seen, but I'm not sure if I'm willing to give up Immonen for him. Dawes definitely not.
Since another poster mentioned that Bell filed for arbitration, and we all know just how cheap Bill Wirtz is, that means he'll be out of there soon enough, and that should lower his trade value, being that Chicago wouldn't have the bargaining power in a deal.
Might as well chime in with my 2 cents. I like Bell & I like what he brings. He is the kind of player that if you have him playing with better players he will play better. He is not going to make the players playing with him better.
Having said that I would not make a deal if it included Prucha or Dawes. Immonen, yes. Throw in a D. Moore, yes. Sub a Pock for D. Moore or Chicago comes back with a 4th round pick for all 3 and we have a deal. Those clowns throwing around a straight for Havlat or Gomez are far over stating Bell's value.
Don't get me wrong, he's a nice player and as others have said would do well in a structured system like Renney's. The object here is to do a proper analysis of your own prospects and trade to trade the ones who have a higher external value then you hold for them.
We have been down the road of trading a young scorer far too often. I think it is wiser at this point in time to stick with a Prucha and maybe over estimate his potential then it is to make the same old mistake again. The trend must be broken.
Sather is a wise trader. If a player like Bell is available I am sure that he will not over pay. If someone is truly offering a Gomez Chicago would be wise to jump on it.
If that is the price tag, pass and move on. Another player of similar statute will come on the market eventually for nothing but MSG $s.
Good post. I'm so tired of trading away potential for what we perceive to be someone else's better assets.
Mark Bell has had 5 years in the NHL to develop up to 25 G, 23 A, -14 +/- and 107 PIM in 82 GP.
Petr Prucha, in his first year racked up 30 G, 17 A, +3 +/-, and 32 PIM in 68 GP and as has been well documented on these boards, he didn't look like the same player when he came back from the injury. And he's 2 years younger.
Don't get me wrong, I like Bell and I like his game and would like him on the Rangers. But I don't want to give up Prucha to get him.
Typical infantile HF BS..Who said Prucha was a weakiling and who said anything about how he got hurt? I really liike Prucha and I LOVE his style but I do have concerns that his small frame can handle his style of play in the long run...
ALl that being said, I like what Mark Bell could and can bring to this team even better when every thing is taken into consideration...Hey, you feel more comfortable with Prucha and three unknowns that have done nothing to covince me they will be successes in the nHL, that's fine by me..I cab see where you're coming fromUnlike others, I try not to stoop to sophmoric levels and call people's opinions or ideas dumb...But hey, you come to expect that around here since EVERYBODY;s opinion is right
You've been here and long time and I know you're a diehard but you take things way too seriously.
I did not call your idea dumb (you assumed that yourself). I said it makes no sense to trade Prucha or Dawes because centers need finishers and that's what these guys will do. In fact who scored the most goals outside of Jagr. That'd be Petr Prucha.
I assumed what you meant was that Prucha could not withstand the rigors of the NHL because he was weak & frail which is baloney because he HAS ALREADY. His injury was due to being caught awkwardly and that could happen to anyone..
I also said I would take Bell on this team but not at the cost you think it would take.
Thanks for calling me infantile by the way. I appreciate your kindness.
If Mark Bell is on the block the Rangers should look into it. You know we have a prospect that is from Chicago that could probably get the deal done. I'm not saying I would include Montoya but If there are discussions between the teams I'm sure his name will come up...
I think Immonen and a 2nd is enough but I'm not the biggest Bell fan. Don't get me wrong I think Bell is a good player but before we trade Immmonen I would really like to see what he can do day in and day out for the Rangers. When he came up he looked like he had good postion and was decent on faceoffs.
The guy I would think about moving for Bell is Tyutin. I know some might think because I was a bit rough on Tyutin after the season that I might be quick to deal him...Please don't misread me at all I just think Tyutin might be a bit overated. Overrated defenseman have more value than overrated forwards. Perhaps Tyutin for Bell is enough for Chicago to bite..
He's big yes, but he can also score, fight and would be ideal for going to the net with a guy like Jagr.
If he were only 6'0 and played that type of game I'd want him, the fact that he's 6'4, 215 pounds only serves as a VERY nice bonus.
And he's also a LW not just a third line center. Third line centers don't score 25 goals two years in a row on one of the worst team's in hockey.
Quote:
If he plays center on our second line he should be able to pass to someone who can score and Melnyk here wants to move Prucha who is one of the only finishers on the team.
Real good idea.
We don't even have a RW to pair him with at this time.
Personally I'm not necessarily inclinded to move Prucha, but I do consider Dawes and Immonen. At some point you have to give to get and Bell is a fair combination.
Quote:
Immonen and Pock not likely. If that is what it took I'm okay with it, but including Dawes or trading Prucha straight up is one of the dumbest things I've heard
Not for anything but does everyone somehow just expect that teams are going to give us good players for nothing?
Is Mark Bell a world beater? No, but he's a good YOUNG player who fits the Rangers need. Bell is also interesting in that his top end as he enters his prime and plays for a good team could equal a VERY nice return.
He's big yes, but he can also score, fight and would be ideal for going to the net with a guy like Jagr.
If he were only 6'0 and played that type of game I'd want him, the fact that he's 6'4, 215 pounds only serves as a VERY nice bonus.
And he's also a LW not just a third line center. Third line centers don't score 25 goals two years in a row on one of the worst team's in hockey.
Personally I'm not necessarily inclinded to move Prucha, but I do consider Dawes and Immonen. At some point you have to give to get and Bell is a fair combination.
Not for anything but does everyone somehow just expect that teams are going to give us good players for nothing?
Is Mark Bell a world beater? No, but he's a good YOUNG player who fits the Rangers need. Bell is also interesting in that his top end as he enters his prime and plays for a good team could equal a VERY nice return.
Thank you for the sanity you bring to discussions like these.
Thank you for the sanity you bring to discussions like these.
At the end of the day, any deal will come down to the players involved.
But I try to ask a few questions when it comes to Bell, and that's where my POV is from. I usually come up with the following views.
A. We don't have a player like Mark Bell and like a lot of people, we could really use one.
B. Players like Bell are pretty rare. Honestly, how many guys with his size, at his age are in the NHL right now? Not too many.
C. For all the talk that he "only" score 25 goals, that would've been good enough for third on the Rangers this year. That's also not considering that his numbers would likely have been higher playing on a better/more offensive team. It wouldn't be unfair to say he easily would've score 30 or even 35 goals on the Rangers last season.
D. He's entering that age where there could be something really special waiting. At 26 he's starting to enter that 4-5 year period where Power forwards really hit their stride. If his offense never hits a higher level, he could net 30 on a good team. If it does, you might have something really valuable.
E. Bell has always been a work in progress. This was a kid who going to develop over the long haul and he has. He's gotten better every season and he's done it on some pretty weak Chicago teams.
At the end of the day, his age and his production on bad teams is going to cost a team who wants him, assuming Chicago is even crazy enough to move him. You want a player like that, it's going to cost you. People are funny with trades. They'll say something like "Immonen and a second is fair" but we have to ask ourselves if Hugh Jessiman became a 25 goal, 50 point player at the age of 26 would we want to trade him for a 24 year old minor league center who looks good but not GREAT and a pick that is likely to be in the 50-60 range?
Probably not. So if we're not willing to make that trade, then you can't expect another team to.
another Bell fan here too. Immonen, Pock and another mid level prospect and/or pick sounds good.
Why would Chicago want that?
Two 24 year olds. One of which might be a second line center, the other one was just ranked as the 17th best prospect in the system and hasn't been able to crack the lineup. (The reasons have been debated to death, everyone knows some of the feelings on that one).
And a mid level prospect/low pick.
If I'm Chicago why do I make that deal?
Maybe Immonen is as good of an offensive player as Bell, maybe even a little more but the numbers won't be much different because he's got no wingers yet. So I'm gaining little offense (assuming he even makes it) and losing size and physical play.
I'm getting a 24 year-old defenseman with a lot of question marks and some throw in's with the other prospect/pick.
I'm getting a whole lot of question marks and fluff for a player who at the very least has already made it and a proven scorer at the NHL level. Which says nothing of how good he might still be as he enters his prime.
If I'm going to trade safety for ?'s I think I better be getting a better return than that.
In that whole deal Immonen is the only one who stand good odds of being something right now. And I have to ask which is harder to find? A european, second line playmaking center or a 6'4, 25 goal scoring power forward?
I never said I would be against Bell being a Ranger. I would not take him in any deal involving Dawes or Prucha.
If Prucha were to leave we'd have to replace a LW/RW and 30 goals. Bell isn't going to score without linemates.
Dawes is just a prospect at the moment yes, but I feel (and perhaps management does as well) that he will become a very good player for us shortly.
Immonen is simply a center similiar to Bell without the NHL experience and grit. Do I move him in a deal for Bell. Absolutely. Do I add another prospect and a pick? Probably.
I never said I would be against Bell being a Ranger. I would not take him in any deal involving Dawes or Prucha.
If Prucha were to leave we'd have to replace a LW/RW and 30 goals. Bell isn't going to score without linemates.
Dawes is just a prospect at the moment yes, but I feel (and perhaps management does as well) that he will become a very good player for us shortly.
Immonen is simply a center similiar to Bell without the NHL experience and grit. Do I move him in a deal for Bell. Absolutely. Do I add another prospect and a pick? Probably.
Prucha i wouldnt move, Dawes I probably would.
