Confirmed with Link: Kravtsov requests trade

[NYR Viper]

Right but I am saying, if the goal was not to get stuck in on any long term winger contracts, then why sign Kreider to 7 years at 6.5?

I can't argue with that, all I can say is that portion of the mural is already painted so we have to just deal with it

 

[duhmetreE]

What's the deal with Barrett Hayton?

 

[leetch99]

What's interesting is that for two years we've been hearing how Drury was instrumental in beefing up the support network for players and helping integrate them into the fabric of the organization. Afterall, that was one of his qualifications and something we spent money recruiting and hiring people to do.

In all of the aggravation of the current situation, that's kind of become a forgotten piece of history.

He might end up having a shorter leash them many of us think .

 

[brakeyawself]

Well that's your answer right there, because they committed to Kreider.

It was always one or the other for the Rangers.

And yes it was more than salary, they specifically targeted Blais. He's someone they believe has the ability to be a 20 goal/40 point shit disturber who can play a top 9 role.

Ugh, did they say that about Blais or is that just an assumption on your part? Because I am not sure that he has that ability, but I guess we will see.

And I think most fans think they made a huge mistake resigning Kreider to that contract. Seriously, theres no reason he should cost more than Buch with the way Buch was performing relative to Kreider.

Whatever their actual plans are, it would have been well worth adjusting those plans to include Buch if they had any inkling Kravtsov wouldn't be here long term. And Laf, Kakko and probably Krav, would have ended up at similar salaries to Buch with likely far less production. And Blais' 1.5 is up this year, so he will get extended likely, much closer to Buch's contract, again without the equivalent production.

And frankly, even if Blais meets those expectations, he's not worth having over Buch at 5.8. There is no way. If they liked Blais that much, trade something else for him. Plain and simple.

I don't know why so many are actively trying to defend the Buch trade. It was rushed when it happened, Drury didn't use the 3 months he had to shop him around, and it was below value. Adding a 1st round pick instead of a 2nd would have made all the difference. As 1st round picks are worth THAT much more than 2nds. But either way, Blais isn't the type of player you sacrifice a player like Buch for. He was our best defensive forward last season and on pace for 70 points. We can only HOPE that Kakko turns into that. Which doesn't even seem likely at this point. And if Kakko does turn into that, I guarantee he will cost substantially more than Buch. I am not sure you are grasping the extent of the production the Blues got for such a low price. Extending Buch at 5.8 would have been a GOOD cap move for the future, because you just don't usually get two way production like that for a price like that.

Buch would still be our best RW right now and the way things are going, he would have still been our best RW in 3 years from now.

 

[brakeyawself]

I can't argue with that, all I can say is that portion of the mural is already painted so we have to just deal with it

Yup, unfortunately.

 

[Edge]

Ugh, did they say that about Blais or is that just an assumption on your part? Because I am not sure that he has that ability, but I guess we will see.

And I think most fans think they made a huge mistake resigning Kreider to that contract. Seriously, theres no reason he should cost more than Buch with the way Buch was performing relative to Kreider.

Whatever their actual plans are, it would have been well worth adjusting those plans to include Buch if they had any inkling Kravtsov wouldn't be here long term. And Laf, Kakko and probably Krav, would have ended up at similar salaries to Buch with likely far less production. And Blais' 1.5 is up this year, so he will get extended likely, much closer to Buch's contract, again without the equivalent production.

And frankly, even if Blais meets those expectations, he's not worth having over Buch at 5.8. There is no way. If they liked Blais that much, trade something else for him. Plain and simple.

I don't know why so many are actively trying to defend the Buch trade. It was rushed when it happened, Drury didn't use the 3 months he had to shop him around, and it was below value. Adding a 1st round pick instead of a 2nd would have made all the difference. As 1st round picks are worth THAT much more than 2nds. But either way, Blais isn't the type of player you sacrifice a player like Buch for. He was our best defensive forward last season and on pace for 70 points. We can only HOPE that Kakko turns into that. Which doesn't even seem likely at this point. And if Kakko does turn into that, I guarantee he will cost substantially more than Buch. I am not sure you are grasping the extent of the production the Blues got for such a low price. Extending Buch at 5.8 would have been a GOOD cap move for the future, because you just don't usually get two way production like that for a price like that.

