Kitchener Rangers 2022-23 Season Thread (Part 2)

[zaluty]

Remember the good old days of watching hockey us old timers could enjoy before radio let alone TV?

Or the internet which made every one an expert

 

[ottsabrefan]

...and the main discussion in the game thread is about how he didn't deserve it...but lol at getting player of the game on the losing side in an embarrassing loss being proof of his worth. Are some of you on Shane's PR team payroll?

Being in on both goals and leading the team in points is somehow worthy of dropping his stock? Lol He was not the sieve goalie or the poor defencemen not picking up guys. Nor on the PK where they put no pressure on the other team. But sure…bash him since he didn’t single-handedly carry them to victory.

 

[bobber]

Remember the good old days of watching hockey us old timers could enjoy before radio let alone TV?

A guy at a Ranger game reminded me once that I was Gordie Howe's Peewee coach. It gave me flash backs to the old days when we gave players instructions carved on stone tablets. My "Old Timers" hasn't fully kicked in yet.

 

[Coaches Coroner]

Being in on both goals and leading the team in points is somehow worthy of dropping his stock? Lol He was not the sieve goalie or the poor defencemen not picking up guys. Nor on the PK where they put no pressure on the other team. But sure…bash him since he didn’t single-handedly carry them to victory.

Then have your team over trade for him instead of trying to convince everyone else he's worth it.

Sorry I'm not as interested in him for the price as the posters here that appear to be trying out for his PR team.

 

[Rangers True Blue]

The goalies you mentioned are Overagers in the OHL as 20 year olds and thus not eligible for the tournament.

So do once-in-many-years, 4th overall pick Shane Wright and his value/cost go down if he has a bad tournament? It's just one game but that doens't look like a guy you trade Rehkopf++ for and improve your team like people were trying to sell us on.

OAs......sorry......of course.

 

[rangersblues]

Then have your team over trade for him instead of trying to convince everyone else he's worth it.

Sorry I'm not as interested in him for the price as the posters here that appear to be trying out for his PR team.

Can you at least admit Wright would be best player available if he's sent back?

 

[bobber]

MM made the decision to make some sort of serious run this season. I am sure he has another move or 2 to strengthen this squad. With the assets he has left I doubt he has enough to compete for the top players being mentioned on these boards. If anything he will be looking at strengthening the two bottom lines IMO.

 

[Rangers True Blue]

That puts a stamp on how bad Canada played where Wright is Canada’s player of the game. Wright didn’t have a bad game. He didn’t partake in the 1 vs 4 battles that his line mate continually participated in resulting in at least a dozen turnovers.

Watching Bedard continually go one on three or four with the line mates he has is insulting to his linemates. And then listening to the broadcasters gush all over Bedard was equally as insulting.

Wright probably deserved player of the game strictly for keeping Bedards head on his shoulders on the bench. I’m surprised his teammates didn’t rip it off.

Button drives me. He has his favourites and that's all he talks about...and talks about.....etc
I enjoyed it when he was questioned on his claim that this was the best team of all time blah blah blah.
He had to eat crow but tried to back pedal it into some new iteration of what he claimed. LOL

 

[Coaches Coroner]

Can you at least admit Wright would be best player available if he's sent back?

I've never said he's not, I've maintained his cost is inflated and the team could be improved in other ways that address definitive needs for less. He's, imo, not worth the price (and especially not the price some here insist he is definitely worth)...which is a position that seems to bother the future Shane Wright PR All-Star Team.

 

[Rangers True Blue]

MM made the decision to make some sort of serious run this season. I am sure he has another move or 2 to strengthen this squad. With the assets he has left I doubt he has enough to compete for the top players being mentioned on these boards. If anything he will be looking at strengthening the two bottom lines IMO.

As of today, non-World Junior players can be traded. Will MM make a move or moves sooner than later?
I still don't think he's done.

 

[bobber]

As of today, non-World Junior players can be traded. Will MM make a move or moves sooner than later?
I still don't think he's done.

Looking at the competition this year in both conferences and having a couple of top franchises with assets to spend and not making a move yet MM has to do something else IMO. It's going to be one hell of a challenge going forward just to move up the ladder and compete. Teams at the top of the standings will add and bolster their already strong squads. MM usually complains that prices are crazy at the deadline. Got to pay to play.

 

[OMG67]

I've never said he's not, I've maintained his cost is inflated and the team could be improved in other ways that address definitive needs for less. He's, imo, not worth the price (and especially not the price some here insist he is definitely worth)...which is a position that seems to bother the future Shane Wright PR All-Star Team.

I agree. Shane Wright as a 15 year old vs Shane Wright as a 17 year old wasn’t a big enough progression. In fairness, there was a the lost year to the Pandemic and that had a negative effect on many so we need to be somewhat cognizant of that.

He’d still be the best player available for sure. But, if DelBelBelluz goes for two 2nds and three 3rds as an example, Shane Wright isn’t worth that plus a ‘06 1st IMO. To me he is worth marginally more than guys like Morrison and DelBelBelluz or even Arcuri. Add a 2nd and a warm body and the comparison is probably more accurate.

 

[dirty12]

I agree. Shane Wright as a 15 year old vs Shane Wright as a 17 year old wasn’t a big enough progression. In fairness, there was a the lost year to the Pandemic and that had a negative effect on many so we need to be somewhat cognizant of that.

He’d still be the best player available for sure. But, if DelBelBelluz goes for two 2nds and three 3rds as an example, Shane Wright isn’t worth that plus a ‘06 1st IMO. To me he is worth marginally more than guys like Morrison and DelBelBelluz or even Arcuri. Add a 2nd and a warm body and the comparison is probably more accurate.

If the Petes had an ‘06-1st picked 15-20, Wright would be worth an ‘06-1st, 2-2nds, 3-3rds; of that I’m quite sure. I also think the Petes would have to be considered a bit fortunate if getting Del Bel Belluz for only picks. It’s been awhile since this many good players have been traded plus how many more are supposedly available.

 

[OMG67]

If the Petes had an ‘06-1st picked 15-20, Wright would be worth an ‘06-1st, 2-2nds, 3-3rds; of that I’m quite sure. I also think the Petes would have to be considered a bit fortunate if getting Del Bel Belluz for only picks. It’s been awhile since this many good players have been traded plus how many more are supposedly available.

The player is worth whatever someone is willing to give. That isn’t the point being discussed.

The point is whether his performance is worth that compared to some others being traded right now.

IMO, Shane Wright is not worth significantly more (double) than a player like DelBelBelluz. I am somewhat biased in so far as I don’t think any player is worth what most feel Wright is worth so I am not as objective as I should be in that regard.

To me, if you have a high profile ‘06 1st like Van Volsen, the trade should be straight up. There should be no draft picks involved. If a team is getting what is considered a can’t miss prospect that will likley contribute for 2-3 seasons for a half season rental, that should be the adequate compensation. This whole concept of player plus a basket of high picks seems ridiculous to me.

Even at the NHL level, trades like this don’t happen for half season rentals.

 

[HockeyPops]

Even at the NHL level, trades like this don’t happen for half season rentals.

Junior hockey is not the NHL. You have NHL players playing on the top line for 10+ years in the NHL, and under team control for 10+ years. Of course teams aren't going to pay that for a 1/2 season rental in the NHL. In junior hockey you have very few players playing top line minutes for more than 2 seasons, plus the uncertainty of those top players perhaps graduating a year early. Plus the gap between a top junior player and a replacement level junior player is way larger than the gap between a top NHL player and a replacement level NHL player.

These are just a few reasons why a half season rental in junior hockey is much more palatable.

 

[OMG67]

Junior hockey is not the NHL. You have NHL players playing on the top line for 10+ years in the NHL, and under team control for 10+ years. Of course teams aren't going to pay that for a 1/2 season rental in the NHL. In junior hockey you have very few players playing top line minutes for more than 2 seasons, plus the uncertainty of those top players perhaps graduating a year early. Plus the gap between a top junior player and a replacement level junior player is way larger than the gap between a top NHL player and a replacement level NHL player.

These are just a few reasons why a half season rental in junior hockey is much more palatable.

Sorry but I disagree.

We see similar scenario trades all the time at the NHL Level. We see deals where a rental player is traded for a short term UFA in a similar situation as we have at the OHL level. Granted, that UFA could be resigned but regardless, we don’t see comparable deals at the NHL Level anymore. They aren’t adding three 2nds and three 3rds to the deal.

We don’t even see those deals for players that aren’t expiring contracts. We will see a deal for Chychrun coming up this season most likely. Even that deal with three years remaining on his contract won’t come close to a deal we see at the OHL Level.

The reality is, we will see deals at the OHL Level at this deadline that don’t equate at all to fair comp value when you consider impact games played on one side vs the other side. If a player like Shane Wright were to be traded for Foster plus picks, Kingston will get a player likely to score 30 goals this season as a 17 year old followed by two more productive season plus draft picks. It doesn’t equate. It doesn’t make sense to me at all.

