Judging by the fact that it is past 9:00AM and we haven't gotten any news, I am guessing the arbitration has began.
IMO, I do not think this is a good sign. I always said I thought it was going to be a long term deal or a trade. Hoping for the former, but at this point it seems unlikely.
What do you guys think? I think if we hear about a 1 year deal, a trade will soon follow. But I could be way off, just a guess from a fan without any real inside info.
5/25 would be ideal, a lot of money but seems like the market rate. However, I could see CK wanting to bet on himself on a 1 year deal... in which case I think we have to trade him now while we have some leverage.
That's a good deal if the twitter reports are accurate.
Nice job
Where did you see this?
If true, excellent.
Link - ( New Window )
Chances are, not to sound like a downer -- but chances are we are going to want to trade this contract for picks in year 3 or 4.
Yeah, 5 year term would have been great considering Hank likely retires in 4 years... you could get a nice return for him most likely in that 4th year.
Only guy left now is Hayes... I'm guessing we'll bridge him since he's really proven very little to date...
Biggest issue remains the defense - perhaps this allows us to trade Hayes or Nash for Shattenkirk or Fowler. Fowler would obviously also return a pick or whatever in addition.
No interest in Fowler for ne.
Kreider had 43 points last year, only 120 forwards had 42 or more points last year. And I think he can be a 50 point guy.
Nash+NYR eating 20-25% of the deal makes a lot of sense to me for Shattenkirk or someone like that.
I'd be apt to see what we can get for Hayes in a trade but I don't want to just be giving him away. He slumped last year just like everyone not named Miller but after his rookie season we were generally convinced that he was going to be a valuable building block going forward. At the bare minimum you sign him to a bridge deal and trade him during the season after he's had a chance to build his value back up
Our old slow defense still scares me to death....fingers crossed that G and Staal have some sort of bounce back because all the youth and speed in the world on the front end won't be worth shit if our d can't make a breakout pass or continually gets stuck in our own end
Chris Kreider contract with #NYR has 11 team no trade in last two years. Paid $5M,$5M,$4.5M,$4M.
Still wish these weren't the currency we dealt in, but this one is hardly tragic.
Told Kreider insisted on 4 yrs as opposed to 5. That's why AAV is lower than Palmieri. Gets to UFA 1 yr earlier though it will be lockout yr
Still wish these weren't the currency we dealt in, but this one is hardly tragic.
I know its only 11 teams but in a tight salary cap league where the difference between Pittsburgh and Winnipeg isn't all that drastic... it sucks to limit trade partners. I knew there had to be damn catch to getting him at 4.625
He will have 2 years left with only $8.5m of cash due, 27 years old and hopefully 2 50-point seasons under his belt.
That summer will be a big one for the Rangers.
Nash off the books
Klein off the books
Miller and Zucc UFAs
Staal deal moves to partial-NMC I think
And I'm sure other stuff.
As of right now, it basically it looks like the rangers have propped the window open for 2 more years while getting a little bit younger, with an option for a significant reset in 2 years.
I'd feel a helllll of a lot better if we could add a young 2-way defenseman (of course, what team wouldn't...)
With that being said, I would not mind trading him. He is so laid back that it really rubs me the wrong way sometimes. But that's not totally fair. If we could rid ourselves of one of Staal/G contracts, you have to give him up I think, regardless of how minimal the return is.
I probably could have stopped at "I'd rather just fire Vigneault". He's done an atrocious job over the past two seasons.
I probably could have stopped at "I'd rather just fire Vigneault". He's done an atrocious job over the past two seasons.
Last year, you know I unequivocably agree with you. Not sure about the Presidents Trophy year though. Caught some tough injury breaks. Playing McDonaugh when his foot couldn't be iced in time and dressing only 11 forwards... one of them Glass who he proceeded to play for 6 minutes... was inept though.
I would do Hayes, Fast and Staal for Dumba
I still think Hayes had a better year than people give him credit for - I think his S% drop to a more normal level (mostly luck) and losing Hagelin hurt his production more than his own play.
He's 24, btw.
Probably not enough, but I'd absolutely consider a move like that.
Or Hayes for Dumba and a pick?
I do not want Fowler.
bigbluehoya : 10:20 am : link : reply
2 years.
He will have 2 years left with only $8.5m of cash due, 27 years old and hopefully 2 50-point seasons under his belt.
But sure, why not!
