Player Discussion Jeff Gorton

[Levitate]

Rebuilding through the draft doesn't necessarily mean dump everyone older than 23, suck for 5 years, and then ice a team completely composed of draft picks.

I actually agree in theory that moving Lundqvist in the next few years would theoretically be the best move, but it's something he'd have to ask for so there's no use getting all worked up about whether or not it's going to happen. I'd be really uncomfortable with management forcing someone like Lundqvist to leave the team. It's a business but some guys have earned the right to have some more respect.

In their wildest dreams I'm sure management is hoping they can rebuild things pretty quick and be back in the winning category in a few years. That's partly why they got guys in their trades who are close to stepping into the NHL. Hajek, Howden, Rykov...all those guys could be competing for spots sooner rather than later. Chytil and Andersson could be contributing in a big way in a year or two. If they draft well this year they could have contributors from that in a year or two. Add in any good depth free agent signings and keeping guys like Kreider, Zibanejad, etc, and they could be back into contention sooner rather than later IF they hit on all of these moves.

That's what they hope for I'm sure but they'll also try to keep drafting well to keep up the depth and keep guys coming into the team.

 

[Ori]

I don`t think all here understand what the word "rebuild" is all about on the HF forum. Because you need to build your team in the draft, and as we witness before the deadline - Tampa never gave away their top young prospects in that deal - you need draft top prospect to build around, and unless we win in the lottery (one) 8th pick won`t be enough with all the holes we have on this team, especially our defensive core.

 

[Levitate]

I don`t think all here understand what the word "rebuild" is all about on the HF forum. Because you need to build your team in the draft, and as we witness before the deadline - Tampa never gave away their top young prospects in that deal - you need draft top prospect to build around, and unless we win in the lottery (one) 8th pick won`t be enough with all the holes we have on this team, especially our defensive core.

I think that's your specific definition of "rebuild" and there is not a specific objective definition of it.

 

[True Blue]

you need draft top prospect to build around, and unless we win in the lottery (one) 8th pick won`t be enough with all the holes we have on this team, especially our defensive core.

Not sure that I agree here. You need draft picks. Full stop. Yes, higher end can obviously help. But the more darts you can throw at the dart board, the better off you are. And if your talent evaluators are good, you can find starting NHL defensemen out side the first round. Hence the need for the amassing of draft picks in a draft as deep as this one. The more you have

 

[Off Sides]

Not many will like my take but what else is new.

They tried to retool, that failed to make the playoffs.

They figured they may as well call it a rebuild near the deadline, accompanied by a letter and press conference.

Yet they ended up selling for less of a return than they were anticipating.

They have now reconsidered what they are calling this as it turns out "rebuilding" does not extract an appropriate level of financial support from the revenue streams, nor does it inspire much hope as they are not likely to be drafting a soon to be perceived build around piece.

So now it's about "Winning" as Lundqvist put it, which Gorton soon followed suit with.

Which in my estimation, given what they have and will add, will at least be successful enough to get back into the playoffs, maybe as early as next season given some of the teams that make them are really not all that good, which will be seen as progress as making them or even getting close to making them will be considered to have been about maintaining a winning culture.

 

[Ori]

Not sure that I agree here. You need draft picks. Full stop. Yes, higher end can obviously help. But the more darts you can throw at the dart board, the better off you are. And if your talent evaluators are good, you can find starting NHL defensemen out side the first round. Hence the need for the amassing of draft picks in a draft as deep as this one. The more you have

I understand your reasoning, I mainly thought about elite talent skills to have a player to build around and those picks are usually gone early in the draft in (%), but you`ve a better chance to hit with something the way you described it. Alright, I`ll let the draft aspect of it rest until we are done drafting a bit later this year, and I appreciate the good conversations here, and have a good evening!
I need a hot shower and cook a late meal.

I think that's your specific definition of "rebuild" and there is not a specific objective definition of it.

Yes, that`s one way to do it for sure, and Vancouver Canucks are 3 years into a rebuild right now, and they are doing it the way I described it - they are drafting their future core early in the draft.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Not many will like my take but what else is new.

They tried to retool, that failed to make the playoffs.

They figured they may as well call it a rebuild near the deadline, accompanied by a letter and press conference.

Yet they ended up selling for less of a return than they were anticipating.

They have now reconsidered what they are calling this as it turns out "rebuilding" does not extract an appropriate level of financial support from the revenue streams, nor does it inspire much hope as they are not likely to be drafting a soon to be perceived build around piece.

So now it's about "Winning" as Lundqvist put it, which Gorton soon followed suit with.

Which in my estimation, given what they have and will add, will at least be successful enough to get back into the playoffs, maybe as early as next season given some of the teams that make them are really not all that good, which will be seen as progress as making them or even getting close to making them will be considered to have been about maintaining a winning culture.

When did they get a return less than they anticipated?

 

[Ghost of jas]

When did they get a return less than they anticipated?

Apparently, even though Gorton got what the historical market value for McDonagh, it’s not the return people expected.

 

[Off Sides]

When did they get a return less than they anticipated?

When they had to include Miller in that deal to get it done.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

When they had to include Miller in that deal to get it done.

Where did you see that they had to? They said they’ve talked about a miller trade for months. The only thing that was reported as a hangup was Tampa including Hajek, which they relented and the deal got done

 

[Off Sides]

Where did you see that they had to? They said they’ve talked about a miller trade for months. The only thing that was reported as a hangup was Tampa including Hajek, which they relented and the deal got done

Depends on how one breaks that trade down.

They basically received back for McD what Yandle went for. Maybe even less as the Rangers gave up two players who were in the NHL at that time versus the two prospects the Rangers received back. The picks are basically the same if Tampa does not win a cup with McD. So historically if one values Yandle the same as McD that fits.

Then they have the Miller for Namestnikov swap. Either they thought that was an even swap, or they knew they were giving up some value.

What am I to believe? That they gave up value because they did not know there was a value difference, or do I believe they had to give up value to facilitate the other part of the trade?

On top of that, am I to believe the Rangers willingly went into the making those deals believing they would have to give up that value difference or am I to believe they were unaware and ended up being offered less than anticipated for the McD portion?

 

[broadwayblue]

So now it's about "Winning" as Lundqvist put it, which Gorton soon followed suit with.

Which in my estimation, given what they have and will add, will at least be successful enough to get back into the playoffs, maybe as early as next season given some of the teams that make them are really not all that good, which will be seen as progress as making them or even getting close to making them will be considered to have been about maintaining a winning culture.

We'll see. But in Gorton's interview on the FAN yesterday they discussed the letter to the fans. Gorton said you can't send one of those out every six months. I took from that they are going to do the rebuild the right way so they won't need to send us another letter about blowing up the team three years from now.

 

[Beacon]

I`m aware of that @GordonGecko - it do not necessary help this team to compete for the cup short term, but are they are going to rebuild in the draft or not?
We have 1 8th pick in 2018 draft is that enough to be satisfied concerning the whole rebuild topic? I really doubt it and it looks more like a retool for me.

Almost nobody really wants a rebuild. When people say they want it, they mean that they'd like our 30 year olds to turn into young kids and for the team to instantly be better next season. Rebuilds are a b---h. You draft a guy and even if he works out beautifully like McDonagh, Kreider and Zuccarello, it still takes 4-6 years for them to make the NHL, and another 1-2 years to hit their prime, which makes sense because you draft them at 18, but a player's prime usually begins at 24-25. So if you trade McDonagh, Nash, etc for picks in 2018, your returns are likely to come in somewhere between 2022 and 2026... and that's assuming the kids work out. Throw in that 50-50 of the late picks (like those we got for McD, Nash) go bust and you need more than 1 year of multiple high picks. That's why you either need a couple very early picks (top-3) or a ton of firsts and seconds for a few years. Or you need good luck where you draft Messier, Lowe and Glenn Anderson in one year and then Coffey and Kurri the next, while signing Gretzky as a UDFA.

 

[GregSirico]

Not many will like my take but what else is new.

They tried to retool, that failed to make the playoffs.

They figured they may as well call it a rebuild near the deadline, accompanied by a letter and press conference.

Yet they ended up selling for less of a return than they were anticipating.

They have now reconsidered what they are calling this as it turns out "rebuilding" does not extract an appropriate level of financial support from the revenue streams, nor does it inspire much hope as they are not likely to be drafting a soon to be perceived build around piece.

So now it's about "Winning" as Lundqvist put it, which Gorton soon followed suit with.

Which in my estimation, given what they have and will add, will at least be successful enough to get back into the playoffs, maybe as early as next season given some of the teams that make them are really not all that good, which will be seen as progress as making them or even getting close to making them will be considered to have been about maintaining a winning culture.

All of Gorton's interviews suggest the opposite. Sure they are going to try and be competitive, no team doesn't want that, but they aren't risking futures to try and build a cup contender in 12 months.

 

[Beacon]

In their wildest dreams I'm sure management is hoping they can rebuild things pretty quick

I can pretty much guarantee that the management is not thinking this. If they did, they'd acquire near-ready prospects who can step in next year. Sure they have lower ceiling (nobody trades away a near-ready prospect who has a reasonable shot at being a first liner), but they can help in the 2019 or 2020 playoffs. That was the Rangers strategy all through the window - they never acquired first rounders, they dealt them away because they couldn't wait for years for a kid to hit his prime.

Picks take a half dozen years and a bunch of them will turn into nothing. You get picks because you realize you won't be good for a while, so what the hell, let's take a stab at a home run, maybe we'll get Corey Perry at #28, Carlson at #27, David Pastrnak at #25. We have all the time in the world to wait to see if our picks can turn into stars instead of acquiring a nice third liner for the same price.

 

[Off Sides]

We'll see. But in Gorton's interview on the FAN yesterday they discussed the letter to the fans. Gorton said you can't send one of those out every six months. I took from that they are going to do the rebuild the right way so they won't need to send us another letter about blowing up the team three years from now.

I hope they do follow through on this.

My concerns are based on my interpretation on what he is saying in conjunction with what the past iterations of management, who are still within the hierarchy have done. As in not being able to send out that letter every 6 months, versus him saying can't send that letter every 3 years.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Depends on how one breaks that trade down.

They basically received back for McD what Yandle went for. Maybe even less as the Rangers gave up two players who were in the NHL at that time versus the two prospects the Rangers received back. The picks are basically the same if Tampa does not win a cup with McD. So historically if one values Yandle the same as McD that fits.

Then they have the Miller for Namestnikov swap. Either they thought that was an even swap, or they knew they were giving up some value.

What am I to believe? That they gave up value because they did not know there was a value difference, or do I believe they had to give up value to facilitate the other part of the trade?

On top of that, am I to believe the Rangers willingly went into the making those deals believing they would have to give up that value difference or am I to believe they were unaware and ended up being offered less than anticipated for the McD portion?

They got back the foundation of any star player that’s been traded in the recent past, but I think they got more quality in the pieces than any of the other trades. I don’t think the Rangers valued Miller as much as people around here do (I don’t either), so I think that’s why a lot of people don’t get/are upset with that part of the trade.

 

[Off Sides]

All of Gorton's interviews suggest the opposite. Sure they are going to try and be competitive, no team doesn't want that, but they aren't risking futures to try and build a cup contender in 12 months.

We'll see how that works out should they be in playoff position and thinking about renting. Every year we see the "it's the right thing to do to give a playoff team a better chance by renting/self renting" ideas.

 

[GregSirico]

We'll see how that works out should they be in playoff position and thinking about renting. Every year we see the "it's the right thing to do to give a playoff team a better chance by renting/self renting" ideas.

I think they did that to try and sustain the Hank run, that window is exhausted they gut it down and rebuilding, only real core piece throughout all of these runs is Hank and he's still here. I don't see them trading futures in 2018 to win it all. That is literally everything against what Jeff said.

 

[Off Sides]

I think they did that to try and sustain the Hank run, that window is exhausted they gut it down and rebuilding, only real core piece throughout all of these runs is Hank and he's still here. I don't see them trading futures in 2018 to win it all. That is literally everything against what Jeff said.

I'm not sure that will change, I think Lundqvist will still be there should they be in playoff position.

Are they not going to try to give him the best chance they can? If they think that chance is better by selling off some futures at that point, are they going to resist temptation?

It's not like this team is far out of a playoff position should they decide to keep most of what they have, promote some youth and sign a couple players with the cap space they are looking to have. And what else are they going to do with that space? Not using it will be condemned as not doing enough towards trying to win/build/maintain.

 

[GregSirico]

I'm not sure that will change, I think Lundqvist will still be there should they be in playoff position.

Are they not going to try to give him the best chance they can? If they think that chance is better by selling off some futures at that point, are they going to resist temptation?

It's not like this team is far out of a playoff position should they decide to keep most of what they have, promote some youth and sign a couple players with the cap space they are looking to have. And what else are they going to do with that space? Not using it will be condemned as not doing enough towards trying to win/build/maintain.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying. You mean we should go all in next year?

 

[Beacon]

It's not like this team is far out of a playoff position should they decide to keep most of what they have, promote some youth and sign a couple players with the cap space they are looking to have. And what else are they going to do with that space? Not using it will be condemned as not doing enough towards trying to win/build/maintain.

How close are they really? If you replace Nash with Spooner, Grabs with one of Chytil or Lias (chances of both making it f/t next year aren't great, look around at D+2 players), and McDonagh with Pionk, is the team better than the one that just missed the playoffs? Seems worse, significantly worse. A year later, MZA is gone either via trade or UFA. Maybe the second of Lias/Chytil makes the Rangers that year. Does he instantly (or ever) become as good as MZA? Hank will turn 38 that year. Richter, Beezer already retired by that age, how good will Hank be? Is Shesterkin or Geo going to be as good that year as Hank was this year when we missed the playoffs? Is Hank still going to be as good?

If anything, the team gets worse in 2018-19, then even worse in 2019-20. And so long as we'll suck anyway, let's get some value out of MZA before he walks as a UFA.

 

[Off Sides]

How close are they really? If you replace Nash with Spooner, Grabs with one of Chytil or Lias (chances of both making it f/t next year aren't great, look around at D+2 players), and McDonagh with Pionk, is the team better than the one that just missed the playoffs? Seems worse, significantly worse. A year later, MZA is gone either via trade or UFA. Maybe the second of Lias/Chytil makes the Rangers that year. Does he instantly (or ever) become as good as MZA? Hank will turn 38 that year. Richter, Beezer already retired by that age, how good will Hank be? Is Shesterkin or Geo going to be as good that year as Hank was this year when we missed the playoffs? Is Hank still going to be as good?

If anything, the team gets worse in 2018-19, then even worse in 2019-20. And so long as we'll suck anyway, let's get some value out of MZA before he walks as a UFA.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying. You mean we should go all in next year?

I am not saying the playoffs should be their goal, their goal should be to rebuild.

But it is really a rebuild if they missed the playoffs once, sold off what they did and then make moves to get right back into the playoffs and maybe also rent on top to do better in those playoffs?

 

[GregSirico]

I am not saying the playoffs should be their goal, their goal should be to rebuild.

But it is really a rebuild if they missed the playoffs once, sold off what they did and then make moves to get right back into the playoffs and maybe also rent on top to do better in those playoffs?

I believe that is their goal. I don't think making the playoffs and rebuilding are contradicting ideas.

 

[RangerBlues]

I can pretty much guarantee that the management is not thinking this. If they did, they'd acquire near-ready prospects who can step in next year. Sure they have lower ceiling (nobody trades away a near-ready prospect who has a reasonable shot at being a first liner), but they can help in the 2019 or 2020 playoffs. That was the Rangers strategy all through the window - they never acquired first rounders, they dealt them away because they couldn't wait for years for a kid to hit his prime.

Picks take a half dozen years and a bunch of them will turn into nothing. You get picks because you realize you won't be good for a while, so what the hell, let's take a stab at a home run, maybe we'll get Corey Perry at #28, Carlson at #27, David Pastrnak at #25. We have all the time in the world to wait to see if our picks can turn into stars instead of acquiring a nice third liner for the same price.

Pastrnak was no secret to the Rangers. He was highly coveted and the Rangers were trying to get a first round pick