Blais was a target for them. That was confirmed. I don't necessarily agree with them, but it was their view. I am of the mindset they didn't get enough value in the Buch trade. I've been very vocal about that.

I knew Buch was a goner. But we needed to get more from that deal. There was also at least one offer out there that I liked more.

Re-signing Kreider was something that I think some fans talked themselves into. I remember even when we did polling on here, you could see people start to panic and then the vote shifted. I think it actually ended in favor of re-signing him when all was said and done. Of course, you're probably going to see backtracking on that now. But with or without Lafreniere and the lottery, the correct decision was to move him.

As for adjusting their plans, this is where we start getting into concerns about how the Rangers have managed things. This is where the frustration about gambling on Kravtov, only to have it blow up is a legit gripe.

 

[rangers1314]

I knew Buch was a goner. But we needed to get more from that deal. There was also at least one offer out there that I liked more.

Any chance you'd spill the beans on that other offer?

 

[brakeyawself]

Blais was a target for them. That was confirmed. I don't necessarily agree with them, but it was their view. I am of the mindset they didn't get enough value in the Buch trade. I've been very vocal about that.

I knew Buch was a goner. But we needed to get more from that deal. There was also at least one offer out there that I liked more.

Re-signing Kreider was something that I think some fans talked themselves into. I remember even when we did polling on here, you could see people start to panic and then the vote shifted. I think it actually ended in favor of re-signing him when all was said and done. Of course, you're probably going to see backtracking on that now. But with or without Lafreniere and the lottery, the correct decision was to move him.

As for adjusting their plans, this is where we start getting into concerns about how the Rangers have managed things. This is where the frustration about gambling on Kravtov, only to have it blow up is a legit gripe.

I agree with you.

But I think Blais being a "target" for them is part of the problem. I mean sure, he can be a target, but he's simply not worth losing a guy like Buch for now matter how you swing it.

Like, forget the 2nd round pick, could we have gotten Blais for, I don't know, Tuomanen and Henricksson? or Gauthier and Tuomanen? Maybe less even? And teams should have numerous targets and work towards getting the best deal for them, not just targeting and settling on one player, who frankly isn't so unique or irreplaceable. To get that hyperfocused on one option IS part of the problem we are dealing with here in regard to Drury and the franchise. And seriously, did we need Reeves, Goodrow AND Blais? That's overkill as far as I am concerned.

And this is why I seriously think that Tom Wilson has become a mind virus for this club. They seem absolutely obsessed with gritty depth players at the expense of everything else. And when we all ready have a guy like Barron who is close, and a guy like Gauthier, adding two of Reeves, Goodrow and Blais would have been enough. And Buch was our best defensive forward, he was one of the only forwards that played with true grit. PLUS he has such a superior offensive game. It just makes no sense to me still. I was only ok with it because it seemed to me to mean that they were sticking with Kakko and Kravtsov, developing and blooding them into the NHL. But now, it's, well.. I guess getting redundant.

Anyway, I am just not very optimistic about this team after the Kravstov ordeal. It's just one more thing in a perpetual line of mishandled, mismanaged assets for this club. And I think one of the worst things a pro sports team can do is push the team prematurely as if they were real contenders when they are not. As far as I am concerned this was still a developmental year. And you don't risk your future in a developmental year just to make the playoffs, if this team even can make the playoffs, which is questionable. The fact that they don't realize this team is not ready and still in development is worrying in itself.

 

[smoneil]

Ugh, did they say that about Blais or is that just an assumption on your part? Because I am not sure that he has that ability, but I guess we will see.

And I think most fans think they made a huge mistake resigning Kreider to that contract. Seriously, theres no reason he should cost more than Buch with the way Buch was performing relative to Kreider.

Whatever their actual plans are, it would have been well worth adjusting those plans to include Buch if they had any inkling Kravtsov wouldn't be here long term. And Laf, Kakko and probably Krav, would have ended up at similar salaries to Buch with likely far less production. And Blais' 1.5 is up this year, so he will get extended likely, much closer to Buch's contract, again without the equivalent production.

And frankly, even if Blais meets those expectations, he's not worth having over Buch at 5.8. There is no way. If they liked Blais that much, trade something else for him. Plain and simple.

