Blues 2024 Off-Season Trade Proposals Thread

[Brockon]

He did have 40 pts last year in his age 21 season with hardly any PP time. His numbers fell off this year, but you’d have to think he’s pressing super hard with his draft status, and being in a major market.

If you can get him for cheap, or as a secondary piece in say a Buchnevich deal, I think it could end up being a very smart move. Not many players his age are as good defensively as he is.

I don't see the NYR paying to re-aquire Buchnevich, having moved on from him a few years ago.

I too think Kakko would benefit from a change of scenery and probably see an uptick in scoring (Buchnevich/JT Milller 2.0?).

I think there's more there than Puljujarvi was able to show @bleedblue1223 . I'm not looking to pay a ransom for Kakko (which probably puts us out of the running), but I think a Schwartz or Saad esque 50-60 point career high with sound defensive metrics and being a huge asset in board battles and ozone cycle as a complementary player is a reasonable expectation for a guy who has had a 40 point season at his age, with suboptimal deployment.

Kakko may never outgrow that middle six role, but a defensively sound winger with a little scoring upside has value - especially when you look at Buchnevich/Saad who are likely to be gone in the next year and Blais, Kapanen, Walker as guys he'd be an improvement over that are either free agents or simply replacement level depth in Walker's case.

There's a place on good teams for a defensive specialist (see Jordan Staal's career. Yes I know he played center - but he didn't live up to the 2oa expectations). I can see Kakko having the size, grit and drive to play that 3 RW and push up occasionally if injuries occur to Kyrou or Snuggy.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Buch originally broke out in his last Rangers season, and Miller was always a pretty solid 2nd liner, Kakko wasn't on their level. Much closer to Puljujarvi who looked like a potential 40 point guy with good defense, what he was in 20/21 and 21/22.

I think people look at those players and want to see them follow the Nichushkin path, but I just don't see it.

 

[simon IC]

I absolutely love the idea of acquiring Kakko. I wonder what the ask would be?

 

[ds774622]

I’m getting resigned to the fact that our D corps is set in stone and can’t be materially changed until next year when some of the NTCs change to modified-NTCs. We have a need for a 2C (hopefully just a stopgap until Dvorsky steps in in a few years). What can we reasonably do here? Anything to be had for flipping Buchy for a center?

 

[WeWentBlues]

I’m getting resigned to the fact that our D corps is set in stone and can’t be materially changed until next year when some of the NTCs change to modified-NTCs. We have a need for a 2C (hopefully just a stopgap until Dvorsky steps in in a few years). What can we reasonably do here? Anything to be had for flipping Buchy for a center?

I think they could fit another 7-8M AAV player on the backend without shedding salary if there was such a player out there.

 

[Brian39]

I don't see the NYR paying to re-aquire Buchnevich, having moved on from him a few years ago.

I too think Kakko would benefit from a change of scenery and probably see an uptick in scoring (Buchnevich/JT Milller 2.0?).

I think there's more there than Puljujarvi was able to show @bleedblue1223 . I'm not looking to pay a ransom for Kakko (which probably puts us out of the running), but I think a Schwartz or Saad esque 50-60 point career high with sound defensive metrics and being a huge asset in board battles and ozone cycle as a complementary player is a reasonable expectation for a guy who has had a 40 point season at his age, with suboptimal deployment.

Kakko may never outgrow that middle six role, but a defensively sound winger with a little scoring upside has value - especially when you look at Buchnevich/Saad who are likely to be gone in the next year and Blais, Kapanen, Walker as guys he'd be an improvement over that are either free agents or simply replacement level depth in Walker's case.

There's a place on good teams for a defensive specialist (see Jordan Staal's career. Yes I know he played center - but he didn't live up to the 2oa expectations). I can see Kakko having the size, grit and drive to play that 3 RW and push up occasionally if injuries occur to Kyrou or Snuggy.

Buch originally broke out in his last Rangers season, and Miller was always a pretty solid 2nd liner, Kakko wasn't on their level. Much closer to Puljujarvi who looked like a potential 40 point guy with good defense, what he was in 20/21 and 21/22.

I think people look at those players and want to see them follow the Nichushkin path, but I just don't see it.

Really enjoyed the back and forth here.

I like Kakko a good chunk more than Puljujarvi and would push back a bit about what Puljujarvi looked like in 2020/21 and 2021/22. He put up those numbers because he got stapled to McDavid. He played 70% of his 5 on 5 minutes with McDavid and started getting 60% of his zone starts in the O-zone. Despite the best opportunity in hockey, he still only produced at a 41 point pace.

I'm more impressed by Kakko's performance in a more traditional bottom/middle 6 role than I am with PulJujarvi only being able to produce like a middle 6er while playing with the best player in the world.

I don't think Kakko has a Buch/Miller level breakout incoming, but I do think that he is a fairly safe bet to be a long-term middle 6 player with pretty reasonable 2nd line upside. I'm honestly not sure what his trade value is, but I do wonder if his $2.4M qualifying offer and arbitration rights would scare off all/most contenders from targeting him in a trade. He won't get a big enough arbitration award that a team could walk away from it, so any team that acquires him would have to be fine with a $2M+ uncertainty to their cap structure that could very well extend deep into summer.

I could definitely see him being part of another deal or sold at what feels like a discount early in the summer. He could almost certainly be pried out of New York with a 1 year, $3.5M offer sheet, which would require a 2025 2nd round pick as compensation. I think that will make it hard for the Rangers to extract a great return for him since teams know that they could fall back to that offer sheet if things fall through. Offer sheets are rare, but part of the reason they are rare are because the potential of one can get things moving in trade talks.

I'd be content giving up a 2nd for Kakko. We have an extra 2nd rounder this year and that feels like a nice gamble for a team in our position. I don't expect it to happen, but we are in a position to sniff around deals like that.

 

[Mike Liut]

probably take both 2nds for Kakko imo.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I think Kakko is a significant safer bet to stay a decent bottom 6 winger that Puljujarvi, but I don't think he'd fill a role needed enough to be worth the cost. I'd probably prefer a move for Frost or Farabee.

 

[Brian39]

probably take both 2nds for Kakko imo.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Rangers held firm at that. I don't believe that anyone will offer them that and I'd be content walking away from that demand. More power to them if they can get a couple 2nd rounders for him.

Before walking away from their asking price, I would inform the Rangers that I'm offer sheeting him July 1st if they are still holding his unsigned RFA rights (assuming we don't go full-sellers mode at the draft).

 

[Celtic Note]

I don't see the NYR paying to re-aquire Buchnevich, having moved on from him a few years ago.

I too think Kakko would benefit from a change of scenery and probably see an uptick in scoring (Buchnevich/JT Milller 2.0?).

I think there's more there than Puljujarvi was able to show @bleedblue1223 . I'm not looking to pay a ransom for Kakko (which probably puts us out of the running), but I think a Schwartz or Saad esque 50-60 point career high with sound defensive metrics and being a huge asset in board battles and ozone cycle as a complementary player is a reasonable expectation for a guy who has had a 40 point season at his age, with suboptimal deployment.

Kakko may never outgrow that middle six role, but a defensively sound winger with a little scoring upside has value - especially when you look at Buchnevich/Saad who are likely to be gone in the next year and Blais, Kapanen, Walker as guys he'd be an improvement over that are either free agents or simply replacement level depth in Walker's case.

There's a place on good teams for a defensive specialist (see Jordan Staal's career. Yes I know he played center - but he didn't live up to the 2oa expectations). I can see Kakko having the size, grit and drive to play that 3 RW and push up occasionally if injuries occur to Kyrou or Snuggy.

I was thinking something similar. If we pay for the player he is close to today and are not looking for him to emerge as an elite talent, then it might be a good move.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I think Kakko is a significant safer bet to stay a decent bottom 6 winger that Puljujarvi, but I don't think he'd fill a role needed enough to be worth the cost. I'd probably prefer a move for Frost or Farabee.

frost in particular would be a great fit, but i suspect he is gonna cost a bit more.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'd be more open to a Kakko trade if we were moving a couple other players off the roster that resulted in acquiring a bunch of picks/prospects. If we move Buchnevich for a 1st and stuff, and then we trade some of that stuff for Kakko. Still not that interested though, especially if the Rangers want value for his "potential".

 

[ds774622]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Rangers held firm at that. I don't believe that anyone will offer them that and I'd be content walking away from that demand. More power to them if they can get a couple 2nd rounders for him.

Before walking away from their asking price, I would inform the Rangers that I'm offer sheeting him July 1st if they are still holding his unsigned RFA rights (assuming we don't go full-sellers mode at the draft).

One of my best mates is a NYR die hard, so I'm fairly in tune with their team. The consensus on their side seems to be that they waited for Laf to break out--which he did this year--so they need to be patient with Kaako. He's getting less than 15 mins ice time per game, and I don't think any is on the PP. Highly unlikely they move a cost controlled asset for two 2nds when they really need to address the Trouba albatross contract. Doubt GMDA burns a bridge with an offer sheet. Don't think he's ever done one to date.

Drury wasn't wrong years ago when they sent us Buchy as a cap casualty, in an attempt to get some grit. They need grit on the front end but more in line with prime Backes-types, not Reaves 4th liner types. Zbad, Panarin, Trochek are all finesse type top-6 and they need a shake up. Hard with all the NMCs but Kaako is unlikely to be moved.

 

[ds774622]

I think they could fit another 7-8M AAV player on the backend without shedding salary if there was such a player out there.

The only player that comes to mind here is an extended Buch to ANA for Zegras. CAR appears to have made Necas available, but not sure if his C experience is any different than the Buchy at C experiment that we've done. Otherwise if Buch doesn't resign it's purely for futures at the TDL.

As for 2C next year, UFAs are going to be overpaid. Less than $6m you're probably looking at Monahan or Stephenson, but at that point why not see what the kids bring to camp?

 

[WeWentBlues]

The only player that comes to mind here is an extended Buch to ANA for Zegras. CAR appears to have made Necas available, but not sure if his C experience is any different than the Buchy at C experiment that we've done. Otherwise if Buch doesn't resign it's purely for futures at the TDL.

As for 2C next year, UFAs are going to be overpaid. Less than $6m you're probably looking at Monahan or Stephenson, but at that point why not see what the kids bring to camp?

I was responding to the defense being set in stone. Don't think that's the case even without moving someone out.
Blues have the cap space to sign Skjei or Zadorov.
Blues could pursue Chabot, Chychrun, Provorov, Rielly, Pelech, Byram, Samuelsson via trade
Blues could take cap dumps from contending teams (Orlov, Schmidt, Suter to name a few)

Then there is the crop of emerging players/futures that Blues could be interested in that could be a cap casualty (Harley? Hronek? Hague?), need a change a scenery (Brannstrom, Vaakanainen, Valimaki), or the team has a lot of D prospects and could be interested to swap for forwards (see Montreal).

 

[Brian39]

One of my best mates is a NYR die hard, so I'm fairly in tune with their team. The consensus on their side seems to be that they waited for Laf to break out--which he did this year--so they need to be patient with Kaako.

That may be the fan consensus, but it absolutely isn't the consensus within the organization. Laf and Kakko got fairly similar deployment under Gallant, but went in completely opposite directions under Laviolette. From the start of the season, Laf was the guy who got the favored usage this year and the gap widened as the season went on. Kakko pretty quickly went from middle 6 usage to the bottom 6. It culminated in him being scratched in game 2 of the Conference Final.

The front office very well may want to continue being patient, but the head coach (who is currently tasked with winning a Cup right now) views him as a guy who can't contribute positively. Kakko is also 8 months (and a draft class) older than Laf.

They have 2 more seasons with Panarin under contract and he is 32. Shesterkin is due a large raise next summer. K Miller is due a large raise next summer. Laf is due a pretty decent raise next summer. Lindgren is due a large raise this summer. Zibby is under contract long term, but is 31. Kreider has 3 years left but is 33. That organization is (and should) be treating 2024/25 as a Cup window season and the coach very clearly doesn't view Kakko as a guy who currently is a top-half-of-the-roster player for a contender.

I think it is far from a consensus that they will prioritize developing a guy in his D+6 season over building the best possible roster they can for 2024/25. And considering he was scratched in the playoffs and is clearly in the coach's doghouse, I think it is far from a given that the player won't do absolutely everything in his power to get to a better situation.

He's getting less than 15 mins ice time per game, and I don't think any is on the PP.

Which is extremely unlikely to meaningfully change. All the guys getting top 6 minutes ahead of him are under contract next year. He was on the 2nd PP unit and has next to no chance of being bumped to the top unit (which was extremely effective).

There is very little path for him to get expanded opportunity under Laviolette on a team squarely in win-now mode.

Highly unlikely they move a cost controlled asset for two 2nds when they really need to address the Trouba albatross contract.

I wouldn't consider Kakko as a cost controlled asset for them.

He's an RFA with arbitration rights who very likely wants a raise. He may or may not deserve that raise, but there is no guarantee that he doesn't get it. He's only 2 years from UFA and has every incentive to dig his heels in during negotiations. What is a number that feels cost-controlled for a guy who the coach views as a bottom 6 player? Is $3M against the cap a number that feels cost-controlled for the role he plays on their team? I'd say no and he might get that.

As to the Trouba thing, that also feels much more like fan consensus than organizational consensus. He was playing hurt in the playoffs, is their captain, and is squarely deployed like a top 4 D man. I very strongly doubt that they view moving him as addition by subtraction and would instead need to bring in another veteran to replace him. I think odds are pretty low that they actually move him, so then they are in a situation where they are looking to improve/maintain team quality with just $11.3M to fill 5 spots.

I think it is far from a given that the organization would view Kakko at $3M as a good move for winning in the short term. I'm not even sold that spending $2.4M on Kakko helps them in 2024/25 and that is the amount it will take to qualify him. I think he can take a couple more steps forward, but I think the odds of him doing it under Laviolette in a bottom 6 role are fairly low.

I'm also not sure how much he's in their long term plans if he were to break out next year. He has 2 more years until UFA status. All of Shesterkin, Laf, K Miller are due large raises next summer before he hits UFA. Even if he were to break out like they want, he still might very well be the cap casualty to keep those guys.

All of this is why he is in one of the few situations where an offer sheet actually makes sense. You can make him financially unappealing to the Rangers by preventing him from being a cost-controlled asset. That is exactly how his trade value would depreciate. Every team who owns a 2025 2nd and expendable cap space in 2024/25 can get him for just those assets. Compensation is just a 2nd round pick for offers up to $4.5M. There is without question a number you can offer that the Rangers will not match.

I don't think him getting offer sheeted is what happens. But like tons of other guys in the past, the threat of an offer sheet (and/or arbitration award) is used in trade negotiations to drive down the trade price. That's almost certainly how we got Buch for the price we paid. The Rangers knew that he was vulnerable to an offer sheet that they wouldn't want to match and that he could potentially get an arbitration award that would screw their plans. So they made the best deal they could a few days before free agency opened.

One of the (several) reasons offer sheets rarely happen is because the possibility of an offer sheet facilitates trades before it gets to that point.

 

[Brockon]

Buch originally broke out in his last Rangers season, and Miller was always a pretty solid 2nd liner, Kakko wasn't on their level. Much closer to Puljujarvi who looked like a potential 40 point guy with good defense, what he was in 20/21 and 21/22.

I think people look at those players and want to see them follow the Nichushkin path, but I just don't see it.

I have to disagree with your characterization of JT Miller when you look back at his numbers, he's not 2nd line caliber at Kakko's current age - that would mirror into Kakko's next season. But following that direct comparison it's hard to say Miller was a solid second liner until he was moved to Tampa and then he blossomed into a Star 1st liner after going to Vancouver.

Buch showed his ability to hold a middle 6 role for his 23-25 years, Kakko had those totals in his age 22 sophomore season but feel back this year.

Miller
2013-14 (21) 30gp 3-3-6p
2014-15 (22) 58gp 10-13-23p
2015-16 (23) 82gp 22-21-43p
2016-17 (24) 82gp 22-34-56p
2017-18 (25) NYR 63gp 17-23-40p
2017-18 (25) TBL 19gp 10-8-18p

Buchnevich
2015-16 (21) KHL 58gp 16-21-37p
2016-17 (22) 41gp 8-12-20p
2017-18 (23) 74gp 14-29-43p
2018-19 (24) 64gp 21-17-38p
2019-20 (25) 68gp 16-30-46p

