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

Sather must decide: Is dealing Girardi best for Rangers?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-09-2014, 01:17 AM
  #476
Kwayry
Take the damn deal
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,914
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cake or Death View Post
I honestly think there is a huge value gap between Gardiner and Girardi. Gardiner is pretty unproven - he is almost the exact age as MDZ with half the career points and GP. Heck, didn't Gardiner spend almost all of last season in the minors? This is, imho, a big risk on a fairly unproven player which creates a massive hole in the top 4. Keep in mind Girardi logs a ton of tough minutes and has only missed 4 games over the past 7 seasons.
I agree. Gardiner is less proven than DZ, produces less, is less accurate, doesn't hit as often, blocks less shots, turns the puck more often. I don't get the love fest, except for his skating.

Kwayry is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 01:19 AM
  #477
Mikos87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwayry View Post
I agree. Gardiner is less proven than DZ, produces less, is less accurate, doesn't hit as often, blocks less shots, turns the puck more often. I don't get the love fest, except for his skating.
Did everyone see Dom Moore school Gardiner on his 2nd goal the TOR game? That's Jake Gardiner. Fly-by defenseman.

Very very pretty skater however. Kid looks like Brian Boytano in a Leafs jersey.

Mikos87 is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 01:26 AM
  #478
Kwayry
Take the damn deal
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,914
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikos87 View Post
Did everyone see Dom Moore school Gardiner on his 2nd goal the TOR game? That's Jake Gardiner. Fly-by defenseman.

Very very pretty skater however. Kid looks like Brian Boytano in a Leafs jersey.
I am not saying he is a bad Dman, but he is definitely not a top pair material.

Kwayry is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 01:38 AM
  #479
Kwayry
Take the damn deal
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,914
vCash: 500
@ Pizza, you are asking some very good questions. I'd like to add one. With Girardi and Cally being good locker room leaders, who will replace their leadership?

Kwayry is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 06:14 AM
  #480
SML
Registered User
 
SML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,743
vCash: 500
I have always felt that leadership is a term that is used too much in hockey. The new group wikl select its own leader. That is not necessarily an older guy. If you start over with a bunch of young 20somethings, is their leader going to be the old guy doing the wife and kids thing? Just because someone is class president at one school doesnt mean they would automatically be at a different one. My point is, the group will find someone, and they will be fine. We lost Messier, we got Drury, out goes Drury, we get Callahan. It will happen again.

SML is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 07:02 AM
  #481
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
I'm not even sure I am comfortable giving him 5 years, but it would certainly be better than 6x6 or 6x7.
The longer term you give, the lower AAV you get.

It seems alot easier to sell the below contract to Girardi than 5.5m x 4 years. If you also could get a limited NTC the last 4 years, he could be an easy to sell to budget teams.

8 Years (AAV = 5.5m per)
1y - 8m
2y - 8m
3y - 6m
4y - 6m
5y - 4m
6y - 4m
7y - 4m
8y - 4m

Ola is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 07:20 AM
  #482
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,899
vCash: 500
The Rangers wouldn't give Lundqvist 8 years. They aren't giving Girardi 8 years. The Rangers weren't crazy about giving Lundqvist 7 years.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 07:24 AM
  #483
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kwayry View Post
@ Pizza, you are asking some very good questions. I'd like to add one. With Girardi and Cally being good locker room leaders, who will replace their leadership?
So you want Girardi and Callahan being leaders on this team for the next 7 years? No other players will be able to emerge into leadership roles with those players on the team. The Boston Bruins traded Joe Thornton because they wanted the Bruins to become Patrice Bergeron's team. That wasn't happening with Thornton on the team. Pierre McGuire was praising the Thornton trade for SJ during the Sharks-Hawks broadcast on Sunday night. Pierre forget to mention Boston won a Cup and went to the Finals two years later with Bergeron. The Sharks haven't been to a Cup final.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 07:29 AM
  #484
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
Who? What assets? Who replaces Girardi? People seem to be having a tough time answering that one.

Opinion. If your going to say what you said is it also not fair to say that those players have benefited from playing with Girardi.

Speculation. You don't know this.

I'm saying be damn careful trading away a big minute, shut down defense man.

Paying him would be expensive, but and I will speculate a little myself, maybe not as expensive as a lot of people think.

How expensive is it to find the guy who eats the minutes and helps shut down guys like OV and Crosby?
No one will replace Girardi for the rest of this season. Everything can't be about this season. That type of thinking is why the Rangers have won 1 championship in 74 years.

