Strongly disagree. In the future I could see trading a top 4 defensemen (providing players like McIlrath and Erixon pan out accordingly), but at this point in time that would be a pretty bad idea IMO.
This team has a pretty large window of contention opening up and as of right now, this team is well ahead of schedule. We have plenty of promising prospects who are close to NHL ready and will be implemented into the line up within the next 2 or 3 seasons. Once we see what players become expendable then we can make a trade to fix our weaknesses.
Especially in a cap era, patience with up and coming prospects is a virtue. Once you see how your promising prospects develop at the NHL level, then you can start to make decisions on who to ship out. As an organization, we are not at that point yet. We're close, but just not there.
This organization has come a long way since the lockout, there is no reason to make a move we will regret simply because we aren't scoring.
Who do you expect to try and tempt Columbus with for Nash without a top-4 D-man? D is the only position where we have expendable value. Dubinsky is overpaid, no one wants him as a core piece for a star. We know Kreider will be ready, but I'm not counting on JT making it. If he does make it out of camp that's great, but we shouldn't force any young guys into our line up just for the sake of a mass youth movement.
Why are you so incessant on a huge move if this team doesnt win the cup? The same team whose playoff fate was decided on the last day of the season the past 2 years....thats the team you are placing Stanley Cup aspirations upon? As Torts says, this is a "process."
And part of the process is not giving up assets that truly helped you get to this point, and thats what the top 4 D, Lundqvist, Gaborik, and Callahan have been
Why are you so incessant on a huge move if this team doesnt win the cup? The same team whose playoff fate was decided on the last day of the season the past 2 years....thats the team you are placing Stanley Cup aspirations upon? As Torts says, this is a "process."
And part of the process is not giving up assets that truly helped you get to this point, and thats what the top 4 D, Lundqvist, Gaborik, and Callahan have been
Rather trade none, but if I had to choose, it would be whoever fetches more between Staal/Girardi. I'd rather trade Girardi, but if Staal had more value, i'd trade him. Again, I don't want to trade either, but if the offense falters and Bobby Ryan happens to become available and Anaheim is interested in one of them, i'd pull the trigger.
Who do you expect to try and tempt Columbus with for Nash without a top-4 D-man? D is the only position where we have expendable value. Dubinsky is overpaid, no one wants him as a core piece for a star. We know Kreider will be ready, but I'm not counting on JT making it. If he does make it out of camp that's great, but we shouldn't force any young guys into our line up just for the sake of a mass youth movement.
i dont think nashs price will be as high this summer...i doubt howson is the GM at that point.
Good point , ultimately the NYR need at least 2 solid wingers and a real 3 rd line center
Agreed. If we had the appropriate winger depth, two of Stepan/Dubinsky/Anisimov could be our 2nd and 3rd line centers, and Boyle would be on the 4th line where he belongs.
Do I think we can contend this year? Sure. But by no means should we be favorites.
I wouldn't trade any of the top 4. Defense wins championships. Depth wingers are easy to come by.
I think the point was that packaging one of Staal/Girardi/MDZ/McD can bring back a legit top 6 winger. Someone who can pot 30+. By bringing in someone like that, you don't have to play Stepan or Dubinsky or Anisimov out of position. Everyone slides down the depth charts a bit and adds to the total forward depth.
I'm not advocating trading any of our defenseman, because I think next year Dubinsky can get back to putting up 50 points, Stepan and Hagelin will have improved through experience, and Kreider/Miller can contribute to the third line.
Staal is quietly finding his game again. In my opinion, hes been the Rangers best defenseman over the last couple of weeks.
When both are healthy, he is a superior player to Sauer. Cant believe you'd even make such a comparison.
Bottom line for me is that the depth on D is a bit of an illusion at this point. No reason to deal any of the top 4.
Sauer was a +29 over the last two seasons. Guess what? That is an example of +/- being a stat indicative of how well the guy plays defensively. Look who his partners were -- Macdonagh and Del Zotto. Not exactly a veteran presence to carry either duo.
Sauer is an excellent defender.
Rangers were 23-9-4 without Staal. They're 19-8-3 with him.
Because of his salary and term, I think he's the guy you get rid of.
Sauer was a +29 over the last two seasons. Guess what? That is an example of +/- being a stat indicative of how well the guy plays defensively. Look who his partners were -- Macdonagh and Del Zotto. Not exactly a veteran presence to carry either duo.
Sauer is an excellent defender.
Rangers were 23-9-4 without Staal. They're 19-8-3 with him.
Because of his salary and term, I think he's the guy you get rid of.
Don't know if you noticed...but last year, our 2nd pairing was a higher +/- than the first. If they were better defensively, why did Torts not match them up against the opponent's top lines? Because they were not as good as the first pairing, regardless of their +/-.
I guess it is true that out of all those guys, Girardi does have the least upside and is thus, the most expendable. But as any veteran fan will attest to,... durability is an important virtue over the course of a long season. Staal and Sauer may be more talented, but it doesn't do us any good if they're banged-up and out for long periods of time. Plus, Girardi is a righty.
Trade him if you want, but I think Ranger fans will miss Girardi more than they think.
We actually need a quick puck moving blueliner who can head the rush up ice . DZ might someday fill that role if he can get to the next step...which I have my doubts about . Those kind of defense are seemingly becoming a rare breed . Our blueline also lacks an over all physical force factor that opponents would be fearful of outside of Bickel . Despite having a great season up till now...we have many holes that need either improving or filling before we start making plans to face a Western conference team in a Cup final...many !!!
What are with these threads? Panic much? Geez step away from the ledge.
They played two bad games and all hell is breaking loose. Some of you were so spoiled with how well they have played all year that you cant accept a few poorly played games. It happens. The other thread is ripping Biron. Some of you need to stop being a bunch of babies they will be fine.
The trade deadline killed this team, at the very least we should have went after a third line defenseman. One without "Scott" on the back of his jersey. I guess as we reflect back on this season at some point, the lack of additional help at the deadline will always be questionable IMO. Maybe management has already conceded this season? Kinda crazy how a team first in it's conference is expected to fail in the postseason miserably, not just my opinion, one that's shared among a lot of hockey brains around the NHL.
Agree with this completely. Baffles me how we didn't bring in any additional help.
There should be a none of the above option. Maybe though the OP thought that his point of view was so obvious that we didn't need that option.
Personally I think there are a lot of posters here who are trade happy. Would be Mike Milbury's. I don't think that anyone can argue that the Rangers have been making a lot of progress the last couple seasons. Their personnel decisions have been quite good. Who they draft. Who they sign as free agents and who they trade for. They've held on to their best prospects and they have been developing an even younger core to go with the not so old Girardi, Staal, Dubinsky, Callahan quartet.
The amateur GM's fret too much. Lack of patience can kill a team. I bring up Milbury for a reason. Couldn't sit by and watch a young team flounder--no patience for growing pains. Add Luongo and Chara to their current squad and they would be ****ing good.
Don't know if you noticed...but last year, our 2nd pairing was a higher +/- than the first. If they were better defensively, why did Torts not match them up against the opponent's top lines? Because they were not as good as the first pairing, regardless of their +/-.
I don't know if you noticed, but Sauer was a rookie last year. Detract all you want, a healthy Sauer is good enough defensively to offset the loss of Staal.
The record without Staal speaks volumes of how well the group has played.
There should be a none of the above option. Maybe though the OP thought that his point of view was so obvious that we didn't need that option.
Personally I think there are a lot of posters here who are trade happy. Would be Mike Milbury's. I don't think that anyone can argue that the Rangers have been making a lot of progress the last couple seasons. Their personnel decisions have been quite good. Who they draft. Who they sign as free agents and who they trade for. They've held on to their best prospects and they have been developing an even younger core to go with the not so old Girardi, Staal, Dubinsky, Callahan quartet.
The amateur GM's fret too much. Lack of patience can kill a team. I bring up Milbury for a reason. Couldn't sit by and watch a young team flounder--no patience for growing pains. Add Luongo and Chara to their current squad and they would be ****ing good.
Great post EB. Pretty much what i was thinking. Just no patience, too much panic.
Not to mention hypothetically having heatley and spezza had they not traded a couple picks
As I have said before, 95% of Ranger fans over 40 would want anything to do with that spawn of evil (Parise).
For those of you who don't know, Zac Parise's father, J.P., who was basically a no-name scrub, scored a overtime goal seven seconds in at the Garden in Game #3 of the opening round (they played 3 game series back then) of the 1975 playoffs for the Islanders. This gave the Islanders legitimacy, and started the Rangers into a tailspin. The Rangers were a contender for most of the early 70's. This playoff exit is what started the whole "curse" nonsense and the "1940" chants.
The name Parise should NEVER be on the back of any Ranger sweater, PERIOD!
There are perfectly legitimate reasons why one would not want Parise on the Rangers. This is not one of them.
