Kitchener Rangers 2024-25 Season Thread, Part III

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,895
3,179
Regardless of who owns the team be it a community or private they are still running a business. Most here really want the team to garner more picks and keep going with the plan to develop the young skilled talent. Does the play off revenue factor in to the immediate plans at this deadline? Guess we find out this week.
I think we end up with the same number of playoff games whether we stand pat or buy hard. Likely get to the conference final and that's it.
 

GeoBlue

Registered User
Oct 21, 2017
1,733
1,754
Kitchener
Pridham during 1st period interview says he still plans on going to NCAA in the fall. I know that can change but as of now seems like that is his plan. Would of been a heck of an OA.
I doubt he is going the college route being a Chicago 2nd rounder. He either makes the team next spring or he goes back to junior. No sense in starting college if the NHL is within your grasp. Just IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: East Avenue Bully

Squirrel88

Registered User
Jul 1, 2023
99
162
In the pre Covid days, I was told by an owner of one of the teams that their break even was 2,500 fans per game and 2 playoff dates. With far above 2,500 per game,we should be thinking about banners, not the bottom line.
Coming out of covid, it was reported that the Rangers break even was around 4,500 per game.

What would change if they were thinking about banners and not the bottom line?
 

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,895
3,179
Of course. And what do you think that will be?
I have no idea. But given that Boston College is such a good program, if he's promised top line minutes it wouldn't surprise me if he ended up there. I'd give his return to Kitchener no better than 50-50, especially the way he's talking.

My original statement was Pridham will do what the Blackhawks tell him. The more I think about it, if he doesn't like their decision, I think going NCAA keeps his options more open. He won't have to sign with them immediately going the college route and he'll get his education. It's really uncharted territory with the new rules. That said there's a chance he returns to Kitchener and that chance didn't even exist a few short months ago.
 

I Mac 80

Registered User
Jul 23, 2023
39
111
I have been saying all season that we should be selling. However with the rule changes that have occurred does MM know that some of the flyer picks he took in later rounds are going to report next year? If so that makes trading some picks and some quality younger players easier. IMO though Headrick wouldn’t be one of them. In regards to the 26-27 year and the OHL being Mem cup hosts there are no guarantees that we are going to be selected as hosts which makes it more tricky to get to the Mem cup even with the league having to slots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: East Avenue Bully

Jives

Registered User
Jan 6, 2018
1,033
1,627
If not Headrick then who? Can’t trade Bilecki, Xu, Cameron, Antsis or Schaubel. They aren’t trading Reid, Romano or Lam. Stark value is probably too low right now. Ellis has upside. Leaves pretty much Arquette, Labrash, MacNeil and Schneider from our 2007/2008 group. I mean it’s an ok starting point but lots of picks will need to be added to get a big player.
 

Ward Cornell

Registered User
Dec 22, 2007
6,520
2,984
If not Headrick then who? Can’t trade Bilecki, Xu, Cameron, Antsis or Schaubel. They aren’t trading Reid, Romano or Lam. Stark value is probably too low right now. Ellis has upside. Leaves pretty much Arquette, Labrash, MacNeil and Schneider from our 2007/2008 group. I mean it’s an ok starting point but lots of picks will need to be added to get a big player.
I can most definitely seeing Lam being traded. He has 2 or 3 yrs left in the O, offensively gifted but the drawback for him on the Rangers is too many players of his stature. IMHO, any true contender can only have 2 players maybe 3 tops of that size. The Rangers have Lam, Ellis, Arquette and Headrick. I think Headrick is untouchable and of the remaining 3, Lam would fetch the most value
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
8,220
8,104
I can most definitely seeing Lam being traded. He has 2 or 3 yrs left in the O, offensively gifted but the drawback for him on the Rangers is too many players of his stature. IMHO, any true contender can only have 2 players maybe 3 tops of that size. The Rangers have Lam, Ellis, Arquette and Headrick. I think Headrick is untouchable and of the remaining 3, Lam would fetch the most value
Agree 100%.

Bilecki and Xu seems to have bumped MacNiel and Schneider down the depth chart. Looks like Headrick may have bumped Lam down the depth chart.

The good thing about Lam as a trade chip is that he’d very likely be a five year player in this league. If he were moved at the deadline, he’d be 3.5 years with his new team. That’s value.

I think Headrick is untouchable today. But, if a guy like Valentini reports, I can see Headrick be put in play. But Valentini isn’t here yet so unless he reports this week, I doubt we see Headrick moved.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
8,220
8,104
If not Headrick then who? Can’t trade Bilecki, Xu, Cameron, Antsis or Schaubel. They aren’t trading Reid, Romano or Lam. Stark value is probably too low right now. Ellis has upside. Leaves pretty much Arquette, Labrash, MacNeil and Schneider from our 2007/2008 group. I mean it’s an ok starting point but lots of picks will need to be added to get a big player.
If MM doesn’t put Headrick in play, we won’t be adding a big player. Guys like Lam, MacNiel, and Arquette could be put in play along with non 2025 picks to bring in secondary help that could return next year.

I believe that the only way we bring in a big player is if Headrick goes the other way. If he refuses to waive, conversation over. But if not, I’d rather the big player we bring in is an 06 who’d return next year.

Complete Hypothetical:
If I told you the Rangers could move, say, Headrick, MacNiel, 2nd’26, 2nd’27, 3rd’28, and 4th’27, and in return we get Jett Luchanko, 2nd’27* and 3rd’27*, would that be a deal we’d be happy making? That’s close to the Owen Beck to Peterboro deal. The conditionals go back to Guelph when Luchanko plays one game in the 25-26 season. I believe he’ll play in the OHL next year. I had the conditionals as Guelph picks because they can afford to tie up a couple picks for a few months. We cannot.

This is the only type of deal involving Headrick that I can stomach. I don’t see Luchanko as a rental where a guy like Pinelli would be.

I’ll sum this up by saying I doubt very much it happens.
 

dirty12

Registered User
Mar 6, 2015
10,652
4,744
I believe 2 to 4 years ago London was in the same boat we are in right now and sold a couple pieces off to build for the future…..and it 100% worked. They were one of the top teams and didn’t buy but sold a couple pieces cause they knew there were stronger teams out there and they knew they had a very strong young core (hmmmmm…like a team I know very well this year).

probably a half dozen years ago now, London sold while 3rd in conference. I know that I was surprised. I don’t think London was as loaded with first and second year players as Kitchener is now though.
I like a previous post that suggested pulling the rug out from under Jussi in consecutive seasons might not be a good idea.
 

dirty12

Registered User
Mar 6, 2015
10,652
4,744
4500 seems very high. Maybe because of debt incurred as a result of the Covid years? Most teams break even around 2750-3000 with one round in the playoffs added to that.

There are teams like Brampton and NB with very attractive arena deals.

Team and arena owned by the community; so greater than average tenant costs, poor concession revenue sharing, no parking revenue …whatever balances the bottom line best for the community. There is no doubt the Kitchener rangers make $ though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: East Avenue Bully

bobber

Registered User
Jan 21, 2013
9,245
7,666
Kitchener Ontario
Coming out of covid, it was reported that the Rangers break even was around 4,500 per game.

What would change if they were thinking about banners and not the bottom line?
Because it's a business I think it's always the bottom line first and then the banners. Banners are great for execs looking to pad resumes. MM pushed the idea of making a bid to host the Mem cup here again. I think what he does at this deadline will tell if he sticks to that plan. There is no guarantee a team will win a bid. They still have to build a team with that in mind regardless if that is the plan going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeoBlue

bobber

Registered User
Jan 21, 2013
9,245
7,666
Kitchener Ontario
If MM doesn’t put Headrick in play, we won’t be adding a big player. Guys like Lam, MacNiel, and Arquette could be put in play along with non 2025 picks to bring in secondary help that could return next year.

I believe that the only way we bring in a big player is if Headrick goes the other way. If he refuses to waive, conversation over. But if not, I’d rather the big player we bring in is an 06 who’d return next year.

Complete Hypothetical:
If I told you the Rangers could move, say, Headrick, MacNiel, 2nd’26, 2nd’27, 3rd’28, and 4th’27, and in return we get Jett Luchanko, 2nd’27* and 3rd’27*, would that be a deal we’d be happy making? That’s close to the Owen Beck to Peterboro deal. The conditionals go back to Guelph when Luchanko plays one game in the 25-26 season. I believe he’ll play in the OHL next year. I had the conditionals as Guelph picks because they can afford to tie up a couple picks for a few months. We cannot.

This is the only type of deal involving Headrick that I can stomach. I don’t see Luchanko as a rental where a guy like Pinelli would be.

I’ll sum this up by saying I doubt very much it happens.
Luchanko has 20 points this season and is like 130th in scoring. Is he really a big fish? He really did nothing playiing on the world stage. This is where players like Jett had their chance to shine. Let the Knights have him. Maybe skated around like a Jett but nothing else. . Lots of players can skate but are they worth a first rounder and picks. I would never be happy with that hypothetical deal for Luchanko. Headrick is small but he seemed to be the only spark on the Rangers lifeless power play. In saying this I will take another crow pie out of the freezer in case it happens.
 

Rangers True Blue

Registered User
Aug 2, 2017
1,879
1,750
First big fish now gone. Romani to Barrie. Cost Barrie Parker Vaughan who was the 5th overall pick in this past draft.

The rumour leaders.
Jett to London
Pinelli to Brantford
Gibson to Oshawa

Headrick in the line up today. If he was trade bait with Pinelli or anyone else he may have sat this one out. Good news he is playing!
And rumour has it that MM backed out of Romani because his name was too close to Romano and might confuse the fans... :D
 

MidwestStorm

Registered User
Oct 9, 2023
135
102
Sorry but that is a very unfair and inaccurate assessment of Jett.
20 points and 1.18 pts per game which is close to top 40 not 130th. Who on the Rangers is at 1.18 points per game and can play defense too?
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
8,220
8,104
Luchanko has 20 points this season and is like 130th in scoring. Is he really a big fish? He really did nothing playiing on the world stage. This is where players like Jett had their chance to shine. Let the Knights have him. Maybe skated around like a Jett but nothing else. . Lots of players can skate but are they worth a first rounder and picks. I would never be happy with that hypothetical deal for Luchanko. Headrick is small but he seemed to be the only spark on the Rangers lifeless power play. In saying this I will take another crow pie out of the freezer in case it happens.
I’m also not married to the idea either. All eggs in one basket for one player doesn’t move the needle enough. But if we moved two or three decent 07’s plus picks (no ‘25 2nds or 3rds) and brought in two or three secondary vets (two forwards and a D) to deepen the roster, we might be in better shape post deadline.
 

Rangers True Blue

Registered User
Aug 2, 2017
1,879
1,750
That Storm tv guy said back when he played goal in the driveway with his rubber boots on against his sisters those goals counted. His mother said they did.
He flip flopped on that goal more times than I remember! At one point he guaranteed that that would have been a goal in the NHL. He also asked what is goalie interference really. Good point. Straddling the leg of Schaubel who was down and moving him away from the play is.....well....it's....GOALIE INTERFERENCE!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobber

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad