Larry Brooks: Marc Staal wants to stay in New York

[zuckera1]

Bouwmeester and Seabrook are 1st pair defensemen, but not number 1s. In Seabrook's case, he's a fairly 1 dimensional one. Bouwmeester signed his contract after 3 seasons of not looking like a 1st pair defenseman... at all. That description, "not #1, but first pair," pretty easily applies to Marc Staal.

Orpik is certainly overpaid, but only because he's paid for what he was, which was a 1-dimensional 1st pair D, as opposed to what he his, which is a #4 D.

I agree with you. I believe Staal will garner at least 6-6.5 on the open market. My point is that to us he's not worth that with McD and our current cap situation. He doesn't play on our first pair, he's a luxury we can't afford any more.

 

[pld459666]

Bouwmeester and Seabrook are 1st pair defensemen, but not number 1s. In Seabrook's case, he's a fairly 1 dimensional one. Bouwmeester signed his contract after 3 seasons of not looking like a 1st pair defenseman... at all. That description, "not #1, but first pair," pretty easily applies to Marc Staal.

Orpik is certainly overpaid, but only because he's paid for what he was, which was a 1-dimensional 1st pair D, as opposed to what he his, which is a #4 D.

Not sure I would lable Seabrook as fairly one dimensional.

Is he Staal good defensively? No, but he's still pretty good defenceman.

He's better than Staal is offensively than Staal is better defensively.

 

[Trxjw]

Unfortunately, timing wise, this rarely works out.

Staal's contract is up in less than 11 months. Are we going to know if Skjei is ready by then? Most likely no.

How does it rarely work out? You re-sign Staal, then let Skjei push him out of a spot before you worry about trying to move him. I'm just speaking to the point people seem to make about Skjei being ready to take over for Staal next year, and that means we ought to trade him.

 

[vipernsx]

probably offer him the same deal as Callahan, 6x6.

How does it rarely work out? You re-sign Staal, then let Skjei push him out of a spot before you worry about trying to move him. I'm just speaking to the point people seem to make about Skjei being ready to take over for Staal next year, and that means we ought to trade him.

Trading Staal because Skjei looks so good, is a rookie mistake. I used to advocate trading Girardi because we had Sauer, then McIlrath. Trading Girardi too soon, would have been a HUGE mistake!

 

[Tawnos]

A Staal type player that posts 30+ points a year.

An above average defenceman that can be a threat offensively.

...

Personally speaking, I'm not in favor of keeping him at anything above what Dan G got at 5.5.

I just don't think you pay that kind of premium for one dimensional defensive player regardless of how good some may believe he is in that one dimension.

"Above average" underrates Staal's defensive ability. Excellent would be more in line. But that essentially describes a #1 defenseman. Excellent defensively + 30 or more points per year is a very rare commodity.

You don't want to pay him more than Girardi? That's fine. Except then you need to look at it in line with what Girardi really got. The first year of Girardi's contract is just under 8% of the Cap. Unless something goes really wrong with the Canadian dollar, that means Staal should get around $5.8m. That's in that $6m range. Cap hit comparables need to be based on percentage, not dollar amount, otherwise it either overvalues the player signed earlier or undervalues the player signed later.

You also have to look more closely at Girardi's contract structure. The last two years of his deal pay him $4m per. The first 4 pay him an average of $6.25m per. If Staal signs a 6 year contract, those equivalent first 4 years of Girardi's deal will be the last 4 years, age-wise, of Staal's deal. If Girardi was a UFA at 28, he likely would have gotten at least $6.5m.

I, personally, don't consider $6m to be any kind of premium really.

Not sure I would lable Seabrook as fairly one dimensional.

Is he Staal good defensively? No, but he's still pretty good defenceman.

He's better than Staal is offensively than Staal is better defensively.

Here again, I think you're simply underrating Staal defensively.

 

[vipernsx]

I agree with you. I believe Staal will garner at least 6-6.5 on the open market. My point is that to us he's not worth that with McD and our current cap situation. He doesn't play on our first pair, he's a luxury we can't afford any more.

Rangers CAN afford to give Staal a 2m raise.

 

[Tawnos]

probably offer him the same deal as Callahan, 6x6.


Trading Staal because Skjei looks so good, is a rookie mistake. I used to advocate trading Girardi because we had Sauer, then McIlrath. Trading Girardi too soon, would have been a HUGE mistake!

You trade Staal if, and maybe when, Skjei looks like he adequately handle Staal's minutes. That doesn't mean when he can handle them as well as Staal, but rather just when he can handle them without actively hurting the team. From there, he should grow into making a positive contribution on top of that.

I always go back to what happened with McDonagh. He got his chance because Roszival got hurt. In that chance, he showed that he could fill the role, so Roszival got traded. Rozy didn't get dealt while McDonagh was still in Hartford. That's the model we need to be following here.

 

[Ola]

Jay Bouwmeester/Brent Seabrook type. Orpick is highly overpaid, as is MacDonald.

Okkiii, so market value is NOT what the market decided to pay for two guys that just signed new deals???

But if we want to replace Staal, we will be able to find someone at a "fair" price, right?

 

[Ola]

Skjei was nothing but a mediocre D in the WJCs.

I don't want to trash him, he could have a future for sure. But he is NOT ready to play in the NHL. Definitely not.

 

[zuckera1]

Rangers CAN afford to give Staal a 2m raise.

What if he asks for 6.5, are we gonna give him that and short change Zucc and Stepan?

 

[zuckera1]

Okkiii, so market value is NOT what the market decided to pay for two guys that just signed new deals???

But if we want to replace Staal, we will be able to find someone at a "fair" price, right?

Orpik was overpaid because the Caps D was a mess, and they had space. Same with the Flyers and MacDonald.

Do you think Pouliot's contract represents "market value" just because Edm signed him?

 

[Tawnos]

Orpik was overpaid because the Caps D was a mess, and they had space. Same with the Flyers and MacDonald.

Do you think Pouliot's contract represents "market value" just because Edm signed him?

I think we can be reasonable in identifying players who are signed to contracts that expect them to be players they aren't.

 

[eco's bones]

Skjei was nothing but a mediocre D in the WJCs.

I don't want to trash him, he could have a future for sure. But he is NOT ready to play in the NHL. Definitely not.

After the WJC's Skjei's game picked up and that's when most of his offense happened. The other thing is Gordie Clark seems to think he's on the cusp of making it. Most likely if he turned pro this year he would have started in the AHL but we'd have a much better picture going forward of his progress which would have given us more to go on in regard to Staal. Any case he's a future top 4 left side d-man at the least. It's a similar thing to Kreider IMO when he went back for his junior year at BC after the Rangers were pushing him to turn pro. It's questionable whether this decision helped or hindered Chris's development in the meantime. It may be that the decision had more than less negligible effect. The one thing I would say is that I always knew that barring death or career ending injury Kreider was going to be an NHL player--because of all the physical dimensions of his game and in particular the size, strength and skating. Skjei as well has the size, strength and skating where he is a slam dunk NHL player IMO as well. He has an advantage over Chris in having better experience and coaching. He already has the positioning thing figured out. After being drafted Chris then had to learn how to play. Skjei's physical skills and hockey IQ are noticeably superior to McIlrath's or Kreider's at the same age. He may be the most easily projectable prospect in our entire prospect pool.

 

[pld459666]

"Above average" underrates Staal's defensive ability. Excellent would be more in line. But that essentially describes a #1 defenseman. Excellent defensively + 30 or more points per year is a very rare commodity.

You don't want to pay him more than Girardi? That's fine. Except then you need to look at it in line with what Girardi really got. The first year of Girardi's contract is just under 8% of the Cap. Unless something goes really wrong with the Canadian dollar, that means Staal should get around $5.8m. That's in that $6m range. Cap hit comparables need to be based on percentage, not dollar amount, otherwise it either overvalues the player signed earlier or undervalues the player signed later.

You also have to look more closely at Girardi's contract structure. The last two years of his deal pay him $4m per. The first 4 pay him an average of $6.25m per. If Staal signs a 6 year contract, those equivalent first 4 years of Girardi's deal will be the last 4 years, age-wise, of Staal's deal. If Girardi was a UFA at 28, he likely would have gotten at least $6.5m.

I, personally, don't consider $6m to be any kind of premium really.




Here again, I think you're simply underrating Staal defensively.

It's not a matter of under-rating Staal's ability, for me it's a matter of wanting more than he can provide at that number.

We can dissect the contracts until we are blue in the face. The only real issue here is the actual cap hit and what we get from that number. Structure matters to the player. I am only concerned with how that fits into the teams structure.

We are already getting less bang for the buck from Nash. I'm really not intereted in compounding that problem.

Staal at 6 per puts him at 12th in the NHL for Defenceman in terms of cap hits. Right behind the well overpaid defensive sive Mike Green.

But ahead of guys like Keith, OEL, J-Bo and even Girardi whi I think is just as good as Staal is.

If I'm committing 6 or better (as a cap hit) to a defenceman, I want more than excellent defence. In fact I'd be willing to give up the excellent defensive part for an above average defenceman that will also be above average on the other end of the ice.

 

[zuckera1]

I think we can be reasonable in identifying players who are signed to contracts that expect them to be players they aren't.

I agree.

Let me clarify, there's a difference between "market value" and "fair value." Stralman's new deal represents fair value, Fayne's new deal is fair value. Ehrhoff's new deal is below his fair value, he's probably worth 5.5-6. You bet he'll get at least that in his next deal.

MacDonald and Orpik's deals are not fair value. Staal's market value will probably be 6-6.5, but that's not fair value for his skill set and his place on our team. Therefore, we should trade him rather than overpay.

Subban's market value was likely 8.5-9, I wouldn't have signed him for a penny over 8.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

How does it rarely work out? You re-sign Staal, then let Skjei push him out of a spot before you worry about trying to move him. I'm just speaking to the point people seem to make about Skjei being ready to take over for Staal next year, and that means we ought to trade him.

Gotcha. I was talking about Staal's current deal.

I would easily give him around $6M per if the deal didn't come with a NT/NMC

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

After the WJC's Skjei's game picked up and that's when most of his offense happened. The other thing is Gordie Clark seems to think he's on the cusp of making it. Most likely if he turned pro this year he would have started in the AHL but we'd have a much better picture going forward of his progress which would have given us more to go on in regard to Staal. Any case he's a future top 4 left side d-man at the least. It's a similar thing to Kreider IMO when he went back for his junior year at BC after the Rangers were pushing him to turn pro. It's questionable whether this decision helped or hindered Chris's development in the meantime. It may be that the decision had more than less negligible effect. The one thing I would say is that I always knew that barring death or career ending injury Kreider was going to be an NHL player--because of all the physical dimensions of his game and in particular the size, strength and skating. Skjei as well has the size, strength and skating where he is a slam dunk NHL player IMO as well. He has an advantage over Chris in having better experience and coaching. He already has the positioning thing figured out. After being drafted Chris then had to learn how to play. Skjei's physical skills and hockey IQ are noticeably superior to McIlrath's or Kreider's at the same age. He may be the most easily projectable prospect in our entire prospect pool.

Its not that I don't believe you, its thats not a good enough reason to get rid of Staal this season.

 

[zuckera1]

It's not a matter of under-rating Staal's ability, for me it's a matter of wanting more than he can provide at that number.

Staal at 6 per puts him at 12th in the NHL for Defenceman in terms of cap hits. Right behind the well overpaid defensive sive Mike Green.

But ahead of guys like Keith, OEL, J-Bo and even Girardi whi I think is just as good as Staal is.

If I'm committing 6 or better (as a cap hit) to a defenceman, I want more than excellent defence. In fact I'd be willing to give up the excellent defensive part for an above average defenceman that will also be above average on the other end of the ice.

Well said.

 

[vipernsx]

You trade Staal if, and maybe when, Skjei looks like he adequately handle Staal's minutes. That doesn't mean when he can handle them as well as Staal, but rather just when he can handle them without actively hurting the team. From there, he should grow into making a positive contribution on top of that.

I always go back to what happened with McDonagh. He got his chance because Roszival got hurt. In that chance, he showed that he could fill the role, so Roszival got traded. Rozy didn't get dealt while McDonagh was still in Hartford. That's the model we need to be following here.

agreed.

What if he asks for 6.5, are we gonna give him that and short change Zucc and Stepan?

Of the 4 players that need to be resigned next year, one is a defenseman and one is a center and those spots get priority. Depth through the middle wins. Skjei will get his shot and I'm very high on the kid, though until he literally pushes Staal out, the Rangers need to keep him.

If the combined asking price of the 4 players is too steep for the Rangers budget, one of the wingers will be moved. Just like Callahan, a winger was moved while Girardi the blueliner stayed. Don't be surprised if its Zuccarello, the same guy that Slats walk over to the KHL.

 

[zuckera1]

Of the 4 players that need to be resigned next year, one is a defenseman and one is a center and those spots get priority. Depth through the middle wins. Skjei will get his shot and I'm very high on the kid, though until he literally pushes Staal out, the Rangers need to keep him.

Not sure if you can make that assertion, yet. If Zucc replicates his numbers from last year (55-60), unless Staal has an injury-free season with solid defense I'd say Zucc is more important to this team moving forward.

Stepan definitely is, and IMO Zucc will be after this year too.

 

[Tawnos]

It's not a matter of under-rating Staal's ability, for me it's a matter of wanting more than he can provide at that number.

We can dissect the contracts until we are blue in the face. The only real issue here is the actual cap hit and what we get from that number. Structure matters to the player. I am only concerned with how that fits into the teams structure.

We are already getting less bang for the buck from Nash. I'm really not intereted in compounding that problem.

Staal at 6 per puts him at 12th in the NHL for Defenceman in terms of cap hits. Right behind the well overpaid defensive sive Mike Green.

But ahead of guys like Keith, OEL, J-Bo and even Girardi whi I think is just as good as Staal is.

If I'm committing 6 or better (as a cap hit) to a defenceman, I want more than excellent defence. In fact I'd be willing to give up the excellent defensive part for an above average defenceman that will also be above average on the other end of the ice.

Yeah... your argument loses a ton of credibility when you compare a potential Staal $6m contract to Duncan Keith or OEL. Keith, whose legal portion of his contract in today's NHL would have a cap hit of $7.21m. OEL's contract is his 2nd. Simply saying 12th most oversimplifies the issue to absurdity.

Staal signing a $6m contract on a $72m cap would put him at 8.33%. It would make him tied for 18th with Niskanen and Markov in terms of value against the Cap. That doesn't account for better defensemen on 2nd contracts, like Ryan McDonagh.

As for the bolded, I would suggest you adjust your expectations of a $6m defenseman.

 

[RangerBoy]

Staal will be the best D in free agency next summer.

 

[zuckera1]

Yeah... your argument loses a ton of credibility when you compare a potential Staal $6m contract to Duncan Keith or OEL. Keith, whose legal portion of his contract in today's NHL would have a cap hit of $7.21m. OEL's contract is his 2nd. Simply saying 12th most oversimplifies the issue to absurdity.

Staal signing a $6m contract on a $72m cap would put him at 8.33%. It would make him tied for 18th with Niskanen and Markov in terms of value against the Cap. That doesn't account for better defensemen on 2nd contracts, like Ryan McDonagh.

As for the bolded, I would suggest you adjust your expectations of a $6m defenseman.

Not going to disagree with your premise, but it doesn't change the fact that, on our team, we do not NEED to be allocating 6-6.5 million long term for a 2nd pairing defender who provides little offense and has had injury issues. I'd argue he's also had consistency issues his entire career but that's a different argument.

I like Staal, but he's a luxury we can't afford.

 

[Tawnos]

Not going to disagree with your premise, but it doesn't change the fact that, on our team, we do not NEED to be allocating 6-6.5 million long term for a 2nd pairing defender who provides little offense and has had injury issues. I'd argue he's also had consistency issues his entire career but that's a different argument.

I like Staal, but he's a luxury we can't afford.

Yes, and this is what the keep or trade Staal argument is really about. Marc Staal is absolutely a $6m player, by your terms in "fair value." His "market value" is probably closer to $6.5m... maybe more on a 3-4 year contract.

I'd argue that the Rangers success has hinged on their top 3 defenseman playing in front of the best goalie in the world. I'm hesitant to mess with that recipe.

 

[zuckera1]

Yes, and this is what the keep or trade Staal argument is really about. Marc Staal is absolutely a $6m player, by your terms in "fair value." His "market value" is probably closer to $6.5m... maybe more on a 3-4 year contract.

I'd argue that the Rangers success has hinged on their top 3 defenseman playing in front of the best goalie in the world. I'm hesitant to mess with that recipe.

I think he's more of a 5.5-5.75 in fair value but we're squabbling over 250-500k so that's fine. He's equal to Girardi IMO but with the cap rising and him being 2 years younger, 6 is a good number.

He'll arguably be the best dman on the market next year, if not #1 than at least 2-3. His market value IMO will be 6.5 over a long term deal (6-7 years), assuming he plays well this year and stays injury free. We can't afford that.

Defense has been our strength but it hasn't won us anything, yet. It's come close. Still need more offense in the playoffs.