Toggle sidebar

Hartford Wolf Pack (AHL) / Maine Mariners (ECHL) 2018-19: Part IX

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
nyr2k2 said:
If you would consider sending Chytil down in 6 games then you should also consider sending him down after the next two games so his contract can slide again.
Click to expand...
That's a good point although my hope would be that he would come back after we thin out our NHL forwards at the deadline.
 
Walter t said:
1) Chytl I would give another 6-8 games because I doubt want these kids on a go-to thinking a few bad games is all It takes to get them sent down. But if he's still struggling ( and it wouldn't shock me) then yes, the AHL would be best for him.
2) Pionk is a little different in that I want ice time for DeAngelo too so even if Pionk is less deserving of a demotion you might send him down to get him 20+ minutes a night in Hartford and ADA a spot in the Ranger lineup.
3) Howden would really have to take a step back for me to send him down.
D) Don't rush Andersson but if you follow the timetable above for Chytl and if he keeps playing as he has so far then I would be fine having him here by mid November.
E) There are probably 4 or 5 Dmen at Hartford who would be better than Staal but Hajek and Lindgren especially need the development time.
vi.) Instead of having Georgiev in NY and only sending him down when we are absolutely sure he WON'T play, I would keep in in Hartford and only bring him up when we're absolutely sure he WILL play.
Click to expand...

On 2) Pionk is already getting 20 minutes a night with the NHL team. Just saying. Average time on ice for Rangers D goes like this 1) Skjei 22.59 2) Pionk 20.27 3) DeAngelo 19.03 (though Quinn's not playing him) 4) Smith 18.20 5) McQuaid 18.05 6) Shattenkirk 17.53 7) Staal 17.11 8) Claesson 15.50.

I'm kind of expecting Pionk's average ice time to go up a bit into the 21/22 minute range. One reason it's higher than some of the others is he plays in all situations--5v5, 5v4, 4v5. And it would seem that Quinn trusts him more than Shattenkirk. I just don't see the justification for sending Pionk down--at least not right now. If he were to--DeAngelo would surely play more but to match the minutes and responsibilities that Pionk is handling now Tony would have to play 4v5 and have some kind of success in that.

On 1) a few bad games in a row is a very good reason to send a young player down. They have to know that to stay they need to maintain a standard of play. IMO Chytil seems to me to be struggling with his offensive game and some time in the AHL might do a lot to correct that. So I don't have an issue sending him down right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheGortonConspiracy
tradenashnow said:
Quinn is doing a good job with the young players. He's got Skjei back on track. He's making Pionk and DeAngelo earn icetime just like the vets. He's got Howden playing some good hockey as a rookie. It's not his fault that Chytil has no intangibles to his game. He needs to develop them in the AHL. I think he needs 2 full years of AHL play before he's NHL ready. Andersson is ready now. So is Hajek. Bigras probably can play in the NHL. The problem is Gorton and his incompetent signings like Shattenkirk, Namestnikov and Spooner. His inability to move Staal off a good year. Gorton is very greedy in the returns he asks for and often screws himself. It's obvious.
Click to expand...

Mostly I agree but Staal is not tradeable at all really. The way you move players who have cap hits far exceeding their value (and Sather is the man who signed Marc Staal not Gorton) is to send along other useful assets like very good prospects and high draft choices which I wouldn't do. A better option IMO is to buy his contract out. After this season there will be two years remaining on his $5.7 mil cap hit and IMO the Rangers should just buy that out. We will have a cap penalty but there will be more in cap savings to offset that and we won't trade any players, prospects or picks to make it happen.
 
eco's bones said:
Mostly I agree but Staal is not tradeable at all really. The way you move players who have cap hits far exceeding their value (and Sather is the man who signed Marc Staal not Gorton) is to send along other useful assets like very good prospects and high draft choices which I wouldn't do. A better option IMO is to buy his contract out. After this season there will be two years remaining on his $5.7 mil cap hit and IMO the Rangers should just buy that out. We will have a cap penalty but there will be more in cap savings to offset that and we won't trade any players, prospects or picks to make it happen.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with buying him out. What do we need the cap space for? Why sacrifice almost 3 mil in space down the line when we can use it now and free it up for when the team is ready to compete?
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband and Dijock94
eco's bones said:
Mostly I agree but Staal is not tradeable at all really. The way you move players who have cap hits far exceeding their value (and Sather is the man who signed Marc Staal not Gorton) is to send along other useful assets like very good prospects and high draft choices which I wouldn't do. A better option IMO is to buy his contract out. After this season there will be two years remaining on his $5.7 mil cap hit and IMO the Rangers should just buy that out. We will have a cap penalty but there will be more in cap savings to offset that and we won't trade any players, prospects or picks to make it happen.
Click to expand...

Why not retain $$ and trade option, everything else being equal?
 
I think you just ride the Staal and Smith contracts out. Let Staal be the 7th defenseman. No sense in havin dead cap space in 4 years when we actually may need the space. Doubt anyone but Hajek will be ready in the following 2 years anyway. Left side for the next 2 years should look like this.

Skjei
Hajek
Smith
Staal

After Staal and Smith’s contracts expire we may be looking at something like this

Skjei
Hajek
Miller
Rykov
 
kovazub94 said:
Why not retain $$ and trade option, everything else being equal?
Click to expand...

That might work too if you can find a team willing to give us something worthwhile who think that Staal is worth something in the neighborhood of $2.85 mil per (assuming we retain 50%). I don't think he is worth that much. For us--one of the worst rosters in the league he's a bottom pairing defenseman. IMO he's not worth his contract even at half. For a team trading for him they'd have to think differently and even be willing to throw some asset(s) our way to pull the transaction off. More possible than just trading him straight up but if I were a GM I wouldn't be interested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kovazub94
Dijock94 said:
I think you just ride the Staal and Smith contracts out. Let Staal be the 7th defenseman. No sense in havin dead cap space in 4 years when we actually may need the space. Doubt anyone but Hajek will be ready in the following 2 years anyway. Left side for the next 2 years should look like this.

Skjei
Hajek
Smith
Staal

After Staal and Smith’s contracts expire we may be looking at something like this

Skjei
Hajek
Miller
Rykov
Click to expand...

The last two years of his buy out would be $1.2 mil each. The Rangers are still going to be riding a bunch of first and second contracts. Unless the Rangers are planning on opening up the checkbook and going after the biggest free agents going 2 years from now I don't see the issue.
 
If smith keeps playing the way he is he’s very tradeable. Only 2 years left and under 5 mil. Plays both sides. Skates well. Very tradeable. Gorton just has to do his job. Which he struggles with.
 
eco's bones said:
That might work too if you can find a team willing to give us something worthwhile who think that Staal is worth something in the neighborhood of $2.85 mil per (assuming we retain 50%). I don't think he is worth that much. For us--one of the worst rosters in the league he's a bottom pairing defenseman. IMO he's not worth his contract even at half. For a team trading for him they'd have to think differently and even be willing to throw some asset(s) our way to pull the transaction off. More possible than just trading him straight up but if I were a GM I wouldn't be interested.
Click to expand...

Agree. The potential trading partner would view it as either they are helping us for a payment or they are looking for what they think Staal would bring (and he’s still has a reputation around the league) at acceptable to them cap price. The former are likely to be in a similar position as the Rangers while the later would probably be a team fighting for a playoff spot.
 
kovazub94 said:
Agree. The potential trading partner would view it as either they are helping us for a payment or they are looking for what they think Staal would bring (and he’s still has a reputation around the league) at acceptable to them cap price. The former are likely to be in a similar position as the Rangers while the later would probably be a team fighting for a playoff spot.
Click to expand...

If he were a rental it's easier to pull off a deal. Worse case scenario--you pay a small portion of his cap then and he helps your depth on a playoff run---kind of like Holden last year with Boston. You're not overcommitted to playing him at half his cap hit for 2 and a half/3 years. As he is he's not going to bring offense or be a two way D in any way which is the trend around the league--so he's bottom pairing and he's getting older as well. To want to take him you'd have to believe his ability in defensive situations was worth nearly $3 mil (that is dependent on the Rangers retaining) and IMO that's a tall order especially when most good teams don't have a lot of cap space sitting about and if you're not that good a team why would you want a 31 year old d-man who brings no offense with that kind of cap hit on your bottom pair?

It's not that he's a terrible player--it's that his kind of game is outdated for any really serious minutes. If he were under $2 mil with a year left--yeah, okay.
 
Dijock94 said:
I think you just ride the Staal and Smith contracts out. Let Staal be the 7th defenseman. No sense in havin dead cap space in 4 years when we actually may need the space. Doubt anyone but Hajek will be ready in the following 2 years anyway. Left side for the next 2 years should look like this.

Skjei
Hajek
Smith
Staal

After Staal and Smith’s contracts expire we may be looking at something like this

Skjei
Hajek
Miller
Rykov
Click to expand...


The more I think about it, the more certain I am that a lot of things will need to fall Skjei's way for him to still be on this time by the time they emerge from the rebuild. Right now, he is a good #3. There is obviously the chance that he grows into a true top pair guy, but for the sake of argument, let's assume he carves out a career as a very good 2nd pair guy. The problem there is that there are a BUNCH of guys behind him who are younger, cheaper, and have the potential to be what Skjei is now. If one of Hajek/Rykov/Miller/Lindgren/Lundkvist/someone new can match what Skjei does, then the team would have a decision to make. They would still need to invest in a #1 D (FA, most likely). If any of those kids behind Skjei shows that they can be a good 2nd pair option, the team will likely end up going with the younger, cheaper option (particularly at that point, when they will likely be going right up to the cap again).

I can easily see the team trading Skjei the season before his next contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jas
I do not like Lindgren and to a lesser extent, Day, sitting for ****ing Pedrie. Hope it's some minor thing vs. healthy scratch.
 
Crazy we got Bigras for Graves. Hes looked great so far for the Pack and he was a top prospect for them not even two years ago
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnowblindNYR
RGY said:
He has way more potential and needs to PLAY
Click to expand...
Rangers743 said:
Compared to Pedrie he should be. But I assume its because they're playing a b2b and want to give some guys rest
Click to expand...
The point is that defensemen in the AHL tend to rotate in and out of the lineup, he’ll play a good amount of games by the end of the season regardless, if he doesn’t want to be one of the players rotating, then he needs to show he’s just that good
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joey Bones
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom