Speculation: Free Agent Frenzy Part III - Will EK stay or will EK go?

[DutchShamrock]

That wasn’t his point and he maid it quite clear in the first sentence of his post. I don’t think that it’s irrelevant at all. Those numbers show clearly, players on that level maintain that level well into their 30’s sans for injuries, which is really a risk for any player.

I got his point, but again, moving targets. Cherry picking a trophy to prove a specific player will have longevity. He even goes through the list and dismisses the short careers because of injuries. That's not how you use evidence. The hart is a bad argument. It's an achievement trophy voted with bias for players that are generational and proven. Its confirmation bias.

This is where these arguments go when information has been exhausted and everyone is dug in.

 

[Savant]

Tampa traded Drouin for Sergachev. Nashville traded Erat for Forsberg. Hamilton was traded for Hanifin. Larsson was traded for Hall. Saad was traded for Panarin.

For all the moves Gorton made, the three best assets they own -- Shestyorkin, Chytil and Kravtsov -- were original Rangers picks. But only thee studs out the last five drafts ain't anything to brag about.

This rebuild will be like 2004, when all the picks and prospects collectively suck and were massively overrated by both the fans and the front office. It'll be one or two that will be built around, and that building will be done with vets and roster player trades.

The biggest key to the rebuild is cap space. Clark lately has sucked at drafting elite talent, so the onus is on pro scouting to grab other teams' assets.

Plus, three teams within the division -- Philly, Isles and Devils -- already have franchise players with superstar potential and deep prospect pools to boot.

Going for a full tear-down rebuild will take close to a decade.

Gorton needs to find a sucker at GM then. That's the common denominator between those trades. All of those trades, expect the Forsberg deal involved a player with higher perceived value getting moved to for a player with weird circumstances . Drouin was a top 3 pick, and hadn't shown anything and was moved to a team desperate for talent, especially French Canadian talent. Saad was moved for Panarin because Chicaco loved his past performance and thought that he could salvage a Toews in decline. Hamilton (Top 10 pick) has had more assets traded for him than any defense of his caliber shouldhave, and still Hanifin (Top 5 pick) has shown inconsistency, but is going to his old coach. Larsson (top 5 pick) for Hall (number 1 overall pick); the less spoken about that the better.

Winning teams are built from top 5 picks and ripping people off in trades. Look at the Kings. The Blue Jackets have them two titles but they still had Doughty (number 2) pick doing a ton of the heavy lifting.

I'd argue that besides the Eric Staal trade, Gorton has come out on top of the moves that he has made from an asset standpoint. Yes he has work to do but I think he has done about as well as he could have. If that rip of the other team trade hasn't been there, and the premium draft picks have not been there until this year, again I ask, who is this slam dunk franchise changing player that they passed on?

 

[DutchShamrock]

I give up. See everyone later in the week. That's just a clear point of having either not read or entirely ignored the second sentence I wrote.

Yeah, it's such a sound point that anyone that doesn't agree is at fault. Must be neat up there on your high horse.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Seeing this board tear itself apart about a player/trade the team will most likely have nothing to do with is funny

 

[AlternateSideParking]

If Gorton is actually thinking what was in that Brooks article, this organization is in big trouble.

How could someone think Lindgren is untouchable but Zibanejad and Buchnevich aren't? By all means, they should all be available to be traded. We suck, and none of them are McDavid, but leaving out two of your best players in favor of a picked out of a hat group of prospects? Makes no sense. Thats not a rational thought, and I'd hope thats just Brooks speculating more than actually being told thats the group of players who are untouchable and the group who aren't.

I thought the same thing about Lindgren. Howden too. Decent prospects but neither were in the top three or maybe five in their original team's prospect pool.

You can't have three untouchable center prospects. Howden most certainly should be a trade chip. Only reason why I wouldn't include Andersson is because of where he was drafted and the cost of getting him.

 

[Pizza]

Seeing this board tear itself apart about a player/trade the team will most likely have nothing to do with is funny

Happens in some form or fashion nearly every summer.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I thought the same thing about Lindgren. Howden too. Decent prospects but neither were in the top three or maybe five in their original team's prospect pool.

