Larry Brooks: Marc Staal wants to stay in New York
- Thread starter RangerBoy
- Start date
- Status
kovazub94
Enigmatic
- Aug 5, 2010
- 12,561
- 8,414
Rangers without Staal will be a serious step back on D. I'd rather the Rangers traded one of the other upcoming "raisers" and I can only see this being Hagelin. Fast, Butch and Duke could be all fighting for this spot a year from now.
It's best to give him an extension now rather than later, and I feel the same way about Stepan. You want cost control on your assets, you get it done early.
Look at the Subban deal, its not a precedent for Staal, but its a allegory of what's to come when you don't manage your assets when you can for cheap.
Staal hasn't gotten used to a 5.4 Salary yet, so why not give him the Girardi deal and he can feel like he's got 7 years at 5.5, the Rangers get 1 year at the old cap hit and they don't risk losing him or having to overpay.
If Glen Sather can throw out organizational rules for Scott Gomez (no more than a 5 year deal), then he can throw it out for Staal and Stepan (early extensions).
When you manage contracts properly you get great deals (Mac Truck before offensive explosion). When you don't then it bites you.
The question isn't if they are going to sign him or not at this stage. It's if they are going to trade him or not.
If they aren't then extend him. If they are, then do it since its unlikely a MSL for Callahan type situation will come up.
The Rangers have a very smart coach, and a great goaltender, but neither those two forces can overcome losing an anchor of a defenseman for nothing.
Look at the Subban deal, its not a precedent for Staal, but its a allegory of what's to come when you don't manage your assets when you can for cheap.
Staal hasn't gotten used to a 5.4 Salary yet, so why not give him the Girardi deal and he can feel like he's got 7 years at 5.5, the Rangers get 1 year at the old cap hit and they don't risk losing him or having to overpay.
If Glen Sather can throw out organizational rules for Scott Gomez (no more than a 5 year deal), then he can throw it out for Staal and Stepan (early extensions).
When you manage contracts properly you get great deals (Mac Truck before offensive explosion). When you don't then it bites you.
The question isn't if they are going to sign him or not at this stage. It's if they are going to trade him or not.
If they aren't then extend him. If they are, then do it since its unlikely a MSL for Callahan type situation will come up.
The Rangers have a very smart coach, and a great goaltender, but neither those two forces can overcome losing an anchor of a defenseman for nothing.
Bring Back Avery
Registered User
I don't really get all of the "durability issues" talk. Yeah, he had the concussion, but the eye thing was totally a freak accident. It could've happened to anyone. Personally, I think Staal is much better than Girardi. He has more offensive upside, is a better skater, and seems to be better positionally. I don't remember him doing the "snow angels" nearly as often as G during the playoffs. I hope we re-sign Staal and trade G to the Lightning so he can be reunited with Cally. ;-)
GOAT AINEC
Soon..
- Jun 4, 2014
- 2,809
- 37
Zil
Shrug
- Feb 9, 2006
- 5,558
- 42
Staal has offensive upside? Generally to have offensive upside you have to be capable of handling the puck. Extending him would be a mistake. We have depth on the left side of the system. There's no need to pay Staal $6 million+ for what he brings.
Staal hasnt gotten his accuracy back. before the eye injury he had a pretty good shot.
having 3 top pairing dmen is a huge part of what made us a great team. what depth do we have on the left side? I am not comfortable handing John Moore Staal's minutes at all. Skjei is not ready yet. how would extending Staal be a mistake? I highly doubt he'll get over 6 mill.
That feels a little harsh doesn't it? He was really starting to tap into some offense before the eye injury. 11 points in 21 games in the lockout shortened season. His offense was increasing every year before his concussion. 30 points is a very reasonable guess for him, I think, which, for his defensive prowess is a fantastic return.
I know everyone is in love with possession statistics, but I don't think we need to tear Staal down. My main gripes (and really only gripes) with possession statistics are that they can't track the quality of the opportunities the opponent gets, and they can't measure the physical impact of a player.