Why haven't the Rangers re-signed Girardi? Gorton has spoken to Don Meehan. Sather has spoken to Meehan.

Answer. Meehan wants a fortune. Just like Newport wanted with Lundqvist.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 08:01 AM
  #485
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
No one will replace Girardi for the rest of this season. Everything can't be about this season. That type of thinking is why the Rangers have won 1 championship in 74 years.

Why haven't the Rangers re-signed Girardi? Gorton has spoken to Don Meehan. Sather has spoken to Meehan.

Answer. Meehan wants a fortune. Just like Newport wanted with Lundqvist.
Who is replacing Girardi next season then? Vaatanen? When and how do you intend to replace Girardi?

We have holes in the lineup, we open up two more by dealing Girardi and Callahan. That is 4-5 major holes that must be filled. When do you intend to compete? 5 years? 7 years? What do you do with McD, Kreider and co in the meantime?

Odds for us to win a cup isn't that high. Now is not the time to tear things apart though. Do it in 5 years instead and then do it for real.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 08:06 AM
  #486
haohmaru
#bdwyblueshirts
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 5,852
vCash: 500
Odds for anyone to win the Cup aren't high. Pittsburgh has had the best player in the world for years and routinely has one of the best lineups in the league and they've won once (with that player). Edmonton has had 1st round picks up the wazoo and can't make the playoffs. The Blues haven't won a Cup in their history and have fielded competitive teams for years - same for Vancouver, San Jose, etc...

30 teams, one winner, in a cap based league = low % chance you're going to win.

haohmaru is online now  
Old
01-09-2014, 08:16 AM
  #487
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Who is replacing Girardi next season then? Vaatanen? When and how do you intend to replace Girardi?

We have holes in the lineup, we open up two more by dealing Girardi and Callahan. That is 4-5 major holes that must be filled. When do you intend to compete? 5 years? 7 years? What do you do with McD, Kreider and co in the meantime?

Odds for us to win a cup isn't that high. Now is not the time to tear things apart though. Do it in 5 years instead and then do it for real.
I actually think we have one of the most complete teams in the league, but we have several spots which aren't holes but the current player just doesn't really cut it.

I mean Stepan is a good-to-great top-6 C, but not really a 1C. At least this year.

Richards is a decent top-6 C, but nothing more.

Brassard is skilled but not a great fit at 3C.

Girardi is at best passable at 1RD.

Trading Girardi opens up a hole, but I don't think trading Callahan does. Nash and Zucc can easily hold down the top-6 RW spots and a 3RW isn't that difficult to find.

Pittsburgh is a team with real holes.

I'd say the only really complete team in the league are the Sharks. The Blues and Hawks are close to complete, but I'm not sold on their goaltending.

Blue Blooded is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 08:33 AM
  #488
haohmaru
#bdwyblueshirts
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 5,852
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Blooded View Post

I'd say the only really complete team in the league are the Sharks. The Blues and Hawks are close to complete, but I'm not sold on their goaltending.
Have to throw Anaheim and Boston in that conversation.

haohmaru is online now  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:10 AM
  #489
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Who is replacing Girardi next season then? Vaatanen? When and how do you intend to replace Girardi?

We have holes in the lineup, we open up two more by dealing Girardi and Callahan. That is 4-5 major holes that must be filled. When do you intend to compete? 5 years? 7 years? What do you do with McD, Kreider and co in the meantime?

Odds for us to win a cup isn't that high. Now is not the time to tear things apart though. Do it in 5 years instead and then do it for real.
Girardi isn't going to play forever. Sooner or later, he will need to be replaced. Should we sign Girardi for 7 years, then draft a kid in the mid 1st who might be able to replace him in 4 or 5 years? Will Girardi still be playing well by then? How is that any better of a plan?

There are young dmen around the league who we can target. Vatanen is just one of them. Hell, maybe we get a couple 1st rounders and move up to pick Ekblad. I don't have the answer to who replaces Girardi, but if we are trading him, finding a replacement for him, even if that replacement is a year or two away from reaching Girardi's level, will be part of the plan.

There's only 2 things I know for sure will happen. Girardi's price tag will go up and his value will go down.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:12 AM
  #490
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,022
vCash: 500
Awards:
I posed the question earlier and it still remains one that needs answers:

At this point, are you paying Girardi for what he has done or what he will do?

