Mercogliano 8 Early Trade Deadline Targets for Rangers

[Br4d]

Just now, Rangers said:

Give them Chytil

 

More like Laffy and no and besides Pens probably say no also.

[Rangers]

Just now, Br4d said:

 

More like Laffy and no and besides Pens probably say no also.

I was just joking

[Sharpshooter]

Probably Duclair or Vatrano reunion.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Long live the King said:

 

More scoring is more scoring.  Wheeler has at least figured out where to go when he catches up to the play.  He's too slow to slot into the 3rd line role and at this point I don't see them moving him out of the line up.

I guess my point is I don't see the reason to remake three lines if you don't have to.

[RangersLEETCH]

I guess I’m old school but “if it ain’t broke don’t try to fix it” comes to mind here. Rangers have a ways to go a lot of hockey left to play. They are the number one team right now which is pretty good right? Yeah pretty good #1 out of 32? Thats pretty good to me. I know there are options out there. It is a great problem to have! You have to feel great

as a Rangers fan right now. Let’s see what happens at the end of Feb, beginning of March 2024. Let us see where the Rangers are then. Something tells me they will be just fine. 
Let’s go Rangers, tonight crush that Florida Panther and their rats! 
LETS GO RANGERS!!! 
Ranger Ed 

[Br4d]

1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said:

Probably Duclair or Vatrano reunion.

 

Vatrano retained would be good.  He's got this season and next on the contract and both affordable.

 

Pure north-south player and probably right in Laviolette's wheelhouse.

[Sharpshooter]

Just now, Br4d said:

 

Vatrano retained would be good.  He's got this season and next on the contract and both affordable.

 

Pure north-south player and probably right in Laviolette's wheelhouse.

Yes, and was a good fit here anyway, and adding another guy that can shoot. 

[torontonyr]

I actually think this team should pull the trigger early, or play it safe.

 

They need time to gel and ensure we're not messing with the recipe

 

[The Dude]

9 hours ago, Valriera said:

Duclair remains the smart money pick as of now but, need to wait for chytil’s situation to work out 

Duclair has 7 goals, 6 assists, minus 9 in a top line role with prime PP minutes. 

 

Wheeler is at 5 goals,  9 assists , +1 and minimal PP time while playing a decent chunk of his season on the 3rd line.  

 

Duclair was looking hot at the start of the season,  but has come back to earth. And Wheeler isn't hurting line 1 at all. 

 

I'm not sure Duclair fits a 3rd line role. Wheeler doesn't either. Target is 3C and 3RW with potential slide up the lineup if needed. 

 

[The Dude]

You guys are aiming pretty high. I'm ready for something less attractive. More like a Frederick Gaudreau.  3C making 2.1 for a bunch more years. Pretty disposable if something better comes along in the future. Decent at faceoffs, blocks shots has had small success offensively as his career went on. 30-40 point center. 

 

The Wild stink and should be in sell mode. He'd probably come extremely cheap. But he's signed for 4 more years. 

 

I think this is the type of player the Rangers are in the market for. Cost wise anyway. 

 

If the price range is Lindholm or Monahan,  why not just pay for Gourde, who is the superior fit due to his versatility and I believe has one more year left on his contract. You get more than a rental,  you get a winner and next year he should ball out in a contract year.  I'd think the cost in trade would be similar to Lindholm. 

Edited December 30, 2023 by The Dude

[Valriera]

7 hours ago, The Dude said:

You guys are aiming pretty high. I'm ready for something less attractive. More like a Frederick Gaudreau.  3C making 2.1 for a bunch more years. Pretty disposable if something better comes along in the future. Decent at faceoffs, blocks shots has had small success offensively as his career went on. 30-40 point center. 

 

The Wild stink and should be in sell mode. He'd probably come extremely cheap. But he's signed for 4 more years. 

 

I think this is the type of player the Rangers are in the market for. Cost wise anyway. 

