Around the NHL: Part XV - End the Damn Season Already

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Tampa won as many playoff games as we did last year.

I’m certainly not mouring McD/Miller after that fiasco.

 

[Edge]

What were the expectations? You're the only one who seems to think he should be better than a 30-40 point player

I don’t even know how someone compares Etem to Names.

So basically Names is a third line, utility forward who pops in 30-35 points. Maybe 40 in the right scenario.

Etem isn’t even playing in the NHL.

In an effort to prove a point we’re going so far off the rails, it almost feels like parody.

 

[Edge]

Better probability that the Vancouver pick will be higher (no playoffs in 2021) than The lighting winning the cup. I think it’s obvious the lightning did this move to remove another 5 million plus from their books but at the same time they could have a realistic chance at getting a top 15 pick in two years. To me that’s a win win for them. This deal has the feel of Benning needing to make the playoffs in the next two years or he’s gone. So for him it’s a worthwhile gamble.

Could it happen? Sure. But I’m not sure I see Vancouver just sitting close to the same spot for the next two years as Pettersson grows, Hughes develops, and Benning continues to make moves.

Will the pick be higher than Tampa’s? Probably. But I don’t think the pick is going to be a high lottery pick, if it’s a lottery pick at all. And that’s to say nothing about the inherent flaw of dividing our Tampa trade into two deals in the first place.

 

[Leetch3]

I think the vast majority of people think the McD trade was fair value. I think for a smaller percentage of people, it will never have been enough and anything ever associated with that deal, now or in the future, will be met with a heightened response.

And it’s not exactly like the end result for Tampa was much different than the story we saw. McD, under the strain of playing top pairing minutes, was once again hurt and worn out by the time the playoffs rolled around, and Miller found him on the fourth line and in the dog house by the end of the season, before being traded.

Forgive me I sounds dismissive of the reactions to the whole thing, but I’ve seen this episode before.

agreed about the value of the trade...i just laugh hearing people saying we were tricked into thinking names was better than he was playing with those guys like he was coming off a 30 goal season.

 

[Edge]

agreed about the value of the trade...i just laugh hearing people saying we were tricked into thinking names was better than he was playing with those guys like he was coming off a 30 goal season.

I think most people acknowledged the numbers were inflated. I think you can probably make an argument that we were probably hoping for close 40 points as compared to 30, but I don’t think anyone thought we were getting a 25 goal, 60 point player either.

I also think one can be disappointed that Names hasn’t produced more without the whole deal being some kind of poor return.

The whole two trade approach always felt so arbitrary to me.

How does one decide that it’s Names for Miller?

Why isn’t Names part of the McD trade? How do we decide the divide in the trade?

Is it Howden and Hajek for McD? Why isn’t it Hajek, Names and a first? Or how about Howden, a first and a second? Or how about Howden, Names and a second? Who do we pair with who and how?

And why this trade? Do we divide all multi-player trades into parts?

 

[Rangers ftw]

If we wanted the package for Miller that Tampa got, we should have traded to a moron like Benning. That’s why we only got fair value and not stupid good like Tampa.

 

[eco's bones]

Were they though?

Maybe a better way of saying it was that they thought they were getting a better player than he actually is. And really after his first two games he hit the skids but the Rangers gave him a pretty nice contract (pretty much paying him based on his entire season last year) and not a contract say that they would give to a more useful home grown 30 + point player like Jesper Fast. Fast makes $1.85 mil per to be the Rangers Swiss army knife--Namestnikov more than twice that and for us anyway he's not as valuable a player.

 

[eco's bones]

can people please stop talking about how names put up these great numbers with stamkos and kucherov...his career high is 44 points. he has never put up big numbers playing with anyone

Actually 48--44 in 62 games with Tampa and 4 in 19 games with us. If he hadn't moved his numbers would have pro-rated out to about 58 which would have been a significant jumped over his previous high of 35. I don't think he's ever going to see 48 points in a season again but that's why the Rangers gave him $4 mil per two year contract.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Maybe a better way of saying it was that they thought they were getting a better player than he actually is. And really after his first two games he hit the skids but the Rangers gave him a pretty nice contract (pretty much paying him based on his entire season last year) and not a contract say that they would give to a more useful home grown 30 + point player like Jesper Fast. Fast makes $1.85 mil per to be the Rangers Swiss army knife--Namestnikov more than twice that and for us anyway he's not as valuable a player.

Disregarding contracts I'd say Fast and Names are very similar as players in terms of impact and roles. Fast has the advantage of being a right shot while Names has the advantage of being able to play center as well as winger.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I think most people acknowledged the numbers were inflated. I think you can probably make an argument that we were probably hoping for close 40 points as compared to 30, but I don’t think anyone thought we were getting a 25 goal, 60 point player either.

I also think one can be disappointed that Names hasn’t produced more without the whole deal being some kind of poor return.

The whole two trade approach always felt so arbitrary to me.

How does one decide that it’s Names for Miller?

Why isn’t Names part of the McD trade? How do we decide the divide in the trade?

Is it Howden and Hajek for McD? Why isn’t it Hajek, Names and a first? Or how about Howden, a first and a second? Or how about Howden, Names and a second? Who do we pair with who and how?

And why this trade? Do we divide all multi-player trades into parts?

People really need to stop looking at every trade as a battle won or lost. It's all about the complete puzzle to me. After winning the lottery and seeing already what the two trade deadline deals brought, I have completed re-thought some of my pre-conceived notions. Did it matter that the Rangers didn't get this year's 1st for Zuccarello, when they were able to get a player at 49 who would have been great value if the Dallas pick was in 28-31 range? Would we have thought that trading Kevin Hayes eventually facilitated a deal for Trouba? Was there a player at 37 that the Rangers would have taken over Fox? Hell, even the fact that the Rangers finished behind Detroit and Buffalo and ended up getting Kakko flies in the face of "tanking". I walk away from this draft believing the Rangers did a very good job of filling in the gaps of the system with a lot of players with boom potential. Just one slot to fill...FU Edmonton.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Maybe a better way of saying it was that they thought they were getting a better player than he actually is. And really after his first two games he hit the skids but the Rangers gave him a pretty nice contract (pretty much paying him based on his entire season last year) and not a contract say that they would give to a more useful home grown 30 + point player like Jesper Fast. Fast makes $1.85 mil per to be the Rangers Swiss army knife--Namestnikov more than twice that and for us anyway he's not as valuable a player.

If this is about contracts, the offseason Namestnikov signed his deal was an offseason where we saw the likes of Jay Beagle and Leo Komorov get like 4 year $3m deals, salaries are inflated, and he’s better than both of them

 

[eco's bones]

If this is about contracts, the offseason Namestnikov signed his deal was an offseason where we saw the likes of Jay Beagle and Leo Komorov get like 4 year $3m deals, salaries are inflated, and he’s better than both of them

Well Beagle and Komarov were UFA's too and everyone knows how the UFA market works and if Vlad is better it ain't that much IMO. Jesper Fast is a better 30 point player than Namestnikov and he's getting $1.85 mil. Vlad should have been in the $2.5-3 range. FWIW though the Rangers made a worse mistake with Spooner who if he's not putting up points--mostly assists because he's a perimeter player is pretty much useless otherwise.

 

[eco's bones]

Disregarding contracts I'd say Fast and Names are very similar as players in terms of impact and roles. Fast has the advantage of being a right shot while Names has the advantage of being able to play center as well as winger.

Fast is better in that role though and at least partly because he accepted it a long time ago. It's his identity as a player. Fast always plays the same way--he's consistent--everyone knows what to expect. It took a little time but Quinn eventually got Namestnikov forechecking harder and hitting more. Worked him into the penalty kill rotation.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Maybe it's just me, but I like Names and think he adds value to our team. I wouldn't be quick to get rid of him unless it's in the right deal. Much rather move Vesey or Fast.

