Rangers say no to all of them besides the LA trade

They could prob even get more for holden. At least a 3rd.

Not to mention we have no need for those goalies as Shestyorkin will be over here soon

I agree -- none of these are getting done... you had Nash (w/ eating salary) + Grabner + a FIRST??? For a High prospect and a 2nd/3rd - are you out of your damn mind? Nash & Grabs are pretty much each worth a first (almost)... If you take the first and move it to the other side of the trade...you may get the convo rolling...but only maybe

-so trading out 2 expiring contracts to ANA to get a potential #1/2C isn't a good move? yes there is a (lottery protected) 1st, but you get a 2/3 back?
-G's are a fickle bunch, sometimes they pan out and sometimes not, why not have a stable of 3 under 26, in case/when Hank retires (or no longer performs) - costs you what? kevin Hayes?; and you then flips Cole for a prospect/pick
-you could flip DD for a 5-6th rd pick, but if you include a mid rounder, maybe you find a potential #3/4C; Tambellini isn't panning out & Chytil/Andersson need to be top 6/9 F
-Trading RMcD isn't what you want, but in 2 years he's proabaly gone, unless someone takes on the Staal $, you get a first rd, stable b/u G who can handle 40 games as either the young G's play, a speedy scoring RW, some grit for the bottom 6, and save $

We can get more for Grabner and Nash anyways without giving up a first (which is against what we’re trying to do in the first place)

As far as goalies we also have Huska and Halverson in the pipeline

The Desharnais trade is fine I didn’t notice that one

We can definitly get a better return for McDonagh than a ok prospect, late first, AHL goalie and cap dump