I don't know why so many are actively trying to defend the Buch trade. It was rushed when it happened, Drury didn't use the 3 months he had to shop him around, and it was below value. Adding a 1st round pick instead of a 2nd would have made all the difference. As 1st round picks are worth THAT much more than 2nds. But either way, Blais isn't the type of player you sacrifice a player like Buch for. He was our best defensive forward last season and on pace for 70 points. We can only HOPE that Kakko turns into that. Which doesn't even seem likely at this point. And if Kakko does turn into that, I guarantee he will cost substantially more than Buch. I am not sure you are grasping the extent of the production the Blues got for such a low price. Extending Buch at 5.8 would have been a GOOD cap move for the future, because you just don't usually get two way production like that for a price like that.

Buch would still be our best RW right now and the way things are going, he would have still been our best RW in 3 years from now.

I hated the Buch trade when it happened. He was one of my favorite players on the team. But there comes a point where you choose to support the team or an individual player, and Buch is no longer ON this team. So many of your points here are either looking at events with the benefit of hindsight, over-reactions, or hyperbole.

On Kreider's contract-- I think they should have traded him at the deadline and then, if they wanted him moving forward, signed him back that summer. But complaining about how he's making more than Buch? Buch's contract includes an RFA year and was signed in the middle of a flat cap situation. Kreider's contract was signed just before the world fell to pieces. Those numbers don't exist in a vacuum. Also, he was signed before we won the lottery for Laf, when our LW depth was Panarin, Kreider....and that's about it. Now we look at the roster and see Laf, Panarin, Kreider, with Cuylle and Othmann in the (no pun intended) wings, and think "why the hell did we sign Kreider for that?" But 3 of those 5 players weren't Rangers when that contract was signed, and there was EVERY indication that the team was going to go Center if they didn't win the Laf Lottery (a lotto win that was extraordinarily unlikely).

On Blais--We didn't JUST get Blais in return. We also got a 2nd round pick in what, according to every report, is supposed to be one of the deepest drafts in years for high end talent. I would have preferred the team sign Buch to his RFA arbitration award and then move him at the TDL for more, but there would have been risks there, too (injury, and then losing him for nothing). Frankly, Fox probably had more to do with losing Buch than Kreider did. Fox likely upped his next contract by AT LEAST 3 million thanks to his Norris year. The money was never going to work. I also don't see any way Blais gets even close to Buch's numbers. He's yet to play more than 40 games in a single season or score more than 15 points. Even if he DOES put up 20/25 goals this year, he's still going to get paid like a guy who needs to fully establish himself. If he gets any more than 3 or 3.5 on the high end, I'd be shocked.

I agree that Buch would be our best RW right now. If he would have been our best RW 3 years from now? That would mean that something went horribly wrong, in which case it wouldn't matter anyway.

To bring it back to the thread topic--I do think that the plan was always to have Kakko/Kravtsov as the top 6 RWs. I also don't see Kreider sticking at RW for long, and it seems clear that Kravtsov has fully burned his Rangers bridge.

Does Drury almost need to target a right wing in any potential Kravtsov trade? We don't seem to have any top six RWs either on the team or in the pipeline. I suppose we could, in the short term, move Chytil to the second line (either in the middle with Strome at RW or vice versa), but that doesn't do much for next year, when we likely lose Strome to the cap.

 

[brakeyawself]

Any chance you'd spill the beans on that other offer?

I think it's pretty simple. For our best defensive forward, a guy on pace for 70 points, who's only 26, MORE than Blais and a 2nd.

A 1st round pick and Blais at minimum. And there is a big difference between a 1st round pick and a 2nd.

Buch would still be our best RW currently and he'd likely still be our best RW in 3 years from now with the way things are going.

I don't believe Drury actually knows what he could have gotten for Buch because it genuinely doesn't seem like he spent enough time shopping him around. This last part obviously is just speculation.

But Buch at 5.8 per, which as an amazing price for a potential 70 point, two way forward. Not just a two way forward, our best defensive forward. Blaise and a 2nd just doesn't cut it.

 

[smoneil]

A 1st round pick and Blais at minimum. And there is a big difference between a 1st round pick and a 2nd.

Again, prefacing this by saying that I hated the trade, but I think in any other draft year, Buch would have gotten a first+. Teams seem to be too excited about the 2022 and 2023 draft classes to spend their firsts (I'd actually love to see the Rangers pick up more 2nd rounders for 2022--there will be some gems who drop that far). That was why I wanted them to sign Buch's RFA arbitration award and then see if they could snag a first off of some desperate team at the TDL. But I also don't blame the team for not taking that risk (if they know Buch doesn't fit into their future plans financially, and Buch gets hurt around the TDL, they we would have basically lost him for nothing).

 

[brakeyawself]

I hated the Buch trade when it happened. He was one of my favorite players on the team. But there comes a point where you choose to support the team or an individual player, and Buch is no longer ON this team. So many of your points here are either looking at events with the benefit of hindsight, over-reactions, or hyperbole.

On Kreider's contract-- I think they should have traded him at the deadline and then, if they wanted him moving forward, signed him back that summer. But complaining about how he's making more than Buch? Buch's contract includes an RFA year and was signed in the middle of a flat cap situation. Kreider's contract was signed just before the world fell to pieces. Those numbers don't exist in a vacuum. Also, he was signed before we won the lottery for Laf, when our LW depth was Panarin, Kreider....and that's about it. Now we look at the roster and see Laf, Panarin, Kreider, with Cuylle and Othmann in the (no pun intended) wings, and think "why the hell did we sign Kreider for that?" But 3 of those 5 players weren't Rangers when that contract was signed, and there was EVERY indication that the team was going to go Center if they didn't win the Laf Lottery (a lotto win that was extraordinarily unlikely).

On Blais--We didn't JUST get Blais in return. We also got a 2nd round pick in what, according to every report, is supposed to be one of the deepest drafts in years for high end talent. I would have preferred the team sign Buch to his RFA arbitration award and then move him at the TDL for more, but there would have been risks there, too (injury, and then losing him for nothing). Frankly, Fox probably had more to do with losing Buch than Kreider did. Fox likely upped his next contract by AT LEAST 3 million thanks to his Norris year. The money was never going to work. I also don't see any way Blais gets even close to Buch's numbers. He's yet to play more than 40 games in a single season or score more than 15 points. Even if he DOES put up 20/25 goals this year, he's still going to get paid like a guy who needs to fully establish himself. If he gets any more than 3 or 3.5 on the high end, I'd be shocked.

I agree that Buch would be our best RW right now. If he would have been our best RW 3 years from now? That would mean that something went horribly wrong, in which case it wouldn't matter anyway.

To bring it back to the thread topic--I do think that the plan was always to have Kakko/Kravtsov as the top 6 RWs. I also don't see Kreider sticking at RW for long, and it seems clear that Kravtsov has fully burned his Rangers bridge.

Does Drury almost need to target a right wing in any potential Kravtsov trade? We don't seem to have any top six RWs either on the team or in the pipeline. I suppose we could, in the short term, move Chytil to the second line (either in the middle with Strome at RW or vice versa), but that doesn't do much for next year, when we likely lose Strome to the cap.

Yea, but I am pointing out, that if this team knew they were going to move away from Kravtsov, moving Buch was about the dumbest thing they could have done. Which is why I do think this was a recent development.

And I don't care how deep a draft class is, a 2nd round nhl pick is just not that valuable.

The NHL Draft has a systemically low success rate. Meaning teams whiff WAY, WAY more than they succeed. And once you get beyond the 1st round, the success rates plummet substantially.

Success rates at picks 1-5 are the highest, but still significantly poor. And that gets even lower with about every 5 picks, until it just drops off a cliff after the 1st. So, a bird in hand is worth WAY WAY more than a 2nd.

At minimum, and this still would have been too low probably, Blais and a 1st. At minimum.

And sure, there are always risks. But he's a guy who was proving himself on the ice. And you just can't find 70 point, two way forwards anymore for 5.8 really, unless they are still on their entry deal. To lose a player like that, at a salary like that, for under their value is disappointing on so many levels.

I know WHY they did it, but I think they were completely wrong for doing it. And I think everything else Drury has done since, aside from signing Goodrow I guess, has been at best questionable and at worst completely misguided.

