Kitchener Rangers 2024-25 Season Thread, Part III

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,897
3,186
That was my original thought too but the Colts are very good and I would love to see Parsons go up against another top team. He singlehandedly gives us a chance to win that game too.
It really is a toss up. On one hand you'd like to see how we measure up against one of the top teams. On the other you'd like to spread the work load. Yet another factor would be it would be nice to give Schaubel a start against a very good team to see exactly where he is.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
8,232
8,137
It's interesting reading the comments here vs what London fans have to say about the possibility of acquiring Luchanko.
It’s nothing against Luchanko. It’s against buying.

Once Dickinson and Bonk are back, they’ll get some of the minutes that Allen has been getting. I’m not saying Allen will play third pairing. But there are only so many minutes to go around.

If the Rangers did acquire Luchanko, he’d get top C minutes and be on PP1. If he went to London, that may not be the case.
 

LostRangers

Registered User
Feb 1, 2023
143
309
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?
Not worrying about generating an extra round of playoff revenue at the expense of a potential championship run. That’s what.
 
  • Like
Reactions: All the Answers

East Avenue Bully

Registered User
Jan 9, 2020
154
195
What do posters think of the strength of the league this season? London has been on top most of the season and really seems to be the only legitimate contender. Also is the east really as weak as it looks in the standings compared to the top teams in the west or is there more parity having a bunch a teams not that far apart?
Oshawa has played pretty well vs London this year, in my own biased and flawed memory
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobber

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
8,232
8,137
This is a good team. They're on pace for something like 105 points which would be their most since 2008, they have the league's best goaltender, and they have probably the league's second-best coach. However, they also completely lack star power beyond Parsons, frequently let bad teams hang around, have won a bunch of games in the skills competitions (8-3 in OT/SO), have few picks to trade, and are staring up at maybe the best team the OHL has seen since the Spitfires dynasty.
We had very little star power in 2008 until we brought in Steve Mason. No household names. No first round picks. One player in Azevedo who was around 2 PPG. Halischuk and Spaling barely over a PPG as was Boedker. Everyone else was under a PPG.

As far as star recognition goes, it was an anonymous lineup - and it won a championship.

So to compare, setting London aside for a few minutes, if we picked up Luchanko, he could be that star presence, up to 2 PPG player but after that, an anonymous team. And it would make noise in the post season. Probably get us past round two a little easier.

Would it be as good as the 08 team? Maybe not. And there is that London issue down the 401.
 

GeoBlue

Registered User
Oct 21, 2017
1,733
1,754
Kitchener
We see all the time how players like Luchanko are “struggling” with their 1.18 on their bad team but then get traded to a new team and their ppg with that team is a completely different story.
I haven't done a lot of research but I think that when players get traded to better teams, the results are 50/50. I know with the Rangers last 5 late season trades, that is the case. Maybe a tad under 50%. Arcuri and Savard improved their PPG, Zhilkin, Moore and Sale did not though the latter was almost the same for both teams. Whether these 5 went to a "better team" can be debated. But I do feel that a lot of factors come into play and it's a coin flip whether the PPG goes up or down.
 

bobber

Registered User
Jan 21, 2013
9,251
7,678
Kitchener Ontario
Sorry, I will let myself out but it it a nerve comparing Jett to a130th scoring type player that can skate and nothing else.
Wasn't looking to upset the Storm fans about Jett. It's just a fact that he actually is 130th in the stat column with 20 points Point per player which would increase in London if they made a deal. The top players are at 60 points.
When a GM is looking at giving up a hypothetical 1st round player or two plus picks it better be for one of the top 10 players in that Stat column. Otherwise that GMs skin will be on a barn door. Mark Hunter has hung a few on his barn door over the years. Jett Lachenko is a skilled forward but I just don't think he was worth what was mentioned earlier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rangersblues

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,897
3,186
We had very little star power in 2008 until we brought in Steve Mason. No household names. No first round picks. One player in Azevedo who was around 2 PPG. Halischuk and Spaling barely over a PPG as was Boedker. Everyone else was under a PPG.

As far as star recognition goes, it was an anonymous lineup - and it won a championship.

So to compare, setting London aside for a few minutes, if we picked up Luchanko, he could be that star presence, up to 2 PPG player but after that, an anonymous team. And it would make noise in the post season. Probably get us past round two a little easier.

Would it be as good as the 08 team? Maybe not. And there is that London issue down the 401.
While some were ranking Luchanko much too low, I don't think I'd put him in the star power category either.
 

frontsfan67

Registered User
Dec 3, 2022
3,668
2,289
I haven't done a lot of research but I think that when players get traded to better teams, the results are 50/50. I know with the Rangers last 5 late season trades, that is the case. Maybe a tad under 50%. Arcuri and Savard improved their PPG, Zhilkin, Moore and Sale did not though the latter was almost the same for both teams. Whether these 5 went to a "better team" can be debated. But I do feel that a lot of factors come into play and it's a coin flip whether the PPG goes up or down.
may get some heat for saying this but I think it’s only the real big game changers that usually increase ppg- a player of Luchankos calibre would fall in line with that but not a guy like Owen van steensel (but in van steensels case he is reuniting with wakely and Romani with that terrific line- I can see him being as good or better than last year) if he just got traded to Kingston for example without Romani and Wakely I don’t believe he all of the sudden becomes the main guy and ppg probably either stays the same or very slightly increases- not a big jump such as Jason Robertson, Owen Beck, Shane wright and soon to be Jett Luchanko that really move the needle
 

frontsfan67

Registered User
Dec 3, 2022
3,668
2,289
But, will Allen get the same minutes when Bonk and Dickinson are back in the lineup?
No doubt because of this Allen’s ppg will fall. However could see him on second powerplay after Dickinson and playing top 4 minutes for sure. Maybe Dale shuffles the lines and Allen gets top 2 minutes? Regardless I’m sure by the end of the year his ppg will be higher than 0.93 like it was in Guelph
 

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,897
3,186
No doubt because of this Allen’s ppg will fall. However could see him on second powerplay after Dickinson and playing top 4 minutes for sure. Maybe Dale shuffles the lines and Allen gets top 2 minutes? Regardless I’m sure by the end of the year his ppg will be higher than 0.93 like it was in Guelph
London's second power play unit. That should get him the last 20 seconds 😁
 

East Avenue Bully

Registered User
Jan 9, 2020
154
195
If buying and not wanting to mortgage the future, how about McCue and/or Fimis? The later is > 60% at face offs and a pain to pay against. He's an OA, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RB76

Jives

Registered User
Jan 6, 2018
1,049
1,659
If buying and not wanting to mortgage the future, how about McCue and/or Fimis? The later is > 60% at face offs and a pain to pay against. He's an OA, though.

Fimis I’d prefer over Missle but MM isn’t going to make that trade for a slight improvement as he has actually gaps to fill. I believe the OAs are set.

McCue would complete the top 6 and push Lam down to the 3rd line where he should be on a team trying to win.

Pridham - Ellinas - Swick
McCue - Romano - Missle
Stark - Mercer - Lam

I don’t mind Lam and Stark on 3rd line but Mercer just isn’t a 3rd line player. Mercer 4th line C and PK guy I’m very happy with. He just provides very little offence to be on a 3rd line trying to win. And I’m not sold on Vermeulen being that guy either. Both good 4th line players. Or I’d probably spread out the 3 lines a little more evenly and have Lam and Stark apart.

Pridham - Ellinas - Lam
McCue - Romano - Missle
Stark - ? - Swick

Basically….we need 2 more players for a top 3 lines. I think Stark and Lam our the 8th and 9th guys but we are missing 6th and 7th currently. McCue would easily fit into the top 9 but still 1 more needed.
 

East Avenue Bully

Registered User
Jan 9, 2020
154
195
I agree with 90% of what you said.

I'm just looking at our faceoffs and looking at Fimis face off% -- have him and Ellinas on the dot and our possession time should shoot way up and hopefully have some PP success.

Add both. Have Vermulen, Grisola, and Stark and Headrick play for the 8 and 9 fwd spot. Who knows, maybe Ellis or Headrick can earn it.

Just spit balling.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
8,232
8,137
Fimis I’d prefer over Missle but MM isn’t going to make that trade for a slight improvement as he has actually gaps to fill. I believe the OAs are set.

McCue would complete the top 6 and push Lam down to the 3rd line where he should be on a team trying to win.

Pridham - Ellinas - Swick
McCue - Romano - Missle
Stark - Mercer - Lam

I don’t mind Lam and Stark on 3rd line but Mercer just isn’t a 3rd line player. Mercer 4th line C and PK guy I’m very happy with. He just provides very little offence to be on a 3rd line trying to win. And I’m not sold on Vermeulen being that guy either. Both good 4th line players. Or I’d probably spread out the 3 lines a little more evenly and have Lam and Stark apart.

Pridham - Ellinas - Lam
McCue - Romano - Missle
Stark - ? - Swick

Basically….we need 2 more players for a top 3 lines. I think Stark and Lam our the 8th and 9th guys but we are missing 6th and 7th currently. McCue would easily fit into the top 9 but still
How about:

Outgoing:
Lam. MacNiel. Arquette. Picks not from the ‘25 draft.

In:
05-McCue.
06-Bedkowski.
05-Nordh.
McCue and Bedkowski for Lam and MacNiel (maybe add a 4th, 5th)?
Nordh for Arquette, 3rd, 4th. 4th?


Swick. Ellinas. Pridham.
Nordh. Romano. Miseljevic.
McCue. Mercer. Grisolia.
Stark. Ellis. Vermeulen.
Labrash. Hlacar. Headrick.

Andonovski. Chromiak.
Reid. Campbell.
Dirracolo. Bedkowski.
Bilecki. Xu.
 

Squirrel88

Registered User
Jul 1, 2023
99
162
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.
I don't know what the cost was to raise the roof and add seats and concourse space, but it wasn't cheap. I'm also too lazy to look it up. I also forget whether they have paid down the debt from adding the boxes.

I think people put too much emphasis on the team wanting to get an extra round of the playoffs for revenue. You're giving the directors too much credit if you think they care whether $200k goes to charity to $225k.

The old guys that remember when the team almost folded in the '90's either aren't around anymore or don't have the same influence that they once did. Bienkowski once said that the Rangers wouldn't bid on the Mem Cup because of the financial risk, but that seems to have changed.

The audited financials are available each year to anyone that cares to read through them.
 

Stellar29

Registered User
Sep 12, 2016
1,317
1,368
Owen Sound
How about:

Outgoing:
Lam. MacNiel. Arquette. Picks not from the ‘25 draft.

In:
05-McCue.
06-Bedkowski.
05-Nordh.
McCue and Bedkowski for Lam and MacNiel (maybe add a 4th, 5th)?
Nordh for Arquette, 3rd, 4th. 4th?


Swick. Ellinas. Pridham.
Nordh. Romano. Miseljevic.
McCue. Mercer. Grisolia.
Stark. Ellis. Vermeulen.
Labrash. Hlacar. Headrick.

Andonovski. Chromiak.
Reid. Campbell.
Dirracolo. Bedkowski.
Bilecki. Xu.
Owen Sound says no awfully fast to that offer. It's way light. Lam isn't a DeGray type anyways so I don't think that would be of much interest personally. The rumored ask on McCue was an 08 first rounder on his own and Bedkowski is a late birth 06 who could very likely return as an OA. That would basically mean buying 1.5 seasons of McCue and 2.5 seasons on Bedkowski. McCue may move this deadline for the right offer but I don't see Owen Sound having interest in parting with Bedkowski.
 

SFC

Registered User
Jan 4, 2023
44
116
We had very little star power in 2008 until we brought in Steve Mason. No household names. No first round picks. One player in Azevedo who was around 2 PPG. Halischuk and Spaling barely over a PPG as was Boedker. Everyone else was under a PPG.

As far as star recognition goes, it was an anonymous lineup - and it won a championship.

So to compare, setting London aside for a few minutes, if we picked up Luchanko, he could be that star presence, up to 2 PPG player but after that, an anonymous team. And it would make noise in the post season. Probably get us past round two a little easier.

Would it be as good as the 08 team? Maybe not. And there is that London issue down the 401.

"Star power" perhaps wasn't the best choice of words. I'd include Azevedo (led the league in scoring), Halischuk (played for team Canada), and Spaling (named to Canada's WJT camp, probably would have made the team is he didn't come down with mono) and maybe even Boedker (top 10 pick) in that category, though. This year's leading scorer is, bless him, Adrian Misaljevic.

The 2015 Oshawa Generals might be a better example of a team that was more than the sum of its parts, with no real stars other than Dal Colle (top 10 pick) until they added McCarron (another NHL first rounder).

All that said, I'm coming around a bit to adding if the "flyer" talent pipeline is still flowing and the sellers are interested in some of the surplus young talent.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
8,232
8,137
Owen Sound says no awfully fast to that offer. It's way light. Lam isn't a DeGray type anyways so I don't think that would be of much interest personally. The rumored ask on McCue was an 08 first rounder on his own and Bedkowski is a late birth 06 who could very likely return as an OA. That would basically mean buying 1.5 seasons of McCue and 2.5 seasons on Bedkowski. McCue may move this deadline for the right offer but I don't see Owen Sound having interest in parting with Bedkowski.
I think it’s probably light as well. Maybe tack on a higher pick or two, or another body, or swap out Bedkowski for Petrovski.

But I’m not entertaining Headrick for McCue as the primaries in a deal. If that’s the ask, that’s fine. But if that’s the ask, I’m reverting back to using Headrick as the primary for a Pinelli.

But my “what if” was an exercise in trying to improve the team by targeting secondary additions where we wouldn’t have to use a Headrick to close a deal and wouldn’t have to use our 2nd and 3rd’s in the next draft.

In my view, McCue is a secondary addition. Petrovski may be as well but maybe a notch above. My including Bedkowski would have had the return for Barlow trending a year younger as Lam and MacNiel would be 3.5 year players.
 

bobber

Registered User
Jan 21, 2013
9,251
7,678
Kitchener Ontario
Personally I can't fathom giving up a first round pick like Headrick for anything less than a top ten player in the point stats. The issue is those players are all on teams that at the will take some sort of run this season. McCue is at slightly less than a point per game and is around the 50th spot.
The top players are at close to 70 points. Some players are being over valued because their names get tossed around IMO. GMs that give up a 1st rounder should get a top end skilled player that is guaranteed to make an impact going into the new year.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad