Post-Game Talk: #45 - 01/16/18 | flyers @ rangers | Thank you, Bob Richards

Status
Not open for further replies.

Glen Sathers Cigar

Sather 4 Ever
Feb 4, 2013
16,506
19,971
New York
Rangers aren't winning the cup during grabbers window for success. Trade him.
That's not the only reason to keep good veterans around. You want to develop your kids, they need solid players to play with.

When you just put kids and borderline NHLers out there, you get situations like Arizona and Buffalo and Edmonton (pre McDavid) where they're perpetually stuck in a rebuild. Also why winning culture is important. Have established players around who expect to win and that rubs off on younger players.

Players like Andersson, Chytil, Tony D are all better served if they can become NHLers alongside some solid vets and in a winning culture.

To me, ideal scenario, is we trade some of our UFAs (as long as the deals are worth it) while still remaining heavily in the playoff race, then promote Lias, Filip and Tony to the NHL and they get a taste of playoff intensity by trying to make the playoffs late season and possibly making it. I don't want to trade the UFAs and then miss the playoffs just to likely end up with the 15th pick or something when we can trade players, still make the playoffs and get the 22nd pick or so. Sacrificing that difference is worth it to me for the development gained.

Brady Skjei was picked in the 2012 draft, the season we went to the ECF. So it's not impossible to have a great season, deep playoff run AND get a great prospect with your own 1st rounder.
 

Samuel Culper III

Mr. Woodhull...
Jan 15, 2007
13,144
1,099
Texas
That's not the only reason to keep good veterans around. You want to develop your kids, they need solid players to play with.

When you just put kids and borderline NHLers out there, you get situations like Arizona and Buffalo and Edmonton (pre McDavid) where they're perpetually stuck in a rebuild. Also why winning culture is important. Have established players around who expect to win and that rubs off on younger players.

Players like Andersson, Chytil, Tony D are all better served if they can become NHLers alongside some solid vets and in a winning culture.

To me, ideal scenario, is we trade some of our UFAs (as long as the deals are worth it) while still remaining heavily in the playoff race, then promote Lias, Filip and Tony to the NHL and they get a taste of playoff intensity by trying to make the playoffs late season and possibly making it. I don't want to trade the UFAs and then miss the playoffs just to likely end up with the 15th pick or something when we can trade players, still make the playoffs and get the 22nd pick or so. Sacrificing that difference is worth it to me for the development gained.

Brady Skjei was picked in the 2012 draft, the season we went to the ECF. So it's not impossible to have a great season, deep playoff run AND get a great prospect with your own 1st rounder.

While this is true, it’s not a good reason to miss out on converting our most valuable UFA trade chip into a 1st rounder. First, you can trade Grabner and still offer him a contract in July. More important, you can find other vets and leaders in UFA to fill those spots on the team that you’re talking about. Also, trading Nash and Grabner doesn’t all of a sudden leave this team without vets or experience. Lias/Chytil and ADA/Pionk will be the only youth most likely coming up and I’d be surprised if more than 2 of them are here full time. You have to convert on the Grabner asset, especially if you have no guarantees he’s going to extend with you by the TDL.
 

TheDirtyH

Registered User
Jul 5, 2013
6,216
6,675
Chicago
Pitt and Boston are light years better imho

Toronto is better too. And the Devils and Islanders both smacked us in their last games against us.

The Rangers managing a good win against a team that lost 11 in a row this year doesn't erase their struggle to survive a game against a team that didn't get a win in their first 20 games not a month prior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samuel Culper III

Samuel Culper III

Mr. Woodhull...
Jan 15, 2007
13,144
1,099
Texas
I would love to sign Grabner for another 2-3 years if we could swing it. The guy has great speed and is on pace for 30, plus he can PK. I don't care if you can get a 1st for him because whomever we pick won't be playing in this league for another 2-3 years probably.

This is exactly how we stay the 2017-2018 Rangers in perpetuity. We could get a 1st for Grabner and draft twice (or even 3 times/move up significantly, depending on any other moves) in the first round in back to back years, significantly bolstering our prospect pool. Or we could re-sign a guy (who we’re still allowed to sign on July 1 even if we trade him - why do 99% of posts act as if the two routes are mutually exclusive?) because he’ll be good for the next 2-3 years and we don’t have the patience to develop youth. As if we’re going to be magic contenders next year. Our best chance at becoming a serious contender is adding top end talent through the draft to a mostly young group like Zib, Buch, Kreid, Miller, Hayes, Nieves, Fast, Lettieri, Skjei.
 

Igright

Registered User
Apr 18, 2015
644
208
Grabner scored again after a steal - for the 2nd consecutive game. In Pittsburgh he stole a puck from Malkin, yesterday - from Voracek. It's a pleasure to watch Grabner stealing a puck, approaching a goaltender at full speed and scoring!
Yesterday I also enjoyed two passes - from Buch to Nash and from Holland to Carey - that were so accurate as to leave all the defenders behind a forward who could face poor Elliott.
Good moments to recall!
 

NCRanger

Bettman's Enemy
Feb 4, 2007
5,426
2,103
Charlotte, NC
If anyone actually thinks someone is going to trade a 1st rounder for Grabner, I have a bridge to sell you.

This is going to be one of the most boring trade deadlines in history. Everyone wants to “sell” because everyone is so mediocre, yet there are only so many buyers.
 

FireGerardGallant

The Artist Formerly known as FireDavidQuinn
Mar 19, 2016
6,646
7,555
If anyone actually thinks someone is going to trade a 1st rounder for Grabner, I have a bridge to sell you.

This is going to be one of the most boring trade deadlines in history. Everyone wants to “sell” because everyone is so mediocre, yet there are only so many buyers.
Grabner is literally the perfect tdl piece.
Fast, Cheap, can kill penalties, play anywhere in the lineup, and he can score. There would be atleast a few teams interested in his services, for example a team like washington who has a bit of a problem with wing depth would love a michael grabner
 

Samuel Culper III

Mr. Woodhull...
Jan 15, 2007
13,144
1,099
Texas
If anyone actually thinks someone is going to trade a 1st rounder for Grabner, I have a bridge to sell you.

This is going to be one of the most boring trade deadlines in history. Everyone wants to “sell” because everyone is so mediocre, yet there are only so many buyers.

Okay. You’re a contender. We say Grabner for a 1st. You say 2nd + prospect. Maybe the deal ends up being Grabner + Holden for 1st and 4th or Grabner + 4th for 1st. Personally I don’t believe that no one will pay a 1st for Grabner, but even if that we’re true, everyone acts like these values have to be static. Like if Nash’s value wasn’t a 1st but Nash + a 3rd could get you a 1st, you would probably consider adding to bring in another 1st round pick.
 

ReggieDunlop68

hey hanrahan!
Oct 4, 2008
14,441
4,434
It’s a rebuild.
Okay. You’re a contender. We say Grabner for a 1st. You say 2nd + prospect. Maybe the deal ends up being Grabner + Holden for 1st and 4th or Grabner + 4th for 1st. Personally I don’t believe that no one will pay a 1st for Grabner, but even if that we’re true, everyone acts like these values have to be static. Like if Nash’s value wasn’t a 1st but Nash + a 3rd could get you a 1st, you would probably consider adding to bring in another 1st round pick.

I actually think we could get a good return for Grabner because it's very clear he's hungry, and he's off the books.

It's a relatively low risk:high reward deal for the bidder.

Also the Rangers don't HAVE TO trade him, so it's not a deal where you bent over do to bad contract hardship.
 
Last edited:

Amazing Kreiderman

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
44,816
40,285
With Stall having a hip flexor think he should take some time to get %100. No need for Stall to play under %100.
Need to take a look a defenseman down in Hartford. Would really like to see Graves in an NHL game. If not Graves then Gilmour, Pionk, ADA , Sproul anyone but the same old same old. We know what Kampher can do let's see what these Hartford players got!!!
Lettieri has brought some energy....Nieves had a good run with a recent fall-off along with the entire team. Holland was very respectful last night.
Heck it may even help Hartford who are having a tough go .... Getting some of these guys time in NHL may actually do wonders for their development.
Slats and Gorts need to tell AV get on-board or go home.
Although, actually thought I heard AV say perhaps it was a time for a system change? Did we see that last night? Seemed to be more structure all over the ice.... maybe just the inmates or an assistant Coach coup!!

I will never understand how someone can misspell the name of someone who has been on the team for 10 years.
 

PuckLuck3043

Stairway To Heaven
Nov 15, 2017
9,534
14,038
Hudson Valley
This is exactly how we stay the 2017-2018 Rangers in perpetuity. We could get a 1st for Grabner and draft twice (or even 3 times/move up significantly, depending on any other moves) in the first round in back to back years, significantly bolstering our prospect pool. Or we could re-sign a guy (who we’re still allowed to sign on July 1 even if we trade him - why do 99% of posts act as if the two routes are mutually exclusive?) because he’ll be good for the next 2-3 years and we don’t have the patience to develop youth. As if we’re going to be magic contenders next year. Our best chance at becoming a serious contender is adding top end talent through the draft to a mostly young group like Zib, Buch, Kreid, Miller, Hayes, Nieves, Fast, Lettieri, Skjei.