 

If the price range is Lindholm or Monahan,  why not just pay for Gourde, who is the superior fit due to his versatility and I believe has one more year left on his contract. You get more than a rental,  you get a winner and next year he should ball out in a contract year.  I'd think the cost in trade would be similar to Lindholm. 

Gourde is a good fit too but unsure if he’s even available

[Pete]

They can't afford Gourde without shedding salary.  

[BrooksBurner]

Rangers would need at least a million retained on Gourde. Probably more considering cap impact next season too. Seattle has started to turn it around is on the playoff bubble with a lot of season to go. I don’t see them selling right now, and don’t see them eating at their cap with retained money next season. They are going to have cap to be major players in the FA market.

[RangersIn7]

2 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Rangers would need at least a million retained on Gourde. Probably more considering cap impact next season too. Seattle has started to turn it around is on the playoff bubble with a lot of season to go. I don’t see them selling right now, and don’t see them eating at their cap with retained money next season. They are going to have cap to be major players in the FA market.

I agree on this. I don’t expect them to be sellers now that they are playing better. Especially on Gourde.

[BrooksBurner]

Regardless of my hesitation to buy in to this team being as good as their record, I also believe in the philosophy that when you run at the top of the league, you push your chips in the middle and hope for the best almost regardless of circumstance. The guys in the room deserve that. Drury needs to be all in, and he shouldn’t give two shits about losing a first or possibly even two if the return is right (non-rental).

Edited December 30, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[RangersIn7]

7 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Regardless of my hesitation to buy in to this team being as good as their record, I also believe in the philosophy that when you run at the top of the league, you push your chips in the middle and hope for the best almost regardless of circumstance. The guys in the room deserve that. Drury needs to be all in, and he shouldn’t give two shits about losing a first or possibly even two if the return is right (non-rental).

Yeah.

 

There’s only a smaller number of circumstances under which you can really trade 1sts.

 

They are in one now.

If you’re really good, playing well, and at or near the top of the standings, you can do it. 

[Br4d]

The Rangers already traded 1sts the last couple of seasons.  They used up the stash of easy boosts.

 

Before anybody says "but this year is special", that's what we all said the last two years also.

 

If the Rangers really need to rebalance they should trade frontline assets for frontline assets.

 

It's not like we don't have the most valuable D in the NHL because we do, alongside maybe 4 or 5 high quality LW's and prospects.

Edited December 30, 2023 by Br4d

[The Dude]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

They can't afford Gourde without shedding salary.  

If Chytil is done, I think they can .  It's only a few hundred k more than Lindholm, whom everyone has been talking about. 

 

Wish it were easier to dump Goodrow. It would make things easier. No good team would want that contract. 

 

I know you like Goodrow,  but I really don't see him as a must keep. Especially since he hasn't been pushed up the lineup (with these injuries) like I would expect a player that expensive to be. 

 

I feel like Laviolette isn't as big of a fan of his as I expected.  I thought he'd have him up and down the lineup more than GG did. For some reason he's stuck on the 4th line . 

 

Bonino as the 4 C with Pitlick and Vesey  is pretty much the same as it is with Goodrow as the C . Only cheaper and better defensively.. 

 

Moving Goodrow and putting Chytil on the shelf for the season would open up a shit ton of cap space. 

Edited December 30, 2023 by The Dude

[The Dude]

I'm OK with trading a 1st. But not for a guy we already traded a 1st for. Meaning Tarasenko. 2- 1sts for 4 months of Tarasenko is bad. 

 

 

[Br4d]

57 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I'm OK with trading a 1st. But not for a guy we already traded a 1st for. Meaning Tarasenko. 2- 1sts for 4 months of Tarasenko is bad. 

 

 

 

This is faulty logic.  2 1sts for 4 months of anybody is bad.  If Tarasenko is the best available and the Rangers have to give up a 1st you go get Tarasenko.

 

I don't want to trade any more 1sts at this point because I don't want to live through the lean years that will come from doing this over and over again.

[The Dude]

17 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

This is faulty logic.  2 1sts for 4 months of anybody is bad.  If Tarasenko is the best available and the Rangers have to give up a 1st you go get Tarasenko.

