Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 79

Thread: Adam Fox is a Stud

  1. #1
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    80,817
    Rep Power
    631

    Adam Fox is a Stud

    Last edited by Pete; 05-23-2020 at 09:33 AM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Squirt Division jsm7302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NW NJ
    Posts
    490
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    ADA was the biggest piece of the Stepan trade considering our pick with that #7 pick. He is everything we would want in a developed offensive D man. I dont understand this mentality of giving up our developed pieces to go develop another and hope they turn out as well as the piece we give up. ADA's numbers are elite numbers this year. We developed that talent and this break out season. IMO he would be a piece we build around, not send off and hope for something as valuable. ADA, Zib and Panarin are the drivers of this offense. Shesty is the future in net. Trouba had been chosen as the main defensive piece to build around; if we send anyone away in order to keep Fox, I say, let it be Trouba.

  3. #3
    Banned Junior Division
    Albatross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    7,102
    Rep Power
    120
    I thought u were always against turning dmen into forwards?
    Dmen are productive only when seeing the game in front of them. I dont think there was ever a success story of a dman turned forward. Was there?

  4. #4
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    80,817
    Rep Power
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by Albatross View Post
    I thought u were always against turning dmen into forwards?
    Dmen are productive only when seeing the game in front of them. I dont think there was ever a success story of a dman turned forward. Was there?
    Sorry, "turn him into" meant trading him for a LD or winger. I'll go edit.

  5. #5
    Banned Junior Division
    Albatross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    7,102
    Rep Power
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by jsm7302 View Post
    ADA was the biggest piece of the Stepan trade considering our pick with that #7 pick. He is everything we would want in a developed offensive D man. I dont understand this mentality of giving up our developed pieces to go develop another and hope they turn out as well as the piece we give up. ADA's numbers are elite numbers this year. We developed that talent and this break out season. IMO he would be a piece we build around, not send off and hope for something as valuable. ADA, Zib and Panarin are the drivers of this offense. Shesty is the future in net. Trouba had been chosen as the main defensive piece to build around; if we send anyone away in order to keep Fox, I say, let it be Trouba.
    Trouba is unmovable. ADA will get u a truckload in a trade. We have a mobile D core(sans staal) and the future on D looks bright with upcoming rookies who also can put up points. There’s really no place or need for ADA.

  6. #6
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    80,817
    Rep Power
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by jsm7302 View Post
    ADA was the biggest piece of the Stepan trade considering our pick with that #7 pick. He is everything we would want in a developed offensive D man. I dont understand this mentality of giving up our developed pieces to go develop another and hope they turn out as well as the piece we give up. ADA's numbers are elite numbers this year. We developed that talent and this break out season. IMO he would be a piece we build around, not send off and hope for something as valuable. ADA, Zib and Panarin are the drivers of this offense. Shesty is the future in net. Trouba had been chosen as the main defensive piece to build around; if we send anyone away in order to keep Fox, I say, let it be Trouba.
    It's a business, and there's a cap, pretty simple. I'd also trade Trouba, but the Rangers won't. Fox, IMO, had a more impressive season than ADA because he's a rookie, didn't get the PP time or time with Panarin that ADA did, or the favorable zone starts. Plus Fox can defend.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4,379
    Rep Power
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    I would replace succeed with excel. Trouba did fine with what he was asked to do and with who.

    Keep ADA. He is too good. Trade Georgiev for a winger instead. Wingers are much cheaper than stud defensemen.

    Agreed on all things Fox.

  8. #8
    Banned Junior Division
    Albatross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    7,102
    Rep Power
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    I would replace succeed with excel. Trouba did fine with what he was asked to do and with who.

    Keep ADA. He is too good. Trade Georgiev for a winger instead. Wingers are much cheaper than stud defensemen.

