Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 31 of 31

Thread: Michael Grabner – What's the Cost of a Unicorn?

  1. #21
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Valriera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Rep Power
    34
    I don’t keep him. Half of his goals this year are ENG that will pass his contract beyond what he’s worth.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Junior Division
    The Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    5,175
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by josh View Post
    For like 4m, though?
    I think id rather have Nash at that amount

    And the Rangers can't afford 4m without the cap going up, and getting rid of Miller, Hayes and/or Vesey.
    Literally, no money next offseason
    Around the 3 mark. I would take Nash back at 4, but with Grabner you're not going to think you have to have him on your top two lines. With Nash, for the next few years you have to consider him a top line guy. I think it's time to start to walk away from Nash in that regard. If he comes back, he's gotta know his role is no longer as THE guy. He might wind up on a third line. Grabner should already know that, and is effective in that role as is. No ego, no allegiance. That's not to say I don't like Nash or don't want to bring him back. I would at the right price and if it's clear to him that it's time to get in the back seat. Problem is, you need a player good enough to force him back there.

  3. #23
    a.k.a.Phildagoalie Junior Division
    Respecttheblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    9,524
    Rep Power
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by paddynyc View Post
    Very tough decision with Hayes, Miller, Skjei and Vesey all up for new contracts. How do you keep them all ?
    I haven't studied the cap numbers, and I'm not goint to until much closer tot he deadline. But it seems to me the team has to let one or two or a few veterans on the downslope of their career go or they will really pancake the future.

    I hate to lose Grabner but we got two for the best rolls of the dice with him, and his value ought to have increased, and ENG's, while nice to seal a game, are harder to come by in the playoffs, I reckon (but I could be wrong). Jesper Fast could be his heir apparent, as much as you can replace a player as unique as Grabner. If he was young like Hagelin was, I'd have much more of a problem losing him to free agency. I'm still pissed about that.

    His game depends on speed. But a multi year contract seems liek a big risk. I'm leery of the 31+ contracts these days — which is crazy for a 56 year old guy to say as 31-40 still seems young enough to do plenty of damage, jto me, ust ask Jagr, lol.
    Last edited by Respecttheblue; 12-02-2017 at 06:19 PM.
    If n ya gots jowls, they might as well be furry ones.

  4. #24
    a.k.a.Phildagoalie Junior Division
    Respecttheblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    9,524
    Rep Power
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by The Dude View Post
    Around the 3 mark. I would take Nash back at 4, but with Grabner you're not going to think you have to have him on your top two lines. With Nash, for the next few years you have to consider him a top line guy. I think it's time to start to walk away from Nash in that regard. If he comes back, he's gotta know his role is no longer as THE guy. He might wind up on a third line. Grabner should already know that, and is effective in that role as is. No ego, no allegiance. That's not to say I don't like Nash or don't want to bring him back. I would at the right price and if it's clear to him that it's time to get in the back seat. Problem is, you need a player good enough to force him back there.
    With Nash, that appears to be precisely our problem. I don't think we have enough top-tier, top-6 talent to do that right now.
    Lemme see ... (Zibs if he can stay unconcussed), the players that come to mind as out best forwards aside from Nash are Kreider, Buch, Hayes, Vesey, Miller, Zucc, and Fast, (Chityl's gonna need time and luck).
    None of them bring what Nash brings in one package, but Buchnevich is improving nicely. We need Vesey to take a leap forward and Miller to progress.
    I'm OK with a young eager and very decently talented team, but it needs another game-breaking talent to get to the promised land, and logically Nash dollars should be banked for signing our future talent. If we can get a #1 pick for him, I think we have to look at it very seriously, especially as the team is likely to try to keep McD -- who is probably the biggest chip we have to dangle for a #1 pick plus.

    But, as many have said before, this team tends to be a buyer not a seller when it sniffs playoffs.
    If n ya gots jowls, they might as well be furry ones.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division 4EverRangerFrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    524
    Rep Power
    7

    Michael Grabner – What's the Cost of a Unicorn?

    While I sincerely appreciate what Nash brings, consistently too I might add, it still remains all too true that the spin-o-Rama move often fails, the one handed shot while leaning in on the D-man while driving to the crease often fails and at his pay rate more goals should result. Sorry to say but he has to go OR take a major discount to stay a Ranger.

    On the other hand, these ‘faults’ in Nash makes keeping Grabner a much easier decision. It’ll all come down to $$$.
    Last edited by 4EverRangerFrank; 12-03-2017 at 06:11 AM.

  6. #26
    Member Mite Division Sod16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    37
    Rep Power
    3
    As noted, as long as AV is around, this guy is a perfect fit. He was the single biggest difference in the Rangers improved performance between 2015-16 and 2016-17. He pulls away like an Nitro Burning Funny Car, and he will last longer than most players due to that speed.

    Tidbit: I've been watching the Rangers for 50 years now (yikes!) and I'm pretty sure that I've never seen a hat trick with two into an empty net. All of these empty netters that he's getting are more than just stat padders though, because many of them are cutting off extended 6 on 5 sequences in the final minute or two, and you know how well we do in those situations...

  7. #27
    Senior Member Junior Division
    ThirtyONE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    9,597
    Rep Power
    66
    People RIPPED Dubinsky for scoring ENGs. Grabner is the ENG king. His numbers and future contract will be massively inflated.
    FIRE VIGNEAULT

  8. #28
    Just a Simple Country Squire BSBH Prospect
    Dunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    10,989
    Rep Power
    199
    I'm pretty sure all the FO's in the league are well aware of what Grabner is at this point.

  9. #29
    Moderator Junior Division
    Future's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    5,747
    Rep Power
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by ThirtyONE View Post
    People RIPPED Dubinsky for scoring ENGs. Grabner is the ENG king. His numbers and future contract will be massively inflated.
    That wasn't true until a few weeks ago. He only had 4 last year and even if you include all 10 with this year, he's still near 30 5v5 goals. That doesn't really change anythign in terms of production vs. cost right nwo.

  10. #30
    List Maker BSBH Rookie
    josh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    22,064
    Rep Power
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunny View Post
    I'm pretty sure all the FO's in the league are well aware of what Grabner is at this point.
    Yeah, well, I said the same thing about Smith and Shattenkirk heading into last offseason...

    Last thing we need is some GM saying "I'd give Grabner 2m"... and so Gorton offers 5.5x7.

  11. #31
    List Maker BSBH Rookie
    josh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    22,064
    Rep Power
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by Future View Post
    That wasn't true until a few weeks ago. He only had 4 last year and even if you include all 10 with this year, he's still near 30 5v5 goals. That doesn't really change anythign in terms of production vs. cost right nwo.
    I believe they mean even strength goals, not necessarily 5 on 5. (unless im wrong, but I thought he had a few 4 on 4)

    Dubinsky did get ripped on for ENG... mostly because thats all he did his 2nd to last year in NY. Phil can show you his old "4.4m to kill penalties" sig, if you want. I even went back through all of his goals (one of those seasons) and he only had 3 "meaningful" goals (non EN, scored when team was up by 2, down by 2, etc). So, Dubinsky got ripped for it, but that was a bullet point, not the reason for the criticism.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •