Toggle sidebar

Depth or Dearth?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Savant

Savant

Registered User
Oct 3, 2013
39,254
11,912
The Rangers are in a very strange spot in terms of their personnel. With the upcoming UFAs and players perceived to be ready in the AHL combined with the uncertain direction I wanted to take a little closer of a look. I understand tensions have been high but its as good of a time as any to look in the mirror. As a preface I will say that in a salary cap era, teams cannot afford to overpay, and general managers need to proactive to replenish assets. Also these don't need to happen over night.

Upcoming UFAs Forwards:
Callahan, Brassard, Boyle, Pyatt, Pouliot, Asham, D. Moore, Powe, Haley.

I am going to talk about Callahan and Brassard a little later.

Asham, Powe and Haley will certainly be gone. For the record I might take Haley over Dorsett at this stage but I digress.

Boyle and Moore as well as Pyatt and Pouliot were redundant signings. I think one of the major problems with the Rangers since their run two years ago if that they had been getting away with 3rd liners on the 2nd line, 4th liners on the 3rd line, etc. Boyle and Moore are both 4th liners with no legitimate upside at this stage. Boyle is obviously a very polarizing figure on this board but when push comes to shove, he will be in the ball park of 2.75-3 million cap hit to resign, which in the face of at least a minor rebuild seems foolish. Pouliot has seemed like a nice player but there is a reason he has bounced around. Also he is another player who is an offensive misfit being in the top 6 by default basically due to injury. Pyatt is in the the same boat. he had a couple of nice games last year but they were few and far between. Again, the question is are either of these players a lock to be on the team next year? I would hope the answer is no.

Yes I am aware I just banished 2/3 of our bottom six. However as I mentioned in another thread I would look at the example set in SJ. They made the commitment to get younger, faster and hungrier in their bottom six and that team has really catapulted on the upswing. Also they are certainly sustainable. How often can a team faced with losing a Thornton and a Marleau in the off season and have a legitimate shot to be BETTER next year if they stay the course. But how does this relate to the Rangers? Counting Jesper Fast, they have 5 or 6 players that could absolutely be useful in re-energizing the roster. if you were to switch out the Rangers current bottom six, (mind you this doesn't have to be overnight) for example Kreider-Miller-Kristo, a fast forechecking line that can grind and finish, and Hrivik-Lindberg-Fast, which is certainly capable of puck possession and strong two way play. Is this not an example of zone matching? Not only that but a lot of those players are interchangable with each other. In this scenario relegating Dorsett to an Asham role in this scenario makes the team able to match up when necessary. The Rangers need speed and energy, would this not help in that area? This brings me to the next section

Upcoming RFA forwards:
Zuccarello, Kreider, Mashinter, Bourque, Jean, Wilson, Missanen, Kristo

I am only going to discuss the bold players. Mashinter might get a shot with the big club every one else, I don't see it. Kreider and Kristo are two very important players because by the deadline, they need to assess if either are worthy of the roster. A shot in the bottom six with a chance to move up is the only way to determine it. Everyone expects them to be up with the roster at some point this year, and I am not sure what benefit there is to delaying it in favor of players that you already know what you have with, particularly those mentioned above. Personally, I do not see the point of keeping Fast up if his line mates can neither skate with him nor get him the puck. Obviously I think Fast's best possible NHL linemates are in the AHL but I am not sure how much sense that makes. Zuccarello to me is a great 13th forward for extra offense. I just do not see how he holds up in a top six role over 82 games. However I think MZA is at his best in small doses. He can be a spark plug over a couple of games at a time but he is not a guy I would want to rely on over a full season. At least one of the three bolded players I think are destined to be trade bait. Which brings me to my next point...

Callahan, Brassard and Hagelin:

These guys represent the best trade bait on the Rangers. Only Hagelin is contracted past this summer. I like Hagelin as much as the next fan, but the question comes to mind; do I think he is good enough to score enough to justify being in the top six going forward? It is a maybe at best, however he has value and is a piece you can move. Also, Fast seems to be his replacement anyway in my opinion.

Brassard is a guy I would definitely trade. I just do not see any scenario in which he can be statistically worth what he would demand in his next contract as a youngish 2/3 center with offensive talent. However as a center, you should be able to trade him for a similar wing or defenseman, since people love their centers. While I am a proponent of keeping Richards at LW, if Brassard was traded Richards could slot into the center role, that is before he is amnestied due to the necessity of the cap recapture. The irony of that is sickening.

Callahan I would love to keep. However I do not think he is a keep at all costs player at least anymore. If he wants Dustin Brown money, I think you really need to look at possibly moving him. Anything over 5.25million is ludicrous for Callahan and personally I wouldn't go over 5. In a salary cap era, the biggest mistake you can make is signing players to contracts that are too long and too expensive relative to their talent. Girardi you need to trade if he wants more than McDonagh, and I would trade him anyway because he is another guy I can't see being worse the money required to sign him in an imminent bidding war. The same with Henrik. I would have a very hard time giving him more than the 8x8 deal Kessel got.

Summing up. The Rangers in theory have depth players to rebuild the team out in a more modern way, however if they choose to go this route it is neither impossible nor without president. I am not guaranteeing the big 6 prospects the Rangers have pan out, but they certainly can create minutes without sacrificing too much. If they can get 2 of those six players to evolve into top 6/top 3 players the team should be ecstatic, but with either way they have the players to try it out. Either way they need to find some 1A/1B talent. Need to swing for the fences in trades to find these players, Glen just has to get creative. I have some ideas about how I would go about this and a more than willing to discuss at some juncture but as for now remember kids, no half measures.
Click to read more...
 
I would love to keep Callahan but I really don't want to commit anything more than 3-4 years for a player like him. If he is looking for one of those long term retirement contracts I would let him go
 
I think we should only keep Brassard if we give him legitimate goalscoring wingers to work with. He's a great passer but he refuses to shoot and when he does he usually misses the net. We are wasting his talent playing him with the Pouliots and Zuccarellos of the world.
 
I couldn't agree more re: Callahan. I wouldn't give him anymore than Brown got and even that I would hesitate to give him, as I think Brown is a better player. I worry about the way that Callahan plays the game and his longevity. I don't think he's a player you give a long contract to. I like him as a player, but I'm not holding on to him and giving him a big contract just because he's the Rangers' captain.
 
i like callahan but i think he is greatly overrated by most rangers fans. that being said, he is a 25-30 goal scorer who hits, fights when he has to, and is great on the pk. i still wouldnt pay him that kind of money at a long term.
 
Lundqvist signing an 8x8? Would never happen, at LEAST 8.5 and he'll start talking. That's a lot of roster spots you're trusting kids to. The idea of trading Hagelin for anything short of a great return is just no. I think he'll only grow, and if he can ever finish, become a 60 point defensive winger. I would definitely like to see bottom 6 spots handed to kids though, but not just the big prospects. Bring up guys like Andrew Yogan, Michael Kantor, etc. We need guys to fill roles, you can't just throw Kristo-Kreider-Lindberg in the bottom 6 and say "go play hockey" you need to give them roles they can play.
 
Raspewtin said:
Lundqvist signing an 8x8? Would never happen, at LEAST 8.5 and he'll start talking. That's a lot of roster spots you're trusting kids to. The idea of trading Hagelin for anything short of a great return is just no. I think he'll only grow, and if he can ever finish, become a 60 point defensive winger. I would definitely like to see bottom 6 spots handed to kids though, but not just the big prospects. Bring up guys like Andrew Yogan, Michael Kantor, etc. We need guys to fill roles, you can't just throw Kristo-Kreider-Lindberg in the bottom 6 and say "go play hockey" you need to give them roles they can play.
Click to expand...