Kakko
2021-22 (21) 43gp 7-11-18p
2022-23 (22) 82gp 18-22-40p
2023-24 (23) 61gp 13-6-19gp

Puljujarvi
2019-20 (21) Liiga 56 24-29-53p
2020-21 (22) 55gp 15-10-25p
2021-22 (23) 65gp 14-22-36p
2022-23 (24) EDM 58gp 5-8-13p
2022-23 (24) CAR 17gp 0-2-2p
2023-24 (25) PIT 22gp 3-1-4p

There's a pretty clear
Miller>Buchnevich>>>>>Puljujarvi

Kakko regressed, or was pushed down the lineup for a contender this year, depending on your take. Time will tell where Kakko slots into that particular talent scale ahead/behind Puljujarvi or if he finds himself nearer the Buchnevich/Miller end of that line.

Head to head comparison of age 22 & 23 totals.

Puljujarvi 120gp 29-32-61p
Kakko 143gp 31-28-59p

Kakko produces less with more games played (I can't recall if injuries or healthy scratches influence the GP for each player).

I do recall Edmonton specifically lacked wingers, so Puljujarvi got better deployments until he was moved vs Kakko being behind a deeper line up this season.

Argument to be made that Kakko should be able to force his way into a top 6 spot if he's supremely talented (as 2oa picks should be), but I feel there's a similar usage to our 2019 playoff line up (Finals G1 line-up):

Schwartz Schenn Tarasenko
Blais ROR Perron
Maroon Bozak Thomas
Barbie Sundqvist Steen

Kreider - Zibanejad - x (playoffs Chytil)
Panarin - Trochek - Lafreniere
Roslovic - Chytil (playoffs Wennberg) - Kakko
Cuylle - Goodrow - Brodzinski

It could easily go either way with respect to Kakko taking a step forward this next year or trending towards the Puljujarvi bust end of the spectrum - I can't help but to think Wennberg, Roslovic, Wheeler go and Kakko gets one last shot at solidifying a top 6 role before he gets moved next summer unless someone pays a premium for him this summer.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Miller was a pretty clear 2nd line player in 16/17 and 17/18, stayed that way for Tampa, and then exploded with Vancouver. Your OP implied that Buchnevich's uptick started after the trade out of New York, and in the above you are leaving out his breakout in New York where he scored 48 points in 54 games, 1st line production, where his ice time also shot up to 18:44. Miller and Buchnevich were traded as pretty known quantities and in my view, didn't come with much risk at all. At a bare minimum they showed clear 2nd line ability, and in Buchnevich's case, he displayed 1st line upside in his last Rangers season.

Kakko started this season very rough. He was given almost 15 mintues a game, and had 2 points in his first 15 games. He was under 13 minutes for his next 46 games. Depending on how you count Chytil, Kakko was the 9th or 10th forward in playoff ice time for the Rangers.

I don't think Kakko flops like Puljujarvi, I think Kakko has shown enough consistency to be a 3rd liner. My point with Puljujarvi was to specifically find a younger player that was viewed with upside that had similarish production and defensive metrics. I'd agree with @Brian39 with the flaw in how Puljujarvi got his production next to elite forwards and why he carried more risk than Kakko. My main point was that Kakko isn't similar to Miller or Buchnevich on any level. If Kakko was similar to those players, he wouldn't have been knocked down like he was this season and in the playoffs. Maybe he has more in him and needs a change, but I do think how the Rangers viewed him this season has to be taken into account.

Not really sure what the comparison is with our 2019 roster. Comparing a 23 year old Kakko to a 19 year old Thomas?

 

[bleedblue1223]

Maybe a better comp is Sam Bennett, so maybe for future discussions, I'll leave Puljujarvi aside and use Bennett as the comp.

Would I do the equivalent of 2 2nds for Kakko? Probably not. I'd need to be convinced that Kakko's defensive upside is that of being a genuine good part of an actual shutdown line and not just having decent defensive metrics in typical 3rd line usage. Bennett's upside was his physical play, so his extra offense would be the bonus, and the idea that playing center could help his production. I could agree that simply playing more minutes in a bigger role would lead to Kakko scoring more, but I'd also want it to be as a result of him actually being good enough for an increased role, and not just us handing it to him.

To me, it would be worst case scenario if we left this draft with a forward at 16 or even one of the defensemen that feels more risky than those at the top, and then Kakko with the 2 2nds. Go for Kakko if it means we are trading vets for picks and we have extra picks, or if the price is less than 2 2nds, then I'd be more on board.

 

[PocketNines]

Rangers fans are trying to pry a single 3d out of the Avs for him

Blues better not pay two 2ds for this guy

 

[bleedblue1223]

Rangers fans are trying to pry a single 3d out of the Avs for him

Blues better not pay two 2ds for this guy

I wouldn't really trust either side on that to have an accurate estimation on what it would take to trade Kakko. If it's a 3rd, then sure why not, give him a 2 year deal, and if he flops, let him go at the end of it.

I could see it being like when we tried to trade Dunn and wanted at least a 2nd, and only got offers of 3rds or worse, or whatever it was. Are the Rangers truly ot the point of dumping him for anything, or are they hoping to hold on for at least a 2nd.

 

[ds774622]

That may be the fan consensus, but it absolutely isn't the consensus within the organization. Laf and Kakko got fairly similar deployment under Gallant, but went in completely opposite directions under Laviolette. From the start of the season, Laf was the guy who got the favored usage this year and the gap widened as the season went on. Kakko pretty quickly went from middle 6 usage to the bottom 6. It culminated in him being scratched in game 2 of the Conference Final.

The front office very well may want to continue being patient, but the head coach (who is currently tasked with winning a Cup right now) views him as a guy who can't contribute positively. Kakko is also 8 months (and a draft class) older than Laf.

They have 2 more seasons with Panarin under contract and he is 32. Shesterkin is due a large raise next summer. K Miller is due a large raise next summer. Laf is due a pretty decent raise next summer. Lindgren is due a large raise this summer. Zibby is under contract long term, but is 31. Kreider has 3 years left but is 33. That organization is (and should) be treating 2024/25 as a Cup window season and the coach very clearly doesn't view Kakko as a guy who currently is a top-half-of-the-roster player for a contender.

I think it is far from a consensus that they will prioritize developing a guy in his D+6 season over building the best possible roster they can for 2024/25. And considering he was scratched in the playoffs and is clearly in the coach's doghouse, I think it is far from a given that the player won't do absolutely everything in his power to get to a better situation.


Which is extremely unlikely to meaningfully change. All the guys getting top 6 minutes ahead of him are under contract next year. He was on the 2nd PP unit and has next to no chance of being bumped to the top unit (which was extremely effective).

There is very little path for him to get expanded opportunity under Laviolette on a team squarely in win-now mode.



I wouldn't consider Kakko as a cost controlled asset for them.

He's an RFA with arbitration rights who very likely wants a raise. He may or may not deserve that raise, but there is no guarantee that he doesn't get it. He's only 2 years from UFA and has every incentive to dig his heels in during negotiations. What is a number that feels cost-controlled for a guy who the coach views as a bottom 6 player? Is $3M against the cap a number that feels cost-controlled for the role he plays on their team? I'd say no and he might get that.

As to the Trouba thing, that also feels much more like fan consensus than organizational consensus. He was playing hurt in the playoffs, is their captain, and is squarely deployed like a top 4 D man. I very strongly doubt that they view moving him as addition by subtraction and would instead need to bring in another veteran to replace him. I think odds are pretty low that they actually move him, so then they are in a situation where they are looking to improve/maintain team quality with just $11.3M to fill 5 spots.

I think it is far from a given that the organization would view Kakko at $3M as a good move for winning in the short term. I'm not even sold that spending $2.4M on Kakko helps them in 2024/25 and that is the amount it will take to qualify him. I think he can take a couple more steps forward, but I think the odds of him doing it under Laviolette in a bottom 6 role are fairly low.

I'm also not sure how much he's in their long term plans if he were to break out next year. He has 2 more years until UFA status. All of Shesterkin, Laf, K Miller are due large raises next summer before he hits UFA. Even if he were to break out like they want, he still might very well be the cap casualty to keep those guys.

All of this is why he is in one of the few situations where an offer sheet actually makes sense. You can make him financially unappealing to the Rangers by preventing him from being a cost-controlled asset. That is exactly how his trade value would depreciate. Every team who owns a 2025 2nd and expendable cap space in 2024/25 can get him for just those assets. Compensation is just a 2nd round pick for offers up to $4.5M. There is without question a number you can offer that the Rangers will not match.

I don't think him getting offer sheeted is what happens. But like tons of other guys in the past, the threat of an offer sheet (and/or arbitration award) is used in trade negotiations to drive down the trade price. That's almost certainly how we got Buch for the price we paid. The Rangers knew that he was vulnerable to an offer sheet that they wouldn't want to match and that he could potentially get an arbitration award that would screw their plans. So they made the best deal they could a few days before free agency opened.

One of the (several) reasons offer sheets rarely happen is because the possibility of an offer sheet facilitates trades before it gets to that point.

Agree with most of the analysis, but not the conclusion. History tells us Kakko is a 30-40 point 3rd liner, which their Front Office should view as serviceable at $3m, or thereabouts. Either he doesn't take the next step and they decide to move on, or he becomes valuable at a lower cap hit for 50-55 points. If Kakko is trending towards bust, then I have no desire to repeat the Yakupov experiment even if it only costs a second or two seconds. But right now he has more value than that to Drury, imho. Luckily for us we will only have to wait a few months to see exactly how the Rangers valuate him.

Playoffs ECF Trouba was sheltered heavily. He may be an albatross but his contract is borderline immovable since they will not want to attach high picks just to clear him out. I'd be less surprised with a buyout...which doesn't even make sense until next summer. My point there is just that the Rangers have other priorities than to nickel and dime with Kakko. Dolan wants to make a splash to get over the hump, so I'd listen for chatter on more of their expensive assets.

 

[Brian39]

Agree with most of the analysis, but not the conclusion. History tells us Kakko is a 30-40 point 3rd liner

...under a coach that they fired.

History tells us that he is a 25 point pace 9th forward when playing under the coach who will be behind their bench for the foreseeable future. He was absolutely not a 30-40 point 3rd liner this year. He was not a serviceable $3M (or thereabouts) player this year.

He had 2 points and went -4 playing 12 minutes a night through 15 playoff games this year. 9th in even strength time per game and 10th in overall time per game among Rangers forwards. In the regular season, he was 9th in even strength and overall time per game.

, which their Front Office should view as serviceable at $3m, or thereabouts.

Nothing about this season suggests that the front office should view his floor as a serviceable $3M+ player. Giving him that AAV would absolutely need to be done on the assumption that they very well might be setting $2M of cap space on fire.

Playoffs ECF Trouba was sheltered heavily.

His most frequent forward opponents at 5 on 5 in the ECF were (from most-to-least) Reinhart, Barkov, Tkachuk, Tarasenko, and then Verhaege at 5th.

Tkachuk didn't see any Rangers D man more often than he saw Trouba. Reinhart didn't see any Rangers D more often than he saw Trouba. Barkov saw Miller more often than he saw Trouba, but Trouba was his 2nd most frequent D opponent in the ECF.

In the ECF, he played the 3rd most 5 on 5 minutes for the Rangers (a whopping 23 seconds less than Fox) and he had the lowest O zone start rate on the team. He was 2nd among Rangers D in PK minutes.

This is a nonsense claim. He was given the hardest job on the Rangers blueline in the ECF.

He may be an albatross but his contract is borderline immovable since they will not want to attach high picks just to clear him out. I'd be less surprised with a buyout...which doesn't even make sense until next summer.

This is a prime example of how fan opinion often drastically differs from the organizational opinion. Fans are acting like he's a bum that absolutely has to get moved and shouldn't have even been out there. Meanwhile, the organizational opinion of him was to play him like thei #1 shut down D man in the ECF even while he was playing on a broken ankle.

He's not a #1 D. He's overpaid. He wasn't good enough in the playoffs. But he is a high end 2nd pair guy who is deployed as their primary defensive D man against top competition.

My point there is just that the Rangers have other priorities than to nickel and dime with Kakko. Dolan wants to make a splash to get over the hump, so I'd listen for chatter on more of their expensive assets.

Wanting to acquire more talent is exactly why they very well may be ready to move on from Kakko. If the coach intends to put Kakko in the same role next year, they can fill that role for half the price and put the savings toward an upgrade. Not paying a medium-to-long term project $3M+ and paying a journeyman $1.5M to fill the role in the short term is exactly the type of nickle and diming teams do when they are in win-now mode.

 

[ds774622]

...under a coach that they fired.

History tells us that he is a 25 point pace 9th forward when playing under the coach who will be behind their bench for the foreseeable future. He was absolutely not a 30-40 point 3rd liner this year. He was not a serviceable $3M (or thereabouts) player this year.

He had 2 points and went -4 playing 12 minutes a night through 15 playoff games this year. 9th in even strength time per game and 10th in overall time per game among Rangers forwards. In the regular season, he was 9th in even strength and overall time per game.



Nothing about this season suggests that the front office should view his floor as a serviceable $3M+ player. Giving him that AAV would absolutely need to be done on the assumption that they very well might be setting $2M of cap space on fire.

You're arguing that they move on from him after one down year with a new coach (from an admittedly weak baseline for a 2OA pick). ONE YEAR. I disagree with your point, that's all. Saying he's only worth $1m-ish and the other $2m is thrown down the drain doesn't align with how the organization should manage their asset. If that's the case then he would have been in the press box all year. Drury may be playing lip service, but he also said the same about an hour ago.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1799142422796009536

His most frequent forward opponents at 5 on 5 in the ECF were (from most-to-least) Reinhart, Barkov, Tkachuk, Tarasenko, and then Verhaege at 5th.

Tkachuk didn't see any Rangers D man more often than he saw Trouba. Reinhart didn't see any Rangers D more often than he saw Trouba. Barkov saw Miller more often than he saw Trouba, but Trouba was his 2nd most frequent D opponent in the ECF.

In the ECF, he played the 3rd most 5 on 5 minutes for the Rangers (a whopping 23 seconds less than Fox) and he had the lowest O zone start rate on the team. He was 2nd among Rangers D in PK minutes.

This is a nonsense claim. He was given the hardest job on the Rangers blueline in the ECF.

Based on what I watched, he wasn't deployed the same as he was throughout the first two rounds. I will concede here since you have the stats to back it up.

Wanting to acquire more talent is exactly why they very well may be ready to move on from Kakko. If the coach intends to put Kakko in the same role next year, they can fill that role for half the price and put the savings toward an upgrade. Not paying a medium-to-long term project $3M+ and paying a journeyman $1.5M to fill the role in the short term is exactly the type of nickle and diming teams do when they are in win-now mode.

What veteran are you getting to fill that role for $1.5m? That's fourth line money when they'd be making a spot open on the third line. That's absolutely ridiculous. They maybe could backfill with a prospect but cutting the cord on Kakko isn't smart asset management at this stage of his career. Nickel and diming is what TBL can do to keep their window open when they're already at the top. The Rangers are not a third liner away from a Cup.

 

[Brockon]

You're arguing that they move on from him after one down year with a new coach (from an admittedly weak baseline for a 2OA pick). ONE YEAR. I disagree with your point, that's all. Saying he's only worth $1m-ish and the other $2m is thrown down the drain doesn't align with how the organization should manage their asset. If that's the case then he would have been in the press box all year. Drury may be playing lip service, but he also said the same about an hour ago.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1799142422796009536

Based on what I watched, he wasn't deployed the same as he was throughout the first two rounds. I will concede here since you have the stats to back it up.


What veteran are you getting to fill that role for $1.5m? That's fourth line money when they'd be making a spot open on the third line. That's absolutely ridiculous. They maybe could backfill with a prospect but cutting the cord on Kakko isn't smart asset management at this stage of his career. Nickel and diming is what TBL can do to keep their window open when they're already at the top. The Rangers are not a third liner away from a Cup.

Respectfully disagree here...

G1 3-0 L
G2 2-1 OTW
G3 5-4 OTW
G4 3-2 OTL
G5 3-2 L
G6 2-1 L

Those are exactly the kind of games where having a little more out of their 3rd line could have tipped the game in their favor, by either tying the game or preventing a goal against.

Are you getting that guy for 1.5m? Not likely, but for the 2-3m mark being discussed around the Kakko Qualifying offer - you can absolutely get a reliable vet looking to win that will take a paycut to chase a cup.