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

Trade Rumor Thread V: "Trade 40 Goal Scorer NBD" (3/8: Getzlaf re-signs)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-04-2013, 03:33 PM
  #576
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,495
vCash: 500
From Katie Strang's chat today:

Quote:
Jason (Southport, CT)

Katie, what are the chances of the Rangers moving Gaborik? What would they look for in return?
Katie Strang (3:32 PM)

I think they will definitely have some willing trade partners. Considering that they'll also be in the playoff mix, I'd say at least a top prospect, top draft pick and a player that can contribute NOW for Rangers

NYR Viper is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 03:56 PM
  #577
JeffMangum
I'm v
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 58,813
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
From Katie Strang's chat today:
She didn't answer the first question.

__________________
Soon.
JeffMangum is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:00 PM
  #578
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
She didn't answer the first question.
I know

Sounds like what we have been discussing here though. Good young player, top prospect + 1st

NYR Viper is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:03 PM
  #579
TheRedViper
Registered User
 
TheRedViper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Niagara
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
The whole point of my original post was to flip Cowen to a team who needed someone like that.



First I've heard of that. Source?
Meant to include " take it with a grain of salt" I was at the draft last year and was talking to one of the Chicago execs. Said that he heard from their camp that he was unhappy. Nothing that's ever going to surface, just thought it was an interesting mention

TheRedViper is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:04 PM
  #580
JeffMangum
I'm v
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 58,813
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
I know

Sounds like what we have been discussing here though. Good young player, top prospect + 1st
Honestly, I think we know as much as she does about the situation.

That response seemed very speculatory and not fact based to me.

JeffMangum is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:39 PM
  #581
haohmaru
#bdwyblueshirts
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 6,096
vCash: 500
Only Rangers fans would want to trade a guy like Gaborik in his prime. How many Rangers players, in the history of the NYR, have scored 40+ goals for us in two seasons besides Gaborik?

Answer: 2

Jean Ratelle
Mike Gartner

That's it. In 86+ years and in the high flying 80's that's it. And this is they guy some of you want to send to someone else?

No thanks.

haohmaru is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:44 PM
  #582
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 11,409
vCash: 500
neither a top prospect or a #1 pick helps the Rangers NOW (IE next 2 years) as Strang speculated. That main player we are getting better be a damn stud in order to move gaborik.

Lundsanity30 is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:45 PM
  #583
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
Only Rangers fans would want to trade a guy like Gaborik in his prime. How many Rangers players, in the history of the NYR, have scored 40+ goals for us in two seasons besides Gaborik?

Answer: 2

Jean Ratelle
Mike Gartner

That's it. In 86+ years and in the high flying 80's that's it. And this is they guy some of you want to send to someone else?

No thanks.
It's quite ridiculous to be honest. I understand the concerns with the cap. But Gaborik has an expiring contract after next season. And I really don't see him signing another contract that pays him $7 million per year. I think it would be between $5-6. If it is higher you walk. I know there is a large portion here who want to get something in return for him rather than seeing him walk, but we are not other teams. The Rangers can spend money. I'd rather have a 40 goal scorer here next season that can score goals than worrying about replenishing the farm by trading him. I'm sure sather/gorton would be able to find someone on the FA market to replace some of gaborik's scoring at the cap hit they are willing to pay, meanwhile keeping the talented sniper for the 2013-2014 season.

RGY is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:47 PM
  #584
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
Only Rangers fans would want to trade a guy like Gaborik in his prime. How many Rangers players, in the history of the NYR, have scored 40+ goals for us in two seasons besides Gaborik?

Answer: 2

Jean Ratelle
Mike Gartner

That's it. In 86+ years and in the high flying 80's that's it. And this is they guy some of you want to send to someone else?

No thanks.
I get what you are saying but in this cap world, he won't be kept. Maximize the asset for the long-term health of the organization.

NYR Viper is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:49 PM
  #585
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGY View Post
It's quite ridiculous to be honest. I understand the concerns with the cap. But Gaborik has an expiring contract after next season. And I really don't see him signing another contract that pays him $7 million per year. I think it would be between $5-6. If it is higher you walk. I know there is a large portion here who want to get something in return for him rather than seeing him walk, but we are not other teams. The Rangers can spend money. I'd rather have a 40 goal scorer here next season that can score goals than worrying about replenishing the farm by trading him. I'm sure sather/gorton would be able to find someone on the FA market to replace some of gaborik's scoring at the cap hit they are willing to pay, meanwhile keeping the talented sniper for the 2013-2014 season.
Why are you okay with letting an asset, especially one as valuable as Marian Gaborik walk for nothing? I really don't understand this logic that people and many teams have. If there is a chance to bring in very good young assets for a player who is not in the long-term plans of the organization you do it 10x/10

NYR Viper is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:52 PM
  #586
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
Why are you okay with letting an asset, especially one as valuable as Marian Gaborik walk for nothing? I really don't understand this logic that people and many teams have. If there is a chance to bring in very good young assets for a player who is not in the long-term plans of the organization you do it 10x/10
Because I'd rather win a stanley cup. When you have these "assets" all at once on your team (Nash, Richards, Gaborik, Callahan, solid defense, all world goalie) you keep them as long as you can and you play to win now. You don't plan to win future stanley cups.

RGY is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:54 PM
  #587
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 11,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
Why are you okay with letting an asset, especially one as valuable as Marian Gaborik walk for nothing? I really don't understand this logic that people and many teams have. If there is a chance to bring in very good young assets for a player who is not in the long-term plans of the organization you do it 10x/10
Because we brought in Nash to put with Gaborik to try to create enough scoring to win a cup, not trade one before they get a legit chance to do so

Lundsanity30 is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:56 PM
  #588
haohmaru
#bdwyblueshirts
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 6,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
Why are you okay with letting an asset, especially one as valuable as Marian Gaborik walk for nothing? I really don't understand this logic that people and many teams have. If there is a chance to bring in very good young assets for a player who is not in the long-term plans of the organization you do it 10x/10
That's the problem with your logic. The "long term plans" of the organization have led us to RIGHT NOW. These two years are the Rangers window for a deep playoff run. Have you looked at the RFA/UFA situation after next season? We've got 4 guys signed on the current roster for that season. Henrik is early 30's, Gabs is early 30's, Richards is going to decline, Nash is late 20's, etc...

Now is the time for the Rangers to hold onto their 40 goal scorer (how many of these were there last year in the entire league?) and go for it.

haohmaru is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:57 PM
  #589
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGY View Post
Because I'd rather win a stanley cup. When you have these "assets" all at once on your team (Nash, Richards, Gaborik, Callahan, solid defense, all world goalie) you keep them as long as you can and you play to win now. You don't plan to win future stanley cups.
This is a gradual process. The Rangers are top-heavy. They were able to get an asset (Nash) for less than his normal value would be. Maximize Gaborik's value, replenish the farm AND get a good young player who is cost controlled. Boston did it with Kessel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
Because we brought in Nash to put with Gaborik to try to create enough scoring to win a cup, not trade one before they get a legit chance to do so
I understand your point, but I would rather compete this year and for the next 10 years than just this year and next year.

NYR Viper is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 04:57 PM
  #590
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
Because we brought in Nash to put with Gaborik to try to create enough scoring to win a cup, not trade one before they get a legit chance to do so
This. And the fact that some people want to trade him this year is laughable. Let's just always trade players at the end of their contract so we can get the most bang for our buck and this way we'll always be prepared for the future....

When did we become a small market team?

RGY is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:01 PM
  #591
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
This is a gradual process. The Rangers are top-heavy. They were able to get an asset (Nash) for less than his normal value would be. Maximize Gaborik's value, replenish the farm AND get a good young player who is cost controlled. Boston did it with Kessel.



I understand your point, but I would rather compete this year and for the next 10 years than just this year and next year.
Now were too top-heavy??? What in the world is going on with the fans of this team. So damn bipolar. One minute (last year) we don't have enough high end talent to compliment gaborik and take the load off him...now we have too much high end talent and need to spread it out. What is it? Pick a side and stick with it.

You are trying to manage this team as if this organization has had success and a chance to win every year. Have we really forgotten those 7 years of no playoff appearances? I mean I know we all want to keep them a distant memory but we can't act like it didnt happen. The Rangers have a very real chance to make a deep playoff run. Don't be blinded by the slow start this year with no training camp and a lot of injuries here and there. This is a win now team. We aren't on a 5 or 10 year plan.

RGY is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:06 PM
  #592
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,036
vCash: 500
And we need to stop referencing the phil kessel trade. He was 21 years old at the time and very unproven. He had one very, very good year and he wanted to cash in. Boston took a huge chance because not many organizations trade their 21 year old blue chip prospect. They took a chance and got lucky.

Gaborik is a proven 40 goal scorer in his prime right now. Let's not compare apples to oranges.

RGY is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:20 PM
  #593
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Gaborik's scoring doesn't make him elite. It makes him tolerable. Tolerable to dress...not $7.5 million, keep him because we're making a cup run tolerable. Stat sheets can say one thing but you are your skill set. Sorry Gabby, it was nice knowing you but you gotta go.

Also, this notion that you can pinpoint when we are geared up for a cup run is the craziest part of this whole debate.

MSG the place to be* is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:23 PM
  #594
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
Only Rangers fans would want to trade a guy like Gaborik in his prime. How many Rangers players, in the history of the NYR, have scored 40+ goals for us in two seasons besides Gaborik?

Answer: 2

Jean Ratelle
Mike Gartner

That's it. In 86+ years and in the high flying 80's that's it. And this is they guy some of you want to send to someone else?