 

[brakeyawself]

Again, prefacing this by saying that I hated the trade, but I think in any other draft year, Buch would have gotten a first+. Teams seem to be too excited about the 2022 and 2023 draft classes to spend their firsts (I'd actually love to see the Rangers pick up more 2nd rounders for 2022--there will be some gems who drop that far). That was why I wanted them to sign Buch's RFA arbitration award and then see if they could snag a first off of some desperate team at the TDL. But I also don't blame the team for not taking that risk (if they know Buch doesn't fit into their future plans financially, and Buch gets hurt around the TDL, they we would have basically lost him for nothing).

I don't get that impression at all. This draft seems top heavy to me honestly. It's definitely going to be better than this past draft, but I am not sure it stands out like that. I mean, where are you getting this from ? Because I've mostly heard, almost the complete opposite. And it really doesn't matter how deep a draft is. 2nd round picks are just not worthwhile for a plausible 70 point 2 way player, with Blais or even a slightly better player.

I would have honestly rather traded into the 2021 2nd round to grab one of the guys like Pinelli that fell. I don't think guys fall that far next year as it won't be so chaotic and they'll be way more scouting done. The main difference between 2022 and 2021 are real top end players on the front end. Wright is probably the best prospect since McDavid and Matthews. After Wright, there's a pretty clear drop off.

But still, the top say 10-15 stand out. It's deep in that sense. But I don't think that depth really translates to the 2nd round so much. A lot of superstars up front. And I get why teams are excited about the draft, in regard to the 1st round. Beyond that is still a crapshoot.

 

[ohbaby]

As more time passes on this fiasco by management, the more we hear this has nothing to do with the waiver wire and Hajek. Repeating this clear falsehood, over and over doesn't make it anymore truthful. It is a fact Hajek was not exempt. It is a fact, Hajek at best, is our 10th defensemen on the depth chart. It is a fact he made the club and Vitali did not. It is a fact Gallant used Vitali's injury and missed time as an excuse in losing his spot. It is a fact Ryan Reaves suited up off his horrendous looking injury without any rehab or conditioning. It is a fact Gallant lied about a captain and that Hunt and Gauthier won a spot over Vitali. Any Rangers fan with a grade school education knows those two couldn't shine Vitali' shoes much less outplay him for a spot. Those two are fringe, borderline NHL players. Vitali in returning from Russia last year, suited up for every one of the last 20 games of the season, averaging better than 12 minutes a game. And mind you it was only a 56 game season. So it wasn't like garbage time.

The sooner we get rid of Gallant the better. Lying to us and his players before the season starts is no way to start coaching a new team. Starting your back up goalie for the season opener is icing on the cake. I'm sure Shesty is just thrilled from the Coach's vote of confidence.

Him saying,... "But our job is to put the 23 guys that we think are available right now to play the best hockey" that includes Tinordi, Hajek, Hunt, and Gauthier over Vitali Kravtsov is just laughable.

He needs to go. And you guys thought Quinn made some bonehead moves.

 

[brakeyawself]

As more time passes on this fiasco by management, the more we hear this has nothing to do with the waiver wire and Hajek. Repeating this clear falsehood, over and over doesn't make it anymore truthful. It is a fact Hajek was not exempt. It is a fact, Hajek at best, is our 10th defensemen on the depth chart. It is a fact he made the club and Vitali did not. It is a fact Gallant used Vitali's injury and missed time as an excuse in losing his spot. It is a fact Ryan Reaves suited up off his horrendous looking injury without any rehab or conditioning. It is a fact Gallant lied about a captain and that Hunt and Gauthier won a spot over Vitali. Any Rangers fan with a grade school education knows those two couldn't shine Vitali' shoes much less outplay him for a spot. Those two are fringe, borderline NHL players. Vitali in returning from Russia last year, suited up for every one of the last 20 games of the season, averaging better than 12 minutes a game.

The sooner we get rid of Gallant the better. Lying to us and his players before the season starts is no way to start coaching a new team. Starting your back up goalie for the season opener is icing on the cake.

Him saying,... "But our job is to put the 23 guys that we think are available right now to play the best hockey" that includes Tinordi, Hajek, Hunt, and Gauthier over Vitali Kravtsov is just laughable.

