Proposal: #2/3 D-Man to NYR
- Thread starter FoxyClean
- Start date
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
Lays
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2017
- 13,559
- 12,630
Not a chance with the way Miller's been playing this year. Before the season I would've done that though.
Miller for Vatanen straight up might be something to look into. The Rangers can't afford to lose a #4 D-Man (Klein) for a 2nd right now though. Miller + Clendening for Vatanen + 3rd would be more in the ballpark.
Has Vatanen been playing like a solid #2/3 this season? That's the only way I can see the Rangers giving up their best forward this season.
How about Nash not Miller
Ducks have a forward to move back that makes a descent amount ?
He's had a phenomenal year in juniors and I can see him being a solid middle pairing D for the Rangers in a couple of years.
I agree he's had a good year but it's way inflated by being on one of the best teams in junior hockey. I have a tough time seeing his absolut, perfect scenario upside as anything more then a #4 and i don't think it's very likely he gets to his perfect scenario upside. He has too many flaws in his game imo, i'd love to be wrong but he shouldn't be anywhere near a 'not available' list.
From my understanding what the Rangers are looking for is a defenseman to take over Girardi's role as RHD to McDonagh, that Girardi has regressed a little. I take from this article that a bit of forward depth would not be a bad thing: http://nypost.com/2017/02/16/nhl-pest-who-would-make-sense-as-a-rangers-trade-rental/
Albeit I've also read that the writer has had some controversial opinions. Unfortunately I don't watch the Rangers more than two or so times a year.
A recent talk with Benning on TSN 1040 (https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-va...games-before-deadline-to-decide-where-were-at) had the following to say (obtained from a great poster on reddit/canucks):
• Still have 5 games to see where they're at before the deadline.
• Says team will explore the possibility of seeing if team's with a surplus of wingers are willing to exchange with the Canucks for defensemen.
• Haven't talked to any players about potential trades.
• Will maybe have discussions with players during the bye week.
I'd also like to point out that Vancouver has to expose one of Hansen, Granlund or Baertschi to the expansion draft along with the only other solid candidate being Sbisa.
I understand that Tanev has been talked about to death and I'm sorry for shoving him down your throats again. But what do you think about the value of this with minor sides/cap dumps added if need be:
Tanev + Hansen for Buchnevich or JT Miller + Klein + 1st
Tanev would be the clear target for 2/3 defenseman. He obviously doesn't produce points much, is a little injury prone from blocking the phenomenal amount of shots he does. But he is by all rights a beast of a player and someone Canucks fans love (Not only to offer up in trades!). Some would argue he's a number 1, some a number 3, whatever. I'd like to just point out that he has elevated the game of every person he plays with so far and is a really humble guy on a very decent contract and has had a history with AV, even if it was brief and in a 3rd pairing role before he broke out.
Hansen is likewise a valued player. He helped Horvat find his footing a season or two ago and now plays all over the line up, sometimes on our first line with the Sedins, sometimes with Horvat, sometimes with Sutter. He can fit anywhere in your lineup and produce. He's quick and gritty but I'd say not too physical. Going by the article he would really help to insulate some of your younger guys and wouldn't mind playing anywhere from a 1st to a 4th line role. If you look through the main Hansen discussion thread you'll see some other Canucks fans arguments as to why he is a great 2nd liner. But that's not the point. He can help you on almost any line, he has a very nice contract for this year and the next (2.5million cap) and most importantly he is available because he could be our one most trade-able asset.
I added Klein because I kind of think we need a RHD while Gudbranson is out, otherwise we could have up to 3 rookies on the right side if Biega gets injured, which is worrisome. Maybe someone else can fit in better. Personally I feel like Canucks fans might want more for this package but it could be a start to a discussion. I realise that Miller and Buch are both on your non available list but well, don't think we can get much done for someone else.
The return for the Canucks is of course one of Buch or JT Miller with their top 6 upside and a first. The player we get would slot in where Hansen would have played.
Albeit I've also read that the writer has had some controversial opinions. Unfortunately I don't watch the Rangers more than two or so times a year.
A recent talk with Benning on TSN 1040 (https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-va...games-before-deadline-to-decide-where-were-at) had the following to say (obtained from a great poster on reddit/canucks):
• Still have 5 games to see where they're at before the deadline.
• Says team will explore the possibility of seeing if team's with a surplus of wingers are willing to exchange with the Canucks for defensemen.
• Haven't talked to any players about potential trades.
• Will maybe have discussions with players during the bye week.
I'd also like to point out that Vancouver has to expose one of Hansen, Granlund or Baertschi to the expansion draft along with the only other solid candidate being Sbisa.
I understand that Tanev has been talked about to death and I'm sorry for shoving him down your throats again. But what do you think about the value of this with minor sides/cap dumps added if need be:
Tanev + Hansen for Buchnevich or JT Miller + Klein + 1st
Tanev would be the clear target for 2/3 defenseman. He obviously doesn't produce points much, is a little injury prone from blocking the phenomenal amount of shots he does. But he is by all rights a beast of a player and someone Canucks fans love (Not only to offer up in trades!). Some would argue he's a number 1, some a number 3, whatever. I'd like to just point out that he has elevated the game of every person he plays with so far and is a really humble guy on a very decent contract and has had a history with AV, even if it was brief and in a 3rd pairing role before he broke out.
Hansen is likewise a valued player. He helped Horvat find his footing a season or two ago and now plays all over the line up, sometimes on our first line with the Sedins, sometimes with Horvat, sometimes with Sutter. He can fit anywhere in your lineup and produce. He's quick and gritty but I'd say not too physical. Going by the article he would really help to insulate some of your younger guys and wouldn't mind playing anywhere from a 1st to a 4th line role. If you look through the main Hansen discussion thread you'll see some other Canucks fans arguments as to why he is a great 2nd liner. But that's not the point. He can help you on almost any line, he has a very nice contract for this year and the next (2.5million cap) and most importantly he is available because he could be our one most trade-able asset.
I added Klein because I kind of think we need a RHD while Gudbranson is out, otherwise we could have up to 3 rookies on the right side if Biega gets injured, which is worrisome. Maybe someone else can fit in better. Personally I feel like Canucks fans might want more for this package but it could be a start to a discussion. I realise that Miller and Buch are both on your non available list but well, don't think we can get much done for someone else.
The return for the Canucks is of course one of Buch or JT Miller with their top 6 upside and a first. The player we get would slot in where Hansen would have played.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
I'm fine with Vatanen for Miller straight up and shopping elsewhere for a stop gap #4D. Clendening is of no use to us though, you can keep him.
No thanks, no interest in moving any of top D pieces for Nash. They're all young, affordable assets and we'd demand the same in return.
rangers923
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 37,103
- 10,749
This is moreso just based off my personal assessment of what we can afford to give up. Obviously none of us know what Gorton's thinking.
- Sep 1, 2010
- 9,813
- 7,696
It's a good assessment, but I still firmly believe the Rangers have a good stockpile of solid forwards and don't need to be adding any right now. Our main goal is to use those forwards plus draft picks to bolster the Defense.
I don't want to give up any D-man other than Clendening (because he doesn't play much anyway), because our defense needs a lot of help and trading away Klein would be counterproductive.
That would leave us with Miller/Buch and Tanev/Hansen. I don't think Gorton would give up Buchnevich. And I don't think Tanev has enough value for us to give up our best forward right now.
Stepan + Clendening + 2nd for Tanev + Hansen would be something much more doable for us right now.
Alternatively, Stepan for Tanev + 2nd
- Sep 1, 2010
- 9,813
- 7,696
no Miller, no Buch, no 1st, so no thanks
but i don't see NYR giving one of their top 8 F's,
or Buch or Vesey
or their 1st 1st in years
I understand the process, at these threads, of
trying to build what seems a fair deal based on market expectations,
but that doesn't mean a team will do it, if it counters their other priorities
If NYR could work out a deal w VC based on
- Klein(or other non McD/Skjei D) plus
- prospects (Day, Gropp, a non-Shesty goalie, etc) ,
- future picks,
- young F's (Lindberg, Puempel, Nieves, Tambellini, Fontaine)
then it might work out
Not trying rip any one off,
always ok with agree to say no, we all walk away happy
I just don't see the framework above as deal NYR would do ...
not watching VC closely, so these comments may be way off
Canucks seem to be stuck in the early parts of the rebuild expected a couple years ago (Horvat sure is a stud, great get for Schneider)
don't know their goalie depth chart but obvi Miller is getting old and Markstrom hasn't yet been a full time starter, now 27
IMHO Hansen is not special player, just added to punch up the price,
NYR might actually prefer Burrows as a rental, there was an article suggesting that, AV knows him, NYR don't have a guy who distracts and annoys, and he is playoff proven
anyway, while i am always reluctant to overpay, NYR were not, in the Yandle, Staal, St.Louis or Clowe in-season deals, so we'll see ...
Just stop. The Rangers are done with the go for it now trades. It's just not going to happen
J.T. Miller has been one of the better, two way forwards in the league. Gorton isn't going to trade him. He's also cheap.
MarkMessyay11
Registered User
That is the main problem with a vast majority of proposals on this site. Fan value =/= team value. Sure it's fun to speculate and gauge what players could return in trades. But I can almost guarantee that Stepan and Nash are not only not "Very Available" but are not available at all. Nash could probably be had for the right price, but then again so could anyone.
Realistically, the Rangers aren't trading anyone off their NHL roster this year besides maybe Clendening, Lindberg, Fast, or Pirri...unless it's to return an established, young top 4 D. And even then, I have a hard time seeing them part with someone like Skjei, Buch, or Vesey...forget about Stepan, Miller, Kredier, Zucc, etc.
If they're going to make a big time move, I can see them offering one or more of Graves, Tambellini, Gropp, Halverson, and any 2017 draft pick(s). Maybe someone like Fast or Lindberg would go in a deal as well, if it makes sense. Other than that, I wouldn't expect a huge move until the offseason, if at all.
This isn't really true... I love JTM and he's been amazing offensively but he still has lots of work to do defensively.
Before the season i would have traded him for many young(ish) top 4 RHDs, now not so much. I'd still trade him for the Troubas of this world and while i love Tanev i don't think i'd add JTM to an offer for him, but it's close.
67Blues
Got it for Bobby
This doesn't make any sense for the Rangers to look for a #2/3 when you already have Shattenkirk's jersey made and sitting in his new locker for next season 
