Player Discussion Kaapo Kakko

[Doctyl]

That’s fine with me. I just want people to be realistic about what he is. If you still think there’s a point per game future there, you’re more optimistic than I. I think he can be a better Fast/Lehkonen/etc. who may have a few 50 point seasons. Let’s stop talking about how he NEEDS to be in the top six next year or has been our best forward. He NEEDS to show up faster and more assertive next year and earn top six time.

I think his absolute ceiling is Mark Stone. I do not think its out of the realm of possibility for him to become a 60 point 2 way beast. I think the floor is Jesper Fast.

I also don't think we are trading him for anything better, so I would rather just keep him than sell him for a bunch of meh

 

[LokiDog]

I think his absolute ceiling is Mark Stone. I do not think its out of the realm of possibility for him to become a 60 point 2 way beast. I think the floor is Jesper Fast.

I also don't think we are trading him for anything better, so I would rather just keep him than sell him for a bunch of meh

I’ve never once said to trade him or cut bait. Or suggested he can’t be a valuable part of our future. I’ve argued that the people who say he’s been fantastic in his role and I’m a hater need to lower their expectations drastically. A poor man’s Stone seems like a good maximal expectation while Fast seems like a very conservative minimum and I’ve been comfortable saying that from the beginning.

 

[bbny]

They don’t need a new core, they really need to augment what is already here.

That may mean moving Kakko for another body. It 100% means moving on from certain guys (Strome, I wish Panarin but that isn’t happening.)

Agree with most of this, but re: bold - good. He shouldn’t go anywhere. The only basis is he’s had a disappointing single playoff run here. He’s more than good enough to be better next go around. You don’t give up on that. He’s earned way more than one playoff go to prove he’s a guy who can get a Cup here.

 

[LokiDog]

Agree with most of this, but re: bold - good. He shouldn’t go anywhere. The only basis is he’s had a disappointing single playoff run here. He’s more than good enough to be better next go around. You don’t give up on that. He’s earned way more than one playoff go to prove he’s a guy who can get a Cup here.

Eh… 100 points is nice, but he played like ass a lot of this season and last. Not as bad as the playoffs, but he’s a guy who will make bad, liability plays all over the ice on the way to a 3 point night. He also has the second highest cap hit in the league. I don’t know that he’s a guy you win with - at that cap hit - if he won’t make the fundamental play and stop with the blind spinoarama behind the back passes to no one when the games get tighter. Is it just one bad playoffs? For now, yes (though many didn’t like his game all season long), however… is he the best bang for 12M you can get on your roster? I’m not really convinced of that. He’s absolutely an elite offensive point producer. I don’t think he’s the second most valuable player in the NHL and I’m not sure why he’s paid as such or if we wouldn’t do better with a 9M guy who plays a more complete game and still produces at a point per game pace.

 

[LOFIN]

Kakko has been underwhelming, and there's no point in continuing to make excuses for him. He has had good opportunities as well.

That in no way means Rangers should give up on him.

 

[Synergy27]

Eh… 100 points is nice, but he played like ass a lot of this season and last. Not as bad as the playoffs, but he’s a guy who will make bad, liability plays all over the ice on the way to a 3 point night. He also has the second highest cap hit in the league. I don’t know that he’s a guy you win with - at that cap hit - if he won’t make the fundamental play and stop with the blind spinoarama behind the back passes to no one when the games get tighter. Is it just one bad playoffs? For now, yes (though many didn’t like his game all season long), however… is he the best bang for 12M you can get on your roster? I’m not really convinced of that. He’s absolutely an elite offensive point producer. I don’t think he’s the second most valuable player in the NHL and I’m not sure why he’s paid as such or if we wouldn’t do better with a 9M guy who plays a more complete game and still produces at a point per game pace.

It’s kind of fun to watch the Panarin schism take shape. I don’t think anyone can rationally argue that he’s worthy of the second highest cap hit in the league. They certainly can still point to his production and be “right”, but he’s very clearly not a bang for the buck value to me in any way.

 

[CLW]

It’s kind of fun to watch the Panarin schism take shape. I don’t think anyone can rationally argue that he’s worthy of the second highest cap hit in the league. They certainly can still point to his production and be “right”, but he’s very clearly not a bang for the buck value to me in any way.

It's interesting that Panarin is starting to get a bit of flack from the media, tame and timid as it is.

 

[CLW]

That’s fine with me. I just want people to be realistic about what he is. If you still think there’s a point per game future there, you’re more optimistic than I. I think he can be a better Fast/Lehkonen/etc. who may have a few 50 point seasons. Let’s stop talking about how he NEEDS to be in the top six next year or has been our best forward. He NEEDS to show up faster and more assertive next year and earn top six time.

He has much more innate talent than Fast/Lehkonen and the likes. The issue is fit and growth. He does not fit with either Panarin or Zib, so that's two wonky lines if he plays on them which leads to frustration. He has issues to go with his strengths. Skating, positioning in the o-zone/slot area (what are you telling him coaches?), style/fit etc.

Kakko's a possession player, he wants to keep the puck within the team and take care of it, he is looking for support that is not there - because he is playing with players who base their games on a different personal approach. Those players in turn get frustrated with him because he is not doing the things they need to support their flow.

When I said he played fantastic I was not being specific about his personal play, I was talking about the kid line playing "fantastic" relative to their age and situation, going up against seasoned cup winning vets deep in the playoffs. Then you took that word as a base for an argument about his personal play, supported it with wonky statistics (+/-) and it took off. The point was more that they have synergy as a line, the only line of three players to actually look like a line in my eyes. Yes, they are not playoff hardened vets, yet. But the more minutes the merrier as I see it. They complement each other nicely. Kakko gets the support he needs from Chytil and Laffy. Is it not interesting that they were the players who created actual scoring chances against the Canes away 5v5? The finishing comes with experience (hopefully) when they learn when to take their time and when to shoot directly etc.

This again leads to the first paragraph. How to create a situation where the kids flourish and grow. I know most people are looking to win, but I'm also looking at the greater picture. To me the growth of the kids is the real joy of following the team.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Kakko has been underwhelming, and there's no point in continuing to make excuses for him. He has had good opportunities as well.

That in no way means Rangers should give up on him.

LoL, what a handful of games on the 2nd line and 20 seconds of PP a game?

He absolutely has not had good opportunities. The time he did play with Panarins he was scoring points, then he got injured or whatever happened.

 

[LokiDog]

He has much more innate talent than Fast/Lehkonen and the likes. The issue is fit and growth. He does not fit with either Panarin or Zib, so that's two wonky lines if he plays on them which leads to frustration. He has issues to go with his strengths. Skating, positioning in the o-zone/slot area (what are you telling him coaches?), style/fit etc.

Kakko's a possession player, he wants to keep the puck within the team and take care of it, he is looking for support that is not there - because he is playing with players who base their games on a different personal approach. Those players in turn get frustrated with him because he is not doing the things they need to support their flow.

When I said he played fantastic I was not being specific about his personal play, I was talking about the kid line playing "fantastic" relative to their age and situation, going up against seasoned cup winning vets deep in the playoffs. Then you took that word as a base for an argument about his personal play, supported it with wonky statistics (+/-) and it took off. The point was more that they have synergy as a line, the only line of three players to actually look like a line in my eyes. Yes, they are not playoff hardened vets, yet. But the more minutes the merrier as I see it. They complement each other nicely. Kakko gets the support he needs from Chytil and Laffy. Is it not interesting that they were the players who created actual scoring chances against the Canes away 5v5? The finishing comes with experience (hopefully) when they learn when to take their time and when to shoot directly etc.

This again leads to the first paragraph. How to create a situation where the kids flourish and grow. I know most people are looking to win, but I'm also looking at the greater picture. To me the growth of the kids is the real joy of following the team.

Meh, I kind of do and kind of don’t agree. The kid line hasn’t been incredible. It’s been good relative to how offensively anemic we’ve become. If there are 32 teams in the NHL, that’s 96 third lines, I don’t know that they are a top 80 third line. I feel there’s no getting around the fact that we’ve set extremely low expectations for them. I think Kakko will be a long time Ranger and make a difference. I just think drafting your (non physical) Blake Coleman with the #2 OA still feels like Thor Bjornsson kicking you in the nut sack. … real hard.

 

[The New Russian Five]

Talking about Rangers?

View attachment 553199

No in comparison to other 2nd round picks 3 season in.

 

[Ruggs225]

Shesterkin has more points this playoffs

 

[mas0764]

Total 5v5 points/60

1. Svechnikov - 1.69
2. Patrick: - 0.64
3. Laine - 1.35
4. Eichel - 2.04
5. Reinhart - 1.44
6. Barkov - 2.31
7. Landeskog - 2.36
8. Seguin - 1.97
9. JVR - 1.94
10. J. Staal - 1.94
11. Ryan - 1.92

Kakko - 1.58

I would rather Kakko be a bust and just be a better Jesper Fast on our 3rd line than trade him to a team that knows how to develop prospects and watch him become Mark Stone. I don't want to be the Senators looking at Zibanejad

If he can get to Svechnikov that’d be great

 

[Cuckoo4Kakko]

The kid line generated chances like this throughout the playoffs. Glad Chytl put 2 in, but we were really pretending we haven't seen this effort throughout, and significantly more than any other 5v5 line? Really?

