And BTW...I am not saying deal for Thornton, as I said I could go either way on that one, but things are not a simple as sign this guy, or re-sign that guy, or get Nash to waive his NTC and then deal him.
If we sign Stall now this would be extension right? Meaning he will be making 5.5M next season? Am I wrong? I understand the big picture but it is what it is. We cannot trade our core for 38 year old players. This team came a long way to have Girardi, McD and Stall on D. I think that is great 3 Ds who know each other and know this organization so well. We can always add another Boyle or another Strallman if need be and anyone can play on third pair. Plus having guy like Stall on second D pair would be beneficial to other young Ds due to his experience. It is just great situation to have, how can we give that up? I am saying we cannot trade these players: Stepan, Krieder, Zuk, Brassard, Hagelin, St.Louis, D.Moore, Girardi, Stall, McD and probably John Moore. Everyone else including picks can go for the right deal.
Yes, his extension cap hit will start in October 2015 if we re-sign Staal. So you are in favor of re-signing Staal long term, that is cool. Honestly I am not sure where I stand on that. We would have Klein, Staal, Girardi, and McDonagh all locked up for 4 years or more. And Boyle and Moore (I assume he will get a two year bridge deal soon) for two years each. That's a lot of D locked up. Now sure we can flip Klein, but a lot of D locked up long term, and Girardi and Staal with NTC's (I assume Staal will get one in his extension). As for trading core players for 35 year old guys, I do think Brassard and Staal for Thornton is too much considering Thornton is 35, but again I really think it all comes down to what we plan to do with Staal. Most people would do Brassard for Thornton straight up, I know we have a love affair in here with Brass, but the guy is 27 and never had more than 47 points. Brass also will be getting a contract in the 4's somewhere real soon, maybe 4.5 +. So I would deal Brass for Thornton, the question is what else would be included. I do think Staal would be too much like I said, but it isn't crazy if we aren't going to re-sign Staal anyway, but I would want something else back with Thornton if we dealt those two guys for him. The other thing we need to remember is we have a lot of good young players. Let's not forget that. Stepan, Kreider, Zucc, Brass, Hags, Miller, Fast, Lindberg all under the age of 27. That is good youth. So we are not an old team. And if we did deal Brass for Thornton we would still have some good young players. I really could go either way on Thornton. I do think we could use a C upgrade, but I also think Brass and Staal is too much for him. I guess we'll see how this plays out.
The Rangers showed during the Stanley Cup Final that they lacked depth down the middle and that remains an issue after free agency started. (ESPN.com) The Rangers have Derek Stepan, Dominic Moore, JT Miller, Oscar Lindberg and Chris Mueller under contract at the center position. Derick Brassard is an RFA but expected to sign a multi-year deal. When asked who would replace Brad Richards down the middle, Alain Vigneault said that the Rangers had some options including Miller, Lindberg and Mueller. It’s been said that the Rangers hope JT Miller can fill that role and Vigneault has spoken about wanting to add young players to the lineup.
Would love to get E. Staal. Want no part of Thornton. Staal is younger, big, and tough. Can play with the big boys. Just what we need. Like I cautioned about before trading for Nash, don't look at the raw numbers. Look at how they play and what situations they were in. Thornton, at 35, and never a great playoff performer, never won anything, got 76 points but only 11 goals on a team loaded with speed and much more offense. SJ tied for 6th in goals scored. Staal played for a crap team who was near the bottom in goals scored. Maybe he also had a bit of down year for him, but that can happen on crap team. If 21 goals, 40 assists on a bad team is a down year, I'll take it. He also is a proven playoff performer and goes to the dirty areas. The deals some of you guys mentioned would be a home run in my humble opinion. Agreed Carolina would have to eat some salary.
62, i would love Staal as well, but why would Carolina trade him? if anything, they would want Marc so they can have all the Staal brothers on the same team.
I was responding to all the posts in this thread, but I did read somewhere, maybe a month ago, that Carolina might be willing to move him. Have no idea if that's true. If it is, I'd be all in, depending on the price of course. Regardless, I still do not want Thornton unless they practically gave him to us, which is not going to happen. Just makes no sense to me.
I agree not wanting Thornton. I simply don't want to trade young assets for a mid 30's player. However, he seems to get a bad rep during the playoffs. I don't follow the Sharks so can only go by stats, but he has 100pts in 132 PO games (0.76pt/gm). That is not bad AT ALL. Yes, he had poor playoffs this year, but it had been almost a decade since the last time he had a poor playoff showing. Compare that to Nash who has 18 in 41gms (0.44pt/gm) and the 2 are just not comparable.
and by the way, i was also in the camp that Thornton = PO choker, until a few weeks ago when the rumors first surfaced and looked at the numbers.
You know I'm with you on Nash, Thornton this year had 3 points and -6. I don't put much weight on +/-, but I'd have to look closer his year by year numbers. Were a lot of his points earlier in his career? Did he get them at important times of the games? I don't know the answers. You would hope Sather would do his homework and know this, just not go by name recognition. You might be right 31. Maybe his PO rep is overblown. I still don't want him. I could see his 76 points with SJ, especially another year older, translate into 56 points with us. I will say there is no easy answer to our center problem.
Yeah, Thornton is not an easy answer IMO. You could debate it either way, and as always it comes down to what we have to give up. I also think the first question Sather needs to answer is will he give Staal a Girardi type extension? That will really set the course with Staal. If we do not plan to re-sign him we should deal him. So to me make that decision first, and then have a plan to move forward.
Agree with you Chuck. I know Marc would like a deal done in the offseason, but I'd think Kreider, Zuc, and Brass have to be done 1st so Sather knows what he's working with. I know a new deal wouldn't affect this year's cap, but I don't think Sather is in any hurry with Staal.
Yeah, well Staal did say he wants a new deal prior to the season. But even if you forget that, I believe it is in our best interest to deal him this summer if we don't want to re-sign him long term, and we know that answer right now I bet. If we don't want to re-sign him I don't see the upside to waiting until the trade DL when it would be more difficult to replace a top 4 dman like Staal. Decide now Sather, and if no extension deal Staal now. To me that is the way this should be done. Sather knows if he wants to keep Staal long term. He has an idea what Staal will want. So decide and go from there. Because if he does not want to re-sign him then dealing Staal should become a high priority IMO.
It's beyond what the point totals would be for a Thornton or E. Staal, it's about what they can do skill wise to help their linemates out, more than a guy like Stepan could. They're just better players.