You can't have three untouchable center prospects. Howden most certainly should be a trade chip. Only reason why I wouldn't include Andersson is because of where he was drafted and the cost of getting him.

That must be Brooks speculating like he usually does. It doesn't make much sense specifically when the Rangers are weak on the wing as it is, and they have more LHD than know what to do with. Add in that Zib and Buch are productive NHL'ers and Lindgren and Howden are well, not. If the Rangers FO have similar beliefs, that is a problem.

 

[Good Intentions]

This rebuild will be like 2004, when all the picks and prospects collectively suck and were massively overrated by both the fans and the front office. It'll be one or two that will be built around, and that building will be done with vets and roster player trades.

No, you don’t know that. No parallel between previous B-/C+ level classes and the current crop of depth.

I recently posted TSN’s Top 10 organizational prospects list going back to 03-04. The prospects we had don’t compare to the current batch. Happy to repost it if needed. i.e. Josef Balej was a flashy overager that hit his ceiling in Hamilton, a shot in the dark. Overrated? Certainly. Different era.

It’s a numbers game. The better your system is, the better you’ll survive a Blackburn, Cheeneski, Kloucek hit. Knock on wood, we won’t face another like that.

If anything, this reconstruction may closely mimic what the Yankees were just able to flip within their system.

IMO, your tone has a bit of jealousy. To be blunt, a guy like Gordie Clark is a dumb old man. He’s well connected, and paid his dues. His hockey knowledge probably doesn’t match yours, being sincere. It is what it is.

Aside from that, our system is in as good shape as it’s been in 20 years. Point blank period.

 

[Fitzy]

Evidently I don't rate Lindgren nearly as high as Brooks does. If he wasn't walled by Boston, why would he be by us?

 

[SA16]

Yeah, it's such a sound point that anyone that doesn't agree is at fault. Must be neat up there on your high horse.

Ok one more post and then I'm actually leaving.

It's not that you disagree. It's that you didn't read my post or intentionally ignored it.

First I clearly said I'm using the Hart trophy instead of Norris because it's easier because it's basically just the point leader. If you prefer go ahead and look at the Art Ross trophy since it isn't voted on. It doesn't matter. It's not that Hart Trophy winners don't fall off. You need to compare the elite with the elite. Not with the very good. Here are recent Art Ross winners that have had long careers (Both Sedins, Thornton, MSL, Forsberg, Iginla, Jagr, Lemieux, Gretzky. All players that were highly productive their entire career. Really need to use runner ups or the like for this though since Jagr/Lemieux/Gretzky take up too many spots).

Second the "bias" in the voting is minimal. It basically always goes to a top 5 player in the league. Yes, sometimes better players are left out because people they don't give it to teams not in the playoffs. That is also why I said you can go through and use the nominees if you like. That will capture more players. I don't feel like doing the extra work at the moment but it's quite simple to do so.

Third - there are no moving targets. I did not cherry pick anything. I simply stated that Karlsson is an elite player and needs to be compared to other elite players. Not players like Shea Weber who appear to have been propped up by a teammate (Suter) and aren't as good as they look. If you have a better way to determine who is an elite player than Hart Trophy Winners/Nominees/Art Ross Winners by all means go ahead and use it. This was just the clearly one that I could think of.

Fourth - I don't know why you even mentioned Carey Price. For one, I mentioned I'm intentionally neglecting Hasek because he is a goalie which is not comparable to a skater (Obviously I meant Price too and just overlooked him). Additionally everyone knows my thoughts on the goalie position and I still stand by the football kicker comparison. I would never trade anything of value for a goalie.

Fifth - short careers due to injury. So what? Some players get hurt. Getting hurt is not predictable. Forsberg had a chronic back issue. Karlsson doesn't. Lindros had a ton of concussions. Karlsson hasn't. Karlsson has had one ankle injury that he had minimal time to rehab since it occurred in the year his team went to the SCF. And he had another major injury 6 years ago and clearly has produced fine since then. Additionally if a player has to retire due to injury five years from now that's an even better outcome for the team than if he was in some serious decline because you can recoup the cap space with LTIR.

This website ALWAYS does this. Latching on to the one thing in the post that they disagree with and completely ignoring everything else. I don't know what's so complicated to understand. Have a nice weekend.

 

[Hockey Gamer]

I thought the same thing about Lindgren. Howden too. Decent prospects but neither were in the top three or maybe five in their original team's prospect pool.

You can't have three untouchable center prospects. Howden most certainly should be a trade chip. Only reason why I wouldn't include Andersson is because of where he was drafted and the cost of getting him.

I remember someone shared the TBL prospect ranking the day of the McDonagh trade (credit to the poster below).

Just FYI, over on Prospects | Bolt Prospects , Howden was ranked as their 2nd best prospect. Hajek was up there as well (not sure of the number).

So lets not pretend like we got some scrub.

Obviously, if you go to their prospect list now, Howden isn't listed there anymore but if you go to their most recent listing before he was traded, you can see he was at number 3 going into the 2017-2018 season.

Offseason Prospect Rankings | Bolt Prospects

 

[DutchShamrock]

Ok one more post and then I'm actually leaving.

It's not that you disagree. It's that you didn't read my post or intentionally ignored it.

First I clearly said I'm using the Hart trophy instead of Norris because it's easier because it's basically just the point leader. If you prefer go ahead and look at the Art Ross trophy since it isn't voted on. It doesn't matter. It's not that Hart Trophy winners don't fall off. You need to compare the elite with the elite. Not with the very good. Here are recent Art Ross winners that have had long careers (Both Sedins, Thornton, MSL, Forsberg, Iginla, Jagr, Lemieux, Gretzky. All players that were highly productive their entire career. Really need to use runner ups or the like for this though since Jagr/Lemieux/Gretzky take up too many spots).

Second the "bias" in the voting is minimal. It basically always goes to a top 5 player in the league. Yes, sometimes better players are left out because people they don't give it to teams not in the playoffs. That is also why I said you can go through and use the nominees if you like. That will capture more players. I don't feel like doing the extra work at the moment but it's quite simple to do so.

Third - there are no moving targets. I did not cherry pick anything. I simply stated that Karlsson is an elite player and needs to be compared to other elite players. Not players like Shea Weber who appear to have been propped up by a teammate (Suter) and aren't as good as they look. If you have a better way to determine who is an elite player than Hart Trophy Winners/Nominees/Art Ross Winners by all means go ahead and use it. This was just the clearly one that I could think of.

Fourth - I don't know why you even mentioned Carey Price. For one, I mentioned I'm intentionally neglecting Hasek because he is a goalie which is not comparable to a skater (Obviously I meant Price too and just overlooked him). Additionally everyone knows my thoughts on the goalie position and I still stand by the football kicker comparison. I would never trade anything of value for a goalie.

Fifth - short careers due to injury. So what? Some players get hurt. Getting hurt is not predictable. Forsberg had a chronic back issue. Karlsson doesn't. Lindros had a ton of concussions. Karlsson hasn't. Karlsson has had one ankle injury that he had minimal time to rehab since it occurred in the year his team went to the SCF. And he had another major injury 6 years ago and clearly has produced fine since then. Additionally if a player has to retire due to injury five years from now that's an even better outcome for the team than if he was in some serious decline because you can recoup the cap space with LTIR.

This website ALWAYS does this. Latching on to the one thing in the post that they disagree with and completely ignoring everything else. I don't know what's so complicated to understand. Have a nice weekend.

The issue is Weber gets dismissed because he hasn't won the Norris. Top defender for a stretch but hey, hes ruled out because of that. But Karlsson gets lumped in with hart winners because he got a norris. That's a moving target. I try to apply rules imposed on me but guys don't like that.

The debate isn't if he's elite. No one challenged it. The debate is if his peak meshes with our window. Is that risk worth a 9 year commitment? We don't need to go prove elite.

I brought up Price to show how silly the exercise was. You dismiss it because it because doesn't support the elite guys don't fall off narrative. If I made a proposal to acquire Price to replace Lundqvist I would get flamed. Can't carry a team, play is falling off, injuries, huge cap hit. Would his hart help my argument? Of course not.

 

[Trxjw]

This is going to be a tough board to read if every time Brooks writes a fluff piece people lose their minds. Brooks is a mouthpiece. His speculation is full of hot takes and garbage. This is the same guy who got everyone in a tizzy last summer because Stepan had to fetch at least Clayton Keller+ or there would be no deal. His valuations are consistently awful.

 

[broadwayblue]

We're still comparing goalies to kickers?

 

[AlternateSideParking]

Gorton needs to find a sucker at GM then. That's the common denominator between those trades. All of those trades, expect the Forsberg deal involved a player with higher perceived value getting moved to for a player with weird circumstances . Drouin was a top 3 pick, and hadn't shown anything and was moved to a team desperate for talent, especially French Canadian talent. Saad was moved for Panarin because Chicaco loved his past performance and thought that he could salvage a Toews in decline. Hamilton (Top 10 pick) has had more assets traded for him than any defense of his caliber shouldhave, and still Hanifin (Top 5 pick) has shown inconsistency, but is going to his old coach. Larsson (top 5 pick) for Hall (number 1 overall pick); the less spoken about that the better.

Winning teams are built from top 5 picks and ripping people off in trades. Look at the Kings. The Blue Jackets have them two titles but they still had Doughty (number 2) pick doing a ton of the heavy lifting.

I'd argue that besides the Eric Staal trade, Gorton has come out on top of the moves that he has made from an asset standpoint. Yes he has work to do but I think he has done about as well as he could have. If that rip of the other team trade hasn't been there, and the premium draft picks have not been there until this year, again I ask, who is this slam dunk franchise changing player that they passed on?

"Slam dunk" are your words. I said legitimate superstar potential. And Mittelstadt has it. Andersson doesn't. But I bring it up only because you asked. Not getting into another CM-LA debate.

None of the players acquired at the deadline or the draft outside of Kravtsov fit that bill. Good prospects, added assests but none are cornerstone types like a Sergachev or Forsberg or Barzal, all of whom were acquired via trades.

The point is that this front office can't draft stars or acquire kids with star potential. This isn't news.

The Rangers screw up the draft way, way, waaaaaay more than they screw up hockey trades and free agency.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

The Rangers screw up the draft way, way, waaaaaay more than they screw up hockey trades and free agency.

I think this statement is total malakia.

 

[SA16]

We're still comparing goalies to kickers?

I will give you a like for having proven that you read the entire post.

 

[Savant]

"Slam dunk" are your words. I said legitimate superstar potential. And Mittelstadt has it. Andersson doesn't. But I bring it up only because you asked. Not getting into another CM-LA debate.

None of the players acquired at the deadline or the draft outside of Kravtsov fit that bill. Good prospects, added assests but none are cornerstone types like a Sergachev or Forsberg or Barzal, all of whom were acquired via trades.

The point is that this front office can't draft stars or acquire kids with star potential. This isn't news.

The Rangers screw up the draft way, way, waaaaaay more than they screw up hockey trades and free agency.

I think we both agree that this is why keeping the cap space intact is crucial. They may have to look to free agency (Panarin?) to get that player. I also had major issues with this draft. I didnt like the trade up for Miller considering the assets that were involved and taking Lindbom in the 2nd made it worse. But I do think the Kravtsov pick is their attempt to get their franchise player. Forsberg is a cornerstone but that was a very flukey trade. Those trades are the exception not the rule. Barzal was acquired by moving up in the draft, but he also fell way past where he was projected to be taken. Sergachev the jury is still out on. I dont really think those are fair to use as evidence of front office ineptitude.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

I remember someone shared the TBL prospect ranking the day of the McDonagh trade (credit to the poster below).



Obviously, if you go to their prospect list now, Howden isn't listed there anymore but if you go to their most recent listing before he was traded, you can see he was at number 3 going into the 2017-2018 season.

Offseason Prospect Rankings | Bolt Prospects

That's an old list. Howden was surpassed by Cirelli on the depth chart which made him expendable.

To me, prospects are players under 23 with less than a year of NHL service. That puts him behind Sergachev and Cirelli. Then throw in all the AHL-proven scorers Yzerman wouldn't part with like Joseph, Volkov and Stephens. Then throw in Katchouk, Raddysh and Foote.

Having a tough time taking Howden over any of the eight I mentioned.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

I think this statement is total malakia.

