Holmberg going to want at least 1.2 mill

0 chance this happens… dumbest post I’ve seen. “We have no cap space so trade him to other team with no cap space for cap friendly players/picks”

This is a very Maple leaf’s fan thing to do.. smh

Let's pretend the Rangers had the cap space to do this anyway... why would they? Kakko's a 21-year-old 2nd overall pick with a boatload of potential still. Why would they give him up plus picks for a pure rental? New York isn't a Nylander away from the cup, especially when you take Kakko out of the team. They need defensive help. A lot of the defensemen in New York are great offensively but have had turmoil defensively whether due to the system or just early-season rust. If you want a youngster back for Nylander from the Rangers, I think the only one they might move right now is Kravtsov, and only because he seems to be struggling to get into the lineup. They could just go and sign Kane (a New York native) if they wanted a winger with the cap space that they currently do not have.

Or they could sign him instead of making a hilariously bad trade.
I like how you took draftemsignemtradedubasmakesmesoangry's trade and made it even worse though. Funny that

Yeah, trading their best playoff performer during his best season yet to a team theyd probably have to go through in the playoffs to get back some late picks and a much much much worse player is sadly a big leafs fan thing around here

That seems like an awful low return for Nylander. a 2nd a 7th and a bust for a ppg guy?

Rangers have no cap room for Nylander and Kakko isn't being traded for any rental.

My point exactly.. Your statement backs mine up as well. The whole “not putting any thought into the move” point.. may as well have been a move to Tampa.. someone who can’t afford him and a team that is a direct competitor in the conference.. typical leaf fan acgm. Not much thought went into this

and you missed the point entirely. It doesnt matter how little you think the rangers need nylander, this is a shockingly bad value trade for the leafs that the rangers make all day every day and filter the value somewhere else either by moving a guy the didnt need to either by flipping him or moving someone else. Pretending that the rangers wouldnt do this in a heart beat is pretty silly

If cap wasn't an issue, there is no reason that they don't trade Kakko + a 2nd+ a 7th for Nylander. For 1-year (he has 1.5) of Nylander it would require Kravtsov+ a 1st at the least. Kakko having potential and being a former 2nd OV might be enough for them to just give up a 2nd, but doubt it considering how his performance has been thus far. As for going and signing Kane, he's 8-years older than Nylander, so if 5-years is a big deal for not giving away Kakko for a finished product in Nylander, would they really sign a guy who is 13 years older, to play ahead of the 21-year old stud in the lineup just to save assets?

Then you don't need to give up a kid with immense potential for 1 year of a winger who arguably isn't as good as the guy 8 years older? That would be the common sense play. Not to mention, New York have 2 1sts this year (Dallas, from the Lundkvist trade) why would they not value Kakko at more than a 1st? Your entire argument is age. If Kane is better than Nylander, they can get him for nothing in free agency, then why would they not do that instead of paying assets for Nylander? I really don't get it.

I'll start that I didn't realize that this was supposed to take place in 2023-24 season but that changes little that I said already.

My argument is NOT age, the first thing you said as to why NYR shouldn't make the trade was "why would they? Kakko's a 21-year-old 2nd overall pick with a boatload of potential still," then you mentioned they need defense. Then when you came back to talking about trading for Nylander as a rental, you said "If you want a youngster back for Nylander from the Rangers, I think the only one they might move right now is Kravtsov, and only because he seems to be struggling to get into the lineup" and went on to talk about signing Kane (who they would have already had to sign) So, from that I took that 1) you are arguing that they shouldn't do this trade due to age and 2) they shouldn't give up assets. So, I asked why would they even want Kane in their lineup, playing ahead of Kakko, if they care about age so much? Just to save some assets? Plus, in this imagined scenario, it doesn't have to be 1-year of Nylander if it's possible that they can sign Kane for like 6m-7m, with the cap increase there would be the possibility of resigning Nylander at 10-11m if they so choose.

My point is that giving up a good young player with immense potential is normal to acquire a well-established player just entering their prime. As I previously said, even if it's for Nylander as a rental, it's going to start at Kravtsov+ a 1st, that wouldn't be nearly enough. As for Kakko, he might save the Rangers from giving up a 1st, due to his status but again it's not a farfetched ask especially if he doesn't break out by then. We already overlooked the cap issue, so whether they want to trade for Nylander as a rental or not is up to them, but Kakko+a 2nd+ a 7th is a tame cost for a PPG player in their prime even as a pure rental.

It should go without saying that if Kakko breaks out that season, they wouldn't do the trade at all.

Got that earlier someone sent Domi there for picks wtf is TB getting $3 cap space nevermind $3,000,000. So byeah it's not just leaf fans that don't consider other teams situations.

No, it's actually reality, no way the Rangers do this.

lol, good one. and the leafs wouldnt trade a robertson a 7th and a 2nd for Shesterkin. great joke love it. lol

Well, without trying to teach you basic math skills, the Rangers do not have any cap space for Nylander and based on NMC's and NTC's, are not trading anyone to try to fit Nylander under the cap. That is called reality, you should try it sometime. Additionally, they are not interested in trading Kakko anyway.

well, without trying to teach you basic logic skills, the rangers are capable of trading players to increase their cap space, and with these basic math skills you're boasting about, you should be able to calculate that after this trade alone the Rangers would only need to clear 2.2 mill in cap space, and 750k of that is even easier to clear because they can send someone down! Now, I know this may seem complicated and confusing to you, but this is something that literally any competent GM could do, and would do if they could win a trade as bad as they win this one

Logic skills from someone that can't understand that the Rangers are not in reality trading anyone to try to fit Nylander under the cap this year, PLUS, have such a cap crunch next season with their RFA's that Nylander's cap hit would force them to lose one or two of them. That is called logic and math. Try both some time. No chance in REALITY that Rangers make this trade.

it is legitimately comical how hard you are trying to make this a loss for the rangers when it is a complete win. Bro, if the rangers were offered this tomorrow, in REALITY, they'd sign the papers so fast the pen would catch fire.

100% wrong. And I'm not comparing the value of the trade, I'm saying in REALITY the Rangers can't AFFORD HIM. What about that don't you get? Who would the Rangers trade in order to 1 - fit his cap this year, and 2 - sign their RFA's after this season? Tell me who, specifically.

Panarin, Mika, Kreider, Trocheck, and Trouba all have NMC's and they are not looking to move any of them anyway.
Goodrow has a M-NTC and they are more than happy with his play and not looking to move him,
Fox and Lindgren as top pair D and going nowhere,
They are not looking to move Kakko,
And they want to re-sign Chytil, Laffy and Miller next year.

So show me the math.

100% right, and you arnt comparing trade value, you are flat out ignoring it. I know you are saying the REALITY is the rangers cant AFFORD HIM, but I have told you many times that they actually could AFFORD HIM because they would make it work. I literally did your basic math for you and showed they had to move 1.5 million dollars, max, to make it work. Most teams can do that with shortening the roster with cap tricks alone.
But hey, since you dont seem to even want to pretend to have a creative bone in your body they trade Blais for a pick. Oh my god that was so hard! So SO SOOOOOOO HARD.
The rangers do that in a heartbeat

You are a 40w light bulb trying to live in a 100w world and get don't get basic math and concepts like the salary cap, NMC's, a teams desire to sign their own RFA's in a salary cap world and a teams limited ability to move players with NMC's, even if they want to. Enjoy Fantasyland.

ah i love it when they play this game. Just keep spouting the same stuff over and over and over ignoring that you've literally been proven wrong at every turn. It's a good thing for you that the leafs arnt stupid enough to do such a terrible trade because the rangers would make you look real foolish with how much extra they'd add to get a shot at nylander

Yeah.. trading away what we need for someone we will have to flip for what we gave away… GMs do this often? I’ve never seen it. Maybe you can point out when in history it’s happened. Common sense tells me that it’s never happened but you seem to think you’re them most sensible on this site. Please share examples. Also if the leafs could get double this offer, then it makes this post even more ridiculous. So trading to a team without cap, a direct competitor in the east and for a fraction of the loot he would fetch. -3 thoughts went into this post and while you’re attempting to troll me you’re only adding to the embarrassment of the leaf post. Tell your friends to start trading Nylander to ARZ/CHI who have cap space, aren’t seeing playoffs anytime soon and who have loads of high 1sts to give.

Gms dont do it often because they dont usually get hilariously good offers like this because even the gms dumb enough to trade a guy like nylander for so little are smart enough to call a 2nd team and get more.

This is a trade that the rangers jump on without blinking and anyone pretending otherwise is either a massive rangers homer, trying to save face for a dumb statement like the rangers are too dumb to find 1.5 in cap space or they are just trolling
Pick your poison, bro