because we have a cap crunch and Fast looks like he can fill the same role for a lot less. Whereas there is no replacement for Stepan or JT Miller available from within the organization. Plus the failure to develop a dman since McDonagh came up 5 years ago.
I am valuing production, however you get it. You're arguing that because Hagelin is good on 5v5, we should pay him between 4-5. I am arguing maybe we should allocate our limited resources in improving our PP. Hagelin doesn't get a ton of production to justify that salary (in a vacuum and especially in our situation).
was nice. Trading Haggerty was tough, because it did reflect some bad decisions in the past and he is worth a lot. That said, they have forced themselves into a position where they have to decide who the core of core is going forward, and that means finding money to keep Stepan, Kreider, Miller and Hayes.
I am valuing production, however you get it. You're arguing that because Hagelin is good on 5v5, we should pay him between 4-5. I am arguing maybe we should allocate our limited resources in improving our PP. Hagelin doesn't get a ton of production to justify that salary (in a vacuum and especially in our situation).
No, you're flailing. You said he sucks and isnt worth 4 million. That's a totally different argument than the Rangers shouldnt put their $4 million into Hags (a position I advocated in a lot of game threads this year, and I love Hags). But even your argument is kind of silly since (1) there is no reason to favor PP production over ES production and indeed, a lot of evidence that PP is the least important of the three phases of the game. And (2) the alternatives to trading Hags probably wouldnt help the PP either; we're out of trade ammo, the UFA market sucks, and guys like Klein and Glass (other $$ savings centers) dont contribute on the PP either. Dont pretend like the options are Hags vs. Sheldon Souray.
I can at least understand an argument that says within the context of our cap situation, he's not worth that allocation but in a vacuum, outside of a salary cap crunch and relative only to his peers, I think he is absolutely worth 4+ per. So he sucks on the power play and doesn't get chances there. Big deal. He kills penalties, he's very good defensively, he forces defensemen to think twice about joining rushes and can change a game at any given moment with his wheels by creating an odd man.
He's a very, very good player overall. So he doesn't have great hands and doesn't score a ton of goals. Big deal
Well said.
Not trading Girardi during the 2014 deadline was just killer.
You think? My guess is that this is more about Skapski being hurt to start the season, and needing 3 goalies anyway. Remember Desjardins was signed to be the #3 goalie last year but got hurt. Skapski should be the backup this year or next.
Usually you wouldnt bring up a goalie like the two we took last year to be backups to a franchise goalie in their age 20 seasons. Halverson to the AHL, Shetsyorkin remains in the KHL in 2016-17.
that Hags is definitely worth 4+ while at the same time recognizing that we couldn't be the ones to give him that in our current cap situation. I thought they got decent value out of him by moving him now. Though it's tough to see him go.
If Hagelin had hands and could finish, he'd be an amazing player. Now, he's a possession, 2-way speedster who is a bit of a pain in the neck. I do like Etem because he's still young, he's a power forward (which usually take a while to develop), he's cheap, and he has a lot of potential. I'm gonna miss Hagelin though.
Raata seems very good and a guy with some potential. When was the last time we had a Finn? Jokinen?
at work all day....so sad to see Hags go. He was def a favorite of mine, but I know in the end it's business and the Rangers couldn't afford 4-4.5 for him. I do however like Etem. I remember wanting him in the draft. Big body, can skate, and has offensive tools. He just needs to take that next step to become a player. He'll prob start out on 4th line, he's also not afraid to drop the gloves and stick up for teammates. Still sucks to lose Hags though.
I'm curious to know what you viewed as the better alternative(s) given where the team is going into this offseason.
I think it's hard to disagree with the premise that trading Hagelin was ultimately a result of some questionable decisions made previously. Those have been well documented.
I'm curious to know what you'd have them do differently in the present, given the past. You were just hired as GM after the loss to TB. What were the better ideas than what happened today?
Trade Steps? Plan on possibly losing Kreider or Hayes or Miller or Fast?
I'm sure there are a dozen viable and reasonable answers. I'm just trying to get a better read on where people are coming from.
at work all day....so sad to see Hags go. He was def a favorite of mine, but I know in the end it's business and the Rangers couldn't afford 4-4.5 for him. I do however like Etem. I remember wanting him in the draft. Big body, can skate, and has offensive tools. He just needs to take that next step to become a player. He'll prob start out on 4th line, he's also not afraid to drop the gloves and stick up for teammates. Still sucks to lose Hags though.
It's fine to trade Hags, but only for a worthy return. Unless they were convinced that the kid they took at #41 was really worth a top 20 pick, the return wasnt good enough (a disappointing former #1 and a swap of 2nds). I think a resigned Hags would have brought a better return -- give him a fair multiyear deal and a whole bunch of "bad" markets get interested.
Moreover, a better alternative would have been trading Klein and holding on to Hags.
Im totally sold on Skapski being a better alternative for 2016-17 as a 20 game NHL backup than those two kids. Being an NHL backup at age 20 is a waste of an important developmental year. Also, the Russian needs a lot of work. If he's going to make it at his size, he needs to be more technically proficient. He cant get by on agility alone with NHL-level passers and shooters.
Hagelin and Klein as alternatives to one another. In my view, at least one D needs to go, and Klein is the only one that makes a shred of sense. I think he'll still be moved.
It's a fair point about the returns we saw today. I thought we should and could have done better in both instances.
Doesn't change my view that disposing of one of Stepan and Hagelin was the best long-term move for the squad.
I know, Stralman is water under the bridge, let it go. But
this seems like similar water under the same bridge.
ct
Nah, Hagelin was traded while Stralman wasn't resigned. Now if Sather trades more prospects and draft choices for a speedy winger which commands a Hagelin price tag then it's like Stralman.
when they tend to sign prospect blocking replacement level UFA's.
The only guy I really want is Erik Condra and maybe Shawn Matthias. I hope no one blocks Lindberg from coming to the big leagues. He's earned it with his play in Hartford.
yep Sather is cooked. It's time to hand the keys to Gorton. We're going on 18 months of head scratchers and dumb decisions from Glen. He's desperate for a swan song Cup and is hurting the club. It's not irrecoverable by any means but they need to stop the bleeding now.
He overplayed his hand and those offers evaporated. Draft weekend is a sensitive time and it's very fluid. Once he had an over market offer he should have closed. He didn't get it done.
As far as Hags it's linked to all the stupid moves he's made going back to Girardi and Glass. You can't not talk about it because it had a direct effect on our ability to ink Carl. Millions pissed away for a poor return in performance. $4.5M for Dan freaking Boyle at 38? That's money well spent?
His judgement can no longer be trusted imo.
RE: I'm hoping Gorton is stepping into the forefront
again, I'm not a slats fan but we have no idea what was offered for Talbot.
When the going rate for a goalie is a #3 pick and he received more, that's a windfall. After the first 15 picks the NHL draft is about as accurate as a weather forecast. The more picks the better b/c children, in which few can bench press 135lbs 10 reps, are the choices.
Boyle, Glass, etc were ridiculous moves. As far as Hags he did get some solid return and the kid likely has a better shot than Hags. Looking forward, where do we want Hags to play? Nash, Kreider, Hayes, Miller, Zucs, Fast with Lindberg and Buchnevich in the near future, where does Hags play? Sure, Lindberg can play center, but we're looking at nine forwards already with Hags likely stuck on a 3rd line making some decent coin which could result in losing a top 6 forward.
Not a fan of Slats for along while but can't kill him this weekend. He made the team younger, less costly and added quite a few draft picks. Meanwhile, the President trophy winning team is basically still all here outside of one.
That the Rangers were offered a lot more for Talbot from the Panthers. So the question is, as a GM, do you take less and send the goalie out west, or do you look to help your team further and play against him 5 or 6 times a year?
That the Rangers were offered a lot more for Talbot from the Panthers. So the question is, as a GM, do you take less and send the goalie out west, or do you look to help your team further and play against him 5 or 6 times a year?
That the Rangers were offered a lot more for Talbot from the Panthers. So the question is, as a GM, do you take less and send the goalie out west, or do you look to help your team further and play against him 5 or 6 times a year?
What's a lot more? Draft picks? That Florida team is a fast growing power in the Eastern Conference. IMO, you don't help them by giving them their #1 goalie for maybe's.
We really don't know what the actual offers for Talbot were. There was smoke everywhere and I doubt we would have passed up on some of the rumored deals if they were ever actually on the table.
It's a bummer if we passed on Jimmy Hayes but I don't know what the whole package was going to be and it also may have been difficult to retain him anyway. We did need draft picks because we needed to re-stock the pipe a bit.
We can certainly argue that the return on Hagelin was less than what we'd have wanted but we're in a cap crunch and we just weren't going to be able to afford to pay him and retain guys like Stepan, Kreider, Hayes, etc. Better to get something than nothing.
We've already replaced Talbot with Raanta and I don't think there will be much of a drop off there. Etem has a ceiling that he hasn't come close to yet.
It felt disappointing overall but I think a lot of the rumors created unrealistic expectations.
over the past 18-24 months, and there's plenty of deals where he gambled on the present, and traded away significant pieces of the future (the MSL trade, the Yandle trade) ... those were heavy gambles on winning now, and I'd agree Sather went too heavy. I suggested it at the time of both trades, so this isn't hindsight.
That the Rangers were offered a lot more for Talbot from the Panthers. So the question is, as a GM, do you take less and send the goalie out west, or do you look to help your team further and play against him 5 or 6 times a year?
What's a lot more? Draft picks? That Florida team is a fast growing power in the Eastern Conference. IMO, you don't help them by giving them their #1 goalie for maybe's.
I think it included Jimmy Hayes' brother, who will be due for some $$$
Gorton's comments and the fact Lehner fetched a first make it logical to conclude Sather didn't maximize the return for Talbot. I think the return was essentially fair value, but market value seemed quite a bit higher. It seems Sather screwed up.
And the Rangers do okay in the Hags trade if Etem becomes a decent third liner, which they seem to think he can be. The issue is that the Rangers don't have the top tier talent other teams do, so they have to win on quality depth. This hurts that ability a lot. And then when you have Glass killing an entire line, it becomes hard. Hopefully Fast and Lindberg can mitigate Hagelin's loss. We'll see.
Jon's spot on. Sather has had a bad 18 months outside of Hayes, IMV, and most of those moves were criticized from the start.
Relative team success (and still without a Cup) shouldn't make us think management is doing well.
b) we decided to spend precious cap space on Glass and extending Girardi
This is an oblique way of saying that Hags wasn't move because he wasn't worth the 4.25 a year.
Well, advance stats all say Hagelins production goes well beyond his goals and assists numbers.
You're just wrong.
He is worth it and they had to trade him or someone else to cover up for previous mistakes.
No, you're flailing. You said he sucks and isnt worth 4 million. That's a totally different argument than the Rangers shouldnt put their $4 million into Hags (a position I advocated in a lot of game threads this year, and I love Hags). But even your argument is kind of silly since (1) there is no reason to favor PP production over ES production and indeed, a lot of evidence that PP is the least important of the three phases of the game. And (2) the alternatives to trading Hags probably wouldnt help the PP either; we're out of trade ammo, the UFA market sucks, and guys like Klein and Glass (other $$ savings centers) dont contribute on the PP either. Dont pretend like the options are Hags vs. Sheldon Souray.
He's a very, very good player overall. So he doesn't have great hands and doesn't score a ton of goals. Big deal
Well said.
Not trading Girardi during the 2014 deadline was just killer.
Good results for 2014-15. 7-4-1OTL-2SO 14GP/.936SP/1.89GAA
Cap hit is 750K. Final year of his deal.
Good value trade. I'd expect Halverson or Shestyorkin to be ready for the 2016-17 season.
Usually you wouldnt bring up a goalie like the two we took last year to be backups to a franchise goalie in their age 20 seasons. Halverson to the AHL, Shetsyorkin remains in the KHL in 2016-17.
I figured it had to be something like that. Otherwise the return on Hags is just dreadful.
Pretty disappointing to get just one D and no 6' center prospects.
Good results for 2014-15. 7-4-1OTL-2SO 14GP/.936SP/1.89GAA
Cap hit is 750K. Final year of his deal.
Good value trade. I'd expect Halverson or Shestyorkin to be ready for the 2016-17 season.
Raanta played in 2013-14. 13-5-4 1SO 25GP/.897/2.71
Raata seems very good and a guy with some potential. When was the last time we had a Finn? Jokinen?
I think it's hard to disagree with the premise that trading Hagelin was ultimately a result of some questionable decisions made previously. Those have been well documented.
I'm curious to know what you'd have them do differently in the present, given the past. You were just hired as GM after the loss to TB. What were the better ideas than what happened today?
Trade Steps? Plan on possibly losing Kreider or Hayes or Miller or Fast?
I'm sure there are a dozen viable and reasonable answers. I'm just trying to get a better read on where people are coming from.
Maybe he can replace Glass
Moreover, a better alternative would have been trading Klein and holding on to Hags.
Im totally sold on Skapski being a better alternative for 2016-17 as a 20 game NHL backup than those two kids. Being an NHL backup at age 20 is a waste of an important developmental year. Also, the Russian needs a lot of work. If he's going to make it at his size, he needs to be more technically proficient. He cant get by on agility alone with NHL-level passers and shooters.
It's a fair point about the returns we saw today. I thought we should and could have done better in both instances.
Doesn't change my view that disposing of one of Stepan and Hagelin was the best long-term move for the squad.
I know, Stralman is water under the bridge, let it go. But
this seems like similar water under the same bridge.
And Sather did this in part to have $$ to re-sign Yandle*,
whose impact was so significant that Sather had to make
that deal?
*If I have this correct
Great hockey skin!! Waaaaaaaaa
I know, Stralman is water under the bridge, let it go. But
this seems like similar water under the same bridge.
ct
Nah, Hagelin was traded while Stralman wasn't resigned. Now if Sather trades more prospects and draft choices for a speedy winger which commands a Hagelin price tag then it's like Stralman.
The only guy I really want is Erik Condra and maybe Shawn Matthias. I hope no one blocks Lindberg from coming to the big leagues. He's earned it with his play in Hartford.
The going rate for a goalie has been a 3rd round pick for a few years now. He received three picks.
Hags had to go at his price tag and slats received a good player with a lower price tag in return.
What's the problem?
As far as Hags it's linked to all the stupid moves he's made going back to Girardi and Glass. You can't not talk about it because it had a direct effect on our ability to ink Carl. Millions pissed away for a poor return in performance. $4.5M for Dan freaking Boyle at 38? That's money well spent?
His judgement can no longer be trusted imo.
Did you see his interview on the Rangers site? He looked like he was going to cry.
When the going rate for a goalie is a #3 pick and he received more, that's a windfall. After the first 15 picks the NHL draft is about as accurate as a weather forecast. The more picks the better b/c children, in which few can bench press 135lbs 10 reps, are the choices.
Boyle, Glass, etc were ridiculous moves. As far as Hags he did get some solid return and the kid likely has a better shot than Hags. Looking forward, where do we want Hags to play? Nash, Kreider, Hayes, Miller, Zucs, Fast with Lindberg and Buchnevich in the near future, where does Hags play? Sure, Lindberg can play center, but we're looking at nine forwards already with Hags likely stuck on a 3rd line making some decent coin which could result in losing a top 6 forward.
Not a fan of Slats for along while but can't kill him this weekend. He made the team younger, less costly and added quite a few draft picks. Meanwhile, the President trophy winning team is basically still all here outside of one.
The later every single time.
What's a lot more? Draft picks? That Florida team is a fast growing power in the Eastern Conference. IMO, you don't help them by giving them their #1 goalie for maybe's.
It's a bummer if we passed on Jimmy Hayes but I don't know what the whole package was going to be and it also may have been difficult to retain him anyway. We did need draft picks because we needed to re-stock the pipe a bit.
We can certainly argue that the return on Hagelin was less than what we'd have wanted but we're in a cap crunch and we just weren't going to be able to afford to pay him and retain guys like Stepan, Kreider, Hayes, etc. Better to get something than nothing.
We've already replaced Talbot with Raanta and I don't think there will be much of a drop off there. Etem has a ceiling that he hasn't come close to yet.
It felt disappointing overall but I think a lot of the rumors created unrealistic expectations.
Quote:
That the Rangers were offered a lot more for Talbot from the Panthers. So the question is, as a GM, do you take less and send the goalie out west, or do you look to help your team further and play against him 5 or 6 times a year?
What's a lot more? Draft picks? That Florida team is a fast growing power in the Eastern Conference. IMO, you don't help them by giving them their #1 goalie for maybe's.
I think it included Jimmy Hayes' brother, who will be due for some $$$
And the Rangers do okay in the Hags trade if Etem becomes a decent third liner, which they seem to think he can be. The issue is that the Rangers don't have the top tier talent other teams do, so they have to win on quality depth. This hurts that ability a lot. And then when you have Glass killing an entire line, it becomes hard. Hopefully Fast and Lindberg can mitigate Hagelin's loss. We'll see.
Jon's spot on. Sather has had a bad 18 months outside of Hayes, IMV, and most of those moves were criticized from the start.
Relative team success (and still without a Cup) shouldn't make us think management is doing well.