Speculation: Offseason Thread #15: Thinking of a new title is Vesey difficult

[jay from jersey]

how??

no on Montour because he is not expansion draft exempt
he would also cost the guy we lose who is drafted

exempt Pesce from Canes is our guy; in the right deal Murphy is a throw in

========

they do not want Nash

how he's a prospect?

 

[GAGLine]

no on Montour because he is not expansion draft exempt
he would also cost the guy we lose who is drafted

exempt Pesce from Canes is our guy; in the right deal Murphy is a throw in

========

they do not want Nash

Montour is exempt. He's 22, but he only signed his ELC at 21. He's going into his 2nd pro year, same as Skjei, so he is exempt.

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

 

[GAGLine]

Thanks. I hardly think they do Nash for Shattenkirk straight up though. What do you think it'll take to get him?

It doesn't matter because we aren't trading for him. I doubt we will even sign him when he becomes a UFA. Brooks has already reported that the Rangers don't plan to pay Shattenkirk what he will command as a UFA.

 

[Gardner McKay]

It doesn't matter because we aren't trading for him. I doubt we will even sign him when he becomes a UFA. Brooks has already reported that the Rangers don't plan to pay Shattenkirk what he will command as a UFA.

You wonder if that has to do with our current amount of dollars allocated to our defense. If they were able to move Girardi and bring in Shattenkirk, I have a hard time believing they would say no to paying Shattenkirk an extra 1.5 - 2 million considering how large of an upgrade he is over G.

 

[GAGLine]

You wonder if that has to do with our current amount of dollars allocated to our defense. If they were able to move Girardi and bring in Shattenkirk, I have a hard time believing they would say no to paying Shattenkirk an extra 1.5 - 2 million considering how large of an upgrade he is over G.

It's possible, or maybe they are just leery of handing out big contracts to older players. If he signs for 7 years, he'll be 35 when it's done. Maybe he will be good until then, but we haven't had much luck with older players. We have lots of contracts coming up in the next 2 years: Zibanejad, Miller, Hayes, Skjei, Vesey. I would rather roll the dice on someone younger and cheaper.

 

[Kovalev27]

Blues were looking for a top 6 forward preferably a wing and a blue chip prospect which is where they were getting blocked. If they were willing to take a B level prospect and a winger Shattenkirk prob can be moved

 

[Gospel of Prospal]

Blues were looking for a top 6 forward preferably a wing and a blue chip prospect which is where they were getting blocked. If they were willing to take a B level prospect and a winger Shattenkirk prob can be moved

Nash and IDK, Ryan Graves?

 

[Kovalev27]

Eeeesh I really don't want to give up Graves like him a lot.

I don't know if they want a D prospect or forward prospect but their asking price was too high.

Nash or Zucc and a prospect. Obviously right now asking price isn't right but we'll see. You see how they built this team. Obviously Shattenkirk is the guy that fits this core.

 

[Inferno]

i want them to take back staal...to me if they dont take back staal, im not interested...he'll be free to come here on his own volition in 1 years time. dont take the bait.

 

[Kovalev27]

How have we not been able to make a Staal to Winnipeg deal happen?

Close to home and they're desperate for a shutdown Left D.

That would be a huge help to slot Skjei in on the correct side.

At the same time we may not be so willing to deal Staal considering McDonagh has been made of glass lately.

Shattenkirk is the guy for me though I don't want to just throw away a year and get him next season. Hank doesn't have that luxury. Need to take our shots while he's still a top guy.

 

[Avery16]

Eeeesh I really don't want to give up Graves like him a lot.

I don't know if they want a D prospect or forward prospect but their asking price was too high.

Nash or Zucc and a prospect. Obviously right now asking price isn't right but we'll see. You see how they built this team. Obviously Shattenkirk is the guy that fits this core.

I don't think they do want a D prospect. They have Pietrangelo, Parayko, Lindbohm, Edmundson, Schmaltz and Vannelli all under 28 and established in solidly in the system.

On taking Nash + another $ contract: see the link below. That story suggests that WERE taking back the $ contract. I wouldn't have minded Berglund or Steen, but I don't think we need either now.

i want them to take back staal...to me if they dont take back staal, im not interested...he'll be free to come here on his own volition in 1 years time. dont take the bait.

Blues are already saddled with Bouwmeester and Gunnarson as LHD they cant easily move. No chance in hell they take a $ contract D like Staal or Girardi. The ONLY reason they're moving Shattenkirk to begin with is their young D pushing $ contract D out. It'd make no sense for them to take Staal to move Shattenkirk.

http://spectorshockey.net/latest-on-the-blues-and-blackhawks-august-20-2016/

 

[bernmeister]

This is awesome, thanks for taking the time to do this. ......

Totally. The reason I keep including Miller in deals is because I think the Rangers have three prime trade chips right now between Kreider, Hayes, and Miller. ...

this is your error
need to keep the young core, move the vets

Staal, McIlrath, Halverson/Shestyorkin for Trouba?

although they could use more depth w prospects in net, no rush by them to cough up for same
Want LD but not staal
smartest move is
McD + for Trouba +

Montour is exempt. He's 22, but he only signed his ELC at 21. He's going into his 2nd pro year, same as Skjei, so he is exempt.

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

thanks I was going on someone saying the opposite later will find post

 

[NYR713]

I'm hoping to see a Graves/McIlrath pairing in preseason. It could be an awesome pairing for years to come once both are full time NHL'ers.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Nash and IDK, Ryan Graves?

Why are you so eager to trade Nash+ for 1 year of Shattenkirk?

 

[Tawnos]

Why are you so eager to trade Nash+ for 1 year of Shattenkirk?

Why are you always assuming it's just one year?

 

[Gospel of Prospal]

Why are you so eager to trade Nash+ for 1 year of Shattenkirk?

It's not one year (or at least doesn't have to be, especially if we trade Nash), but the number one reason is the salary. I'd like to shed Nash's salary.

 

[New York RKY]

It's not one year (or at least doesn't have to be, especially if we trade Nash), but the number one reason is the salary. I'd like to shed Nash's salary.

You'd like to shed Nash's 7.8 to add at least 6 mill for Shattenkirk?

 

[Gump Hasek]

How have we not been able to make a Staal to Winnipeg deal happen?

Close to home and they're desperate for a shutdown Left D.

Some fans might be desperate for a shutdown LD, but the Jets have Josh Morrissey ready to graduate at LD and as such they don't really need Staal, like at all.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Why are you always assuming it's just one year?

Because he only has 1 year left on his current deal. Everywhere I hear people say he wants to play for us. Fine, why waste assets for an extra year then? Sign him as a free agent in 2017

 

[RangerBoy]

Winnipeg already has too D to protect in expansion and they already have a ton of money on D. Go look. They have two NMC players with Myers and Trouba.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Winnipeg already has too D to protect in expansion and they already have a ton of money on D. Go look. They have two NMC players with Myers and Trouba.

Buff and Enstrom. Myers has no clause and Trouba is not signed yet

 

[RangerBoy]

Buff and Enstrom. Myers has no clause and Trouba is not signed yet

Trouba will be signed soon. Winnipeg has all of the leverage. Where is Trouba going? They don't want to trade him.

 

[RangerBoy]

Read very carefully

If the Rangers reset by moving money out, they don’t seem committed to bringing money back in. Unless there has been a recent dramatic shift in thinking, New York management is not interested in dealing for St. Louis’ right defenseman Kevin Shattenkirk and then giving him the six-year, $42 million extension it would probably take to keep him off the free-agent market next summer when his current deal expires. So while Nash (or perhaps Kreider or Stepan) going to the Blues in exchange for Shattenkirk makes intellectual sense, it does not appear a deal the Rangers are pursuing.

http://nypost.com/2016/06/21/truth-behind-rangers-gms-reset-plan-stars-must-be-traded/

If not Girardi, it is unclear who would inherit the assignment, but sources indicate the Blueshirts are extremely unlikely to pursue St. Louis’ Kevin Shattenkirk in a trade. With only one year at a reasonable $4.25 million remaining on his contract, it likely would take a six-year commitment at upward of $6.5 million per to keep Shattenkirk off the 2017 open market. That’s an investment the Rangers are not going to be willing to make.

In that same column

Expect the Rangers to be in big-time on pending free-agent winger Jimmy Vesey of Harvard, who will become available on Aug. 15 when the Predators lose the rights to the 66th overall selection of the 2012 entry draft.

Common wisdom has the North Redding, Mass., native signing with either the Maple Leafs (for whom his father works) or the hometown Bruins, but there is every reason to believe the Blueshirts will be serious players on this one.

Brooks nailed that one

http://nypost.com/2016/05/25/you-might-not-recognize-anyone-on-the-rangers-next-season/

Regarding Nash, who, despite an off-the-charts bad 2015-16, has been the Rangers’ best forward by a considerable margin over his four seasons in New York: The Post has been told the Blues are not interested in dealing for No. 61, even if the 32-year-old winger is one of St. Louis coach Ken Hitchcock’s all-time favorite players.

That should put an end to the hypothetical Nash-for-Kevin Shattenkirk scenario that has been floating about cyberspace. Shattenkirk is a top-four right-handed defenseman the Rangers normally would covet, but, as previously reported in this space, management is leery about the cost of a contract extension for the 27-year-old, whose deal for $4.25 million per expires at the end of the next season and who then would be eligible to hit the open market.

With former Ranger Keith Yandle having signed a seven-year deal worth $6.35 million per with the no-tax-state Panthers on Thursday morning, Shattenkirk likely would be in line for a seven-year deal worth at least $7 million per, though one well-connected individual said the New Rochelle native might be willing to give the Blueshirts a hometown discount.

http://nypost.com/2016/06/23/rangers-slow-playing-rick-nash-trade-chris-kreider-extension/

There is no discount. Yandle was willing to give the Rangers a discount so he could stay in New York close to his family in Massachusetts. He wanted a minimum of $45M for 7 from the Rangers. What a discount.

 

[RangerBoy]

EJ Hradek was asked on twitter about Shattenkirk and the Rangers. Not happening. They asked Brooks on twitter about Shattenkirk. Not happening.

Just because Shattenkirk is from New Rochelle doesn't mean the Rangers should trade for him or wait until July to give him a monster contract. He is not worth 6 or 7 or 8 years at $6M plus per with a NMC/limited NTC. Case closed. I don't care if he vacations in the Hamptons. I love that one.

 

[Vitto79]

EJ Hradek was asked on twitter about Shattenkirk and the Rangers. Not happening. They asked Brooks on twitter about Shattenkirk. Not happening.

Just because Shattenkirk is from New Rochelle doesn't mean the Rangers should trade for him or wait until July to give him a monster contract. He is not worth 6 or 7 or 8 years at $6M plus per with a NMC/limited NTC. Case closed. I don't care if he vacations in the Hamptons. I love that one.

You may be right but it's easy for fans to look at it and say they need a rd , shatty would likely want to play in NY. I wouldn't deal assets only Nash. Still think as a ufa they make an offer