I don't think Hagelin has the hands or the shot power to hit 60 points. The rangers do not have first line talent. They have not drafted a first line talent since the late Cherepanov. It's catching up with them. Hagelin is a tradable asset that can be used to improve the team. The rangers do not have a lot of people that fit this category. I do not think you can contend with a Brassard as a second line center and Hagelin as a top six winger. It's not good enough. In theory you start out the six kids in the bottom six and you ease them up when they are ready. Of course they would have roles I mention that in the OP how they could be used, but irregardless it's up to the coaching staff.
 
Savant said:
I don't think Hagelin has the hands or the shot power to hit 60 points. The rangers do not have first line talent. They have not drafted a first line talent since the late Cherepanov. It's catching up with them. Hagelin is a tradable asset that can be used to improve the team. The rangers do not have a lot of people that fit this category. I do not think you can contend with a Brassard as a second line center and Hagelin as a top six winger. It's not good enough. In theory you start out the six kids in the bottom six and you ease them up when they are ready. Of course they would have roles I mention that in the OP how they could be used, but irregardless it's up to the coaching staff.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, what do you guys expect out of Hagelin? I will be thrilled if he hits 20/20 this year 50 points tops.
 
Savant said:
I don't think Hagelin has the hands or the shot power to hit 60 points. The rangers do not have first line talent. They have not drafted a first line talent since the late Cherepanov. It's catching up with them. Hagelin is a tradable asset that can be used to improve the team. The rangers do not have a lot of people that fit this category. I do not think you can contend with a Brassard as a second line center and Hagelin as a top six winger. It's not good enough. In theory you start out the six kids in the bottom six and you ease them up when they are ready. Of course they would have roles I mention that in the OP how they could be used, but irregardless it's up to the coaching staff.
Click to expand...

He's definitely a tradeable asset, but I don't see a reason to trade him unless he directly addresses a need. I don't think he's a first line talent or anything I just think 55-60 points is his ceiling. Also I think the coaching staff really needs to pay attention to those roles because the first steps into the NHL are so crucial for development. If we had someone like Ryan Strome and played him on the 4th line would that help him? Not really. I really hope the coaches get good looks at the young guns, they could really make a difference next year.
 
My take:

Callahan, Brassard, Boyle, Pyatt, Pouliot, Asham, D. Moore, Powe, Haley.
Click to expand...

Callahan should be resigned with Dustin Brown's contract. If Callahan WANTS to play with the Rangers, he'll take a hometown discount.

Brassard is a usable asset. We have NOT seen him play a full season outside of Columbus, so we need to assess him over THIS season and then make a decision, while factoring in his prior seasons just in case

Boyle is a good penalty killer. Unfortunately, have a feeling he will be resigned...

None of Pyatt, Pouliot, Asham, D Moore, Powe SHOULD be resigned, but I have a feeling AV MIGHT pull for Pyatt to be resigned, and it's definitely possible Powe gets signed for AHL Veteran presence

Haley WILL get a call to the NHL this year (i predict), and will rock it hard. He'll be resigned after playing so well

Zuccarello, Kreider, Mashinter, Bourque, Jean, Wilson, Missanen, Kristo
Click to expand...

Zucc resigned only if he is usable on a proper line

Kreider will NOT be a free agent if he does not play in the NHL this year, as his ELC slides to next year

Mash will probably get a call up, most likely resigned for AHL gooning

Bourque is meh... hopefully no resign

Jean should be resigned. I still see potential in him from what I have observed

Unsure of Wilson and Missanen
 
Kreider is too old for his SPC to slide. 18 and 19 year olds can have their SPCs slide. Kreider is 22. He will be a group II with arb rights. Kreider signed as a 21 year old. Its his age as of 9/15. Kreider was 21 on 9/15/12. He needs 3 years for arbitration. 11-12,12-13 and 13-14. If he didn't play in 11-12,the Rangers would have another year on the ELC. Group III is the same.
 