To me, those are Staal's main assets. He keeps players to the outside ALWAYS, and he makes them pay a price every shift. I also happen to think Staal will be better this year then last year. It's his first summer in years not coming off an injury. He had a long season to adjust to the eye. I say pay him Girardi's contract before he commands even more money.
broadwayblue
Registered User
Zil
Shrug
- Feb 9, 2006
- 5,558
- 42
His eye is permanently dilated. The Staal we saw this year is as good as you can expect him to be going forward. You don't give out massive contracts on hopes and prayers. And his shot wasn't that great before the injury. He's not a scorer.
We do not have three top pairing defensemen. We have one elite defenseman and a bunch of guys who are solid enough, especially when playing in front of the world's best goalie. Staal's the definition of a second pairing guy at this point. He's solid enough in his own end and good at suppressing shots. Post-injuries, his game bounces up and down in quality. He's no longer the consistently dominant force of 2010-11.
The Rangers think Skjei is ready. Skjei decided to go back to college. He'll be here in 15-16. Allen is probably better than Moore right now. We've had rookies step into the top four before. The second pairing is where both McDonagh and Sauer broke in. It's not something to be afraid of.
Did you see the contract Brooks Orpik just got? Dedicating $11 million+ in cap space for two non-elite, purely defensive defensemen leaves us with very few avenues to improve the roster.
Stepan scored at a 75 point pace during the lockout season. We all hope he'll put up those kinds of totals, but he has yet to do that over a full season. And there aren't any injury considerations with Stepan. You can't just pencil Staal in for 30 points when he has never done it before. He played a full season and playoffs last year and didn't so much as show a pulse offensively.
There's no reason to differentiate between quality of scoring chances because the only way to generate lots of high quality scoring chances is by putting lots and lots of pucks on net. And any useful physicality will translate into increased puck possession either in the form of more shots for your team or less shots for your opponents.
Staal is actually good at shot suppression, and it shows up in his numbers, but that alone does not make him worth the kind of $6 million+ contract he's going to get. And Staal may struggle this year because he's going to have to cover for a fairly weak defensive partner in Dan Boyle.
I wouldn't pencil him into anything, including some deadbeat pylon category that you've assigned he and Girardi into with Brooks Orpik. Marc Staal is not Orpik. He doesn't have the lateral speed, or acceleration of a McDonagh, but Staal is not a traffic cone. The guy can move, especially up the ice. Staal improved throughout the season on joining the rush with forwards, often resulting in quality odd man rushes, and when it didn't work out, rarely was he not back in position. I thought, early on Staal was way too aggressive offensively, then I saw him reign it in, especially lat in the season as he and Stralman became a primary shut-down pair.
Yes and no. Physicality, particularly around the front of the next is one of the only ways the prevent second chance opportunities—which is the majority of goals scored by my estimation, anf therefore, what I might also most frequently call high quality chances. I don't want to take anything away from Stralman, because I think he's a great player, but I think that Staal's contributions to that pair are really being ignored lately. There were stretches this season that the popular opinion was that Staal was playing better the McDonagh. Does that mean he's better? Not at all, but I think it's a shame to ignore his contributions to the team because of the attention Stralman's garnering.
Again, nobody's saying that "shot suppression alone" justifies a long term extension. I believe Staal brings much more than that, and has shown it over and over again. I also think that the more he adjusts to his game post-injury, the better he will be. Whether the advanced statistics agree with it or not, a first-pairing defensemen to me is one you can trust to play against the toughest competition and award the majority of minutes, and expect it to have a positive impact on the outcome of the game. Staal is very much that IMO.
Also, where is this Dan Boyle is weak defensively coming from?
That, he is definitely not. The Rangers probably used up his peak years though and smooth skating dmen seem to fit in with AV's system. It's a perfect timing for the Rangers to part with a probable declining asset.
Zil
Shrug
- Feb 9, 2006
- 5,558
- 42
I brought up Orpik to point out the kind of crazy money defensemen are getting, not to compare their games. The fact that Staal is better than Orpik the pylon means that he'll get an even more massive deal. We can't contend for a Cup if we use all our cap space just keeping our own, slowly aging roster together. That means infusing young talent where we have it (wings and left defense) so that we can make a significant upgrade down the middle where we desperately need help. We can try and make one last run with Staal this year, but committing to him long-term is not a smart play.