No thanks.
Rangers traded Gartner, at 33 (one year older than Gaborik) at the trade deadline in 1994. 28 goals in the 71 games for the Rangers that season.

Rangers won the Cup in 94.

Rangers traded Ratelle in 1976, he was 34 years old, 3 years later the Rangers were in the Stanley Cup Finals.

The cap is coming down. The Rangers need to extend their core players, all within a couple of years. The Rangers can get very good value in return for Gaborik, and keep moving forward.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:26 PM
  #595
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkton7 View Post
Gaborik's scoring doesn't make him elite. It makes him tolerable. Tolerable to dress...not $7.5 million, keep him because we're making a cup run tolerable. Stat sheets can say one thing but you are your skill set. Sorry Gabby, it was nice knowing you but you gotta go.

Also, this notion that you can pinpoint when we are geared up for a cup run is the craziest part of this whole debate.
I'm not opposed to trading Gaborik if the situation is right (though I don't think it will be until after this season), but this is nuts. The window is OBVIOUSLY here. This is OBVIOUSLY a team built to win now. The window hasn't been this clear for this team since 1994. That doesn't mean the Rangers are the best team in the league, or that they are a sure bet to win. It means it probably isn't going to get any better than this for this core. It's only reasonable to go for it right now. Lundqvist, Callahan, Staal, Girardi, and Nash are all in their prime. Gaborik and Richards are exiting their primes.

NYR Sting is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:45 PM
  #596
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 11,409
vCash: 500
As long as we have Nash Hank and keep our core *which we can for a few more years at least* this team could be a threat easily for the next 5 yrs. Even if Gabs walks, the team can use that money on another talent. We don't have to move Gabs to stay competitive. I feel some people believe we do and that's why they are trying to "maximize his value"

Lundsanity30 is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:47 PM
  #597
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 11,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Rangers traded Gartner, at 33 (one year older than Gaborik) at the trade deadline in 1994. 28 goals in the 71 games for the Rangers that season.

Rangers won the Cup in 94.

Rangers traded Ratelle in 1976, he was 34 years old, 3 years later the Rangers were in the Stanley Cup Finals.

The cap is coming down. The Rangers need to extend their core players, all within a couple of years. The Rangers can get very good value in return for Gaborik, and keep moving forward.
28 goals is a far cry from 40+.. a handful of guys get 40 anymore

Lundsanity30 is online now  
Old
03-04-2013, 05:55 PM
  #598
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
I'm not opposed to trading Gaborik if the situation is right (though I don't think it will be until after this season), but this is nuts. The window is OBVIOUSLY here. This is OBVIOUSLY a team built to win now. The window hasn't been this clear for this team since 1994. That doesn't mean the Rangers are the best team in the league, or that they are a sure bet to win. It means it probably isn't going to get any better than this for this core. It's only reasonable to go for it right now. Lundqvist, Callahan, Staal, Girardi, and Nash are all in their prime. Gaborik and Richards are exiting their primes.
Ravens, SF Giants part II, Kings, NY Giants, Stl Cardinals, Mavericks, Bruins, SF Giants part I...

I mean all those teams were primed for those championships, right? That's why the SF Giants traded one of the top prospects in baseball for Beltran in 2011 but by some act of god they win WS titles in 2010 and 2012. I guess the equation to winning a championship isn't so obvious.

MSG the place to be* is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 06:13 PM
  #599
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
I'm not opposed to trading Gaborik if the situation is right (though I don't think it will be until after this season), but this is nuts. The window is OBVIOUSLY here. This is OBVIOUSLY a team built to win now. The window hasn't been this clear for this team since 1994. That doesn't mean the Rangers are the best team in the league, or that they are a sure bet to win. It means it probably isn't going to get any better than this for this core. It's only reasonable to go for it right now. Lundqvist, Callahan, Staal, Girardi, and Nash are all in their prime. Gaborik and Richards are exiting their primes.
Our window started in 2006-07. It will most likely not end in 2 years and it has a good chance of being extended if Gaborik can bring back a big return.

Please name for me the last team, in ANY sport, that gave themselves a limited window and won a championship in that window. Celtics would be a stretch. Obviously they put an older team together with the aim of winning a championship and they won in year 1. But they also played in a finals game 7, were 1 win from the finals last year and won playoff rounds in the other two years. So that success debunks the theory that they had a limited window.

MSG the place to be* is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 06:27 PM
  #600
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkton7 View Post
Our window started in 2006-07. It will most likely not end in 2 years and it has a good chance of being extended if Gaborik can bring back a big return.

Please name for me the last team, in ANY sport, that gave themselves a limited window and won a championship in that window. Celtics would be a stretch. Obviously they put an older team together with the aim of winning a championship and they won in year 1. But they also played in a finals game 7, were 1 win from the finals last year and won playoff rounds in the other two years. So that success debunks the theory that they had a limited window.
Blackhawks. That they've rebuilt their depth since then is immaterial to the question.

Tawnos is online now  
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 07:36 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.