    Agreed on all things Fox.
    What kind of a winger would Geo get? Buttom 6, no more

  9. #9
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4,379
    Rep Power
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by Albatross View Post
    What kind of a winger would Geo get? Buttom 6, no more
    The rumored equivalent value at the deadline was a Kasperi Kapanen or Andreas Johnsson. I don't think Kapanen was on the table, but I do think Johnsson probably was. That's good enough for me. We can always add to the deal to move up a tier. It is worth doing to keep DeAngelo.

  10. #10
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    80,817
    Rep Power
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    The rumored equivalent value at the deadline was a Kasperi Kapanen or Andreas Johnsson. I don't think Kapanen was on the table, but I do think Johnsson probably was. That's good enough for me. We can always add to the deal to move up a tier. It is worth doing to keep DeAngelo.
    It's a cap issue. ADA and Geo won't make the same amount.

    We simply can't afford Trouba + ADA long term + Fox when he's up.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4,379
    Rep Power
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    It's a cap issue. ADA and Geo won't make the same amount.

    We simply can't afford Trouba + ADA long term + Fox when he's up.
    Sure we can, as long as we don't overpay players in the Strome/Buchnevich tier. You can get away with one of those kinds of contracts long term, which they already did by signing Kreider (not an overpay, but a good amount of cap dedicated to him now) But if we are choosing middle 6 players over high end defensemen, regardless of depth, we are doing it wrong.

  12. #12
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    80,817
    Rep Power
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    Sure we can, as long as we don't overpay players in the Strome/Buchnevich tier. You can get away with one of those kinds of contracts long term, which they already did by signing Kreider (not an overpay, but a good amount of cap dedicated to him now) But if we are choosing middle 6 players over high end defensemen, regardless of depth, we are doing it wrong.
    Even if I agreed with you that we can afford them (we can't, if you want to keep Mika), it becomes a question of how wisely you're sprending. How much are you paying ADA to be a third pair PP specialist? How much are you paying Trouba to get no PP time.

    It's a question of value. You can't spend just to spend.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Squirt Division jsm7302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NW NJ
    Posts
    490
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Albatross View Post
    Trouba is unmovable. ADA will get u a truckload in a trade. We have a mobile D core(sans staal) and the future on D looks bright with upcoming rookies who also can put up points. There’s really no place or need for ADA.
    The future on D looks bright. How far in the future? We have a top tier offensive D man NOW. We have 2 potential MVP candidates in Zib and Bread. We have a stud for a goalie coming in now. I'm not gambling on future Hope's when we have something tangible now. No way. This team is on the fringe of being something special. Losing pieces that we have developed isnt the answer. The answer lies within keeping the flow of middling forwards and d men moving instead of paying big money to them. Buch is a great example.

  14. #14
    A-hee-ahee ha-hee BSBH Prospect
    Drew a Penalty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    14,482
    Rep Power
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Even if I agreed with you that we can afford them (we can't, if you want to keep Mika), it becomes a question of how wisely you're sprending. How much are you paying ADA to be a third pair PP specialist? How much are you paying Trouba to get no PP time.

    It's a question of value. You can't spend just to spend.
    Why can't you? Zib's contract doesn't expire for another two seasons. Any of the restrictive contracts will be gone by that point. If you re-sign ADA longterm this offseason I don't see how that'll be prohibitive. He paced 64 points this season. Defensemen like that don't come around very easily. The Rangers haven't had one since Leetch. Fox might be good, but that doesn't mean you get rid of DeAngelo.

    Leetch and Zubov were before my time, but are there really any people who would argue that they wouldn't have preferred to keep Zubov in addition to Leetch? I don't see how that's any different here. Lundkvist, Miller, and the other potential reinforcements in the system might be able to fill in his offense. As of now they're unproven and haven't even set foot in the NHL. They might not be able to replicate DeAngelo's production for several seasons if ever.

    If the time comes where you need to sell one of the defensemen I don't see that being very difficult. We're all afraid of Trouba's NMC, but how often do NMCs really prevent deals if ever? Trades still happen. His cap hit is high, of that there is no doubt. However, just this past offseason PK Subban was traded without retention. I don't think there's a great deal of difference between Subban and Trouba. Trouba is also 26 so it's not like you really have to worry about a decline for several years. If the player traded has to be DeAngelo, fine. I'm sure whatever $4.5-5.5M deal he signs won't be prohibitive in a trade either.

    Spending becomes a problem when you do it too much and remain overtly loyal to the wrong players at the wrong time.

  15. #15
    ContraQuinndicated BSBH Prospect
    G1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    18,663
    Rep Power
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew a Penalty View Post
    Why can't you? Zib's contract doesn't expire for another two seasons. Any of the restrictive contracts will be gone by that point. If you re-sign ADA longterm this offseason I don't see how that'll be prohibitive. He paced 64 points this season. Defensemen like that don't come around very easily. The Rangers haven't had one since Leetch. Fox might be good, but that doesn't mean you get rid of DeAngelo.

    Leetch and Zubov were before my time, but are there really any people who would argue that they wouldn't have preferred to keep Zubov in addition to Leetch? I don't see how that's any different here. Lundkvist, Miller, and the other potential reinforcements in the system might be able to fill in his offense. As of now they're unproven and haven't even set foot in the NHL. They might not be able to replicate DeAngelo's production for several seasons if ever.

    If the time comes where you need to sell one of the defensemen I don't see that being very difficult. We're all afraid of Trouba's NMC, but how often do NMCs really prevent deals if ever? Trades still happen. His cap hit is high, of that there is no doubt. However, just this past offseason PK Subban was traded without retention. I don't think there's a great deal of difference between Subban and Trouba. Trouba is also 26 so it's not like you really have to worry about a decline for several years. If the player traded has to be DeAngelo, fine. I'm sure whatever $4.5-5.5M deal he signs won't be prohibitive in a trade either.

    Spending becomes a problem when you do it too much and remain overtly loyal to the wrong players at the wrong time.
    Generally agreed. That said, events over the past days have had me reconsidering some things.

    1 - The players willingly declined their final paychecks of the year.
    2 - There's almost assuredly a need for compliance buyouts.
    3 - It's looking like 2020-21 revenues will also be impacted, meaning we also won't see the cap go up.

    All that considered, there's a good chance that we're going to be using some different numbers in the not-too-distant future.
    Hidden Content
    Blueshirts Brotherhood. We do what we must because we can - for the good of all Rangerkind

  16. #16
    A-hee-ahee ha-hee BSBH Prospect
    Drew a Penalty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    14,482
    Rep Power
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by G1000 View Post
    Generally agreed. That said, events over the past days have had me reconsidering some things.

    1 - The players willingly declined their final paychecks of the year.
    2 - There's almost assuredly a need for compliance buyouts.
    3 - It's looking like 2020-21 revenues will also be impacted, meaning we also won't see the cap go up.

    All that considered, there's a good chance that we're going to be using some different numbers in the not-too-distant future.
    Compliance buyouts have been pretty much entirely ruled out.

    There's also a pretty good reason for the deferral of paychecks, battling escrow. This 24 team playoff combined with the deferral of paychecks means that teams won't be pulling from players paychecks the same way had the season been canceled. This ties in with the cap not going up. There was the prospect of players having to pay in more with escrow despite the same cap. This provides some relief until the eventual TV deal, Seattle's entry to the league, and the cap escalator that the NHLPA still has yet to exercise.

    The short-term is gloomy, but there's a way out of this mess and they're clearly working towards it.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4,379
    Rep Power
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew a Penalty View Post
    Compliance buyouts have been pretty much entirely ruled out.

    There's also a pretty good reason for the deferral of paychecks, battling escrow. This 24 team playoff combined with the deferral of paychecks means that teams won't be pulling from players paychecks the same way had the season been canceled. This ties in with the cap not going up. There was the prospect of players having to pay in more with escrow despite the same cap. This provides some relief until the eventual TV deal, Seattle's entry to the league, and the cap escalator that the NHLPA still has yet to exercise.

    The short-term is gloomy, but there's a way out of this mess and they're clearly working towards it.
    Yup. And short term is only one more year. They have to be a bit creative here until that lump of cap hell expires. Shattenkirk/Staal/Smith/Lundqvist = something like 23 million. More than a quarter of the cap.

  18. #18
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    80,817
    Rep Power
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by Drew a Penalty View Post
    Why can't you? Zib's contract doesn't expire for another two seasons. Any of the restrictive contracts will be gone by that point. If you re-sign ADA longterm this offseason I don't see how that'll be prohibitive. He paced 64 points this season. Defensemen like that don't come around very easily. The Rangers haven't had one since Leetch. Fox might be good, but that doesn't mean you get rid of DeAngelo.

    Leetch and Zubov were before my time, but are there really any people who would argue that they wouldn't have preferred to keep Zubov in addition to Leetch? I don't see how that's any different here. Lundkvist, Miller, and the other potential reinforcements in the system might be able to fill in his offense. As of now they're unproven and haven't even set foot in the NHL. They might not be able to replicate DeAngelo's production for several seasons if ever.

    If the time comes where you need to sell one of the defensemen I don't see that being very difficult. We're all afraid of Trouba's NMC, but how often do NMCs really prevent deals if ever? Trades still happen. His cap hit is high, of that there is no doubt. However, just this past offseason PK Subban was traded without retention. I don't think there's a great deal of difference between Subban and Trouba. Trouba is also 26 so it's not like you really have to worry about a decline for several years. If the player traded has to be DeAngelo, fine. I'm sure whatever $4.5-5.5M deal he signs won't be prohibitive in a trade either.

    Spending becomes a problem when you do it too much and remain overtly loyal to the wrong players at the wrong time.
    Leetch and Zubov played different sides.

    These guys all play the same side. Plus what you have coming up in prospects.

    And you have holes up front that need to be addressed. Deal from a position of strength to add to a position of weakness.

  19. #19
    A-hee-ahee ha-hee BSBH Prospect
    Drew a Penalty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    14,482
    Rep Power
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Leetch and Zubov played different sides.

    These guys all play the same side. Plus what you have coming up in prospects.

    And you have holes up front that need to be addressed. Deal from a position of strength to add to a position of weakness.
    We haven't had enough of a chance to see if someone can't be transitioned to another side. Quinn began using Fox and DeAngelo together at 4 on 4 and during offensive zone starts. Who's to say that DeAngelo can't learn to play on Trouba's left? The most NHL ready defenseman the Rangers have is yet another right-handed player in Lundkvist. Even then, we don't know how ready he is.

    What holes need to be addressed that can't be from within? You say trade DeAngelo for a wing? Why? How does that help? Panarin and Kreider are locked in on the top two left-wing spots for the perpetual future. Buchnevich likely doesn't have much time left on the team, but then you have Kakko, Kravtsov, and Gauthier all waiting to move up. They need time, but they'll hopefully get there and be cost-controlled. Adding another wing via trade probably means more salary which aligns with more of your "spending for the sake of spending" notion.

  20. #20
    (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ BSBH Prospect
    Keirik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    10,225
    Rep Power
    178
    A large reason we are on the up is because of ADA. You just don’t get rid of that. Offensively Fox is good but ADA is a large step above in my opinion. He improves the offense just be being an elite threat back there.
    I’ll never understand this logic of getting rid of a 23 yr old elite offensive d because we have a 21 year old 40 point rookie d. If ADA is really worth a truckload then I’d rather keep that talent in the first place. Try to lock him up for the next 2-3 years. Fox is an RFA for the start of the 22/23 season. The bigger decision can be made then. It’s also when Kakko hits RFA, Ziby UFA, and possibly Buch if his RFA deal is only a one year show me. That’s two more seasons worth of keeping threats together for a cup run. That is still the goal right?

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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