HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Canes-NYR-Avs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-26-2013, 10:54 AM
  #51
Kris Chreider
#Bickel4Norris
 
Kris Chreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 6,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misfit Semin View Post
Easy no from the Canes.

Now talk something around Skinner for Boyle and Staal and it will get things going.
You're the ones adding to Skinner if you want Staal.

Kris Chreider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 10:55 AM
  #52
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
 
Feed Me A Stray Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Feed Me A Stray Cat
Rangers get way too much for Staal.

Feed Me A Stray Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 10:56 AM
  #53
Kris Chreider
#Bickel4Norris
 
Kris Chreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 6,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsylvestre View Post
The summer that Carolina acquired Jordan, Marc Staal was an RFA. he chose to re-up with the Rangers.
No he wasn't. That was last summer. Staal signed a 5-year $20M deal 3 years ago.

Kris Chreider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 10:57 AM
  #54
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
 
Feed Me A Stray Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Feed Me A Stray Cat
Quote:
Originally Posted by vipernsx View Post
Sorry I'm not overwhelmed by Tlusty to warrant moving Staal. Is he going to get top6 time above Stepan, Hagelin, Callahan, Nash, Krieder, & Brassard? I don't see it.

I mean since their time in the NHL has Tlusty really done that much more then Benoit Pouliot? Cause the Rangers just signed Pouliout for 1.3m and didn't give up anything close to Staal to get him because they didn't give up anything at all.

Pouliot - 26y/o, 291 games, 61g, 63a, 201PIM, 13.5 s%, 12:31 ATOI, 324 hits
Tlusty - 25y/o, 276 games, 57g, 55a, 112PIM, 13.77 s%, 13:20 ATOI, 187hits

I'm sorry but last season wasn't a full season and if a small sample size is adequate enough to determine a players value, which I'm not saying it is, then Mats Zuccarello should be in the Rangers top6 before Juri Tlusty.

If someone wants Staal, then they're going to have to pay the price it takes to get one, just like Jordan Staal cost. Which means the OP proposal except swap out Tlusty for Faulk.
Tlusty scored 23 goals in 48 games last year. Way more value than Pouliot.

Feed Me A Stray Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 10:59 AM
  #55
Kris Chreider
#Bickel4Norris
 
Kris Chreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC/Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 6,751
vCash: 500
And Jonathan Cheechoo once outscored Marian Gaborik.

Kris Chreider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 11:08 AM
  #56
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 30,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Chreider View Post
And Jonathan Cheechoo once outscored Marian Gaborik.
Yeah, and then got packaged with Michalek for a 40-50 goal scorer.

Tlusty had a fantastic year. You don't need to act like he's some garbage utility piece just to argue a point.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 11:45 AM
  #57
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,088
vCash: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feed Me A Stray Cat View Post
Tlusty scored 23 goals in 48 games last year. Way more value than Pouliot.
So if you mean to say he's a 40g scorer over an 82 game season, he's not. Nor is he a 35 or a 30 goal scorer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Yeah, and then got packaged with Michalek for a 40-50 goal scorer.

Tlusty had a fantastic year. You don't need to act like he's some garbage utility piece just to argue a point.
Tlusty had a fantastic 1/2 year.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 12:09 PM
  #58
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 20,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vipernsx View Post
So if you mean to say he's a 40g scorer over an 82 game season, he's not. Nor is he a 35 or a 30 goal scorer.

Tlusty had a fantastic 1/2 year.
No, Tlusty had a fantastic year. He was first put with Staal the February before the lockout. He put up 18 points in 27 games, including a 9-game point streak.

Then this past year, Semin was added to the line, and he put up 38 points in 48 games.

In other words, since he started playing in the Top 6, he's put up 56 points in 75 games. Sounds like a fantastic season to me.

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 12:15 PM
  #59
Discipline Daddy
RIP Big Joe
 
Discipline Daddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 293
vCash: 500
Quote:
So if you mean to say he's a 40g scorer over an 82 game season, he's not. Nor is he a 35 or a 30 goal scorer.
Can you tell me next year's lottery numbers while we're at it?

Listen, I get that you don't want to trade Marc Staal for garbage, nor would I if he was on the Canes. But I don't see why you're needlessly bashing Jiri Tlusty. Two years ago he was beginning to show promise, scoring 17 goals, most of which came in the 2nd half of the year after he was paired with Staal. Next year he gets 2 legitimate linemates (Staal and Semin) and goes on a tear, scoring almost a goal every other game, ending up 3rd on the team in scoring (after Staal and Semin), and amazingly ending up 6th in the entire league in goals. Clearly he has proven capable of playing up to his linemates, and at 25 it's logical he's finally living up to his potential as a 13th overall pick.

In what world is he incapable of scoring 30 goals? If he played a full season last season, he'd only need to score 7 goals in his next 34 games to do so. No Canes fan is saying he's the next Brett Hull, but the man is clearly capable of scoring goals. Sure we don't EXPECT him to score 40 next year, but 30 isn't totally out of the picture. After all, he did score more goals than Rick Nash last year in 4 more games. Does that mean Rick Nash has less value at 29?

Point is, Tlusty is a capable goal scorer who belongs on a first or second line and can play decent defense. He also is quite underpaid for one more year. I find it puzzling that you would suggest that Tlusty couldn't crack your team's top-6. Do you put your leading goal scorers on the 3rd and 4th lines? Are his 38 points in 48 games not good enough to knock down Chris Kreider, who amazed the world with 3 points in 23 games?

It's fine to disagree with subjective measures like a player's value, but please don't trash a fine player just because you don't want to trade M. Staal for him.

Discipline Daddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 12:17 PM
  #60
Kreider
My name is Nils
 
Kreider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NYC
Country: Austria
Posts: 15,275
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Booth23 View Post
LOL. You people want "proof" that a guy would want to play with his brothers. I think that's a pretty safe assumption- once which required no proof. You guys must not have brothers or something. My little brother joined the Army because I had- and he didn't even really want to.

Yet make the astonishing statement that Marc "hates" his brothers. Where is the "proof" for that?

So, my argument is that while Marc finishes out his 2 years in a "real" hockey market, he's either going to win the Cup or he's not. If he does, then what's stopping him from signing in Carolina? If he doesn't...then what's stopping him from signing in Carolina? He'll have been part of an organization that has consistently failed to live up to the hype year after year despite all the overpriced talent, maniacal coaches, ect. Why would he continue to ride that train into the wall?
Koivu, O'Reilly, Miller, Foligno, Wellwood, Stewart, Pyatt, and Michalek

__________________
Kreider is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 12:32 PM
  #61
MisterUnspoken
Vintage
 
MisterUnspoken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 9,989
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MisterUnspoken
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
No, Tlusty had a fantastic year. He was first put with Staal the February before the lockout. He put up 18 points in 27 games, including a 9-game point streak.

Then this past year, Semin was added to the line, and he put up 38 points in 48 games.

In other words, since he started playing in the Top 6, he's put up 56 points in 75 games. Sounds like a fantastic season to me.
Rangers have no interest in him regardless.

Jiri Tlusty = Petr Prucha. Their career trajectories will probably be similiar. Tlusty will be that guy that had one or two good seasons and then faded into obscurity being a useful but insignificant player.

Then again he could be the next Brett Hull, registering 30+ goals until he drops dead from being TOO awesome.

MisterUnspoken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 12:34 PM
  #62
aufheben
Moderator
Jung at heart
 
aufheben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The jam must flow...
Country: Angola
Posts: 7,082
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Booth23 View Post
Really, it doesn't take Dionne freakin' Warwick to speculate that he'd naturally want to come play here. What, you think when the family gets together (like they do all the time) that his brother's don't talk to him about that? And that Eric would maybe have a little sidebar with Rutherford about it? It was no accident that the last game they played against the Rangers, the first line out on the ice was Marc's other 3 brothers.

Of course he wants to win a cup, and figures he has a better shot in NY. Which is why I'm sure he wants to stay there the next 2 years. But NY was supposed to be a legit contender the past couple of years. If they continue to fizzle out...why wouldn't he cut away when his contract is up?

But the bottom line is that why would Rutherford hamstring the team to get him right now? We have a problem on D. So, we give up our best D man to get somebody who is a better D man. And one of our tops scorers. And some other guy. He paid too much to get Jordan, I really don't think you'll see that repeated.
So, no?

aufheben is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 01:01 PM
  #63
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 30,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterUnspoken View Post
Jiri Tlusty = Petr Prucha. Their career trajectories will probably be similiar.
Did Tlusty do something really awful to the Rangers or something? Where is this stuff coming from?

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 01:35 PM
  #64
TheRightWay
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,429
vCash: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Did Tlusty do something really awful to the Rangers or something? Where is this stuff coming from?
I think Rangers fans might be going a bit overboard in not giving Tlusty credit for his nice (half) season, but the general point makes complete sense. Marc Staal has spent a number of seasons in the NHL progressing to where he is now and has a proven track record. Jiri Tlusty has been a lost soul aside from a 48 game season. There have been a number of players who have had one or two seasons that were abnormal from their career trajectory. Maybe Tlusty will be one of those. Maybe not. Point is that it's not a gamble we're willing to take right now if it requires us to move arguably our best defenseman to do so.

TheRightWay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 01:50 PM
  #65
Roboturner913
Registered User
 
Roboturner913's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,730
vCash: 500
So the Canes have to give up Tlusty AND Gleason AND Dalpe?

Marc Staal is cool, but no thanks.

Roboturner913 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 02:04 PM
  #66
MikeC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester9881 View Post
Was this thread started by an Avs fan? Colorado gets the worst end of this deal by a good margin IMO.
Sadly he is an Avs fan...

MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 02:43 PM
  #67
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
 
Feed Me A Stray Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Feed Me A Stray Cat
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRightWay View Post
I think Rangers fans might be going a bit overboard in not giving Tlusty credit for his nice (half) season, but the general point makes complete sense. Marc Staal has spent a number of seasons in the NHL progressing to where he is now and has a proven track record. Jiri Tlusty has been a lost soul aside from a 48 game season. There have been a number of players who have had one or two seasons that were abnormal from their career trajectory. Maybe Tlusty will be one of those. Maybe not. Point is that it's not a gamble we're willing to take right now if it requires us to move arguably our best defenseman to do so.
Plus a 1st...plus Stefan Elliott...

Feed Me A Stray Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 04:48 PM
  #68
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamitter View Post
...
Quote:
What in the world is with your recent fascination with Siemens? He's your next Hall.
No undue fascination. He is a worthy target for acquisition if the price is right. That's all, same as was case with Hall.

Quote:
You keep calling him "the next Hamilton" despite
a) He is nothing like Hamilton except in height
b) Hamilton isn't even that good yet
I did once or twice say Doug Hamilton is a good comparison not as to literally every single aspect of the game, but as to what could be hoped for, ie, a young big D from a good pedigree (draft) suggesting a decent chance of success he'll develop, and develop into a preferred asset.

I would not say "He is nothing like Hamilton except in height".
Gernat of Edmonton is like 6'5", and he is a stickhandling skating type you hope, best case scenario, develops into someone like Hedman --- again, I emphasize an EXTREMELY lite Hedman.

Hamilton and Siemens and McIlrath are all big, strong tough guys who can clear the crease. That is the fair and accurate common denominator. You may be aware of more intricate differences than I am, but my analogy is apt to that extent, which is fair.

As to "Hamilton isn't even that good yet" I would exactly consider him chopped liver.
Hamilton is turning into an irreplacable lynchpin for the Bs.
He has a way to go before he gets to the level of a Staal, but it is a favorable comparison given the experience of the master versus the adapting by the newbie.

Quote:
You're giving up an established top pairing guy from a contender for a prospect who almost definitely won't be as good as Staal. It's ridiculous.
A draft slot is no guarantee of future value. At the same time, it is not always wrong.
Mark Staal was drafted what, like 12th overall?
Siemens and Hamilton in the top 10?
There is no guarantee in absolute terms, not withstanding that technically only God is actually absolute, that Siemens won't ever become as good as Staal. Or that he actually will. It is a crapshoot. An informed crapshoot with some idea of the variables involved, but it is a crapshoot.

However, as discussed following, there is more to the equation than who is the better player NOW. Salary cap. Getting younger. ETC.


Quote:
Stop looking at "value". Trades aren't done in a vacuum with prices established in dollars. Nobody cares that we're getting 4 dimes in 3 years for our quarter now. We aren't going 17 steps back to jump 5 forward with the promise of 30 future steps forward. Coke for Pepsi is more common than an elephant for thirteen jaguars. Taylor Hall is not moving. We are not icing 4 rookies on our blueline.
Those who live for today, and only today, constantly in win now mode, without setting up for the future, would have players in their prime only, burning twice as brightly but for half as long. That is too much risk. Learn from the Hawks, who have gotten it right.

Up until recently, our drafting SUCKED. big time. Dealing established value for promising potential IF DONE CAREFULLY can not immediately but soon enough have the effect of reversing that. That is not open to debate. That is logic. That is fact. Like any other action, it can be screwed up. But if you get it right, you get your reward.

"We aren't going 17 steps back to jump 5 forward with the promise of 30 future steps forward."
If that route actually takes us forward, it should only not be pursued if there is an even better route forward.

The guys that want to just do win now mode, those are the ones that are not addressing reality.

PS --- my detractors on this, kindly, bend, buckle and break.

While we are immediately ok, at some point we need to move vets --- eg Staal, Girardi + yes even Callahan (as we are locked in on Nash and will have to pony up for Lundqvist). That is not an option because of the cap.

Doing do sooner as opposed to later = max or at least better return than waiting to the last minute. I agree, if there is no good deal, don't make a bad one --- but at least be open minded.


"Coke for Pepsi is more common than ...."
Coke for Pepsi, not withstanding the exceptions where you get equal or better value on a complementary need, a lefty for a righty, is a waste of time.

It's good that we made small improvements, such as the ones where we recently moved Christian Thomas and Kris Newbury. I consider that not really coke for pepsi, but getting the slightly better product for slightly less, not really a different product.

But let us not kid ourselves.
You want to make an omelette, you need to break a few eggs.

You want to advance, you have to think outside the box.
And if you lack the courage to do that, don't criticize those that do.

Quote:
A trade that changes more than a third of the makeup of any team will not happen.
If that third of the team could be improved it should be tried, whether it is one (or two) fell swoop larger deals, or several mini deals.

Change is not the consideration. PROGRESS and IMPROVEMENT should be the goal.
I agree, change for the sake of change = coke for pepsi = nothing to brag about.
But the correct changes if worthwhile should be pursued.


Quote:
Next time you propose something, ask yourself two things before:

1) Does this make the team contending worse and the team who is not concerned about the immediate future better?

2) Does this involve several moving parts that would never move in a trade together?
I will take that under advisement.
But those questions do not superimpose themselves upon my approach.

Quote:
If the answer is yes to either, don't post it.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that as constructive criticism for the moment, whether I agree with it or not.

However, let no one get me pissed with comments that restrict freedom of speech or would arbitrarily restrict the competition of ideas.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 07:35 PM
  #69
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
No, Tlusty had a fantastic year. He was first put with Staal the February before the lockout. He put up 18 points in 27 games, including a 9-game point streak.

Then this past year, Semin was added to the line, and he put up 38 points in 48 games.

In other words, since he started playing in the Top 6, he's put up 56 points in 75 games. Sounds like a fantastic season to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
No undue fascination. He is a worthy target for acquisition if the price is right. That's all, same as was case with Hall.


