Player Discussion Kaapo Kakko

[dshea19]

I usually look at a player's 23 or 24 year old season. Some guys struggle until then. Some guys come out of the gate firing. Even for someone like Auston Matthews, who was a great player out of the gate, this season (turned 24 in September) was his big jump. Smaller improvements until a big leap this year. Sens dump Mika at 23. He is 25 before he approaches PPG playing. Buch is 27 before that happens for him. Not every trajectory is great, and I don't put super importance on third or 4th year. I tend to look at age. Mika and Buch started doing the smaller things that lead to success more consistently when they were 23/24. It took a little bit for the results to pop. Laf and Kakko are, in my opinion, just starting to apply those lessons. Their jumps are coming. The question is how much of a jump is even possible. That remains to be seen. Kravtsov might be in the same boat. He seems like he might be putting the pieces of all the lessons together. This is going to be an interesting year to see if the kids take big steps or not.

 

[B17 Apricots]

KK will become a very good player.

 

[bhamill]

Being disappointed with him is fine. I am as well. But calling him a but seems odd considering Andrew Ladd, Henrik and Daniel Sedin didn't hit 50 points until they were 25. Van Riemsdyk was 24. Reinhart and J. Staal 23. Niederreiter was 25. Huberdeau was 22. So were Horton and Vanek. All were top-5 draft picks.

This notion that a player is done developing at age 21 is insane.

AGREED.

 

[bleedblue94]

The debate in this thread is so stale.

if he were named Mikko Maako and had been drafted 2nd overall by ANY other team in the league, the same people defending him would be laughing at that team’s fans for doing the same.

100%

 

[bhamill]

The debate in this thread is so stale.

Look, Kakko still may breakout to a 50-60 point player and may even produce beyond that. I use 50-60 points because I think that’s the cutoff for where we’d be “satisfied”.

At the same time, if he were named Mikko Maako and had been drafted 2nd overall by ANY other team in the league, the same people defending him would be laughing at that team’s fans for doing the same.

The debate IS stale, but nah, do you see me laughing at LA over Byfield? Chicago over Dach? Nope. they are 21 year old players, just like ours... It changes nothing that they are on other teams.

 

[CLW]

I usually look at a player's 23 or 24 year old season. Some guys struggle until then. Some guys come out of the gate firing. Even for someone like Auston Matthews, who was a great player out of the gate, this season (turned 24 in September) was his big jump. Smaller improvements until a big leap this year. Sens dump Mika at 23. He is 25 before he approaches PPG playing. Buch is 27 before that happens for him. Not every trajectory is great, and I don't put super importance on third or 4th year. I tend to look at age. Mika and Buch started doing the smaller things that lead to success more consistently when they were 23/24. It took a little bit for the results to pop. Laf and Kakko are, in my opinion, just starting to apply those lessons. Their jumps are coming. The question is how much of a jump is even possible. That remains to be seen. Kravtsov might be in the same boat. He seems like he might be putting the pieces of all the lessons together. This is going to be an interesting year to see if the kids take big steps or not.

Yep, that's how I look at it. Men's nervous systems (brains) develop until around 24 years of age. I guess you can also say "until they get their man's strength". Outside of that causes and conditions wary, good coach/bad coach/freedom/support/chemistry/personal maturity etc and so on.

The Ranger kids are growing, but are far from grown. The Rangers have put themselves in the position they have their big stars/contracts tied down. Those older players won't change much, any future success now hinges on the development and growth of the young players into dominant players. It follows the coaching staff has one main task now outside the routine ones - the development of the kids.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I'll be seriously disappointed if we move any of Lafreniere, Kakko, Shesterkin or Miller. To me these guys are the foundation that this rebuild is supposed to be built on and they should be Rangers for 7 or 8 years atleast.

 

[Peltz]

The debate IS stale, but nah, do you see me laughing at LA over Byfield? Chicago over Dach? Nope. they are 21 year old players, just like ours... It changes nothing that they are on other teams.

Agreed. Dach is going to be great. Byfield, I personally haven't seen enough of though to make a comment.

