Player Discussion Kaapo Kakko

[Steve Kournianos]

Kakko’s biggest concern should be the four wingers behind him — Cuylle, Othmann, Berard, and Kravtsov. One of them is going to hit big time, and Lafreniere should be top six next season and then for good.

 

[CLW]

Kakko’s biggest concern should be the four wingers behind him — Cuylle, Othmann, Berard, and Kravtsov. One of them is going to hit big time, and Lafreniere should be top six next season and then for good.

There's always someone behind you until you become an immovable object with an NMC.

However, Drury is again circling back to playing Laf at RW next season, but on which top 6 line? Will all of Laf, Kakko and Kravtsov play RW for the Rangers next season? I doubt it. Gallant will want his trusted vets.

 

[Crease]

There's always someone behind you until you become an immovable object with an NMC.

However, Drury is again circling back to playing Laf at RW next season, but on which top 6 line? Will all of Laf, Kakko and Kravtsov play RW for the Rangers next season? I doubt it. Gallant will want his trusted vets.

If GG is hellbent on splitting up the Kid Line, I’d like to see:

Kreider - Zibanejad - Kakko
Panarin - TBD - Laf

Think Laf’s no-nonsense style will be a good influence on Panarin, who has gotten too loosey goosey out there.

Blais Chytil and Kravtsov can round out the third line.

Motte Goodrow and Hunt/Reaves on the fourth.

 

[bhamill]

Do you think he is "all world?"

Have you heard of hyperbole?

What do you think would happen with the NY media if they said they were disappointed and they expect more from him? It would be the story that would last all summer.

Do you think he is "all world?"

Respectfully I'm not really interested in repeating myself with the other portions just as I am sure you aren't either, we've said our peace. I really think you are dismissing how important those press conferences are when Drury does speak bc it is rare and it is a big deal the language he uses. NYR is on the NY media wagon right now, people actually care again. This isn't Arizona where the gm can say "we want to see more out of Barrett Hayton" and it will only get a few tweets and responses. Dont be naive to the fact that any comment by Drury that is negative in anyway about one of the keystones to the "rebuild" will be a shitstorm in the media. Those pressers are about giving the media what they want and avoiding stepping on a landmine

It doesnt matter if I think he's all world, the point is why would the front office use such hyperbole if they were truly disappointed. If they were disappointed a "We are very pleased with his progress" is more than enough to avoid controversy. Hahaha. Sure "all-world" could certainly be hyperbole for a player they are actually HIGH on though. I mean that makes logical sense. I already addressed that and you quoted it.
Yeah I mean we are going back and forth making the same points to each other now. Hahaha.
I'm fine with letting it drop. All good, brother.

 

[bleedblue94]

It doesnt matter if I think he's all world, the point is why would the front office use such hyperbole if they were truly disappointed. If they were disappointed a "We are very pleased with his progress" is more than enough to avoid controversy. Hahaha. Sure "all-world" could certainly be hyperbole for a player they are actually HIGH on though. I mean that makes logical sense. I already addressed that and you quoted it.
Yeah I mean we are going back and forth making the same points to each other now. Hahaha.
I'm fine with letting it drop. All good, brother.

I think bc they just benched him for the elimination game you cant just go in soft with the generic "we are pleased with his progress" bc their action say otherwise. If they were pleased he wouldnt have been scratched.

Also, sorry if I came at you harshly, you are being reasonable with a conflicting view and I actually appreciate that opposed to some of the other posters on here that just fly off the handle on stuff and are dicks. Sorry I jumped at you, I have just gotten use to the other types of posters in many instances. Cheers!

 

[The New Russian Five]

If GG is hellbent on splitting up the Kid Line, I’d like to see:

Kreider - Zibanejad - Kakko
Panarin - TBD - Laf

Think Laf’s no-nonsense style will be a good influence on Panarin, who has gotten too loosey goosey out there.

Blais Chytil and Kravtsov can round out the third line.

Motte Goodrow and Hunt/Reaves on the fourth.

Can someone explain to me why Kreider can't play RW?

 

[bhamill]

I think bc they just benched him for the elimination game you cant just go in soft with the generic "we are pleased with his progress" bc their action say otherwise. If they were pleased he wouldnt have been scratched.

Also, sorry if I came at you harshly, you are being reasonable with a conflicting view and I actually appreciate that opposed to some of the other posters on here that just fly off the handle on stuff and are dicks. Sorry I jumped at you, I have just gotten use to the other types of posters in many instances. Cheers!

Not at all dude! We love hockey, we can both get a little overexcited! I love discussing this shit and appreciate you engaging.

 

[Off Sides]

A one year deal for "$2m or less" for Kakko as reported by Staple in the Athletic is such classic Rangers shortsightedness and is a horrible idea.

At least pay him to get a second year.

Well, a 1 year deal still leaves him with 3 RFA years when it ends. Personally I'd like to see a 1 or 2 year deal. (unless it's something like a 5 year at like 2.5M, which the player is not going to sign)

It's the bridge contracts which end with only 1 RFA year left which I don't understand. The player basically see himself as a UFA at that point as he can play his last RFA year for his qualifier, or go to arbitration to get a 1 year deal, both leave him as a UFA after. Or the player wants UFA rates for his last RFA year even if he signs something longer term. It's a no win situation for the team when they do that.

 

[duhmetreE]

Signing Kakko to a 1 year deal is dumb on the orgs behalf.

 

[Off Sides]

Signing Kakko to a 1 year deal is dumb on the orgs behalf.

Depends, if he breaks out into a 50-60, or more point player, sure.

Yet if he remains a 20 point player they are not committed to his next 20 point season(s) after that.

 

[duhmetreE]

I dont agree with this. Miller didnt struggle ever as much as people here made him out to be, and when he struggled the rest of the time he stood out. You can deal with a young player making some mistakes here and there if they are standing out in a good way the rest of the time.

Laf never really stood out. He would get opportunities and had spurts and when those spurts withered they moved him down, and I think a lot of that had to do with reinforcing to him that effort had to be there consistently. The laffy of the last three months gave far more consistent of an effort shift to shift than the laffy even of 6 months ago.

I still stand by my believe that kakko has done nothing really to distinguish himself in this league. He has tools but he hasn't established anything. And I really get sick of hearing about linemates, opportunity, and ice time because good players make the most of their time and earn more.

If you need case and point look at Schneider. kid gets called up for injuries and doesn't play a ton but he made the most of his time. He is 20 and is taking a regular shift all the way till the conference finals and has established himself as an nhl player. he made the most of his opportunity as opposed to another flavor around here who didn't in nils. Schneider also got benched and there wasn't outrage and he didnt sulk, he came right back and played better.

If kakko is here next year than that is going to be his season and he better establish himself as someone that can make a difference around here instead of being a passenger. I dont even care about point totals, I want to see a difference maker who distinguishes himself as an NHL player and has an actual impact when he is on the ice like he did a couple times in playoffs games being a one man cycle playing keep away from defensemen in the o zone, not someone that I need to be looking for.

I'm not arguing that they weren't stale to start.... but when they play well they should be rewarded. When they are producing, they should be left alone. Both players were moved after starting to find their groove.. most notably Kakko with Panarin and Laffy was replace by Reaves in Minnesota.

It's bizzaro moves like that, that bother me. Laffy should have been getting 17-18 minutes a game in the playoffs. He was easily our best 5v5 player IMO

Depends, if he breaks out into a 50-60, or more point player, sure.

Yet if he remains a 20 point player they are not committed to his next 20 point season(s) after that.

There's no risk in giving him a 2-3 year deal.

There is a risk in giving him a 1 year deal.

 

[Off Sides]

I'm not arguing that they weren't stale to start.... but when they play well they should be rewarded. When they are producing, they should be left alone. Both players were moved after starting to find their groove.. most notably Kakko with Panarin and Laffy was replace by Reaves in Minnesota.

It's bizzaro moves like that, that bother me. Laffy should have been getting 17-18 minutes a game in the playoffs. He was easily our best 5v5 player IMO


There's no risk in giving him a 2-3 year deal.

There is a risk in giving him a 1 year deal.

A 2 year, okay, yet a 3 year leaving him with only one RFA year left is a risk. They could easily end up in the same spot they did with Buch, they don't want to pay him UFA money on a long term deal, so they look to trade him and they get back negligible returns as the next team is putting themselves in that same, commit or do not position.

 

[duhmetreE]

A 2 year, okay, yet a 3 year leaving him with only one RFA year left is a risk. They could easily end up in the same spot they did with Buch, they don't want to pay him UFA money on a long term deal, so they look to trade him and they get back negligible returns as the next team is putting themselves in that same, commit or do not position.

The market will be much different in 2-3 years.

Buch would have gotten back a lot more if there wasn't a flat cap.

 

[bhamill]

I'm not arguing that they weren't stale to start.... but when they play well they should be rewarded. When they are producing, they should be left alone. Both players were moved after starting to find their groove.. most notably Kakko with Panarin and Laffy was replace by Reaves in Minnesota.

It's bizzaro moves like that, that bother me. Laffy should have been getting 17-18 minutes a game in the playoffs. He was easily our best 5v5 player IMO


There's no risk in giving him a 2-3 year deal.

There is a risk in giving him a 1 year deal.

Maybe they have a plan where they will have more cap space next off season and they get another year to decide if they want to lock him up longer term using it.
I agree with Off Sides that bridge to last RFA year is bad, so I'm okay with 1 rather than 3 years, and I think 2 is probably "safe."

 

[Off Sides]

The market will be much different in 2-3 years.

Buch would have gotten back a lot more if there wasn't a flat cap.

I can only explain the disadvantages to leaving a bridged player with only a1 RFA year left. The market does not change the RFA rules.

 

[Gluten Free Breadman]

Can someone explain to me why Kreider can't play RW?

I think Panarin should play RW. He is already excellent at it on the powerplay. He loves to gain the zone and make a pass. On the right side, he can do exactly that on his forehand.

Kreider on the RW also makes sense from a perspective of taking a shot off the rush from the middle of the ice.

 

[will1066]

Can someone explain to me why Kreider can't play RW?

I think it has something to do with how they break out out of their own zone and move up ice. They want that rush play with the stretch pass, usually with the right-handed Fox and Trouba, who can cross-seam it onto an onrushing Kreider's forehand. I've also seen Kreider do a better job of making the quick first pass and chipping pucks out of the zone while under pressure on the left wall. His center is also right-handed. If he's on the RW, he would receive a lot of passes on his backhand.

 

[duhmetreE]

Can someone explain to me why Kreider can't play RW?

 

[GAGLine]

Depends, if he breaks out into a 50-60, or more point player, sure.

Yet if he remains a 20 point player they are not committed to his next 20 point season(s) after that.

A 1 year deal for Kakko would be bad because the last thing we need is another player who needs to be re-signed in 2023. We already have Laf, Miller and Chytil who will need new contracts. If Kakko does break out, we'd be screwed. If he doesn't, it still makes things more difficult as we'd need to re-sign him or move him. It's better all around if we give him a 2 year deal. 3 is no good, as that will push the AAV up more. 2 years is the sweet spot.

If he breaks out on a 2 year deal, it's likely in the 2nd year anyway, and we'll pay him accordingly when the cap goes up. We can't always worry about trying to get players on sweetheart deals. It's great when it happens, a la Zib, but with the flat cap and how tight we are to it, trying to get cute is more likely to blow up in our faces.

 

[Off Sides]

A 1 year deal for Kakko would be bad because the last thing we need is another player who needs to be re-signed in 2023. We already have Laf, Miller and Chytil who will need new contracts. If Kakko does break out, we'd be screwed. If he doesn't, it still makes things more difficult as we'd need to re-sign him or move him. It's better all around if we give him a 2 year deal. 3 is no good, as that will push the AAV up more. 2 years is the sweet spot.

If he breaks out on a 2 year deal, it's likely in the 2nd year anyway, and we'll pay him accordingly when the cap goes up. We can't always worry about trying to get players on sweetheart deals. It's great when it happens, a la Zib, but with the flat cap and how tight we are to it, trying to get cute is more likely to blow up in our faces.

I agree a 2 year is the best idea.

Yet if he is intent on not signing for 2 years, I'd still prefer 1 year over 3.

 

[will1066]

A 1 year deal for Kakko would be bad because the last thing we need is another player who needs to be re-signed in 2023. We already have Laf, Miller and Chytil who will need new contracts. If Kakko does break out, we'd be screwed. If he doesn't, it still makes things more difficult as we'd need to re-sign him or move him. It's better all around if we give him a 2 year deal. 3 is no good, as that will push the AAV up more. 2 years is the sweet spot.

If he breaks out on a 2 year deal, it's likely in the 2nd year anyway, and we'll pay him accordingly when the cap goes up. We can't always worry about trying to get players on sweetheart deals. It's great when it happens, a la Zib, but with the flat cap and how tight we are to it, trying to get cute is more likely to blow up in our faces.

I hate to say it, but what if he does bust? The tight cap could be seen the other way; you don't want to commit what's more than necessary. On a 1-year deal, he's still RFA and his rights retained after next year. Kakko needs to prove it, if on a 1-year deal. There's also RFA arbitration as an option. Looking at it from management's side.

 

[CLW]

I'm not arguing that they weren't stale to start.... but when they play well they should be rewarded. When they are producing, they should be left alone. Both players were moved after starting to find their groove.. most notably Kakko with Panarin and Laffy was replace by Reaves in Minnesota.

It's bizzaro moves like that, that bother me. Laffy should have been getting 17-18 minutes a game in the playoffs. He was easily our best 5v5 player IMO


There's no risk in giving him a 2-3 year deal.

There is a risk in giving him a 1 year deal.

If the plan is to give both Kakko and Kravtsov 1 year deals to let them slug it out over the season they set them up for stress, disappointment and resentment. So much of point production depends on usage, minutes, chemistry with your line mates etc. Or if they get jerked around (again) once they start to produce... There's so many factors that are out of the hands of the players. And if both have great seasons then you face the fact you have 4 great kids that need new contracts, Miller, Kakko, Kravtsov, Laf in the same off season.

Let's say you are the kid that get to play with Panarin and Strome. They are loafing around the ice waiting for the next PP and their gimme point(s), while you have to work for two covering on defense, be physical and zoom up and down the ice, score lots and lots of points because you are playing with Panarin!!1. If you cough up the puck once at the blue line you are benched or demoted. If you don't score you are a bust. And so on.

Is Drury Galaxy Braining himself? It doesn't add up unless it's smoke and he plans to move one or two of the kids.

 

[GAGLine]

I hate to say it, but what if he does bust? The tight cap could be seen the other way; you don't want to commit what's more than necessary. On a 1-year deal, he's still RFA and his rights retained after next year. Kakko needs to prove it, if on a 1-year deal. There's also RFA arbitration as an option. Looking at it from management's side.

He's still RFA after a 2 year deal. He'll be arbitration eligible in either case. If he's going to be a bust, we probably aren't going to know that by next summer. The cap savings on 1 year deal vs a 2 year deal will be minimal. It's not worth the risk of having his contract expire at the same time as everyone else.

 

[will1066]

He's still RFA after a 2 year deal. He'll be arbitration eligible in either case. If he's going to be a bust, we probably aren't going to know that by next summer. The cap savings on 1 year deal vs a 2 year deal will be minimal. It's not worth the risk of having his contract expire at the same time as everyone else.

Busting or not is a moving goalpost, though if Kakko doesn't show numbers improvement next season, his D+4, this board will implode. They can take it to arbitration, he can hold out as an option until he can be traded, which is what the board will likely want anyway.

 

[McRanger92]

Kakko’s biggest concern should be the four wingers behind him — Cuylle, Othmann, Berard, and Kravtsov. One of them is going to hit big time, and Lafreniere should be top six next season and then for good.

And all 4 of those guys will most likely play in NY at some point next season. I’m fine with a 1 year deal with Kakko. Let all these guys compete for the open wing spots.