 

I don't want to trade any more 1sts at this point because I don't want to live through the lean years that will come from doing this over and over again.

It's not faulty logic if you could have had the player as a free agent. If you traded or maybe even bought out Goodrow he would have been here at game 1. 

 

Goodrow is one of the few Drury mistakes along with Buchnevich. But it seems like it's one he won't eat, because then it's an admission of a mistake. That or nobody wants that contract.  

 

Tarasenko wanted back in NY. My impression is that Drury wasn't able to find a taker for Goodrow in order to clear cap space to bring him back.

 

Tarasenko took a long time to sign anywhere. He almost went to Carolina. Then he fired his agent. And he wound up in Ottawa.  Who the hell signs with Ottawa? 

 

He was waiting for the Rangers.  Maybe he signed with Ottawa to eventually facilitate a retained salary trade to the Rangers?

 

It's not faulty logic. It's good asset management. You don't trade 2 first rounders for a guy you should have signed in free agency.

 

Even with retained salary it's not good. Only way I am ok with it is if he agrees to an extension of some sort. Not sure how that could work.  That or they get additional pieces in the trade AND Ottawa takes a big salary back (Goodrow). 

 

 

 

[Phil]

Jordan Greenway. One more year at $3 million.

[Dunny]

Lindholm would be incredible.

 

Tell Phillip to stay home. Go all in for Lindholm now, just keep Othmann and Kakko out of the deal. Lindholm also playing for a potentially massive contract, all kinds of motivation.

[RangersIn7]

17 hours ago, The Dude said:

It's not faulty logic if you could have had the player as a free agent. If you traded or maybe even bought out Goodrow he would have been here at game 1. 

 

Goodrow is one of the few Drury mistakes along with Buchnevich. But it seems like it's one he won't eat, because then it's an admission of a mistake. That or nobody wants that contract.  

 

Tarasenko wanted back in NY. My impression is that Drury wasn't able to find a taker for Goodrow in order to clear cap space to bring him back.

 

Tarasenko took a long time to sign anywhere. He almost went to Carolina. Then he fired his agent. And he wound up in Ottawa.  Who the hell signs with Ottawa? 

 

He was waiting for the Rangers.  Maybe he signed with Ottawa to eventually facilitate a retained salary trade to the Rangers?

 

It's not faulty logic. It's good asset management. You don't trade 2 first rounders for a guy you should have signed in free agency.

 

Even with retained salary it's not good. Only way I am ok with it is if he agrees to an extension of some sort. Not sure how that could work.  That or they get additional pieces in the trade AND Ottawa takes a big salary back (Goodrow). 

 

 

 

It’s pretty fair to say Tank wanted to stay here. Whether or not he had the belief for whatever reason that the Rangers were trying to get it done, that IDK. But regardless, yes, I do believe he wanted to be here.

 

And I also agree in part that that’s why he picked Ottawa. 
Yes, they had the space to pay him good money. And yeah, he looked at the team and thought they might be pretty good. But he knew on a 1 year deal that if they were lousy, he’d easily be able to move. 
 

As for trading yet another 1st for him… yeah, it’s kind of a head scratcher and a bit hard to swallow if they were to do that. 
I don’t have an issue with them trading a 1st this year. This would be the time.
But 2 of them, in a year, for the same player, as a rental, twice?

Yeah… not great. 

[Pete]

I was not a fan of giving up more assets for Tarasenko but the more I think about it the more I realize you just have to take the name out of the equation.

 

They need a right wing with a shoot first mentality. If they kept Vatrano then maybe they don't get Tarasenko or Kane. They didn't keep either of those players, but I would trade for either of them today because either one of them will fill the role (Tarasenko moreso).

 

Point being, if you need to fill a role and you know it's going to cost you a first, a pick, and a prospect... Then you better get the best player available for that package, regardless if it's one that you let walk last year. That player was going to walk regardless, and you still need a player now, you don't cut your nose off despite your face.