Andrew Gross at The Bergen Record talks of a rumor that would send Brandon Dubinsky to the Stars for Brad Richards... "Of course, there also are whispers Dubinsky, once signed, could be moved to the Stars for center Brad Richards, who played for Tortorella with the Lightning."
...if there would ever be a trade that would define Sather's follies as Rangers GM this would be it. Why in the world would you trade a 23-year-old center for a 29-year-old center? Especially when they're both coming off essentially identical seasons statistically.
...fyi, Richards is a combined -50, yes -50, the last four years in which he's only played a full season once.
11 comments:
We love your blog - but there's an "H" in "wHisper".
Your friends at BlueShirt Brothers (.com)
I keep waiting for Sather to make a terrible trade and trading Dubinsky for Richards would be beyond terrible.
Just seeing if you guys are paying attention.
This would make me absolutely sick. I don't live in the NY area anymore and won't bother to pay for NHL center ice to watch the Rangers if something like this goes down.
Ugh... I hope it's just a terrible, stupid rumor... but it's so absurd and stupid that it seems Sather-like and actually possible :(.
If this were to happen, not only would I want Sather gone, which I already do, but Torts could go with him!
I agree this would be a bad trade, but your point of them having statistically identical seasons is a bad one. First of all, Richards scored more goals, and had more assists, while playing in 26 less games. There is no question that Richards is the superior offensive player. Dubinsky also looks like he is playing with a broom rather than a hockey stick. I have some real doubts about his touch.
Secondly, there would obviously have to be other players involved, because even if Dubinsky gets a $2 million payday, there is still a $5.8 million difference. You all are so quick to say "it's so absurd and stupid that it seems Sather-like and actually possible" and things like you would want Sather gone, but you haven't thoroughly thought it through. It is not even possible that this could be a 1 for 1 trade.
What if it were Dubinsky and Redden, plus a low level prospect for Richards and Trevor Daley?...or something more reasonable like that in which we would rid ourselves of a bad contract? If we could trade away Redden, and get a guy like Richards who without question makes us a better offensive team, I think that sacrificing Dubinsky wouldn't be the end of the world. Richards is a UFA after the 2010-2011 season, and wouldn't handcuff us cap-wise very long.
I agree with Brian. One-for-one, it's no good, but Sather is not as dumb as you guys think. In general, he gets excellent value for his trades (--it's free agency and drafting that sometimes makes one wonder). I seriously doubt he would pull the trigger without getting more than Richards in return.
Also, dumping Redden is fine with me, but we're still short on experienced D. Who would play his 20+ minutes? We're already looking at two rookie D to start the season. Unless they get Ricahrds and a decent d-man in return, Redden might as well stay until the trade deadline. He's not worth his salary, but the Rangers are under cap and have few alternatives.
Also...
I'm not a huge fan of Sather, but the current state of the Rangers rests squarely on the shoulders of James Dolan.
Dolan is the guy who wants to sell tickets all the time without waiting to build. It's Dolan who pressures the team to make shortsighted deadline trades to ensure playoff revenue. This whole "New York won't wait for a winner" bullsh*t is straight from the top and it's bogus. How long did we wait for the Yankees in the 80's?!?! People still seem to like them...
Sather is merely a cog in a systemic failure of management. It won't matter who manages this team until new ownership arrives or Jim-bo gets a few things through his thick skull. Look at all the the successful teams in the league over the last 10-12 years--Detroit, New Jersey, Pitt, Avs, Dallas--they all have steady ownership that's willing to invest for the long term and reap steady returns year over year.
James...
Dolan also owns the Knicks...who are rebuilding and NY is waiting until the 2010 season to even think about being competitive again...all of this was possible because they finally got a GM who knows what he is doing....I believe Sather is behind the times in todays hockey and it is time for the Rangers to move on...They should have grabed Burke last season when thy had the chance
Brian while your points are valid, I wouldn't say Richards is the "superior" offensive player. Better, sure, but not enough to trade a solid 23-year-old player for no matter who else we get back or give them.
Fleisch,
I'm astonished anyone would cite the Knicks as evidence of good ownership. That franchise has been dragged through the mud. To think such a storied franchise had to endure the Isiah Thomas era--complete with embarassing sexual harassment lawsuits and petulant superstars who decide to sit out at their whim. And don't forget Jimbo's unflagging support for Isiah through it all--he was totally enamoured with the guy! The Knicks are rebuilding now because they have no choice after being even more poorly managed than the Rangers. Their strategy has been like the Rangers on steroids--TERRIBLE free agent signings and trades with zero forsight: Marbury? Steve Francis? Mcdyess? They may have more luck with their "rebuilding" because the NBA has a more forgiving financial structure than the NHL for teams that behave like the Knicks--drafting is somewhat less important and as players reach free agency younger. Even now, I'm not sure the Knicks strategy is anything more than cutting as much salary as possible in hopes of signing Lebron and another superstar next season.
It's fairly common knowledge that Dolan is a big basketball fan and only a casual hockey fan. For that we should be thankful! He's meddled with the Knicks far more than with the Rangers and the results have been disastrous.
Post a Comment