Is Staal Actually Becoming Trade-able?

For years, the answer to this question was simply no. Improbably, he has been better this year than last, and last year he was better than the year before. He always is making nice little plays these days, and he's doing it against the opposition's top lines. MSG put together a clip between the second and third periods a couple of games ago showing a half doesn't excellent plays that he had made in the first 40 minutes. Is it to the point where someone would take on the next two years with a $5.7 cap hit? Getting a prospect for him and opening up cap space for other endeavors sure would be nice. He has a modified no-trade at this point, the particulars of which have never been disclosed, but I assume there is a limited number of teams to which he can be traded. I used to poo-poo the notion of ever unloading him. Now I wonder, at least a little bit.

I'm sceptical.

Possibly if you retain some salary.

I don't think so, because of the NMC. It isn't that he isn't a serviceable player (I think he has been more than serviceable - he has been good). I am not sure he would waive the NMC, and even if he would I am not sure a team would want to inherit a guy with an NMC. I suppose if the Rangers absorb at least 50% of the salary you might find a taker.

Anybody is tradable, in Staal's case you're better off waiting a year or maybe even two.

I gotta say...after watching him pretty closely this season, I think Staal has played fairly well back there. He's even scored a couple of meaningful goals! I've never been a big fan of Marc Staal's game. I always thought he was really soft for such a big dude. I don't mind the fact that he's not an offensive threat, but this season he's been playing in the opponent's face more than I've ever seen.

 

If we can get something of value for him, SURE!! Let's do it and maybe trade Staal to a team that has a chance to win a title.

 

I'm all about the return though...It'd be nice to score something like a "diamond in the rough" type player with Staal...who knows.

Don't let the bloggers fool you, Staal has been fantastic. The same people that said Girardi was terrible are the same people that tell you Staal is terrible.

I think Staal has been one of their best defensemen this year.

I think Staal has been one of their best defensemen this year.

 

Same. Doubt you?re getting anything of value for him though and they don?t need to free up cap space right now so what?s the point?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Don't let the bloggers fool you, Staal has been fantastic. The same people that said Girardi was terrible are the same people that tell you Staal is terrible.

Fantastic is a bit of a stretch, but he's always been better than he gets credit for. Staal's problem is that he's only good in the D zone. He's pretty bad in transition both ways (though I wonder how much is scheme, b/c the Rangers don't stand up on their own blueline ever).

 

As a player, he's always been tradeable, but that contract is tough. I bet they could move him at next year's deadline fairly easily, if he waives the NMC.

He's terrible offensively. Luckily, he's a defenseman.

Don't let the bloggers fool you, Staal has been fantastic. The same people that said Girardi was terrible are the same people that tell you Staal is terrible.

 

I think his play has been good, for the most part.

 

Trading him now - I don't think youll get meaningful assets in return, even retaining $2m per season.

And the full NMC plays into it, as well.

 

Maybe next season a team might give up a middle round pick, and that might improve the following season.

 

Currently, they get more out of Staal (playing) than they would get from a potential random 7th rounder that wont make it out of Maine.

I think Staal being borderline immovable is actually okay. If they can get him out, fine, but I think he's solid and guy to have around. He's still a good NHL player.

I think his play has been good, for the most part.

 

Trading him now - I don't think youll get meaningful assets in return, even retaining $2m per season.

And the full NMC plays into it, as well.

 

Maybe next season a team might give up a middle round pick, and that might improve the following season.

 

Currently, they get more out of Staal (playing) than they would get from a potential random 7th rounder that wont make it out of Maine.

 

I agree - the longer they wait, the better the return will be, that also depends if he keeps the level of play up

No rush to move Staal. He is what he is, and part of that is he's a good guy to have around a young team.

I'd rather focus on getting shot of Smith, Shattenkirk and McQuaid.

At this point, if I had a choice, I'd keep Staal and move Smith and Shatty. Staal is about to play his 800th game as a Ranger. I like his solid veteran presence on the back end. However, moving those 3 has nothing to do with return. The benefit is the roster openings for Hajek, Rykov, Lundkvist, and Miller to compete for over the next 2 summers. If you get a mid round pick back in addition that's just a bonus.

I keep wondering why people think Pionk is propping Staal and not vice versa.

I really don't see any team taking on that contract and term. Even if the Rangers were to retain half his salary, a buyer would be commiting to 2 years of 2,85M. That's a heavy risk.

 

Right now, the Rangers don't need the cap space. They will perhaps need it in the future, but then it makes a lot more sense to keep him and buy him out when the need arises than tying yourself to half of his salary in retention.

He more tradeable than Smith ,or Shattenkirk

wonder if he'd waive his NMC to play in Minny with his brother

wonder if he'd waive his NMC to play in Minny with his brother

 

These rumors go back to Carolina, but why does anyone think he'd want to play with his brother? They played together already in NY.

 

And Minny doesn't need him.

These rumors go back to Carolina, but why does anyone think he'd want to play with his brother? They played together already in NY.

 

And Minny doesn't need him.

I think he'd be a perfect deadline acquisition for a team like Minny, contract notwithstanding. Theire top 4 is set, but Staal would be an upgrade on Seeler on that third pair, I think. Who knows if Minny thinks of it that way, but no contender is going to add Staal thinking of putting him in their top 4.

I think he'd be a perfect deadline acquisition for a team like Minny, contract notwithstanding. Theire top 4 is set, but Staal would be an upgrade on Seeler on that third pair, I think. Who knows if Minny thinks of it that way, but no contender is going to add Staal thinking of putting him in their top 4.

Well yeah, the contract for 2 more seasons is the issue. Or is it one more? Can't look now.

Well yeah, the contract for 2 more seasons is the issue. Or is it one more? Can't look now.

Two more after this year. That's why I think he gets traded at the deadline next year, at the earliest.

 

I'm just saying that the type of team Minny is, right now, makes a lot of sense.

I don't think so, because of the NMC. It isn't that he isn't a serviceable player (I think he has been more than serviceable - he has been good). I am not sure he would waive the NMC, and even if he would I am not sure a team would want to inherit a guy with an NMC. I suppose if the Rangers absorb at least 50% of the salary you might find a taker.

 

Capfriendy says he has a NMC but Spotrac says he has a M-NTC.

Capfriendy says he has a NMC but Spotrac says he has a M-NTC.

 

Interesting. I always thought it was a full NMC. Did some digging:

 

"The deal has a full no-trade clause in the first three years and begins right away, according to the source. There is also a full no-move clause, which pertains only to waivers."

 

http://www.espn.com/new-york/nhl/story/_/id/12188724/marc-staal-new-york-rangers-complete-6-year-extension