2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part IV

[mas0764]

Really? How do you intend to replace the 110 points that just came out of the starting lineup?

And they are not trading Kreider anymore than they are not trading Trouba.

You're being a little disingenuous I think.

Obviously I agree with you that Kreider is not being traded, but "how do we replace the 110 points that came out of the lineup"?

Uh... with Lafreniere and Byfield, then, and internal improvements from Kakko and Chytil assuredly.

If Lafrieniere adds 50 and Byfield adds 30 and Kakko and Chytil each shoot up to 45 points from from 23, well, there's 120.

 

[Edge]

Kakko too in a year or 2

Definitely has that ability/potential.

He's almost the forgotten man at the moment, but there's another kid with franchise player ability who is capable of 90+ points.

 

[Joey Bones]

Thanks, I ended up catching it last night, lolol. Super encouraging, nonetheless.

 

[BB88]

Definitely has that ability/potential.

He's almost the forgotten man at the moment, but there's another kid with franchise player ability who is capable of 90+ points.

90 point potential as a powerforward, build for playoffs, high compete level.

Top top tier forwards of the game.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

90 point potential as a powerforward, build for playoffs, high compete level.

Top top tier forwards of the game.

Both Laf and Kakko are bulls who will dominate along the boards.

 

[Edge]

Thanks, I ended up catching it last night, lolol. Super encouraging, nonetheless.

I cannot begin to express to this board the respect and admiration I have for John.

What you see in this interview is who he and his wife are as people.

There's no pretending. He's helped my career, and been very kind to me and my family, and I'm one of a long list of people who can say that.

Having him back with the Rangers feels right.

 

[mas0764]

This is not about revenue. This is about competing. The pure asset gathering stage is done.

Good thing I'm not advocating "pure asset gathering."

I'm targeting a position of weakness by dealing from a position of strength.... excess wingers. We are talking about a guy who has no long term future on this club. His contract is over after the coming season. Barring another very short contract, he will be done here at that time. He has no room in a future top 6 for us.

I agree it's about competing. I'm trying to make the best contender for the next decade. The outcome of next season pales in comparison to that goal, especially when you figure that, frankly, Buchnevich's impact on next season on THIS roster is probably relatively minimal. We are not talking about subtracting a PPG player, more like a 40 point one.

How does having Panarin, Kreider, Trouba all long term in addition to young talents like Kakko, Fox & soon to be Lafreniere signal that this organization is not building for having a contender that contends for multiple Cups?

Who said they aren't? I think the organization is doing overall a great job.

But it needs a long term center, badly.

I actually have confidence they will be able to find one.

But Buchnevich and/or Strome should be on the table to accomplish that.

Sorry, but bull. There was no way that this team would go into tank mode next year.

Who said anything about tanking?

This team is not able to tank anymore. It is too talented.

It is making the playoffs with or without Buchnevich on the roster.

It is also, though, likely still too young to win a Cup, again with or without Buchnevich on the roster.

His presence in my opinion is maybe the difference in a round or two. Not as important as a future long term center, if he could be packaged for one with the Carolina pick. Or even with Georgiev too.

The rebuild has several stages, and you seem fighting tooth and nail to stay in the first one.

No, I just want a top center prospect in this system besides Chytil. Then I'm good.

You are not trying to give him away for unknowns? Did I misunderstand you? What 2nd line center are you trying to bring in? Who is it?

Top prospects are not unknowns. I mean, you can call them that, but we know lots about the prospects and what and when they are likely to contribute. If we are dismissing likelyhood then it's also unknown whether Trouba sucks or improves, whether Kakko ever becomes a top 6 winger, etc, but I can assure you the team is making it's decisions this offseason on the assumption that they will be good players for us very soon. So.... lots of unknowns.

I am all for trading him and do believe that it will probably happen, but please tell me how having him on the team lessens the chances to win a Cup next year or the year after that?

I believe what I said was acquiring another long term center dramatically boosts our chances at winning a Cup or Cups long term.

You just said that you are not trading him for unknowns. Then you turn right around and want to trade him for a draft pick or a prospect who is nowhere near the NHL.

There is a difference between selling a player off for "whatever I can get," i.e., a future draft pick, when you have no idea what that draft class looks like, what players might be available, or even what pick number the selection will be, versus sitting in your war room on draft day, having studied a particular player for months, and knowing that if you trade Buch you can have that very prospect.

I'm advocating the latter, not the former. The former would count as "pure asset accumulation," as you put it. Not trying to do that anymore, I agree.

But we have excess assets - in our D prospect system, and on our NHL roster at wing.

Some of them are gonna have to be shipped out or allowed to walk.

If trading Buch now allows me to maximize the return by turning it into something I need in the near-ish future, then that's the best idea.

You seem to be opposing literally anything that subtracts from next year though.

That's short sighted. I don't need to make next year's team better necessarily, I am about making future teams better.

That's not tanking. I'm not trying to strip down and finish in the top 10 of the draft again. I frankly think the team is a playoff team either way.

It's just smart asset management.

 

[BB88]

Both Laf and Kakko are bulls who will dominate along the boards.

That’s what I’m excited about and talked post draft lottery.

Your new franchise guys are 2 beasts with high compete level. Guys who will be your best players in the biggest games.

Lot of teams have ultra skilled guys but they lack that factor

 

[mas0764]

Also, I always thought of Hossa as a great complimentary star when you had guys like Crosby, Malkin Kane, Toews, Datsyuk, and Zetterberg on your team. Never thought of him as a franchise player.

Yeah I suspect, or at least hope, that Hossa is selling Lafreniere short. He had a 4 year run or so between Ottawa and Atlanta where he was 80, 82, 92, and 100 points, but otherwise he was kind of a 60-70 point guy.

Jagr probably is too much, I think Jagr transcends into generational territory. He's an all timer. He broke 100 points 5 times, had in the upper 90s another 5 times, and led the league in scoring 5 times.

Patrick Kane seems more fair to me. If you are looking at on-ice only (take away the fact that Kane won three Cups), that is maybe the on-ice performance you'd hope for from Lafreniere. Break 100 twice, otherwise in the 70-80 point range. Also Kane's prime years of 24-25-26 were cut short by injury each year whereas those ages are where Hossa put up all his points, so if Kane was healthy those years the gap is greater.

 

[Edge]

Thanks, I ended up catching it last night, lolol. Super encouraging, nonetheless.

Also a few takeaways from this video:

1. For a guy who the Rangers aren't tipping their hand about, their gushing about Lefreniere. He's going to be the pick.

2. Watch that video, and Lafreniere coming down the right side and getting off a shot. Who do you all see?

3. As a follow-up to number 2, notice how the Messier talk is starting to come up more and more. Again, a lot of similarities.

4. JD talks about contributions from kids who aren't even here yet. Point being, this isn't the final product. Please be patient and keep that in mind.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

That guy is awesome. Big fan of his videos.

Yeah I discovered him after the lottery lol he does good work and I feel like he knows a lot about Canadian prospects

 

[Fugazy]

I cannot begin to express to this board the respect and admiration I have for John.

What you see in this interview is who he and his wife are as people.

There's no pretending. He's helped my career, and been very kind to me and my family, and I'm one of a long list of people who can say that.

Having him back with the Rangers feels right.

Beyond thankful things worked out where he was able to make his return. I love having him and Gorton in charge and the figureheads of the franchise.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Also a few takeaways from this video:

1. For a guy who the Rangers aren't tipping their hand about, their gushing about Lefreniere. He's going to be the pick.

2. Watch that video, and Lafreniere coming down the right side and getting off a shot. Who do you all see?

3. As a follow-up to number 2, notice how the Messier talk is starting to come up more and more. Again, a lot of similarities.

4. JD talks about contributions from kids who aren't even here yet. Point being, this isn't the final product. Please be patient and keep that in mind.

Yup, not a coincidence. Could be a PR move to the fanbase. But, make no mistake about it, this kid is being groomed to be the face of the franchise.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

How does Alexis Lafreniere compare to Jagr as a prospect? I know it's hard to compare him to an all-time great but great hands, more of a playmaker at wing, but can score well sounds like Jagr.

Jagr is bigger and Lafreniere’s hair is nowhere close to what Jagr was rocking

 

[True Blue]

You're being a little disingenuous I think.

Obviously I agree with you that Kreider is not being traded, but "how do we replace the 110 points that came out of the lineup"?

Uh... with Lafreniere and Byfield, then, and internal improvements from Kakko and Chytil assuredly.

If Lafrieniere adds 50 and Byfield adds 30 and Kakko and Chytil each shoot up to 45 points from from 23, well, there's 120.

And who is replacing the points that that they scored last year?

So you replacing 120 points on banking that Lafrieniere produces like a top liner, Byfield produces and Kakko and Chytil all improve their production by over 20 points? Gotcha. Don't think that most GMs think like you do, but if wishes were fishes.....

 

[Polar Bear]

I cannot begin to express to this board the respect and admiration I have for John.

What you see in this interview is who he and his wife are as people.

There's no pretending. He's helped my career, and been very kind to me and my family, and I'm one of a long list of people who can say that.

Having him back with the Rangers feels right.

John had a contract with the CBJ. In his deal, he had the right to terminate it and leave if only ONE position came open and that was President for the Rangers. It goes to show how much his heart is here.

 

[mas0764]

And who is replacing the points that that they scored last year?

So you replacing 120 points on banking that Lafrieniere produces like a top liner, Byfield produces and Kakko and Chytil all improve their production by over 20 points? Gotcha. Don't think that most GMs think like you do, but if wishes were fishes.....

I'm not advocating trading Kreider right now.

Just saying you are being disingenuous. We are not "replacing 110 points."

It's a new season and new players are going to take on new roles. As it is, Kreider is probably not going to be leaned on as heavily as last year because Kakko's role probably expands, Lafreniere is on the team and by all indications probably has a better rookie year than Kakko, and other young players also probably take up slack.

And for your troubles, if you do miss having Kreider around, you have a nice consolation in Byfield for the future.

You have to give a little to get a little. You are unwilling to ever "give," from an upcoming season and then claim that "no team ever would do that," (which is obviously untrue).

It's a silly discussion to begin with because a Kreider/Carolina pick/DeAngelo package for the second overall pick seems unrealistic, but your insistence on browbeating him on the basis of replacement of exact point totals is misleading.

 

[mas0764]

3. As a follow-up to number 2, notice how the Messier talk is starting to come up more and more. Again, a lot of similarities.

Transition to center CONFIRMED

 

[Edge]

John had a contract with the CBJ. In his deal, he had the right to terminate it and leave if only ONE position came open and that was President for the Rangers. It goes to show how much his heart is here.

You hear about people bleeding Rangers blue.

In my experience, I've met four people who personify this at the highest level:

1. John Davidson
2. Adam Graves
3. Brian Leetch
4. Mike Richter

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

You here about people bleeding Rangers blue.

In my experience, I've met four people who personify this at the highest level:

1. John Davidson
2. Adam Graves
3. Brian Leetch
4. Mike Richter

Hopefully we can add Laf eventually

 

[Edge]

Hopefully we can add Laf eventually

I think Lafreniere would embrace the entire New York experience in a manner similar to Lundqvist.

 

[Fugazy]

You here about people bleeding Rangers blue.

In my experience, I've met four people who personify this at the highest level:

1. John Davidson
2. Adam Graves
3. Brian Leetch
4. Mike Richter

5. Lafreniere?

 

[Edge]

5. Lafreniere?

I think he could.

I think Lundqvist is probably on that list too, but I've never worked or intereacted with him like I did the other four guys I mentioned.

 

[True Blue]

Good thing I'm not advocating "pure asset gathering."

Trading for prospects is just that.

I'm targeting a position of weakness by dealing from a position of strength.... excess wingers. We are talking about a guy who has no long term future on this club. His contract is over after the coming season. Barring another very short contract, he will be done here at that time. He has no room in a future top 6 for us.

Why does he have no future? Where is the excess? What RW are knocking on the door?

But it needs a long term center, badly.

They already have one, and hope in another one and a current stop gap.

Who said anything about tanking?

You did when you said it was a good idea to do next year.

This team is not able to tank anymore. It is too talented.

It is making the playoffs with or without Buchnevich on the roster.

It is also, though, likely still too young to win a Cup, again with or without Buchnevich on the roster.

His presence in my opinion is maybe the difference in a round or two. Not as important as a future long term center, if he could be packaged for one with the Carolina pick. Or even with Georgiev too.

Making playoffs becomes harder when you just traded away a top 6 winger and replaced him with.......??

No one is talking about a Cup next year.

They have a long term top line center. You seem to be conflating a second line center with a first.

Top prospects are not unknowns. I mean, you can call them that, but we know lots about the prospects and what and when they are likely to contribute. If we are dismissing likelyhood then it's also unknown whether Trouba sucks or improves, whether Kakko ever becomes a top 6 winger, etc, but I can assure you the team is making it's decisions this offseason on the assumption that they will be good players for us very soon. So.... lots of unknowns.

Until they actually do something in the NHL they are still unknowns. You make educated guesses.

I believe what I said was acquiring another long term center dramatically boosts our chances at winning a Cup or Cups long term

Except you are giving up a top-6 player for not a long term center. You are giving him up for the promise of another long term center.

There is a difference between selling a player off for "whatever I can get," i.e., a future draft pick, when you have no idea what that draft class looks like, what players might be available, or even what pick number the selection will be, versus sitting in your war room on draft day, having studied a particular player for months, and knowing that if you trade Buch you can have that very prospect.

I'm advocating the latter, not the former. The former would count as "pure asset accumulation," as you put it. Not trying to do that anymore, I agree.

But we have excess assets - in our D prospect system, and on our NHL roster at wing.

A future draft pick and a current draft pick is still just a draft pick. Trading for picks or prospects that have not stepped a toe onto NHL ice is still just gathering assets.

And I am still missing the excess assets on right wing at the NHL level. Can you tell me what they are?

You seem to be opposing literally anything that subtracts from next year though.

That's short sighted. I don't need to make next year's team better necessarily, I am about making future teams better.

Whether I am for it or against it, makes no difference. My argument is not whether or not a DeAngelo or a Strome or a Buchnevich should or should not be traded. My stance comes from my belief that management is done trading for pure picks or prospects. And if the move a significant piece, it will be for another piece that will step into the line up and contribute. An NHL ready piece.

If you are a playoff team and you trade a big contributor for a prospect, there is the short sight. I have been on record that I actually believe that when the music stops, it will be Buchnevich that gets moved. But it is for completely different reasons that what you are listing. There is no way that this team has a resigned Buchnevich, Strome and DeAngelo. I think it is Buchnevich that goes, but it will not be for a pick or prospect.

 

[Polar Bear]

You here about people bleeding Rangers blue.

In my experience, I've met four people who personify this at the highest level:

1. John Davidson
2. Adam Graves
3. Brian Leetch
4. Mike Richter

What about Messier?