Trade Matt Gilroy

Hockey, like most sports these days, is a business and at times, then a sport. The Rangers have a player in Matt Gilroy that needs to become a victim of asset management. What the Rangers have on their hands is a talented player (asset) who has value but whose value is fast fading. What makes trading Gilroy the sensible thing to do is that he is not a need in the organisation but is something (asset – there’s that word again) that can bring something of value back to the organisation. He cost nothing but cablevision dollars btu could bring back a valuable draft pick.

The former college standout is being wasted in New York. With Mike Del Zotto and to a lesser extent Marc Staal and Michal Roszival on the roster the need for offensive blue liners is not as great as it once was and while his defense has improved it will never be Gilroy’s calling card. As it is, the Rangers have a trio of solid defenseman in the minors learning their trade (Valentenko, Kundratek, McDonagh) and another in Mcilrath eventually on his way from junior. The Rangers should get something back for Gilroy while his exploits at the NCAA level are still fresh in other GM’s mind. They also need to be aware that should he continue to be scratched or receive little ice time he won’t be looking to re-sign in NY come the end of the season either.

The Rangers have done a good job of drafting in recent years and a talented kid with an expiring contract should be able to fetch a 2nd round pick (many teams need an offensive blue liner). At this stage it’s worth noting if Dominic Moore can get a 2nd pick in return so can Gilroy. Let’s not forget how well the Rangers have done with 2nd round picks either. Brandon Dubinsky and Artem Anisimov are tearing it up on the Rangers and Ethan Werek looks a keeper in junior, just to name a few. It’s in a situation like Gilroy’s  where asset management should come into play. It makes sense to trade Gilroy for the organisation’s long term benefit. He isn’t being deployed properly, is wasting cap space that could be crucial later in the year and if he continues to play (or not as the case may be) then his trade value will become weaker than the Greek economy. It hurts to lose, even give up on a talented prospect but in this case it’s worth the hurt. The Rangers need to do what’s best with a talent that isn’t being used efficiently.

10 Responses to “Trade Matt Gilroy”

  1. Dave says:

    I’m not exactly attached to him, and I think he deserves a shot on an organization that actually has the room for him. If they can even get a 3rd round pick, it’s worth it.

  2. opie says:

    no one ever talks about Mikhail Pashnin I would rank him higher than Valentenko, Kundratek, McDonagh I know he is in the big K and not currently signed but he will be in camp next fall
    Mcilrath has been playing terable in juniors I would not be surprised if he became another bust of a first round pick and never plaY A game for the rangers

    • Nick says:

      You must not have watched Mcilraths last six games he and his team started slow. Pashnin would be a nice surprise you must watch alot of Russian hockey to rate him above Valentenko. McDonagh looks to be the bust out of any of the guys you mentioned 1 point and -7 in Hartford.

    • Dave says:

      You should check the Prospects Stats page. McIlrath is doing just fine after a slow start.

  3. Brian says:

    I don’t get this at all. Yes, he had a rough first full season going straight from the NCAA to the NHL. It’s 10 games into the season and he hasn’t looked out of place in the 8 games he’s played. This kid has talent even if his best games so far have been preseason games. Most of the games he’s played have been on the L-side which is not the natural side for a R-hand shooting defenceman. I wouldn’t be so quick to give up on him and none of the prospects mentioned have surpassed him at this point. I thought the reason that Sanguinetti became expendable was because Gilroy is slated to be our R-handed point man.

    Here’s a thought – why not give him ample playing time to see what he can do before trading him for a draft pick that has a 25% chance of ever sniffing the NHL.

    • Dav says:

      I think the point of the post was that he’s not going to get playing time with the Rangers (that’s what it looks like), so get something of value for him now while you can.

    • Chris says:

      Brian, it doesnt seem you got the point of the post.

      The point is that Gilroy, however talented he may be, is not going to get the ice-time to prove himself in this organization. It has nothing to do with people ‘giving up on him’ because of his play… its because hes just not ‘needed’ by the organization right now.

      It would actually be beneficial for HIM to be traded osmewhere that he’d actually get to play (see: Petr Prucha).

      I like Gilroy, a lot… but Im totally in agreement that the Rangers need to trade him away now and get something in return before they lose what value he has and he walks as a FA in July.

  4. Mark says:

    Agreed with Dave… get something while his value is still high… However I would like to see him get a legit shot. Sit Eminger and let Gilroy play a little bit. If he falters we trade him away. if he doesn’t we ahve 2 point men and some solid sparks on the blue line. It is never a bad thing to have too many good young defenseman.

    Also on a side note to this strand, please relax on labelling people busts. It is the first couple of months of a young season. McIlrath and McDonaugh are in their first years… and McDonaugh can not be a bust, we didn’t draft him. He was a throw in on a salary dump trade so we can sign Gaborik… if he turns out to be a solid NHLer he is actually a steal, no shot of being a bust…

    • becky says:

      Mark, I agree with you, I’m just worried that if he gets playing time and doesn’t do well, it’ll be detrimental to them getting someone of higher value for him. Obviously these execs aren’t stupid, but it’s almost like now you can say “hey we’re giving you a great defenseman because we have no room to play him” rather than “we’re a little afraid he won’t do so well so please take him and give us a lot.”