Drew a Penalty Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Highlighting some of the names that haven't already been discussed ad nauseam. Vince doesn't have anything new about them. Ducks Quote A sleeper trade candidate to keep an eye on is veteran RW Jakob Silfverberg, who’s in the final year of a contract that pays him $5.25 million annually and has some of the best metrics on this floundering Ducks’ team. Predators Quote Michael McCarron ($775,000 AAV) and Yakov Trenin ($1.7 million) are a couple other modestly priced forwards on expiring contracts. The former ranks second behind Novak with a 54.77% xGF, albeit in a limited fourth-line center role, while the latter is a physical presence, aggressive forechecker and above-average skater. Neither are going to put up many points (McCarron has 12 this season, while Trenin has 11), but both would bring versatile elements New York wants to infuse into its bottom six. If you dig even deeper, Nashville has a couple forwards in the AHL who could be had for cheap. Liam Foudy is a former first-round pick who played 72 games with the Columbus Blue Jackets last season but hasn’t been able to stick with the Preds this year, while Mark Jankowski is a 29-year-old center who brings a big body (6-foot-4, 212 pounds) and has been one of the AHL’s leading scorers with 46 points (15 goals and 31 assists) through 38 games. He also has a 17-goal NHL season on his resume back in 2017-18 with the Calgary Flames. Novak is the only obvious top-nine choice for the Rangers, but there are some interesting bargain buys to consider if Drury is turned off by the prices for more established players. Senators Quote Another Ottawa forward to monitor is winger Dominik Kubalik. His production is way down this year – 12 points (nine goals and three assists) through 43 games played – but he scored 30 goals as a 2019-20 rookie in Chicago and 20 last season with Detroit. With an expiring contract and a manageable $2.5 million AAV, the 28-year-old could be a buy-low candidate. Sharks Quote There are also a couple of centers who could be viewed as options for the third line if Grier is willing to let them go with one year remaining on their contracts. Mikael Granlund, who has been San Jose’s best points-per-game player with 29 (five goals and 24 assists) through 38 games played, has been out since Jan. 16 with a left-shoulder injury but is expected back soon. His $5 million AAV for this season and the next would create a squeeze, which makes him somewhat of a long-shot candidate. But the skilled 30-year-old would certainly qualify as a 3C upgrade. Nico Sturm is another interesting man in the middle. He hasn’t provided much offensive production, with seven points (three goals and four assists) through 32 games, but the 28-year-old is the type of two-way player the Rangers value. He played that exact third-line center role in Colorado when the Avalanche won the Stanley Cup two years ago, and with a $2 million AAV through the end of the next season, his cap hit is doable. The centers would cost more than the UFA-bound wingers, but all besides Granlund could probably be had for mid-round picks and/or mid-tier prospects. Perhaps Drury could even talk Grier into a two-for-one type of deal. (Duclair and Sturm, anyone?) Kraken Quote But perhaps the most intriguing option would be Yanni Gourde, who won two Cups in Tampa Bay while playing on the same line with current Blueshirt Barclay Goodrow. He’s proven to be a championship-caliber 3C and would fit New York's preference for a hard-working, two-way center to a tee. The 32-year-old is under contract through the end of the next season for a $5.167 million AAV, which adds a layer of complication. But he’s in the midst of a down year, and if the Kraken don’t see him sticking around, perhaps Drury could talk them into moving on without having to surrender his very best assets. It will be a few weeks before Seattle declares its intentions, but GM Ron Francis should be on Drury’s speed dial. https://www.lohud.com/story/sports/nhl/rangers/2024/02/08/ny-rangers-possible-trade-deadline-partners-latest-news/72509626007/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 If we get Gourde, I'll have to duck as Keith's weenie may poke down Nicholls Road into my backyard! 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Kubalik seems like a great option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 I know he’s got a new extension kicking in at $4 mill per year next year but I still think Ryan Hartman can really help this Rangers team. Tough as fuck. Can definitely play the 3c role or slide over to RW when needed. Loads of experience as well. He’s only 29 and performs to a $4 mill a year contract. i know he’s not everyone’s favorite but of what’s available I’d take my chances with him. Certainly over Henrique. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 56 minutes ago, Kevin said: I know he’s got a new extension kicking in at $4 mill per year next year but I still think Ryan Hartman can really help this Rangers team. Tough as fuck. Can definitely play the 3c role or slide over to RW when needed. Loads of experience as well. He’s only 29 and performs to a $4 mill a year contract. i know he’s not everyone’s favorite but of what’s available I’d take my chances with him. Certainly over Henrique. Why don't you think he's everyone's favorite? I don't know much bout him honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 I think he signed until he's 34, and I'm not really interested in that. We have too many players signed into their mid-30s already. "only" 29... 29 isn't young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Pass on all of these. I like Trenin, he’s just not what they need right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: Pass on all of these. I like Trenin, he’s just not what they need right now The only one from the article mentioned that I really like is Novak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 If Seattle is in sell mode, I’d be asking about the price on McCann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 18 minutes ago, Pete said: I think he signed until he's 34, and I'm not really interested in that. We have too many players signed into their mid-30s already. "only" 29... 29 isn't young. Sounding younger and younger every day… regardless, I think over the next 3.5 years he lives up to his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 35 minutes ago, jsm7302 said: Why don't you think he's everyone's favorite? I don't know much bout him honestly. He’s not going to come in and wow you with any particular part of his game. But he’s definitely a rugged forward that’s capable defensively and has some offensive aspects to his game. Heart and soul kinda player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 6 minutes ago, Kevin said: Sounding younger and younger every day… regardless, I think over the next 3.5 years he lives up to his contract. I worry about guys like these bodies breaking down. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 5 hours ago, Drew a Penalty said: Jakob Silfverberg I brought him up months ago. Hasn't been doing much for a few years now, but the guy is a playoff beast. If it's for nothing, he's a guy I'd rather have as a depth piece than a Brodzinski. But definitely not at the top of a desired list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Totem transactions will do nothing for the Rangers. "playoff beasts" 6 years ago are more likely to resemble their current production than the "beast" they used to be. Bringing in highly productive players might help but it didn't last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 3 hours ago, Br4d said: Totem transactions will do nothing for the Rangers. "playoff beasts" 6 years ago are more likely to resemble their current production than the "beast" they used to be. Bringing in highly productive players might help but it didn't last season. Tarasenko without Kane would've been more successful imo. Too many hole fillers and not enough holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 6 hours ago, jsm7302 said: Tarasenko without Kane would've been more successful imo. Too many hole fillers and not enough holes. Desperation. That's the only explanation for the hoops the Rangers jumped through to bring in Patrick Kane. The kids were looking pretty good before the Tarasenko and Kane trades and then they just vanished for the rest of the season. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Br4d said: Desperation. That's the only explanation for the hoops the Rangers jumped through to bring in Patrick Kane. The kids were looking pretty good before the Tarasenko and Kane trades and then they just vanished for the rest of the season. You can’t blame Drury for that though. There isn’t a GM in this league that would turn down either of the trades made. We got Tarasenko for a dime on a dollar and then Kane for pennies. It cost us nothing prospect wise and hardly anything draft pick wise. And both players came with salary retained. That’s why I don’t like to talk shit about taking a swing at it. Had we gotten out of our own way in that Game 7 in Jersey, who knows what could have happened? I don’t for a second blame them for taking a major swing at it. It didn’t work, sure. But it’s not as if it set us back or anything because of what we lost. And honestly, FWIW, Kane and Tarasenko were both the least of our problems in that series. Edited February 9 by RichieNextel305 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 16 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said: You can’t blame Drury for that though. There isn’t a GM in this league that would turn down either of the trades made. We got Tarasenko for a dime on a dollar and then Kane for pennies. It cost us nothing prospect wise and hardly anything draft pick wise. And both players came with salary retained. That’s why I don’t like to talk shit about taking a swing at it. Had we gotten out of our own way in that Game 7 in Jersey, who knows what could have happened? I don’t for a second blame them for taking a major swing at it. It didn’t work, sure. But it’s not as if it set us back or anything because of what we lost. And honestly, FWIW, Kane and Tarasenko were both the least of our problems in that series. Tarasenko meshed well but GG tried to fit a square peg in a round hole with Kane. Kane didn’t fit with that team and that was a major problem. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Couldn’t have known until after he got here. And I wouldn’t say he didn’t fit. For instance, I still think signing him was something that should have been looked at more earlier in the year. That said, I get the resistance on our end due to the surgery. And even when he was here, I don’t look at it as if he didn’t fit; I look at it as if he was compromised because of his hip issue. And even with that, he still produced decently here and had some good games in the playoffs. I don’t regret either deal. Again, you won’t find a GM in this league that would have done things any differently than Drury did last year when you take into account how cheap it was to bring both those guys in here with retained salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 The Rangers gave up a 1st and a 3rd for Tarasenko and Mikola rentals. That is a lot of future value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 8 minutes ago, Br4d said: The Rangers gave up a 1st and a 3rd for Tarasenko and Mikola rentals. That is a lot of future value. That trade worked pretty well. Tarasenko started to get his feet and Mikola was serviceable. The team seemed to nosedive post Kane trade. I get why they did it but at the same time, just because you can doesn't mean you should. If you stood back and saw what was developing before your eyes, adding another top 6 forward post Tarasenko trade was not the play to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Probably would have worked out better with Kane if GG had him with Panarin for more than 30 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 5 minutes ago, jsm7302 said: That trade worked pretty well. Tarasenko started to get his feet and Mikola was serviceable. The team seemed to nosedive post Kane trade. I get why they did it but at the same time, just because you can doesn't mean you should. If you stood back and saw what was developing before your eyes, adding another top 6 forward post Tarasenko trade was not the play to make. Hindsight is 20/20, and as said, it’s completely understandable for them to trade for Kane. You can’t beat them up for that and it’s just unfortunate that it didn’t work out. What I’d have really loved to see them do was instead of adding Kane, maybe add to the deal they made with St. Louis for Tank and Mikkola and get Barbashev too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 56 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said: Couldn’t have known until after he got here. And I wouldn’t say he didn’t fit. For instance, I still think signing him was something that should have been looked at more earlier in the year. That said, I get the resistance on our end due to the surgery. And even when he was here, I don’t look at it as if he didn’t fit; I look at it as if he was compromised because of his hip issue. And even with that, he still produced decently here and had some good games in the playoffs. I don’t regret either deal. Again, you won’t find a GM in this league that would have done things any differently than Drury did last year when you take into account how cheap it was to bring both those guys in here with retained salary. Looks back at the Kane rumors thread. Lots of peeps didnt want him, especially after the Tarasenko trade. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 42 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said: Hindsight is 20/20, and as said, it’s completely understandable for them to trade for Kane. You can’t beat them up for that and it’s just unfortunate that it didn’t work out. What I’d have really loved to see them do was instead of adding Kane, maybe add to the deal they made with St. Louis for Tank and Mikkola and get Barbashev too. Tbh, it isn't hindsight because I said it prior to and post trade. I get why they did it (cost to acquire) but it just wasn't what the team needed, BUT we cant change the past and I'm not the GM so hopefully lessons have been learned and we can address complementing the current roster and not remaking it at the deadline. We all know the two MAJOR holes on the roster; this should be an easy deadline for Drury. Address the two holes with serviceable NHLers, preferably at least one with speed and one with scoring touch. 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