Speculation: Trade Rumors/Speculation Part IX: Dubinsky, Rozsival and a 2nd

[Mikos87]

Boyle to Chicago is a good fit.
I've said BB's value is late 1st, and 2014 Hawks 1st qualifies. THAT is the deal for Boyle I do.

However, they are disappointed in McNeil, a mid 1st we looked at before correctly selecting Miller.
They are not disappointed to give Miller away, but they will discount him. My ballpark feeling I think they were saying they wanted a 2nd, a 2nd +.

Separate and apart from Boyle for Chitown 2014 1st, do McNeil for guaranteed third, plus 5th in 2015 which could be upgraded to additional third IF McNeil ____________ (meets certain targets, fill in the blank).

It's not like Dylan Olsen is available anymore

Trading for a late 1st means the kid is 3 years away, if he makes it. I would much rather raid the system of a winning organization. If it's the Hawks, I would target Phillip Danault. One of those guys that might become one of best utility players in the game.

 

[Oak]

Nash's worth could increase with a strong Olympiad.

This is what I am hoping for.

 

[17futurecap]

It was my understanding (via a Sports Law class I took in college) that once the clause is waived, it has been waived for the duration of the contract. Essentially you cannot pick and chose when to waive certain benefits provided under a clause of a contract. If it's waived, it's waived unless the team specifically agrees to honor it.

Got this from CapGeek, seems teams honor them in majority of cases.

If a player waives a clause to accept a trade to a new team, it is rare he will do so without a promise that the acquiring team will continue to honour the clause. Brad Richards, when traded from Tampa Bay to Dallas in 2007-08, is an example of this.

http://www.capgeek.com/faq/what-s-the-difference-between-a-NTC-and-NMC

 

[Weltschmerz]

That was also before Burns was moved to forward and Hertl broke onto the scene like a seasoned veteran. Plus Howson was hell-bent on getting Couture from San Jose, so the deal was never going to happen.

Nash would still have a lot of value around the league, but he still holds the cards with his NMC/NTC, and the Rangers would have to take back a lot of money in the deal as well. If the Rangers offered to eat 40% of his deal for this season his value would be huge.

Not sure if I got you right, but salary can only be retained for the whole contract.

 

[Crease]

This is how it works in the NHL:

There are only three reasons why a trade could/would void an NTC/NMC.

1. The player voluntarily agrees to waive it for the duration of the contract - I know of no players who have done that.

2. The NTC/NMC has an explicit condition in it that states that it is voided upon a trade - I know of no SPCs which such a term.

3. If an RFA who signs a deal with a NTC/NMC, that NTC/NMC cannot go into effect until the year that the player would have become UFA eligible - if he is traded before then, the NTC/NMC is not binding on the new team unless they choose to honor it and file paperwork with the League to that effect. This case is not that uncommon.

Nash has an interesting contract. The NMC runs from 2011 to 2015. The NTC runs from 2016 to 2018. So the NMC was active (but temporarily waived) at the time of the trade and is still active now. The Rangers get the option of honoring or voiding the NTC that kicks in in 2016. They might have already agreed to honor it as part of the initial trade. Or they might still be able to choose not to honor it for the purpose of leaving the door open to trading him in 2016.

 

[Trxjw]

Not sure if I got you right, but salary can only be retained for the whole contract.

Hmm. Guess I misunderstood that.

 

[Thirty One]

This is how it works in the NHL:

There are only three reasons why a trade could/would void an NTC/NMC.

1. The player voluntarily agrees to waive it for the duration of the contract - I know of no players who have done that.

2. The NTC/NMC has an explicit condition in it that states that it is voided upon a trade - I know of no SPCs which such a term.

3. If an RFA who signs a deal with a NTC/NMC, that NTC/NMC cannot go into effect until the year that the player would have become UFA eligible - if he is traded before then, the NTC/NMC is not binding on the new team unless they choose to honor it and file paperwork with the League to that effect. This case is not that uncommon.

Nash has an interesting contract. The NMC runs from 2011 to 2015. The NTC runs from 2016 to 2018. So the NMC was active (but temporarily waived) at the time of the trade and is still active now. The Rangers get the option of honoring or voiding the NTC that kicks in in 2016. They might have already agreed to honor it as part of the initial trade. Or they might still be able to choose not to honor it for the purpose of leaving the door open to trading him in 2016.

Which one does Visnovsky fall under?

 

[Hire Sather]

Lol, Nash basically demands a trade to the Rangers and still gets to have his NMC stand. Such a joke...

 

[Crease]

Which one does Visnovsky fall under?

Yikes. The Lubo case was a mess. Basically the third situation applied, twice over. The situation actually isn't limited to just RFA extentions. The arbitrator had to figure out whether EDM agreed to honor it years ago when LA traded him to EDM a day before the NTC kicked in. If EDM didn't agree to honor it, then Lubo never had a NTC. If EDM did agree to honor it, then ANA would have been obligated to honor it since it was active when ANA acquired him.

 

[Crease]

The policy makes sense. If the acquiring team was not bound to an active NTC/NMC, then it opens the door to NTC/NMC circumvention. For example,

Toronto Player A has a NTC. Willing to waive it for Chicago. Unwilling to for Ottawa.
Ottawa wants Player A.
Ottawa reaches agreement in principle with Chicago involving Player A.
Chicago then acquires Player A and flips him to Ottawa.

 

[Vidic15*]

San Jose hasnt been back to the CF since they got rid of their last one-dimensional scoring winger.

Nash has a history with Thornton when they played in Switzerland during the 2005 lockout.

Nash's worth could increase with a strong Olympiad.

They also played together in last year's lockout in Davos, Switzerland.

 

[Thirty One]

The policy makes sense. If the acquiring team was not bound to an active NTC/NMC, then it opens the door to NTC/NMC circumvention. For example,

Toronto Player A has a NTC. Willing to waive it for Chicago. Unwilling to for Ottawa.
Ottawa wants Player A.
Ottawa reaches agreement in principle with Chicago involving Player A.
Chicago then acquires Player A and flips him to Ottawa.

.... And no player ever waives a NTC to go to Chicago again.

 

[UConn126]

Khokhlachev and a #1 will do for a start.

Honestly, from a Bruins fan perspective, I think I like it.

 

[Ail]

Honestly, from a Bruins fan perspective, I think I like it.

Okay then we retract this offer because if the other team likes it, it must mean it's close to fair and that's not how trade proposals on HF roll.

 

[bobbop]

Nash's worth could increase with a strong Olympiad.

The only way Nash is going to Sochi is if he buys a ticket

 

[BBKers]

The only way Nash is going to Sochi is if he buys a ticket

Or denounces his Canadian citizenship and becomes a Norwegian

 

[Charlie Conway]

Trading for a late 1st means the kid is 3 years away, if he makes it. I would much rather raid the system of a winning organization. If it's the Hawks, I would target Phillip Danault. One of those guys that might become one of best utility players in the game.

A guy like Danault is very intriguing. Looks like he has decent size and (from what I read) a good work ethic and leadership capabilities. He'd be a nice bottom 6 fit. Boyle for Danault? Sounds good to me.

If the Rangers did decide to blow it up, you could move a good deal of guys for valuable prospects and picks. Aside from the typical names of Girardi, Cally, DZ, Nash, etc., there's also the already-mentioned Boyle, as well as Pouliot and D. Moore. They'd be good depth guys for a team taking a run at the cup. It's hard to say I'm on board with doing a total rebuild, but it's about time the Rangers had a REAL rebuild and not another "take a run at the best FA on the market and trade for an "elite talent" and call it a day. Thing is, Sather won't do it. Sather's all about the sexy moves.

When we came closest to the cup? After drafting and forming an identity. The top teams draft and build well, then sign free agents or trade to supplement and complement what they have. The Rangers might be on par with other teams in how they were assembled, but I think we're looking too much to FA and trades to build our top-6 talent when we should be focusing on quality drafting and keeping the pipeline well-stocked. Of course, easier said than done.

 

[RangerBoy]

Richards has not scored a goal in 9 games. He has 4 assists in those 9 games. $9M salary this season. Richards had 5 goals in the first 8 games. He has 4 goals in the last 31 games. The amnesty buyout in June can't come soon enough. Ron Duguay picks a player to watch in the pre-game show. He picked Richards on Friday night because he had three days off and should have good skating legs.

The transcript of what was said on the Hotstove

On Hockey Night in Canada, Elliotte Freidman said, “Stralman, a right handed shot got hurt last night and Del Zotto played 24 minutes. There was some thought that the Rangers would pull him back but there are still teams that think it will get dealt.â€

Glenn Healy said, “if the Rangers trade him it will be a D for a D because of the Stralman situation but look for the Boston Bruins to call the Rangers about Dan Girardi. That is going to happen because that is a good player and there is no deal done. He isn’t for a whole host of a ransom but it still isn’t done. If they can get a lot back they will make that move.â€

Friedman also wonders if Anaheim will be a player for Girardi.

http://snyrangersblog.com/2013-14/2...-latest-on-michael-del-zotto-and-dan-girardi/

A late #1 pick and a prospect isn't a lot back. The Rangers taking back a contract with another year in the deal isn't a good deal especially when its another lefty shot.

Stralman's injury is not considered a long-term injury. The Rangers don't really have the time to pull DZ back off the market. Staal should be returning later this week in Pittsburgh or Toronto. Allen will get a look with Stralman hurt.

 

[egelband]

Lol, Nash basically demands a trade to the Rangers and still gets to have his NMC stand. Such a joke...

he earned the contract he signed, including the ntc. if he chooses to waive it in some circumstance(s), that's up to him. seems fair to me. that's the contract the rangers acquired.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Richards has not scored a goal in 9 games. He has 4 assists in those 9 games. $9M salary this season. Richards had 5 goals in the first 8 games. He has 4 goals in the last 31 games. The amnesty buyout in June can't come soon enough. Ron Duguay picks a player to watch in the pre-game show. He picked Richards on Friday night because he had three days off and should have good skating legs.

The transcript of what was said on the Hotstove



http://snyrangersblog.com/2013-14/2...-latest-on-michael-del-zotto-and-dan-girardi/

A late #1 pick and a prospect isn't a lot back. The Rangers taking back a contract with another year in the deal isn't a good deal especially when its another lefty shot.

Stralman's injury is not considered a long-term injury. The Rangers don't really have the time to pull DZ back off the market. Staal should be returning later this week in Pittsburgh or Toronto. Allen will get a look with Stralman hurt.

I know this is a reply to my earlier post. Who plays Girardi's minutes? Staal isn't going to be rushed back. If the Rangers keep Del Zotto, you can get away with playing him 18-20 minutes a night. He needs to be on the left side though.

I'm in the small minority that would rather keep Del Zotto and trade Girardi. A middle pairing defenseman, a 1st, and a great prospect is not that horrible of a return for a rental. Girardi doesn't fit this team moving forward. I'm not saying give him away, but Glen should definitely be taking calls about him.

By the way, Kerdiles isn't just some throw in prospect. He has 17 points in 14 games so far in his sophomore season.

 

[Ghost of jas]

A late #1 pick and a prospect isn't a lot back. The Rangers taking back a contract with another year in the deal isn't a good deal especially when its another lefty shot.

Stralman's injury is not considered a long-term injury. The Rangers don't really have the time to pull DZ back off the market. Staal should be returning later this week in Pittsburgh or Toronto. Allen will get a look with Stralman hurt.

Agreed, but, I think that is the core of any deal involving Girardi, with other pieces added.

 

[RangerBoy]

I know this is a reply to my earlier post. Who plays Girardi's minutes? Staal isn't going to be rushed back. If the Rangers keep Del Zotto, you can get away with playing him 18-20 minutes a night. He needs to be on the left side though.

I'm in the small minority that would rather keep Del Zotto and trade Girardi. A middle pairing defenseman, a 1st, and a great prospect is not that horrible of a return for a rental. Girardi doesn't fit this team moving forward. I'm not saying give him away, but Glen should definitely be taking calls about him.

By the way, Kerdiles isn't just some throw in prospect. He has 17 points in 14 games so far in his sophomore season.

The Girardi trade isn't happening today. The Rangers want to trade DZ for a D. Staal will return later this week. Stralman's injury isn't a long-term injury.

McDonagh,Staal,Moore,D acquired for DZ,Stralman,Falk. That's 6. Give Allen an opportunity.

If the Rangers are looking to move Girardi and it looks like Girardi is on the block,they are looking to maximize the asset and aren't really concerned with the rest of this season. Not matter how you look at it the Rangers won't be a better team THIS season by trading Girardi. Maybe management doesn't want to give Girardi a long-term contract. Trading him is the prudent thing to do. That would be a positive development. They already have Lundqvist(7 years) and Nash(4 more years) signed for big bucks. Maybe they bite the bullet and re-sign Callahan to a long-term deal worth $6M per. How much money can you have tied up long-term in 4 players if you include Girardi even with the cap going up? There won't be enough money to fill the roster with good players which has numerous holes. Its hard to pay both Girardi and Callahan. The team isn't a Cup contender.

When will Kerdiles play in the NHL? Not all of the players are like Stepan who leave school after their sophomore year and make the immediate jump to the NHL. Another year of school for Kerdiles? How many years in the AHL? That's the issue.

The late #1 won't be in the NHL for 3-4 years.

The Rangers need to bring back a young roster player who can play for them as part of the deal for Girardi. That's all. Play the teams in the west up against each other. There isn't much separating them. Girardi could be the difference between a Cup final berth in the West VS a first round lost.

If money is an issue,the Rangers should retain some of Girardi's money or take back an expiring contract.

Girardi has a $3.4M salary and $3.325M cap hit.

Other players should also be traded.

 

[I Eat Crow]

The Girardi trade isn't happening today. The Rangers want to trade DZ for a D. Staal will return later this week. Stralman's injury isn't a long-term injury.

McDonagh,Staal,Moore,D acquired for DZ,Stralman,Falk. That's 6. Give Allen an opportunity.

If the Rangers are looking to move Girardi and it looks like Girardi is on the block,they are looking to maximize the asset and aren't really concerned with the rest of this season. Not matter how you look at it the Rangers won't be a better team THIS season by trading Girardi. Maybe management doesn't want to give Girardi a long-term contract. Trading him is the prudent thing to do. That would be a positive development. They already have Lundqvist(7 years) and Nash(4 more years) signed for big bucks. Maybe they bite the bullet and re-sign Callahan to a long-term deal worth $6M per. How much money can you have tied up long-term in 4 players if you include Girardi even with the cap going up? There won't be enough money to fill the roster with good players which has numerous holes. Its hard to pay both Girardi and Callahan. The team isn't a Cup contender.

When will Kerdiles play in the NHL? Not all of the players are like Stepan who leave school after their sophomore year and make the immediate jump to the NHL. Another year of school for Kerdiles? How many years in the AHL? That's the issue.

The late #1 won't be in the NHL for 3-4 years.

The Rangers need to bring back a young roster player who can play for them as part of the deal for Girardi. That's all. Play the teams in the west up against each other. There isn't much separating them. Girardi could be the difference between a Cup final berth in the West VS a first round lost.

If money is an issue,the Rangers should retain some of Girardi's money or take back an expiring contract.

Girardi has a $3.4M salary and $3.325M cap hit.

Other players should also be traded.

Pretty much agree, we'll see what happens.

It's a matter of what kind of young player the Rangers can get back in a Girardi trade. What worries me is that Sather won't like what's being offered and he'll hold onto Girardi and Callahan and let them walk for nothing. A 1st and a blue chip prospect that's within a year of being NHL ready would be a good return for either.

Kerdiles could play in the NHL next season, but he'd be better served staying at Wisconsin for his junior year.

 

[Roo Returns]

If the Rangers and Anaheim do business for Girardi I would like to see;

Girardi for Sami Vatanen (your RHD), Devonte Smith-Pelley (helps the bottom six become young and competent), and a first.

 

[I Eat Crow]

The Ducks aren't going to trade Vatanen. They'll move a guy like Allen, Souray, or even Sbisa before him.