I did once or twice say Doug Hamilton is a good comparison not as to literally every single aspect of the game, but as to what could be hoped for, ie, a young big D from a good pedigree (draft) suggesting a decent chance of success he'll develop, and develop into a preferred asset.

I would not say "He is nothing like Hamilton except in height".
Gernat of Edmonton is like 6'5", and he is a stickhandling skating type you hope, best case scenario, develops into someone like Hedman --- again, I emphasize an EXTREMELY lite Hedman.

Hamilton and Siemens and McIlrath are all big, strong tough guys who can clear the crease. That is the fair and accurate common denominator. You may be aware of more intricate differences than I am, but my analogy is apt to that extent, which is fair.

As to "Hamilton isn't even that good yet" I would exactly consider him chopped liver.
Hamilton is turning into an irreplacable lynchpin for the Bs.
He has a way to go before he gets to the level of a Staal, but it is a favorable comparison given the experience of the master versus the adapting by the newbie.



A draft slot is no guarantee of future value. At the same time, it is not always wrong.
Mark Staal was drafted what, like 12th overall?
Siemens and Hamilton in the top 10?
There is no guarantee in absolute terms, not withstanding that technically only God is actually absolute, that Siemens won't ever become as good as Staal. Or that he actually will. It is a crapshoot. An informed crapshoot with some idea of the variables involved, but it is a crapshoot.

However, as discussed following, there is more to the equation than who is the better player NOW. Salary cap. Getting younger. ETC.



Those who live for today, and only today, constantly in win now mode, without setting up for the future, would have players in their prime only, burning twice as brightly but for half as long. That is too much risk. Learn from the Hawks, who have gotten it right.

Up until recently, our drafting SUCKED. big time. Dealing established value for promising potential IF DONE CAREFULLY can not immediately but soon enough have the effect of reversing that. That is not open to debate. That is logic. That is fact. Like any other action, it can be screwed up. But if you get it right, you get your reward.

"We aren't going 17 steps back to jump 5 forward with the promise of 30 future steps forward."
If that route actually takes us forward, it should only not be pursued if there is an even better route forward.

The guys that want to just do win now mode, those are the ones that are not addressing reality.

PS --- my detractors on this, kindly, bend, buckle and break.

While we are immediately ok, at some point we need to move vets --- eg Staal, Girardi + yes even Callahan (as we are locked in on Nash and will have to pony up for Lundqvist). That is not an option because of the cap.

Doing do sooner as opposed to later = max or at least better return than waiting to the last minute. I agree, if there is no good deal, don't make a bad one --- but at least be open minded.


"Coke for Pepsi is more common than ...."
Coke for Pepsi, not withstanding the exceptions where you get equal or better value on a complementary need, a lefty for a righty, is a waste of time.

It's good that we made small improvements, such as the ones where we recently moved Christian Thomas and Kris Newbury. I consider that not really coke for pepsi, but getting the slightly better product for slightly less, not really a different product.

But let us not kid ourselves.
You want to make an omelette, you need to break a few eggs.

You want to advance, you have to think outside the box.
And if you lack the courage to do that, don't criticize those that do.


If that third of the team could be improved it should be tried, whether it is one (or two) fell swoop larger deals, or several mini deals.

Change is not the consideration. PROGRESS and IMPROVEMENT should be the goal.
I agree, change for the sake of change = coke for pepsi = nothing to brag about.
But the correct changes if worthwhile should be pursued.




I will take that under advisement.
But those questions do not superimpose themselves upon my approach.


I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that as constructive criticism for the moment, whether I agree with it or not.

However, let no one get me pissed with comments that restrict freedom of speech or would arbitrarily restrict the competition of ideas.
I see where he's coming from, Bern. Your steps back to step forward idea doesn't work in NY and it doesn't work with the franchise's BEST GOALTENDER EVER right in the prime of his career. You just can't do that here and now.