NYR 30-goal scorers traded/signed since 1991:

Messier
Graves
Verbeek
Gaborik
Jagr
Nash
Lindros
Fleury
Nedved
Dvorak

NYR 30-goal scorers drafted since 1991:

Prucha

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I think this statement is total malakia.

Yeah but it's much more rewarding to be negative because you will be right more often.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

NYR 30-goal scorers traded/signed since 1991:

Messier
Graves
Verbeek
Gaborik
Jagr
Nash
Lindros
Fleury
Nedved
Dvorak

NYR 30-goal scorers drafted since 1991:

Prucha

So for example Stepan and Skjei and Lundqvist are considered a screwed up picks because they will never score 30 goals?

 

[Ola]

No, you don’t know that. No parallel between previous B-/C+ level classes and the current crop of depth.

I recently posted TSN’s Top 10 organizational prospects list going back to 03-04. The prospects we had don’t compare to the current batch. Happy to repost it if needed. i.e. Josef Balej was a flashy overager that hit his ceiling in Hamilton, a shot in the dark. Overrated? Certainly. Different era.

It’s a numbers game. The better your system is, the better you’ll survive a Blackburn, Cheeneski, Kloucek hit. Knock on wood, we won’t face another like that.

If anything, this reconstruction may closely mimic what the Yankees were just able to flip within their system.

IMO, your tone has a bit of jealousy. To be blunt, a guy like Gordie Clark is a dumb old man. He’s well connected, and paid his dues. His hockey knowledge probably doesn’t match yours, being sincere. It is what it is.

Aside from that, our system is in as good shape as it’s been in 20 years. Point blank period.

I don’t know about the trashing of Gordie Clark.

I think we oversimplify things. Give a draft — at least — 5 years. Look back at the top 60 picks in 2010, 2012 and 2013. Is it easy to draft players? Is all you need to do just to pick the concensus kid?

There is a slight overweight in the top 12, and sure it’s not better to pick late, but it’s not by much. It’s darn random. All top 4 picks are crap one year. Another year only 1/4 picks become decent NHLers from like 5-6 to 30. And so forth and so forth.

My point is just, forget about just going with the concensus pick. Some drafts you could go with the concensus pick and have the No 1 pick overall, No 2 pick overall, No 3 pick overall and No 4 pick overall — and still walk away with nothing, just crap. Yaks, R Murray, Galchenyuk and G Reinhardt.

If we look at our last drafts, Skjei, Kreider, JT Miller and co — aren’t they pretty good picks? Buch was a good pick, Duke looked promising.

 

[Siddi]

Price is a bad example overall. Highly inconsistent goalie with 1 monster season where he was given the Hart due to a down season among skaters. Price actually has more bad/average seasons then good/great seasons.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

I think we both agree that this is why keeping the cap space intact is crucial. They may have to look to free agency (Panarin?) to get that player. I also had major issues with this draft. I didnt like the trade up for Miller considering the assets that were involved and taking Lindbom in the 2nd made it worse. But I do think the Kravtsov pick is their attempt to get their franchise player. Forsberg is a cornerstone but that was a very flukey trade. Those trades are the exception not the rule. Barzal was acquired by moving up in the draft, but he also fell way past where he was projected to be taken. Sergachev the jury is still out on. I dont really think those are fair to use as evidence of front office ineptitude.

Why aren't the Rangers making these moves? That's my point. For all the firepower they traded away, which prospect or return moves that superstar potential needle? Don't get me wrong, I like the players and they make the team deeper. But where is the dominant jersey seller? I'm guessing it's Kravtsov for now.

They made one -- Gomez for McDonagh, which was a heavily criticized trade, as McDonagh was a high pick in a deep draft and their best prospect (at the time) after Price. But I don't even want some sort of robbery. A fair hockey trade like a Drouin for Sergachev.

That's why I would acquire Karlsson. They don't draft superstars (skaters). This is a HOF superstar we're talking about. Ottawa will lose this trade regardless, but that's on their owner and the culture there. The Rangers should take advantage of that because the last thing Dorion wants is to lose him for nothing like the Islanders with Tavares. Give them Zibanejad. Give them Skjei. Give them Andersson. I'll pay that price for two or three more Norris Trophies.

Kravtsov and Chytil are my only untouchables.