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

Should Shanny be traded?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-03-2007, 03:53 PM
  #26
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
I almost feel like creating a Family Guy moment on this thread by picking up a newspaper and smacking some people on the head while saying "No, no."

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 03:58 PM
  #27
shoothepuck
88
 
shoothepuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: upstate
Country: Italy
Posts: 12,197
vCash: 500
He shouldn't be traded, he should be signed to another year.

shoothepuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 06:31 PM
  #28
WheresBarnaby
Registered User
 
WheresBarnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,607
vCash: 500
Shanny Traded!?!?!?!?!?


WheresBarnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 06:34 PM
  #29
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Why I don't bother posting anymore.

Gimme a break.

BringBackNeilSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 07:58 PM
  #30
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Yes.

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 10:48 PM
  #31
blueliner94
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 130
vCash: 500
TBH I would rather trade Jags. Shanny is a guy who can help mold young players. A great leader and still can score as we seen in the first leg of the season.He also hits and plays a great two way game, granted he has slowed down but i donno if i had a choice It would be Jag. Maybe he wants to try for a cup and would waive his no trade clause. He did say hes done in about two years. At this rate this team wont win another cup in another 54

blueliner94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 10:53 PM
  #32
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
I say yes. I mean let's trade a goal scorer, leader and guy who is willing to block shots. I mean that's clearly going to be worth getting an extra draft pick that our scouts seems to be able to do so much with.

Then we can truly be a one line team.

I'd rather keep the guys who are working out and try and find players who work with them rather than trade them to get a low first round pick and then start all over again hoping to find someone who does well and someone who can play with him.

At some point keeping the players who are actually bringing something to the table is worth more than getting an extra pick in the draft.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 10:55 PM
  #33
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I say yes. I mean let's trade a goal scorer, leader and guy who is willing to block shots. I mean that's clearly going to be worth getting an extra draft pick that our scouts seems to be able to do so much with.

Then we can truly be a one line team.

I'd rather keep the guys who are working out and try and find players who work with them rather than trade them to get a low first round pick and then start all over again hoping to find someone who does well and someone who can play with him.

At some point keeping the players who are actually bringing something to the table is worth more than getting an extra pick in the draft.
Agreed. So, on a different note...who do you like in the top ten of the upcoming draft? Who do you see the Rangers targetting? (I'm only slightly kidding.)

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 10:59 PM
  #34
snowcloud
Registered User
 
snowcloud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 456
vCash: 500
We trade Shanny then good luck at signing anymore big name free agents for years to come. No way should we trade him.

snowcloud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 10:59 PM
  #35
snowcloud
Registered User
 
snowcloud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I almost feel like creating a Family Guy moment on this thread by picking up a newspaper and smacking some people on the head while saying "No, no."

snowcloud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 11:00 PM
  #36
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
I like Sutter.

But I can also see this team moving their first to get younger talent.

Either way, trading the team's 4 best forwards is not the answer. I'd much rather see this team go out and bring in a younger play to play WITH Shanahan.

A guy like Shanahan, even if he eventually drops down to a third line player, is still ideal for me because he's a guy I want in that lockerroom.

The team has had plenty of picks and prospects over the years, more picks isn't going to make a world of difference if the scouting department can't find players. Next year will be when this team needs to start showing some results from it's efforts. If it doesn't, one extra late first round pick isn't going to change that.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 11:13 PM
  #37
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I like Sutter.

But I can also see this team moving their first to get younger talent.

Either way, trading the team's 4 best forwards is not the answer. I'd much rather see this team go out and bring in a younger play to play WITH Shanahan.

A guy like Shanahan, even if he eventually drops down to a third line player, is still ideal for me because he's a guy I want in that lockerroom.

The team has had plenty of picks and prospects over the years, more picks isn't going to make a world of difference if the scouting department can't find players. Next year will be when this team needs to start showing some results from it's efforts. If it doesn't, one extra late first round pick isn't going to change that.
I agree. The top 4 aren't going anywhere. And, I'd probably keep A. Ward around for some veteran stability on the blueline. (But, he should be getting 3rd pairing minutes at this point.) Next year SHOULD be the 1st year we see the results of the first draft after the purge. Callahan just about ready, Dubi will have a full year under his belt, Montoya should be ready enough to be an inexpensive alternative to Weekes as a backup, and Byers and Korpkoski could make runs at being 4th liners. Plus, the 1st fruits of the 2005 draft, in the form of Staal, could make its presence felt. And, if this upcoming draft is what I've heard it will be - a deep draft with not much difference between rounds one and two, it might not be a bad year to trade down and pick up an extra 2nd.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 11:18 PM
  #38
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
I agree. The top 4 aren't going anywhere. And, I'd probably keep A. Ward around for some veteran stability on the blueline. (But, he should be getting 3rd pairing minutes at this point.) Next year SHOULD be the 1st year we see the results of the first draft after the purge. Callahan just about ready, Dubi will have a full year under his belt, Montoya should be ready enough to be an inexpensive alternative to Weekes as a backup, and Byers and Korpkoski could make runs at being 4th liners. Plus, the 1st fruits of the 2005 draft, in the form of Staal, could make its presence felt. And, if this upcoming draft is what I've heard it will be - a deep draft with not much difference between rounds one and two, it might not be a bad year to trade down and pick up an extra 2nd.
To me next year is a more important year than this year because we start to see who is taking the leaps and who isn't. A lot of the 03 and 04 kids will have experience under their belts and we should start to see how far they've come (or haven't come).

Personally if they could, I'd like to see the Rangers go after a guy like a Horton or a Richards and move some assets to get him.

You compliment a move like that by adding a Dawes or a Callahan, Staal, etc. to your roster.

I am willing to avoid drafting this year if it brings a higher end young talent back in return.

But everything from this point is going to be out asset management. This is where the guys doing this for a living are required to show why they should continue to get paid to do this for a living.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 11:26 PM
  #39
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
To me next year is a more important year than this year because we start to see who is taking the leaps and who isn't. A lot of the 03 and 04 kids will have experience under their belts and we should start to see how far they've come (or haven't come).

Personally if they could, I'd like to see the Rangers go after a guy like a Horton or a Richards and move some assets to get him.

You compliment a move like that by adding a Dawes or a Callahan, Staal, etc. to your roster.

I am willing to avoid drafting this year if it brings a higher end young talent back in return.

But everything from this point is going to be out asset management. This is where the guys doing this for a living are required to show why they should continue to get paid to do this for a living.

Just to jump off on a suggestion you made about acquiring Horton, instead of adding Dubinsky, why not take advantage of Callahan's soaring value and offer a package that includes him and Montoya for Horton? Maybe you have to add the 1st round pick to complete the package, but why add a center, when you'd be replacing Callahan with an upgrade in Horton, and not depleting the center position? Then, if the salary cap allows it, if you don't think Dubinsky is quite ready, or just want to bring him along slowly at 4th line center, you sign a Drury - Shanny/Drury/Horton, perhaps?

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 11:43 PM
  #40
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Certainly a possibility, I guess it really depends on whether you think Horton's future is at Center or RW.

I mean the reality is that outside of Staal you could probably move just about anyone in the system in a Horton deal. From Prucha to Dubinsky to Callahan it really also depends on who Florida likes.

So depending on those factors anything is really a possibility.

I think when all is said and done, the Rangers have options and ultimately important decisions ahead of them.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2007, 11:51 PM
  #41
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
Certainly a possibility, I guess it really depends on whether you think Horton's future is at Center or RW.

I mean the reality is that outside of Staal you could probably move just about anyone in the system in a Horton deal. From Prucha to Dubinsky to Callahan it really also depends on who Florida likes.

So depending on those factors anything is really a possibility.

I think when all is said and done, the Rangers have options and ultimately important decisions ahead of them.
Yeah, I guess that would be the biggest factor. But, since they already the likes of Olesz, Kreps and Weiss, not to mention, Jokinen, I was thinking they might have a need for wingers, as opposed to a center. If Horton is available, I do think Montoya makes a very nice starting point for any discussion.

Here's something I just thought - what if the deal was to be Montoya, Callahan and Jessiman for Horton. The deal would essentially be the 3rd overall in 2003 for the 12th overall in 2003, the 6th overall in 2004, plus a 4th round pick in 2004. Looking down the line, would that have been fair value on draft day in 2003?

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2007, 12:01 AM
  #42
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
Yeah, I guess that would be the biggest factor. But, since they already the likes of Olesz, Kreps and Weiss, not to mention, Jokinen, I was thinking they might have a need for wingers, as opposed to a center. If Horton is available, I do think Montoya makes a very nice starting point for any discussion.

Here's something I just thought - what if the deal was to be Montoya, Callahan and Jessiman for Horton. The deal would essentially be the 3rd overall in 2003 for the 12th overall in 2003, the 6th overall in 2004, plus a 4th round pick in 2004. Looking down the line, would that have been fair value on draft day in 2003?
Most likely they'd want a winger and as Xander pointed out in another thread, you're probably (though not necessarily) looking at Prucha in that deal.