The Siemens/Staal thing. Sure, Siemens would be a great piece to get back if we're moving Staal, but why would we be moving Staal if we can fit him? The easier solution would have been to move Brad Richards and not play chicken with the compliance buyout periods. However, we are talking about the New York Rangers here and that would make too much sense for upper management.

Just as it made too much sense to not trade Marian Gaborik and instead get rid of the coach who couldn't solve a 4+ year offensive and power play problem.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 08:30 PM
  #70
WWAD
Registered User
 
WWAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vipernsx View Post
Sorry I'm not overwhelmed by Tlusty to warrant moving Staal. Is he going to get top6 time above Stepan, Hagelin, Callahan, Nash, Krieder, & Brassard? I don't see it.
Tlusty scored more points than all but Stepan last season, and scored more goals than all six of them.

WWAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 09:22 PM
  #71
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WWAD View Post
Tlusty scored more points than all but Stepan last season, and scored more goals than all six of them.
Again, this was ONE 48 game season.

You think Tlusty seriously outscores Rick Nash in a full season?

I understand the point you Canes fans are making with the undervaluing of Tlusty, but at the same time I'd hope you see why the Rangers fans aren't nearly as high on him as you guys are. Aside from this season and an even SMALLER sample size from the season before, Tlusty has done nothing to warrant his draft position and has done even less (if possible) to warrant being the core of a package that would make us want to trade our all-star elite shutdown defender away for, despite his injury.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2013, 05:00 PM
  #72
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist View Post
....
1- Don't see the connection to the first quote box with all comment directed to my quote.

2:
Quote:
I see where he's coming from, Bern. Your steps back to step forward idea doesn't work in NY and it doesn't work with the franchise's BEST GOALTENDER EVER right in the prime of his career. You just can't do that here and now.
Not only can we, my friend, we have to, because we are still catching up from prior crappy drafts. That, though is open to interpretation, I admit, based on how much you think we need to improve the club. If you are good enough w/Rangers in the status quo, you can toe the line a bit longer. I for one prefer to take improvement at most opportunities, because windows to make deals open and close all the time, and the deal you can make next month, you have to risk you can do better than the one you can do this month.

But what is not open to interpretation, as I noted, is how the cap will push us to move our vets.

That doesn't mean we have to 'blow up everything' all at once.
But it does mean we need a controlled demolition on a couple of assets -- those vets --- as soon as the return is favorably high. And if we have to bundle other assets to get the best deal possible, that's okay too as long as we get good or better value coming back the other way on such other assets.

Quote:
The Siemens/Staal thing. Sure, Siemens would be a great piece to get back if we're moving Staal, but why would we be moving Staal if we can fit him?
If we are not moving MDZ/Moore to RD, or trading one, we have an extra LD w/McD + Staal. Sure, there are injuries, insurance, etc, but that's what we got guys like Aaron Johnson for. So the fit is too tight if you don't wanna waste --- or under use and overpay --- for a certain asset.

I'm flexibile, we could move MDZ, let Staal prove his MAX value and we are good until cap forces him to go. With Skjei on the way, that's an option. But given the position the AVs are in, they might well move a prime prospect for a prime asset if we provide conditional guarantee. MDZ will command, but not as high as Staal.


Quote:
The easier solution would have been to move Brad Richards and not play chicken with the compliance buyout periods. However, we are talking about the New York Rangers here and that would make too much sense for upper management.
Preaching to the choir. Amen.

Quote:
Just as it made too much sense to not trade Marian Gaborik and instead get rid of the coach who couldn't solve a 4+ year offensive and power play problem.
I view Gaby and Torts as connected, but able to be disconnected. So there were good and bad moves for keeping or trading Gaby. Torts had to go.

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2013, 08:09 PM
  #73
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
1- Don't see the connection to the first quote box with all comment directed to my quote.
Accidental, didn't realize I quoted it.

Quote:
2:


Not only can we, my friend, we have to, because we are still catching up from prior crappy drafts. That, though is open to interpretation, I admit, based on how much you think we need to improve the club. If you are good enough w/Rangers in the status quo, you can toe the line a bit longer. I for one prefer to take improvement at most opportunities, because windows to make deals open and close all the time, and the deal you can make next month, you have to risk you can do better than the one you can do this month.
No, YOU CAN'T because then our franchise player and best goaltender in the history of this club and the current best goaltender in the world would want to walk out on this team and there's not a living soul who can blame him as he wants to win a damn cup before he retires and won't with your mindset.

Quote:
But what is not open to interpretation, as I noted, is how the cap will push us to move our vets.

That doesn't mean we have to 'blow up everything' all at once.
But it does mean we need a controlled demolition on a couple of assets -- those vets --- as soon as the return is favorably high. And if we have to bundle other assets to get the best deal possible, that's okay too as long as we get good or better value coming back the other way on such other assets.
Like who? Who needs to go aside from the obvious Beaver, who is a cap casualty?

Quote:
If we are not moving MDZ/Moore to RD, or trading one, we have an extra LD w/McD + Staal. Sure, there are injuries, insurance, etc, but that's what we got guys like Aaron Johnson for. So the fit is too tight if you don't wanna waste --- or under use and overpay --- for a certain asset.
This makes no sense. We deal Moore, MDZ, or Staal because the fit is too tight??? That's just awful asset management.

Quote:
I'm flexibile, we could move MDZ, let Staal prove his MAX value and we are good until cap forces him to go. With Skjei on the way, that's an option. But given the position the AVs are in, they might well move a prime prospect for a prime asset if we provide conditional guarantee. MDZ will command, but not as high as Staal.
Why are you talking about Skjei like he's even in the cards in the next 2-3 years? He's not. You're basing these hypothetical scenarios on a guy like Skjei stepping in and eating up minutes? Have you gone mad? The kid hasn't even played a professional game yet. You're just completely out of reason right now.

[QUOTE/Preaching to the choir. Amen.

I view Gaby and Torts as connected, but able to be disconnected. So there were good and bad moves for keeping or trading Gaby. Torts had to go.[/QUOTE]

Torts should have went before Gaborik was traded. We had 2 40-goal threats and a team that could roll two different lines that could kill you on any night and the coach STILL couldn't manage the slightest bit of offense with it. A credit to his awful and outdated system. We were a couple of good bottom 6 players and a 6th/7th defender away from a cup.

Now, we're right back where we started.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2013, 09:27 PM
  #74
Viqsi
"They're back."
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,049
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Not only can we, my friend, we have to, because we are still catching up from prior crappy drafts.
Wow. If the current state of the Rangers as you see it is "still catching up", then we're going to do much better in the Metro than I ever would have dreamed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
That doesn't mean we have to 'blow up everything' all at once.
But it does mean we need a controlled demolition on a couple of assets -- those vets --- as soon as the return is favorably high. And if we have to bundle other assets to get the best deal possible, that's okay too as long as we get good or better value coming back the other way on such other assets.
I think you may have lost track of the final goal here. The idea behind trades is to improve one's team so as to be able to win games, not to maximize some hypothetical "player value" amount. While keeping such guys around may not help you "maximize value", they're still typically good players that win hockey games for you. And in the end, that's kind of the goal, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
If we are not moving MDZ/Moore to RD, or trading one, we have an extra LD w/McD + Staal. Sure, there are injuries, insurance, etc, but that's what we got guys like Aaron Johnson for.


If you're seriously counting on Aaron Johnson to handle NHL depth issues, y'all are so very screwed. His best possible use is, through his friendship with Nash, to have some continuity of leadership between your NHL team and your AHL team.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2013, 09:32 PM
  #75
Calad
Section 422
 
Calad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
If you're seriously counting on Aaron Johnson to handle NHL depth issues, y'all are so very screwed. His best possible use is, through his friendship with Nash, to have some continuity of leadership between your NHL team and your AHL team.
He's like our 8th-9th D, whats unreasonable about that?

Calad 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 11:41 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.