My point is that sometimes you give up something of value tomorrow when you need something of value today.Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia
Amonte and Weight, etc.
My point is that sometimes you give up something of value tomorrow when you need something of value today.
Amonte and Weight, etc.
Happens at every deadline. I brought up forsberg as well because it’s basically the same scenario
Of course. This whole argument has been misconstrued. My point from the start is that trading prospects you've lost faith in isn't "giving to on" them. It's a recognition that something isn't working and can be a proactive affair in getting something that will while the value is still there.
Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
"Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
- John Tortorella
"Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
- Christopher Hitchens
Or maybe they didn't even lose faith. Maybe they just realize you have to give to get and don't want to move players off the current roster.
Talking Tolvanen, not Andersson.
I'm either doing a terrible job at explaining myself (very possible), or something else is going on here because we keep coming back to this verbiage as though I'm the one suggesting they have. I'm not. So I'm going to try to lay this out one more time because I'm kind of exhausted on this whole thing:
Trading prospects that a team is potentially losing faith in, to me, isn't "giving up on" said prospects. Not while they're still viable. This was the reaction of Gravesy in another thread after Mike (Rhom) floated the idea of the Rangers trading Andersson while there's still shine on his draft status. Rather, dealing a player under those circumstances is more like a recognition that for whatever the reason, something isn't working, and a change of scenery, a change in personnel, what have you, can potentially right the ship for both teams involved in such a deal.
This can occur across the entire spectrum of the NHL's landscape — buyers to sellers. For buyers, said player is more likely to be involved in a deal for an immediate NHL roster player (Tolvanen, Nashville). For sellers, that player would most likely be involved in a deal for another team's stalling prospect (Andersson, Rangers). But the principle doesn't change. Moving underperforming prospects while they still have value isn't "giving up on" them. The fact they're even involved in a would-be trade for something of significance negates that idea from the start.
To me, giving up on a player is more like what you see when a third- or fourth-year pro goes to RFA and the team walks away from his arbitration award, after which he doesn't receive an NHL contract and ends up packing up and moving to Europe. Or, like in the case of McIlrath, when the player is held onto for years in the hopes that he is a late bloomer and is eventually traded for future considerations and/or a very low-end draft pick.
If this doesn't make sense, I'll just take the L and tap out. I can't think of a way to put it any better.
"Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
- John Tortorella
"Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
- Christopher Hitchens
I think it makes sense. I don't disagree either, but I do think it's semantics.
In the context of where the Rangers are as a rebuilding organization, I think looking to trade your 7th overall pick less than 2 years after the fact is tantamount to giving up on him. I.e. you no longer believe he is the player you thought he would be at the time of drafting. Or maybe it just didn't work out, for whatever reasons be it cultural, locker room dynamics or similar. I mean, it's obviously possible to find other fitting descriptions, but it boils down to the same in my book.
Of course, if someone calls Gorton and offers a deal that blows his socks off then it's not necessarily giving up on him. But my understanding of the original topic was whether the Rangers should actively look to move him.
We're probably boring everyones tits off, so should probably leave it at that.
Yeah, I think we ironed this out.
"Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
- John Tortorella
"Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
- Christopher Hitchens
From Pronman's Q&A this afternoon
How was the weekend in Hartford and any impressions on the teams top prospects? Hajek, Lindgren, Andersson...
Corey Pronman
@Eric J. Best game I've seen of Hajek's this season. Andersson was invisible.
I’d love to have some rumors start heating up. Less than 2 weeks away now.
GORTON 2020
"Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
- John Tortorella
"Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
- Christopher Hitchens
Tonight Rangers will go with 4 Forwards and 14 defensemen
Lias Andersson for #AJT2019
You don't have to explain this to me LOL. If you're tired of it, stop answering!
The optics of flipping Andersson just look bad, just quickly admitting a whiff on a high end pick so quick.
Frankly I'm a bit surprised that a deal for Hayes doesn't happen sooner rather than closer to the deadline. wonder if the MSG phone lines are being burned up for him. Strength at the C is paramount in the playoffs, and there's more than one contender that can use him.
Acqua in bocca
Teams waiting on Duchene to set the high, and probably someone like Brassard to set the low bar.
Lias Andersson for #AJT2019
I don't think the need for Hayes vs. the ransom we want for him are really in line, personally, but I agree with Josh that there's no real benchmark set yet.
Its not like anyone in the 2017 draft that was drafted out of the Top 2 + Elias Petersson has been lighting it up. Could maybe make the case the Rangers could have drafted Mittlestadt or Rasmussen instead. If Chytil was drafted at 7 and Andersson at 21 I think we'd be pretty happy. If he doesnt show improvement next season then it could start to be considered a whiff.
Last edited by Blue Heaven; 02-13-2019 at 04:22 PM.
It's funny to me that we talk about trading guys to try to get....Vesalainen, Bowers, Tolvanen, whoever...all who were drafted well after Lias.
IDK. I'd swap that. Brassard is at least a playoff performer. Both are likely going to be wanted, but Hayes production is maybe a bigger selling point. I'd think he sets the bar. Weird. I know. I fucking hate him.
I don't think that's true anymore (not that I really agree it ever was anyways).
7 points and 3 goals in his last 25 playoff games.
Reply With Quote
