Rangers prospect Nicklas Jensen, who was traded to the Rangers in 2016 for Emerson Etem, has left the NHL for Finland, signing a one-year deal with Jokerit Helsinki of the KHL.
Click here to view the article.
Rangers prospect Nicklas Jensen, who was traded to the Rangers in 2016 for Emerson Etem, has left the NHL for Finland, signing a one-year deal with Jokerit Helsinki of the KHL.
Click here to view the article.
So basically we traded Hagelin for Ryan Gropp and cap space.
Sent from my NEM-L51 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Cap space is more valuable than Hagelin is. No reason to overpay a 30 point player.Originally Posted by Mistercosmic
Hidden Content
$1080 and counting
We traded Hagelin's RIGHTS. He wasn't even under contract when he was traded and we weren't going to be able to afford him.
Not to mention the fact that he wasn't anywhere close to worth the contract he did get.
I'm fine with the fact that we traded his rights in that specific situation. Nonetheless the fact remains that we got two once overrated busts (Etem, Jensen) and one so far average performing rookie out of this trade, while Hagelin is a two-time Stanley Cup champion now.
Sent from my NEM-L51 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Who cares about Hagelin winning 2 cups with Pittsburgh? That's beyond the Rangers control. He's not worth his contract, and they didn't overpay him. That's what matters. He's not even a 1/2 pt per game player. Had the best 3 months of his life last year, and won a cup with a team that no one can stop with or without Hagelin.
Hidden Content
$1080 and counting
So are you saying if we paid $4m for Hagelin's 22 regular season points and 2 playoff goals last year we would have won the cup? Or Pitt wouldn't have won either cup without him?
No, of course not. But we lost a good player in a deal, that possibly could had been better. There's a reason why Cup contenders like the Ducks or the Pens trade for a player like Hagelin and are willing to pay him what he gets. We sadly have not benefited from it (so far).
Sent from my NEM-L51 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
It's like getting mad that Rozsival won a cup.
Hidden Content
$1080 and counting
We have/had tons of players like Hagelin. Fast, Lindberg, Grabner, Stalberg. Put any of those speedy PKers on the Pens instead of Hags and they still win 2 cups. The Ducks won the cup 11 years ago, they are less of a recent contender than the Rangers. The Pens are Cup Champs because of Crosby, Malkin, and Kessel not Carl Hagelin.
Just answer me one question: Do you think that trading Hagelin for Etem -> Jensen + Gropp turned out to be a good deal for the Rangers at this moment? If your answer is “No, I would've traded him as well, but the result should be better“, than you and I have something in common.
Sent from my NEM-L51 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Who is getting mad? And who is that Rosziwhale?
Sent from my NEM-L51 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Absolutely, how would you justify paying a 22 point guy $4 million a year? Fast scored 21 points last year and just signed a 3 year deal for $1.85 per year.
ho hum...this guy was invisible in the handful of games that he played with us last year. I'm sure there are 4 or 5 guys in Hartford that can fill the same role as Jensen.
How'd it turn out for Anaheim?
Hidden Content
$1080 and counting
Answer this question: With a cap hit of $4m, is any team in the league going to trade the 41st overall pick or better for Hagelin?
What makes this trade IMHO even worse besides of the outcome on our side (Etem/Jensen, Gropp) is the fact that we traded Hagelin to the Western Conference but he returned into our Division playing for a rival team just after a few months. It's a long shot, I confess, but I bet the Rangers could've done a better deal if they had traded Hagelin directly to the Pens or another Eastern Conference team.
Sent from my NEM-L51 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
It's funny to see how time changes the minds. I remember the days when Hags was a fan favorite and many people screamed “Give this guy the money!!!“ after his performances in the postseason. Now it sounds like he's a player on the same level with Tanner Glass.
Sent from my NEM-L51 using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
How does something completely outside the Rangers control make it worse? If there was a better deal on the table why would they not take it?
Tanner Glass was never mentioned in the players I compared him to. I still like the player Hags is. What no one likes, and I don't recall ever hearing anyone scream for, is to pay him almost as much as Zucc.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote