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

Rangers Attempting to Acquire Matt Martin's Contract from TOR

Phil

By Phil
in New York Rangers

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply
NYR2711 BSBH Junior

NYR2711

Posted
Posted
What does Stepan have to do with 70 point players?

 

The fact that the team will trade one of their leading scorers. If they traded Stepan, they would have no problem trading Hayes. And Hayes won’t be a 70 point player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Long live the King BSBH Hall-of-Famer

Long live the King

Posted
Posted
The fact that the team will trade one of their leading scorers. If they traded Stepan, they would have no problem trading Hayes. And Hayes won?t be a 70 point player.
Hayes being a 70 point player was a hypothetical scenario. One in which the past trade of a mid 50s player is irrelevant, leading scorer or not. If Stepan was a 70 point player he'd still be here.

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Giacomin BSBH Mite

Giacomin

Posted
Posted
I have no idea what you're talking about. In one instance you call Hate a 3C, yet want to trade him at the cost of a 2C.... Huh?

 

It's easy. Many consider Hayes a 2C, on most teams he's a 2C. That is the type of return I want. He'd make an excellent 3C on a team loaded for a Cup run. These 2 opinions can coexist.

 

Hayes didn't drastically improve his 4th year though....

 

I didn't say drastically, but I did mention 3-4 areas of improvement. More improvement than most in their 4th year.

 

You write off Spooner, and continually say he prefers the wing when he doesn't.

 

WTF, I never wrote off Spooner. I said that about playing wing during the season. What the hell, you are hallucinating.

 

You act as if he is not needed. And look past the fact that HE had the good run at the end of the season. They are the same age, yet you act like Spooner is done and Hayes is on the rise.

 

Dude, stop attributing shit to me that I never said and does not resemble my opinion. I told you in the last fuckin post I never even mentioned Spooner, why do you keep bringing him up. You have me confused with someone else. Please fuckin stop. Spooner is fine. Happy to keep him. Fine trading him, if he returns something that excites me.

 

I feel like many including yourself are putting way too much stock into Hayes stats from this past season. Calling him a 50 point player is a stretch. A big one.

 

Show me one post where I mention a Hayes stat. I doubt it, two is impossible. This is a gross inaccuracy, I don't get it.

 

You go on to say you want a return similar to what O'Reilly got. Kevin Hayes is not on the same planet as O'Reilly.

 

You finally got the right guy, I said that. I think Hayes should get something near that return, maybe a little less, but I don't need the 30 and 31 year old player.

 

Hayes at 5 X 5 or even 5.3 is on the same planet as ROR with his contract, age and potential baggage. Maybe he is not quite as good, but considering the contract with age, Hayes is in the ballpark. But who cares. Hayes is a valuable Ranger. ROR will never be. I am more picky than you about who I'd trade Hayes for. It's that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CBrowningPI BSBH Champion

CBrowningPI

Posted
Posted
Please point me to that post.
Hayes reminds me of Jordan Staal. Exceled playing behind some guys but will never carry the load in a top 6 role. I suppose you could say that you were talking about Staal but the inference was there.

Post 90 in Rangers Accelerated Rebuild. It took me a long time to find it and then it was mixed up with Staal. Damn those Staals.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted
Hayes reminds me of Jordan Staal. Exceled playing behind some guys but will never carry the load in a top 6 role. I suppose you could say that you were talking about Staal but the inference was there.

Post 90 in Rangers Accelerated Rebuild. It took me a long time to find it and then it was mixed up with Staal. Damn those Staals.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I was talking about Staal.

 

And the rest of the thread I'm defending Hayes.

 

That post is also 3 months old...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Dude BSBH Legend

The Dude

Posted
Posted
So Jenner has 1 30 goal season 3 years ago and hasn't topped 20 since.

 

Jenner is not a face off guy. There were 4 players on the Jackets the took more faceoffs than he did. He's taken 1297 career faceoffs. Hayes took 1112 last year.

 

Jenner career shooting % is 10.3. Hayes is 13.1.

 

Jenner 160 career takeaways. Hayes 173. (in 32 less games).

 

A) I still don't know where you're getting your incorrect numbers from. B) You're again comparing Hayes to a role player and complaining that Hayes is worse because he doesn't hit enough for you.

 

I must have read it all wring or was in a hurry. Yeah, I don't know where I came up with that. I used hockey reference, but fucked it up. Twice. Chalk it up to me being an idiot, sorry.

 

But Hayes not hitting enough isn't why I don't like the player. It's how he over carries the puck, and that he doesn't shoot enough. I think his offensive skills are average, and isn't deserving of 2nd line ice time or a 5 year contract.

 

Sorry for the poor comparison. I do see them as somewhat similar types if players though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Dude BSBH Legend

The Dude

Posted
Posted
It's easy. Many consider Hayes a 2C, on most teams he's a 2C. That is the type of return I want. He'd make an excellent 3C on a team loaded for a Cup run. These 2 opinions can coexist. [/Quote]

 

This can't coexist when all you seem to want to do is trade Hayes for something he can't return. You can't trade a 3C as a 2C, just because you want to. In YOUR opinion is he a legit 2C or is he the 3C?

 

 

 

 

I didn't say drastically, but I did mention 3-4 areas of improvement. More improvement than most in their 4th year.

Drastically/"a bunch". I think you're splitting hairs here. Is there a big difference in the phrases?

 

 

 

WTF, I never wrote off Spooner. I said that about playing wing during the season. What the hell, you are hallucinating.

 

You have him in multiple trade proposals and you said in the "teams interested in Hayes" thread or what ever it's called, that Spooner is a winger now and not a center (paraphrasing, it's late, I'm not doing the work if exact quotes right now)

 

 

Dude, stop attributing shit to me that I never said and does not resemble my opinion. I told you in the last fuckin post I never even mentioned Spooner, why do you keep bringing him up. You have me confused with someone else. Please fuckin stop. Spooner is fine. Happy to keep him. Fine trading him, if he returns something that excites me.

 

Ok, watch your tone. Like I just stated. You have Spooner in multiple trade proposals, you assume he likes the wing, you are giving Hayes props for a good finish, yet consistently overlook what Spooner did. Maybe it's because you have ideas of trading almost everyone. I don't see much positive talk about Spooner other than what trade you want to include him in... That doesn't make it seem like you think much of him, when all you do is want to trade him.

 

 

Show me one post where I mention a Hayes stat. I doubt it, two is impossible. This is a gross inaccuracy, I don't get it.

 

You are saying he's a 2nd line center (but a 3rd but a 2nd....). That's due to his stats. No? Then by what are you suggesting that he's a 2?????? In the quote I mention others first.

 

You finally got the right guy, I said that. I think Hayes should get something near that return, maybe a little less, but I don't need the 30 and 31 year old player.

 

Hayes at 5 X 5 or even 5.3 is on the same planet as ROR with his contract, age and potential baggage. Maybe he is not quite as good, but considering the contract with age, Hayes is in the ballpark. But who cares. Hayes is a valuable Ranger. ROR will never be. I am more picky than you about who I'd trade Hayes for. It's that simple.

 

Again.. what!?!?!??? Potential baggage? Hayes contract, no matter how low it can be, will NOT bring back the value that O'Reilly just brought back. Not even if the Rangers paid half his salary. No. He will not bring back that kind of value. What makes you think that any situation levels out with Hayes equalling O'Reilly in trade value?

 

You're interested in Gorton pulling off the miracle of signing this guy, then in a year, flipping him in a blockbuster deal.

 

I'm sorry you feel I don't think Hayes is worth as much in trade as you do. I think I'm done discussing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Giacomin BSBH Mite

Giacomin

Posted
Posted
This can't coexist when all you seem to want to do is trade Hayes for something he can't return. You can't trade a 3C as a 2C, just because you want to. In YOUR opinion is he a legit 2C or is he the 3C?

 

I've put it so many ways, how about this: On our team and about 20 others he is a 2C. On the most talented teams or teams with C's like Crosby/Malkin, Stamkos/Point, Kuz/Backstrom he is 3C. [~ 10 teams]

 

If he improves under our new coach this year, which I expect, he will certainly be worth a 2C. This is why I'm reluctant to trade him for the return you're suggesting.

You have him in multiple trade proposals and you said in the "teams interested in Hayes" thread or what ever it's called, that Spooner is a winger now and not a center (paraphrasing, it's late, I'm not doing the work if exact quotes right now)

 

Went thru the last 5 threads with Hayes in the title. Couldn't find anything I said on Spooner. I do think he is more suited to wing because D responsibilities typical of a C is not his strength. His strengths are his playmaking abilities, skating, offensive vision and he can take faceoffs. Looking forward to seeing how he does this year, he can be fun to watch.

 

What I did find were posts supporting Hayes. To the post asking, "who to trade, Z or Hayes", my response was:

 

Neither. It is a stupid question. If Zibs is a concussion risk, how can one justify an urgent need to trade Hayes? We are going into the season with both, and the team will assess our talent under a new coach.

 

Keeping Z and Hayes is part of why our plan should not be defined as a 'full tear down tank job'. It is a rebuild, meaning we are not going to mortgage the future for the short term. All moves now have a long view in mind.

 

Can't our rebuild can be about accumulating as many good young assets as possible, w/o stripping the team bare of every 24-26 year old? Shouldn't part of the rebuild be to see which young vets are capable of taking the next step in new circumstances, with new leadership? Who will be part of the vet core in the next 2-5 years?

 

In the thread titled, "FA puts Hayes at a crossroad" I responded to Ozzy's comment about the need to trade Hayes with this:

 

Hayes is staying unless a team ponies up relative to the ROR deal. Or a Trouba type deal. He is the most valuable C left on the mkt and he's not really on the market. That's the way the Rangers should play it too.

You have Spooner in multiple trade proposals

 

There are threads discussing trades, Gorton alluded to them and he's an RFA. Shoot me. He is not untradeable, not rushing to trade him either.

 

you assume Spooner likes the wing, you are giving Hayes props for a good finish

 

so? Doubt Spooner cares where he plays if he is getting top 9 minutes. If we need him at C (injuries or kids not ready) and he can do the job, I have no issue. And yes Hayes finished well.

 

yet consistently overlook what Spooner did. I don't see much positive talk about Spooner other than what trade you want to include him in... That doesn't make it seem like you think much of him, when all you do is want to trade him.

 

Nope, completely untrue. I touted his play when he arrived here and throughout the rest of the season. Said he was a tested player who had an injury in Boston and was better when healthy and more solid than some think. At the end of the season I said he could fill Zuc's playmaking winger role, freeing Zuc up to trade. I complimented numerous aspects of his game and don't label him a perimeter player, even though he is not physical.

 

I started a thread about looking at trades differently. Essentially, don't look to trade anyone, instead seek out young upside players that could be available and then make offers from a pool of players. Or let teams inquire about our guys and deal from strength.

 

No need to force anything. If we make no other moves, just sign every RFA, bring everyone to camp and let the coach and players sort it out. Mgmt and fans can assess and go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blue Heaven BSBH Legend

Blue Heaven

Posted
Posted
Boomer Esiason said on WFAN that Matt Martin had the opportunity to come to the Rangers. The Maple Leafs gave him the option on where he wanted to go between the Rangers and Islanders. Said that he chose the Islanders b/c of the familiarity with the team and the community but gave it serious thought about coming to the Rangers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ozzy BSBH Legend

Ozzy

Posted
Posted
Yeah but he cant keep up with play.

 

I'd much rather teach the kids to play in your face, than have Matt Martin's slow ass getting icetime.

 

I'm with you on this one, Josh man!!

 

Get these veterans out of the way and gimme some new rock n roll, baby!!! LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
siddious BSBH Legend

siddious

Posted
Posted
He'll probably get a chance to play there.

 

Not sure he'd be in the lineup, or on the roster, here.

 

You may be right because of the emphasis on letting young guys play here but the isles have at least 3-4 guys who are essentially the same player or can fill a similar position.

 

Oh well though, youre right about letting the kids play. Just thought it was interesting that were being passed over by a team thats such a mess right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Future BSBH Mite

Future

Posted
Posted
You may be right because of the emphasis on letting young guys play here but the isles have at least 3-4 guys who are essentially the same player or can fill a similar position.

 

Oh well though, youre right about letting the kids play. Just thought it was interesting that were being passed over by a team thats such a mess right now.

They're going to be playing Komarov in the top-6 lol, so Martin will be back with Cizikas and Clutterbuck.

 

I'd bet that's what he was sold on, if ice time was any deciding factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slobberknocker BSBH Rising Star

Slobberknocker

Posted
Posted
You may be right because of the emphasis on letting young guys play here but the isles have at least 3-4 guys who are essentially the same player or can fill a similar position.

 

Oh well though, youre right about letting the kids play. Just thought it was interesting that were being passed over by a team thats such a mess right now.

 

i dont know if I'd classify the Isles a mess. they need goalie help and lost tavares but might have more in the pipe than we do right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Future BSBH Mite

Future

Posted
Posted
i dont know if I'd classify the Isles a mess. they need goalie help and lost tavares but might have more in the pipe than we do right now.

The Isles are further away from being a contender than Buffalo and Arizona.

 

They have no goalie, no defensemen, and will only be able to put together 1 top-6 line. With no JT to carry Bailey and Lee, they will now have difficulty scoring to compliment their total lack of defense. Trotz should win coach of the year if this team wins 35 games. I mean, this is what they're probably going to roll with...

 

Eberle - Barzal - Beauvillier

Lee - Nelson - Bailey

Ho-Sang - Komarov - Ladd

Martin - Cizikas - Clutterbuck

Filpula, Kovar, Kuhnackl

 

Leddy - Boychuck

Pelech - Pulock

Hickey - Aho

Mayfield

 

Lehner

Greiss

 

Even if Wahlstrom is a legit top-6 tomorrow, that team is going to be terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...