HFBoards

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

Trade Rumor Thread IV - "What's all the roar over RoR?"

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-21-2013, 03:30 PM
  #426
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,594
vCash: 500
DZ has value. Goligoski went for Neal and Niskanen. Schenn went for JVR. DZ is better than both of those 2 defensemen.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 03:38 PM
  #427
JeffMangum
Ra shi da
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 55,177
vCash: 300
"ROR will never have Stepan's offense"

Umm...55 points to 51 last year, on a much worse team, playing with a lesser offensive winger than Stepan, who played with Gaborik for a large part of the year.

B-b-b-********.

JeffMangum is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 03:42 PM
  #428
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
The issue is the overwhelming lack of seeing things from beyond the simplistic: guy 'x' puts up 'x' amount of points, guy 'x' is not expendable...

This isn't an argument of stats. And if the trade happens, it won't be because of points.

There are a multitude of factors at play. Why the majority refuse to acknowledge them all, is dumbfounding.

Del Zotto is our only 'point producing' defenseman. It's not a fact, however, as Girardi and Staal both put up over 30 points themselves. But here's the difference: they did it while shutting down oppositions' top offensive players.

Del Zotto will always be behind the triplet of McDonagh, Staal, and Girardi as long as the four of them are in New York.

Del Zotto himself hasn't contributed to an improved Power Play. He hasn't contributed to an improved transition game, you know, when the team is pinned in it's own zone or when they are breaking out and fail to get through the neutral zone consistently, that's a failed transition. Transition from being on the defensive side of the puck to an attack, quickly.

He lacks the foot speed to carry the puck himself, through the neutral zone.

He has very good hands, and good vision, but his draw backs, and brain farts are preventing him from taking the next step.

Del Zotto will get paid big on his next deal. 5+ million per. For a guy who will be trapped behind McDonagh, Staal, and Girardi. That makes him a #4. You do not pay a #4 that kind of money...while also lacking depth down the middle.

This is where this trade starts to make sense...

Richards is 32 right now. After the 13-14 season, he will be 34. 34 years old with 6 years remaining on his contract, at 6.6 million per.

The cap ceiling is dropping to 64.

There is only one more compliance buy out available for the Rangers.

This spells a possible and maybe even probable Richards compliance buy out after 13-14.

Ironically when Del Zotto will be up for his new 5+ million per contract.

O'Reilly will make around that.

Rangers need to address the center depth. O'Reilly does that long-term.

Maximizing value, Del Zotto, a luxury, for a future need.

"Tyson Barrie can't come in and fill 'Del Zotto's shoes'" as if Del Zotto made huge shoes to fill to begin with. Tyson Barrie is equally as skilled and is a more efficient skater. Simply because he hasn't had the opportunity yet at the NHL level, and Del Zotto has, doesn't make it any less true. Barrie is one year younger, and is ridiculously cheaper. And is cost-controlled for a couple of years.

The Rangers have been building organizational depth on the blue line for a reason.

"Prospects are garbage because they're unknown commodities". If you feel that way, it's your prerogative. It's not how things work. In a capped league, especially. Sacrificing current roster players and filling from within, making shrewd trades, and moving forward is exactly how successful team's operate.

This would be a shrewd trade.

Netting a future #1-#2 center, while also netting a future PP QB and point getter from the blue line, for a defenseman that will cash in very soon.

This isn't "oh Del Zotto isn't expendable". There are more factors at play, that have to be looked at. Ignoring those factors 'just because' isn't how things work.

I'm all for keeping Del Zotto, if it's possible. He is a talented player. And he seems to be maturing a little at a time.

But to fill needs, you need to make sacrifices and tough decisions.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 03:51 PM
  #429
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
"ROR will never have Stepan's offense"

Umm...55 points to 51 last year, on a much worse team, playing with a lesser offensive winger than Stepan, who played with Gaborik for a large part of the year.

B-b-b-********.
I see. Are these posts supposed to be the "refutations" of my points that were brought up earlier?

Until last year, Ryan Callahan never outscored Brandon Dubinsky. Was Dubinsky the better offensive player?

Again, watch the games, kid. O'Reilly's boost in points came from having Landeskog on his wing. So many of his "assists" to Landeskog were nothing plays. The scouting report on RO'R from day one was that he didn't have a big league offense and that he had very little nose for the goal. Stepan is the better offensive player, and he always has been (RO'R is superior to Step defensively, but as I said--the primarily defensive player goes to the third line).

Two players--same age:

O'Reilly--236 games played, 39 goals, 107 points.
Stepan--179 games played, 41 goals, 104 points.

But I'm sure those 4 Landeskog fueled points last year tip it in his favor.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 03:51 PM
  #430
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,903
vCash: 50
I still haven't seen any evidence to convince me that ROR fills a greater team need than Del Zotto does.

A value argument is fine, a next contract argument is fine, but it isn't going to make me want to trade a 2nd pairing defensemen for a 3rd top 6 center, unless I have some evidence that we were going to deal Richards now, and not simply buy him out in 18 months.

Fitzy is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 03:54 PM
  #431
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antithesis View Post
I still haven't seen any evidence to convince me that ROR fills a greater team need than Del Zotto does.

A value argument is fine, a next contract argument is fine, but it isn't going to make me want to trade a 2nd pairing defensemen for a 3rd top 6 center, unless I have some evidence that we were going to deal Richards now, and not simply buy him out in 18 months.
I haven't seen any consistent evidence that Del Zotto fills the need that you think he fills.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:00 PM
  #432
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,903
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I haven't seen any consistent evidence that Del Zotto fills the need that you think he fills.
2012-2013 TOI/game

Girardi- 24:40
McDonagh 24:31
Staal 24:02
Del Zotto 22:30
Stralman 16:08
Gilroy 9:09

2011-2012 TOI/Game

Girardi- 26:14
McDonagh- 24:44
Del Zotto 22:26
Staal- 19:53
Stralman- 17:05
Eminger 13:16

Take away Stralman's Girardi hurt minutes this year, and it is closer to 13 a game. Now, compare that with the normal number of minutes we give our third line center, and I think its a strong counter argument.

I was the one who brought up the question of whether people would trade MDZ for ROR before it was even initially rumored. There was a generally negative response. This has changed, for some reason.

Fitzy is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:04 PM
  #433
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 17,218
vCash: 500
Can someone answer something? Does this Tyson Barrie stuff have any basis in any rumors or is it just part of the imagination of fans? I still don't understand why a team needing D-men will trade a young and promising D-man ALONG with ROR.

SnowblindNYR is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:07 PM
  #434
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,750
vCash: 500
Im loving the contradictory statements about how people cant see what Del Zotto brings to the Rangers, while saying - sometimes in the next sentence - that he will garner $5M+ in his next deal. Must be doing something right, I guess. The only thing better is completely glossing over the issue, by saying that a kid with 18 games of NHL experience can and will be MDZ's replacement. Somebody who may not even be available on COL's end, by the way. These are simply leaps of faith, and not the proper foundation to get a deal done.

Im not even mentioning what, in my mind, is the biggest red flag. The fact that O'Reilly is acting like a spoiled brat and holding out.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:09 PM
  #435
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post

Del Zotto is our only 'point producing' defenseman. It's not a fact, however, as Girardi and Staal both put up over 30 points themselves. But here's the difference: they did it while shutting down oppositions' top offensive players.

Del Zotto will always be behind the triplet of McDonagh, Staal, and Girardi as long as the four of them are in New York.
You just lost credibility. Girardi has put up over 30 points exactly once (31 point season). Staal has never done it. Yes, they are better shut-down guys than MDZ. MDZ is a much better PMD than either of them. I say again--Del Zotto is much better at 22 than either Staal or Girardi were at the same age, and he's not THAT far behind them right now (the only difference is the consistency of his defensive game, which has been improving steadily for more than a year).