Interesting take on a move towards a full on rebuild. It would take years, to build up to a contender if the core players are jettisoned. Ekblad and McDavid are no guarantees either.

I just look at this roster as a collection of misfits put together with a group of players that made the Rangers what they are. Looking at how badly the eastern puck possession have gotten beaten by big heavy hockey teams out west, wouldn't it be in the Rangers advantage to play that way in the east?

Now there is a team in the east that does that and they just went to the finals. The big bad bruins that had their way with the east last year. I think that heavy brand of hockey is tense hockey for sure, where the margins are narrow. Torts was a guy that had trouble managing his stress levels and would have fits mid game, so I can only imagine how out of hand it could have gotten behind the scenes, but AV looks like he is much more composed, so I imagined the the team finally playing stress free, mistake free hockey.

If mediocrity is what this season transpires to be, then there is no doubt a rebuild is around the corner given the contract status of key players on the team.
 
Last edited:
Callahan is the only UFA that could bring a return. Any idea what he would be looking for his next contract?
 
Girardi could bring at the VERY least a 1st round pick. A team like Toronto would be begging for a guy like him at the deadline.
 
Mikos87 said:
If mediocrity is what this season transpires to be, then there is no doubt a rebuild is around the corner given the contract status of key players on the team.
Click to expand...

What kind of rebuild? A real one, where teams need 2-3 seasons to really build their team up? Or a "Sather rebuild" where he drafts high for a year and then signs misfit UFAs to plug the holes he couldn't draft the plugs to? I'd like the former option, but with Glen around, very unlikely it ever happens.
 
Raspewtin said:
Girardi could bring at the VERY least a 1st round pick. A team like Toronto would be begging for a guy like him at the deadline.
Click to expand...

Girardi will get more than Jay Bouwmeester got at last years deadline because he is right handed, closer to his last all star appearance, and Sather is a better GM than Feaster.
 
Raspewtin said:
He's definitely a tradeable asset, but I don't see a reason to trade him unless he directly addresses a need. I don't think he's a first line talent or anything I just think 55-60 points is his ceiling. Also I think the coaching staff really needs to pay attention to those roles because the first steps into the NHL are so crucial for development. If we had someone like Ryan Strome and played him on the 4th line would that help him? Not really. I really hope the coaches get good looks at the young guns, they could really make a difference next year.
Click to expand...

No one on the Rangers bottom six can score (not that their top six is lethal anyway). Calling up the kids with offensive talent adds scoring threat and they get to hands on learn AV's system.

I could be wrong but I don't think its being implemented in Hartford.

Personally I am a believer in firing GM, Coach and AHL coach all at once, so the AHL coach is teaching what they will have to do at the pro level. GM needs to pick his guys. Et cetera. That is how you create team identity.
 
Savant said:
Girardi will get more than Jay Bouwmeester got at last years deadline because he is right handed, closer to his last all star appearance, and Sather is a better GM than Feaster.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this.

Savant said:
No one on the Rangers bottom six can score (not that their top six is lethal anyway). Calling up the kids with offensive talent adds scoring threat and they get to hands on learn AV's system.

I could be wrong but I don't think its being implemented in Hartford.

Personally I am a believer in firing GM, Coach and AHL coach all at once, so the AHL coach is teaching what they will have to do at the pro level. GM needs to pick his guys. Et cetera. That is how you create team identity.
Click to expand...

I haven't watched any HFD games to be honest but from what I hear Gernander is trying to implement the same system. Can anyone clarify this? Well anyway, the Rangers need to get their bottom 6 figured out, because it's very unclear who slots in once everyone is healthy. First line should be set as XXX-Stepan-Nash, IMO. And the fourth line as Boyle-Moore-Dorsett. The middle six lines are kind of a toss up, which is not a good thing. One thing is for sure, this lineup will not be the same in the next few weeks, and I honestly have no idea what to expect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom