Brooks: Go Get St. Louis

Larry Brooks of the NY Post, in a recent article, thinks the Rangers should go after Marty St. Louis. St. Louis, 34, would be the go-to scorer that this team, and Tortorella, desperately needs to stand a chance in the playoffs. His cap hit is $5.25 million for the next two years, so the Rangers would have to move some salary over to Tampa for St. Louis.

Let’s run through this a bit. Tampa would want some solid prospects/young players in return for St. Louis. So they will definitely ask for Staal, which the Rangers will say no to. Next down the line is a combination (2 or 3) of the following: Dubinsky, Callahan, Girardi, Grachev, Del Zotto. Now, knowing Glen Sather, he would consider this. The deal would likely be Dubinsky, Del Zotto and Rozsival (the only movable contract to make room), and probably a draft pick (2nd-4th rounder) for St. Louis.

Three words come to mind when I think of that deal: GOOD GOD NO!!!!!! St. Louis is thirty-freakin-four! I could understand this deal if he were much younger. But trading away two or three solid young players, players that are under 25 and will probably be on the team for a long time to come, for two years of St. Louis is blasphemy. Yes, he would be the go-to guy for putting the puck in the net, but plugging that hole and opening up others with the departure of whoever goes to Tampa will probably put the Rangers in a worse-off spot. The thing with the Rangers is that they need the high profile scorer IN ADDITION TO the current team. Like it or not, this is not a Stanley Cup contending team, nor will it be next year, with St. Louis (and subsequently without whichever roster players are dealt). I will put into question Sather’s ability (well, further put into question) as a GM if he makes that kind of deal.

Side note: To all of you who want a major shakeup of the team, yes I agree. But the shakeup should be of the big name “stars” with the bloated contracts, not the young guys who we have all enjoyed watching develop before our eyes this year, or the guys that the Rangers have seen grow up in the minors/juniors.

Now, the article did mention something else that was worth noting, about the possibility of acquiring Alexander Radulov, bringing him back to the NHL after his one-year hiatus in the KHL:

If not St. Louis, the Rangers should immediately turn their focus toward acquiring Nashville’s Alexander Radulov, who has one year at $918,587 remaining on the contract he ignored in order to play this season in the KHL.

The NHL wants him back. Given the league’s take-no-prisoners negotiating approach, the Russians would be wise to find the way to make it happen, what with the 2014 Olympics in Sochi now a Gary Bettman bargaining chip. Radulov, a top-end talent, will be 23 next month. Pretty much everyone would be on the table then on the Rangers’ side.

Now this is the type of deal that I am a big fan of. In 52 GP for the Salavat Yulaev Ufa, Radulov put up 22-26-48 and 92 PIMS. The kid is 23, and, like Brooks said, would come on the cheap side for the season. He’s 6’1 190, so he’s not a little guy that will get pushed around. An even bigger plus? I don’t think he would cost the Rangers any youth or prospects. I believe it would just be a buyout of his KHL contract (someone correct me if I’m wrong please).

Where would Radulov fit in? Well, right where Zherdev or Antropov used to play. If the Rangers can get Radulov, I see no reason to bring either of the Niks back, especially with Anisimov showing the poise he did in his playing time in Game 7. The signing of Radulov, coupled with Anisimov playing full time next year, and the non-signing of the Niks, saves the Rangers about $3 million in much needed cap room. This saved cap room allows them to resign Betts, Sjostrom, Callahan and Dubinsky in the offseason, and gives them some breathing room when Girardi and Staal are up for new contracts at the end of next season.

So to this, I have four words: GO GET ‘IM SLATS!

Disclaimer: This does not fall under the Rumors category, because it is pure speculation of certain circumstances. This is just analysis of those circumstances and the related situations/results if either of these deals go through.

Comments are closed.