News Article: Chris Kreider 2019-20 Edition

[bernmeister]

The Rangers are gamblers here!

They had two choices regarding Kreider and their salary cap issues going into this summer:

1. Trade Kreider in the offseason and hopefully work out the numbers to avoid a buy out(s).

The return - They would've gotten less value for him and would've had to bury Smith and/or be forced to make other moves to become cap compliant. It's possible they would've lost Strome, Namestnikov or even a Buchnevich or other player in addition to Kreider.

The gain - They would still have Shattenkirk and a lot less dead space over the next 4 seasons.

The risk - Losing Kreider's production from the lineup on a more skilled offensive team and missing out on the increased trade value for Kreider later in the season.

2. Hold on to Kreider and trade him during the season/deadline when his value hopefully rises, but buyout Shattenkirk to make the cap work.

The return - 6+ Million in cap relief for this season and not losing any other roster players, including Kreider.

The gain - They get to keep Kreider's production and veteran presence on what will be a more dangerous offensive attack.

The risk - Losing a bounce-back candidate in Shattenkirk and trusting your 2nd and 3rd pairings to ADA and an unproven rookie in Fox. Adding additional dead cap space to the next 3 seasons. Hoping that Kreider will stay on the ice and his value increases the closer they get to the deadline for a much greater return then what they couldve gotten for him this summer.

The wild card here being they actually find a way to extend Kreider.

extended Kreider is scenario that best adds value to this asset, whether we keep or trade him

 

[Edge]

my gut tells me the negotiation will come down to kreider wanting to be part of what he started here.

this team is trending up. he knows that. hes one of the team leaders and a homegrown guy. im sure theres a measure of finishing what you started at play.

5 yr deal. 6.5 mil i believe gets it done. CK comes off as a guy who will know when its time to say when, leave with body and mind still intact and do something else, maybe within the organization.

i believe he stays and this will be his last deal.

The question is whether he accepts that, especially if he as a strong season.

Five years and 6.5 per million is likely going to be pretty far below market value in terms of dollars and years.

And as you start adding dollars and years to any proposal, you're right back into the conundrum the Rangers have found themselves in as to how high and how long they want to go on a deal.

What I do think we could see, because the Rangers were unable/unwilling to move him thus far, is that this board will likely fall in love with the idea of keeping him and become more resistant to the idea of moving him as the season wears on.

 

[Leonardo87]

Would keep him for 6 @ 6.5 million. It's about around a 2 million raise, cap should go up at least a few million (hopefully), some contracts are falling off, could work. Just feel our Top 6 will be more lethal with CK in it.

 

[bernmeister]

Would keep him for 6 @ 6.5 million. It's about around a 2 million raise, cap should go up at least a few million (hopefully), some contracts are falling off, could work. Just feel our Top 6 will be more lethal with CK in it.

I think we ask him, and he goes as low as 6.2 x 5.
but Gort has to make nice, no hardball, no take it or leave it insult.
CK holds the cards.
we both need to be flexible, but us more than him since he can get mo than 6.2 x 5 elsewhere.

 

[Machinehead]

4, no. But 5? I would

4 is better?

 

[bobbop]

ok, I'll accept that the NTC and NMC are functionally similar on large contracts but I'm against having NTCs at all. Imagine in a last act of stupidity, Paul Fenton wanted to trade us Matt Dumba for Marc Staal. nope, sorry. Handcuffed. I get why players demand it but those should not be given out willy nilly. It seems like everyone has a NTC or L-NTC these days.

NTC's and NMC's are currency for players. The NHL has a lot of destinations that are perceived as unacceptable by players (especially American born players) and as a result, you have to spend the currency or they will take their chances. elsewhere. You want to go to Winnipeg? Edmonton? And in any given year, certain franchise become pretty unacceptable. About five years ago, a Coyote executive told me that it felt like half of the no trades out there specifically prohibited a team trading a player to Arizona.

 

[bobbop]

The question is whether he accepts that, especially if he as a strong season.

Five years and 6.5 per million is likely going to be pretty far below market value in terms of dollars and years.

And as you start adding dollars and years to any proposal, you're right back into the conundrum the Rangers have found themselves in as to how high and how long they want to go on a deal.

What I do think we could see, because the Rangers were unable/unwilling to move him thus far, is that this board will likely fall in love with the idea of keeping him and become more resistant to the idea of moving him as the season wears on.

You know, I thought that until I looked at some comparables and the age of the players when they signed. It's probably below market but not way, way below.

 

[bobbop]

OK, here's my final offer to Kreider

2020-21 Age 29 (possible lockout year) $8MM Bonus, $1MM Salary (Full NTC, NMC)
2021-22 Age 30 $8MM Bonus, $1MM Salary (Full NTC, NMC)
2022-23 Age 31 (possible lockout year) $5MM Bonus, $1MM Salary (Full NTC, NMC)
2023-24 Age 32 $5MM Salary (Limited NTC, NMC)
2024-25 Age 33 $5MM Salary (Limited NTC, NMC)

5 Years, $34MM, Full move protection for three years, limited trade protection for last two years.

Given he already has a contract for this year, that gives him six years of security

Any takers?

 

[Edge]

You know, I thought that until I looked at some comparables and the age of the players when they signed. It's probably below market but not way, way below.

I think the money is closer than the years.

I expect him to command a 7X7 offer on the open market, maybe slightly more if a team with an elite center thinks he’s an exclamation point for them.

But much like Hayes, I think the concern might be less about the dollars, but rather the years and the conditions. When you start getting into a 6 year or 7 year deal, which is likely because I don’t think Kreider would take two less years than the 7 the market is likely to offer, now things get a little less certain.

Suddenly the conversation starts drifting from $6.5 x 5 ($32.5m) through age 34, to $7 x 7 ($49m) through age 36. And that’s without possibility of him seeing a bump to his numbers next season, or a movement clause, which much like the Hayes debates, isn’t something that can be easily removed from consideration.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

I think resigning Kreider would be a mistake

 

[Edge]

OK, here's my final offer to Kreider

2020-21 Age 29 (possible lockout year) $8MM Bonus, $1MM Salary (Full NTC, NMC)
2021-22 Age 30 $8MM Bonus, $1MM Salary (Full NTC, NMC)
2022-23 Age 31 (possible lockout year) $5MM Bonus, $1MM Salary (Full NTC, NMC)
2023-24 Age 32 $5MM Salary (Limited NTC, NMC)
2024-25 Age 33 $5MM Salary (Limited NTC, NMC)

5 Years, $34MM, Full move protection for three years, limited trade protection for last two years.

Given he already has a contract for this year, that gives him six years of security

Any takers?

I think the Rangers would take that. I think his agent would probably lose a client.

 

[n8]

NTC's and NMC's are currency for players. The NHL has a lot of destinations that are perceived as unacceptable by players (especially American born players) and as a result, you have to spend the currency or they will take their chances. elsewhere. You want to go to Winnipeg? Edmonton? And in any given year, certain franchise become pretty unacceptable. About five years ago, a Coyote executive told me that it felt like half of the no trades out there specifically prohibited a team trading a player to Arizona.

totally. I just think players should have to take a pay cut in order to get that "currency"
while i don't have a contract by contract analysis, I tend to feel like these are just tacked on to contracts because the players demand it. Also I wouldn't want to get traded to Senators either...

 

[True Blue]

4 is better?

I clarified that. I meant that I do not think that he will sign for 4. Full stop. And I would do 5 for him. But then I am not Gorton.

 

[True Blue]

Suddenly the conversation starts drifting from $6.5 x 5 ($32.5m) through age 34, to $7 x 7 ($49m) through age 36. And that’s without possibility of him seeing a bump to his numbers next season, or a movement clause, which much like the Hayes debates, isn’t something that can be easily removed from consideration.

that's the debate. And that is up to Kreider. If he wants to stay with the Rangers, it would likely be $6.5x5. Maybe $7, but that is splitting hairs. But move to a 7 year deal and the answer has to be "no".

 

[Edge]

that's the debate. And that is up to Kreider. If he wants to stay with the Rangers, it would likely be $6.5x5. Maybe $7, but that is splitting hairs. But move to a 7 year deal and the answer has to be "no".

And that's why I think the salary is closer than the terms (years+NMC).

The question for the Rangers will also be how many older forwards they want locked up well into their 30s.

Because while the conversation in 2019 is based on names like Panarin and Kreider, there's going to come a day (while those contacts are still on the books), when we're talking about Kakko, Kravtsov and others, including (potentially) Zibanejad.

 

[MrPodz]

How would you guys feel if kreider explodes onto the offensive scene (given maybe kreider chytil and kakko line light it up) and we are in a playoff spot come february, we trade kreider for a haul and maybe use some of those assets to acquire a younger lw who could be a break out candidate. Maybe like the calgary trade when lindholm had johnny hockey and had a career high for himself. I hope the "new analytic department" jd promised is able to use analytics to find such a player who is poised for a breakout.

 

[will1066]

I think the Rangers would take that. I think his agent would probably lose a client.