Once again you've got to give up to get and if we're afraid to move anyone than we might as well back it in now.
If Bell were older, no I don't make the move but getting a 26 year-old power forward who can score at the NHL is going to cost you. If it means trading an undersized scoring winger than fine. I'll still have Prucha, who like Bell has already scored at the NHL level.
I also don't think Bell plays center in NY. I think he plays LW which he has done A LOT of in Chicago. Him being at center is more a reflection of the team's struggles than maximizing Bell's ability which would happen in NY.
Once again you've got to give up to get and if we're afraid to move anyone than we might as well back it in now.
If Bell were older, no I don't make the move but getting a 26 year-old power forward who can score at the NHL is going to cost you. If it means trading an undersized scoring winger than fine. I'll still have Prucha, who like Bell has already scored at the NHL level.
If Bell is dealt, it's most likely for a goal scoring top six forward.
Tallon has been frustrated with Bell's inconsistency and some of that can be contributed to lack of offensive support and constant shuffling among linemates.
The only reason Gomez and Havlat have been linked to Bell in trade "suggestions" is that Havlat would only be a one year rental (and would leave the team once he hits UFA-no way he'd stay) and the cap is putting pressure on NJ and Gomez is a popular name still left unsigned. Without these conditions existing, Bell's value wouldn't be near high enough to get these guys.
So if Chicago deals Bell, I doubt they'd be looking at a Dawes, Pock, or Immonen. Not that they aren't good players, but they don't fit Chicago's needs.
Prucha would be more like it because he appears to be that goal-scorer the Hawks need. I don't know if that's fair from NY's standpoint because I don't pretend to know their needs, but that's what I believe Chicago would be looking to get back.
If Bell is dealt, it's most likely for a goal scoring top six forward.
Tallon has been frustrated with Bell's inconsistency and some of that can be contributed to lack of offensive support and constant shuffling among linemates.
The only reason Gomez and Havlat have been linked to Bell in trade "suggestions" is that Havlat would only be a one year rental (and would leave the team once he hits UFA-no way he'd stay) and the cap is putting pressure on NJ and Gomez is a popular name still left unsigned. Without these conditions existing, Bell's value wouldn't be near high enough to get these guys.
So if Chicago deals Bell, I doubt they'd be looking at a Dawes, Pock, or Immonen. Not that they aren't good players, but they don't fit Chicago's needs.
Prucha would be more like it because he appears to be that goal-scorer the Hawks need. I don't know if that's fair from NY's standpoint because I don't pretend to know their needs, but that's what I believe Chicago would be looking to get back.
We had our chance to get Bell at 98 draft, oh wait we could have selected Bell but with number 7 we selected Malhotra, Bell went to Hawks at number 8
At the end of the day, any deal will come down to the players involved.
But I try to ask a few questions when it comes to Bell, and that's where my POV is from. I usually come up with the following views.
A. We don't have a player like Mark Bell and like a lot of people, we could really use one.
B. Players like Bell are pretty rare. Honestly, how many guys with his size, at his age are in the NHL right now? Not too many.
C. For all the talk that he "only" score 25 goals, that would've been good enough for third on the Rangers this year. That's also not considering that his numbers would likely have been higher playing on a better/more offensive team. It wouldn't be unfair to say he easily would've score 30 or even 35 goals on the Rangers last season.
D. He's entering that age where there could be something really special waiting. At 26 he's starting to enter that 4-5 year period where Power forwards really hit their stride. If his offense never hits a higher level, he could net 30 on a good team. If it does, you might have something really valuable.
E. Bell has always been a work in progress. This was a kid who going to develop over the long haul and he has. He's gotten better every season and he's done it on some pretty weak Chicago teams.
At the end of the day, his age and his production on bad teams is going to cost a team who wants him, assuming Chicago is even crazy enough to move him. You want a player like that, it's going to cost you. People are funny with trades. They'll say something like "Immonen and a second is fair" but we have to ask ourselves if Hugh Jessiman became a 25 goal, 50 point player at the age of 26 would we want to trade him for a 24 year old minor league center who looks good but not GREAT and a pick that is likely to be in the 50-60 range?
Probably not. So if we're not willing to make that trade, then you can't expect another team to.
Isn't he a UFA next year? If so I would think most teams would not offer fair value unless there was a side agreement to allow the acquiring team a window of opportunity to sign him to a long term deal. You do make some very good points in your argument for obtaining him. I would be interested in hearing what you would consider a fair offer for him from our point of view.
In addition, I was intrigued by your comment that he was a work in progress. Is there a similar type player in our organization right now? Personally I think a lot of players are being forced fed at the NHL level and have to round out their game while playing in the NHL. That sometimes has a negative impact on the players development. It can retard if not compeletly set back the player. I think we, as an organization are being smart in not rushing people.
