Player Discussion Kaapo Kakko

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Kind of like Osgood was a better goalie than Hasek.

Niemi better than Lundqvist

 

[bbny]

So are we really going to only keep one of Copp/Strome/Vatrano this offseason just so that we can overpay Kakko on a bridge deal because he was a 2OA? I think I’d rather keep two of those three and get some futures value out of Kakko via trade before it’s gone. There has to be a few teams out there who would still pay a fair amount for him.

 

[bhamill]

So are we really going to only keep one of Copp/Strome/Vatrano this offseason just so that we can overpay Kakko on a bridge deal because he was a 2OA? I think I’d rather keep two of those three and get some futures value out of Kakko via trade before it’s gone. There has to be a few teams out there who would still pay a fair amount for him.

I think that you are in the minority there. Yes pretty much every team that can afford his cap hit would trade for him, but I doubt anyone would pay enough to make it worth while to the NYR. I'd say Kakko is going to be a part of this team for a long long time.

 

[mas0764]

You can’t judge off a 14 game season.

I'm not, I'm taking his entire career into account. You, on the other hand, are judging off a 36 game season.

 

[mas0764]

So are we really going to only keep one of Copp/Strome/Vatrano this offseason just so that we can overpay Kakko on a bridge deal because he was a 2OA? I think I’d rather keep two of those three and get some futures value out of Kakko via trade before it’s gone. There has to be a few teams out there who would still pay a fair amount for him.

We aren't trading Kakko to make room for Vatrano.

 

[bbny]

We aren't trading Kakko to make room for Vatrano.

I would choose the first two. In any case, it’s not 1 for 1. It’s Kakko for one of those three players + return for Kakko.

 

[bbny]

I think that you are in the minority there. Yes pretty much every team that can afford his cap hit would trade for him, but I doubt anyone would pay enough to make it worth while to the NYR. I'd say Kakko is going to be a part of this team for a long long time.

I know, but I also don’t care if it’s a minority position. I think a good portion of the majority are just too scared to move on because “#2 OA”. It’s been three years and we’ve seen no display of top 6 traits. All third line traits.

 

[mas0764]

When you consider his cap hit is 2 million, I think, it does seem foolish.

I've heard that we wanted him back at roughly that price and he just didn't want to be in NY anymore.

 

[McRanger92]

I know, but I also don’t care if it’s a minority position. I think a good portion of the majority are just too scared to move on because “#2 OA”. It’s been three years and we’ve seen no display of top 6 traits. All third line traits.

Kakko is not untouchable anymore. Fairly or unfairly, him basically losing a full season to injury when he had a chance to make himself a clear core piece over Lafreniere & Kravtsov has put the Rangers in an interesting spot. Lafreniere is younger and has already shown more offensive ability than Kakko, and looked better on the top line with Mika & Kreider. Kravtsov is an older player and seems like he will be retuning to the fold next year. Even Brennan Othmann has distinguished himself as one of the best wing prospects in the league. Theres only 2 top 6 wing spots available. Not all of these guys are going to be on the team next year and Kakko will be making the most $. Something will have to give, especially if Drury want to bring back some of the established NHLers who have impacted this team in such a positive way post deadline.

 

[mas0764]

The Rangers aren't going to move out Kakko for anything less than an even better young chip in return, which is extremely hard to think up names that would even be possible. Like.... Zegras.

Chytil will be moved first if they need to unload ~$2m in salary. And even moving Chytil is dumb.

This is a narrative pushed by a crowd that is so driven to sell the win now narrative that they subscribe to the idea that moving out any piece that isn't ready to play top 6/top 4 minutes in favor of veterans who have maybe 2 more seasons in that capacity is a good idea.

It's a fireable offense if it does happen.

 

[bhamill]

I'm not, I'm taking his entire career into account. You, on the other hand, are judging off a 36 game season.

Wrong once again, I'm judging the trend in every season in his career where he gets enough games in to make some semblance of a judgement. Guess what 14 ain't that, 11 ain't that... And judging the player he will be at 26 (next season) at least in part by how much he scored as a 21 or 22 year old. As if its not completely normal for a player to develop into a better one over that time.
At this point we both know you are just trying desperately to be "right." It doesn't matter. You've shown you aren't willing to be rational if it doesn't support what what you want the case to be. I have no more time for you on this. Have a good one.

 

[mas0764]

Wrong once again, I'm judging the trend in every season in his career where he gets enough games in to make some semblance of a judgement. Guess what 14 ain't that, 11 ain't that... And judging the player he will be at 26 (next season) at least in part by how much he scored as a 21 or 22 year old. As if its not completely normal for a player to develop into a better one over that time.
At this point we both know you are just trying desperately to be "right." It doesn't matter. You've shown you aren't willing to be rational if it doesn't support what what you want the case to be. I have no more time for you on this. Have a good one.

I'm not gonna base my projections of him on one 36 game sample size when the rest of his career, including his most recent sample, is substantially less than that. You keep trying to insinuate I should accept linear improvement when his most recent campaign he regressed. Why a 36 game sample is relevant but a 14 game sample isn't, isn't logical.

If you have nothing else to add then it's probably wise for you to bow out because your position is absurd.

 

[bhamill]

I know, but I also don’t care if it’s a minority position. I think a good portion of the majority are just too scared to move on because “#2 OA”. It’s been three years and we’ve seen no display of top 6 traits. All third line traits.

You are of course entitled to your opinion. Personally I'm not afraid over his draft position, I'm afraid over selling low on a player who I believe will be excellent in this league. I'm not proclaiming he's untouchable, but if we trade him we should get fair value for that potential. And that's of course JMO.

 

[bhamill]

I'm not gonna base my projections of him on one 36 game sample size when the rest of his career, including his most recent sample, is substantially less than that. You keep trying to insinuate I should accept linear improvement when his most recent campaign he regressed.

If you have nothing else to add then it's probably wise for you to bow out because your position is absurd.

Again I based my opinion on every season he got 15 (30 really) or more games in. A reasonable standard. You can keep arguing against something I didn't say but it makes you look like you have no clue.

 

[bhamill]

delete

 

[mas0764]

Again I based my opinion on every season he got 15 (30 really) or more games in. A reasonable standard. You can keep arguing against something I didn't say but it makes you look like you have no clue.

Again, that's not reasonable. It's arbitrary. It's like the definition of arbitrary.

My standard is every season he got at least 37 games in. Top that. /sarcasm

The only, ONLY reason you are picking 15 is because it's a cut off designed to exclude this past season where he regressed.

Therefore it's illogical.

If you are trying to argue progression is worth taking note of, that's fine, but try at least averaging his past 3 seasons in comparison to his first two seasons, so you have a 90+ game sample size to take an average of.

I already did that math for you, though, and you didn't like it because it still made him look like warmed over shit.

 

[bbny]

You are of course entitled to your opinion. Personally I'm not afraid over his draft position, I'm afraid over selling low on a player who I believe will be excellent in this league. I'm not proclaiming he's untouchable, but if we trade him we should get fair value for that potential. And that's of course JMO.

Well, yes. I also mentioned fair value. Though fair value isn’t #2 OA value anymore.

 

[bbny]

The Rangers aren't going to move out Kakko for anything less than an even better young chip in return, which is extremely hard to think up names that would even be possible. Like.... Zegras.

Chytil will be moved first if they need to unload ~$2m in salary. And even moving Chytil is dumb.

This is a narrative pushed by a crowd that is so driven to sell the win now narrative that they subscribe to the idea that moving out any piece that isn't ready to play top 6/top 4 minutes in favor of veterans who have maybe 2 more seasons in that capacity is a good idea.

It's a fireable offense if it does happen.

It’s a fireable offense after year 1. Not after year 3.

 

[bhamill]

Again, that's not reasonable. It's arbitrary. It's like the definition of arbitrary.

My standard is every season he got at least 37 games in. Top that.

The only, ONLY reason you are picking 15 is because it's a cut off designed to exclude this past season where he regressed.

Therefore it's illogical.

I used 15 to illustrate how ridiculously low numbers of games played make for ridiculously inaccurate projections. He's either been over 32 or under 15. Any rational person knows a 32, 36 or 40 game sample is a far better representation than 11 or 14. So of course you cant grasp it.
Also since you want me to "top" your childish 37 games thing, he had 13 in 40 in 19-20. That is .33 points per game or a 27 point full season as a 23 year old. Yeah it would be wildly uncharacteristic for an NHLer to score 8 points more than that as a 26 year old.
But go ahead and move the goalposts since I'm sure you thought 36 games was the most he played. Have the last word I'm not going to bother with you.