Quote:
Del Zotto will get paid big on his next deal. 5+ million per. For a guy who will be trapped behind McDonagh, Staal, and Girardi. That makes him a #4. You do not pay a #4 that kind of money...while also lacking depth down the middle.
I cut out the stuff where you nit-pick certain parts of Del Zotto's game. If we're going to move guys for having "brain farts" and not single-handedly improving the power play, we're going to have a team with a goalie and no skaters.

You are also making huge assumptions about his "next deal." Everyone thought Del Zotto was going to get 4+ million on his current deal. Remind me again how that panned out? In two years, Del Zotto may very well have made Staal or Girardi expendable.


Quote:
This is where this trade starts to make sense...
I literally cut everything after this, as it's the product of a skewed look at the entire scenario. You contradict yourself with each point. Barrie is better than Del Zotto because he's cheaper, yet we need to bring O'Reilly in even though he'd be more expensive. Barrie needs to replace Del Zotto because he's a better skater and skating is important, but we need to get O'Reilly even though poor skating has always been one of his biggest flaws.

Again, you do what all the pro trade folks have done--in your world, everybody we get is going to maximize their potential (or maximize potential they never had--please, stop calling O'Reilly a potential #1 C unless you can back that ceiling up with any legitimate scouting report not written by an Avs fangirl). In your world, this trade addresses a problem you THINK we're going to have in two years even though it creates a problem right now.

This isn't a "shrewd trade." It's SNT (shiny new toy) syndrome. Take a minute and seriously think about this--if you can't justify a trade without twisting the scenario to present the incoming players in the best possible light and the outgoing player in the worst case scenario (despite ALL of the evidence to the contrary), doesn't that say something to you? You shouldn't have to manipulate facts so hard to justify an actual "shrewd" trade.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:11 PM
  #436
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I haven't seen any consistent evidence that Del Zotto fills the need that you think he fills.
The 2011-2012 Hockey season. Perchance you should give it a look.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:30 PM
  #437
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,123
vCash: 500
Again, I really don't understand the resistance to moving DZ in the trade that's been discussed. He's an asset - a valuable asset - but he's a redundant one and one that we can't maximize on this team. He has more value to other teams.

Therefore, we shouldn't give him away for peanuts or pipe dreams, but we should explore opportunities to leverage that value to gain a player of equal or better value that we CAN maximize on this team - in particular if that player doesn't just maximize his value here, but fills an organizational need (as it appears top 6 center is becoming once again).

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:36 PM
  #438
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Again, I really don't understand the resistance to moving DZ in the trade that's been discussed. He's an asset - a valuable asset - but he's a redundant one and one that we can't maximize on this team. He has more value to other teams.

Therefore, we shouldn't give him away for peanuts or pipe dreams, but we should explore opportunities to leverage that value to gain a player of equal or better value that we CAN maximize on this team - in particular if that player doesn't just maximize his value here, but fills an organizational need (as it appears top 6 center is becoming once again).
How is he redundant exactly? Hes different than anyone else we have on the blueline

People thought McDonagh was poised for an offensive breakout - hasnt happened yet. And somehow, the argument that Staal and Girardi have about 25% less offensive production than MDZ has been a talking point to move him. I dont get it.

You're also moving him for a guy thats holding out and asking for a contract that exceeds MDZ's by about $1.5M yearly. I am not adverse to moving Del Zotto in the right deal. This aint it.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:38 PM
  #439
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Part of being a PMD is single-handedly improving the PP. Being a PPQB is a role that can and should make a PP better.

If the only evidence that DZ is a need for this team is:

1.) His TOI/defensive reliability

and

2.) His 40 points

then both of them can be replaced by trading for RoR, and finding another reliable top4 defensive defensemen. The latter being the harder part.

He doesn't help this teams transition game, or their PP, so he's not really a true PMD here, imo. Maybe he can be elsewhere. If they keep DZ I want him to excel at all areas a PMD should.

__________________
Ail is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:41 PM
  #440
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,092
vCash: 500
I thought it was pointed out that Del Zotto was NOT the only piece going the other way, but Avs also wanted a young forward (hagelin, miller, kreider, etc) as well? I would move Del Zotto alone for ROR, but I would NOT include any of those other 3.

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:43 PM
  #441
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
I would move Del Zotto alone for ROR, but I would NOT include any of those other 3.
Of course not, no one here would who is sane.

Ail is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:45 PM
  #442
Sticky Fingers
Registered User
 
Sticky Fingers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
Exactly this. People are just ignoring the cap. Choices.
So how is paying 4-4,5 millions in 4-5 years (as rumored he demands) to an unproven player that have a good season and some more behind him good cap assessment? On top of this you can question his moral. And most important. Where is he to play? Are we dealing Stepan or Richards? Or do we demote or own product Stepan to third line duty as a reward for good duty? And trade away another of our own products in MDZ?

Good teams are built from inside, we've already traded away some heart, we need to keep those we've left.

Sticky Fingers is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:48 PM
  #443
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
Part of being a PMD is single-handedly improving the PP. Being a PPQB is a role that can and should make a PP better.

If the only evidence that DZ is a need for this team is:

1.) His TOI/defensive reliability

and

2.) His 40 points

then both of them can be replaced by trading for RoR, and finding another reliable top4 defensive defensemen. The latter being the harder part.

He doesn't help this teams transition game, or their PP, so he's not really a true PMD here, imo. Maybe he can be elsewhere. If they keep DZ I want him to excel at all areas a PMD should.
Thats the entire point though.

People are ready to put their faith into Barrie? Are you kidding me? A 22 year old defenseman coming off a 40+ point +20 season isnt the right answer for the blueline all of a sudden. Its really unbelievable.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:49 PM
  #444
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
Counting New Jersey, Stralman is on his 4th team. At age 26. But I'm sure you know more than all of those teams (including our own, which is on record as saying that Stralman shouldn't be playing above the 3rd pair on a regular basis).

You assume they are exploring it at all. The Avs beat writer said that Colorado wants MDZ. The Rangers beat writer said the MDZ and Stepan were non-starters in the trade discussion. "The organization" is interested in O'Reilly's availability (as they should be. He'd be a great upgrade at 3rd line center). They also, based on what we know, are NOT considering moving Del Zotto to get that upgrade at 3rd line center. "Exploring" the upgrade is not the same as entertaining an absurd demand.
Counting the team he never played for? Flimsy at best. Can you point me to that quote where the Rangers actually said that about him, or are you just misinterpreting Tortorella saying he can't eat Girardi's minutes?

The rumor reported was that the pieces added to Del Zotto was a "non-starter." Not that Del Zotto himself was a non-starter.

Quote:
Watch the games. Barrie was getting 20 minutes a night on a defense corps that, aside from EJ, wouldn't displace Gilroy from our third pair. The "offense" he's providing consists on one PP goal and three secondary assists. He's getting a chance because of how dismal that team is on the back end, but he's also getting exposed pretty badly, and his minutes have been going down as a result.
I've watched plenty of him, thanks. You realize that "generating offense" doesn't necessarily result in points, correct? He makes a great breakout pass and rushes the puck better than Del Zotto wishes he could. In the last 5 games, he's played fewer than 20 minutes one time, but actually had more shifts. Not sure that's evidence that his minutes have been going down in a negative way, especially considering he's taking the same number of shifts.

Quote:
You might have a point with McD. I've said it before that I want to see him on the PP with Del Zotto. The rest of the argument is NOT "nonsense." Do you have a short memory? The biggest complaint about the Rangers pre-MDZ was that we weren't getting enough offensive help from the blueline. Yeah, guys like Rozsival would chip in 30 points (40 even in one of the big-scoring years right after the lockout), but nobody was really stepping up back there. You want to know the difference between keeping the guy we've got who we KNOW can do it and waiting to develop or sign another? I'll tell you the difference:

Sanguinetti. Pock. Ozolinsh. Redden. Roszival. Rachunek. Poti. Tyutin. Mara. Girardi. Staal. And on and on. How many times did we think we had the guy who could take that next step? Roszival hit 40 even once in a season with artificially increased scoring. McDonagh hit 32. Have any of the others even got past 30? This is a mixed bag of prospects, signings, young guys acquired via trade. It even excludes the guys we had high hopes for who never made the NHL (Kundratek, Kondratiev, etc). Stop saying it's going to be easy to replace him. It isn't, and there's a decade of proof that you can't simply ignore.
I never said it's "easy" to replace him, I'm saying his contributions are overrated. People weren't clamoring for PMD because they wanted more points from the blue line, they wanted someone who could run the PP. Del Zotto hasn't proven capable of doing that thus far.

Quote:
Richards, Stepan, Boyle and Miller. O'Reilly is an upgrade over the latter two, to be sure, but they are still adequate 3rd line pivots for a contending team. I hadn't been including Halpern at all, though frankly, you could use the same logic on him that you guys do on Stralman (he could do it, even if it wouldn't be ideal).
Sorry, you lost me when you said Miller is a adequate 3rd line center for a contending team.

Quote:
And yet, it seems that it IS a certainty that O'Reilly gets better? Fascinating.
Easy to put words in people's mouths I guess.

Quote:
Who has ever labeled O'Reilly as having 65+ point upside? Oh yeah, nobody outside of Colorado fans and the gullible fans on this board who believe them. RO'R has never--repeat--NEVER shown the offense at any level to make anyone think he would be a first line center in the NHL. Why was O'Reilly a 2nd rounder? Because he had the defense, but not the O. Del Zotto was a first rounder, and that was even AFTER he fell in the draft because people were concerned about his defensive play. He was thought to be a top ten pick that year, and all he's done since then is improve on his defense. Del Zotto has higher upside at the rarer position.
He fell in the draft because he was a lousy skater at that age. I'm assuming he was voted the 3rd best playmaker in the OHL East that year by the coaches poll because they felt bad for him? Del Zotto fell because he couldn't play a lick of defense. He improved in that regard, so I don't see any reason that ROR continuing to improve his offense is some incredible mountain to climb. Especially when he's proven he can do it.

Quote:
RO'R will never have Stepan's offense--ergo the more defensive player will be the guy playing 3rd line. Also, "today" you think he's better than Richards? Because of a cold start to the season? Way to overreact there, chief. Richards, Stepan, O'Reilly would be the pecking order.
Last year he did have Stepan's offense, and hit 50 points at a younger age than Stepan. Where exactly did I said he was better than Richards? Oh, that's right. Nowhere.


Quote:
I've provided PLENTY of tangible support. You either choose to ignore it (which is not the same as refuting it) or you can't see it due to being blinded by something (which, to be fair, is possible. That new toy is ever so shiny, after all.)
Oh, right. The whole "he rode Landeskog's mojo" thing.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:50 PM
  #445
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
How is he redundant exactly? Hes different than anyone else we have on the blueline

People thought McDonagh was poised for an offensive breakout - hasnt happened yet. And somehow, the argument that Staal and Girardi have about 25% less offensive production than MDZ has been a talking point to move him. I dont get it.
I dunno, I just don't see it. I think McDonagh's points would be the same and Staal would come pretty darn close if either was granted the same PP time that DZ gets. And, in fact, the fact that the PP is at the bottom of the league WITH DZ further points to the fact that he's not vital there.

Again, if DZ showed signs of becoming Doughty or Karlsson I would absolutely see your point, but as it is I just see a good defenseman with a nice offensive game, not a standout offensive defenseman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
You're also moving him for a guy thats holding out and asking for a contract that exceeds MDZ's by about $1.5M yearly.
Most (or certainly enough) reports seem to contradict this fact and state that something has gone badly wrong in the relationship between the team and the player. If that's not the case, I think most of us are on record that we wouldn't do the deal - especially if we plan to keep Richards next year.

But even that changes if we're thinking about a compliance buyout - and with every game that goes by, that becomes more and more realistic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I am not adverse to moving Del Zotto in the right deal. This aint it.
Fair enough. Agree to disagree about this particular deal. For the record, however, if we could flip DZ in a deal for Stamkos, I'd certainly take that one over this one too.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:52 PM
  #446
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Thats the entire point though.

People are ready to put their faith into Barrie? Are you kidding me? A 22 year old defenseman coming off a 40+ point +20 season isnt the right answer for the blueline all of a sudden. Its really unbelievable.
I agree with that completely.

I don't think obtaining a long-term replacement D from COL is the answer. I think it could be done this off-season however. If they can get someone to fill-in the rest of this year, that's fine with me. I honestly don't think this is their year anyway.

To me this is a move for the future overall, not this year.

Ail is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:53 PM
  #447
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,092
vCash: 500
Honestly, its like some people want to make trades because they're are knee jerk reactions all over this board. I'm not saying O'reilly for Dz is a horrible idea (its actually grown on me), but so many people here are just ready to throw everyone into a trade other than probably Nash and hank.

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:55 PM
  #448
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
Part of being a PMD is single-handedly improving the PP. Being a PPQB is a role that can and should make a PP better.

If the only evidence that DZ is a need for this team is:

1.) His TOI/defensive reliability

and

2.) His 40 points

then both of them can be replaced by trading for RoR, and finding another reliable top4 defensive defensemen. The latter being the harder part.

He doesn't help this teams transition game, or their PP, so he's not really a true PMD here, imo. Maybe he can be elsewhere. If they keep DZ I want him to excel at all areas a PMD should.
Again--he's 22 years old. At 22, Staal was just starting to try to work offense into his game (if you recall, it negatively impacted his defense, and people on this forum were roasting him for it--he looked like a mess for a decent chunk of that season). Dan Girardi was just getting his first taste of NHL hockey after getting called up midway through the season for the first time. In 36 games, Girardi played more than 20 minutes just twice.

The argument for Del Zotto's value to this team is that he is playing defensively responsible minutes plus PK time (something nobody thought he would do after his first season and a half) while putting up 40+ points and STILL having tons of space to go before hitting his ceiling. He's had games where he has looked like our best defenseman (yes, even better than McD). The idea that he's never going to eclipse Staal and Girardi is ridiculous. I'll be shocked if he doesn't eclipse both of them by the end of his current contract.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
I thought it was pointed out that Del Zotto was NOT the only piece going the other way, but Avs also wanted a young forward (hagelin, miller, kreider, etc) as well? I would move Del Zotto alone for ROR, but I would NOT include any of those other 3.
The Avs beat writer tossed that out there. The Rangers beat writer stated that Del Zotto (and Stepan) were both non-starters in the trade talks. My guess is that the Avs leaked their opening request to their guy (MDZ+) and the Rangers leaked their response to their media. IIRC, Sather made a point of saying that guys like Stepan and Kreider were off the table during the Nash talks. He never quite got around to saying that about any of the guys who were moved. The fact that MDZ and Stepan were reported to be non-starters makes me highly doubt that either would ever be moved for RO'R.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:56 PM
  #449
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post

Most (or certainly enough) reports seem to contradict this fact and state that something has gone badly wrong in the relationship between the team and the player.
Yea, the Avs decided to give one of the most exciting young players in the league the captaincy over him, and then offered O'Reilly a 2 year $7M contract. More than fair when you consider market value. Poor kid :-(

Im not arguing theres not a falling out -- but you'll be hardpressed to convince me the bitterness and reason for the issue isnt squarely on O'Reilly's side.


Last edited by Bleed Ranger Blue: 02-21-2013 at 05:06 PM.
Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 04:56 PM
  #450
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
Honestly, its like some people want to make trades because they're are knee jerk reactions all over this board. I'm not saying O'reilly for Dz is a horrible idea (its actually grown on me), but so many people here are just ready to throw everyone into a trade other than probably Nash and hank.
Don't forget Stu Bickel, dudes as untouchable as they come.

Ail 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 10:34 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.