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:12 AM
  #491
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Blooded View Post
I actually think we have one of the most complete teams in the league, but we have several spots which aren't holes but the current player just doesn't really cut it.

I mean Stepan is a good-to-great top-6 C, but not really a 1C. At least this year.

Richards is a decent top-6 C, but nothing more.

Brassard is skilled but not a great fit at 3C.

Girardi is at best passable at 1RD.

Trading Girardi opens up a hole, but I don't think trading Callahan does. Nash and Zucc can easily hold down the top-6 RW spots and a 3RW isn't that difficult to find.

Pittsburgh is a team with real holes.

I'd say the only really complete team in the league are the Sharks. The Blues and Hawks are close to complete, but I'm not sold on their goaltending.
I agree.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:22 AM
  #492
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I posed the question earlier and it still remains one that needs answers:

At this point, are you paying Girardi for what he has done or what he will do?
Oooh Oooh Oooh pick me Mr. Kotter!

I know the answer!

Jersey Girl is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:28 AM
  #493
Off Sides
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 463
Are you guys not worried about what they would actually do with that cap space though?

I am all for a retool and I don't see anyway having Nash, Lundqvist, Callahan and Girardi all tied up in long term expensive no trade/movement clauses is a good idea, but I do fear what they would do.


I think many of us feel they would just use those return assets to get younger and better long term but I am really not so sure that is what they would actually do.

I think the temptation to shop on UFA day would be just to great for them to overcome.

If that is the case, is it still better to sell them? I guess at least they may get some picks or prospects back in the process but I also think it would mean just different UFA being brought in on equally as bad of contracts.

From there would they actually be patient with whatever future assets they received, or would those be used to rent at the deadline to bolster the new batch of UFAs at the first sign of them making the playoffs?

I guess I just don't have any confidence that they would actually do the things we think would lead to a long term better team or continue to follow that path for long enough.


If the plan is to build a long term contender, I am all for trading these players, but if the plan is to just repeat what they have been doing, just with different players, then I would rather they just kept the players who have worked hard here.

Off Sides is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:33 AM
  #494
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I posed the question earlier and it still remains one that needs answers:

At this point, are you paying Girardi for what he has done or what he will do?
I see where your going and don't disagree in principle.

I will counter with: is there any player in the 27-29 range who you are signing purely for what they "will do"? It's impossible. And it's equally impossible to field a competitive team with no contracts signed in that age range.

It is inevitable that your veteran players are going to be some degree of overpaid, if you are signing them at the typical UFA age. The game is to make sure they are not overpaid to the point of being crippling. And that you are signing the right players - the ones you have no other way of replacing. Or that would be so expensive to replace in terms of assets that the cap savings is washed out.

Under the old CBA one could argue for the option of signing 21-24 year olds to 10 year deals to minimize this. That carries it's own risks (Tyler Myers) and is no longer an option, anyway.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is online now  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:35 AM
  #495
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Off Sides View Post
Are you guys not worried about what they would actually do with that cap space though?

I am all for a retool and I don't see anyway having Nash, Lundqvist, Callahan and Girardi all tied up in long term expensive no trade/movement clauses is a good idea, but I do fear what they would do.


I think many of us feel they would just use those return assets to get younger and better long term but I am really not so sure that is what they would actually do.

I think the temptation to shop on UFA day would be just to great for them to overcome.

If that is the case, is it still better to sell them? I guess at least they may get some picks or prospects back in the process but I also think it would mean just different UFA being brought in on equally as bad of contracts.

From there would they actually be patient with whatever future assets they received, or would those be used to rent at the deadline to bolster the new batch of UFAs at the first sign of them making the playoffs?

I guess I just don't have any confidence that they would actually do the things we think would lead to a long term better team or continue to follow that path for long enough.


If the plan is to build a long term contender, I am all for trading these players, but if the plan is to just repeat what they have been doing, just with different players, then I would rather they just kept the players who have worked hard here.
Well said. This is sums up my feelings as well.

HatTrick Swayze is online now  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:50 AM
  #496
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I posed the question earlier and it still remains one that needs answers:

At this point, are you paying Girardi for what he has done or what he will do?
You'd be paying Girardi to help you win the Cup. Which is generally the same idea when you sign Richards, Lundqvist or McDonagh or trade for Nash's contract.

We don't know what Girardi and his agent would want to sign?--we don't have an idea what Sather and his team have offered or that they have offered anything at all or plan to make an offer. We don't know if Girardi is dead set on going to another team like Toronto--nearest his hometown or whether he intends to explore probably his only real chance as an UFA this summer and get the best deal possible or instead balance it out between the deal and a team with a legit chance to contend for the next several years. I would imagine the Rangers do have an idea and on that and this years playoff hopes hinges whether they intend to trade him or not.

What we do know is losing Girardi is going to leave a big hole on our right side defense--that losing Anton Stralman also a UFA and our 2nd pairing right side d-man would exacerbate the problem to a critical level of just who defends the right side next year. And Stralman if he decides to stay is not likely to be able to replace Girardi's minutes--so the team's competitiveness moving forward is going to center around other issues than whether we have a legit 1st line center or not. Rangers are likely then to go into the UFA season--looking for the best solution to band aid the current hole which may or may not be as costly as just signing Girardi (again--if he were willing) in the first place. Or as RB likes to point out--Rinse, cycle, repeat.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 09:58 AM
  #497
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,022
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
You'd be paying Girardi to help you win the Cup. Which is generally the same idea when you sign Richards, Lundqvist or McDonagh or trade for Nash's contract.
Moves and a MO that certainly have paid off. 6 months from now, they're going to pay Brad Richards to NOT play for them.

OK, as constituted, do you see this team winning a Cup in, say, the next 6 years?

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 10:10 AM
  #498
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
Moves and a MO that certainly have paid off. 6 months from now, they're going to pay Brad Richards to NOT play for them.

OK, as constituted, do you see this team winning a Cup in, say, the next 6 years?
No I don't. I see 5--maybe 6 guys in Hartford that might be good NHL players one day and 3 or 4 of our other prospects at most--which is less than most teams. At the moment there's not a lot of help on the way. In that sense I can see moving Girardi--he could bring back 3 very good prospects/young players.

In the meantime if the Rangers retool they are likely wasting Henrik's last years and Nash's as well. Not that if I were going younger I'd want to keep Nash around. Too complacent a player on and off the ice. Blowing things up goes against the team's MO. Sitting out multiple non-playoffs years is not fun for the fans either as I'm sure you're aware. There are more than a few that post on these pages though who have no idea.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 10:23 AM
  #499
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
No I don't. I see 5--maybe 6 guys in Hartford that might be good NHL players one day and 3 or 4 of our other prospects at most--which is less than most teams. At the moment there's not a lot of help on the way. In that sense I can see moving Girardi--he could bring back 3 very good prospects/young players.

In the meantime if the Rangers retool they are likely wasting Henrik's last years and Nash's as well. Not that if I were going younger I'd want to keep Nash around. Too complacent a player on and off the ice. Blowing things up goes against the team's MO. Sitting out multiple non-playoffs years is not fun for the fans either as I'm sure you're aware. There are more than a few that post on these pages though who have no idea.
I'm not the least bit concerned about that. They get paid to play. Henrik knew the state of the team when he signed the contract. Both can be traded if they don't want to play here any more.

That being said, I don't think we are talking about a 10 year plan here. And re-tooling isn't rebuilding. We still have a lot of quality young players and we would be adding to that through trade. Free agency can be used to supplement the roster. Short term commitments.

Trading Girardi won't have as big of a negative impact on this team as some think. And even if it does, even if we end up finishing bottom 5 next year, so what? So we get a good pick in a very deep draft and maybe get the kind of talent this team hasn't had in forever. Girardi isn't the linchpin that is going to set this team back to the dark years.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
01-09-2014, 10:31 AM
  #500
Off Sides
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
Well said. This is sums up my feelings as well.
Thanks,

I will add I think we have already seen where they are leaning, if they were going to retool with youth even if it meant a couple down years, not sure they sign Lundqvist or trade for Carcillo.

At this point I think they will try resign these players if they can even if it means they may possibly walk for nothing, if they walk they will just sign other UFAs.

While I do not agree with the thinking, I do think there is something to be said for a organization who tries to give it's current players the best chance they can at the playoffs and winning in them.

As a fan it drives me crazy as I see it as counter productive to building a long term contender, but if I were a player, like say Lundqvist, McD, I would not be too happy with the idea of selling at the deadline if I thought there was a chance the team could in fact do something like contend. From a players perspective I'm not sure they would/should feel any other way, sort of have to believe in it or else they'd just go through the motions.

Off Sides 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 10:33 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.