honestly, kovalchuk is out of the picture for me....he is a pipe dream as players like dubi, zherdev and callahan will all be looking for significant raises if they continue their good play....
i know many are down on rozsival and both kalinin's and mara's contracts are up after this season leaving the rangers with a sort of dilema if rozsival was to be traded.....
i, as many others, would love to resign mara if he can continue his play as of late....he needs to continue playing with snarl to be effective but i believe he could be a cheaper replacement for rozsival.....leaving
now comes the trade of rozsival.....i know many here will possibly disagree with me, however i believe the rangers shouldnt go out and look for a scorer first, but instead for a top-tier defenseman like JBo.....he is having an off season and he doesnt look like he will resign so i would honestly prefer JBo to kovalchuk at this point because JBo would be the far cheaper option and would add to an already very good defensive core of the future....
this may get complicated but there are two seperate trades i would make:
OTT 1st 09
OTT gives up their first in order to add scoring depth immediately to their lineup and a defenseman who can move the puck.....
Uh... you mean like Pittsburgh traded a top six forward to get Hossa? Or Phoenix to get Jokinen? Or San Jose to get Thornton?
I know that fans of teams about to lose a top player never want to admit this, but you (almost) never get a bona fide top line player in exchange for a bona fide top line player - if for no other reason than it defeats the purpose of acquiring the new guy in the first place. Heck, it also defeats the purpose for the team trading the guy away since a) if you're trading a top line talent, you're probably looking to rebuild (& therefore are looking for multiple talented young guys) and b) if you were only one top line player away from a long playoff run, you wouldn't want to trade the guy you already have.
What you do get is a bunch of assets that might some day add up to more than the guy you're trading away. Especially when everyone in the league knows that the guy you're trading is months away from leaving for nothing.
I think the offer I suggested for Kovalchuk is both fair and realistic (and actually might be more than the Rangers would have to give). Now, it might not be the best that the Thrash could get. And it might not be something that the Rangers would want to do. But it's silly to say that you'd have to send Gomez the other way to get him - or that the Rangers would want to do so.
Pittsburg was a deadline deal for a player the team had 0% chance of resigning. They had to sell low.
Phoenix - gave up to two top 6 dmen, and Jokinen.
Thornton - well nobody understands that trade.
But here is the kicker for all the trades - they all had ample cap room. We do not. and if you want to get rid of Rosy, you just create a void on defense that will need to be replaced immediately, as we don't have anybody in HFD ready for NHL experience which will cost money and cap space. Plus you need to resign a Jbow, or Kovy, or Gabo to contract that will in all likelyhood be alot higher than Rosy's contract. Thus taking up more of this valuable cap space that we lack.
combine that with the fact that in the next two years we have Zherdev, Dubi, Cally, Korps, Dawes, Staal, Girardi all going to get raises. Taking up even more cap room. Plus we do not have any significant contracts expiring. Also combine the fact that there is a very very very real threat of the cap shrinking and we have some issues. Thus we need to shed a big contract ie Gomez, Drury, or Redden to make this possible.
So yeah, maybe we can get a top six forward for Rosy picks, and prospects. But the full cost of it maybe losing a a player to an offer sheet, or trading Gomez, and Redden for nothing b/c of the cap (and including a pick), or cutting players and having dead cap space.
you CANNOT have too many long term high contracts on a team. Especially those to players who will NEVER live up to those contracts. Adding another one w/o getting rid of one would create a nightmare of a cap situation.