Appraisal of Rangers' Salary Structure

[mas0764]

I am not sure long term value deals are possible.

If the youth breaks out, like many are counting on, (me too) I feel as if this is more like Toronto than anything else where all these players coming off their entry levels are going to demand a ton. The Shesterkin contracts did not give me any reason to change that feeling.

They are definitely possible - look at the Colorado breakdown posted here. Landeskog at $7.5m is an A deal, Makar at $9m is an A deal, Rantanen even at 9.5m is an A deal. MacKinnon is an A+ deal though only with 2 years left if I recall.

You just gotta get some young guys to lock in before the totality of their peak is reached. Kakko on a long term deal would be very smart. Chytil would have been too.

 

[IDvsEGO]

"They were on the right track creating an uber-skilled team, but decided to go all in on grit after Tom Wilson ruffled their feathers."

This narrative that we completely changed the structure of our team has been around all off-season and it's baffling.

The only "uber-skilled" guy we lost was Buchnevich, who had a career year. We're counting on the kids to replace his production and added some quality guys to the bottom sixers.

The thing is dom's model struggles with young players and translating their play until they're established nhl'ers. Growth is tricky and it breaks his model. We've broken his model past 2 years and he's only ever balanced out because we over achieved or underachieved in different directions. In 19-20, kakko had a bad rookie year, and it was balanced out by both Panarin and Mika having absolutely insane years.
In 20-21 Laf' under achieved, but it was balanced by kakko's growth, by panarin continuing his dominance and by strome elevating his play (dom suggested that strome would fall back down).

 

[nyr2k2]

"They were on the right track creating an uber-skilled team, but decided to go all in on grit after Tom Wilson ruffled their feathers."

This narrative that we completely changed the structure of our team has been around all off-season and it's baffling.

The only "uber-skilled" guy we lost was Buchnevich, who had a career year. We're counting on the kids to replace his production and added some quality guys to the bottom sixers.

Right. And people point this out to Dom on Twitter regularly and he just ignores it. It's very frustrating.

 

[haveandare]

Dolan's reaction was to Wilson, I'm guessing.

Tampa did something similar to win, but they were on the cusp of winning, and they brought in mostly guys who could take a regular shift. Reaves and Tinordi are not those kinds of players.

The Rangers, to me panicked and moved a year too soon in that direction

Tinordi won’t be taking regular shifts in all likelihood, he’s an extra at best. And Reaves has been taking regular shifts on a team that performed a lot better than this one.

 

[IDvsEGO]

Tinordi won’t be taking regular shifts in all likelihood, he’s an extra at best. And Reaves has been taking regular shifts on a team that performed a lot better than this one.

Tinordi will be our 3rd pair defenseman this season unless he's beaten out by Robertson. I dont see jones beating him out just yet defensively and I see lundkvist as the bigger prospect/upgrade.

 

[DudMan28]

Right. And people point this out to Dom on Twitter regularly and he just ignores it. It's very frustrating.

I mean, we did lose uber skilled Brett Howden so I can kinda see where he's coming from.

 

[DudMan28]

The thing is dom's model struggles with young players and translating their play until they're established nhl'ers. Growth is tricky and it breaks his model. We've broken his model past 2 years and he's only ever balanced out because we over achieved or underachieved in different directions. In 19-20, kakko had a bad rookie year, and it was balanced out by both Panarin and Mika having absolutely insane years.
In 20-21 Laf' under achieved, but it was balanced by kakko's growth, by panarin continuing his dominance and by strome elevating his play (dom suggested that strome would fall back down).

It makes sense - young players have less data points so it's harder to project them. He usually says his model has no idea what to make of the Rangers and its probably because the outcomes for guys like Laf, Kakko, Krav can vary greatly.

 

[East Coast Bias]

I think the Goodrow contract is bad. Kreider is bad.

Trouba is the one I’ll argue bc I think bashing it is trendy. It’s 5/40 right now and considering the awful shit doled our this summer, it’s looking better.

fox is a stud but Trouba brought something we didn’t have at the time. And I like having a RD beyond Fox to take hard minutes so we don’t McDonagh/Girardi the shit out of Fox. Yes you want to play your best players all the time, but I would have the idea of a Fox/Nils/Vet right side.

 

[Levitate]

You just gotta get some young guys to lock in before the totality of their peak is reached. Kakko on a long term deal would be very smart. Chytil would have been too.

I mean you're also negotiating with these guys to some extent not just picking your terms. Guys like Chytil and Kakko may push for shorter contracts precisely so they can "prove it" and earn a bigger contract later, especially if they view the possibility that the cap goes up eventually.
Sure you could just give them a take it or leave it offer but then things could start getting messy and leave you with a guy forcing his way out and you get peanuts in trade return because of it

 

[Levitate]

I think the Goodrow contract is bad. Kreider is bad.

Trouba is the one I’ll argue bc I think bashing it is trendy. It’s 5/40 right now and considering the awful shit doled our this summer, it’s looking better.

fox is a stud but Trouba brought something we didn’t have at the time. And I like having a RD beyond Fox to take hard minutes so we don’t McDonagh/Girardi the shit out of Fox. Yes you want to play your best players all the time, but I would have the idea of a Fox/Nils/Vet right side.

Fox should get a lot of minutes but yeah I think balancing the minutes a bit is better in the long run

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Right. And people point this out to Dom on Twitter regularly and he just ignores it. It's very frustrating.

And they will probably be even more skilled now with the addition of Nils. I'd say Nemeth is a wash with Smith. Different types of players. But you don't need skill in that role.

I mean you're not losing much skill-wise with these "grit" swaps either:

In
Goodrow
Blais
Reaves
Barron (likely more games)

Out
Howden
PDawg
Blackwell (not by choice really)

You want to say Reaves is a drop-off? Fine. I'm not thrilled with him here but we all knew it was going to happen. Goodrow over Howden is a massive upgrade. Blais is more effective than Di Giuseppe. Blackwell would still be here if it wasn't for expansion.

I feel like Buch is a wash with getting Kakko & Kravstov more time.

You could say its PK were you lose out specifically since Buch (and Howden I might add) did a tremendous job there. But Goodrow was on TBs top kill, he fills in there. And there's always a player that you can develop IMO. No one expected Buch to be that good on the PK 2-3 years ago.

 

[Levitate]

Tinordi will be our 3rd pair defenseman this season unless he's beaten out by Robertson. I dont see jones beating him out just yet defensively and I see lundkvist as the bigger prospect/upgrade.

Nemeth will be the 3rd pair defenseman on the left. They didn't sign him to that contract to be the 7th D. Lundkvist is likely his partner on the right. Tinordi is a lefty.

 

[Thirty One]

Tinordi will be our 3rd pair defenseman this season unless he's beaten out by Robertson. I dont see jones beating him out just yet defensively and I see lundkvist as the bigger prospect/upgrade.

So who is Tinordi beating out between Lindgren/Miller/Nemeth?

 

[pld459666]

I doubt Goodrow's contract will be considered a good one and sooner rather than later.

The average salary for a 23 man roster with an 81.5 million cap is 3.5 million

I doubt his deal is anything but solid for the next 4 years.

 

[Levitate]

We do know what happened in the Carolina play in series and we do know how no physical elements were added. Was the plan to change that? We don’t know

Just gonna call this out because it's flat out wrong. JD and Gorton and Quinn talked at length about wanting to add some grit and toughness to the team, they just didn't see a viable market to do it in last offseason especially since it was so weird and we didn't know when the season would be or if we would have one.
But it was always the plan to get tougher to play against, after the Carolina series there were rumors in the beat writers columns about how upset the team was with their performance, and again they talked openly about the need to upgrade the team grit. We know for a fact that JD and Gorton were planning to change the makeup of the team along the lines of what they've done this offseason. Ultimately it may appear they just didn't move fast enough for Dolan.

