Player Discussion Keith Yandle: Part III

[The Gloaming]

Trading Nash to keep Yandle would have the same effect as the inverse. No reason, would close the window just the same.

Not sure about that. Sure, Nash is important to the team. But consider what our defense looks like without Yandle and what our forwards look like without Nash. I would argue that given the complete lack of puck movement and really - talent - on the backend, Yandle is more important to this team. At least when he's being used correctly and not in AV's bizzaro third pairing nonsense.

 

[Raspewtin]

Not sure about that. Sure, Nash is important to the team. But consider what our defense looks like without Yandle and what our forwards look like without Nash.

Well I agree here. We have a lot less quality on D than F. But my point is that if you trade Nash for lesser pieces, you are closing the window. You don't just replace the best ES goalscorer in the NHL. And if he's declined as much as some argue he has, then the window is already closed.

I would argue that given the complete lack of puck movement and really - talent - on the backend, Yandle is more important to this team. At least when he's being used correctly and not in AV's bizzaro third pairing nonsense.

I think they're equally important. And I actually think neither of them are utilized properly. If we lose either of them, the team is screwed, that's for sure.

 

[The Gloaming]

Well I agree here. We have a lot less quality on D than F. But my point is that if you trade Nash for lesser pieces, you are closing the window. You don't just replace the best ES goalscorer in the NHL. And if he's declined as much as some argue he has, then the window is already closed.



I think they're equally important. And I actually think neither of them are utilized properly. If we lose either of them, the team is screwed, that's for sure.

So, TL;DR: the team is screwed already?

We've already covered Nash's performance this season. So not wanting to rehash the subject, if we assume that last year's Nash is the best we'll ever see, then maybe it's time to trade him before his decline really starts to hit. To me, he just doesn't look to have the same legs he had last year. That would mean it's probably better to trade Nash for some depth/cap space/prospects/picks, and keep Yandle. On the other hand, if we think that Nash will keep being an elite goal scorer for a few more seasons, and we get rid of Yandle, we're screwed regardless.

I would be in favor of exploring some Nash trade options in order to fit Yandle. Just due to the fact that the wonder twins are immovable, and Nash has the biggest cap hit on the team save for Hank. You might not be able to replace last season's Nash, but I think this season's Nash and playoff Nash is easier to replace by quite a bit. You can replace scoring by committee. You can't replace a puck mover on the backend by committee.

 

[bl02]

Trading Nash to keep Yandle would have the same effect as the inverse. No reason, would close the window just the same.

If I had to choose between the two due to freeing up Money i would rather keep Yandle. Just trying to be realistic considering most likely no one will take staal or girardi. If a smart move is made couldn't we get something for Nash (someone who makes 2-3 million range and a high pick?).Of course we aren't going to replace his ES scoring but freeing up 8 million dollar would be huge going forward. Not to mention Nash will be on the decline soon if he isn't already

 

[bl02]

So, TL;DR: the team is screwed already?

We've already covered Nash's performance this season. So not wanting to rehash the subject, if we assume that last year's Nash is the best we'll ever see, then maybe it's time to trade him before his decline really starts to hit. To me, he just doesn't look to have the same legs he had last year. That would mean it's probably better to trade Nash for some depth/cap space/prospects/picks, and keep Yandle. On the other hand, if we think that Nash will keep being an elite goal scorer for a few more seasons, and we get rid of Yandle, we're screwed regardless.

I would be in favor of exploring some Nash trade options in order to fit Yandle. Just due to the fact that the wonder twins are immovable, and Nash has the biggest cap hit on the team save for Hank. You might not be able to replace last season's Nash, but I think this season's Nash and playoff Nash is easier to replace by quite a bit. You can replace scoring by committee. You can't replace a puck mover on the backend by committee.

Bingo! We are a playoff team without Nash and his 35 plus goal scoring days are over. By next year I can see him being the third or fourth leading goal scorer on this team

 

[Raspewtin]

So, TL;DR: the team is screwed already?

Unless they can pull off some shrewd, borderline impossible trades that get rid of Girardi and Staal, yeah.

We've already covered Nash's performance this season. So not wanting to rehash the subject, if we assume that last year's Nash is the best we'll ever see, then maybe it's time to trade him before his decline really starts to hit. To me, he just doesn't look to have the same legs he had last year. That would mean it's probably better to trade Nash for some depth/cap space/prospects/picks, and keep Yandle. On the other hand, if we think that Nash will keep being an elite goal scorer for a few more seasons, and we get rid of Yandle, we're screwed regardless.

The best option is to not play here. I'd like to keep both. I'd trade Kreider to keep Yandle.

There's also the realism that Yandle is not going to play the minutes he should with Staal on the team. He's barely playing them with McDonagh out of the line-up. He still doesn't even start on the 1st unit.

I would be in favor of exploring some Nash trade options in order to fit Yandle. Just due to the fact that the wonder twins are immovable, and Nash has the biggest cap hit on the team save for Hank. You might not be able to replace last season's Nash, but I think this season's Nash and playoff Nash is easier to replace by quite a bit. You can replace scoring by committee. You can't replace a puck mover on the backend by committee.

At that point I'd just blow it up. This team is a lot closer to "contending" than a rebuild but there is just no way this team will win anything with Girardi playing top pairing minutes at 5.5 million a year. And Staal just makes a bad situation a lot worse.

This season's Nash is underrated because until Miller recently surpassed him, despite his poor sh%, was in the top 20 in p/60 and lead the Rangers. The Rangers have no goal scorers that are even close to Nash. There is no scoring by committee unless you get back a ****ing banging package for Nash, which probably won't happen.

 

[Off Sides]

I kind of think both Nash and Yandle will not be the same players in like 2 or 3 years, not sure I'd want to see the Rangers keep either.

Although I know it's a pipe dream I'd really like to see them reboot to a point regardless that Lundqvist is getting older.

I think they could use the return from Yandle now, Nash this off-season, and then even Klein when he is a UFA to be to come close to rebuilding their farm while making the on ice roster younger too. Let some other team find out at which point those guys decline, because I think Nash is already showing signs and Yandle will too in about 2 or 3 years. Injuries just pile up and they just don't heal the same as players get older.

Use the extra cap space to re-sign the youth, maybe skip some bridges if the cap hits make sense on some of the more reliable players, sign short term one year vets that can either be sold at the deadlines or re-signed cheap if they work out.

Stop buying at the deadlines, finish where they naturally do, if you can not get back youth/picks at deadlines and they still really feel the need to go for it stand pat or only add in cheap stuff for like 3rd round picks.

Set limits on the UFA targets, Glass should have had a limit of 500K, Boyle 2.5M who cares if they go somewhere else, that is what they are worth to this team. There are cheaper options who can add just as much if not more.

Sell picks at the draft need be when they are worth their most. Buy picks at deadlines when they are available for less.

Be a little more efficient in every way and instead of coming close and having windows the team will always be pretty good, and some years very good.

 

[Raspewtin]

You're asking the Rangers to not be the Rangers. Pretty bold.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Trading anyone but the wonder twins to keep Yandle is basically a waste. Trade Nash to keep Handle so he can play 3rd pair and 2nd PP? Not sure that makes sense.

 

[bl02]

I kind of think both Nash and Yandle will not be the same players in like 2 or 3 years, not sure I'd want to see the Rangers keep either.

Although I know it's a pipe dream I'd really like to see them reboot to a point regardless that Lundqvist is getting older.

I think they could use the return from Yandle now, Nash this off-season, and then even Klein when he is a UFA to be to come close to rebuilding their farm while making the on ice roster younger too. Let some other team find out at which point those guys decline, because I think Nash is already showing signs and Yandle will too in about 2 or 3 years. Injuries just pile up and they just don't heal the same as players get older.

Use the extra cap space to re-sign the youth, maybe skip some bridges if the cap hits make sense on some of the more reliable players, sign short term one year vets that can either be sold at the deadlines or re-signed cheap if they work out.

Stop buying at the deadlines, finish where they naturally do, if you can not get back youth/picks at deadlines and they still really feel the need to go for it stand pat or only add in cheap stuff for like 3rd round picks.

Set limits on the UFA targets, Glass should have had a limit of 500K, Boyle 2.5M who cares if they go somewhere else, that is what they are worth to this team. There are cheaper options who can add just as much if not more.

Sell picks at the draft need be when they are worth their most. Buy picks at deadlines when they are available for less.

Be a little more efficient in every way and instead of coming close and having windows the team will always be pretty good, and some years very good.

Yup. Avoid deals like the ones made for clowe.
In fairness to yandle isn't he pretty durable ? Maybe it's his style of play? Hopefully there's a fair deal to be made between the rangers and yandle. Hopefully no more than the standard 5 years 6 million per but like has been mentioned her a lot he needs to be utilized correctly. 20-22 min per game and first unit pp otherwise trade him

 

[bl02]

Trading anyone but the wonder twins to keep Yandle is basically a waste. Trade Nash to keep Handle so he can play 3rd pair and 2nd PP? Not sure that makes sense.

Good point. Him playing 3rd pairing minutes and getting scrap time on pp is a complete joke. I see how horrendous our pp is and him not being out ther to start every single pp makes me want to break things. I love mcdonagh but yandle belongs on that first unit

 

[The Gloaming]

Unless they can pull off some shrewd, borderline impossible trades that get rid of Girardi and Staal, yeah.



The best option is to not play here. I'd like to keep both. I'd trade Kreider to keep Yandle.

There's also the realism that Yandle is not going to play the minutes he should with Staal on the team. He's barely playing them with McDonagh out of the line-up. He still doesn't even start on the 1st unit.



At that point I'd just blow it up. This team is a lot closer to "contending" than a rebuild but there is just no way this team will win anything with Girardi playing top pairing minutes at 5.5 million a year. And Staal just makes a bad situation a lot worse.

This season's Nash is underrated because until Miller recently surpassed him, despite his poor sh%, was in the top 20 in p/60 and lead the Rangers. The Rangers have no goal scorers that are even close to Nash. There is no scoring by committee unless you get back a ****ing banging package for Nash, which probably won't happen.

I don't see what trading Kreider accomplishes. His cap hit is 2.475. His play this season certainly doesn't warrant a raise of over 1 million. So let's say Boyle's 4.5 comes off the books, Yandle's 2.6, Kreider's 2.475. That 7.575? Then you've got some smaller contracts expiring, but we still have to replace them somehow. Moore at 1.5, Stalberg at 1.1. That's now 10.1? Let's say Yandle gets 6.5, a pretty conservative estimate. That's 3.6 to give Miller and Hayes raises, sign a 7D, and sign some random 4th liners as backups in case one of our forward prospects can't make the jump. That's pretty tight.

If we're seriously about re-signing Yandle, I'd say we have to clear at least 4mil in cap space, in addition to Boyle leaving.

 

[Off Sides]

You're asking the Rangers to not be the Rangers. Pretty bold.

I know, and I know they would not do much of any of those things, but really I think that would be a better path towards just being a solid to very good team almost all the time rather than the bell curve they go through every 15 years.

 

[True Blue]

If we re-sign Yandle that's great too but then Staal absolutely has to go which I'm fine with. Can't see how they can possibly fit both and keep all the forwards that they absolutely have to re-sign. Ultimately for age reasons I prefer Yandle just be traded and predict that if we do not trade him it will be an idiotic failure of epic proportions (as was the MSL trade and the Clowe trade...not as epic of a proportion for the last one). Though I'd love to be wrong

You are not wrong.

 

[Raspewtin]

I know, and I know they would not do much of any of those things, but really I think that would be a better path towards just being a solid to very good team almost all the time rather than the bell curve they go through every 15 years.

If they do what you want them to, don't even half ass it. Sell half the roster. Only keep pieces like McDonagh, Brassard, Zuccarello, Hayes, and Miller. They need to stick to a direction and there's no indication that they plan on doing so.

 

[Off Sides]

Yup. Avoid deals like the ones made for clowe.
In fairness to yandle isn't he pretty durable ? Maybe it's his style of play? Hopefully there's a fair deal to be made between the rangers and yandle. Hopefully no more than the standard 5 years 6 million per but like has been mentioned her a lot he needs to be utilized correctly. 20-22 min per game and first unit pp otherwise trade him

The opposite of the Clowe trade is what I'd love to see.

Yandle, I have no idea his durability, just that when I look at the listing of ages in the NHL, 33-34 years and older there are just not that many players those ages anymore.

 

[Raspewtin]

Meh, Yandle has had a remarkably healthy career and his style of play ages a lot better than most. Dan Boyle was very effective at age 37 until Lapierre tried to end his career. Defensemen that rely on skating and hockey IQ age the best. Mark Streit is another one who's still going pretty strong. Markov. Campbell. Kaberle lasted a long while. All similar.

 

[bl02]

Man why couldn't staal just waive his ntc?! Solves two big problems. Forces AV to give yandle more playing time and frees up close to 6 million which if we won't use for yandle we will need for upcoming expiring contracts.

 

[Raspewtin]

Staal should've never been extended in the first place.

 

[True Blue]

You're asking the Rangers to not be the Rangers. Pretty bold.

What was the PT Barnum line? You will never go broke betting on stupidity??

 

[Captain Lindy]

Trading Nash to keep Yandle would have the same effect as the inverse. No reason, would close the window just the same.

Nooooo!! Not the dreaded "W" word again.

 

[rkhum]

Why do you want Yandle traded so bad?
The Rangers have Boyle coming off the cap....that money can be used to re-sign Yandle...and DG or Staal are moveable....teams still value their grit reputation.

Therefore I want Yandle kept and one or both DG Staal moved.

 

[StepansLabyrinth]

Girardi isn't going anywhere next season. His NMC lasts through the end of next season. After that, his actual pay (3.33 a year) is significantly lower than his cap hit (5.5). He seems like a decent asset for a floor team when you consider his leadership abilities. So he's not that big of a drag in reality, even if we had to kick in a few million to get a deal done. We really don't have much depth on the right side anyway.

Staal's deal is a much bigger burden. His NMC lasts until 2018 and the contract isn't heavily frontloaded until the last year (2020). I'm not sure how we could convince someone to take him based on his current level of play. He's not old and hopefully he returns to form...but I can't think of any deals that would make sense, either.

I can't really see us moving either until the end of next season. That might prevent us from having the room to sign Yandle, but I'd be nervous about giving him 6 years like he's likely to get anyway.

 

[Ori]

Yandle can`t change battery on the fire alarm, that`s a requirement to be Ranger - move him and trade!

 

[Charlie Conway]

Please...no...keep Yandle.

Staal - Girardi or Staal-Klein next year? I can't...