There is talk of the PETES trading VanVolsen. He a solid prospect with three more seasons. Arguably, it will take him two seasons to become elite meaning the team taht acquires will get two full seasons of elite play out of VanVolsen for a half season rental. Yet, somehow the Petes will also need to give draft picks along with that?

EDIT:
I am tuned in to what hte values are and I understand them. I am not arguing that Wright, for example, isn’t worth XXX. I am just saying that IMO it has gotten out of hand. I would have a hard time as an O?HL GM parting with 5-6 prime assets for a 30 game plus playoffs rental. It would mean I would have to offset that with a similar seller trade either prior to that buyer trade or in the future to recoup the assets.

Sorry but the OHL is out of touch IMO. I don’t feel the trade values are realistic from a weighting perspective. I think far too many assets change hands and it disturbs the overall balance of the league. It makes it somewhat of a gong show, like guys at a strip club throwing money on stage and making it rain.

 

[dirty12]

The player is worth whatever someone is willing to give. That isn’t the point being discussed.

The point is whether his performance is worth that compared to some others being traded right now.

IMO, Shane Wright is not worth significantly more (double) than a player like DelBelBelluz. I am somewhat biased in so far as I don’t think any player is worth what most feel Wright is worth so I am not as objective as I should be in that regard.

To me, if you have a high profile ‘06 1st like Van Volsen, the trade should be straight up. There should be no draft picks involved. If a team is getting what is considered a can’t miss prospect that will likley contribute for 2-3 seasons for a half season rental, that should be the adequate compensation. This whole concept of player plus a basket of high picks seems ridiculous to me.

Even at the NHL level, trades like this don’t happen for half season rentals.

That is why you have seen [(1)] top 5 picked player traded at the deadline, and generally a mid to late 1st plus picks returns a WJC player and a good OA.
You generalize 16 yr old 1sts. Top 7, 8-14, 15-22 have very different values.

 

[bobber]

Regardless of what we think a player's worth is at the deadline it all comes down to how much a GM wants a certain player. Usually we are all surprised at the amounts of assets traded. Rangers probably aren't in the same ball park for the top players available unless they say they will only play in Kitchener. Morrison might want to play with his old buddy Constantini.

 

[HockeyPops]

The reality is, we will see deals at the OHL Level at this deadline that don’t equate at all to fair comp value when you consider impact games played on one side vs the other side. If a player like Shane Wright were to be traded for Foster plus picks, Kingston will get a player likely to score 30 goals this season as a 17 year old followed by two more productive season plus draft picks. It doesn’t equate. It doesn’t make sense to me at all.

How can you say it's not worth the price? Those rental players push their team over the top. Look at the last 4 champions.
2022 - Hamilton (McTavish)
2019 - Guelph (Suzuki)
2018 - Hamilton (Thomas)
2017 - Erie (Cirelli)

Sure, if you can get a player cheap (Suzuki) you do it, but if you aren't willing to pay the going rate and that player slips away, you don't land these players and you don't win. The last 4 champions prove that.

You can't really compare total output of two players (ie. two and half productive seasons of Foster), because how much of that production comes in non-contending years? Probably most of it. It's nice to have in non contending years, but you can't value points in down years the same way you value points in contending years.

Sorry but the OHL is out of touch IMO. I don’t feel the trade values are realistic from a weighting perspective. I think far too many assets change hands and it disturbs the overall balance of the league. It makes it somewhat of a gong show, like guys at a strip club throwing money on stage and making it rain.

Not allowing 1st round picks to be traded, and only allowing picks 4 years out to be traded helps to keep this in check. Imagine the other two CHL junior leagues that still allow trading first rounders.

 

[OMG67]

That is why you have seen [(1)] top 5 picked player traded at the deadline, and generally a mid to late 1st plus picks returns a WJC player and a good OA.
You generalize 16 yr old 1sts. Top 7, 8-14, 15-22 have very different values.

Agreed. This is why a 17 year old is sometimes substituted. However, the 17 year old substituted has same value as what you have outlined. So, the reality still exists that the trading team still needs to trade that same value of player across all trades. Ottawa may not be willing to give up Mews as a 7th overall pick but they still need to give Foster who was a 2nd rounder the previous season that is on pace for 30 goals. I’m not sure one or the other is ideal. Right now, Lardis and Foster have relatively similar trade value. Similar stats, similar size, similar skill attributes. The only difference is one was drafted 6th and the other 32nd.

That may not be the best example because it was the Covid draft year. First was picked four spots behind Pinelli. Pinelli’s trade value is not even in the same ballpark as Either Lardis or Foster. It far exceeds it. But, this is the point I am making about draft status/position. Sometimes teams make mistakes and everyone can see it early on. That performance can have an effect on whether a team is willing to trade the player as well as whether it would reduce the pick package going the other way as well.

 

[OMG67]

How can you say it's not worth the price? Those rental players push their team over the top. Look at the last 4 champions.
2022 - Hamilton (McTavish)
2019 - Guelph (Suzuki)
2018 - Hamilton (Thomas)
2017 - Erie (Cirelli)

Sure, if you can get a player cheap (Suzuki) you do it, but if you aren't willing to pay the going rate and that player slips away, you don't land these players and you don't win. The last 4 champions prove that.

You can't really compare total output of two players (ie. two and half productive seasons of Foster), because how much of that production comes in non-contending years? Probably most of it. It's nice to have in non contending years, but you can't value points in down years the same way you value points in contending years.



Not allowing 1st round picks to be traded, and only allowing picks 4 years out to be traded helps to keep this in check. Imagine the other two CHL junior leagues that still allow trading first rounders.

You omit all of the other trades made that result in no Championship. Every team that wins makes deadline deals (typically). It would be folly to suggest otherwise BUT there are other teams that also participate to the same degree that don’t win the Championship.

I am not suggesting teams should not make deadline deals. I am suggesting that the trade balance is off. It doesn’t need to be even; however, it shouldn’t be quadruple the production value.

Ottawa is rumoured to have agreed to trade Cooper Foster plus picks (assumed to be two 2nds and three 3rds) to Kingston for Shane Wright. Wright will arguably score 2 points per game through the remainder of the seasons nd provide similar playoff production. Assuming everything works out for Ottawa and they win a Championship as a result of acquiring Wright, they will get around 50-60 regular season points and 35 playoff points. The value in that is they are condensed into one season which results in a Championship.

Foster will likely garner 10 goals and 5 assists the rest of this season with Kingston.…give or take. Then as an 18 and 19 year old (and potentially as an OA), he will generate in the neighbourhood of 70 goals and 70 assists for 140 points plus whatever he generates as an OA if he remains in the league. This is assuming he continues to progress as most players do as they age. That is a two fold regular season production rate vs Wright’s half season.

On top of that, the 67’s would give two 2nds and three 3rds. Kingston would likely trade those picks and get their own rental back in return that is comparable to the player they traded (Arcuri) Who would project to be a 90-100 point player.

So, the net result of the Wright deal for Kingston is their own rental player next year using the picks that equates to Arcuri, plus Foster who projects to be a 30-35 goal player next season and the following season.

That is the issue I have with the way these trades work. It isn’t close to being balanced in any way. It doesn’t need to be production even but it shouldn‘t be more than double production. We are seeing minimum triple production trade values that force teams to participate in that formula to be able to win. Teams cannot choose to not participate because of the monumental production swings these trades provide. You can’t participate one way and then choose to not participate the other, meaning you can’t be a buyer and not a seller or vice versa. You need to participate in both.

The issue becomes timing etc. Only one team wins a Championship. That means all the other teams spending big assets all lose. I don’t have an issue with that but we are in the Kitchener thread right now and Kitchener has made big moves and won’t stack up against the other teams like Ottawa if Ottawa does what they are “supposed to do” to build a winner.

Ottawa has done all their asset stockpiling. If we are to believe what is rumoured to be “done” in Ottawa, they are adding Wright, DelMaestro and Harrison plus an OA yet to be determined. Or at least they are right there on all of these players meaning they will likley get at least two of them and then acquire the OA plus maybe another body not quite as good as the one they miss out on.

 

[dirty12]

Agreed. This is why a 17 year old is sometimes substituted. However, the 17 year old substituted has same value as what you have outlined. So, the reality still exists that the trading team still needs to trade that same value of player across all trades. Ottawa may not be willing to give up Mews as a 7th overall pick but they still need to give Foster who was a 2nd rounder the previous season that is on pace for 30 goals. I’m not sure one or the other is ideal. Right now, Lardis and Foster have relatively similar trade value. Similar stats, similar size, similar skill attributes. The only difference is one was drafted 6th and the other 32nd.

That may not be the best example because it was the Covid draft year. First was picked four spots behind Pinelli. Pinelli’s trade value is not even in the same ballpark as Either Lardis or Foster. It far exceeds it. But, this is the point I am making about draft status/position. Sometimes teams make mistakes and everyone can see it early on. That performance can have an effect on whether a team is willing to trade the player as well as whether it would reduce the pick package going the other way as well.

I’ve watched every ‘67s game in December (mostly replay this week) to see what you see in Foster; I didn’t.

Preliminary Media/Scout Top 10 for 2023

Time for the first media/scout poll for the 2023 NHL Draft! For those unfamiliar with how this works, I poll many of the OHL's brightest m...

ohlprospects.blogspot.com

I do not see Foster as the equal of Lardis or Beaudoin. It seems these people don’t either.

 

[OMG67]

I’ve watched every ‘67s game in December (mostly replay this week) to see what you see in Foster; I didn’t.

Preliminary Media/Scout Top 10 for 2023

Time for the first media/scout poll for the 2023 NHL Draft! For those unfamiliar with how this works, I poll many of the OHL's brightest m...

ohlprospects.blogspot.com

I do not see Foster as the equal of Lardis or Beaudoin. It seems these people don’t either.

Are you posting a NHL Draft rankings list as a means to suggest value as an OHL player or player trade value? NHL prospect value has nothing to do with OHL production. On top of that, Lardis, for example, played in the OHL last season. Foster played NOJHL. The eyes weren’t on Foster anywhere near as much.

Foster, as a 16 year old, won the League’s (NOJHL) Most Valuable Player after recording 60 points in just 38 games. He has followed that up with 13 goals so far this season in just 31 games. It is not like this is out of the blue. He has a track record of success and he was a relatively high OHL pick at 32nd…again, just 4 slots behind Pinelli.

I think his level of success on the ice speaks for itself from the perspective of value. That is not to suggest any disrespect to other players but at the same time, I think it would be disingenuous to disregard his accomplishments because you didn’t see anything in him as well as Internet Scouts not having him on a ranking list.

Foster doesn’t strike me as the type of player to drive his line. He is more of a complimentary player as are most wingers but he can and has played centre for the 67’s this season. If he were to join Kingston, he’d fit in to a top 6 role right away and he would produce.

 

[dirty12]

Are you posting a NHL Draft rankings list as a means to suggest value as an OHL player or player trade value? NHL prospect value has nothing to do with OHL production. On top of that, Lardis, for example, played in the OHL last season. Foster played NOJHL. The eyes weren’t on Foster anywhere near as much.

Foster, as a 16 year old, won the League’s (NOJHL) Most Valuable Player after recording 60 points in just 38 games. He has followed that up with 13 goals so far this season in just 31 games. It is not like this is out of the blue. He has a track record of success and he was a relatively high OHL pick at 32nd…again, just 4 slots behind Pinelli.

I think his level of success on the ice speaks for itself from the perspective of value. That is not to suggest any disrespect to other players but at the same time, I think it would be disingenuous to disregard his accomplishments because you didn’t see anything in him as well as Internet Scouts not having him on a ranking list.

Foster doesn’t strike me as the type of player to drive his line. He is more of a complimentary player as are most wingers but he can and has played centre for the 67’s this season. If he were to join Kingston, he’d fit in to a top 6 role right away and he would produce.

I do not mean to be-little Foster, I just do not see him as equal to Beaudoin or Lardis

 

[OMG67]

I do not mean to be-little Foster, I just do not see him as equal to Beaudoin or Lardis

From a trade perspective, teams need to project a ceiling. Provided the player projects within that same “range,” the complimentary trade value remains the same.

For example, if Peterborough were to make Lardis available and Ottawa were to make Foster available, the additional picks included would be equal. Is it because the players are equal? No. It is because they both fit within the same range. Neither project to be studs. They project to be productive OHLers that will likely top out around 80 points and have a better than 50-50 chance of playing an OA season.

You can’t look at it from the perspective of whether one player would be straight up traded for the other. That would only ever happen on a “problem for problem” type of trade anyway.

So when we discuss trade value, a player like Foster has the same relative value as Lardis because their body of work is similar, the amount of time they project to play in the league is the same and they are both complimentary wingers.

Beaudoin may be worth more because he is a year younger and he is a centre that projects as capable of driving a line. Beaudoin is also a hell of a lot bigger and is a more prototypical NHL prospect which as much as I don’t agree, it does add value. VanVolsen is in the same boat. To me, both of those players (Mews as well) are higher value. This is why IMO, adding picks to those players to get a player like Shane Wright is just plain stupid.

Kitchener has the rights to Hage. He’s in that same boat too.

However, if the player plays his rookie season and does ok and then plays the first half of his second season and doesn’t show progression, then draft status starts to give away to demonstrated production. This is where Lardis falls. Same with Barlas vs Pinelli in Ottawa. I’d estimate that Linelli, Foster, and Gardiner are all worth more than Barlas as their 1st rounder.