Personally if I am Florida I wouldn't trade Horton for Montoya, Callahan and Jessiman.

Montoya, all talent aside, is still an unproven NHL goalie and Callahan's future in the NHL as likely as a third line winger. Jessiman at this point, would hold little value to me as an opposing GM.

If I'm Florida I'd probably ask for Montoya, Prucha and a first or something along those lines. At the very least I HAVE to get an NHL talent back. I'm giving up the best player in the deal and if all else fails I at least need to be able to say I got a guy who was already a second line NHL'er in the deal.

As for fair value on draft day that's hard to say. Even for the kids who make it, draft day is a time when values are at their most over-inflated. Even if Horton becomes a 35 goal, 85 point player he "was" a "potential 45 goal, 100 point player on game day".

No matter what the possibilities are almost always brighter than the realities, even when those realities are very good. Young players are like collectors items, everyone wants them when they are new but in time they always lose a little bit of that luster. Most times it is because nothing is ever as good as it seems when you don't have it yet.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2007, 07:30 PM
  #43
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowcloud View Post
We trade Shanny then good luck at signing anymore big name free agents for years to come.
Yes because as we all know, players don't go where the money is.

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2007, 11:48 PM
  #44
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,671
vCash: 500
I only do this if I can get a top notch can't miss prospect in return that will be ready in the next year or two. You need a guy to lead around, and I'd love to have him here. Imagine guys like Callahan and Pyatt learning from him? Maybe even Moore or Byers learning some pointers as well.

He's a fan favorite, and still a great player at the age of 37, unless I can get a legitimate bluechip prospect in return, I don't trade him.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2007, 11:51 PM
  #45
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I almost feel like creating a Family Guy moment on this thread by picking up a newspaper and smacking some people on the head while saying "No, no."
:Insert Random Kermit The Frog Cameo:

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2007, 01:20 AM
  #46
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Yes because as we all know, players don't go where the money is.
True but in a salary capped world, a team that isn't a STRONG team can't really afford to throw that extra million or two at a player to persuade them.

Shanahan, when all is said and done, chose us for LESS money.

I think improvement comes from adding a young player to play with and learn from him, not necessarily replace him.

This team, no matter what, is going to need some veterans out there. I'd rather hold onto one who is productive, is a good influence and enjoys being here. No one is going to give us their best prospect for a Shanahan rental so I'd rather hold onto him than get the secondary prospect or late first round pick he'd possibly bring back.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2007, 04:25 AM
  #47
Entrancemperium
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 555
vCash: 500
Yeah allright let's keep him and what if Shanny decides he wants another cup and then hang it up, do you think he'll stay in new york this offseason? I say trade him if we are out of reach I mean come on, he's ufa next season. He could walk for nothing. And then it'll be "oh swell he played here a year and what do we have to show for it?"

Entrancemperium is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2007, 06:10 AM
  #48
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Entrancemperium View Post
Yeah allright let's keep him and what if Shanny decides he wants another cup and then hang it up, do you think he'll stay in new york this offseason? I say trade him if we are out of reach I mean come on, he's ufa next season. He could walk for nothing. And then it'll be "oh swell he played here a year and what do we have to show for it?"
Well, we got him for nothing too. Let's not be greedy here. If he wants to stay, he stays. If he doesn't want to stay, he doesn't stay. Trying to sell off upcoming UFA:s shows just how much trust we put into people. And if we show no trust, they will show no trust back.

Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2007, 06:23 AM
  #49
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,865
vCash: 500
Unless Brendan requests a trade,the Rangers should/will keep him and sign him to another one year contract for 2007-08.This team needs leadership besides the other assets Shanny brings to the table and we aren't getting that from #68

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2007, 08:52 AM
  #50
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Are we in such a petty shape because of luck of leadership? Is that what this team needs? Not at all. We are bad because of luck of chemistry in this team. Chemistry was something this team had last year. Did Shanahan's signing improve the chemistry? No. He (inadvertently) ruined it. Thanks to Shanahan great play that wasn't obvious, but he did not mixed with Czechs, did't make anyone around him better, killed Prucha's season among other things and at the end stopped scoring. He is no longer scoring threat. His trade value diminishes every week. Don't get me wrong, he is not the problem, his departure would make the team worse, not better, but everyone should agree that his signing did not work out (as well as EVERYTHING ELSE Slats did over the summer). Now it is time get at least something out of it. Even if we keep him he will not come back next season. Why? Because he is smart and experienced enough to understand that he also made a mistake coming here.

94now 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 03:40 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.