I think the Miller vs Richards issue is being focused on way too much. It's too much NHL14 or EHM thinking. In reality, Miller is looking to replace Brassard, who is getting a promotion. Instead of one question, it's really two. Can Brassard up his production with more ice time and maybe a better LW? Can Miller provide 25 or so even strength points from the third line?
Those are the questions. Not whether or not Miller can make up for the loss of Richards.
It's not that I don't disagree with what you're saying. I am looking at it differently.
With Vigneault's 4 line system, offensive production seems to be a "points by committee" mindset.
The Rangers lost Stralman, but added Dan Boyle. Hypothetically, worst case, that should net us an extra 20 points from 1 position change.
The Rangers lost Poo, but added Lee Stempniak, a guy with historical totals similar to that of Benoit. No net gain or loss.
The Rangers lost Brad Richards, but are adding JT Miller. For point of argument, if we set Miller's final season point total to 40, slightly under .5 ppg in an 82 game season, the Rangers would be losing roughly 10 points from Richards to Miller.
Exchanging Callahan for MSL nets us anywhere from 15-25 net points more than we would have expected keeping Callahan.
Losing Boyle but adding Lombardi or Lindberg should hypothetically mean at the very least producing 18 points, what Boyle gave us last year, if not striking lightning and getting even more point production from that position.
Glass and Dorsett should be an absolute wash.
A healthy Nash returning to anywhere near a PPG pace should yield 15-25 more points in and of itself.
Improvements to Kreider, Stepan, Zucc, and Brassard's games, in terms of maturing, playing with better linemates more consistently should get us 10-15 more points collectively. For example, what I mean is, if Kreider boosts his production to 40-45 points, Stepan to 60, Brassard to 50, and Zucc to 65... we'd have a net gain of about 15-20 points from last year from those very same players. It's not even improbable to assume that these players will achieve this, as Stepan has been increasing his offensive output with every year he has played, Zucc and Brassard both set to improve slightly with better chemistry together, and Kreider adding 3-8 more points with a full season of hockey rather than playing 67 games is also a reasonable total to add.
The Rangers are adding offensive output, hypothetically, everywhere besides the Miller for Richards swap.
Clearly, all of these will likely not happen, but there is far greater probability for gains than losses.
I think this is more about taking a step back and realizing this team is deviating from the conventional 4 line strategy and doing something similar to Boston's scoring by committee tactic.
.
