Phil Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 So we can start the watch on the Rangers? interest in Winnipeg?s pending free-agent right defenseman Jacob Trouba manifesting itself in trade talks, the Jets having been KO?d in six by the Blues. Winnipeg, the organization that built almost exclusively through the draft, is about to get hammered. Trouba, who had an extremely contentious second-contract negotiation that bled into the start of 2016-17, is a Group II with salary-arbitration rights; wingers Patrik Laine and Kyle Connor are Group II?s without arbitration rights who will nevertheless command massive increases coming off entry-level contracts; and defenseman Tyler Myers is a pending UFA. Trouba, who turned 25 in late February, is likely to command $7 million a year. The Rangers will be among those wanting to give it to him. This, I believe, would suit the Blueshirts just fine on their 2019-20 right side: 1. Trouba; 2. Adam Fox; 3A. Tony DeAngelo; 3B. Neal Pionk. The Jets, in their elimination game in St. Louis on Saturday, were able to muster just 22 five-on-five shot attempts through 40 minutes while outshot 22-6 at full strength. They neither had enough nor got enough. https://nypost.com/2019/04/21/silence-around-lehners-future-is-good-sound-for-islanders/?utm_source=twitter_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunny Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 How do you have Adam Fox ahead of Deangelo? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 There's a world where we pick twice in the top 60 and land both Trouba and Fox for next year. Punting Dallas' 1st (if we're so lucky), Winnipeg's 1st, and the Tampa 2nd doesn't really feel too awful to me if that's the outcome. That's a world I can absolutely live with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Brooks saying Rangers are "linked" to Trouba kist means he read us talking about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Brooks saying Rangers are "linked" to Trouba kist means he read us talking about it. It really has seemed lately like some of his stuff comes out after we bring it up on here!! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 It really has seemed lately like some of his stuff comes out after we bring it up on here!! LOL Nah, it's an offseason tradition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Nah, it's an offseason tradition. I hear ya G!! I really am looking forward to the draft though. I think were still in rebuild mode for next season, but it's going to be easier to cheer for these guys knowing full well we can build around a bigtime player and show some direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 How can we pick up Trouba and Fox without first getting rid of two others. I just don't see it being possible. They have way too many dmen as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 What exactly is Brooks proposing happens to Shattenkirk with that lineup of 4 RHD already? That someone will actually want to just take his contract? Also, what are we paying Pionk to be a 7th dman? Pretty worthless comment there by LB without context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 What exactly is Brooks proposing happens to Shattenkirk with that lineup of 4 RHD already? That someone will actually want to just take his contract? Also, what are we paying Pionk to be a 7th dman? Pretty worthless comment there by LB without context. Unpopular opinion, perhaps, but I think someone will take Shattenkirk, especially if we retain some. I think he'll waive too; dude needs a fresh start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 I think Shattenkirk gets one more season. He came in last year re-habbing. I think, this season, he comes in ready to play. better shape, better mindset, chip on his shoulder. I dont think he wants to get traded, bought out, or benched this season, and works hard this offseason to prevent it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 I think Shattenkirk gets one more season. He came in last year re-habbing. I think, this season, he comes in ready to play. better shape, better mindset, chip on his shoulder. I dont think he wants to get traded, bought out, or benched this season, and works hard this offseason to prevent it. I agree And if he’s lousy he’s traded or bought out next June Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 I think Shattenkirk gets one more season. He came in last year re-habbing. I think, this season, he comes in ready to play. better shape, better mindset, chip on his shoulder. I dont think he wants to get traded, bought out, or benched this season, and works hard this offseason to prevent it. I agree And if he’s lousy he’s traded or bought out next June I don't know if I buy that. He can be dealt to 20 teams per his clause; I think if a decent enough offer comes through, he's gone. Right handed shots are overvalued in the NHL, and I can think of at least a few teams that wouldn't mind adding a cost-controlled righty asset for 2nd-3rd pair + PP time. I also think we'd eat a chunk of that contract. We've got cap space to do so. I don't think he's the first guy off the blueline to go in a perfect world (sup, Brendan Smith) but he's by no means untouchable or untradeable, and he's not really an underwater asset either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Unpopular opinion, perhaps, but I think someone will take Shattenkirk, especially if we retain some. I think he'll waive too; dude needs a fresh start. Sure, I actually agree if they retain half of his contract someone will want roll the dice on him at 3.25 or whatever it is. It would have been worth a sentence in the article. I don't think Shattenkirk being traded is very likely though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 I don't know if I buy that. He can be dealt to 20 teams per his clause; I think if a decent enough offer comes through, he's gone. Right handed shots are overvalued in the NHL, and I can think of at least a few teams that wouldn't mind adding a cost-controlled righty asset for 2nd-3rd pair + PP time. I also think we'd eat a chunk of that contract. We've got cap space to do so. I don't think he's the first guy off the blueline to go in a perfect world (sup, Brendan Smith) but he's by no means untouchable or untradeable, and he's not really an underwater asset either. Oh he has value to someone in a trade especially if they’re eating salary. I just think that they’ll take a shot with him through another season, or at least until the deadline. Not making excuses for his lousy play, but there’s some stuff that he’s dealt with (i.e. essentially lame duck coach, 1st year coach and system, team declining, injury, etc.) that probably earn him a shot until the deadline unless they get an offer for him they like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 At next year's deadline and potentially after 7/1/20, he gets more attractive to budget teams. He's due 6m salary this year, but only 4m in 2020....2m of which is a signing bonus. For a budget team, a 2m payout for a 6.5m cap hit is a big win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LONG LONG LONG TIME FAN Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 WTH does Larry Brooks put in his coffee?? This guy is completely full of non factual B.S. and people believe his baloney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletch Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 http://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/showthread.php?21493-Rangers-Rebuild-Centered-Around-Tricky-Artemi-Panarin-Kevin-Hayes-Pursuit Are we to believe that Panarin, Hayes, and Trouba are all going to be Rangers next year? Or are agents using the New York Rangers to drive up the asking price for free agents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 http://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/showthread.php?21493-Rangers-Rebuild-Centered-Around-Tricky-Artemi-Panarin-Kevin-Hayes-Pursuit Are we to believe that Panarin, Hayes, and Trouba are all going to be Rangers next year? Or are agents using the New York Rangers to drive up the asking price for free agents? I can see Panarin and Trouba. I don't think Hayes comes back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrangers Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Oh he has value to someone in a trade especially if they?re eating salary. I just think that they?ll take a shot with him through another season, or at least until the deadline. Not making excuses for his lousy play, but there?s some stuff that he?s dealt with (i.e. essentially lame duck coach, 1st year coach and system, team declining, injury, etc.) that probably earn him a shot until the deadline unless they get an offer for him they like Those smell like excuses, he's been trash. He's a seasoned vet who has failed miserably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Those smell like excuses, he's been trash. He's a seasoned vet who has failed miserably. We’ll se if they are or they aren’t. Even if that’s not why he’s played poorly, none of that has helped. But they’re going to give him the opportunity. And those things are a part of why they will. That was the operative part of my point. Personally, I think he’ll be shit. I never liked the signing to begin with and have never been a fan of his. He’s lousy in his own end and needs to be sheltered, and if you’re going to be that as a D, you better be outstanding offensively and he’s not ever been that. And he couldn’t find a way to fit with McDonagh. As far as I’m concerned in most cases, unless you’re at or near elite offensively, sheltered minutes=bottom pairing. But they’ll try with him until the deadline at least. If they can deal him then, they will. If not, they find a partner next summer. Or they look at a buyout depending on what they’re able to do with Staal and Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillyb Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Neither Hayes, nor Zucc are coming back. JT Miller isn't coming back either. And good christ, almighty, we can only hope that Ryan Callahan isn't coming back as well. I kinda hope this team doesn't go after Karlsson, but I have no good reason to say that aside from...I just can't fucking stand that guy. And I'd be all in for Panarin, but if he goes deep in CBJ this postseason (let's say they make it to the ECF, or even the SCF), does he sign a deal there? Oh, this is the Trouba thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Froman Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Brooks saying Rangers are "linked" to Trouba kist means he read us talking about it. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 The trouble with trading Shattenkirk and retaining a good sized chunk is that you then have to add a player to take up his roster spot. If that player is making 3m and you are retaining 3m from Shattenkirk, you're effectively paying 6m for a player no better than Shattenkirk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 The trouble with trading Shattenkirk and retaining a good sized chunk is that you then have to add a player to take up his roster spot. If that player is making 3m and you are retaining 3m from Shattenkirk, you're effectively paying 6m for a player no better than Shattenkirk. Why do they have to take a roster player back? There's a logjam on D already and there are prospects knocking on the door. There's also talk about Trouba and Fox, both RHD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now