- Buch’s return is completely subjective. We have no idea what the market was like for a center. B/c you expected it and it didn’t happen doesn’t mean the return for Buch was supposed to be a center

This though is correct. Everyone with any connections, writers, insiders, whatever, have said the market for Buchnevich just did not match what we would normally expect for a player like him. I don't think there was any real clear cut "this is a trade to acquire a future top six C we know will produce". Maybe the Rangers overvalue Blais and skipped on another player that is a C and has potential that they didn't really believe in, but that's not the same as passing on a sure top six C in trade return.

 

[Levitate]

The average salary for a 23 man roster with an 81.5 million cap is 3.5 million

I doubt his deal is anything but solid for the next 4 years.

It's fair to say "you want those kind of players to be on cheap contracts!" but most of the time these guys are annoyingly difficult to find. Maybe Blais or Hunt or something is the next Goodrow on a cheap deal , who knows, but people didn't like those moves either!

 

[pld459666]

It's fair to say "you want those kind of players to be on cheap contracts!" but most of the time these guys are annoyingly difficult to find. Maybe Blais or Hunt or something is the next Goodrow on a cheap deal , who knows, but people didn't like those moves either!

Can't win with some folks.

Personally, I think we have our next Goodrow in Barron, but this Mgmt is looking to compete now. They are not interested in waiting 2-3 more years for Barron to develop into a Goodrow when one was available for a 7th rounder.

Now we have the best of both worlds. Get the real version AND have a replacement developing right there along with him.

And for me, while adding sandpaper to the team was an ABSOLUTE necessity, I like it more for the diversity it affords the forward group that by and large have been waaayy to easy to play against.

Some of these guys understand what takes to score that greasy goal when the talented guys falter.

We haven't had that in a LOOONG time.

And, the only skill player jettisoned is Buchnevich. So its not like we gutted the talent on the roster.

 

[NYSPORTS]

(1) Just gonna call this out because it's flat out wrong. JD and Gorton and Quinn talked at length about wanting to add some grit and toughness to the team, they just didn't see a viable market to do it in last offseason especially since it was so weird and we didn't know when the season would be or if we would have one.
But it was always the plan to get tougher to play against, after the Carolina series there were rumors in the beat writers columns about how upset the team was with their performance, and again they talked openly about the need to upgrade the team grit. We know for a fact that JD and Gorton were planning to change the makeup of the team along the lines of what they've done this offseason. Ultimately it may appear they just didn't move fast enough for Dolan.



This though is correct. Everyone with any connections, writers, insiders, whatever, have said the market for Buchnevich just did not match what we would normally expect for a player like him. I don't think there was any real clear cut "this is a trade to acquire a future top six C we know will produce". Maybe the Rangers overvalue Blais and skipped on another player that is a C and has potential that they didn't really believe in, but that's not the same as passing on a sure top six C in trade return.

1 - it’s not flat out wrong, they added nothing. Going forward, i truly believe they had the cap space and would have added grit. I wish they had the chance yet, like i posted “Was the plan to change that? We don’t know”. Did they sit in front of Dolan and say they didn’t see a market again or something Dolan didn’t like? We don’t know.

2. all speculation like everything. Rangers added grit and landed a #2 pick in a deep draft.

 

[Off Sides]

They are definitely possible - look at the Colorado breakdown posted here. Landeskog at $7.5m is an A deal, Makar at $9m is an A deal, Rantanen even at 9.5m is an A deal. MacKinnon is an A+ deal though only with 2 years left if I recall.

You just gotta get some young guys to lock in before the totality of their peak is reached. Kakko on a long term deal would be very smart. Chytil would have been too.

I am not sure I see how they do that without making trades or buyouts.

28M next year

Pending

Fox
Zibanejad (or #1C)

Strome
Georgiev (or backup)
Blais
Kakko
Kravtsov


Assuming Fox and Zbad (or replacement) are expensive
Even if they eliminate Strome
Turn Geo into a 1-2M goalie

It seems like just extending the others 3 at even the Chytil 2.3M would use up nearly all the 28M.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

I guess some just can’t accept the moves were made b/c the Rangers couldn’t physically compete with physical teams nor could they survive in the playoffs. It’s not on the radar how easily Carolina handled the Rangers in the playoff playin, how the Isles and Bruins pushed the Rangers around when they went into playoff mode.

How teams beyond the previous two mentioned would handle the Rangers including a physical Montreal, a Vegas, a Dallas, St Louis, Tampa or anybody who decided to get physical. We’ll just play defense and let the Rangers skill burn out b/c they nothing on lines 3 or 4.

It’s as if people can’t recognize who and why teams were successful in the playoffs so they default to “it must be Tom Wilson”.

because people who write for the athletic just look at blue and red charts. flashy skills and point totals to determine which teams are good or not. Then they have no answer as to why teams like the Islanders, Stars, Habs go deep in the playoffs and why the Avs, the greatest analytic team in history who are a dynasty according to the spreadsheets, still can't get out of the 2nd round. Can't wait for the Rangers to be a greatly improved team (and in the playoffs) this next season and laugh at all these clowns.

 

[chosen]

- ok, you wouldn’t have fired all management. Neither would any of us while we have no idea what transpired behind the scenes. We do know what happened in the Carolina play in series and we do know how no physical elements were added. Was the plan to change that? We don’t know

- you’re not a GM. Ugh,this is what makes me smh. If you’re going to ridicule without a solution what is the point? Hate a move yet no answer to what you would do? Com’on, you give yourself all the credit for killing moves yet step aside when asked for a move you like? I don’t get it.

- Buch’s return is completely subjective. We have no idea what the market was like for a center. B/c you expected it and it didn’t happen doesn’t mean the return for Buch was supposed to be a center

- Ok you don’t like Goodrow. We’ve beaten this to death. I’d ask what physical players you would like to bring in yet you already played you’re not a GM card and maybe you felt a physical addition wasn’t necessary.

- Reaves is again subjective. What do you care what others posted? He did add more than fighting to Vegas although it doesn’t have to be on the scoresheet. For $1.75 who cares? Is that 3rd Round pick so precious when the Rangers have so many prospects and already gained another 2nd Round pick in a loaded draft for Buch? I say no.

The solution was to not waste roster space and any money on Tinordi and Reaves. Neither is capable of contributing a thing other than slaking the thirst of Wilson-haters. Why do you think Vegas no longer would pay even a bare minimum to Reaves if he adds more than fighting??

Buch - if they were unhappy with his market value they should have kept him until the next trade deadline. They essentially gave awat a 1st or 2nd line forward in his prime for a banger who breaks down every year. That's poor asset management.

Now, the Rangers have two choices. They can sit with their current set of centers or give up some talented youth to get it. If the latter happens, it becomes Buch plus that youth for a center.

Of course the Rangers have to get more physical to be a Cup contender, but usually teams don't make those moves until they're close. The Rangers aren't.

 

[chosen]

Tinordi won’t be taking regular shifts in all likelihood, he’s an extra at best. And Reaves has been taking regular shifts on a team that performed a lot better than this one.

Why do you think Vegas bailed on Reaves if he's an asset at a cheap price?

 

[chosen]

The average salary for a 23 man roster with an 81.5 million cap is 3.5 million

I doubt his deal is anything but solid for the next 4 years.

Goodrow may work out.

 

[CLW]

Why do you think Vegas bailed on Reaves if he's an asset at a cheap price?

I think Reaves was more a guy for the locker room than the roster.

 

[haveandare]

Why do you think Vegas bailed on Reaves if he's an asset at a cheap price?

They didn’t really bail on him. A third for an older 4th liner isnt bad