RichieNextel305 Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Staple also mentioned this in his most recent article in the Athletic. Quote The Rangers, dealing with multiple injuries to key players and leading the Metropolitan Division by eight points, are searching for serious reinforcements ahead of the March 8 trade deadline. And with Filip Chytil out for the season, center is a clear need for New York. To that end, one player the Blueshirts have their eye on, per multiple reports, is Philadelphia Flyers center Scott Laughton. According to Arthur Staple of The Athletic, a recent report that the Rangers are unwilling to trade their 2024 first-round pick at the deadline is inaccurate, meaning they could potentially dangle it for Laughton or another target. Laughton, 29, has seven goals and 17 assists this season for the Flyers and is signed through the 2025-26 campaign -- with an annual cap hit of $3 million. https://sny.tv/articles/rangers-2024-trade-deadline-buzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 He’d fit well and he has term. But does Philly trade him when they’re currently in a playoff spot and also within the division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Heard Dave Pagnotta talk about this earlier today. Solid player, but he's inconsistent as hell.. NGL, the thought of a Laughton centered line with Vesey and Goodrow isn't terrible.. I think we either need to get a real 2c with a depth wing or focus on a proven commodity W and find a 3/4 center, I think the market at W might be a bit easier to navigate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Why is Philly trading him? Aren't they competing for a playoff spot as well??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJWantsTheCup Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 Unless he comes really cheap I say pass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 1 hour ago, Ozzy said: Why is Philly trading him? Aren't they competing for a playoff spot as well??? Issues with the coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 32 minutes ago, Pete said: Issues with the coach. If Torts doesn't like him, there's probably a good reason. Red Flag Alert! 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 There's no point in acquiring an inconsistent player to play a key role in the playoffs. We have plenty of choices down at Hartford who can fill that role. I think the floor for an acquisition at this point should be a Tarasenko/Vatrano level player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty9 Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 The senators aren't giving Tarasenko away,he going to cost the rangers a lot and so is Vatrano Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 If Tarasenko says he only wants to be traded to the Rangers then they’ll get him for a prayer and a song like they did Kane last year. That’s their only hope for getting him. A 1st or anything substantial for him is a complete pass I doubt Ottawa wants to pay the rest of that contract if they’re out of the race, and they are at Tarasenko’s mercy for where he’ll approve a trade to. A 4th round pick and the Rangers don’t even need retention 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 2 hours ago, BrooksBurner said: If Tarasenko says he only wants to be traded to the Rangers then they’ll get him for a prayer and a song like they did Kane last year. That’s their only hope for getting him. A 1st or anything substantial for him is a complete pass I doubt Ottawa wants to pay the rest of that contract if they’re out of the race, and they are at Tarasenko’s mercy for where he’ll approve a trade to. A 4th round pick and the Rangers don’t even need retention The money means nothing for them, they have new ownership. It's not the point of paying him, it's the point of getting something for him. It's asset management. If he was smart he would approve a trade to the team most likely to gas up his stats on his way to free agency. That just might be the Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 11 minutes ago, Pete said: The money means nothing for them, they have new ownership. It's not the point of paying him, it's the point of getting something for him. It's asset management. If he was smart he would approve a trade to the team most likely to gas up his stats on his way to free agency. That just might be the Rangers. He'll probably look to be a focal point on a PP1 if that's how he approaches it, which wouldn't be here. I don't want him anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 43 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: He'll probably look to be a focal point on a PP1 if that's how he approaches it, which wouldn't be here. I don't want him anyway I might challenge that a little bit. There's not many teams who are favored to win a cup who are messing with power play one right now. If he approves a trade to a bubble team like Pittsburgh, well then more power to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 7 minutes ago, Pete said: I might challenge that a little bit. There's not many teams who are favored to win a cup who are messing with power play one right now. If he approves a trade to a bubble team like Pittsburgh, well then more power to you. Winning a Cup and gassing up stats aren't mutually inclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 They aren't. But the Rangers might be the only team with serious Cup aspirations who now definitely need a top 6 wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted February 17 Author Share Posted February 17 10 minutes ago, Pete said: They aren't. But the Rangers might be the only team with serious Cup aspirations who now definitely need a top 6 wing. Plus, and I think this has been widely reported, Tarasenko greatly enjoyed his time here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 I dont think rangers are as close as we think they are. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 5 hours ago, Albatrosss said: I dont think rangers are as close as we think they are. The Rangers think they're closer than you think they are. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 1 hour ago, Pete said: The Rangers think they're closer than you think they are. They might not think that they are that close, but so long as they don't think that they are going to get closer, they will make a significant trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 14 minutes ago, Sod16 said: They might not think that they are that close, but so long as they don't think that they are going to get closer, they will make a significant trade. Teams that don't think they are close don't let it be known that they're "all in". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 3 hours ago, Pete said: Teams that don't think they are close don't let it be known that they're "all in". Of course they’re all in. 15 other teams are all in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 5 minutes ago, Albatrosss said: Of course they’re all in. 15 other teams are all in. And of those 16, how many can afford to bring in Tarasenko? Then, how many need him? And there's a lot of players in this boat - pretty much anyone making over 3M has good control over where they land right now simply because the cap gonna cap. Laughton has less because he hasn't got an NMC/NTC, but if the Flyers are going to trade him, he's probably going to a contender. If the Rangers think they're one piece away....well....i gotta think they're close to right about that. it's a good time to be traded to the Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 I really liked what Tarasenko brought last time, pretty gritty who wasn't afraid to take the puck towards the net and go to the front. I was surprised he played with such an edge, I always thought of him more as a finesse player. I would take him back in a second, especially if the cost is reasonable. I would also agree we're probably at the top of his list. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted February 17 Author Share Posted February 17 2 hours ago, Scott said: I really liked what Tarasenko brought last time, pretty gritty who wasn't afraid to take the puck towards the net and go to the front. I was surprised he played with such an edge, I always thought of him more as a finesse player. I would take him back in a second, especially if the cost is reasonable. I would also agree we're probably at the top of his list. Yep. Tarasenko isn’t a 35-40 goal guy anymore. But I was really happy with his all-around game last year. I think he’d come back in and fit in seamlessly with this team. And in the right environment, he’s still someone who can put up maybe 25 goals and then be relied upon in the playoffs to pot a few. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 I'm not trading a first for Laughton. No way. That's ridiculous. 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