Confirmed with Link: K'Andre Miller - Re-signs with Rangers - 2 years @ 3.872 million

[GoAwayPanarin]

It's one way of looking at it, but any way you slice it Lindgren is better than Trouba.



By what evidence other than Rangers fandom is Trouba better?

Here comes the "intangibles," discussion.

It doesn't work because they both fall into that bucket.

I don't think you can honestly say one is better than the other. We don't know what Lindgren looks like when he isn't playing the bulk of his minutes next to arguably the best defenseman in the league.

What I DO know is that Trouba was much better than Lindgren (w/Fox mind you) in 2021-22. Lindgren inexplicably got a pass from most of this place despite being flaming ass during the regular season.

 

[mas0764]

Neither.

Lindgren is overpaid at 5M and you can find better players for the bottom pair than Mikkola for league minimum.

It's tough to pay Lindgren that much because he brings very little actual point production on offense, but he seems to be pretty damn good at defense.

It doesn't work because they both fall into that bucket.

I don't think you can honestly say one is better than the other. We don't know what Lindgren looks like when he isn't playing the bulk of his minutes next to arguably the best defenseman in the league.

What I DO know is that Trouba was much better than Lindgren (w/Fox mind you) in 2021-22. Lindgren inexplicably got a pass from most of this place despite being flaming ass during the regular season.

Fair enough re: Lindgren.

But the bulk of the last 3-4 seasons from Trouba has been second pair defenseman or worse, at times. At $8m, he's not only a net negative, he's a "getting off the roster is a huge boost to us," player.

At $4m, he's entering the "He's fine as a second pair at that salary," discussion.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Fox has been better with Miller than he has with Lindgren.

I get the sample size isn't massive but thats how its been.

How it impacts the room is a fair point but the reality is they have at minimum 2 years to figure out what they want to do (1 year left on his deal, but an extra year of control.)

By then who knows what the rest of the roster looks like, what will be available on the market or even in the system. If they've moved on from Panarin and/or Trouba, there will be cap space to accommodate a top 4 defenseman.

He has? Not in my opinion. Too small of a sample size

 

[Fireonk]

It's one way of looking at it, but any way you slice it Lindgren is better than Trouba. Meanwhile I'll wait with bated breath for the model that gets every detail right.

I am a big Lindgren fan and I think the notion to trade him is pretty crazy. But, a model that has him at 11.5 mil value and 86% percentile on offense is more than just a detail off. It's essentially measuring Adam Fox's value there.

I think there should be a lot of credit to Lindgren for being able to successfully help bring out the best of Fox and that's a very hard thing to measure. But whatever they are using is obviously not an accurate depiction of the value he brings and shouldn't be used as a fair metric for anyone if it's that off. For clarity, I am not saying fully dismiss it, but treat it with a huge grain of salt.

 

[bhamill]

By what evidence other than Rangers fandom is Trouba better?

Here comes the "intangibles," discussion.

Even though he was hurt for a good portion of the season, on a lower scoring team, he outscored Graves. Also out hit him something like 210 to 80. And condescendingly scoff as you might at intangibles, he's the captain of this team for a reason. Graves is NEVER going to throw a bomb that can turn a series around. EVER. He's soft as hell and cheap.
When Trouba is healthy he is better than Graves in just about every way possible. Except cap hit.

 

[bhamill]

I am a big Lindgren fan and I think the notion to trade him is pretty crazy. But, a model that has him at 11.5 mil value and 86% percentile on offense is more than just a detail off. It's essentially measuring Adam Fox's value there.

I think there should be a lot of credit to Lindgren for being able to successfully help bring out the best of Fox and that's a very hard thing to measure. But whatever they are using is obviously not an accurate depiction of the value he brings and shouldn't be used as a fair metric for anyone if it's that off. For clarity, I am not saying fully dismiss it, but treat it with a huge grain of salt.

Yeah, sometimes fancy stats are not great indicators. Hahahaha.

 

[mas0764]

Even though he was hurt for a good portion of the season, on a lower scoring team, he outscored Graves.

So.... your argument rests on point totals? That's not a great way to measure how good a defenseman is, honestly.

Also out hit him something like 210 to 80.

Hits are nearly meaningless in this context.

And condescendingly scoff as you might at intangibles, he's the captain of this team for a reason.

I can find a captain who brings what Trouba brings in terms of intangibles for far less. In fact, there's probably another Trouba-level captain on the roster already. This isn't Mark Messier we are talking about here.

Graves is NEVER going to throw a bomb that can turn a series around. EVER. He's soft as hell and cheap.
When Trouba is healthy he is better than Graves in just about every way possible. Except cap hit.

No, just false.

Even if I throw you a bone and say they are roughly equal, it still doesn't explain why Trouba needs to be paid nearly twice as much, but frankly Graves is a better defender, which is the most important thing about defenders when they aren't elite offensively (as neither of them are).

 

[bhamill]

So.... your argument rests on point totals? That's not a great way to measure how good a defenseman is, honestly.



Hits are nearly meaningless in this context.



I can find a captain who brings what Trouba brings in terms of intangibles for far less. In fact, there's probably another Trouba-level captain on the roster already. This isn't Mark Messier we are talking about here.



No, just false.

Even if I throw you a bone and say they are roughly equal, it still doesn't explain why Trouba needs to be paid nearly twice as much, but frankly Graves is a better defender, which is the most important thing about defenders when they aren't elite offensively (as neither of them are).

You think your opinion means I’m wrong? Obviously it’s not JUST points, I obviously elaborated. Hahaha. Hits aren’t meaningless. Ask the Penguins last playoff series against us. This fan base would bitch about 6’5 Graves playing softer than Tom Poti. You are just cherry picking what you want to give value. Which is fine, but you can’t tell me I’m wrong for valuing something different. Throw me a bone… You are a riot. Graves does not have the value of Trouba.
But how about this tact: can you honestly tell me Trouba wouldn’t have gotten more than Graves on the open market? That would be a fairly insane take. Wait, maybe you’ll throw me a bone and agree he’d get more but that everyone is wrong to value him more. Hahahaha.

 

[tlk]

Neither.

Lindgren is overpaid at 5M and you can find better players for the bottom pair than Mikkola for league minimum.

Is there a core player of ours that you don't think is overpaid?
Besides Miller ofc.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Is there a core player of ours that you don't think is overpaid?
Besides Miller ofc.

Kreider is under paid. As is Fox. Shesty too.

Zibanejad is fairly paid. Ditto Chytil.

Vesey is a bargain though not a core player.

I don’t hate the AAV on Trochek either.


The only over paid players are Trouba Panarin and Goodrow. It’s unfortunate that 2 of them are our highest and 4th highest paid players.

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

Different draft.

Dahlin, Svechnikov, Tkachuk, Q. Hughes.
I think it's a clear top 4, Miller on an island, and then everyone else starting at 6.

Hughes is much better than Miller and Dobson low-key sucks.

bouchard's not looking too bad either

the guy snipes

 

[Machinehead]

bouchard's not looking too bad either

the guy snipes

I would probably have him 6 or 7

 

[Kakko]

Re: Lindgren

1. I don't think there's a great way to measure this, but it seems to me like player peaks and decline are have moved slightly back over the last decade. Injuries are an inconsistent x-factor, but I don't think a long term deal for Lindgren is problematic unless there's a major lingering injury issue.

2. I'm expecting him to be signed to a reasonable AAV. If he sticks with Fox, we'll think he's underpaid. If they split, we'll think he's overpaid.

3. Regarding the 11.5 value, Dom Luszczyszyn is not smart, and his models are bad. And I think even he's admitted they over/under-value player's to extremes.

 

[markymarc1215]

Good contract for Miller. Lots of potential still untapped. Might reach 50 pts wiith some PP time this year.

I don't think Lindgren staus to be honest. But hopefully I am wrong, as he is a heart and soul player that drives this team. They might see Robertson as the next man up while also saving some coin in the process.

 

[mas0764]

You think your opinion means I’m wrong?

I think we each have our opinions and when arguing I'm not going to say your opinion is right. That's the nature of a debate.

Obviously it’s not JUST points

Well that's the most tangible thing you cited.

Hits aren’t meaningless.

They are, especially in the context in which you named them. Hits can actually be a negative, for example, if by hitting a player you are actually taking yourself out of the play. There's zero context for the hits stat you named. It couldn't matter less as a stat.

At least big, game changing hits, which are like pornography in that everyone "knows it when they see it," can be argued that they subjectively impact the game. They are also rare enough that their impact is vastly overstated over every-possession quality defensive play. To wit: I'll take Adam Fox's defensive play (taking his offense completely out of the equation) over Trouba's despite all the big, game changing hits.

Fox doesn't deliver hardly any big hits, but his defense, positioning, instincts, etc, are all top notch. Trouba has none of that. He's downright mediocre at actual defense, or sometimes worse.

You are just cherry picking what you want to give value.

Well, I'm "cherry picking," the things that actually contribute to winning on the ice.

Which is fine, but you can’t tell me I’m wrong for valuing something different. Throw me a bone… You are a riot. Graves does not have the value of Trouba.
But how about this tact: can you honestly tell me Trouba wouldn’t have gotten more than Graves on the open market? That would be a fairly insane take. Wait, maybe you’ll throw me a bone and agree he’d get more but that everyone is wrong to value him more. Hahahaha.

NHL GMs are neanderthals and value size, and on top of that, Trouba has name value.

Look at Klingberg, another absolutely awful defender, who Ryan Graves is also better than.

So no, I cannot say that another GM wouldn't have overpaid Trouba on this market. I *CAN* say that Trouba would have gotten nowhere near $8m in this market.

I'd guess about $5m-$5.5m, which is still $1m-$1.5m overpaid, and that's because of the delirium of GMs to overpay for the name and size.

 

[mas0764]

3. Regarding the 11.5 value, Dom Luszczyszyn is not smart, and his models are bad. And I think even he's admitted they over/under-value player's to extremes.

I don't think anyone here is actually claiming Lindgren is worth $11.5m, not me anyway. And I bet Dom L would say the same, but that's just what his model spits out and his model is not perfect (no model is).

However it's also not worthless because it actually is measuring things and then contextualizing them. It's just another measurement that Lindgren is worth more than Trouba (and frankly it's not close). If anyone has data that says otherwise, feel free to share it.

 

[mas0764]

Here's a similar GSVA player to Trouba, similar age, who got $3.25m this year.

 

[duhmetreE]

Here's a similar GSVA player to Trouba, similar age, who got $3.25m this year.

View attachment 728564

I get charts are nice to look at and are easier to interpret than scouring through game film.

You have to come to the realization that analytics aren't written in stone with the Hand of God. They have faults. There are variables. Trouba had his worst season of his career. Using that as a baseline is fallacy. I know you do not like Trouba. I know most people here do not like his contract. It is what it is. He's a immobile #4 ( maaaaybe #3 ) on good team. He serves his purpose. Hopefully we see him at his best, this year, with proper coaching/help. ( see what Housley did in Nashville ).

System and coaching has a major effect on how players are perceived. Reading charts is not the entire story.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Here's a similar GSVA player to Trouba, similar age, who got $3.25m this year.

View attachment 728564

He gets bottom pair usage.

6 out of 6th in ATOI for the Kraken both in the regular season and playoffs (amongst regulars.)

Trouba is clearly overpaid and has the 2nd worst contract on the team but lets not act like they're in the same role.

 

[duhmetreE]

I know it's unlikely to happen but KAM probably has one of the better one timers on this team, especially as a LHS.

I'd have him on the right wall on a PP, being set up for bombs... but that's thinking outside the box.

 

[GAGLine]

Here's a similar GSVA player to Trouba, similar age, who got $3.25m this year.

View attachment 728564

It's not really that fair of a comparison. Trouba put up 50 points the year before we acquired him, and he was making 5.5 mil per year on his previous contract. He wasn't taking a pay cut.

We gave him that contract and then both DeAngelo and Fox proved to be better PP options, so Trouba ended up being overpaid, but you really can't make the argument that he should be making 3.25 mil. No GM in the league could have signed him for that amount at that time. The absolute minimum was 6.5 mil. If he had been a UFA, he would have gotten more than that easily.

You want to save cap space and have guys on good contracts? Stop building your core via UFA signings. Yes, Trouba was an RFA, but he only had 1 year remaining. 6 of the 7 years are UFA years.

 

[bhamill]

I think we each have our opinions and when arguing I'm not going to say your opinion is right. That's the nature of a debate.



Well that's the most tangible thing you cited.



They are, especially in the context in which you named them. Hits can actually be a negative, for example, if by hitting a player you are actually taking yourself out of the play. There's zero context for the hits stat you named. It couldn't matter less as a stat.