 

[Doctyl]

Even though he didnt have points tonight, he does more for that line than Motte can. They were buzzing with him. Hes great along the boards and at keeping plays alive. Motte was just spamming shots when he was playing with chytil and laf. Love that when he's on the 4th line, but he isn't the shooter on that line and didn't fit well in the role

 

[OthmannOut]

I don't know. Why don't you do the research and tell me since you seem interested in it? Only takes a few minutes.

I assume when you find a few players who did not get top line time, but still produced, the next question will be "How many of those players had to start their career in a shortened season due to a pandemic?"

And then we'll go on and on with the excuses.

It isn't excuses, it is just the reality of the situation.
Are you really concerned about Kakko? I'm not. He isn't producing at a level I would like but he is noticeable and the freaking out about him is cringe.

 

[Cuckoo4Kakko]

Even though he didnt have points tonight, he does more for that line than Motte can. They were buzzing with him. Hes great along the boards and at keeping plays alive. Motte was just spamming shots when he was playing with chytil and laf. Love that when he's on the 4th line, but he isn't the shooter on that line and didn't fit well in the role

It was always a bad decision to swap Motte with Kakko. Both lines got worse.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

Meh, I kind of do and kind of don’t agree. The kid line hasn’t been incredible. It’s been good relative to how offensively anemic we’ve become. If there are 32 teams in the NHL, that’s 96 third lines, I don’t know that they are a top 80 third line. I feel there’s no getting around the fact that we’ve set extremely low expectations for them. I think Kakko will be a long time Ranger and make a difference. I just think drafting your (non physical) Blake Coleman with the #2 OA still feels like Thor Bjornsson kicking you in the nut sack. … real hard.

32 teams in the NHL would be 32 third lines

 

[LokiDog]

32 teams in the NHL would be 32 third lines

I meant 96 top three lines, rendering the point of my post identical to the original. I don’t know that they’re too 80 of 96 lines. Or top 17 of 32 third lines.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

I meant 96 top three lines, rendering the point of my post identical to the original. I don’t know that they’re too 80 of 96 lines. Or top 17 of 32 third lines.

They’ve been good, this just seems like an arbitrary point to argue, even if a fair criticism. They’re playing above expectations

 

[LokiDog]

They’ve been good, this just seems like an arbitrary point to argue, even if a fair criticism. They’re playing above expectations

It seems arbitrary after they had a big game. The past five pages had devolved into how the kid line has been our best line. If your best line isn’t even in the top 70-90 lines in the league, you aren’t 60 minutes from the ECF. Great game tonight. Doesn’t change reality.

 

[Chaels Arms]

It seems arbitrary after they had a big game. The past five pages had devolved into how the kid line has been our best line. If your best line isn’t even in the top 70-90 lines in the league, you aren’t 60 minutes from the ECF. Great game tonight. Doesn’t change reality.

When people say the kid line has been our best line they're not saying the kid line is one of the best lines in the NHL. No one is saying they are better than the McDavid line or the Mackinnon line or whatever other great lines are still in the playoffs. We are saying that in these playoffs as a whole they have generally been OUR team's best line. This is not really as big a statement as you are making it out to be.

 

[LokiDog]

When people say the kid line has been our best line they're not saying the kid line is one of the best lines in the NHL. No one is saying they are better than the McDavid line or the Mackinnon line or whatever other great lines are still in the playoffs. We are saying that in these playoffs as a whole they have generally been OUR team's best line. This is not really as big a statement as you are making it out to be.

But they haven’t been. It’s something people do to make themselves feel better about the kids. The kid line has been an adequate line that has provided a playoff team with good minutes. They haven’t been our best line as they aren’t anything special. They’re literally doing what’s expected. It’s not like the kid line is all rookies. 5th year, 3rd year, 2nd year. The “best line” notion is hyperbole. The kid line has done well for themselves. Why do they have to be our best line? Other than to make us feel better about how far below expectations they have performed, relative to their draft position and the historical performance of virtually every other player in the past 20+ years of similar draft pedigree?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

The Kid line has been our best line in the Carolina series when they've been together.

I wish this wasn't the case because it's a huge reason why we're preparing for a 7th game instead of getting ready for Tampa. 2/3rds of our top 2 lines have been bull shit in this series and our 4th line has been LOL.

 

[Chaels Arms]

But they haven’t been. It’s something people do to make themselves feel better about the kids. The kid line has been an adequate line that has provided a playoff team with good minutes. They haven’t been our best line as they aren’t anything special. They’re literally doing what’s expected. It’s not like the kid line is all rookies. 5th year, 3rd year, 2nd year. The “best line” notion is hyperbole. The kid line has done well for themselves. Why do they have to be our best line? Other than to make us feel better about how far below expectations they have performed, relative to their draft position and the historical performance of virtually every other player in the past 20+ years of similar draft pedigree?

OK, I'll bite.

Which line has been better?