Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
The Rangers won't be trading Dubinsky for anyone on the Pens not named Crosby, Malkin, or Staal.
If you want Dubinsky, make a proposal around one of those three.
Let's not go too too crazy here. You'd be crazy not to take a deal based around Letang, Martin, or Michalek, and I think that Goligoski and Tangradi could also be pretty enticing starting points for you as well (less on Goligoski's part though since you have someone similar and better than he is in Del Zotto).
Let's not go too too crazy here. You'd be crazy not to take a deal based around Letang, Martin, or Michalek, and I think that Goligoski and Tangradi could also be pretty enticing starting points for you as well (less on Goligoski's part though since you have someone similar and better than he is in Del Zotto).
It is not insanity, it is the practical reality of the situation. Sather has shown that he was unwilling to part with Dubinsky in a deal for Heatley, and is actually proving his words about building a young team core to be true.
The Rangers are strong on defensive prospects and scoring winger prospects, what they lack is a true #1 center, or even a 1C blue-chip prospect. So the only logical trade with Pittsburgh would be around Malkin, Crosby, or Staal, if the Rangers were to include Dubinsky. Otherwise the trade would not be addressing needs.
It is not insanity, it is the practical reality of the situation. Sather has shown that he was unwilling to part with Dubinsky in a deal for Heatley, and is actually proving his words about building a young team core to be true.
The Rangers are strong on defensive prospects and scoring winger prospects, what they lack is a true #1 center, or even a 1C blue-chip prospect. So the only logical trade with Pittsburgh would be around Malkin, Crosby, or Staal, if the Rangers were to include Dubinsky. Otherwise the trade would not be addressing needs.
That is were you lose me, and I'm sure many others.
Why bring them up?
There is nothing logical that the NYR's could conjure up as a single, or a multiple body work of players that the current Penguins would actually ever need/consider trading Malkin & Crosby to the Rangers for, let alone because of Dubinsky was being a part of a trade.
It's just not there, and add too it that they're division rivals.
The Rangers have some nice pieces, just not the right pieces the Penguins need.
lol have you watched Frolov or Dubinsky play before????
Or Gaborik for that matter? I wouldn't call Gaborik gritty but I wouldn't call him soft either. He's strong on the puck and doesn't shy away from contact.
Last edited by RangerFan10: 08-09-2010 at 01:24 AM.
That is were you lose me, and I'm sure many others.
Why bring them up?
There is nothing logical that the NYR's could conjure up as a single, or a multiple body work of players that the current Penguins would actually ever need/consider trading Malkin & Crosby to the Rangers for, let alone because of Dubinsky was being a part of a trade.
It's just not there, and add too it that they're division rivals.
The Rangers have some nice pieces, just not the right pieces the Penguins need.
I'm simply stating what the Rangers would be willing to trade Dubinsky for, logically.
I apologize if I have phrased my argument in a way that it is difficult to understand. I will attempt to rephrase it:
Dubinsky = a scoring, gritty winger/center. The Rangers have a need for more grit combined with skill. The Rangers are stocked with young defensemen and defense prospects/scoring winger prospects. The one thing the Rangers need more than anything else is a #1 center.
The Rangers have little need for a scoring winger, a gritty winger that can't score, a bottom-6 player of any kind, a defense prospect of any kind, or a goaltender. The ONLY thing the Rangers would be willing to trade one of their most valuable assets (Dubinsky) for is a #1 center. The only other need the Rangers have, currently, is for a veteran, crease-clearing defenseman, but they wouldn't give up Dubinsky for that.
Thus, the only logical trade, for the Rangers, when looking at Pittsburgh, would be for Malkin, Crosby, or Staal.
I'm simply stating what the Rangers would be willing to trade Dubinsky for, logically.
I apologize if I have phrased my argument in a way that it is difficult to understand. I will attempt to rephrase it:
Dubinsky = a scoring, gritty winger/center. The Rangers have a need for more grit combined with skill. The Rangers are stocked with young defensemen and defense prospects/scoring winger prospects. The one thing the Rangers need more than anything else is a #1 center.
The Rangers have little need for a scoring winger, a gritty winger that can't score, a bottom-6 player of any kind, a defense prospect of any kind, or a goaltender. The ONLY thing the Rangers would be willing to trade one of their most valuable assets (Dubinsky) for is a #1 center. The only other need the Rangers have, currently, is for a veteran, crease-clearing defenseman, but they wouldn't give up Dubinsky for that.
Thus, the only logical trade, for the Rangers, when looking at Pittsburgh, would be for Staal.
Does that make it any clearer?
You just don't get it, the only logical center the NYR's would have a logical chance at getting would be Staal. It doesn't matter what point you're trying to drive home, just make it a realistic one.
Had you just said the bold fixed part, I would take you some what serious. Even if I thought that would never happen either.
Those two players just don't need to be in discussion because it will never happen at current status.
They need a number one center, Pittsburgh doesn't care.
You know, the Penguins need wingers, but if kunitz is involved, looking at the NYR's, logically..... Gaborik has to be involved, "logically."
See they don't have any decent wingers beyond him, so they must get Gabs back as part of the return.
See.... I can do it too.
Doesn't make any sense, because none of it ever happens.
When did Brandon Dubinsky become the cailber of player that a team would overpay for? If Shero offered a Letang, Martin, Michalek, or a player of that stature up, Slats would most certainly listen.
Don't take the Heatley deal that Slats wouldn't trade Dubinsky for Heatley, because any GM would. Ottawa wanted a ton on top of Dubinsky to make that deal happen, and that his why things got hung up.
Dubinsky is a good 2nd line center. Nothing more than that.
When did Brandon Dubinsky become the cailber of player that a team would overpay for? If Shero offered a Letang, Martin, Michalek, or a player of that stature up, Slats would most certainly listen.
Don't take the Heatley deal that Slats wouldn't trade Dubinsky for Heatley, because any GM would. Ottawa wanted a ton on top of Dubinsky to make that deal happen, and that his why things got hung up.
Dubinsky is a good 2nd line center. Nothing more than that.
The deal was zherdev, roszival, mcdonaugh and a 1st. Ottawa got greedy at the last second and demanded Dubinsky. Otherwise it would have gone through.
When did Brandon Dubinsky become the cailber of player that a team would overpay for? If Shero offered a Letang, Martin, Michalek, or a player of that stature up, Slats would most certainly listen.
Don't take the Heatley deal that Slats wouldn't trade Dubinsky for Heatley, because any GM would. Ottawa wanted a ton on top of Dubinsky to make that deal happen, and that his why things got hung up.
Dubinsky is a good 2nd line center. Nothing more than that.
he's still fairly young, and if you watched him over the last few years you'd see that he leaves everyone expecting a big more. I think he'll breakout soon and be a solid 1A centre.
They would not do those trades for Michalek, etc, too much salary and the Rangers don't need them, they got Staal and a ton of great defenders with potential coming up.
I can't stand Letang. I think he is so incredibly overrated. he averages 30 points per yr as an offensive defenseman, and every goes crazy because of the cup run because he produced a bit more than usual.
Roszival got 7/10 in the playoffs and 6/10 in the playoffs. Does that mean hes an offensive dynamo?
I'm sorry but I'd rather have Roszival than Letang not joking.
If you offered me Letang for Roszival, I'd say no.
Roszival is just as good offensively, better defensively, and more physical.
If you argue that Rozy played with Jagr, well Letang played with Croz and Malkin.
Basically, I don't see where Dubinsky fits on the Rangers anymore,and I think people on here are undervaluing the importance of having a player like Talbot on your team. He is a proven playoff performer.
Dubinsky has been good in the playoffs too. Not saying he's done what Talbot did in 2009, but Dubinsky's done nothing to make people believe he can't perform in big games
The Rangers could use Talbot once they become a Cup Contender. Right now, they need to just contend for the playoffs. Talbot on the Rangers does not help them in the standings, IMO, especially when you consider the lack of offensive-minded centers on the Big Club.
he's still fairly young, and if you watched him over the last few years you'd see that he leaves everyone expecting a big more. I think he'll breakout soon and be a solid 1A centre.
They would not do those trades for Michalek, etc, too much salary and the Rangers don't need them, they got Staal and a ton of great defenders with potential coming up.
I can't stand Letang. I think he is so incredibly overrated. he averages 30 points per yr as an offensive defenseman, and every goes crazy because of the cup run because he produced a bit more than usual.
Roszival got 7/10 in the playoffs and 6/10 in the playoffs. Does that mean hes an offensive dynamo?
I'm sorry but I'd rather have Roszival than Letang not joking.
If you offered me Letang for Roszival, I'd say no.
Roszival is just as good offensively, better defensively, and more physical.
If you argue that Rozy played with Jagr, well Letang played with Croz and Malkin.
Michalek is better than anything New York has defensively. You make room for guys like him.
Letang isn't overrated. He's a young defenseman who can log huge minutes. He gets 30 points a year, but that's pretty decent for a defenseman who gets spotty powerplay time.
If you don't take Letang for Rozsival...well there's no reason to debate any further with you because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Take this opinion as someone who has seen both Letang and Roszival play extensively.
Michalek is better than anything New York has defensively. You make room for guys like him.
Letang isn't overrated. He's a young defenseman who can log huge minutes. He gets 30 points a year, but that's pretty decent for a defenseman who gets spotty powerplay time.
If you don't take Letang for Rozsival...well there's no reason to debate any further with you because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Take this opinion as someone who has seen both Letang and Roszival play extensively.
I'm going to do you a favor and assume that you're discounting Staal due to the fact that he's not signed right now...
I'm going to do you a favor and assume that you're discounting Staal due to the fact that he's not signed right now...
How things stand at the current moment, Michalek is better than Staal defensively. In the future though, if Staal keeps developing, he will be better than Michalek.
sorry but i agree, id rather have rosie than letang, and ive seen both play extensively as well. Its all about your opinion on players, everyone is different.
On the other note about the trade, honestly dubinsky isnt going anywhere unless in a trade for first line talent. Although, two defensman that have me intrigued would be michalek and orpik. maybe a deal of Michalek and Orpik for Dubinsky and Rosie/girardi. Then maybe the rangers can turn around and trade girardi/rosie for a good 2nd line player such as ryan clowe..
I doubt that the penguins would do it but worth a shout out ha.. But rangers arent going to give up dubinsky for talbot and lovejoy. We have a bunch of players like talbot in our system and lovejoy just doesnt fit. If we trade dubinsky we want to upgrade our top 6, not downgrade to a bottom 6 player and a #5-6 defensman.
How things stand at the current moment, Michalek is better than Staal defensively. In the future though, if Staal keeps developing, he will be better than Michalek.
Wow! homer much ha.. michalek is a very good and talented two way dman who i say is a #2 defensman. but he is not better than staal. Staal regularly plays against ovechkin, parise, malkin, crosby, kovy, stamkos, carter, richards, spezza, and eric staal, you name it and shuts them down and makes their lives hell when playing. put up a new thread on who people would rather have being M Staal or Michalek and well see who comes out on top.
When did Brandon Dubinsky become the cailber of player that a team would overpay for? If Shero offered a Letang, Martin, Michalek, or a player of that stature up, Slats would most certainly listen.
Why would we listen because you offered two guys we didn't make a play for a month ago? You've made references to how good Letang "could be" under the right circumstances, why is Dubinsky not afforded the same? Also, let's not forget that Letang isn't exactly the most consistent player in the league.
Quote:
Don't take the Heatley deal that Slats wouldn't trade Dubinsky for Heatley, because any GM would. Ottawa wanted a ton on top of Dubinsky to make that deal happen, and that his why things got hung up.
Murray was quoted as saying, "We couldn't even get a 13 goal scorer in the deal." The only 13 goal scorer at that time was Dubinsky. That's pretty cut and dry if you ask me.
Quote:
Dubinsky is a good 2nd line center. Nothing more than that.
Hasn't played center since he came back from his broken hand.
I'm not advocating any of the deals in this thread, but you're seriously underrating Dubinsky.
Michalek is better than anything New York has defensively. You make room for guys like him.
Letang isn't overrated. He's a young defenseman who can log huge minutes. He gets 30 points a year, but that's pretty decent for a defenseman who gets spotty powerplay time.
If you don't take Letang for Rozsival...well there's no reason to debate any further with you because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Take this opinion as someone who has seen both Letang and Roszival play extensively.
Rozy has been significantly better since his days with Pittsburgh.
Rozy is in our top 4, and was our #1 defenseman until Staal emerged. My person opinion is that Letang isn't as good or as well rounded as Roszival.
Rozy is PAINFULLY UNDERRATED here. He's consistent, he's tough to play against - yeah, he doesn't smash players through the boards and he's certainly not an offensive juggernaut, but at the same time, he's capable of being a good PPQB (if he ever remembers to shoot the ******* puck) and he's defensively sound. I'm with the guy - I'd rather have Rozy - though I have to admit, Letang's shootout stuff is great.
I'd take Letang's physicality, offensive upside and better contract anyday.
Defensively...he is better than Staal at the current moment. He played a top pairing on a Phoenix team that played in a much tougher Western Conference. His play in the defensive zone was one of the driving forces in Phoenix's turn around. Don't believe me...go ask them. And to be quite honest, Staal didn't shut much of anything down when he played the Pens (I didn't pay enough attention in the other games I watched him in). He played very solid defense, but I wouldn't say he could be confused with a Robyn Regehr.
Of course people are going to take Staal if asked what one would you rather have. He's significantly younger, and like I said before, has the potential to be better than Michalek defensively. He just isn't right now. He still has some growing to do.
Yeah, it's not like Staal had Kovalchuk, Crosby, Malkin, Richards and Carter in his division alone. Not to mention playing against players like Ovechkin, Savard, Vanek, Eric Staal, St. Louis, Stamkos, Cammalleri and Kessel for a majority of the other games when playing within the confrence.
He also holds his own very well against these guys, and shuts them down night in and night out. Staal is better then Michalek defensivley, even if you take the conferences into consideration.
