HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

If rebuild, rights to Richards + for Ranger's 1st

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-22-2011, 11:02 AM
  #51
beastly115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,424
vCash: 500
Sather has his hands in many pockets around the league. If he catches wind that Buffalo or Toronto are trading for Richards rights and they actually have a legit chance of signing him, he'll make a move. And despite what Buffalo and Leafs fans think, having his rights doesn't mean he'll sign with them. Sather will just sit back and laugh when Buffalo gives up a first for his rights.

beastly115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 11:15 AM
  #52
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Hey Hey...
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 10,058
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by john skull View Post
There are no guarantees in free agency and people trade for rights often.

I didn't ask if you thought it would go down. I asked what the plus would need to be. Try to stay on topic please.

Okay mini mod telling us to stay on topic, I didnt realize our opinions were not allowed to be shared considering we know the Rangers better than you do.

And Rebbecca was right, there would be no + because the Rangers would not trade their first for the rights to Richards. Those days have been over for the Rangers for years.

MAYBEEEEE in some wild and wacky universe the Rangers would trade one of their two second round picks for the rights to Richards, but not their 1st.

Gardner McKay is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 11:18 AM
  #53
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Hey Hey...
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 10,058
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
If you would have read some of the non-NY media reports in recent months on Richards, you would realize the fallacy of that statement. Yes, the Rangers have an advantage in that their coach has a positive relationship with Richards - but the Rangers are hardly the only team to be able to spend on free agents (and Richards has already publicly conceded in recent interviews that earning top dollars is not as important to him in light of how his monster extension in Tampa led to the breakup of that Cup team).

Richards has said that his goal, first and foremost, is to play for a stable, winning organization with a chance to win the Cup every season. At least 10-12 teams fit into that category and the Rangers aren't even as strong as some in that group are.



When has Richards ever spoken or hinted at any teams, beyond his current one, that he would want to play for? Rangers fans (along with the rumor mongers amongst the NY media) are taking the references Richards has made in the past about his relationship with Tortorella and jumping to conclusions.
I am pretty sure there was a report on HNIC about Richards and his destinations from Pierre Lebrun after the trade deadline when Richards was not traded and he said the most likely destination's would be Dallas, Rangers, Tampa in that order.

Gardner McKay is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 11:27 AM
  #54
HeaveHo94
PSN: NYC_RANGERS_94
 
HeaveHo94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NY NEW YORK
Country: United States
Posts: 2,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by john skull View Post
If the Stars can sign Richards they will. If it become apparent that they can not, then the best way to salvage value is to trade his rights. Assuming he would waive his NMC to go to NYC for negotiations what would the plus have to be from Dallas to make a trade around New York's first be. I would think a 3rd and a mid level forward prospect.

To Rangers:
Rights to Richards
2011 3rd round
Curtis Mckenzie

To Dallas
15th overall pick

Obviously Dallas could upgrade those assets. But what is realistic? Has a trade centered around rights ever been this big? Or do they usually stay small? Would an upgrade to a 2nd or a better prospect be necessary?
OMG... What waste of time this is.

HeaveHo94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 01:44 PM
  #55
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Geez people need to learn to read. Its great to dismiss the OP, if you think its crap, but at least indicate that you understand what the OP was saying. The "omg we arent trading our first for richards rights" stuff is ridiculous since it was never even remotely proposed.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 01:59 PM
  #56
Robert Theodorson
Registered User
 
Robert Theodorson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Washington DC
Country: United States
Posts: 7,347
vCash: 500
Not sure why people are saying Dallas can't sign him, they have the cap space, he likes Dallas and Dallas likes him. Sign him

Robert Theodorson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 02:11 PM
  #57
tarrin8
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canada BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 158
vCash: 500
he doesnt have to waive his NMC because i beleive in the offseason it doesnt count, now im not 100% for sure but i remember hearing somthing like this when toronto was looking to trade kaberle and they were goin to do it during the draft so they wouldnt have to get him to waive his clause

tarrin8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 02:17 PM
  #58
Brand New Stars
Registered User
 
Brand New Stars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: McKinney/C-Stat, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 3,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwedeSpeedBackstrom View Post
Not sure why people are saying Dallas can't sign him, they have the cap space, he likes Dallas and Dallas likes him. Sign him
Have you completely missed out on the ownership/money issues with Tom Hicks and the Stars?

Brand New Stars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 02:35 PM
  #59
Mojo19
He's Big, He's Bald
 
Mojo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,956
vCash: 500
This thread is irrelevant....... because Burke is going to make Brad Richards a Leaf this summer!

Mojo19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 03:08 PM
  #60
Schalkenullvier*
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: tief im westen
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,591
vCash: 500
This thread is completely irrelevant... Because Richards will start sucking in october, just like every other free agent that gets overpaid by the rags

Schalkenullvier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 03:49 PM
  #61
glovesave_35
Name
 
glovesave_35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Korea
Country: United States
Posts: 15,052
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarrin8 View Post
he doesnt have to waive his NMC because i beleive in the offseason it doesnt count, now im not 100% for sure but i remember hearing somthing like this when toronto was looking to trade kaberle and they were goin to do it during the draft so they wouldnt have to get him to waive his clause
Not that it matters in this particular case but I'm pretty sure the Kaberle situation was one where his NMC kicked in at some point in time before that next season started. He wasn't tradable because it was the offseason, he was tradable because his NMC hadn't kicked in yet.

glovesave_35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 03:54 PM
  #62
glovesave_35
Name
 
glovesave_35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Korea
Country: United States
Posts: 15,052
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by blues22 View Post
that did happen and Don LaGreca and EJ Hradek on NHL Live reported it as well as Brooks. Get it through your head. unless you have evidence to the contrary, what is printed and gets reported is generally accepted until there is a denial by one of the principals, and neither Sather or Niewy ever denied the report
Do you have a link to anything written about this? I recall it being heavy in the rumor mill but nothing concrete.

glovesave_35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 04:00 PM
  #63
piqued
Global Moderator
shift
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 30,848
vCash: 27750
Quote:
Originally Posted by blues22 View Post
that did happen and Don LaGreca and EJ Hradek on NHL Live reported it as well as Brooks. Get it through your head. unless you have evidence to the contrary, what is printed and gets reported is generally accepted until there is a denial by one of the principals, and neither Sather or Niewy ever denied the report
Wrong. All those incorrect reports simply parroted the original false story in the NY Post. Rangers fans took it uncritically as gospel anyway and had a big laugh at that rube Nieuwendyk.

From February 24th:
Nieuwendyk denied a New York Post story that he had asked the Rangers for three young studs off their roster, saying: “I haven’t had that discussion.” Asked if he had talked to the Rangers about specific players, he said: “No.”
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slu...eperiods022411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
Richards' rights are worth whatever any particular team decides the urgency of adding Richards to their roster is. Unless you're the GM of any team, it's pointless to state absolutes about what his rights are or aren't worth.
I'm not going preface every statement with "In my opinion..." just so you're not confused as to whether I'm an NHL GM.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 04:10 PM
  #64
beastly115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued View Post
Wrong. All those incorrect reports simply parroted the original false story in the NY Post. Rangers fans took it uncritically as gospel anyway and had a big laugh at that rube Nieuwendyk.

From February 24th:
Nieuwendyk denied a New York Post story that he had asked the Rangers for three young studs off their roster, saying: “I haven’t had that discussion.” Asked if he had talked to the Rangers about specific players, he said: “No.”
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news?slu...eperiods022411

I'm not going preface every statement with "In my opinion..." just so you're not confused as to whether I'm an NHL GM.


Of course he's going to deny those reports. How many times have you heard a GM confirm reports about players he was asking for in a trade? Come on man, use your head.

beastly115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 04:32 PM
  #65
glovesave_35
Name
 
glovesave_35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Korea
Country: United States
Posts: 15,052
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by blues22 View Post
that did happen and Don LaGreca and EJ Hradek on NHL Live reported it as well as Brooks. Get it through your head. unless you have evidence to the contrary, what is printed and gets reported is generally accepted until there is a denial by one of the principals, and neither Sather or Niewy ever denied the report
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaqup View Post


Of course he's going to deny those reports. How many times have you heard a GM confirm reports about players he was asking for in a trade? Come on man, use your head.


So according to you blues22 anything reported is truth as long as it has not been denied, regardless of whether it has been confirmed or not by any involved parties.

And according to you alphaqup any kind of "reported" rumor is truth regardless of public denials by involved parties.

How judicious of both of you.

glovesave_35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 04:37 PM
  #66
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by john skull View Post
Yeah, cool. Dan Hamuis's right were traded last year for a 3rd.
Hamhuis' rights were traded twice last year, and he didn't sign with either team. So why should the Rangers give up a 1st for Richards' rights?

Trading for UFA rights is beyond stupid. Either the player wants to sign with you or he doesn't. Getting him a few weeks early isn't going to change that.

GAGLine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 04:43 PM
  #67
Puckface NYR*
R.I.P. Boogyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glovesave_35 View Post


So according to you blues22 anything reported is truth as long as it has not been denied, regardless of whether it has been confirmed or not by any involved parties.

And according to you alphaqup any kind of "reported" rumor is truth regardless of public denials by involved parties.

How judicious of both of you.
I don't think he was saying it was a truth. He was simply stating that it was a possibility. I think it was fairly clear that both teams were talking at the deadline and trying to get something done. No one has any real idea as to what was asked for or spoken about.

The Ranger fan hatred in this thread is a little ludicrous. The original proposal was not good. And the Rangers have built much of their current team through the draft. A first round pick isn't just going to be thrown away. No Ranger fan is certain that Richards will be a Ranger, but the point is, if Richards decides to leave Dallas, the Rangers will certainly be able to make a strong push in signing him, hence, there is no point in giving up our 1st rounder.

So, look at it this way, would you do this trade.

Rangers: 15th overall

Dallas: 3rd Rounder, Curtis Mckenzie

Because i sure as hell wouldn't.

Puckface NYR* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 04:45 PM
  #68
Isles_Guy*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: long Island
Posts: 6,237
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Isles_Guy*
Quote:
Originally Posted by glovesave_35 View Post


So according to you blues22 anything reported is truth as long as it has not been denied, regardless of whether it has been confirmed or not by any involved parties.

And according to you alphaqup any kind of "reported" rumor is truth regardless of public denials by involved parties.

How judicious of both of you.
2 different things,When its reported by separate sources and not denied then there is the presumption of truth until there is a denial.

There is also the commonly held perception that GM's will gild the lily and withold the truth and never has Neiuwy denied asking for that package and hes had plenty of opportunity to do so

Isles_Guy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 05:01 PM
  #69
glovesave_35
Name
 
glovesave_35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Korea
Country: United States
Posts: 15,052
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckface NYR View Post
I don't think he was saying it was a truth. He was simply stating that it was a possibility. I think it was fairly clear that both teams were talking at the deadline and trying to get something done. No one has any real idea as to what was asked for or spoken about.

The Ranger fan hatred in this thread is a little ludicrous. The original proposal was not good. And the Rangers have built much of their current team through the draft. A first round pick isn't just going to be thrown away. No Ranger fan is certain that Richards will be a Ranger, but the point is, if Richards decides to leave Dallas, the Rangers will certainly be able to make a strong push in signing him, hence, there is no point in giving up our 1st rounder.

So, look at it this way, would you do this trade.

Rangers: 15th overall

Dallas: 3rd Rounder, Curtis Mckenzie

Because i sure as hell wouldn't.
No Ranger hatred here.

The two teams definitely were talking but basically Nieuwendyk had made his position pretty clear - the team was not actively looking to trade Richards (which may have been a mistake in itself). The only way he would leave was for a ludicrous offer that he could not justify turning down. In any case, let's assume that Nieuwendyk was lying and he did ask for the rumored package, it was clearly an "F off" offer.

And of course I would not make that deal. It's terrible and I said as much on the first page of this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blues22 View Post
2 different things,When its reported by separate sources and not denied then there is the presumption of truth until there is a denial.

There is also the commonly held perception that GM's will gild the lily and withold the truth and never has Neiuwy denied asking for that package and hes had plenty of opportunity to do so

I consider LaGreca and Hradek, in the context which you say you heard that (on NHL Live) to be one source. Brooks...seems he's always making outrageous claims regarding the Rangers and possible players they may acquire.

I understand the concept of not showing all your cards Nieuwendyk did deny asking for that, or any package, in the quote and link provided a few posts up.

glovesave_35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 05:16 PM
  #70
Gutchecktime
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Sather has his hands in many pockets around the league. If he catches wind that Buffalo or Toronto are trading for Richards rights and they actually have a legit chance of signing him, he'll make a move. And despite what Buffalo and Leafs fans think, having his rights doesn't mean he'll sign with them. Sather will just sit back and laugh when Buffalo gives up a first for his rights.
I agree that the Rangers have a great shot at signing Richards but this post sounds pretty arrogant to me. Don't count your chickens...

Gutchecktime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 05:19 PM
  #71
HarryNealesGarden
Big Daddy Ted
 
HarryNealesGarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: BOS
Country: United States
Posts: 4,244
vCash: 500
Seems like the Rangers fans are just trying to convince themselves that Richards will sign in NY to avoid the painful pangs they'll feel when he chooses to sign elsewhere and they realize that the Rangers aren't the league's be-all and end-all anymore.

The same Glen Sather that everyone in NY wanted to tar and feather is now all of a sudden the messiah who is totally guaranteed to lead the Rangers to the promised land and no matter what happens will laugh if someone else trades for Richards' right because he knows they'll sign him July 1 anyway?

Give me a break.

HarryNealesGarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 05:21 PM
  #72
Brand New Stars
Registered User
 
Brand New Stars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: McKinney/C-Stat, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 3,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaqup View Post
Come on man, use your head.
You should use your head as well. Do you honestly believe a NHL GM would seriously ask for that kind of package?

Brand New Stars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 05:33 PM
  #73
piqued
Global Moderator
shift
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 30,848
vCash: 27750
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaqup View Post


Of course he's going to deny those reports. How many times have you heard a GM confirm reports about players he was asking for in a trade? Come on man, use your head.
Well, then go ahead and call Joe Nieuwendyk a liar. That's your prerogative. Because there were no shades of gray in that answer.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 05:47 PM
  #74
Armond White
Go Sabres!
 
Armond White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oakland Zoo
Country: United States
Posts: 10,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
Hamhuis' rights were traded twice last year, and he didn't sign with either team. So why should the Rangers give up a 1st for Richards' rights?

Trading for UFA rights is beyond stupid. Either the player wants to sign with you or he doesn't. Getting him a few weeks early isn't going to change that.
Ryan Malone and Jay Bouwmeester both signed deals after their rights were acquired.

Armond White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-22-2011, 05:50 PM
  #75
hctopcheds11
Registered User
 
hctopcheds11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,757
vCash: 500
Let me preface this by saying I HATE when people judge fan bases. I think its stereotyping in the worst form. As a Penguins fan, its no secret that we are stereotyped so poorly its almost laughable from our point of view. ALL fan bases have fans that are excellent and fans that are just poor. If you believe otherwise, you are clearly biased towards your team.

Having said that, for a fan base that I generally have a ton of respect for, I am not sure what has happened to a growing number of Rangers fans on HF. When they had poor teams in the 2000's, I recall being in MSG during the Theo Fleury days and seeing a ton of level headed fans who were fairly knowledgeable.

But a select few Rangers fans who represent HF Boards have developed this feeling of entitlement that I just don't understand. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of good posters for the Rangers (Boyle or Steve Mastr. is an excellent poster) but there are a few that are extremely obnoxious and the numbers seem to be building. These are the same fans who scream for Crosby's head because he's "dirty" while wearing their Messier jerseys. This thread is just another example of this type of fan.

I will continue to NOT judge the Rangers fan base by a select group because as I said, I think thats one of the dumbest things you can do. And please don't think I don't realize that the Pens board has bad posters because we certainly do (luckily, we have done our best to just ignore these posters). But this group on HF needs to stop acting like their **** doesn't stink.


Last edited by hctopcheds11: 05-22-2011 at 05:55 PM.
hctopcheds11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:46 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.