I actually think it's a pretty good deal for you guys, though.
I like Kevin much better than Jimmy, but neither Hayes are a fit for their coaches style of play. Jimmy more than Kevin IMO because he is physical (but less skilled).
Kevin needs to be paired with a Kane or Crosby like skill guy to be successful IMO - or to reach his potential I should say. I'd trade him for a defenseman if the opportunity comes up and replace him pretty easily.
Quote:
Kreider' contract will be a huge asset in
bigbluehoya : 10:20 am : link : reply
2 years.
He will have 2 years left with only $8.5m of cash due, 27 years old and hopefully 2 50-point seasons under his belt.
But sure, why not!
I actually think it's a pretty good deal for you guys, though.
You mean in 3 full seasons he's only scored over 40 twice?
He's 25, and I said hopefully, dipshit.
Quote:
player. You don't trade 22 yr olds like that.
I would do Hayes, Fast and Staal for Dumba
but would they??? I wouldn't take Staal
Kevin needs to be paired with a Kane or Crosby like skill guy to be successful IMO - or to reach his potential
Well then. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but if the point is for the guy to be a good player he needs to be paired with a Hall of Famer... that doesn't bode well for Hayes since 98% of players never get that opportunity.
Figure Vesey is destined for Boston yet thought the same about Hayes years ago.
Quote:
Kevin needs to be paired with a Kane or Crosby like skill guy to be successful IMO - or to reach his potential
Well then. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but if the point is for the guy to be a good player he needs to be paired with a Hall of Famer... that doesn't bode well for Hayes since 98% of players never get that opportunity.
I sort of corrected myself to say "reach his potential" and everyone has different levels of success, but I don't think for example Kevin Stevens has Kevin Stevens career without Mario Lemieux (cocaine issues aside).
that's my point, to play at this level some guys can create others need people to create for them, and then can contribute.
I view Hayes as a contributor, not a creator and he's not going to contribute to the extent to be valuable enough to be part of your teams long term strategy with Gerbe and Fast on the wings IMO.
So based on how the Rangers are built, I'd deal Hayes before re-signing him. I don't think they'll ever get enough value out of him to make it worth it.
Just my opinion....
Quote:
Quote:
Kreider' contract will be a huge asset in
bigbluehoya : 10:20 am : link : reply
2 years.
He will have 2 years left with only $8.5m of cash due, 27 years old and hopefully 2 50-point seasons under his belt.
But sure, why not!
I actually think it's a pretty good deal for you guys, though.
You mean in 3 full seasons he's only scored over 40 twice?
He's 25, and I said hopefully, dipshit.
I hope Ryan Strome wins the Art Ross trophy.
Also, it was a joke. Calmmm downnn.
I view Hayes as a contributor, not a creator and he's not going to contribute to the extent to be valuable enough to be part of your teams long term strategy with Gerbe and Fast on the wings IMO.
I'm not sure where you're reading that Hayes is destined for the 4th line. I imagine he'll C the 2nd line along with Zibanejad (AV will play the hot hand... and injuries happen) and get his chance to play with better players than he's centered in the recent past... Miller, Kreider, Buch, probably Nash & Zuccs at some point, etc.
I hope Ryan Strome wins the Art Ross trophy.
Also, it was a joke. Calmmm downnn.
We need to work on that humor of yours.
Quote:
I view Hayes as a contributor, not a creator and he's not going to contribute to the extent to be valuable enough to be part of your teams long term strategy with Gerbe and Fast on the wings IMO.
I'm not sure where you're reading that Hayes is destined for the 4th line. I imagine he'll C the 2nd line along with Zibanejad (AV will play the hot hand... and injuries happen) and get his chance to play with better players than he's centered in the recent past... Miller, Kreider, Buch, probably Nash & Zuccs at some point, etc.
I don't think the Rangers have the right players to combine with him period. MSL was closest in recent years but he was 40 I think before he was ever even on the Rangers.
That's the type of player I see Hayes thriving with. Nash is the closest I think he'd do well with, but even Nash isn't ideal if 2015 - 2016 Nash is what you get from him going forward.
Quote:
I hope Ryan Strome wins the Art Ross trophy.
Also, it was a joke. Calmmm downnn.
We need to work on that humor of yours.
To be fair, I'm sure Strome has a great shot if he can manage to stop getting scratched from playoff games
I like our forward group. The D- is terrible, but the plan as Brett has said is maybe to use this year to get the younger guys some experience and hopefully rid ourselves of Girardi next June.... and pick up a guy like Shattenkirk for free a year from now.
Report: Evander Kane arrested by Buffalo Police
what a waste of a tremendous talent.
I like our forward group. The D- is terrible, but the plan as Brett has said is maybe to use this year to get the younger guys some experience and hopefully rid ourselves of Girardi next June.... and pick up a guy like Shattenkirk for free a year from now.
And to be clear I'm not saying Hayes is a POS, I just don't think he'll get much better in terms of production with this personnel unless something changes.
I think his perceived value is higher than his actual value and the return could be good right now and if forward is a strength might use a guy who maybe has peaked to help improve other areas.
I think he's got 50-60 point potential. Being on the third line likely limits his potential output, but I'd take a 40 point guy on the third line even if he struggles defensively.
Report: Evander Kane arrested by Buffalo Police
It's not a new incident, it's related to the bar incident
I think this is on point, but he needs to be more consistent on the backcheck to get the top 6 minutes
I won't debate it, people see things differently. I remember watching him at BC with Johnny Gaudreau and feeling like wow, Hayes can really light the lamp, but man Gaudreau manufactured a lot of that success - and is the perfect player to pair with Hayes - though Hayes and Gaudreau were both wings then (centered by Bill Arnold).
I view Hayes as a complementary player, not a primary player.
Great if you can get him set up in that role, but if not you'll get what you get. Maybe a 40 - 50 pt guy (which is not someone awful), who struggles defensively at times and is not a clutch face-off guy. So IMO if he's not putting up 60+ points he's expendable.
I did also wonder why they made Hayes a center.
If he played 2C with skilled linemates, I think he's a consistent 20-30-50 plus kind of player.
If he played 2C with skilled linemates, I think he's a consistent 20-30-50 plus kind of player.
Possibly, I only really watched the rangers in the playoffs or if they were playing the Habs.
Playoffs he was invisible IMO.
last year too in the playoffs (he was young though), or close to invisible and he couldn't win a FO to save his life.
Somewhat aside: 48 points would put you tied for 90th in scoring for forwards. A 50 point player is a first line guy now.
I think two subtle ways they could increase scoring without necessarily increasing net sizes is to move the goals out a little bit from the ends to increase space behind the nets to make plays and two, to somehow change/slope the posts so that any shot that hits the post basically goes in.
Oh and get rid of the goddamn off-side challenges. If the ref missed a guy a half stride offside sometimes 15 seconds before an actual goal is scored... so be it. They miss far more penalties / power play opportunities over the course of a game.
The skill level of goalies is staggering. It took until the first generation of hybrid goalies were retired and advising/coaching the 2nd generation to get there. But goalies are just technicians right now, which I say in the most complimentary way. Watching the stand up era goalies is like watching a different sport.
Vally went into Price's technique on a telecast at some point in the last few years and it was pretty amazing. Talking about how Price worked on how he moved his head and how that improved his mobility and reaction time. Just crazy stuff.
This might help a little. It was a bigger deal in the stand up era, when goalies did not have good lateral movement.
The skill and athleticism levels in the league right now just dwarf what we saw 15-40 years ago. There arent immobile goalies defended by boxers on skates to take advantage of anymore.
I think two subtle ways they could increase scoring without necessarily increasing net sizes is to move the goals out a little bit from the ends to increase space behind the nets to make plays and two, to somehow change/slope the posts so that any shot that hits the post basically goes in.
Oh and get rid of the goddamn off-side challenges. If the ref missed a guy a half stride offside sometimes 15 seconds before an actual goal is scored... so be it. They miss far more penalties / power play opportunities over the course of a game.
Agree with all this. When they overturn a goal because a guys skate was in the air at the blue line but not over it after a 5 minute review it makes no sense. I also am not a fan of the lack of judgment with puck over the glass calls.
Quote:
I think two subtle ways they could increase scoring without necessarily increasing net sizes is to move the goals out a little bit from the ends to increase space behind the nets to make plays and two
This might help a little. It was a bigger deal in the stand up era, when goalies did not have good lateral movement.
The skill and athleticism levels in the league right now just dwarf what we saw 15-40 years ago. There arent immobile goalies defended by boxers on skates to take advantage of anymore.
