Draft and UDFA Thread 2018-19: Part VIII (No Kakko/Hughes Talk)

[True Blue]

In my case, I don’t want to trade Kreider, I just believe it’s inevitable.

Am sort of in the same spot. That said, it would depend on what the ask is. Krieder by himself should be able to net you a #1. If a team like Colorado asks for anything more, it may well be that you see Kreider is resigned.

I guess here is the question that we have all been batting around. If Kreider by himself should net a first rounder, should Kreider + the 20th be able to get you into the top 10 to be able to draft one of the names that we have been discussing and that it is known that Gorton loves? And/or, is there even a valid partner that is available?

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Kreider to AZ for 14thOA and a conditional 2nd next year that becomes a 1st if he re-signs. Use both 2nds to move up from 20. Draft both Newhook and Broberg. Voila!

Or, if you are getting the 14th carte blanche from AZ, use #20 and the 2nd's to move further down into the top 10.

 

[offdacrossbar]

Get hyped!!

sadly, this was the war room right before they drafted McIlrath.....

 

[offdacrossbar]

please do not select a dman in round 1

 

[Edge]

Which is what I bet Gorton will do. The question will be what is the price? Kreider for the 16th? That was a bit painful to type.

Could do Kreider for a pick and a prospect, or Kreider for a pick and a conditional pick, or some combination of the two.

Kreider to AZ for 14thOA and a conditional 2nd next year that becomes a 1st if he re-signs. Use both 2nds to move up from 20. Draft both Newhook and Broberg. Voila!

Certainly possible. Though depending on how the draft breaks, if Zegras slides I'm inclined to trade up from 14 than 20. Ideally, maybe I can do both.

14 + 49 for 10 or 14+58 for 12.

20 + 49/58 for 16/17.

 

[Edge]

Or, if you are getting the 14th carte blanche from AZ, use #20 and the 2nd's to move further down into the top 10.

In my mind there's a line where it becomes almost cost prohibitive to move down further, especially for the perceived difference in talent. Granted it's an arbitrary line.

So I'm personally not as inclided to take something along the lines of 14, 20, 49 and 58 and bundle them into the top 10. Not sure how the Rangers feel about that. I know the word bundle has come up, but I don't know how many assets we're talking about.

 

[wafflepadsave]

Anybody else have an opinion on him?

 

[Ghost of jas]

Could do Kreider for a pick and a prospect, or Kreider for a pick and a conditional pick, or some combination of the two.



Certainly possible. Though depending on how the draft breaks, if Zegras slides I'm inclined to trade up from 14 than 20. Ideally, maybe I can do both.

14 + 49 for 10 or 14+58 for 12.

20 + 49/58 for 16/17.

Personally, it appears to me that the difference between the Zegras/Dach tier and Newhook is less than the cost to trade into the top ten. As you yourself have said, Newhook could be on the same level when all is said and done. So, if the Rangers don’t have to pay more for a roughly equivalent player, so be it. More ammunition to move up to get Broberg. Come away with three high end players.

 

[Edge]

Anybody else have an opinion on him?

I like him as a late first option, because there's no getting around that his season has been great.

But you also can't get around the fact that the kid is 20. Not a late 2000 birthday, or even a late 1999 birthday. He's a first-half 1999 birthday.

I'm always hesitant to get too crazy about a kid for whom the lights suddenly come on. But, when you compare him to some of the other talent in that portion of the draft, you can certainly argue that he's where you'd hope for them to be two years from now. So if you're a playoff bound team, who wants help that could come sooner rather than later, he's a solid option.

But the better the pick, the more you might want to gamble on upside and a kid who isn't that far behind where Leason is now, despite being two or even two and a half years younger. So that's probably the mindset difference between consider Leason at 28-40, vs. considering him at 14-24 or so.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Alright, how about this for a scenario:

20+49+58 for 12: draft Zegras

Kreider for 16+a conditional pick in 2020: draft Newhook.

Walk away from the first round with Kakko, Zegras, and Newhook.

 

[Edge]

Personally, it appears to me that the difference between the Zegras/Dach tier and Newhook is less than the cost to trade into the top ten. As you yourself have said, Newhook could be on the same level when all is said and done. So, if the Rangers don’t have to pay more for a roughly equivalent player, so be it. More ammunition to move up to get Broberg. Come away with three high end players.

And that's part of the debate. How close is Newhook to that level? Personally I think he's right there, but I do think there are more question marks there. So how much are said questions work. Are they worth a second to move up to a few slots to get Zegras? Or are you content to go with Newhook and still have those assets?

Personally, I feel like I can argue it either way. But if I was on the spot, I think I'd pay the little extra.

But it's hard to say just where Zegras, Newhook, Broberg and York will go. I think it will be near impossible to get a combination that include two of the former three. I think York might be doable if we're looking at dream scenarios.

 

[Edge]

Alright, how about this for a scenario:

20+49+58 for 12: draft Zegras

Kreider for 16+a conditional pick in 2020: draft Newhook.

Walk away from the first round with Kakko, Zegras, and Newhook.

Don't think the first package gets you close to 12. I think you have have to be considerably closer. I think you have to be in the 14-16 range to start those talks.

Also don't think the Rangers go with two centers if they have those picks, even though both guys can and have played the wing.

If the Rangers found themselves with three picks, my gut tells me that one of them will probably be a defenseman. And if there's a run, the Rangers would potentially move up to get a defenseman they like.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Alright, how about this for a scenario:

20+49+58 for 12: draft Zegras

Kreider for 16+a conditional pick in 2020: draft Newhook.

Walk away from the first round with Kakko, Zegras, and Newhook.

I want just one of the centers, since we’re getting Lundell next year. And, I want Broberg, since I don’t see his skill set in our current crop of LHD’s as well as 1D capabilities.

 

[Off Sides]

I think the offers to move up to draft Zegras, Newhook, Broberg, would need to be substantial. I think they'd be seen as an over payment.

If they drop beyond say pick 12-15 any team is going to feel lucky to have them drop to them rather than want to trade that pick away.

 

[Edge]

Get hyped!!

I thought I posted a response already, but apparently I didn't.

Without getting too far into reading tea leaves, there are several soundbites on there that match (almost verbatim) what I've had quoted to me about certain players from people I've talked.

:20 to :24 - Byram

:45 to :51 - Newhook

 

[darko]

Could do Kreider for a pick and a prospect, or Kreider for a pick and a conditional pick, or some combination of the two.



Certainly possible. Though depending on how the draft breaks, if Zegras slides I'm inclined to trade up from 14 than 20. Ideally, maybe I can do both.

14 + 49 for 10 or 14+58 for 12.

20 + 49/58 for 16/17.

Doubt pick 49 gets you from 14 to 10.

 

[Edge]

I think the offers to move up to draft Zegras, Newhook, Broberg, would need to be substantial. I think they'd be seen as an over payment.

If they drop beyond say pick 12-15 any team is going to feel lucky to have them drop to them rather than want to trade that pick away.

We should always take into account that who we like isn't necessarily the same as other teams, or their scouting departments (or even ours for this moment).

So while we talk about guys like Zegras, Newhook and Broberg "sliding" that could be a perception thing more than a reality thing --- especially when you look at lists beyond our board.

But any of those guys being on the board at say 10-16 isn't necessarily a slide when we take into account multiple sources and lists.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Doubt pick 49 gets you from 14 to 10.

It usually does.

 

[Edge]

Doubt pick 49 gets you from 14 to 10.

I think it really depends on who is on the table and who climbs that day.

Based on history, it's in the ballpark.

@Amazing Kreiderman do you have that graphic with trade history handy? I need a refresher.

 

[darko]

It usually does.

What pick did we give up to trade up 4 spots for Miller?

 

[Leetch3]

 

[Edge]

What pick did we give up to trade up 4 spots for Miller?

26+48.

As a general rule, a second rounder usually moves you anywhere from 2-6 picks, depending on circumstances, with about four slots being both the mean and the mode.

 

[Ghost of jas]

What pick did we give up to trade up 4 spots for Miller?

A 2nd round pick historically allows for a move of 4-5 spots, no matter the pick, nor the 2nd. Carolina gave up a 2nd in the 40’s to go from 8 to 4 to get Andrew Ladd. The Rangers gave up a 2nd to go from 16 to 12 to take Staal. The value of a 2nd round decreases very little.

 

[darko]

26+48.

As a general rule, a second rounder usually moves you anywhere from 2-6 picks, depending on circumstances, with about four slots being both the mean and the mode.

26-22.

16 to 12 is quite a jump. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[darko]

A 2nd round pick historically allows for a move of 4-5 spots, no matter the pick, nor the 2nd. Carolina gave up a 2nd in the 40’s to go from 8 to 4 to get Andrew Ladd. The Rangers gave up a 2nd to go from 16 to 12 to take Staal. The value of a 2nd round decreases very little.

Fair points.