 

[bbny]

Kakko is not untouchable anymore. Fairly or unfairly, him basically losing a full season to injury when he had a chance to make himself a clear core piece over Lafreniere & Kravtsov has put the Rangers in an interesting spot. Lafreniere is younger and has already shown more offensive ability than Kakko, and looked better on the top line with Mika & Kreider. Kravtsov is an older player and seems like he will be retuning to the fold next year. Even Brennan Othmann has distinguished himself as one of the best wing prospects in the league. Theres only 2 top 6 wing spots available. Not all of these guys are going to be on the team next year and Kakko will be making the most $. Something will have to give, especially if Drury want to bring back some of the established NHLers who have impacted this team in such a positive way post deadline.

Yes. There is good organizational depth at wing, which is a good part of the reason to cut the losses now. One more no-show year from Kakko and he will be more in line with worthless bust more than valuable commodity. Right now, he should still have plenty of value. I just think the Rangers are deep enough with current wings and prospects, and a good enough team now, to capitalize on what is now their first window of winning a Cup.

Let’s say Drury decides to keep Strome and let Copp walk, and Kakko’s bridge deal is the difference between being able to afford Copp or not. What is 1) the likelihood of Kakko being better than Copp down the road (if better, how much better)?, and 2) how long before that happens? Even if it does happen, it could be long enough away and detrimental enough that it could potentially sand bag the first window of contention by limiting the potential of the roster before the young generation (Laf/Miller/Schneider/Othmann/Cuylle/etc) replaces the current core - thereby wasting Zib/Panarin/Kreider/Igor/Trouba primes over the next 3-4 seasons. Kakko to Copp is currently a monumental upgrade to the roster.

 

[ElLeetch]

So are we really going to only keep one of Copp/Strome/Vatrano this offseason just so that we can overpay Kakko on a bridge deal because he was a 2OA? I think I’d rather keep two of those three and get some futures value out of Kakko via trade before it’s gone. There has to be a few teams out there who would still pay a fair amount for him.

Bridge Kakko. Keep Copp and Frank. Let Strome and Braun walk. dump Nemeth and even Hajek if you can.

 

[mas0764]

I used 15 to illustrate how ridiculously low numbers of games played make for ridiculously inaccurate projections. He's either been over 32 or under 15. Any rational person knows a 32, 36 or 40 game sample is a far better representation than 11 or 14. So of course you cant grasp it.

Which is why I suggested his averages over the past 3 seasons. You have highs and lows in there.

It still doesn't support the concept that he's going to be a 35-40 point player.

Using 15 games illustrates nothing other than you want to keep out his most recent regression. If we are throwing out small sample sizes then his 36 game sample size isn't relevant either.

 

[mas0764]

Yes. There is good organizational depth at wing, which is a good part of the reason to cut the losses now. One more no-show year from Kakko and he will be more in line with worthless bust more than valuable commodity. Right now, he should still have plenty of value. I just think the Rangers are deep enough with current wings and prospects, and a good enough team now, to capitalize on what is now their first window of winning a Cup.

Let’s say Drury decides to keep Strome and let Copp walk, and Kakko’s bridge deal is the difference between being able to afford Copp or not. What is 1) the likelihood of Kakko being better than Copp down the road (if better, how much better)?, and 2) how long before that happens? Even if it does happen, it could be long enough away and detrimental enough that it could potentially sand bag the first window of contention by limiting the potential of the roster before the young generation (Laf/Miller/Schneider/Othmann/Cuylle/etc) replaces the current core - thereby wasting Zib/Panarin/Kreider/Igor/Trouba primes over the next 3-4 seasons. Kakko to Copp is currently a monumental upgrade to the roster.

You are either drastically overrating Copp or drastically underrating Kakko.

Kakko may be the best defensive winger on the team already.

Copp had a career high of 26 points through his age 25 season. Kakko paced to fly by that total in pandemic shortened 1st and 2nd years and again in this injury shortened year. He just turned 21. It will be shocking if he doesn't reach Copp's numbers at this stage. The question is, will Kakko still ever reach 50-60-70-80 point thresholds which he always had the ability to do?

There's no way I'm choosing Copp over Kakko long term (or short term, since keeping Kakko short term is necessary to keep him long term).

If the financial straights are that dire, you move Goodrow first. You're not dealing Kakko without a Zegras-like return.

 

[mas0764]

Kakko just needs his offense up to speed. Copp's certainly didn't take off until way later in his career.

Copp on defensive steroids is like Kakko's worst case career scenario.

 

[Peltz]

I know, but I also don’t care if it’s a minority position. I think a good portion of the majority are just too scared to move on because “#2 OA”. It’s been three years and we’ve seen no display of top 6 traits. All third line traits.

You're nuts dude. Kakko is going to be a top 6 player (easily). He arguably already can do it today.