Grabner is a proven NHL talent with speed who is going to lead the team in goal scoring both years he has been here. If you could guarantee me we could sign him after trading him for a first I would be all for it but that doesn't usually work out. I think it would be tough to replace what he brings to the team and even if they get a first there is no way of knowing whether that player would make it to the NHL and be as good as the proven commodity we already have. Thats just my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Igright

Samuel Culper III

Mr. Woodhull...
Jan 15, 2007
13,144
1,099
Texas
Grabner is a proven NHL talent with speed who is going to lead the team in goal scoring both years he has been here. If you could guarantee me we could sign him after trading him for a first I would be all for it but that doesn't usually work out. I think it would be tough to replace what he brings to the team and even if they get a first there is no way of knowing whether that player would make it to the NHL and be as good as the proven commodity we already have. Thats just my opinion.

But Grabner scoring 27 and 35 goals these past two years will have gotten us nowhere and we may not be going anywhere the next couple of years if we don’t make prudent moves. It’s nice to have Grabner score 30 goals. If Grabner is your most potent offensive player, all it means is you’re a bad team. We can lose a guy who might score 25-35 the next two seasons but gain a guy who might be a core player for 10 years or we can keep Grabner and keep the status quo and continue to be mediocre. I agree Grabner is good but at what point do we look at building something for the future rather than maintaining status quo?
 

ReggieDunlop68

hey hanrahan!
Oct 4, 2008
14,441
4,434
It’s a rebuild.
But Grabner scoring 27 and 35 goals these past two years will have gotten us nowhere and we may not be going anywhere the next couple of years if we don’t make prudent moves. It’s nice to have Grabner score 30 goals. If Grabner is your most potent offensive player, all it means is you’re a bad team. We can lose a guy who might score 25-35 the next two seasons but gain a guy who might be a core player for 10 years or we can keep Grabner and keep the status quo and continue to be mediocre. I agree Grabner is good but at what point do we look at building something for the future rather than maintaining status quo?

If we move Grabner, I think Gorton should aim for a roster player back over a pick since the trade will be for an at best 17th overall first rd.

Unless they want the 1st for a package later because a 17th+, unless lucky, is 4 years off being a rookie in today's NHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCRanger

Brooklyn Ranger

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
9,462
298
Brooklyn, of course
With Stall having a hip flexor think he should take some time to get %100. No need for Stall to play under %100.
Need to take a look a defenseman down in Hartford. Would really like to see Graves in an NHL game. If not Graves then Gilmour, Pionk, ADA , Sproul anyone but the same old same old. We know what Kampher can do let's see what these Hartford players got!!!
Lettieri has brought some energy....Nieves had a good run with a recent fall-off along with the entire team. Holland was very respectful last night.
Heck it may even help Hartford who are having a tough go .... Getting some of these guys time in NHL may actually do wonders for their development.
Slats and Gorts need to tell AV get on-board or go home.
Although, actually thought I heard AV say perhaps it was a time for a system change? Did we see that last night? Seemed to be more structure all over the ice.... maybe just the inmates or an assistant Coach coup!!

Who do you think is picking the players to be recalled from Hartford? It's a group decision--the coach asks, the front office considers and the GM and coach of Hartford make the recommendations. How many Wolfpack games to you think AV has seen? The only advantage veteran players have is what's makes them veterans: the fact that they have preformed well enough in the past to stay on a NHL roster for years. Unproven players have to perform to and beyond expectations from shift to shift, game after game. It's true in sports and it's true in the "real" world too. Most of us have to wait our turn and even then still have to outperform the competition to stick.

It's hard to tell, but from what I've seen and read suggests that there really isn't any defenseman in Hartford that is standing out enough to make a difference in New York. It's still about winning: I'm sure the organization is not willing to give up yet and start looking to the future. Love it, hate it, the New York Rangers are about making money for its owners. Do they want to win a Stanley Cup? Sure. But, giving up on the season and deciding to spend 2, 3, 4, ??? years doing a "proper" rebuild right now? Nope.

AV answers to Slats and Gorts, not the other way around.
 

Samuel Culper III

Mr. Woodhull...
Jan 15, 2007
13,144
1,099
Texas
If we move Grabner, I think Gorton should aim for a roster player back over a pick since the trade will be for an at best 17th overall first rd.

Unless they want the 1st for a package later because a 17th+, unless lucky, is 4 years off being a rookie in today's NHL.

That’s simply not true. Old school thinking. Jacob Chychrun and Charlie McAvoy were #14 and #16 ONE year ago. Chychrun is in his second season, McAvoy is a possible Calder candidate, both are Dmen who typically take longer. Alex DeBrincat was taken #39 one year ago and is full time with Chicago and Samuel Girard was taken #47, was a key piece in the Duchene trade and is playing regularly with the Avs now. That’s four players taken #14 or later from just one year ago.

TWO years ago Matt Barzal was #16. Brock Boeser was #23. Both in the Calder race this year. Anthony Beauvelier is playing his second full season for the Islanders as well and was #28. Jake Debrusk is full time with the Bruins, was # 14. Kyle Conner is playing for Winnipeg this year and was #17. Thomas Chabot was taken #18 and has been called up to the Senators. Travis Konecny played 70 games for the Flyers last year and all 44 this year, taken #24. Joel Eriksson Ek plays for Minnesota, taken #20. Sebastian Aho, Christian Fischer and Brandon Carlo, taken #32, #35 and #37 that year as well. And Vince Dunn at #56.

That’s thirteen NHL regulars taken at #14 or later from two years ago and I skipped plenty of guys who have been up and down but have already shown some flashes in the NHL. Scouting is better than ever and the development of prospects is also taken more seriously and approached with a more scientific, clinical edge than ever before. The level of young talent making immediate impacts in the NHL is proof. Yamamoto practically made Edmonton as a 2017 second round pick. It used to be that the top 1-3 players were maybe NHL ready. Now we’re seeing 5 or 6 of the top 10 make the jump immediately a lot of years and plenty of players from the teens and twenties being NHL ready 1-2 years after their draft. Is it a guarantee? No, but the recent trends speak for themselves and it’s become more and more likely.

Not to mention you move Grabner for say #19 overall and we end up with #14 overall. Whose to say we can’t turn that into #5 overall or some such wizardry?
 
Last edited:

ReggieDunlop68

hey hanrahan!
Oct 4, 2008
14,441
4,434
It’s a rebuild.
That’s simply not true. Old school thinking. Jacob Chychrun and Charlie McAvoy were #14 and #16 ONE year ago. Chychrun is in his second season, McAvoy is a possible Calder candidate, both are Dmen who typically take longer. Alex DeBrincat was taken #39 one year ago and is full time with Chicago and Samuel Girard was taken #47, was a key piece in the Duchene trade and is playing regularly with the Avs now. That’s four players taken #14 or later from just one year ago.

TWO years ago Matt Barzal was #16. Brock Boeser was #23. Both in the Calder race this year. Anthony Beauvelier is playing his second full season for the Islanders as well and was #28. Jake Debrusk is full time with the Bruins, was # 14. Kyle Conner is playing for Winnipeg this year and was #17. Thomas Chabot was taken #18 and has been called up to the Senators. Travis Konecny played 70 games for the Flyers last year and all 44 this year, taken #24. Joel Eriksson Ek plays for Minnesota, taken #20. Sebastian Aho, Christian Fischer and Brandon Carlo, taken #32, #35 and #37 that year as well. And Vince Dunn at #56.

That’s thirteen NHL regulars taken at #14 or later from two years ago and I skipped plenty of guys who have been up and down but have already shown some flashes in the NHL. Scouting is better than ever and the development of prospects is also taken more seriously and approached with a more scientific, clinical edge than ever before. The level of young talent making immediate impacts in the NHL is proof. Yamamoto practically made Edmonton as a 2017 second round pick. It used to be that the top 1-3 players were maybe NHL ready. Now we’re seeing 5 or 6 of the top 10 make the jump immediately a lot of years and plenty of players from the teens and twenties being NHL ready 1-2 years after their draft. Is it a guarantee? No, but the recent trends speak for themselves and it’s become more and more likely.

Not to mention you move Grabner for say #19 overall and we end up with #14 overall. Whose to say we can’t turn that into #5 overall or some such wizardry?

I'm not saying it doesn't happen.

I mean there are 3 players on the current roster [Kreider, Miller, and Skjei] who fit the exact mold I explained in the previous post.

Again, it all depends on what's available , but I'd take a good roster player and a 2nd over a 1st for Grabner if we deal with a playoff team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCRanger

PuckLuck3043

Stairway To Heaven
Nov 15, 2017
9,534
14,038
Hudson Valley
But Grabner scoring 27 and 35 goals these past two years will have gotten us nowhere and we may not be going anywhere the next couple of years if we don’t make prudent moves. It’s nice to have Grabner score 30 goals. If Grabner is your most potent offensive player, all it means is you’re a bad team. We can lose a guy who might score 25-35 the next two seasons but gain a guy who might be a core player for 10 years or we can keep Grabner and keep the status quo and continue to be mediocre. I agree Grabner is good but at what point do we look at building something for the future rather than maintaining status quo?

We are going to have to agree to disagree on this. Grabner is only 30 and a solid NHL player. Does the entire team have to be made up of guys in their early/mid 20's? How does keeping one of your most consistent and productive players continue the status quo of being mediocre? We are probably going to add Anderson, Chytil, and ADA to this team next year. Keeping Grabs at a reasonable term and price would be a very smart thing to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->