PDA

View Full Version : [Brooks] Rangers, Staal at Impasse in Extension Discussions



Phil in Absentia
08-03-2014, 10:11 AM
“There’s been no discussion at all, but I did get a call from Jeff early in the offseason telling me that they were working on their arbitration cases, so not to interpret it as a sign of disrespect toward Marc,” agent Paul Krepelka told Slap Shots on Thursday, referring to assistant general manager Jeff Gorton. “I expect that we will be talking at some point before training camp.

“Marc’s objective is to sign a long-term deal with the Rangers, and he would like to get it done before the season starts. That hasn’t changed.

“But we’ll see.”

What we’ll see is if Sather and the Rangers have learned their lesson from last year, when delayed and protracted negotiations with pending restricted free agents Henrik Lundqvist, Ryan Callahan and Dan Girardi unnecessarily intruded on the season and created a circus atmosphere leading up to the trade deadline.


It’s true, the Rangers did have July 1 unrestricted free agency and potential arbitration cases with Group IIs Derick Brassard, Mats Zuccarello and Chris Kreider with which to deal throughout much of last month, but there is no legitimate reason at this moment for management not to be knee-deep in negotiations with the alternate captain.

Because the sooner the Rangers determine Staal’s bottom line — which, at a minimum will be the same $33 million over six years ($5.5 million per) for which Girardi signed days prior to the trade deadline — the sooner they can decide whether to meet it and the sooner they can begin trade talks if they determine the cost is too high.

Staal is going to hit a home run on this contract, whether in New York or not.

http://nypost.com/2014/08/02/rangers-contract-talks-staal-ed-with-defenseman/

Pete
08-03-2014, 10:44 AM
Oh, Larry.

Not having discussions at all ≠ impasse. I'm not worried, They'll get him under contract or move him. It's a win for us, wither way, because the package we'd get back will probably help us now and later.

Valriera
08-03-2014, 10:44 AM
The question is, how high are we willing to go? I certainly don't think Staal deserves Subban money (not many do, including Subban, arguably), but I think that every month this season continues Staal's value goes up a quarter mil. I still think this guy is an incredible trade piece and might be more valuable that way, but it's a hard situation because I also like his defensive play.

Myusername
08-03-2014, 11:50 AM
I would trade him with Brady Skjei just about ready to step in. Not sure we can afford another 5-6 million dollar contract on our blue line. Plus, I'm lusting over what some team might give up for him.

He's still a good defender, but not someone we can't afford to lose.

Slobberknocker
08-03-2014, 12:25 PM
Oh, Larry.

Not having discussions at all ≠ impasse. I'm not worried, They'll get him under contract or move him. It's a win for us, wither way, because the package we'd get back will probably help us now and later.


agreed whole heartedly. guess we cut larry a break here. he's gotta earn his money. nothing better than to stir the pot in august. if he had to write an article i wish he would have plagerized our discussion on possible line combos.

Pete
08-03-2014, 12:45 PM
agreed whole heartedly. guess we cut larry a break here. he's gotta earn his money. nothing better than to stir the pot in august. if he had to write an article i wish he would have plagerized our discussion on possible line combos.

Yea.

Mind you, if they do move him, it'll signify selling if they want the best package in return. If they are trying to upgrade using him as a chip, they'll have to add assets. But we don't have much to give.

Just IMO.

Vodka Drunkenski
08-03-2014, 02:07 PM
I would've packaged him and Stepan for Spezza +

ThirtyONE
08-03-2014, 03:37 PM
Nothing to see here. Typical August writing.

fletch
08-03-2014, 04:42 PM
Stirring the pot. My favorite part:

"What we’ll see is if Sather and the Rangers have learned their lesson from last year, when delayed and protracted negotiations with pending restricted free agents Henrik Lundqvist, Ryan Callahan and Dan Girardi unnecessarily intruded on the season and created a circus atmosphere leading up to the trade deadline."

The 'intrusion' sure had a detrimental effect on a poor season... oh wait, they made the Stanley Cup finals.

How quickly the page is turned in NYC

momentum
08-03-2014, 07:06 PM
I really feel the Rangers have to pick between Girardi and Staal, Girardi is already signed and I think he has a no trade clause so I think they should try to move Staal for help in the top 6 possibly. Or for some really good prospects and or HIGH picks. signing a 2nd pairing dman who is not on the PP for 5.5-6 mil doesn't make any sense when they already have 3 dmen making 5 mil plus...
Like Pete said though, either way is a win really, sign him and keep him and we get a great dman even if its too much invested on the defense really, move him and we get a lot back.

I think the ball is in Staal's court more than the Rangers at this point, he knows how much the Rangers have invested in their D already and in their Goaltending...if he REALLY wants to stay a Ranger so badly he should realize he might have to take a little less than on the open market, if it's all about the money then just get ready for a trade and sign somewhere else.

AmericanJesus
08-03-2014, 08:36 PM
Oh, Larry.

Not having discussions at all ≠ impasse. I'm not worried, They'll get him under contract or move him. It's a win for us, wither way, because the package we'd get back will probably help us now and later.

And this is why I carry on so much about some of these hockey "writers". Brooks is almost inserting himself in the story with this kind of fantasy. You get why Torts couldn't stand him. He probably got beat up at the bus stop.

AmericanJesus
08-03-2014, 08:42 PM
I really feel the Rangers have to pick between Girardi and Staal, Girardi is already signed and I think he has a no trade clause so I think they should try to move Staal for help in the top 6 possibly. Or for some really good prospects and or HIGH picks. signing a 2nd pairing dman who is not on the PP for 5.5-6 mil doesn't make any sense when they already have 3 dmen making 5 mil plus...
Like Pete said though, either way is a win really, sign him and keep him and we get a great dman even if its too much invested on the defense really, move him and we get a lot back.

I think the ball is in Staal's court more than the Rangers at this point, he knows how much the Rangers have invested in their D already and in their Goaltending...if he REALLY wants to stay a Ranger so badly he should realize he might have to take a little less than on the open market, if it's all about the money then just get ready for a trade and sign somewhere else.

The problem with trading him is that you don't want to move him to a team in the East because we'll be competing with them for the playoffs. So that means out West. But out West, you're only going to get a return from a contender, because in his final year, a team not in decent contention aren't going to mortgage their future for him. That means you're getting a non nhl-ready prospect plus a pick some where in the 20's. This weakens us now, when we're still in win now mode. I don't see it.

Only thing that would work would be a hockey trade for both teams. A team that has extra top 6 scorers and needs a top 4 defender. Can't really think of any teams in the West that match that. Too bad 3 team trades are so rare. Getting prospects/picks for Staal from some team out West that we then flip to Ottawa for Bobby Ryan would be an ideal fix for us this year.

Mike
08-03-2014, 10:05 PM
The problem with trading him is that you don't want to move him to a team in the East because we'll be competing with them for the playoffs. So that means out West. But out West, you're only going to get a return from a contender, because in his final year, a team not in decent contention aren't going to mortgage their future for him. That means you're getting a non nhl-ready prospect plus a pick some where in the 20's. This weakens us now, when we're still in win now mode. I don't see it.

Only thing that would work would be a hockey trade for both teams. A team that has extra top 6 scorers and needs a top 4 defender. Can't really think of any teams in the West that match that. Too bad 3 team trades are so rare. Getting prospects/picks for Staal from some team out West that we then flip to Ottawa for Bobby Ryan would be an ideal fix for us this year.

Or a team out west that sucks defensively, and is trying to make the playoffs. Winnipeg and Edmonton come to mind. They're horrific defensively.

CreaseCrusader91
08-03-2014, 10:23 PM
Or a team out west that sucks defensively, and is trying to make the playoffs. Winnipeg and Edmonton come to mind. They're horrific defensively.

Edmonton is fine right now. They have kids on the way up that will be filling in gaps. Staal would help but there is less impetus to make deal.

There's also chance Staal gets traded and jumps ship so destination team may be stiff on the return. Dallas to me would be a good fit based on their blue line situation. They also have some forwards to play with.

Mike
08-03-2014, 11:13 PM
Edmonton is fine right now. They have kids on the way up that will be filling in gaps. Staal would help but there is less impetus to make deal.

There's also chance Staal gets traded and jumps ship so destination team may be stiff on the return. Dallas to me would be a good fit based on their blue line situation. They also have some forwards to play with.

