Speculation: Keeping Ck

[NYRangers0723]

Tarasenko is very possibly better than Kreider. I think your opinion of Kreider may be a little influenced by favoritism.

They are both averaging 0.71 ppg this year exactly.

Again, simple math:

Tarasenko @$4.5m, a first, and a 30s prospect > Kreider @$6.5m by himself.

This is obviously assuming we could get that contract and that haul. I've never said we should give Kreider away just to get rid of him.

Completely disagree. Again if you look at all the variables of how it effects the organization and what they want to do you would see it makes little sense. Just saying “Simple math” Is not a very good argument lol

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Generally speaking it isn't wise, but there are exceptions to every rule. Kreider finds himself at the unique juncture of being one of THE MOST replaceable players we have (we have left wings for days - Panarin, Lafreniere, Othmann, etc), a nice fat salary target, and also extremely desireable in trade for other teams with reasonable term and AAV left on his deal. It's a perfect storm that could allow us to absolutely win a trade.

Also, again, the team isn't staying the same next year anyway. Someone is going. The logic that "we can't move on from anyone if we are trying to win," ignores the reality of the cap and the necessity of turning over key roles to young players as a simple matter of continuing to field a winner. Deciding which veterans to keep and which to let go is mandatory; you can't just say "keep all veterans because we are trying to win."

If we don't make any big veteran trades, then Tarasenko probably walks (for nothing) in free agency. What if trading Kreider for assets allowed us to re-sign Tarasenko? Isn't that a better balancing of the roster? Isn't that better asset management?

Othman needs time in Hartford, Tarasenko is gonna cash in (he was always going to be a rental). This isn't the time for magic beans, it's time to try and win a Cup. There are no keys to turn over because there's room for him, Panarin, and Laff. If you have to lose Goodrow, you lose Goodrow.

You don't ever trade a guy who scores bunches of goals, plays a position on the PP very few players in the league can as good as he can, kills penalties, plays a man's game when it counts, is a leader in the room, and is on a bargain contract relative to his contributions.

You can say it now until his number goes up to the rafters, and you'd be wrong, but they aren't trading him. He's here forever. So buy your CK 20 jersey, throw his Fat Head decal on the wall and enjoy yourself.

 

[NYRangers0723]

Othman needs time in Hartford, Tarasenko is gonna cash in (he was always going to be a rental). This isn't the time for magic beans, it's time to try and win a Cup. There are no keys to turn over because there's room for him, Panarin, and Laff. If you have to lose Goodrow, you lose Goodrow.

You don't ever trade a guy who scores bunches of goals, plays a position on the PP very few players in the league can as good as he can, kills penalties, plays a man's game when it counts, is a leader in the room, and is on a bargain contract relative to his contributions.

You can say it now until his number goes up to the rafters, and you'd be wrong, but they aren't trading him. He's here forever. So buy your CK 20 jersey, throw his Fat Head decal on the wall and enjoy yourself.

He still hasn’t given a legit reason how trading him for picks/prospects and giving that money to Tarasenko makes us better. I like Tarasenko and would love to keep him but he die not seem to get that we would have a massive hole in the lineup. I like Othman but I don’t see him as a real good top 6 player unless all things go well and that would take a few years

 

[mas0764]

Completely disagree. Again if you look at all the variables of how it effects the organization and what they want to do you would see it makes little sense. Just saying “Simple math” Is not a very good argument lol

You haven't explained those variables. I'd rather the more productive player at a lesser cost plus the extra assets.

 

[NYRangers0723]

You haven't explained those variables. I'd rather the more productive player at a lesser cost plus the extra assets.

I have explained but you dont want to listen. You just want to say how right you are. No offense buddy but I don’t see too many others backing up your trade idea. You don’t like Kreider that’s perfectly within your rights but you can’t deny what he had brought to the team and the massive hole it would cause.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

I have a hard time believing the Rangers will retire his number. Next number to be retired eventually will be Fox

 

[mas0764]

Othman needs time in Hartford, Tarasenko is gonna cash in (he was always going to be a rental).

Othmann will be here sooner rather than later. Again, this isn't a question of creating a hole in the roster vs. not. It's a matter of which hole do you want filled with an unproven young player and how much do you want to pay for it.

If Tarasenko requires a mega-deal, that changes the math.

If Tarasenko requires a smaller deal than Kreider, the roster is both better balanced immediately and also better long term for the assets in receives in return, by keeping Tarasenko.

Kreider Zibanejad _____
Panarin Trocheck Kane
Lafreniere Chytil Kakko
Othmann - FA - Vesey

vs

Panarin Zibanejad Tarasenko
Lafreniere Trocheck Kane
Othmann Chytil Kakko
Cuylle Goodrow Vesey

I just moved everyone up the lineup for ease, not saying these would be the exact lines. The second lineup is probably better balanced PLUS has two extra prime assets.

This isn't the time for magic beans, it's time to try and win a Cup.

Listen, you may not prefer it, and ultimately it may not be possible because at the end of the day the NTC exists, but it's just silly to say "it doesn't make sense." No, it makes a ton of sense. That second lineup might be the better one to win a Cup.

I have explained but you dont want to listen. You just want to say how right you are. No offense buddy but I don’t see too many others backing up your trade idea. You don’t like Kreider that’s perfectly within your rights but you can’t deny what he had brought to the team and the massive hole it would cause.

It would not cause a massive hole. The lineup would be better keeping Tarasenko and promoting Othmann than just keeping Kreider, being short a RW, not having a spot for Othmann, and having two less prime assets.

It would require changes to the lineup, but those changes are coming regardless. It's pick which change you want.

 

[NYRangers0723]

Othmann will be here sooner rather than later. Again, this isn't a question of creating a hole in the roster vs. not. It's a matter of which hole do you want filled with an unproven young player and how much do you want to pay for it.

If Tarasenko requires a mega-deal, that changes the math.

If Tarasenko requires a smaller deal than Kreider, the roster is both better balanced immediately and also better long term for the assets in receives in return, by keeping Tarasenko.

Kreider Zibanejad _____
Panarin Trocheck Kane
Lafreniere Chytil Kakko
Othmann - FA - Vesey

vs

Panarin Zibanejad Tarasenko
Lafreniere Trocheck Kane
Othmann Chytil Kakko
Cuylle Goodrow Vesey

I just moved everyone up the lineup for ease, not saying these would be the exact lines. The second lineup is probably better balanced PLUS has two extra prime assets.



Listen, you may not prefer it, and ultimately it may not be possible because at the end of the day the NTC exists, but it's just silly to say "it doesn't make sense." No, it makes a ton of sense. That second lineup might be the better one to win a Cup.


It would not cause a massive hole. The lineup would be better keeping Tarasenko and promoting Othmann than just keeping Kreider, being short a RW, not having a spot for Othmann, and having two less prime assets.

It would require changes to the lineup, but those changes are coming regardless. It's pick which change you want.

Again completely disagree!but it doesn’t matter because it’s not happening. The FO seems to have brains

I have a hard time believing the Rangers will retire his number. Next number to be retired eventually will be Fox

I mean it could definitely happen especially if they win. By next year he will be third all time scoring

 

[mas0764]

Again completely disagree!

You can disagree but the facts are the facts.

The Rangers team will look different than the one currently iced right now, that's a fact. So arguments like "You can't let so and so vet go because we are trying to win," doesn't hold literally any water. Vets are going. It's a matter of which one.

You prefer keeping Kreider. Ok.

I prefer keeping Tarasenko, a historically better and currently roughly equal player, on a cheaper contract, plus two prime assets, and the same number of roster holes.

You are entitled to your opinion but mine addresses way more issues so let's drop the "it makes no sense," charade. It does make sense.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Othmann will be here sooner rather than later. Again, this isn't a question of creating a hole in the roster vs. not. It's a matter of which hole do you want filled with an unproven young player and how much do you want to pay for it.

If Tarasenko requires a mega-deal, that changes the math.

If Tarasenko requires a smaller deal than Kreider, the roster is both better balanced immediately and also better long term for the assets in receives in return, by keeping Tarasenko.

Kreider Zibanejad _____
Panarin Trocheck Kane
Lafreniere Chytil Kakko
Othmann - FA - Vesey

vs

Panarin Zibanejad Tarasenko
Lafreniere Trocheck Kane
Othmann Chytil Kakko
Cuylle Goodrow Vesey

I just moved everyone up the lineup for ease, not saying these would be the exact lines. The second lineup is probably better balanced PLUS has two extra prime assets.



Listen, you may not prefer it, and ultimately it may not be possible because at the end of the day the NTC exists, but it's just silly to say "it doesn't make sense." No, it makes a ton of sense. That second lineup might be the better one to win a Cup.


It would not cause a massive hole. The lineup would be better keeping Tarasenko and promoting Othmann than just keeping Kreider, being short a RW, not having a spot for Othmann, and having two less prime assets.

It would require changes to the lineup, but those changes are coming regardless. It's pick which change you want.

Your second lineup is fantasy land stuff. Resigning a 35 year old Kane and Tarasenko and 50% of your left side are rookies. Never going to happen. They will find a RW in the offseason if they have to. Hell, they could probably bring back Jesper Fast on a reasonable deal, put him with Panarin and Trochek and Panarin wouldn't skip a beat.

 

[NYRangers0723]

You can disagree but the facts are the facts.

The Rangers team will look different than the one currently iced right now, that's a fact. So arguments like "You can't let so and so vet go because we are trying to win," doesn't hold literally any water. Vets are going. It's a matter of which one.

You prefer keeping Kreider. Ok.

I prefer keeping Tarasenko, a historically better and currently roughly equal player, on a cheaper contract, plus two prime assets, and the same number of roster holes.

They aren’t facts but whatever kid

 

[mas0764]

They aren’t facts but whatever kid

Everything there is a fact.

 

[NYRangers0723]

Everything there is a fact.

It isn’t. Again where is the support to your claims. If your idea is so factual and terrific. Why isn’t anyone screaming to trade him for picks/prospects when we’re in win now mode?

Your second lineup is fantasy land stuff. Resigning a 35 year old Kane and Tarasenko and 50% of your left side are rookies. Never going to happen. They will find a RW in the offseason if they have to. Hell, they could probably bring back Jesper Fast on a reasonable deal, put him with Panarin and Trochek and Panarin wouldn't skip a beat.

Exactly. He doesn’t believe in sense or logic

 

[mas0764]

Your second lineup is fantasy land stuff.

It's not in the slightest.

Resigning a 35 year old Kane and Tarasenko and 50% of your left side are rookies. Never going to happen.

Swap Vesey and Cuylle then. Or Cuylle can be a placeholder for any fourth line plug until he's ready.

Kane is in both lineups (assume he takes a 1 year cheap deal - if he doesn't, he's gone too, but it's independent of this Tarasenko-v-Kreider discussion, then).

The variable is Tarasenko on the right with room for Othmann in a third line role, or Kreider on the left, no room for Othmann in a third line role, and a gaping top 6/top9 RW vacancy.

They will find a RW in the offseason if they have to. Hell, they could probably bring back Jesper Fast on a reasonable deal, put him with Panarin and Trochek and Panarin wouldn't skip a beat.

Yeah, they probably could, but my roster construction is better. We are better with Tarasenko slotted in the top 6 appropriately than an overloaded LW room just to keep Kreider. AND we get two prime assets back.

 

[NYRangers0723]

It's not in the slightest.



Swap Vesey and Cuylle then. Or Cuylle can be a placeholder for any fourth line plug until he's ready.

Kane is in both lineups (assume he takes a 1 year cheap deal).

The variable is Tarasenko on the right with room for Othmann in a third line role, or Kreider on the left, no room for Othmann in a third line role, and a gaping top 6/top9 RW vacancy.


Yeah, they probably could, but my roster construction is better. We are better with Tarasenko slotted in the top 6 appropriately than an overloaded LW room just to keep Kreider. AND we get two prime assets back.

Now I know what a Ranger fan high on meth looks like lol

 

[mas0764]

It isn’t.

It is.

It's a fact that veterans are leaving in the offseason and it's a matter of which ones.

It's a fact that Tarasenko is historically better than Kreider.

It's a fact that Tarasenko and Kreider are both averaging 0.71 ppg right now.

It's a fact that if the choice is between Kreider @ $6.5m and Tarasenko at $4.5m, it creates the same amount of top 9 roster holes.

It's a fact that if we trade Kreider, we would get assets back.

Those are all facts.

Here's where I said "You prefer Kreider." (You stated as much).

I prefer Tarasenko under these facts.

Again where is the support to your claims.

Support for what claims? The facts I've outlined above? Just take a look at our roster and cap situation.

If your idea is so factual and terrific.

The preference of who to trade isn't a fact, that's an opinion, as is your opinion on keeping Kreider. Those opinions are reached on the basis of some very real facts, outlined in this post, though.

Don't be obtuse.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

It's not in the slightest.



Swap Vesey and Cuylle then. Or Cuylle can be a placeholder for any fourth line plug until he's ready.

Kane is in both lineups (assume he takes a 1 year cheap deal - if he doesn't, he's gone too, but it's independent of this Tarasenko-v-Kreider discussion, then).

The variable is Tarasenko on the right with room for Othmann in a third line role, or Kreider on the left, no room for Othmann in a third line role, and a gaping top 6/top9 RW vacancy.


Yeah, they probably could, but my roster construction is better. We are better with Tarasenko slotted in the top 6 appropriately than an overloaded LW room just to keep Kreider. AND we get two prime assets back.

At this point in their careers, I'd rather have Kreider over Tarasenki. I don't know where you're getting this 4.5 number from for Tarasenko but I'm sure he and his agent have other ideas. They are going to look to cash in on one more big deal. And it's already been proven that Panarin doesn't need much by way of RWs for him to put numbers up.

 

[NYRangers0723]

It is.

It's a fact that veterans are leaving in the offseason and it's a matter of which ones.

It's a fact that Tarasenko is historically better than Kreider.

It's a fact that Tarasenko and Kreider are both averaging 0.71 ppg right now.

If the choice is between Kreider @ $6.5m and Tarasenko at $4.5m, it creates the same amount of top 9 roster holes.

Those are all facts.

Here's where I said "You prefer Kreider." (You stated as much).

I prefer Tarasenko under these facts.


Support for what claims? The facts I've outlined above? Just take a look at our roster and cap situation.



The preference of who to trade isn't a fact, that's an opinion, as is your opinion on keeping Kreider. Those opinions are reached on the basis of some very real facts, outlined in this post, though.

Don't be obtuse.

Look Mr. Junior Rangers GM/ current McDonald’s employee,

If this was back on 2020 then I could understand. Even though I didn’t agree I understood why many would have rather traded CK. Things have changed and Kreider has evolved not just goal scoring but his overall game especially being a key Penalty killer and probably the best in front of the net. I like Tarasenko but the fact that you think it wouldn’t open up a big hole getting rid of CK is in your words obtuse. Mika and CK are probably two Olof our best all around forwards both of desi tabs defensively. As much as I like Tarasenko he doesn’t bring that. Also again Kreider is probably one of if not the most well conditioned athletes in the league. He’s probably in better shape than most kids 10 years younger than him. Also Tarasenko is the same age as CK so I find it funny that you think l CK will break down but Vkad won’t lol. Despite your “facts” the teal fact is that the organization and the majority of fans understands how vital CK is so the odds of him being traded soon are probably the same as finding Jimmy Hoffa. I mean 2-3 years down the road it’s more possible but not now

At this point in their careers, I'd rather have Kreider over Tarasenki. I don't know where you're getting this 4.5 number from for Tarasenko but I'm sure he and his agent have other ideas. They are going to look to cash in on one more big deal. And it's already been proven that Panarin doesn't need much by way of RWs for him to put numbers up.

I have no idea where he is getting 4.5 from. He probably will get at least 6 which is almost the same as Kreider so makes no sense considering the big joke that will be left which he refuses to acknowledge

 

[mas0764]

At this point in their careers, I'd rather have Kreider over Tarasenki.

Why?

They are both the same age. They are both producing the same ppg.

Tarasenko is coming off an injury and is fresh from a bad situation he did not want to be in. And is historically superior.

I suspect Tarasenko produces substantially more points than Kreider next year if he's in a stable situation.

Kreider scores more goals but he's kind of a one-trick pony at this stage. He scores net front, power play goals, deflections and put backs.

Tarasenko is the way more gifted and well-rounded offensive player at the moment (and forever).

I don't know where you're getting this 4.5 number from for Tarasenko but I'm sure he and his agent have other ideas.

That, fairly, is speculation. If Tarasenko wants $8m then that would change the calculation herein. Given that he wants to be here and has already landed his big contract previously I'm operating under the assumption (and much of the board has speculated this btw) that he may come in at around that number.

I'm still not sure I wouldn't trade Kreider anyway, because I value the recoupment of assets, but for sake of this argument, to at least establish a premise, I'm operating under the assumption that you can get Tarasenko for something like 4.5x3.

They are going to look to cash in on one more big deal. And it's already been proven that Panarin doesn't need much by way of RWs for him to put numbers up.

But we've been much, much better offensively since Tarasenko joined the top 6.

We shouldn't want to go back to having Fasts and Veseys in those roles. If Tarasenko leaves you are back to that arrangement again - a bottom 6 plugger in your top 6. Versus if Kreider is gone, you still have Panarin, Lafreniere, and a very high end prospect in Othmann for those roles.

Hopefully Laf and Kakko prove worthy of those roles officially next year.