He needs to go. And you guys thought Quinn made some bonehead moves.

Now that I could all see being completely true.

Whether Hajek is an excuse or an actual reason, it's not a good reason lol.

They brought in Gallant to compete now, before the team and players are actually ready to compete. And it seems to me they are doing everything as if they think they can actually contend this year, which will only hurt the team more in the long run. This team is not ready to actually compete. And it won't be until at least next season. This is clearly still a developmental year, or at least SHOULD be.

Totally agree. Krav didn't have the best preseason, but there's a few guys on the roster who were way worse or just on par. Those 4 you mentioned AND Miller. And I don't think Laf was exactly better than Kravtsov in preseason either. But they'd never ever send Laf to the AHL. It's hypocrisy at its finest. There is a clear double standard here in regard to how the team is handling Krav and Jones and how they are treating their other players and I am not exactly sure why. If this were about meritocracy, Jones would have taken Miller's spot and Miller would be at Hartford right now. And absolutely, Kravtsov would be on the roster rather than any of Hunt, Tinordi, Hajek or Gauthier. And frankly, Barron might be there too.

And thank you, Gallant seems like an absolute liar and I think has been lying. Which is why I think there is a good chance someone, maybe Gallant, maybe Drury, mislead/deceived/lied to Kravtsov at some point in regard to him having a roster spot and then went back on that.

 

[nyr2k2]

lol fine. But bro, what are you talking about? Again, you are playing semantic games.

Here is the definition of renege.
Definition of renege
intransitive verb
1 : to go back on a promise or commitment
2 : revoke
3 obsolete : to make a denial

To go back on a promise or commitment. Which means the original guarantee was indeed deceitful or in other words a lie. It doesn't have to be a direct synonym. Again, you are just trying to rationalize it using semantics. Do you know what a "promise" or "commitment" is?

Bro, I explained why I thought it was important to differentiate between reneging on a commitment due to a change in circumstance and outright lying to an individual when you never had any intent of honoring your commitment. That's the difference I'm referring to, it's not semantics, it is an important distinction, and I can't be any more clear than that.

I don't have anything else to add.

 

[brakeyawself]

Bro, I explained why I thought it was important to differentiate between reneging on a commitment due to a change in circumstance and outright lying to an individual when you never had any intent of honoring your commitment. That's the difference I'm referring to, it's not semantics, it is an important distinction, and I can't be any more clear than that.

I don't have anything else to add.

And I think your point is irrelevant. It doesn't make it not deceitful, it doesn't excuse it and it doesn't mean it wasn't then a LIE. It's just an ad hoc rationalization and a poor one at that.

If there is a chance of circumstances changing, you don't make guarantees or promises. It's that simple. They would have never backed out their promises to Lundkvist or Laf. NEVER.

Good day.

 

[FireGerardGallant]

If this man waited a week hed be back with the big team
Unreal

 

[smoneil]

Yea, but I am pointing out, that if this team knew they were going to move away from Kravtsov, moving Buch was about the dumbest thing they could have done. Which is why I do think this was a recent development.

And I don't care how deep a draft class is, a 2nd round nhl pick is just not that valuable.

The NHL Draft has a systemically low success rate. Meaning teams whiff WAY, WAY more than they succeed. And once you get beyond the 1st round, the success rates plummet substantially.

Success rates at picks 1-5 are the highest, but still significantly poor. And that gets even lower with about every 5 picks, until it just drops off a cliff after the 1st. So, a bird in hand is worth WAY WAY more than a 2nd.

At minimum, and this still would have been too low probably, Blais and a 1st. At minimum.

And sure, there are always risks. But he's a guy who was proving himself on the ice. And you just can't find 70 point, two way forwards anymore for 5.8 really, unless they are still on their entry deal. To lose a player like that, at a salary like that, for under their value is disappointing on so many levels.

I know WHY they did it, but I think they were completely wrong for doing it. And I think everything else Drury has done since, aside from signing Goodrow I guess, has been at best questionable and at worst completely misguided.

The math just doesn't work, even at 5.8m. With Trouba, Panarin, Kreider, Zibanejad (or Eichel if they made that move), you already have about as many high-dollar veterans as you can handle. Now, as Fox, Laf, Kakko, Shesty and co get new contracts, that cap space is going to dry up VERY quickly. I don't think that the team wanted to be pinching pennies either, especially when Laf comes up for a new deal, as the team that has shown itself most willing to toss an offer sheet also happens to be the team that most desperately wanted Lafreniere (ie: Montreal).

I think 3rd rounders and below are basically lottery tickets, but there is usually talent to be found in the 2nd round. We've found a lot of solid middle six/second pair guys in round 2. Also, my point was that the odds of finding a difference maker would be higher in 2022 than in most years due to the reported depth of the class.

I haven't formed an opinion on Drury quite yet, but you can only get what other teams are willing to pay. As I said, if the best a team would offer was Blais and a 2nd, my choice would have been to get Buch on his arb award and re-visit the trade market at the deadline. But it didn't happen. The DID make the move. So now I'm more invested in hoping for the best re: Blais and looking to get a good player with that 2nd rounder. At some point, the mourning, or the "what could have been" has to give way to what is.

 

[Alluckks]

Not enough of this is being thrown at the whole damn scouting department across the pond that played a role in both this one and Lias tbh

 

[brakeyawself]

The math just doesn't work, even at 5.8m. With Trouba, Panarin, Kreider, Zibanejad (or Eichel if they made that move), you already have about as many high-dollar veterans as you can handle. Now, as Fox, Laf, Kakko, Shesty and co get new contracts, that cap space is going to dry up VERY quickly. I don't think that the team wanted to be pinching pennies either, especially when Laf comes up for a new deal, as the team that has shown itself most willing to toss an offer sheet also happens to be the team that most desperately wanted Lafreniere (ie: Montreal).

I think 3rd rounders and below are basically lottery tickets, but there is usually talent to be found in the 2nd round. We've found a lot of solid middle six/second pair guys in round 2. Also, my point was that the odds of finding a difference maker would be higher in 2022 than in most years due to the reported depth of the class.

I haven't formed an opinion on Drury quite yet, but you can only get what other teams are willing to pay. As I said, if the best a team would offer was Blais and a 2nd, my choice would have been to get Buch on his arb award and re-visit the trade market at the deadline. But it didn't happen. The DID make the move. So now I'm more invested in hoping for the best re: Blais and looking to get a good player with that 2nd rounder. At some point, the mourning, or the "what could have been" has to give way to what is.

BS.

And Trouba and Kreider have 2-3 more years of NMC. When their NMC's are up move them both.

And simply put, Buch at 5.8 >>>>>> Blais, Krav and Nemeth. OR if you are obsessed with Blais, then don't also sign Reeves AND Goodrow. Pick 2 and move on.

There are absolutely ways to make it work. And yea our cap situation is going to be tight. But to suggest it wouldn't or couldn't work is downright untrue.

I don't know exactly what calculations you did or did not do, but if you arrived at the "math doesn't work" reasoning, I would suggest reconsidering the entire premise for your calculation.

2nd and 3rd rounders are lottery tickets ? So basically like rolling a dice. Yea, why would you give up a proven commodity for a tiny chance to land an even near equivalent player. The majority of 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks will be busts. Even 1st rounders yea. Man, just look at the statistics. Volumes have been written about this. The NHL draft has a systemically low success rate. Draft picks outside of the top half of the first round really are worth substantially less than the 1st half of the 1st. And beyond the 1st, you might as well roll a dice. 2nd and 3rd round picks are nothing like lottery picks. Lottery picks are like lottery picks because they are the highest and safest picks.

And again, Drury accepted that deal way earlier than he needed to. Which suggests he wasn't really shopping Buch but liked the deal and aimed for it. And that IMO is a problem when the deal doesn't cover the actual value of the player you are giving up. Buch was still a RFA, which means he wasnt on the books until an extension. They had about 3 months to try to get a better deal.

And it's not just me. Many, many people thought, when the deal went down, that it HAD to be done because the Rangers were going to make a big move that week. That was the only rational explanation for rushing to accept that deal. And then a week passed, two weeks, three weeks, and no such deal happened.

 

[brians1128]

Blais was a target for them. That was confirmed. I don't necessarily agree with them, but it was their view. I am of the mindset they didn't get enough value in the Buch trade. I've been very vocal about that.