 

[Edge]

People really need to stop looking at every trade as a battle won or lost. It's all about the complete puzzle to me. After winning the lottery and seeing already what the two trade deadline deals brought, I have completed re-thought some of my pre-conceived notions. Did it matter that the Rangers didn't get this year's 1st for Zuccarello, when they were able to get a player at 49 who would have been great value if the Dallas pick was in 28-31 range? Would we have thought that trading Kevin Hayes eventually facilitated a deal for Trouba? Was there a player at 37 that the Rangers would have taken over Fox? Hell, even the fact that the Rangers finished behind Detroit and Buffalo and ended up getting Kakko flies in the face of "tanking". I walk away from this draft believing the Rangers did a very good job of filling in the gaps of the system with a lot of players with boom potential. Just one slot to fill...FU Edmonton.

I can even live with the whole Charlie Sheen like #Winning obsession we've taken on in the last 5 years if I felt like there was more to it. But it often feels kind of...empty.

Sometimes it feels like people are so intent on being the smartest person in the room, or the one who "didn't get taken for a sucker" that it's like reading a pro wrestling promo. I don't know if it's a defense mechanism to protect against disappointment kicked into overdrive, or nervous energy, or a genuine belief in the interpretation that's assigned, but a lot of the complaints start to crumble when held to a higher degree of criticism.

Yes, if you cut out 1/2 to 3/4 of a trade, take the part you didn't like, and compare it to a full trade made by another team, you're going to get interesting results. You won't get accurate results, but they'll certainly be interesting.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

I can even live with the whole Charlie Sheen like #Winning obsession we've taken on in the last 5 years if I felt like there was more to it. But it often feels kind of...empty.

Sometimes it feels like people are so intent on being the smartest person in the room, or the one who "didn't get taken for a sucker" that it's like reading a pro wrestling promo. I don't know if it's a defense mechanism to protect against disappointment kicked into overdrive, or nervous energy, or a genuine belief in the interpretation that's assigned, but a lot of the complaints start to crumble when held to a higher degree of criticism.

Yes, if you cut out 1/2 to 3/4 of a trade, take the part you didn't like, and compare it to a full trade made by another team, you're going to get interesting results. You won't get accurate results, but they'll certainly be interesting.

Personally, I still think the McD trade was a good move. We got two really good prospects in Hajek and Howden, who both appear likely to become quality NHL players + the mixed bag of other stuff.

I liked the trade then and I like it now. I have no idea if they could have possibly gotten more had they separated Miller and McD. And I have no idea if they could have had a better offer elsewhere. What I do know, is we got a few young, quality long-term pieces for 2 guys that I had no interest in paying long-term.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Well Beagle and Komarov were UFA's too and everyone knows how the UFA market works and if Vlad is better it ain't that much IMO. Jesper Fast is a better 30 point player than Namestnikov and he's getting $1.85 mil. Vlad should have been in the $2.5-3 range. FWIW though the Rangers made a worse mistake with Spooner who if he's not putting up points--mostly assists because he's a perimeter player is pretty much useless otherwise.

RFA’s get paid like UFA’s do these days and Namestnikov is a handidly offensive player than Fast is, even if his point totals got a little boost from playing with some star players (that also just goes to show that he can play with star players for long stretches)

 

[Edge]

Personally, I still think the McD trade was a good move. We got two really good prospects in Hajek and Howden, who both appear likely to become quality NHL players + the mixed bag of other stuff.

I liked the trade then and I like it now. I have no idea if they could have possibly gotten more had they separated Miller and McD. And I have no idea if they could have had a better offer elsewhere. What I do know, is we got a few young, quality long-term pieces for 2 guys that I had no interest in paying long-term.

At the end of the day, the Rangers got three players who are expected to play in the NHL next season, a first round pick who is showing a ton of promise in Sweden, and a value second round pick who will also play in Sweden. They got five pieces in the trade, including several players who have been/will be counted among the Rangers top prospects between 2018 and 2021.

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

At the end of the day, the Rangers got three players who are expected to play in the NHL next season, a first round pick who is showing a ton of promise in Sweden, and a value second round pick who will also play in Sweden. They got five pieces in the trade, including several players who have been/will be counted among the Rangers top prospects between 2018 and 2021.

Exactly. People make it out as if we traded franchise players for busting prospects.

I would argue this is about as win-win a trade you can get. But I still prefer our side to their's.

Opining on what may or may not have been on the table elsewhere is moot, since I have no insider knowledge.

 

[Zibanejbread]

We're having arguably our best off-season in ages and people will still find things to complain about... not surprised at all.

 

[Edge]

Exactly. People make it out as if we traded franchise players for busting prospects.

I would argue this is about as win-win a trade you can get. But I still prefer our side to their's.

Opining on what may or may not have been on the table elsewhere is moot, since I have no insider knowledge.

Within a couple of years, one of two things will happen:

1. Vancouver will either completely shit the bed, and people will dwell and obsess over the Miller return --- even though you really can't compare the two trades.

2. Vancouver will indeed claw their way into a position that results in a draft pick in the late teens or early 20s, and this will be one of those discussions that isn't really a blip on the radar.

 

[eco's bones]

RFA’s get paid like UFA’s do these days and Namestnikov is a handidly offensive player than Fast is, even if his point totals got a little boost from playing with some star players (that also just goes to show that he can play with star players for long stretches)

UFA's get overpaid all the time by GM's. Basically those players are the ones who f*** up a team's salary structure and the 1st and 2nd contracts are the corrective to that. You got to hold the line with those guys and not overpay them.

 

[JayMan82]

We're having arguably our best off-season in ages and people will still find things to complain about... not surprised at all.

It’s hilarious. We have experts saying the Rangers are executing a rebuild on steroids and of course we have members nickel and diming every trade... I see trading away Step, McD and Miller as addition by subtraction along with any assets we received. One thing our management group knows, it’s asset management.

Being able to flip these players returns before heavy commitments (players above), attaining free assets (Hayes, Pionk, Raanta, Talbot, possibly Vesey, maybe Georgiev later) and flipping them for assets at their possible peaks has been nothing short of outstanding.

How many other teams do you see what the Rangers are doing?

 

[Ghost of jas]

I can even live with the whole Charlie Sheen like #Winning obsession we've taken on in the last 5 years if I felt like there was more to it. But it often feels kind of...empty.

Sometimes it feels like people are so intent on being the smartest person in the room, or the one who "didn't get taken for a sucker" that it's like reading a pro wrestling promo. I don't know if it's a defense mechanism to protect against disappointment kicked into overdrive, or nervous energy, or a genuine belief in the interpretation that's assigned, but a lot of the complaints start to crumble when held to a higher degree of criticism.

Yes, if you cut out 1/2 to 3/4 of a trade, take the part you didn't like, and compare it to a full trade made by another team, you're going to get interesting results. You won't get accurate results, but they'll certainly be interesting.

I’d even relate to the Rangers’ draft this year. Frankly, if the only player this draft produces is a franchise forward, the Rangers are already ahead of the game. While I can discuss prospects, I don’t claim to be an expert, so I can’t quibble over who they took in the 4th or 5th round. But, I like the overall approach and really believe they did a good job filling in the gaps with boom potential players.

 

[Ghost of jas]

It’s hilarious. We have experts saying the Rangers are executing a rebuild on steroids and of course we have members nickel and diming every trade... I see trading away Step, McD and Miller as addiction by subtraction along with any assets we received, one thing our management group knows, it’s asset management.

Being able to flip these players returns before heavy commitments (players above), attaining free assets (Hayes, Pionk, Raanta, Talbot, possibly Vesey, maybe Georgiev later) and flipping them for assets at their possible peaks has been nothing short of outstanding.

How many other teams do you see what the Rangers are doing?

Addiction by subtraction...awesome autocorrect. As for the rest of the post, spot on.