At least big, game changing hits, which are like pornography in that everyone "knows it when they see it," can be argued that they subjectively impact the game. They are also rare enough that their impact is vastly overstated over every-possession quality defensive play. To wit: I'll take Adam Fox's defensive play (taking his offense completely out of the equation) over Trouba's despite all the big, game changing hits.

Fox doesn't deliver hardly any big hits, but his defense, positioning, instincts, etc, are all top notch. Trouba has none of that. He's downright mediocre at actual defense, or sometimes worse.



Well, I'm "cherry picking," the things that actually contribute to winning on the ice.



NHL GMs are neanderthals and value size, and on top of that, Trouba has name value.

Look at Klingberg, another absolutely awful defender, who Ryan Graves is also better than.

So no, I cannot say that another GM wouldn't have overpaid Trouba on this market. I *CAN* say that Trouba would have gotten nowhere near $8m in this market.

I'd guess about $5m-$5.5m, which is still $1m-$1.5m overpaid, and that's because of the delirium of GMs to overpay for the name and size.

Yeah...
I say my opinion is my OPINION. I only say people are wrong about factual things. THATS'S the nature of debate...

So hits are "meaningless" although they can be a negative, but somehow otherwise meaningless... never a positive, right? Either they are meaningless or they are not. You are cherry picking again to support your narrative. Hits matter. Especially some of the clean bombs Trouba throws. It's a positive, even if YOU don't value hitting. Oh, and FOX? How is he a comparable for Graves? That's a real head scratcher. If Graves played anywhere as well as Fox, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Hahahaha.

No you're cherry picking to try to tell me Ryan f***ing Graves is better/more valuable than Trouba. Hahahaha.

So I was right, you're sort of "throwing me a bone" by admitting indirectly he'd get more on the open market, but then saying its an overpayment stictly for size and "name value," like he's some past Norris winner living on reputation... and as I predicted saying the market is wrong and GM's are neanderthals that YOU of course know better than... Sure TROUBA would be overpaid, but Graves as a UFA, who is bigger than Trouba, BTW, though a softie, didn't get an overpayment. Some very "convenient" circumstances for your narrative.

No GM in the league would pick Graves over Trouba for this coming season if their salaries were even. I doubt many would pick Graves now over Trouba at 6.5 million or even more (unless they flat out don't have the cap space).... not because they are ALL neanderthal dummies, but because Trouba is a more valuable hockey player.

 

[mas0764]

He gets bottom pair usage.

6 out of 6th in ATOI for the Kraken both in the regular season and playoffs (amongst regulars.)

Trouba is clearly overpaid and has the 2nd worst contract on the team but lets not act like they're in the same role.

I get charts are nice to look at and are easier to interpret than scouring through game film.

You have to come to the realization that analytics aren't written in stone with the Hand of God. They have faults. There are variables. Trouba had his worst season of his career. Using that as a baseline is fallacy. I know you do not like Trouba. I know most people here do not like his contract. It is what it is. He's a immobile #4 ( maaaaybe #3 ) on good team. He serves his purpose. Hopefully we see him at his best, this year, with proper coaching/help. ( see what Housley did in Nashville ).

System and coaching has a major effect on how players are perceived. Reading charts is not the entire story.

No, the charts aren't entirely the story and they aren't in the exact same role, but its not as if they are entirely incomparable either.

Yes, I agree, he's an immobile #4 defenseman.

He's not overpaid by $1m. He's overpaid by more like $3-4m.

A #4 defenseman would project to what, somewhere in the 97th-128th best defenseman if evenly distributed across the league? Let's be generous and say he's the 80th-90th best.

4.0m to 4.1m is what those peers make. Gosh, if we really drop down into the 100s, ie 4th defenseman territory, that's more like $2.5m-$3.5m.

He's basically twice as expensive as he should be. I could have 2, maybe three equal or better players, given the depressed market, if he could be moved.

You just said it. He's a fourth defenseman. Yes, he's coming off his worst season, but he's had numerous mediocre seasons to accompany it. He's not gonna turn into a top pair stud all of a sudden.

If people on here realized that, it could be "what it is." But then we'd also all be in agreement that he needs to be moved yesterday.

Instead some people actually think he's a positive here. Unfortunately, the front office seems to be in that group. They are wrong.

His presence on this roster, at that salary, is probably the biggest impediment we have to winning a Cup.

He's a net negative at that salary and it's not close to positive.

It's not really that fair of a comparison. Trouba put up 50 points the year before we acquired him, and he was making 5.5 mil per year on his previous contract. He wasn't taking a pay cut.

The decision to acquire Trouba is not nearly as inexcusable as the continued desire to retain him.

We should be desperate to pawn him off as soon as we can, especially if we could trick a team into giving us a first for him, as teams will foolishly often pay for size for size's sake.

That contract was before we knew the cap would flatten, before we knew we had a #1PP QB in Fox, and before we knew that Trouba actually stunk on defense.

The info we had then, it was an overpay, but at least a little more understandable. With 4 years of data now, anyone who doesn't want him off this roster needs to have their head examined.

You want to save cap space and have guys on good contracts? Stop building your core via UFA signings. Yes, Trouba was an RFA, but he only had 1 year remaining. 6 of the 7 years are UFA years.

True.

 

[mas0764]

So hits are "meaningless" although they can be a negative, but somehow otherwise meaningless... never a positive, right? Either they are meaningless or they are not.

Hits as a stat, as you presented them, are meaningless. Ie, saying "here is the raw number of hits player X had, he must be a good physical presence that is worth something."

That conclusion does not follow. Hits can be positive, situationally, but having more quantity of them does not mean you generated more quality. Its like measuring the shots a player takes. If they are all from center ice and none go in, that player is hurting his team by overshooting impossible shots.

The raw hit stat tells you almost nothing that you really need to know about whether a player is being positively impactful.

You are cherry picking again to support your narrative. Hits matter. Especially some of the clean bombs Trouba throws. It's a positive, even if YOU don't value hitting.

Yeah, some of the game-changing bombs that Trouba drops (some, but not all) do end up having an in-game impact. That impact is (1) overstated, and (2) rarely occurs IN COMPARISON to good situational defense, which Trouba stinks at.

So I was right, you're sort of "throwing me a bone" by admitting indirectly he'd get more on the open market, but then saying its an overpayment stictly for size and "name value," like he's some past Norris winner living on reputation... and as I predicted saying the market is wrong and GM's are neanderthals that YOU of course know better than... Sure TROUBA would be overpaid, but Graves as a UFA, who is bigger than Trouba, BTW, though a softie, didn't get an overpayment. Some very "convenient" circumstances for your narrative.

We all know that some NHL GMs make bad decisions and pay names or qualities that don't translate to winning. Why are Darnell Nurse and Seth Jones getting over $9m for example?

Trouba doesn't merit anywhere near $8m based on his on-ice play.

 

[bhamill]

Hits as a stat, as you presented them, are meaningless. Ie, saying "here is the raw number of hits player X had, he must be a good physical presence that is worth something."

That conclusion does not follow. Hits can be positive, situationally, but having more quantity of them does not mean you generated more quality. Its like measuring the shots a player takes. If they are all from center ice and none go in, that player is hurting his team by overshooting impossible shots.

The raw hit stat tells you almost nothing that you really need to know about whether a player is being positively impactful.



Yeah, some of the game-changing bombs that Trouba drops (some, but not all) do end up having an in-game impact. That impact is (1) overstated, and (2) rarely occurs IN COMPARISON to good situational defense, which Trouba stinks at.



We all know that some NHL GMs make bad decisions and pay names or qualities that don't translate to winning. Why are Darnell Nurse and Seth Jones getting over $9m for example?

Trouba doesn't merit anywhere near $8m based on his on-ice play.

This is just more stating your preferences/opinions as fact.
We both know the type of game Trouba plays, the kind of hits he throws. We could easily say not all goals are the same, some are game winners, some are garbage time. They still all count. Trouba throws meaningful hits and flat out almost triples Graves' output. It is not meaningless no matter how much that would help your narrative.
I didn't say Trouba was worth 8mil. Are we arguing things I didn't say now? I said Trouba at 6.5 wasn't a BAD value. And that he's a better, more valuable player than Ryan Graves.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. GM's make bad decisions... like signing Graves over Trouba would be. I'm sure you think you are a better evaluator of talent than GM's and scouting staffs are. Some Dunning Krueger action going on. Hahahaha. You'd straight up rather have Graves than Trouba, you think Graves is a better, more valuable player? That's fine. But lets not pretend its fact, or even that a majority of hockey people would agree with you. Hahahaha.