I'll be seriously disappointed if we move any of Lafreniere, Kakko, Shesterkin or Miller. To me these guys are the foundation that this rebuild is supposed to be built on and they should be Rangers for 7 or 8 years atleast.

I think Miller, Shesterkin, and Laf are safe. No one is trading them.

 

[Rempe73]

VK74 has a better ring

It does. But I went from Buchnevich89 to Kakko24, and I would have to stay with the theme.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Being disappointed with him is fine. I am as well. But calling him a but seems odd considering Andrew Ladd, Henrik and Daniel Sedin didn't hit 50 points until they were 25. Van Riemsdyk was 24. Reinhart and J. Staal 23. Niederreiter was 25. Huberdeau was 22. So were Horton and Vanek. All were top-5 draft picks.

This notion that a player is done developing at age 21 is insane.

I agree with you but in season 4 I think an expectation of 40 points is fair especially for people pushing him to the top 6.

 

[will1066]

I'll be seriously disappointed if we move any of Lafreniere, Kakko, Shesterkin or Miller. To me these guys are the foundation that this rebuild is supposed to be built on and they should be Rangers for 7 or 8 years atleast.

Is it wrong that when I saw Miller, I thought JT and that we were gonna flip him again?

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I personally think we're a good enough team that we can give Laf and Kakko some rope to stay in the top six and see what they can do. Personally I'd prefer Kravstov on the 2nd line but i also realize he has to earn his time and Kakko has to get time to prove himself. So I'm hopefull both players get an opportunity to sink or swim this year.

 

[Baby Punisher]

I'll be seriously disappointed if we move any of Lafreniere, Kakko, Shesterkin or Miller. To me these guys are the foundation that this rebuild is supposed to be built on and they should be Rangers for 7 or 8 years atleast.

One of them is going.

 

[Lgrsean]

I personally think we're a good enough team that we can give Laf and Kakko some rope to stay in the top six and see what they can do. Personally I'd prefer Kravstov on the 2nd line but i also realize he has to earn his time and Kakko has to get time to prove himself. So I'm hopefull both players get an opportunity to sink or swim this year.

Chytil really improved towards the end of the regular season and into the playoffs. If he starts next year the same way, whoever plays on the 3rd line (Laf/Kakko/Kravstov/Blais/Goodrow) will have an opportunity to thrive.

 

[mas0764]

One of them is going.

No they aren't.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Its funny to me how this fanbase completely bought into the rebuild after years of doing things the wrong way, finally get some top draft picks but are now impatient with those young players developing.

For me, id rather let a top young talent fail before my eyes and bust out until the age of 25 instead of whining about it, especially after everything this team has gone through. I get it with Kakko. Theres more to see from him. For sure.

However, you have more cost certainty with a player like him instead of trading them off and likely having to field a team of 6-8 players with hefty contracts. Let them develop. What would wind up happening is youll be bringing up lower pedigree players in the same position anyway to get under the cap, and there is a greater chance of them sucking than a 2OV. Might as well allow these top of the draft players to actually grow up into men, develop and still fail if thats the case.

Just my two bits

 

[Baby Punisher]

No they aren't.

Yes, they are. There is no way they can all be retained once their bridge deals are up. It will be another Buchnevich situation. Choices will have to be made. If this team is serious about winning a cup over the next 3 years one of these guys will have to go. Especially if it's to bring a player like Patrick Kane in and Chicago retains 50%. I said last off-season that the rebuild was over and many on this board lambasted me stating that I was wrong. Well, I wasn't wrong. Now we are all in on winning a cup. You don't get to keep all of your shiny new toys when going for a cup. Someone will have to be traded to help get you there. Just like it was done in 1994. Sure, I wasn't happy that we lost Weight and Amonte, but we got a cup and got close again in 1997 before the wheels fell off the wagon. It's almost 30 years since we won. I want another cup now, not 5 or 10 years from now while waiting for draft picks to mature with no guarantee that they will mature into the player that their draft position suggested they should be. That's not how you win in the NHL. At the same time, I am not advocating to trade away everyone. However, at least 1 of the afore mentioned players will be traded away.

 

[Baby Punisher]

Chytil really improved towards the end of the regular season and into the playoffs. If he starts next year the same way, whoever plays on the 3rd line (Laf/Kakko/Kravstov/Blais/Goodrow) will have an opportunity to thrive.

As much as he improved he didn't show management enough that they would give him a shot at the 2nd line. They went out and signed Trochek. They either envision him as a 3rd liner or they plan on trading him because management knows they can't re-sign him after this season.

 

[duhmetreE]

What will you do @EdJovanovski when/if Kakko outproduces Kravtsov this season?

 

[mas0764]

Yes, they are. There is no way they can all be retained once their bridge deals are up.

Sure they can, we are moving Trouba and/or Kreider.

It will be another Buchnevich situation. Choices will have to be made.

Ok. I choose to move Trouba instead of Lafreniere, Miller or Kakko.

If this team is serious about winning a cup over the next 3 years one of these guys will have to go. Especially if it's to bring a player like Patrick Kane in and Chicago retains 50%.

We cannot afford this and getting rid of long term assets for a Pat Kane rental is stupid.

This team is already right there at the top with Toronto and Carolina. No need to pay ridiculous prices for rentals.

They shouldn't even part with their first round pick this deadline since they did so last deadline and they are going to need to select a center or other forward in this year's strong first round.

We're not going the stupid 2012-15 route where traded all our picks and prospects again.

Now we are all in on winning a cup. You don't get to keep all of your shiny new toys when going for a cup. Someone will have to be traded to help get you there. Just like it was done in 1994. Sure, I wasn't happy that we lost Weight and Amonte, but we got a cup and got close again in 1997 before the wheels fell off the wagon.

Yeah actually most Cup winners don't trade away their Amontes and Weights, only we were stupid enough to do that. Hopefully we don't make that mistake again and instead actually keep our young talent like a Chicago or a Los Angeles so we have a shot at winning more than one Cup over the course of a decade.

 

[EdJovanovski]

What will you do @EdJovanovski when/if Kakko outproduces Kravtsov this season?

Not happening lol and I'm down for any SB Cash bets on it

 

[duhmetreE]

Not happening lol and I'm down for any SB Cash bets on it

is that like Vbucks? you zoomer

 

[Baby Punisher]

Sure they can, we are moving Trouba and/or Kreider.




Ok. I choose to move Trouba instead of Lafreniere, Miller or Kakko.



We cannot afford this and getting rid of long term assets for a Pat Kane rental is stupid.

This team is already right there at the top with Toronto and Carolina. No need to pay ridiculous prices for rentals.

They shouldn't even part with their first round pick this deadline since they did so last deadline and they are going to need to select a center or other forward in this year's strong first round.

We're not going the stupid 2012-15 route where traded all our picks and prospects again.



Yeah actually most Cup winners don't trade away their Amontes and Weights, only we were stupid enough to do that. Hopefully we don't make that mistake again and instead actually keep our young talent like a Chicago or a Los Angeles so we have a shot at winning more than one Cup over the course of a decade.

So you want to trade away a 50 goal scorer and the backbone of our defense to keep unproven talent. Got it.

The two examples of us being right there with Toronto and Carolina is kind if accurate They didn't win a cup either. In fact, You are actually wrong about us being right there with them. We outperformed both teams. We are closer than they are.

No one is saying trade away everyone, or every pick.

Trading for Kane is not stupid. Not if you want a more clear path to winning a Championship. Dreaming about a mini-dynasty is great. How about we win one Cup first, then we worry about the next one.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Not happening lol and I'm down for any SB Cash bets on it

if Kravtsov wins, @duhmetreE has to sub to @EdJovanovski 's OnlyFans. And vice versa.

 

[Lgrsean]

As much as he improved he didn't show management enough that they would give him a shot at the 2nd line. They went out and signed Trochek. They either envision him as a 3rd liner or they plan on trading him because management knows they can't re-sign him after this season.

I look at it as Trocheck addressing a lot of the teams areas of need that Chytil doesn’t at this point. The Rangers might be able to make enough room to sign their young guys by trading Goodrow and filling in with lower cap hit players. If they need more space than that, we’ve had a really successful season and you explore where guys would be willing to waive their NMC.