Accurately measuring Staal's contributions is not the same as ignoring them. The only time Staal looked better than McDonagh last year was during the early playoff rounds when McDonagh clearly wasn't himself. Then McDonagh shook off the injury rust and Staal got exposed in the later rounds.
You keep talking about "it." What is this unquantifiable "it" you think Staal has? He's not a good breakout passer. He doesn't put up points. Whatever "it" is didn't stop Staal from scrambling all over the place in exactly the kind of physical battle against the Kings you claim he excels at.
The Staal we saw last year and the Staal that we will likely see going forward is not the proven, dominant defender he used to be. He's still a solid player, but his game is very limited. He's not dealing with the kind of injuries where he just needs to get his legs back or build up shoulder strength. His eyesight is always going to be impaired.
Reality. Boyle bleeds shots against, especially in comparison to Stralman.
He's not a pylon, but he doesn't move very well out there. I'll be happy when our defense adds mobility with Skjei joining the team.
The Rangers think Skjei is ready to turn pro. That's different than them thinking he can jump right into the lineup. But I do agree about Staal. Regardless of whether Skjei is ready they should try to get something for him instead of signing him to a big deal.
Paulie Walnutz
Make HF Great Again
- Oct 1, 2008
- 10,610
- 7,876
You're right, he spends just as much time on the ice as he does skating on it. Look, I want Staal back, but not at 6 or more. You can't give a one dimensional guy who had 12 points that much money. It's crazy. Rangers have 8 guys making 4 or more million, only 3 have scored 25 or more goals, Nash, a soon to be 40 year old MSL, and Lee ****ing Stempniak. Where's the offense coming from when a lot of cap space is used on defense? Staal's not going to all of a sudden start producing. He's always been terrible at reading plays and getting caught pinching at the wrong times. His balance is poor too. And he doesn't throw the body like he used to. Seems like he gets by now just by using his reach to stick check guys.
Nah, as a general rule a D that is 27 should -- at least -- have his 5 best years infront of him, if not 7...
The problem with Marc Staal spells John Tortorella. He was a 21 y/o coming of his rookie year when he got Torts as his coach. He was showing big signs at the time of stepping up both his offensive and physical game. Then he was forced to play those extremely important years in his development in an environment where he was banned from passing the puck in any other way than straight up the ice, moving it sideways a long the blueline, etc etc etc. Stepping people up at the blueline.
From my POV Staal now seems like an example of a player you could misjudge pretty bad, both ways. If he can push himself just a little bit more offensively and break some boundaries, he could add a new element to his game. We saw that during pre-season last year, he offense in him too. His defense is very very good, underrated around the league IMO. Many fail to seperate the Ds that are able to play defense with good support from teh Ds that can play both with support and without it, there are not 30 Ds in this league that can play good D without proper support. Staal is one of them.
OTOH, another concussion or injury in general, he could head in the wrong direction too...
At the bottomline I am for locking him up, but its hard to argue that there isn't a risk for it to back-fire...
Paulie Walnutz
Make HF Great Again
- Oct 1, 2008
- 10,610
- 7,876
eco's bones
Registered User
First thing a defenseman needs to be able to do is defend and Staal is still very good at that. Teams with two really good top lines tend to have a hard time scoring against us because we can put out McDonagh and Girardi against the one line and Staal is available against the other. That has been invaluable to our teams for several years now. I don't think it's wise to look at possession numbers as a be all end all for him--not when he's stuck out all night long anyway against guys the like of Malkin or Bergeron.
Staal was never much of a producer even when he was healthier. A lot of the puck skills he has are better suited for breaking up plays and moving the puck out of his own zone than they are for putting up offensive numbers. FWIW Girardi and Stralman are both smoother with the puck in the offensive zone than Staal is. Neither of those two ever put up big offensive numbers either.
The Rangers though have been caught in this cycle of too much expense for too few players which is why Richards and to a lesser extent Stralman and Brian Boyle are no longer on this team. We're likely to face the same dilemma next year and Staal might be the odd man out. I think the Rangers will probably sign one or two guys during the season and if Marc is not signed he's probably moved (like Callahan) so we don't wind up with nothing for him. He is worth a bit more than Callahan IMO.
Staal was never much of a producer even when he was healthier. A lot of the puck skills he has are better suited for breaking up plays and moving the puck out of his own zone than they are for putting up offensive numbers. FWIW Girardi and Stralman are both smoother with the puck in the offensive zone than Staal is. Neither of those two ever put up big offensive numbers either.
The Rangers though have been caught in this cycle of too much expense for too few players which is why Richards and to a lesser extent Stralman and Brian Boyle are no longer on this team. We're likely to face the same dilemma next year and Staal might be the odd man out. I think the Rangers will probably sign one or two guys during the season and if Marc is not signed he's probably moved (like Callahan) so we don't wind up with nothing for him. He is worth a bit more than Callahan IMO.
the difference is in the age when the contract ends. Say it's a 6-year contract. That's 34 vs. 36. While that isn't a huge difference, it's bigger than 28/30. What he gets will be dependent on what the market perception is/will be. Girardi just signed, but I think that the pricing may have changed from February to today for his services, and that will affect Staal's services, as will a hopefully higher cap number. Doesn't mean the Rangers can afford Staal. Just means the asking price, and his eventual market price, will likely increase.
This constant background drone wanting Girardi and, or, Staal traded is really hard to understand.
Teams work very hard to draft players with the potential of having careers like either of these guys,
Teams work very hard trying to develop players with the the skills template of these guys.
Teams work very hard trying to acquire players, either by trade or free agency, with the effectiveness of these guys.
We should value them while they are here and appreciate them while we have them because we will certainly miss them when they are gone.
True, Girardi may never have a year like he had a few years ago when he made the all-star game. He is transitioning into that veteran, experienced defensemen that all teams covet.
True, Staal, whether because of the injuries or because we overestimated his offensive upside, will never be that all-around elite d-man that we thought he might be.
But both of these guys are legit 1st pair D (and how lucky are we to be able to play one on the 2nd pair?).
As long as we have Henrik as the focus of the team, we must remain a team that stresses D. Even with the new emphasis on offensive that AV brings, our goaltending and D is the core of the team.
Staal easily merits $6 million a year or a tad more and I would gladly give it to him. Any though of trading him is shortsighted. Signing him before we reach the trade deadline is a priority.
Appreciate what we have in him while we have him.
Teams work very hard to draft players with the potential of having careers like either of these guys,
Teams work very hard trying to develop players with the the skills template of these guys.
Teams work very hard trying to acquire players, either by trade or free agency, with the effectiveness of these guys.
We should value them while they are here and appreciate them while we have them because we will certainly miss them when they are gone.
True, Girardi may never have a year like he had a few years ago when he made the all-star game. He is transitioning into that veteran, experienced defensemen that all teams covet.
True, Staal, whether because of the injuries or because we overestimated his offensive upside, will never be that all-around elite d-man that we thought he might be.
But both of these guys are legit 1st pair D (and how lucky are we to be able to play one on the 2nd pair?).
As long as we have Henrik as the focus of the team, we must remain a team that stresses D. Even with the new emphasis on offensive that AV brings, our goaltending and D is the core of the team.
Staal easily merits $6 million a year or a tad more and I would gladly give it to him. Any though of trading him is shortsighted. Signing him before we reach the trade deadline is a priority.
Appreciate what we have in him while we have him.
It really comes down the the cap and trying to put out there the best combination of players possible. I think most believe Staal is a very good defender (not just good, but very good), but with contracts already given out and with contracts that will need to be given out, how can you afford to keep Staal at the price he will command? Perhaps it comes across as him being "garbage", but I don't believe anyone thinks that of him. The point is, this team likely cannot afford him. In a perfect world, he would be here. Stralman would have stayed too and the top four would have remained in tact. But this isn't a perfect world. It's a cap world and the Rangers have other positions that also need focusing.
- Status
