2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part II

[duhmetreE]

That's not trading down. We are talking about a team trading down here, not a team trading their top 10 pick away.

And who brought up trading down? You did. setting false parameters

I said, To get into the top10 and we have bullets to get a deal done. Buch, Stroke, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, picks etc.

 

[UnSandvich]

And who brought up trading down? You did. setting false parameters

I said, To get into the top10 and we have bullets to get a deal done. Buch, Stroke, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, picks etc.

Technically RGY brought up trading up/the other team trading down first, not AK.

 

[duhmetreE]

Technically RGY brought up trading up/the other team trading down first, not AK.

It's semantics. I was not replying to RGY but AK was replying to me.

Get into the top10. We have the assets.

edit - maybe I'm blind, where did RGY bring up trading down? it doesn't even matter because it's still just semantics

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

And who brought up trading down? You did. setting false parameters

I said, To get into the top10 and we have bullets to get a deal done. Buch, Stroke, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, picks etc.

I didn't bring up anything. I simpy responded. But if you want to be a dick about it, go ahead.

I'm off to bed

 

[duhmetreE]

I didn't bring up anything. I simpy responded. But if you want to be a dick about it, go ahead.

I'm off to bed

You responded and held me to false parameters.... Things that I've never said and added snide remarks.

Only one being a dick here, is you.

 

[UnSandvich]

It's semantics. I was not replying to RGY but AK was replying to me.

Get into the top10. We have the assets.

edit - maybe I'm blind, where did RGY bring up trading down? it doesn't even matter because it's still just semantics

"Also, I would like to see if the Rangers are able to trade into the top 10 with the extra 1st round pick and some of the assets they have accumulated. Hopefully the TOR/CAR pick is 20-25 range and ours is 15-20 range. You package those two picks plus a prospect, could that get us into the 6-10 range?"

Re-read the thread, you might learn something

 

[duhmetreE]

"Also, I would like to see if the Rangers are able to trade into the top 10 with the extra 1st round pick and some of the assets they have accumulated. Hopefully the TOR/CAR pick is 20-25 range and ours is 15-20 range. You package those two picks plus a prospect, could that get us into the 6-10 range?"

Re-read the thread, you might learn something

HAHAHAHAHA you re-read you donut. His proposed package involves picks and prospects. Trading INTO THE TOP 10 WAS THE THEME. NO TRADING DOWN. WE TRADED INTO THE TOP 10 IN 2017. THUS FALSE PARAMETERS WERE SET TO PROVE A FALSE POINT.

Trade Down was never brought up until AK used it to prove a point how 'rare it is'.

Did we trade into the top10 in 2017? Is that a trade down? A trade up? Trade into? Stop this f***in nonsense

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

HAHAHAHAHA you re-read you donut.

Trade Down was never brought up.

You’re joking

 

[duhmetreE]

You’re joking

no.

it's semantics and this pointless conversation has gone on long enough.

who brought up trading-down? What does that have to do with my initial point of trading into the top10?

 

[UnSandvich]

HAHAHAHAHA you re-read you donut. His proposed package involves picks and prospects. Trading INTO THE TOP 10 WAS THE THEME. NO TRADING DOWN. WE TRADED INTO THE TOP 10 IN 2017. THUS FALSE PARAMETERS WERE SET TO PROVE A POINT ON AK's SIDE.

Trade Down was never brought up until AK used it to prove a point how 'rare it is'.

Did we trade into the top10 in 2017? Is that a trade down? A trade up? Trade into? Stop this f***in nonsense

Let me explain this to you, using nice simple words then:

Trading a lower pick(s)+assets for a higher pick is trading up.
Trading a higher pick for 1+ lower picks + assets is trading down.
Trading up or down necessitates the transfer of multiple picks.

Therefore, using picks and prospects to trade for a higher pick is trading up.

This isn't rocket science, bub. Well, for me at least. For you it might be

 

[duhmetreE]

Let me explain this to you, using nice simple words then:

Trading a lower pick(s)+assets for a higher pick is trading up.
Trading a higher pick for 1+ lower picks + assets is trading down.
Trading up or down necessitates the transfer of multiple picks.

Therefore, using picks and prospects to trade for a higher pick is trading up.

This isn't rocket science, bub. Well, for me at least. For you it might be

You keep arguing a point I never made. You continue to twist words and muddy waters. Trading down was brought up twice by AK before RGY ever suggested trading picks. Trading INTO the top 10 was the theme.

TRADE INTO THE TOP 10. I do not care what your subjective definition of 'trading into' 'trading down' or 'trading up' is.

It's essentially turning Quantity into Quality. Take our assets Buch, Strome, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, etc, and yes even picks because they have value, and consolidate them into 1 of equal or fair value.

Get into the top 10 with our assets was the theme I brought up.... That was never argued. Its has now divulged into 'trading down rarely happens' and 'who said it first'. This is non-sense.

So, Once again...

I'd like to trade into the top10 using our assets.

Assets include, Buch, Strome, Lundkvist, Kravtsov, Georgiev, LHD prospects and yes, picks.

Not for just anyone, but for a player we are enamored with... like a Keller or Petterson.

 

[RGY]

I indeed was suggesting we trade our multiple 1st round picks (plus maybe another asset such as a prospect) to get into the top 10. That would involve that team trading down from their position. That was my suggestion. I only cited @duhmetreE point that a team like OTT would entertain trading the lower of what will likely be (2) Top 10 picks, although he was not suggesting OTT trade down but for an asset like a Buchnevich that is still young and couple be a part of their future core moving forward for years.

Bottom line is, I think its possible to make it happen with either of our ideas. Its certainly not a definite, but possible.

 

[NYSPORTS]

I keep reading how great this draft is so would rather keep both #1’s. Especially without a #2

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Trading down in the top-10 is as rare as an accepted offer sheet. The last time that happened was 2007.

Some things only happen on message boards these days

Aho?

 

[Joey Bones]

I have read a few times that this draft is deep in the sense that all of the first 5-10 picks could be capable of playing in the NHL next year.

How true is this.

Also, I would like to see if the Rangers are able to trade into the top 10 with the extra 1st round pick and some of the assets they have accumulated. Hopefully the TOR/CAR pick is 20-25 range and ours is 15-20 range. You package those two picks plus a prospect, could that get us into the 6-10 range? Is it worth it to do so or stand pat since the draft is pretty deep this year? Take the quantity at the later 1st round picks which could still be great qualityv

Think that the first 6 players could essentially all play next year, but I wouldn’t say it’s the right move for some. However if Askarov gets thrown in that mix I can easily see him competing for an NHL spot. He won’t though, but I think he’s that good of a keeper.

 

[Joey Bones]

Okay but what if a package of both 1sts and a prospect like Robertson is proposed? Or maybe its Buch/Strome and the higher of the 1sts?

As @duhmetreE pointed out, a team like OTT might be willing to trade the lower of their top 10 picks to add more assets, an extra 1st round pick and maybe another prospect. In a draft that is considered this deep, picks on the back end of the 1st round would be top 10 in other years. For a team like OTT that could significantly help their rebuild.

I agree it is unlikely, but this is indeed a message board and its not outrageous to bring this to the table of discussion.

I think in Ottawa’s best case scenario is pick with both their picks in the top 10 & collect on potential. They aren’t wining any time soon and could use the assets. That lower 1st for Ottawa in top 10 should be used on Askarov, IMO. Goalie of their future success if management can get their heads out their asses.

 

[Joey Bones]

And who brought up trading down? You did. setting false parameters

I said, To get into the top10 and we have bullets to get a deal done. Buch, Stroke, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, picks etc.

Sorry bud, I’m not trading Kratvsov or Lundkvist for a prospect who’s further along. I honestly wouldn’t trade Buch or Strome unless the other team is sending someone of equal value or someone with a chance to shine if given the right opportunity (ie Lemieux, DeAngelo, Gauthier) in return with the pick.

 

[Joey Bones]

I keep reading how great this draft is so would rather keep both #1’s. Especially without a #2

Rangers management tend to agree....

 

[Edge]

Don’t see any top 10 picks moving this year. Maybe some movement when you get in the 11-15 range, where teams might look to leapfrog a spot.

But I don’t foresee a scenario where you package 15 and 21 and get to 9 or 10.

And I don’t know if I see too many scenarios where teams in the top 10 leapfrog each other.

If the Rangers keep their firsts, they’re probably staying put - especially if they end up at something like 10th and 19th.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Aho?

That offer sheet was matched, not accepted

 

[Irishguy42]

Me coming into this thread to look at the last ~15 hours of discussion

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

I'd imagine this draft being very stacked in the top 10 would make it difficult to trade up into one of those spots

Tankathon added a new tab recently where they look at a team's strength of schedule based on combined PPG of the teams opponents. According to their calculation, the Rangers have the 3rd toughest in the league with the rest of their schedule

Not inconceivable to slide into a top 10 spot

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

That offer sheet was matched, not accepted

I mean, this is literally semantics, but...

An opposing team can choose to extend an offer to an RFA, or not.
The RFA can then choose to accept said offer, or not.
And the rights-holding team can, in turn, then choose to match said offer, or not.

The offer is accepted if the player accepts it; has nothing to do with whether or not it is subsequently matched.

*gets off soapbox*

 

[mas0764]

I feel like we need to get 'our guy'. Get into the top10. A player style like Stutzle, Raymond, Rossi or Holtz would be a nice adds. Raymond has NYR written all over it IMO

We have liked players before but never had the ammo to make the move. Now we do.

You know what would have helped us get the ammo?

Trading Kreider.

 

[Ola]

I think it usually takes a little bit more established GM and team to trade down, and even if there is a dance partner you always have to overpay to trade up.

The exception could be if someone really likes a prospect on another team, like say Nils Lundkvist or a younger player.