International play the rink is almost 3 feet further out from the end boards than in North American (NHL) rinks (not to mention wider, but that's irrelevant to this comment)
The NA style supposedly is conducive to more physical play, the European style rink more finesse, but I have no idea how much those 2+ feet behind the net make a difference.
Quote:
They need to shrink goalie pads, enlarge the net, or both. Goalies are huge now and they have gigantic pads. For those two reasons alone, it's harder to score than it was 20+ years ago.
The skill level of goalies is staggering. It took until the first generation of hybrid goalies were retired and advising/coaching the 2nd generation to get there. But goalies are just technicians right now, which I say in the most complimentary way. Watching the stand up era goalies is like watching a different sport.
Vally went into Price's technique on a telecast at some point in the last few years and it was pretty amazing. Talking about how Price worked on how he moved his head and how that improved his mobility and reaction time. Just crazy stuff.
I'm all for making the goalie equipment smaller, but the problem they'll argue back with is that guys are shooting the puck much harder now, sticks are better - maybe they'll so go back to wood sticks for the other players and then they will shrink the pads.
Price is one guy though who the larger pads don't necessarily benefit as much (they benefit all goalies) but you're right, he's as technically sound as any goalie around. He saves many shots he doesn't even see simply because positionally he's in the right place. He's also a see the shot save the shot goalie (rarely does he not save a non-deflected shot that he sees) so those two combined explain why he's so effective.
Henrik Lundqvist, 2016
The 5'9"-5'11" goalies of yesteryear couldn't play butterfly all that much because everyone would just go high and shoot over their shoulders to the corners.
John Davidson photo - ( New Window )
With Hayes signed, #NYR have settled all 4 arbitration filings and now have a buyout window open for next 48 hours.
Tweet - ( New Window )
There's no real use for that money now anyway.
The only downside is that you carry a 1.25 cap hit from 2020-2024.
2016-17 the Rangers would regain a portion of Girardi's cap hit. It decreases gradually until 2020.
2016-17 3.75
2017-18 2.75
2018-19 1.75
2019-20 1.75
2020-21 -1.25
2021-22 -1.25
2022-23 -1.25
2023-24 -1.25
It depends on how you look at it.
Link - ( New Window )
I'm fine giving Hayes and McIlraith prove it deals. I do worry about the latter only because our coach hasn't given him a shot, that's more on AV than the undertaker. hopefully he plays enough games this year to avoid becoming an UFA. Cant wait until he's healthy scratched for the thoroughly mediocre Colorado guy early in the season.
In two years we should have a pretty cheap defense I would think (McIlraith, Skjei, Bodie, Graves... only McD and [insert FA acquisition here] making coin) and with likely rise in the cap as commodity prices have stabilized... we should be able to re-sign these guys.
Once Stamkos re-signed there was no move out there Gorton could make to improve our contending chances in 2016-2017. Not enough cap space and not enough impact FAs on the market anyway.
We're retooling on the fly here and I'm ok with that. Nothing Gorton can do about these lousy defenseman NMCs - that's on Sather.
We'll fight with NJ, Boston and others for wild card spots this year but the medium term (2-4 yrs from now) for this franchise seems better today than it was a week ago.
Quote:
Are we any better? I would say Not at this time.
Once Stamkos re-signed there was no move out there Gorton could make to improve our contending chances in 2016-2017. Not enough cap space and not enough impact FAs on the market anyway.
We're retooling on the fly here and I'm ok with that. Nothing Gorton can do about these lousy defenseman NMCs - that's on Sather.
We'll fight with NJ, Boston and others for wild card spots this year but the medium term (2-4 yrs from now) for this franchise seems better today than it was a week ago.
Completely agree with you.
Getting better with two massive anchors was going to be a tough thing to do. I think we all knew that keeping Yandle was going to be extremely difficult, and if it were to happen, it would have probably been at the expense of Kreider or Hayes and possibly both. We can say all we want about buying out DG or Staal, but the fact is management wasn't going to do that.
With those facts in mind, the Brassard trade came out of left field, and seems to have been a damn good trade with future intentions in mind. Get younger, get cap space now, add a future pick. We lost production for next year, but hey, if MZ puts it together, it could be massive.
Kreider and Hayes we can all agree are both great contracts, even if we would have liked more term on Kreider. With around $3.2 to play with still that leaves us some leeway to play around in the trade market, even retain salary to hopefully get rid of an anchor.
I watched the first Rangers playoff game this year and thought this guy won't last the series, AV will replace him. He seemed jittery, forced his breakouts, and was so passive offensively in the transition and attack games it was like they were a man down. Solid defensively, but that's not enough in the playoffs.
By the end of the playoffs (as brief as it was) I thought he was the best all around defenseman on the team (given the McDonagh injury). I always liked Skjei from watching all the U17 and U18 US teams and I think he can be a legit top 4 D-man if he adds ANY type of offense. To me right now he's a good passer, but he's not quite involved enough in the play in the transition or offensive zone, but pair him with a more offensively minded D and it's fine. I think he'll get more comfortable with that with time.
He's another decent sized, but not very physical guy, but in his case, he still lays some good hits. Wish he'd do it more.
As for whether we're better, we had an awful lot of guys who had disastrous seasons. And very few guys who over performed. Adding in youth and the maturation of the power forwards (who take longer), we could very easily be a lot better this year. Basically, play the games. I dont think we're as bad as we looked at times last year.
As for whether we're better, we had an awful lot of guys who had disastrous seasons. And very few guys who over performed. Adding in youth and the maturation of the power forwards (who take longer), we could very easily be a lot better this year. Basically, play the games. I dont think we're as bad as we looked at times last year.
Agree about top 4 if he's paired with someone who has some offensive savvy. If not, you better hope it's like a matchup thing we're your line is opposite the other teams first line. Because he excels at positional D, just if he's not paired with someone who can jump into the play in the offensive zone I think that line won't be as effective scoring. I have no idea how long it would take him to develop that comfort, maybe not long at all, I was amazed at his metamorphosis from game 1 to game 2 in the PO's.
Do they have anyone else who might come up in the next year or two on the blueline besides Graves?
We have a lot of ok forward prospects we could probably move for similarly valued D prospects. And there is always the route of NCAA free agents, who should be drawn to our lack of young D depth.
Link - ( New Window )
We knew he would take a discount to come to the Rangers. Shatty grew up as a Rangers and is willing to take a discount to come here ala so many others before him (still waiting for someone to say they actually want to come to the Islanders).
But like I said, even if we trade Nash in a deal for Shattenkirk, it'd essentially be robbing Peter to pay Paul because while we would've fixed our PMD/PP QB/top-four RD issue, we would've lost our only consistent goal scoring threat...that is, unless they're really confident in Buchnevich.
Skjei --- Dumba/Shattenkirk/Klein
Holden --- McIlrath/Girardi (but mostly McIlrath)
Graves/Girardi
And I think Staal gets traded
And worse comes to worse, we go forward with the guys we have now and sign Shattenkirk next offseason
I'm not just shoving him off for a mediocre pick or two, but I'm not against moving him.
Skjei --- Dumba/Shattenkirk/Klein
Holden --- McIlrath/Girardi (but mostly McIlrath)
Graves/Girardi
And I think Staal gets traded
To replace last year's D corpse, no doubt.
Quote:
I think two subtle ways ...
The skill and athleticism levels in the league right now just dwarf what we saw 15-40 years ago. There arent immobile goalies defended by boxers on skates to take advantage of anymore.
Deej, that's too broad and generalized. Rogie Vachon epitomized the stand-up goalie, and he was very athletic, gifted, quick. Even Giacomin was pretty athletic. And the first giant in the NHL nets, Ken Dryden, whom I saw play in college as well as in NHL, nicknamed the spider by some, was an all around athlete, not an immobile type more along the lines of Glenn Hall.
I'm not just shoving him off for a mediocre pick or two, but I'm not against moving him.
They explored dealing him last year and didn't get offered much in return. Maybe a second. He'd return even less now.
He is a good player but he'll always sadden me a bit in that 1) he was traded for del zotto who it turns out would have been a nice fit here the past two years and this year (and we wouldn't have needed yandle)
And 2- they had a choice of retaining one of hagelin or Klein... Chose Klein which turned out to be the poor choice
Quote:
But his value is as high now as it's ever going to be.
I'm not just shoving him off for a mediocre pick or two, but I'm not against moving him.
They explored dealing him last year and didn't get offered much in return. Maybe a second. He'd return even less now.
He is a good player but he'll always sadden me a bit in that 1) he was traded for del zotto who it turns out would have been a nice fit here the past two years and this year (and we wouldn't have needed yandle)
And 2- they had a choice of retaining one of hagelin or Klein... Chose Klein which turned out to be the poor choice
I don't understand you. Klein for Del Zotto has proven to be one of the best deals in Sather's tenure. And it wasn't Hagelin or Klein. You could argue it was Nash or Hagelin. Or Zuccarello or Hagelin. But Klein or Hagelin? One was under contract and one was not. BTW, who would've been our top-4 RD if not for Klein? Girardi, Boyle or McIlrath. Y-I-K-E-S.
Quote:
In comment 13042846 bigbluehoya said:
Quote:
But his value is as high now as it's ever going to be.
I'm not just shoving him off for a mediocre pick or two, but I'm not against moving him.
They explored dealing him last year and didn't get offered much in return. Maybe a second. He'd return even less now.
He is a good player but he'll always sadden me a bit in that 1) he was traded for del zotto who it turns out would have been a nice fit here the past two years and this year (and we wouldn't have needed yandle)
And 2- they had a choice of retaining one of hagelin or Klein... Chose Klein which turned out to be the poor choice
I don't understand you. Klein for Del Zotto has proven to be one of the best deals in Sather's tenure. And it wasn't Hagelin or Klein. You could argue it was Nash or Hagelin. Or Zuccarello or Hagelin. But Klein or Hagelin? One was under contract and one was not. BTW, who would've been our top-4 RD if not for Klein? Girardi, Boyle or McIlrath. Y-I-K-E-S.
I'm not sure how one concludes Klein is anything more than jag. I Like him but anyone who doesn't drool would take last years del zotto and the next 5 years of del zotto over Klein. The deal was fine on Sathers part but Sathers best trade starts and ends with mcdonaugh. No other trade comes within that zip code.
And yes both Klein and Hagelin as well as talbot were shopped last June. We had to fit under the cap and those were the two movable deals. We couldn't find a taker at a remotely decent price for Klein.
That RH pairing you listed above would not have performed worse than this years group by the way.
Quote:
In comment 13043301 MetsAreBack said:
Quote:
In comment 13042846 bigbluehoya said:
Quote:
But his value is as high now as it's ever going to be.
I'm not just shoving him off for a mediocre pick or two, but I'm not against moving him.
They explored dealing him last year and didn't get offered much in return. Maybe a second. He'd return even less now.
He is a good player but he'll always sadden me a bit in that 1) he was traded for del zotto who it turns out would have been a nice fit here the past two years and this year (and we wouldn't have needed yandle)
And 2- they had a choice of retaining one of hagelin or Klein... Chose Klein which turned out to be the poor choice
I don't understand you. Klein for Del Zotto has proven to be one of the best deals in Sather's tenure. And it wasn't Hagelin or Klein. You could argue it was Nash or Hagelin. Or Zuccarello or Hagelin. But Klein or Hagelin? One was under contract and one was not. BTW, who would've been our top-4 RD if not for Klein? Girardi, Boyle or McIlrath. Y-I-K-E-S.
I'm not sure how one concludes Klein is anything more than jag. I Like him but anyone who doesn't drool would take last years del zotto and the next 5 years of del zotto over Klein. The deal was fine on Sathers part but Sathers best trade starts and ends with mcdonaugh. No other trade comes within that zip code.
And yes both Klein and Hagelin as well as talbot were shopped last June. We had to fit under the cap and those were the two movable deals. We couldn't find a taker at a remotely decent price for Klein.
That RH pairing you listed above would not have performed worse than this years group by the way.
How is Klein a JAG? He's as solid of a 2nd pair guy as they come. Not only is he a solid defensive presence, but from the time he got traded to the Rangers he's been surprisingly great on offense. 18 goals the last two seasons is nothing to sneeze at. I'm not really sure how much else you can ask for him. He's much better than Del Zotto right now and the trade was a huge win, especially since Del Zotto was jettisoned from Nashville.
And the last part is also bullshit. Klein was on the top pair when AV finally came to his senses and demoted Girardi and there was finally some stability brought to the first pair. Girardi, Boyle and McIlrath were and are far inferior to Klein both on offense and defense (the jury is out on McIlrath). And it's simple: we didn't want to trade Klein last year. If we did, we would have. A guy with his stats, his locker room presence and his contract would surely net a very good return. In fact, most were afraid that he piqued last year and we should have traded him in order to get a good return. Well, he only duplicated his performance this season and surely if we want to, we could get a very good return.