Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Hartnett: Rangers 'Absolutely' Should Look into Acquiring Jonathan Toews


Phil

Recommended Posts

Still hard to believe the Rangers letter to the fans and timing of the rebuild was done so right.

 

I think the Blackhawks botched the start of their rebuild. Making the playoffs was perhaps the worst thing for them. Could have potentially moved Toews at the deadline for the upcoming draft. Instead, they kept him, Covid hit, they make the playoffs and AFTER the draft and we learn of a flat cap do they think about moving him. Yikes -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm not saying to do it, I'm defending Dave's proposal.

 

This. I was just exploring the cost. Not whether it would be worth it. Eating that much cap for that long is unprecedented. So it was difficult to determine the cost. After that is offset, you look at Toews, a player who hasn't declined statistically, and is a top leader in the league, for three years at $5.25M. Cost is going to be high on that end, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can make arguments for and against a trade like that. I just wonder how much better we would be long term if we did that. Adding Toews probably doesn’t really jump the needle full fledged for 2 seasons. At that point we are talking about one more season and a decline in skill anyway, plus the loss of real assets in those picks that we could have used for another piece via trade or draft if things were going so horribly wrong that we still had high picks.

 

Toews fits here, but in his last year with salary retention and as a complimentary piece to a stacked team just missing that special intangible piece, not as a focal point right now imo.

 

If he stays in Chicago, do I revisit this next offseason if we happened to get in the playoffs and go into the second round or so next year? You betcha.

 

I would imagine that part of the value of Toews is that he's a leader who experienced in Chicago the kind of dynasty built through the draft that the Rangers are trying to replicate. You look at teams that haven't been able to put things together after drafting the way we have (Edmonton, Buffalo, etc) missing out on having a player like Toews.

 

His 60-70 points is nice and all, but we've got scoring. He fills a hole at 2C, of course. But it's the experience he brings that would be the x-factor for me. He would add to the culture and that would be felt after he was gone.

 

Not saying I do it, just that I'd consider it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. I was just exploring the cost. Not whether it would be worth it. Eating that much cap for that long is unprecedented. So it was difficult to determine the cost. After that is offset, you look at Toews, a player who hasn't declined statistically, and is a top leader in the league, for three years at $5.25M. Cost is going to be high on that end, as well.

 

Right. There's another way to look at it, as well. Would you rather pay to acquire a 32-year-old Toews at $5.25 million for three years or pay to sign a 35-year-old Toews at $5.25 million for three years? I know which I'd choose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This, I was just exploring the cost. Not whether it would be worth it. Eating that much cap for that long is unprecedented. So it was difficult to determine the cost. After that is offset, you look at Toews, a player who hasn't declined statistically, and is a top leader in the league, for three years at $5.25M. Cost is going to be high on that end, as well.

From our perspective, if we could have our 2nd line center for 5.25m over the next 3 seasons we would be in good shape. However, the other assets would be rough to give up, particularly the 1sts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. There's another way to look at it, as well. Would you rather pay to acquire a 32-year-old Toews at $5.25 million for three years or pay to sign a 35-year-old Toews at $5.25 million for three years? I know which I'd choose.

 

So do I. Neither. The cost to acquire Toews by trade will be higher than he's really worth, and I see no good reason why you pay through the teeth like that for him when you can have Getzlaf, Krejci, or E Staal, for way cheaper and probably more cap savings if you think longer term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reality, that package that Dave offered. Do you prefer having Toews for that price, or offer sheet Cirelli at 6-6.5m for 4 years or so and only lose a 1st and 3rd. If you think Tampa matches then call them first, offer that plus one prospect and see if it gets it done.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do I. Neither. The cost to acquire Toews by trade will be higher than he's really worth, and I see no good reason why you pay through the teeth like that for him when you can have Getzlaf, Krejci, or E Staal, for way cheaper and probably more cap savings if you think longer term.

 

Far from a guarantee any of them make it to market, let alone opt to sign with the Rangers. Free agency pits teams against one another for the services of players who do make it. It's not as low-risk an approach as you're suggesting, because what happens when all three re-sign with their teams and you're now left with nothing?

 

If they like and want Toews, they should get him. I don't know that that should be done this season, but I do know that if he's available and they value him, strike while you can. Musical chairs has a nasty way of leaving someone without a seat, every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Far from a guarantee any of them make it to market, let alone opt to sign with the Rangers. Free agency pits teams against one another for the services of players who do make it. It's not as low-risk an approach as you're suggesting, because what happens when all three re-sign with their teams and you're now left with nothing?

 

If they like and want Toews, they should get him. I don't know that that should be done this season, but I do know that if he's available and they value him, strike while you can. Musical chairs has a nasty way of leaving someone without a seat, every year.

 

Sure, but we're talking trade. Not FA here. Though, I'll guaran-damn-tee Getzlaf hits FA if he isn't traded.

 

While the Bruins and Sabres probably don't want to move on just yet, the Ducks would probably pay someone to take Getzlaf. They're over the cap as it is (prior to sending Backes to San Diego, anyway), and they're likely on another growing pains season - doubly so with no obvious backup to Gibson under contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have enough prospects now where trades like this could become a reality. There is not enough room for all these kids to make the team. They will have to be dealt at some point. I'd certainly take Toews at half price. Are you kidding me? No brainer, IMO.

 

It actually makes me think back for the Brad Richards deal. We don't want Toews when his current deal is up. Right now is when he still has value to a new team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why it's one or the other. It should be both.

 

Sure, but the cap is already an issue with all the bonus money. Replacing Strome with Toews at 50% retained is a wash, but how are you fitting a top pair LD? You can't. And this Toews move would give you a brief 3 year window, unless you think you could resign him on the cheap at 35.

 

Toews would be a great add, but the timing just isn't right. He wouldn't make them a contender with the current D. It should be both, but both isn't possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we are going to fantasize let’s get Kane too.

 

 

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

 

Happy you brought that up.

 

What if one of the Rangers center turns out perfectly capable of playing center. Maybe it’s Laf for all we know. Then suddenly in a year maybe a Kane or somebody is available.

 

Hold the cards tight. There will always be something worth getting. Patience

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but the cap is already an issue with all the bonus money. Replacing Strome with Toews at 50% retained is a wash, but how are you fitting a top pair LD? You can't. And this Toews move would give you a brief 3 year window, unless you think you could resign him on the cheap at 35.

 

Toews would be a great add, but the timing just isn't right. He wouldn't make them a contender with the current D. It should be both, but both isn't possible.

 

I'm not saying they have to add it all right now.

 

I'm saying Toews for prospects is a no brainer. Bring in a d next summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying they have to add it all right now.

 

I'm saying Toews for prospects is a no brainer. Bring in a d next summer.

 

But that's the point. So then you add a D next summer. So trade a bunch of your best prospects and picks for 2 years of Toews with adequate defense. You don't win in those two years, you wasted those prospects and now need a replacement for Toews. Its just bad timing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's the point. So then you add a D next summer. So trade a bunch of your best prospects and picks for 2 years of Toews with adequate defense. You don't win in those two years, you wasted those prospects and now need a replacement for Toews. Its just bad timing.

 

I don't agree. Just resign him if he does well. In the meantime the young guys on the team learn from a 3x Stanley cup champion. They wouldn't be trading their best prospects either. Kakko and Lafrenier are staying. Maybe you ship kravstov and a young dman though plus a 1st or something along those lines.

 

That's the whole point of having these prospects in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's the point. So then you add a D next summer. So trade a bunch of your best prospects and picks for 2 years of Toews with adequate defense. You don't win in those two years, you wasted those prospects and now need a replacement for Toews. Its just bad timing.

 

I would think the Rangers would resign Strome before trading players for Toews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree. Just resign him if he does well. In the meantime the young guys on the team learn from a 3x Stanley cup champion. They wouldn't be trading their best prospects either. Kakko and Lafrenier are staying. Maybe you ship kravstov and a young dman though plus a 1st or something along those lines.

 

That's the whole point of having these prospects in the first place.

 

Agreed here. Toews is exactly what the Rangers need. If Chicago can retain and it doesn't cost a ton, you do it. They shouldn't just sit around and piss away Panarin and Zibanejad's best years either. Plus, if Lafreniere is as good as advertised, the Rangers can make some noise even with their swiss cheese defense as it stands currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed here. Toews is exactly what the Rangers need. If Chicago can retain and it doesn't cost a ton, you do it. They shouldn't just sit around and piss away Panarin and Zibanejad's best years either. Plus, if Lafreniere is as good as advertised, the Rangers can make some noise even with their swiss cheese defense as it stands currently.

 

this has worked very well for toronto

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...