How many years is Edmonton going to try to fill gaps? They're 30th in the league in GA. They need a real defensemen, not kids that may or may not even play in the NHL.

Pete
08-03-2014, 11:18 PM
Yea, Edmonton isn't fine, at all.

Mike
08-04-2014, 12:46 AM
What team in any sport has had as many top picks as they have for 10 years, and have never even improved, let alone make the playoffs? Sometimes it's not the coach. They need at least 3 vets in there who can show them how to win.

CreaseCrusader91
08-04-2014, 08:40 AM
How many years is Edmonton going to try to fill gaps? They're 30th in the league in GA. They need a real defensemen, not kids that may or may not even play in the NHL.

They added Mark Fayne and Nikita Nikitin. They have Andrew Ference, Justin Schultz, Jeff Petry. That is five spots. Add in Darnell Nurse or Oscar Klefbom, two guys likely to make roster and that is 7 right there.

As for the goals against, it is misleading. Devan Dubnyk and Jason LaBarbera were absolute crap as a tandem. The duo of Scrivens and Fasth gave Edmonton a fighting chance.

Yea they could use an improvement but at this stage they have a ton of defenders and are unlikely to break off their plan at this point. They have been stockpiling defenders for a reason and I can't see them dealing for Staal unless they are sure he can be re-signed.

Edmonton has been bad but they are following a similar arc to other teams that went through similar rebuilds. Goaltending has been their biggest issue, and this year could show how close they actually are.

Pete
08-04-2014, 08:50 AM
They're shit their own end.

Staal is a better defensive player than every single player mentioned.

CreaseCrusader91
08-04-2014, 09:56 AM
Would he re-sign? Doubtful IMO. And apparently EDM is fine with what they have. Nurse and Klefbom have the potential to be solid guys to turn it around for them and that's what EDM is banking on.

Pete
08-04-2014, 10:00 AM
Would he re-sign? Doubtful IMO. And apparently EDM is fine with what they have. Nurse and Klefbom have the potential to be solid guys to turn it around for them and that's what EDM is banking on.

What are you basing this on? The fact that no UFAs signed there? Not sure what that proves other than it's (still) an undesirable place to play.

CreaseCrusader91
08-04-2014, 10:10 AM
What are you basing this on? The fact that no UFAs signed there? Not sure what that proves other than it's (still) an undesirable place to play.

They made small signings, and there is room for prospects to potentially step in.
You know as well as I do, they could have moved someone like Eberle or Yakupov
for some help on defense.

They opted not to. I don't think UFAs will stay away much longer. New arena and
facilities may entice players to sign, especially if team is better by that point.

We shall see though.

Pete
08-04-2014, 10:13 AM
They made small signings, and there is room for prospects to potentially step in.
You know as well as I do, they could have moved someone like Eberle or Yakupov
for some help on defense.

They opted not to. I don't think UFAs will stay away much longer. New arena and
facilities may entice players to sign, especially if team is better by that point.

We shall see though.

I'm not sure why they'd give up on either of those players so early. Especially Yak. And for all we know, they tried. No one really loves that Eberle contract.

CreaseCrusader91
08-04-2014, 10:15 AM
I'm not sure why they'd give up on either of those players so early. Especially Yak. And for all we know, they tried. No one really loves that Eberle contract.

If they got a comparable D and slightly lesser forward it might be worth it. Point is they had options. At the end of the day they might want to trade for Staal but they'd likely send a D back if they were confident he'd re-sign.

RangersRule2
08-04-2014, 12:59 PM
Oh, Larry. Not having discussions at all ≠ impasse. I'm not worried, They'll get him under contract or move him. It's a win for us, wither way, because the package we'd get back will probably help us now and later.

I don't think Staal is the player he was a few years ago (and I'm not saying/sure it's because of the eye injury).

That said, this team has had SO MUCH CHANGE for a team that excelled using depth that I don't want to see more changes if possible. JMHO.

Future
08-04-2014, 04:24 PM
They added Mark Fayne and Nikita Nikitin. They have Andrew Ference, Justin Schultz, Jeff Petry. That is five spots. Add in Darnell Nurse or Oscar Klefbom, two guys likely to make roster and that is 7 right there.
.
Having a lot of defensemen isn't the same as having good defensemen.

You could have 5 goalies but if they all suck, you might as well not even have one.

Staal would go there and play 25 minutes a night immediately.

Phil in Absentia
08-05-2014, 12:12 PM
As it relates to the Rangers, it means the window for signing defenseman Marc Staal to an extension this off-season — and not letting one of their foundation players possibly have his contract status become in an in-season distraction — is also growing shorter.

For anyone wishing to downplay this aspect, go back and review how Henrik Lundqvist played last season before agreeing to his extension or the drama that surrounded the Rangers before ex-captain Ryan Callahan was traded to the Lightning and defenseman Dan Girardi agreed to his new deal.


For the Rangers, the more relevant numbers are Dan Girardi’s six-year, $33 million deal — $5.5 million annual salary-cap hit – which starts with this season and Ryan McDonagh’s six year, $28.2 million contract with a $4.7 million annual salary-cap hit through 2019.

McDonagh is the team’s clear-cut No. 1 defenseman but that won’t be reflected in the salary structure if the Rangers can re-sign Staal, something both sides want.


But the starting point for his new deal is Girardi’s contract and Staal is almost certainly in line for a more lucrative deal. Three years younger than Girardi, Staal should have more prime seasons in his new deal, even with his past concussion issues and damaged sight in his right eye.

There are some decent names among the potential unrestricted free agent defensemen for the summer of 2015 — Christian Ehrhoff, Johnny Boychuk, Johnny Oduya, Marc Methot, Alec Martinez and Mike Green, if you believe he has anything left – but it’s not a stretch to put Staal at the top of that list. And the bar for what defensemen can earn has just been raised by Subban’s contract.

If so, what’s fair market value for Staal if he reaches free agency? Six million a season? Six and a half?

It would be wise for the Rangers not to risk finding out.

http://www.northjersey.com/sports/hockey/rangers-need-to-re-sign-staal-and-soon-1.1062230

--

Andrew Gross joining the fracas.

Pete
08-05-2014, 12:14 PM
I fuckin' wish we didn't have Girardi.

Phil in Absentia
08-05-2014, 12:16 PM
Same. If I had to guess, having re-signed Girardi is going to cost the team Staal, who will probably get traded mid-year while this whole extension stuff acts in exactly the same manner it did Girardi, Callahan and Lundqvist.

Vodka Drunkenski
08-05-2014, 12:36 PM
Did Girardi sign after the Staal injury?

Phil in Absentia
08-05-2014, 01:05 PM
Did Girardi sign after the Staal injury?

Yes. After all the injuries. He re-signed with the team last season prior to the trade deadline.

lefty9
08-05-2014, 01:49 PM
The rangers are probably going to let Staal go, I would rather have him over girardi, the rangers signed the wrong guy

Vodka Drunkenski
08-05-2014, 01:54 PM
They'll trade him before just letting him go, if that's what you meant.

AmericanJesus
08-05-2014, 02:00 PM
Same. If I had to guess, having re-signed Girardi is going to cost the team Staal, who will probably get traded mid-year while this whole extension stuff acts in exactly the same manner it did Girardi, Callahan and Lundqvist.

He's not costing the team Staal. If the salary doesn't fit then the team chose Girardi over Staal. And it was the right choice.

Girardi fills a more important and harder to replace role than Staal does. That said, if Staal gets a $1.5M raise to Girardi's deal, we can still probably re-sign everyone next season assuming some cap inflation and St. Louis taking a 1 year, bonus filled deal.

lefty9
08-05-2014, 02:03 PM
That's what I meant.
glad to have Brady Skjei waiting on the wing

Pete
08-05-2014, 02:15 PM
He's not costing the team Staal. If the salary doesn't fit then the team chose Girardi over Staal. And it was the right choice.

Girardi fills a more important and harder to replace role than Staal does. That said, if Staal gets a $1.5M raise to Girardi's deal, we can still probably re-sign everyone next season assuming some cap inflation and St. Louis taking a 1 year, bonus filled deal.

Oh, I don't agree at all. As I said in another thread —*For what you're paying G, he should at least be able to lead a 2nd pairing. He can't. When he isn't with Staal or McD, he a different player. Staal has shown he can play with different partners and would probably be a #1 on 15-20 other teams. Girardi isn't that player.

You can get a Marc Methot ($3 mil) to play with McD. Staal is a #1 D on the #2 pair. That's depth. G isn't, at least IMO.

Mike
08-06-2014, 07:08 AM
I don't entirely disagree, but the argument that he's easily replaceable because of who he's played with is something I don't completely believe in. You can't take anyone and pair them with a McD equalling instant success. They still have to eat the minutes, they still have responsibilities, they still have to play their side. If it were as easy as putting someone sub-par in your top pair, every team would put a 4,5,6 with their best defender. And honestly, there hasn't been enough sample size to make those judgements. Yes, he didn't play well with other D partners, but there wasn't enough sample size to make a fair assessment imo.

Pete
08-06-2014, 08:38 AM
I don't entirely disagree, but the argument that he's easily replaceable because of who he's played with is something I don't completely believe in. You can't take anyone and pair them with a McD equalling instant success. They still have to eat the minutes, they still have responsibilities, they still have to play their side. If it were as easy as putting someone sub-par in your top pair, every team would put a 4,5,6 with their best defender. And honestly, there hasn't been enough sample size to make those judgements. Yes, he didn't play well with other D partners, but there wasn't enough sample size to make a fair assessment imo.
I didn't call anyone easily replaceable.

I didn't say you can put anyone with McD.

I didn't say you can put someone sub par with McD.

What I said is, you don't need to pay what amounts to your 3rd best option on D $5.5. You don't need to pay a guy that much to play with McD.

If you ARE paying a guy that much, he should be capable of leading a pairing. I don't want to see G paired with any other D on this team besides McD or Staal. It's a recipe for disaster. Would you play G with John Moore? Dan Boyle (right/right shots aside)?

I wouldn't. What's that say about G?

This isn't about G. It's about his paycheck, and who you'd rather have at that number. I'd rather have Staal and a cheaper option to play with McD. You can get a solid right D for 3-4 mil.

AmericanJesus
08-06-2014, 09:09 AM
I didn't call anyone easily replaceable.

I didn't say you can put anyone with McD.

I didn't say you can put someone sub par with McD.

What I said is, you don't need to pay what amounts to your 3rd best option on D $5.5. You don't need to pay a guy that much to play with McD.

If you ARE paying a guy that much, he should be capable of leading a pairing. I don't want to see G paired with any other D on this team besides McD or Staal. It's a recipe for disaster. Would you play G with John Moore? Dan Boyle (right/right shots aside)?

I wouldn't. What's that say about G?

This isn't about G. It's about his paycheck, and who you'd rather have at that number. I'd rather have Staal and a cheaper option to play with McD. You can get a solid right D for 3-4 mil.

The issue I have with these points about Girardi are that the options he had beyond McDonagh or Staal on the left side recently have been Del Zotto and Moore. Both those defenders were relegated to 3rd pair roles. Both were scratched at times. Eventually, (and this isn't to start any attack Del Zotto momentum) Del Zotto was moved and had to wait until a team got desperate to take a 1 year shot on him. Moore is a young RFA who's sitting around waiting to accept Sather's low ball bridge contract because he hasn't earned anything more. How can we point to that and say it's an implication of Girardi's abilities? On the right side, Staal and McDonagh got to play with either Girardi, Stralman or Klein. Stralman moved on for a deal that's just shy of what Girardi got. Klein was a 3/4 defender on his previous team.

I guess you could argue we could have let Girardi go and tried Stralman with McDonagh as a top pair to save $1M per year on a slightly younger player. Although I'd also argue that Stralman made some extra bones with his post season play, information we didn't have when we had to make a decision on Girardi.

To me, this is the same as Brassard situation. Not ideal, but at the time, what were the alternatives?

Pete
08-06-2014, 09:14 AM
The issue I have with these points about Girardi are that the options he had beyond McDonagh or Staal on the left side recently have been Del Zotto and Moore. Both those defenders were relegated to 3rd pair roles. Both were scratched at times. Eventually, (and this isn't to start any attack Del Zotto momentum) Del Zotto was moved and had to wait until a team got desperate to take a 1 year shot on him. Moore is a young RFA who's sitting around waiting to accept Sather's low ball bridge contract because he hasn't earned anything more. How can we point to that and say it's an implication of Girardi's abilities? On the right side, Staal and McDonagh got to play with either Girardi, Stralman or Klein. Stralman moved on for a deal that's just shy of what Girardi got. Klein was a 3/4 defender on his previous team.

I guess you could argue we could have let Girardi go and tried Stralman with McDonagh as a top pair to save $1M per year on a slightly younger player. Although I'd also argue that Stralman made some extra bones with his post season play, information we didn't have when we had to make a decision on Girardi.

To me, this is the same as Brassard situation. Not ideal, but at the time, what were the alternatives?

I get what you're saying, and my counter is that I'd play McD or Staal with anyone on the roster and feel comfortable that their own level of play wouldn't suffer. G just seems to either get pulled up or get dragged down.

Yea, Staal started rocky with DZ last year, but can we agree to toss the first 20 games where no one was even average, let alone good?

Vodka Drunkenski
08-06-2014, 09:20 AM
I'm with Pete on this one. At Girardi's paycheck, he should be able to lead a pairing.

AmericanJesus
08-06-2014, 09:23 AM
I get what you're saying, and my counter is that I'd play McD or Staal with anyone on the roster and feel comfortable that their own level of play wouldn't suffer. G just seems to get dragged down.

Yea, Staal started rocky with DZ last year, but can we agree to toss the first 20 games where no one was even average, let alone good?

Sure. I agree with that. But that probably also coincides with Girardi's weakest regular season play. I feel like early every season we have a discussion about how Girardi's not playing up to par, then about 20-30 games in, his game starts improving and by the halfway mark, we're talking about how Girardi is really playing great hockey. It doesn't excuse his early season play at all, but it also means that we have him playing at his best down the stretch and coming into the post season.

He certainly wore down. It was pretty clear. Girardi is often good for one head scratcher every 5 or so games, but in the final round, he was making multiple ones a game. That's atypical for him. Broken finger maybe, a long haul, or a combination while facing his toughest opponent. Unacceptable any way you slice it, but not really his normal, either.

I definitely see McDonagh as head and shoulders above all our other defenders. I think Staal is tough to gauge because he was at that same level prior to the injuries. Since though, he's been wildly inconsistent. At times he's been significantly better than Girardi, at other times significantly worse. To me, he's a bigger gamble on a longer term contract than Girardi was. The clincher for me is that driving the unit or not, Girardi is playing top pair minutes, while Staal isn't. And I'd argue when paired with Stralman, Staal was sometimes driving and sometimes not.

For these reasons, I would not extend Staal now. I'd give him 30-40 games to see how he fairs playing with Boyle. If he solidifies that pair, then I'd extend him mid-season and worry about how to manage the cap following this season then. It's going to be tight next year again. A lot will depend on the cap, whether MSL comes back, what type of deal he's willing to take (Bonuses) and it might be time to move away from Klein on the back end to free up a couple of $M as well.

BlairBettsBlocksEverything
08-06-2014, 09:27 AM
For these reasons, I would not extend Staal now. I'd give him 30-40 games to see how he fairs playing with Boyle. If he solidifies that pair, then I'd extend him mid-season and worry about how to manage the cap following this season then. It's going to be tight next year again. A lot will depend on the cap, whether MSL comes back, what type of deal he's willing to take (Bonuses) and it might be time to move away from Klein on the back end to free up a couple of $M as well.

Luckily he's very moveable.

In an ideal world we keep both Girardi and Staal. I'd rather have Staal though. For what it's worth, our D has been among the best top 4 in the game the last couple of years. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Hopefully Boyle works out but I think at all costs, keeping that D group together is priority #1

AmericanJesus
08-06-2014, 09:29 AM
I'm with Pete on this one. At Girardi's paycheck, he should be able to lead a pairing.

Right, but if you want to see if Girardi can be a #1, you have to pair him with a legit #2. If you want to see if he can be a #3, you have to pair him with a legit #4. Both Staal and McDonagh had that. When Girardi gets paired with someone other than Staal or McDonagh, it's with a 5/6/7. Now, would McDonagh still be effective playing with a Moore on the right side? Yes, but not as effective. And no question McDonagh is a better defender than Girardi. And his salary, when he's at Girardi's contract status, will certainly reflect that.

Vodka Drunkenski
08-06-2014, 09:40 AM
Girardi is paid as a leader but in reality is a complimentary player IMO.

AmericanJesus
08-06-2014, 10:09 AM
Girardi is paid as a leader but in reality is a complimentary player IMO.

Not sure he's been in a role suitable to lead. If we put Staal in a 2nd pair role with a 5/6/7 defender, he'd probably struggle as a pair as well. That's my only point. I think we say Girardi can play top pair with McDonagh or 2nd pair with Staal successfully, but when he's paired with a 5/6/7 defender the pair struggles. To me, when he's with McDonagh it's obvious who's the top player on the line. With Staal, it becomes less obvious, in the same way Staal/Stralman just complemented each other in a 2nd pair role.

DiJock94
08-06-2014, 10:19 AM
I remember before McDonagh got here and after Staal got hurt he made it to the all star game. People were astonished because he absolutely shut down ovechkin and Malkin any time they came in 1 on 1 on him.

Pete
08-06-2014, 11:52 AM
I remember before McDonagh got here and after Staal got hurt he made it to the all star game. People were astonished because he absolutely shut down ovechkin and Malkin any time they came in 1 on 1 on him.

McD and G were a pair when G made the ASG. It was 2012.

Pete
08-06-2014, 11:55 AM
Sure. I agree with that. But that probably also coincides with Girardi's weakest regular season play. I feel like early every season we have a discussion about how Girardi's not playing up to par, then about 20-30 games in, his game starts improving and by the halfway mark, we're talking about how Girardi is really playing great hockey. It doesn't excuse his early season play at all, but it also means that we have him playing at his best down the stretch and coming into the post season.

He certainly wore down. It was pretty clear. Girardi is often good for one head scratcher every 5 or so games, but in the final round, he was making multiple ones a game. That's atypical for him. Broken finger maybe, a long haul, or a combination while facing his toughest opponent. Unacceptable any way you slice it, but not really his normal, either.

I definitely see McDonagh as head and shoulders above all our other defenders. I think Staal is tough to gauge because he was at that same level prior to the injuries. Since though, he's been wildly inconsistent. At times he's been significantly better than Girardi, at other times significantly worse. To me, he's a bigger gamble on a longer term contract than Girardi was. The clincher for me is that driving the unit or not, Girardi is playing top pair minutes, while Staal isn't. And I'd argue when paired with Stralman, Staal was sometimes driving and sometimes not.

For these reasons, I would not extend Staal now. I'd give him 30-40 games to see how he fairs playing with Boyle. If he solidifies that pair, then I'd extend him mid-season and worry about how to manage the cap following this season then. It's going to be tight next year again. A lot will depend on the cap, whether MSL comes back, what type of deal he's willing to take (Bonuses) and it might be time to move away from Klein on the back end to free up a couple of $M as well.

I think you misunderstood my point re: the first 20 games. I said I'd be comfortable with Staal or McD paired with any defender on the roster. Staal struggled with MDZ beginning of last year, but that was the result of other factors, not ability.

I just feel like for the money G is getting, he needs to not only be a #2, but should at least be able to be the #1 on the second pair. He's just not that guy. What happens if McD gets hurt? G's play just falls to far when he's paired with anyone else. He was bad when McD got hurt, and he was bad against Philly when McD was struggling, too.

cousin
08-07-2014, 10:37 AM
I think you misunderstood my point re: the first 20 games. I said I'd be comfortable with Staal or McD paired with any defender on the roster. Staal struggled with MDZ beginning of last year, but that was the result of other factors, not ability.

I just feel like for the money G is getting, he needs to not only be a #2, but should at least be able to be the #1 on the second pair. He's just not that guy. What happens if McD gets hurt? G's play just falls to far when he's paired with anyone else. He was bad when McD got hurt, and he was bad against Philly when McD was struggling, too.Good points. However, If history is any indication of what to expect, Sather will let this play out into the season. It worked out Ok with Cally leaving maybe he can grab a similar deal next year. Will be in play for sure especially if young dmen show some promise in camp and filling in during the year.