Going by the "7x7" consensus around here, Kreider would be short almost $15M with this deal.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

How would you guys feel if kreider explodes onto the offensive scene (given maybe kreider chytil and kakko line light it up) and we are in a playoff spot come february, we trade kreider for a haul and maybe use some of those assets to acquire a younger lw who could be a break out candidate. Maybe like the calgary trade when lindholm had johnny hockey and had a career high for himself. I hope the "new analytic department" jd promised is able to use analytics to find such a player who is poised for a breakout.

I think if what you say comes true, trading him after two very trying seasons of playoff less hockey, would be messy. Especially if Kakko is thriving on his line.

 

[MrPodz]

I think if what you say comes true, trading him after two very trying seasons of playoff less hockey, would be messy. Especially if Kakko is thriving on his line.

It all depends on his ask ofcourse, im not opposed to a four year deal but im with the majority that 7 x7 doesnt work well for us. We should only overpay for skill and young age imo.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

It all depends on his ask ofcourse, im not opposed to a four year deal but im with the majority that 7 x7 doesnt work well for us. We should only overpay for skill and young age imo.

I don't think anyone knows what the Rangers are willing to offer or what he and his agent are asking for. I'm sure there's a team out there that would happily pay him 7x7, there's also players in similar situations that took less. If he wants to stay and the team wants him, they can work something out. But if he's on a line with Kakko and Chytil and all three are playing well and the team is in a playoff spot, I don't see how you trade him. But I'm not a GM, i'm a fan. Fans think with their hearts.

 

[will1066]

Tough call, but in that situation I think the FO would lean on keeping him for a playoff run and worry about the circumstances later. Puts butts in seats, good optics (NYC always prefers a winner), grabs the newspaper back page, generates non-regular-season revenues.

 

[MrPodz]

Tough call, but in that situation I think the FO would lean on keeping him for a playoff run and worry about the circumstances later. Puts butts in seats, good optics (NYC always prefers a winner), grabs the newspaper back page, generates non-regular-season revenues.

Thats the other option I was considering, especially if the devils are in contention for a spot too- we cannot let them get a cup ever again!

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Tough call, but in that situation I think the FO would lean on keeping him for a playoff run and worry about the circumstances later. Puts butts in seats, good optics (NYC always prefers a winner), grabs the newspaper back page, generates non-regular-season revenues.

Probably, but that would be so dumb.

 

[B17 Apricots]

How would you guys feel if kreider explodes onto the offensive scene (given maybe kreider chytil and kakko line light it up) and we are in a playoff spot come february, we trade kreider for a haul and maybe use some of those assets to acquire a younger lw who could be a break out candidate. Maybe like the calgary trade when lindholm had johnny hockey and had a career high for himself. I hope the "new analytic department" jd promised is able to use analytics to find such a player who is poised for a breakout.

I think out of the more realistic landing spots teams like the Avalanche, Blues, the Wild, it's gonna be hard to pry those types of guys away. I think Eriksson Ek is off limits because of their center depth, Donato & Fiala were just traded for so thats unlikely. Maybe those players make a guy like Kunin available which would be a great add. Robert Thomas has to be off the table for the Blues. A guy like Barbashev or Bokk could be available but even than they might be looking to hold Barbashev to take Bozaks spot so who knows. To me though the best scenario is in Colorado. They have some less high profile guys with more risk like Bowers and Kamenev but now that they added Newhook and Kadri into the mix behind Mackinnon, suddenly Tyson Jost is much more expendable. Something centered around him and Kreider is realistic I think.

 

[MrPodz]

I think out of the more realistic landing spots teams like the Avalanche, Blues, the Wild, it's gonna be hard to pry those types of guys away. I think Eriksson Ek is off limits because of their center depth, Donato & Fiala were just traded for so thats unlikely. Maybe those players make a guy like Kunin available which would be a great add. Robert Thomas has to be off the table for the Blues. A guy like Barbashev or Bokk could be available but even than they might be looking to hold Barbashev to take Bozaks spot so who knows. To me though the best scenario is in Colorado. They have some less high profile guys with more risk like Bowers and Kamenev but now that they added Newhook and Kadri into the mix behind Mackinnon, suddenly Tyson Jost is much more expendable. Something centered around him and Kreider is realistic I think.

Its a situation worth exploring because realistically if we extend kreider we know we are going to have to suffer from his deterioration later down the line. Not a problem you wanna have when 7 mil is on the cap and you have to deal with kids coming off elcs. I really hope the new tv deal comes into place by then and the cap skyrockets.