I knew Buch was a goner. But we needed to get more from that deal. There was also at least one offer out there that I liked more.

Re-signing Kreider was something that I think some fans talked themselves into. I remember even when we did polling on here, you could see people start to panic and then the vote shifted. I think it actually ended in favor of re-signing him when all was said and done. Of course, you're probably going to see backtracking on that now. But with or without Lafreniere and the lottery, the correct decision was to move him.

As for adjusting their plans, this is where we start getting into concerns about how the Rangers have managed things. This is where the frustration about gambling on Kravtov, only to have it blow up is a legit gripe.

Theres definitely a bit of playmaking on the fly. I dont think for one second that this rebuild was a proper rebuild. Panarin forcing his way here and winning the second overall accelerated the rebuild. Signing kreider bc of the accelerated build, then winning first overall and it being another left winger doesnt really fit the motive of a carefully constructed roster.

Now you cant commit to Buch bc you gave the contract to CK20, throws another monkey wrench.
I agree with the return being the issue here. I like Blais and what he brings, he really has grown on me, you change that second to a first and my opinion of the trade changes. I really like this draft and having 2 firsts for a team that could use 2 high end forwards (especially a draft that have forwards who project better at center).

Honestly I think the Rangers best option is to string this thing out to the trade deadline. We don't know what position this team is gonna be in. We could be buyers or sellers. Is he gonna use his opt out and go back to Russia to play?

This team needs to figure out a second line center for next season, a top 6 right winger, top 4 lefty defenseman for Trouba. Can be done in house, at the draft, via trade etc and I don't think it needs to be or can be solved right now. Id give them to next seasons trade deadline to address these 3 things

 

[New York RKY]

Not enough of this is being thrown at the whole damn scouting department across the pond that played a role in both this one and Lias tbh

As far as I’m aware most of them were canned when Drury took over so not sure what can be said.

 

[Thirty One]

Theres definitely a bit of playmaking on the fly. I dont think for one second that this rebuild was a proper rebuild. .

Which teams in history do you think executed proper rebuilds?

 

[smoneil]

I don't get that impression at all. This draft seems top heavy to me honestly. It's definitely going to be better than this past draft, but I am not sure it stands out like that. I mean, where are you getting this from ? Because I've mostly heard, almost the complete opposite. And it really doesn't matter how deep a draft is. 2nd round picks are just not worthwhile for a plausible 70 point 2 way player, with Blais or even a slightly better player.

I would have honestly rather traded into the 2021 2nd round to grab one of the guys like Pinelli that fell. I don't think guys fall that far next year as it won't be so chaotic and they'll be way more scouting done. The main difference between 2022 and 2021 are real top end players on the front end. Wright is probably the best prospect since McDavid and Matthews. After Wright, there's a pretty clear drop off.

But still, the top say 10-15 stand out. It's deep in that sense. But I don't think that depth really translates to the 2nd round so much. A lot of superstars up front. And I get why teams are excited about the draft, in regard to the 1st round. Beyond that is still a crapshoot.

Completely up front--I don't follow any of the prospect leagues or anything like that, so my view on the drafts upcoming is based mainly on what I've read from people who do follow those leagues. Everything I've read has said that 2022 doesn't have a generational elite kid at the top, but has "top 5" caliber guys into the middle of the first round, and first round depth through the first two. The "top heavy" bit that you mention is exactly what I've heard about the 2023 draft (that there are two or three guys in that class who each would have gone first overall in many of the previous drafts). Any draft is a bit of a crap shoot, but having multiple picks in rounds 1 and 2 can insulate a team from a mistake or two (for example, screwing up the Lias pick isn't QUITE as big a deal because we also got Chytil that year. Same thing for Kravtsov because of Miller and Lundkvist).

And finally, as much as I loved Buch, St. Louis didn't get a "70 point 2 way player" for Blais and a pick. They didn't get one for 5.8 million. Because that's not what Buch is. I know all about pace and point per game and what not, but Buch has always been streaky and the bottom line is that he has never scored even fifty points in a season yet. You aren't even just mourning the loss of a player, you are upset about losing a player 20+ points better than the one we had. Until he actually puts up 70, you just can't casually call him a 70 point player.