 

[mas0764]

Look Mr. Junior Rangers GM/ current McDonald’s employee,

If this was back on 2020 then I could understand. Even though I didn’t agree I understood why many would have rather traded CK. Things have changed and Kreider has evolved not just goal scoring but his overall game especially being a key Penalty killer and probably the best in front of the net. I like Tarasenko but the fact that you think it wouldn’t open up a big hole getting rid of CK is in your words obtuse. Mika and CK are probably two Olof our best all around forwards both of desi tabs defensively. As much as I like Tarasenko he doesn’t bring that. Also again Kreider is probably one of if not the most well conditioned athletes in the league. He’s probably in better shape than most kids 10 years younger than him. Also Tarasenko is the same age as CK so I find it funny that you think l CK will break down but Vkad won’t lol. Despite your “facts” the teal fact is that the organization and the majority of fans understands how vital CK is so the odds of him being traded soon are probably the same as finding Jimmy Hoffa. I mean 2-3 years down the road it’s more possible but not now


I have no idea where he is getting 4.5 from. He probably will get at least 6 which is almost the same as Kreider so makes no sense considering the big joke that will be left which he refuses to acknowledge

I never said Kreider will break down and Tarasenko won't. They both will be declining soon.

But the math on each player's situation is different. Switch their contract statuses and you'd probably hear me arguing the opposite.

One of them is leaving. I'm opening up a hole from this current roster either way (again, fact).

One of them, I can get assets back when he leaves, the other I can't.

One of them, I have either an established player, a high end draft pick, or a high end prospect ready to fill the depth chart on that side of the center. The other player, I don't, and a Fast-like or Vesey-like affordable grinder would have to take that spot.

 

[NYRangers0723]

I never said Kreider will break down and Tarasenko won't. They both will be declining soon.

But the math on each player's situation is different. Switch their contract statuses and you'd probably hear me arguing the opposite.

One of them is leaving. I'm opening up a hole from this current roster either way (again, fact).

One of them, I can get assets back when he leaves, the other I can't.

One of them, I have either an established player, a high end draft pick, or a high end prospect ready to fill the depth chart on that side of the center. The other player, I don't, and a Fast-like or Vesey-like affordable grinder would have to take that spot.

You don’t seem to get it. It doesn’t matter what you want it’s not happening. They’re not trading Kreider this summer not should they since it makes zero sense. Now you may get your wish in 2-3 years from now and I would understand since it’s at the end of his contract and they may be retooling at that point but it isn’t happening now. Tarasenko was always going to be a rental I’m sorry that’s just a fact. Would I like them back? Yeah if they price us right. Would they like him back? I’m sure if the price is right. Are they going to sacrifice one of their best all around players to make that happen? Hell No because they aren’t dumb. I mean if they need space they could unload Goodrow but I’m sure knowing you you’d probably keep Goodrow instead lol

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Why?

They are both the same age. They are both producing the same ppg.

Tarasenko is coming off an injury and is fresh from a bad situation he did not want to be in. And is historically superior.

I suspect Tarasenko produces substantially more points than Kreider next year if he's in a stable situation.

Kreider scores more goals but he's kind of a one-trick pony at this stage. He scores net front, power play goals, deflections and put backs.

Tarasenko is the way more gifted and well-rounded offensive player at the moment (and forever).



That, fairly, is speculation. If Tarasenko wants $8m then that would change the calculation herein. Given that he wants to be here and has already landed his big contract previously I'm operating under the assumption (and much of the board has speculated this btw) that he may come in at around that number.

I'm still not sure I wouldn't trade Kreider anyway, because I value the recoupment of assets, but for sake of this argument, to at least establish a premise, I'm operating under the assumption that you can get Tarasenko for something like 4.5x3.




But we've been much, much better offensively since Tarasenko joined the top 6.

We shouldn't want to go back to having Fasts and Veseys in those roles. If Tarasenko leaves you are back to that arrangement again - a bottom 6 plugger in your top 6. Versus if Kreider is gone, you still have Panarin, Lafreniere, and a very high end prospect in Othmann for those roles.

Hopefully Laf and Kakko prove worthy of those roles officially next year.

Because I think of the two, Tarasenko probably ages worse. I'd love to keep him but I don't know where they find the money for it and I'm not trading one of the teams best goal scorers (with a NTC clause in his back pocket) to fit him in. And you wanna call him a one-trick pony, whatever that means, fine. But that one trick has produced close to 100 goals since the start of last season. Goals win hockey games last time I checked and you're saying goodbye to a whole bunch of goals for a lot of what if's and hopes.

 

[NYRangers0723]

Because I think of the two, Tarasenko probably ages worse. I'd love to keep him but I don't know where they find the money for it and I'm not trading one of the teams best goal scorers (with a NTC clause in his back pocket) to fit him in. And you wanna call him a one-trick pony, whatever that means, fine. But that one trick has produced close to 100 goals since the start of last season. Goals win hockey games last time I checked and you're saying goodbye to a whole bunch of goals for a lot of what if's and hopes.

Not just the goals but the space he opens up on the ice for his line mates as well as his net presence. Let’s not forget how dangerous he had become on the PK. 8 short handed goals the past two seasons

 

[mas0764]

Because I think of the two, Tarasenko probably ages worse.

I would at least consider this a reasonable reason. I don't know that I agree with that, though. I'd expect Tarasenko to produce more offense moving forward.

I'd love to keep him but I don't know where they find the money for it and I'm not trading one of the teams best goal scorers (with a NTC clause in his back pocket) to fit him in. And you wanna call him a one-trick pony, whatever that means, fine. But that one trick has produced close to 100 goals since the start of last season. Goals win hockey games last time I checked and you're saying goodbye to a whole bunch of goals for a lot of what if's and hopes.

Well Kreider scores more goals than Panarin too, and has scored more goals than Zibanejad over the past 2 years, but both of those players are exponentially more important to our offense than Kreider is. So is Fox. It's not just about the raw goal scoring.

Kreider scores a lot of goals where other players have done a lot of the setting up of the play. That's not to say Kreider doesn't possess a unique skill set for putting himself into position for a rebound or deftly maneuvering his stick to get a deflection for a goal, but those types of goals are usually two-party affairs that require a pinpoint pass to be tipped or shot through traffic to be deflected. A snipe off the rush or from the circles like Tarasenko is capable of, is the much more hard to replicate type of goal, IMO.

I'm not saying I would expect Lafreniere to come in and score 40 goals, but.... I think he could do a lot of PP work that Kreider does and I don't expect that moving Kreider would mean a loss of 35 goals. I think a good portion of that production would be subsumed by guys like Laf and Kakko.

Since Tarasenko came on board, we are the highest scoring team in the east besides Boston. The value of having that balanced top 6 can't be understated. I don't want to go back to being three deep (four deep, once Othmann arrives) at LW, but having to play Vesey and Fast types in the top 9 on the right side.

You can say that losing Kreider leaves you with "what ifs and hopes," but the same is true if Tarasenko walks. We've seen what happens when we have Kreider but no legit top end RW. It's a mediocre offense. I'll take my chances seeing the flip side with BETTER replacement alternatives on hand, plus two prime assets.

If you are asking me how better to win the Cup, it's definitely Tarasenko over Kreider next year.

 

[NYRangers0723]

I would at least consider this a reasonable reason. I don't know that I agree with that, though. I'd expect Tarasenko to produce more offense moving forward.



Well Kreider scores more goals than Panarin too, and has scored more goals than Zibanejad over the past 2 years, but both of those players are exponentially more important to our offense than Kreider is. So is Fox. It's not just about the raw goal scoring.

Kreider scores a lot of goals where other players have done a lot of the setting up of the play. That's not to say Kreider doesn't possess a unique skill set for putting himself into position for a rebound or deftly maneuvering his stick to get a deflection for a goal, but those types of goals are usually two-party affairs that require a pinpoint pass to be tipped or shot through traffic to be deflected. A snipe off the rush or from the circles like Tarasenko is capable of, is the much more hard to replicate type of goal, IMO.

I'm not saying I would expect Lafreniere to come in and score 40 goals, but.... I think he could do a lot of PP work that Kreider does and I don't expect that moving Kreider would mean a loss of 35 goals. I think a good portion of that production would be subsumed by guys like Laf and Kakko.

Since Tarasenko came on board, we are the highest scoring team in the east besides Boston. The value of having that balanced top 6 can't be understated. I don't want to go back to being three deep (four deep, once Othmann arrives) at LW, but having to play Vesey and Fast types in the top 9.

If you are asking me how better to win the Cup, it's definitely Tarasenko over Kreider next year.

It just seems like you’re extremely undervaluing Kreider which is pretty insane. Who cares where he scores goals. You don’t take into account the space he opens up with his speed and size. How about his screens in front? Also how great he is on the PK and he gets short handed goals. These are all variable I think you’re either ignoring or just do t understand