buy discount cialis

The Obligatory Bobby Ryan Post

As per Nick Kypreos, the Anaheim Ducks are shopping star RW Bobby Ryan. Ryan is an elite talent and he is incredibly young, just 24 years old. The former second overall pick in 2005 has had a bit of a rough go of it to start the year, with “just” 11 points (7-4-11) in 23 games thus far. That is a far cry from his usual output of about 35-30-65, but it still puts him on pace for just under 30 goals, and just under 50 points. Not too shabby, but not worth the $5.1 million contract he has through the 2014-2015 season.

Let’s start with what a package for Ryan would be. We can start with the packages for Ilya Kovalchuk and Marian Hossa, which included two young NHL caliber players, a top prospect, and a first round pick. However, this trade is not like the Kovalchuk or Hossa trades. Kovalchuk and Hossa were headed towards unrestricted free agency, and were not 24 years old. Ryan hasn’t even peaked yet and is under contract for another three years after this one. The price will be higher.

From a Rangers standpoint, the conversation begins with a Brandon Dubinsky/Artem Anisimov/Derek Stepan, a Chris Kreider/Christian Thomas, and a first round pick. The Ducks also need a defenseman, so expect a Dan Girardi/Mike Sauer/Ryan McDonagh/Dylan McIlrath to also be discussed in any potential trade. Looks like with a package of Dubinsky, Sauer, Kreider, and a first, we have reached the requirements of this sort of trade. But that price seems very steep.

Let’s take a step back and realize that those forwards are top nine wingers, and the defensemen are top four defensemen. This has already been established league wide. Including both in a trade with Kreider is a severe¬†over payment¬†by the Rangers. In actuality the Rangers would be more inclined to include someone like Ryan Bourque, who is far from a sure thing, in the deal should it include two high quality NHL players. As the quality of NHL caliber talent provided goes up, the quality of prospects provided goes down. It’s an inverse relationship.

Of course, if the Rangers are only willing to pony up one of a Sauer/Dubinsky type, then Kreider is again back in the conversation. It’s tough to really gauge what team is looking for. The Ducks are relatively weak on defense, and don’t have many prospects in the system. That will come into play later on.

Personally, I don’t think the Rangers and Ducks make good trading partners. The Ducks are going to want to gut the Rangers for Ryan, and Glen Sather has been adamant about not doing that for anyone. There will be talks and rumors, but I don’t see this happening.

Side note: When playing Armchair GM, remember this post. Particularly the bottom one. No team wants your scraps.

37 Responses to “The Obligatory Bobby Ryan Post”

  1. John Delfino says:

    I’d be willing to give up the following:

    Dubinsky/Anisimov/Wolski
    Thomas/Valentenko/Borque/Bickel/Bell
    Any pick.

    Ideal deal:
    NYR: Wolski, Valentenko, Bell, 1st, 2nd
    ANA: Ryan, 2nd

    Not unreasonable for either side, I don’t think, but surely a bit weighted towards NYR. Would depend highly on other packages, ANA desire to shake things up, and Wolski playing well out of the tub to up value.

    • The Suit says:

      Hmm someone didn’t read the post

    • Agentsmith says:

      if thats the deal anaheim makes their GM should be drawn and quartered.

    • Pete says:

      You forgot to add the bag of pucks and chewing gum in the deal going to Anaheim.

    • Keeps says:

      I think this proposal is heavily weighted towards the Rangers. You get canceling 2nd round picks, Wolski, who is a year away from free agency and doesn’t produce numbers anywhere near commensurate with his salary, a decent defensive prospect who is far from proven, Bell, who to me is a depth guy, plus a first round pick.

      The Ducks would be trading a 24-year old stud signed to a reasonable deal for several more seasons for what amounts to a mid-late 1st rounder and spare parts. I know if I’m Bob Murray I want much more than that.

      You’d probably have to begin the package with Dubinsky/Krieder or something comparable.

    • John Delfino says:

      Allow me to qualify a bit.

      I did, in fact, read the post–when it first came out. My intention was to put up my ideal situation; that trade would be very unlikely to go through, yes. But from my couch, it’s where I’d start.

      I think Wolski is much better than most Rangers fans feel, and he would do well on that line. I don’t think he’s a castoff, and I don’t thin, he’s perceived as such in the NHL.

      I would not be opposed to be adding any of the players I mentioned above to the deal, particularly Dubinsky, as he and Ryan fill a similar niche.

      Valentenko will play in the NHL somewhere, likely not with the Rangers. I think he still has upside, and plays with snarl that Anaheim doesn’t have on its blue line.

      Trading seconds simply gives the Rangers a higher 2nd after giving up the 1st.

      Either way I doubt I happens, but it’s fun to speculate.

      • Agentsmith says:

        i mean its fun to speculate but at least be reasonable to both sides. check out ryans highlights on youtube ur talking about a premier offensive talent.

        • The Suit says:

          Agreed, and I don’t want to dump on him anymore, but the league simply doesn’t view WoWo very highly. His value is as low as it can be right now.

  2. Pete says:

    If Staal comes back soon (and healthy)maybe Girardi becomes moveable, and a package surrounding Girardi, Dubi, and some pieces might work. Not a huge fan of trading Girardi, Dubi I would drive to the airport, but with Staal and Sauer, Girardi becomes redundant (and expensive) so I can understand the move.

  3. Leatherneckinlv says:

    A flat out no for any trade of that sort giving up those kinds of assets and layers. When we look at dynasties of Montreal and the dynasties the Oilers and the Islanders you will notice they developed home grown talent on a consistent basis. We are starting to produce our own talents and as can be attested by Lundqvuist it does not matter at what round we get the player, however the odds are greater if drafting wisely to get a solid pick in the 1st round. We are finally getting good players in the 1st round and trading for prospects such as McDonagh and Erixon. Frankly McDonagh will never say he was a Canadien and he will have no problem saying he was a Ranger.

    Thomas and Krieder have the potential to be our stars of the future, Hagelin, McIlrath and Miller key players in the core of this team and with Stepan, Callahan, Anisimov, Sauer, Del Zotto, Dubinsky as part of the core we can see how our drafting is starting to pay dividends. Add in players like St Croix, Fogarty, Bourque, McColgan, Yogan, Wilson and Noreau and Ceresnak and we have the depth to continue in drafting well not because of need but because of depth and selecting the best player available. Why on earth would we want to disrupt that for one player? No thank you to blockbuster trades where we would gut our future and team for one player. The Grass is GREENER on our side of the fence for a change.

    The likes of Zuccarello, Wolski, Christensen, Valetenko, Rupp, Eminger, Stralman and Fedetenko should be for a return of a pick or one where we package a group of those players for a serviceable player. We are starting to be the ones coming from a position of strength.

    The trades that brought us Boyle, Prust, McDonagh, Erixon and yes Eminger are exactly the types of trades we need to do to add to the depth and not subtract from it. I do support a trade that would say place us higher on the 1st round selection board because that allows us to continue building which supports the consistency element of the equation. Example being, adding say Slater Koekkoek or Griffin Reinhart to add to the mold continues the building and say trading for Tyler Biggs enhancing the prospect pool for a continuous feeding of players to the core of the team.

    What will a Ryan or Shae Weber really bring to the plate that players within the current pool can not do? We have our own Weber in the making in McDonagh, our own Ryan developing in Stepan, our own Buekeboom in McIlrath and our own Stamkos potentially in Krieder, ok not Stamkos but you get my drift.

    I really like our grass, Grass is Greener here in Rager land

    • Keeps says:

      I’m all for producing a deep and talented home grown core, and I believe that ability is the foundation for a championship team. But if you look at the examples you sighted of the Canadiens and Oiler’s dynasties, they took place in extremely different economic landscapes in the game. Players are much more apt to be moved either in trades or free agency, and the scouting of amateurs is much more extensive.

      Again, not to disparage your point, but you cannot expect to home-grow almost an entire championship team. A good GM has to be able to acquire talent through all available avenues. While I’m not advocating selling the farm for Ryan specifically, I think you need to be open minded about taking a risk to acquire elite talent (all too elusive in any sport) and maybe making that one move required for a Cup run.

      • The Suit says:

        Agreed. Great point Keeps.

      • Leatherneckinlv says:

        What I am saying is you do not trade say an example here where we trade Staal, Stepan and Krieder to land a Weber or The Ryan proposals I am seeing. You trade from strength and not weakness, Let the Anaheim GM come to Sather not the other way around. Have us be in a position to laugh off a proposal as absurd as I have seen for the likes of Weber and Ryan. Say a trade where we trade a Boyle and Dubinsky for Stastny in Colorado is made then this is a trade that helps both teams without sacrificing the future or the present of either team. That is the type of trades that would be ok to do, not trades for the Iginlas, Webers and the Ryans of the League. My main point is that we are in a position of strength now, with a clear cut vision, a system which some like and some do not under Trots.

    • Fotiu is God says:

      Whooo waaah!

      No way we consider trading any of our blue-chip kids.

      I mean, to put some meat on The Leatherneck’s bones all one has to do is consider Carl Hagelin’s game last night. Woe. (Now imagine if Alexei Cherapanov hadn’t passed tragically…)

      Given Anisimov’s increasingly soft and befuddled game he’s the only kid I’d consider moving, giving Hagelin that slot.

      Now let’s see what TJ Miller–and possibly Shane McColgan, if he makes the US club–do in the upcoming World Juniors.

  4. bob says:

    The big question is are we ready to make the push.Are we good enough to trade some future and make a real concerted effort to make the run.Can we make a couple more moves at the deadline that will give us a chance to go all the way,if we get Ryan.I don’t think so.I think we are close.But we would have to sacrifice alot of our future.And if we don’t win the cup this year or in the next couple it could be a long time to get back to where we are now.Obviously you see what kind of a deal you can get done but I dont think we should sell the farm yet.

    • Keeps says:

      I agree that we are not quite ready to make that push. To Leather’s point, the issue for me is upside. We have all grown attached to our kids, and we have high hopes for what they can become. The question you have to ask yourself is whether the upside/impact of the target is greater than what is would take to replace what you lost?

      For example, if Dubinsky doesn’t ever become that consistent 25-goal scorer, and Stepan only becomes a 50 point guy…isn’t that production easier to acquire than a 70-80 point 24 year old?

  5. Walt says:

    It’s great all the GMs that posted today.

    Personally, Ryan is good, but not worth the dismantlement of the team, and the contract he is currently signed to. He is young, and really hasn’t been as consistant as some other players to be signed for so much, and for the duration. I’d be more inclined to go after Getzlaf, or a Perry if they were available, that Ryan. This leads me to ask one question, why are they even thinking of trading the kid in the firts place???

  6. The Suit says:

    Getz has problems handling the Anaheim press. The NY media would eat him alive. I would not trade for him.

    • Walt says:

      Wasn’t aware that he had issues with their media! Still the question remains, why would they even consider trading Ryan, is he a cancer in the locker room?

      • The Suit says:

        I’m sure they are just trying to motivate him so maybe they leaked a rumor to the press…maybe they are looking to unload him, who knows, but no he’s not a cancer from what I’ve heard.

      • Fotiu is God says:

        Yo Walt, I live in Cali. My best friend’s the ENT/emergency facial surgeon with The Kings; my cousin Kevin (from Smithtown, LI) sets up the ice at The Pond.

        No bad-mouthing of Getzlaf to be heard anywhere, in the press or what amounts to So Cal’s hockey culture.

        The Ducks compete with high school/CIF football for press/attention in OC, even during their Mike Babcock-led halcyon days.

        Getz is the franchise. Full stop.

  7. Bobby G says:

    I would be willing to part with:

    Dubinsky, Thomas, and a 1st

    Although that may not be enough, Id be willing to throw in Erixon if we had to.

    • Leatherneckinlv says:

      This is a much more realistic proposition than some of the other deals that have been suggested for Ryan. I also agree why would the Ducks even consider parting with Ryan?

      • Leatherneckinlv says:

        I think Brooks babels too much with his theories as to who the Rangers should pursue. 1st it was Weber and now it is Ryan. Brooks needs to stick to facts as a reporter and not on speculations. No wonder Trots blew up on him….lol

        • The Suit says:

          This rumor came from Kypreos first, but I see what your saying. In the end though, Brooks job is to sell papers. Can’t hate on him for that.

    • bob says:

      I would do that in a heartbeat.

  8. david says:

    Dubinsky/MZA or thomas/Sauer or take one of those out for a first

    thats a fair deal

  9. Leatherneckinlv says:

    A curious question for all, Who on the Rangers do youse think will fetch us a kings ransom in a trade? Lundqvuist is eliminated from the list as I am guessing how most would gravitate to him immediately. Why on earth are so many Ranger fans on the blogs so fast to over value a player on another team and so quick to under value our own player? Frankly Callahan for Ryan is more realistic straight up than some of the other trades for Ryan that have been mentioned. So what would Callahan net us in a trade for example? Let me quickly mention that I am not advocating trading Callahan for 1 second with that statement I just made.

    • Mikeyyyy says:

      Gabby

      Playing well. Kinda like trading Mike Gartner. Except you won’t be getting Glenn Anderson for the swap.

      • agentsmith says:

        the way gabby is playing and he is locked for 2 more years and he is only 29, he would fetch a fortune. but the rangers would have to find a way to replace 40 goals so it would be kinda dumb.

  10. Rickyrants13 says:

    If Sather makes a trade involving Krieder that ivolves a number one And anyone of McIlrath and or Sauer as well as Dubi. I will personally lead the march on MSG to hang him from the Garden rafters