Confirmed with Link: NYR/OTT: Namestnikov ($750K retained) to Ottawa for 2021 4th Rnd pick and Nick Ebert

[Tawnos]

I don't think the Rangers "don't care" or anything about their lower level players; but I certainly think they have a history of valuing the wrong things in players, particularly bottom 6 players.

You mean the league has a history of this. Which is a bit of a chicken/egg conversation. Do they value the "wrong" things? Or have the "wrong" things proven out over time to be what successful teams have on their 4th line? It's a little bit of an unanswerable question. It's a perfectly valid standpoint to come down on either side, or in the middle of that question.

But part of my whole stance here is that the impact of the difference between the "right" things and the "wrong" things is vastly overstated when it comes to 4th liners.

 

[Raspewtin]

You mean the league has a history of this. Which is a bit of a chicken/egg conversation. Do they value the "wrong" things? Or have the "wrong" things proven out over time to be what successful teams have on their 4th line? It's a little bit of an unanswerable question. It's a perfectly valid standpoint to come down on either side, or in the middle of that question.

The league might have a history of it but there are more severe offenders than others; and as teams have built out analytics departments and the game has changed (I think it's both), the teams that still have this history are thinning out and are much more noticeable than before.

But part of my whole stance here is that the impact of the difference between the "right" things and the "wrong" things is vastly overstated when it comes to 4th liners.

They might play the least and therefore don't get enough time to have severe ES impacts but hockey games are short, fluid, and full of physics defying randomness. Even if you go from a 0WAR player (purely hypothetical) to a 0.2WAR player, why would you not do that? No individual skater has the impact that is required to pass the smell test for some people to "matter". Every little piece counts and sure the better you are up top, in theory, the less detail oriented you need to be about the bottom but you're trying to win a stanley cup in a league full of garbage artificial parity.

 

[True Blue]

Perhaps this allows Gorton to find someone like that.

I don't think he is looking to replace him. I think that the purpose was exactly what it was. Create line up flexibility and get cap breathing room.

 

[True Blue]

I don't think the Rangers "don't care" or anything about their lower level players; but I certainly think they have a history of valuing the wrong things in players, particularly bottom 6 players.

In this case, Gorton decided that line up flexibility, $3.25m in cap space and a 4th round pick is valued more than a $4m Nametsnikov playing on the 4th line. Call me crazy, but I think Gorton valued thins pretty much as he should have.

 

[Raspewtin]

In this case, Gorton decided that line up flexibility, $.325m in cap space and a 4th round pick is valued more than a $4m Nametsnikov playing on the 4th line. Call me crazy, but I think Gorton valued thins pretty much as he should have.

What is "line-up flexibility"?

Was Namestnikov existing the reason Lemieux wouldn't get moved up?

 

[True Blue]

What is "line-up flexibility"?

Was Namestnikov existing the reason Lemieux wouldn't get moved up?

Line up flexibility = the ability to move players and insert others.

If the thought was that Namestnikov should be kept and make all efforts to drive up his trade value, then no, Lemieux was not getting moved up. If you think that the smart course of action would be to simply let Namestnikov walk away at the end of the year with absolutely NOTHING in return, then yes, you could have played him on the 4th line for the rest of the year or simply scratched him. However, and please answer this, what exactly does that accomplish? At the end of the day, whether it is Namestnikov skating on the 4th line or McKegg or Haley, it makes not for one lick of difference as far a where the Rangers will finish.

You go on and on quoting how many points Namestnikov has. But you constantly choose to ignore context. How many of those points did he score while riding shotgun on Tampa's top line? Do you think that he has shown that he would get the same exact output if he played with whomever the center is on the Rangers 4th line and Brendan Smith as linemates? Because if you if you say now, then what is this debate really about? If his offensive output is mostly determined by his linemates, then as Tawnos pointed out, his point deferential would not be that much different than a McKegg.

What is seems you are coming onto is that you would rather have Namestnikov skate on the 4th line and then have him walk away at the end of the year for absolutely nothing. That seems to be what you are preaching.

 

[LORDE]

They might play the least and therefore don't get enough time to have severe ES impacts but hockey games are short, fluid, and full of physics defying randomness. Even if you go from a 0WAR player (purely hypothetical) to a 0.2WAR player, why would you not do that? No individual skater has the impact that is required to pass the smell test for some people to "matter". Every little piece counts and sure the better you are up top, in theory, the less detail oriented you need to be about the bottom but you're trying to win a stanley cup in a league full of garbage artificial parity.

Because you have to factor in the players salary in a cap league and in this case 4M for Namestnikov vs McKegg is a clear choice?

 

[Mac n Gs]

The league might have a history of it but there are more severe offenders than others; and as teams have built out analytics departments and the game has changed (I think it's both), the teams that still have this history are thinning out and are much more noticeable than before.



They might play the least and therefore don't get enough time to have severe ES impacts but hockey games are short, fluid, and full of physics defying randomness. Even if you go from a 0WAR player (purely hypothetical) to a 0.2WAR player, why would you not do that? No individual skater has the impact that is required to pass the smell test for some people to "matter". Every little piece counts and sure the better you are up top, in theory, the less detail oriented you need to be about the bottom but you're trying to win a stanley cup in a league full of garbage artificial parity.

I hate to be that guy, but EvolvingWild did have McKegg as a 0.1 WAR/0.4 GAR player last year, while Namestnikov was at -0.1 WAR/-0.5 GAR. I'm not sure how much is a byproduct of one being on a much better team, nor do I know what the error range are for these metrics, but it is kinda surprising to see McKegg grade out better.

The only benefit I see from this is it Quinn will most likely roll his 4th line much less frequently now to give more time to his top-9. He did this last year too where the 4th line only saw ~7-8 5v5 min/game. The only downside is if Lias is still stuck there.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I hate to be that guy, but EvolvingWild did have McKegg as a 0.1 WAR/0.4 GAR player last year, while Namestnikov was at -0.1 WAR/-0.5 GAR. I'm not sure how much is a byproduct of one being on a much better team, nor do I know what the error range are for these metrics, but it is kinda surprising to see McKegg grade out better.

The only benefit I see from this is it Quinn will most likely roll his 4th line much less frequently now to give more time to his top-9. He did this last year too where the 4th line only saw ~7-8 5v5 min/game. The only downside is if Lias is still stuck there.

That is a good point that we will probably see him use the 4th line less which is a positive for this team with the lack of depth.

 

[SA16]

The league might have a history of it but there are more severe offenders than others; and as teams have built out analytics departments and the game has changed (I think it's both), the teams that still have this history are thinning out and are much more noticeable than before.



They might play the least and therefore don't get enough time to have severe ES impacts but hockey games are short, fluid, and full of physics defying randomness. Even if you go from a 0WAR player (purely hypothetical) to a 0.2WAR player, why would you not do that? No individual skater has the impact that is required to pass the smell test for some people to "matter". Every little piece counts and sure the better you are up top, in theory, the less detail oriented you need to be about the bottom but you're trying to win a stanley cup in a league full of garbage artificial parity.

In theory you should do it but it's all subjective at that point as no WAR system is accurate to that degree. Even MLB ones are generally considered to have something like a tolerance of 0.5. So if you somehow factually knew one player was worth 0.2 WAR and another 0.0 you should do that but in reality if you see one player has 0.2 WAR and another 0.0 it basically gives you no discernible information.

 

[gravey9]

Pretty sure the Rangers had a deal with Vlad and his agent that they would try to move him towards the end of last season or in the offseason. But the market never materialized.

As I said in the PGT, While Vlad skated pretty well in OTT, the rest of his game lacked the kind of fortitude you need from a vet. I think the exact timing of this trade had to do with a growing realization that it might be a struggle to get full effort from him. And how that issue could trickle down to other vets facing a similar situation and impacting the kids.

That all being said, I don't love that Strome and Kreider, who are in a similar position with the team, are playing with Kakko. I'd love at least one other player on Kakko's line that's going to be here past March.

 

[Raspewtin]

In theory you should do it but it's all subjective at that point as no WAR system is accurate to that degree. Even MLB ones are generally considered to have something like a tolerance of 0.5. So if you somehow factually knew one player was worth 0.2 WAR and another 0.0 you should do that but in reality if you see one player has 0.2 WAR and another 0.0 it basically gives you no discernible information.

Yeah I understand that it was just an example.

I hate to be that guy, but EvolvingWild did have McKegg as a 0.1 WAR/0.4 GAR player last year, while Namestnikov was at -0.1 WAR/-0.5 GAR. I'm not sure how much is a byproduct of one being on a much better team, nor do I know what the error range are for these metrics, but it is kinda surprising to see McKegg grade out better.

The only benefit I see from this is it Quinn will most likely roll his 4th line much less frequently now to give more time to his top-9. He did this last year too where the 4th line only saw ~7-8 5v5 min/game. The only downside is if Lias is still stuck there.

Valid and I hope this is what happens.

If you're gonna make the 4th line a bunch of spare parts, play them like it.

Because you have to factor in the players salary in a cap league and in this case 4M for Namestnikov vs McKegg is a clear choice?

It comes off the books at the end of the year and has no long term implications.

The real value add for getting rid of Names would've been this past offseason. I understand there's a myriad of factors at play but unless we are making a big mid-season move for an expensive LHD or C (and I'm aware those opportunities can show up unannounced) this is a net loss. Not a big one, not one that's tanking the season probably, but one regardless.

 

[NYR Viper]

Was Boo Nieves that much worse than Namstnikov last year? Could he not just replace him?

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

I feel like we need to target an AHL D named Siskel

 

[Tawnos]

I hate to be that guy, but EvolvingWild did have McKegg as a 0.1 WAR/0.4 GAR player last year, while Namestnikov was at -0.1 WAR/-0.5 GAR. I'm not sure how much is a byproduct of one being on a much better team, nor do I know what the error range are for these metrics, but it is kinda surprising to see McKegg grade out better.

The only benefit I see from this is it Quinn will most likely roll his 4th line much less frequently now to give more time to his top-9. He did this last year too where the 4th line only saw ~7-8 5v5 min/game. The only downside is if Lias is still stuck there.

The only thing is that McKegg played less than half the minutes that Namestnikov did. It's possible that whatever McKegg was doing was just situational (or in analytics parlance, unsustainable)

I didn't really even bring it up in the discussion last night, but McKegg also had 1.56 p/60 at even strength compared to Namestnikov's 1.07. Objectively speaking, there's nothing objective about making a decision here.

 

[Tawnos]

The league might have a history of it but there are more severe offenders than others; and as teams have built out analytics departments and the game has changed (I think it's both), the teams that still have this history are thinning out and are much more noticeable than before.



They might play the least and therefore don't get enough time to have severe ES impacts but hockey games are short, fluid, and full of physics defying randomness. Even if you go from a 0WAR player (purely hypothetical) to a 0.2WAR player, why would you not do that? No individual skater has the impact that is required to pass the smell test for some people to "matter". Every little piece counts and sure the better you are up top, in theory, the less detail oriented you need to be about the bottom but you're trying to win a stanley cup in a league full of garbage artificial parity.

When it's so close... like in your hypothetical... you start taking in the myriad of the other factors that are out there and those start to mean more in relation to just on-ice impact. Some of them involve the salary cap and daily flexibility. Some of those factors are much more intangible... how the team responds to him on the bench, locker room related, confidence that a player will give everything he has to such a limited role, etc.

These all come into play when discussing a 4th line guy in particular. It's not simply a matter "this guy is a better player than that one"

 

[Luger]

So now we know Namestnikov had no trade value, while JT Miller was worth a first, a higher one than the Rangers got from the Bolts (Lundkvist).

So 2 average NHL players (Howden, Hajek) and an ok prospect (Henriksson) for Mcdonagh. The Bolts didn't win anything yet either. Not great for either team.

 

[Tawnos]

So now we know Namestnikov had no trade value, while JT Miller was worth a first, a higher one than the Rangers got from the Bolts (Lundkvist).

So 2 average NHL players (Howden, Hajek) and an ok prospect (Henriksson) for Mcdonagh. The Bolts didn't win anything yet either. Not great for either team.

If the Lightning were looking in 2017 to trade Namestnikov in a deal like the Miller one, they likely would've gotten a similar return to what they got from Vancouver.

It's only today when he's a bottom-6 player on a team looking to dump him for cap purposes that he was worth next to nothing.

 

[TheTakedown]

I never understood adding JT Miller to the MacD deal so we could get Namestnikov. Understand it less now.

I don't think Namestnikov needed to be here but I think he's proven that he can be useful when playing with talented players and I would have liked to have seen him on the 2nd line. I can't wait until we jettison Strome.

I don't think it was a "Miller for Names" swap...

It was more like:
2 NHL Quantities (one high end, one mid end)

In Exchange for:

2 NHL Prospects (one mid-to-high end, one low-to-mid end) and 1 NHL quantity (Low-to-mid end)
2 picks

 

[Tawnos]

I don't think it was a "Miller for Names" swap...

It was more like:
2 NHL Quantities (one high end, one mid end)

In Exchange for:

2 NHL Prospects (one mid-to-high end, one low-to-mid end) and 1 NHL quantity (Low-to-mid end)
2 picks

Or the return was

1 NHL quantity (low-to-mid end)
2 1st round picks
2 2nd round picks

 

[Thirty One]

In my opinion, the trade was:

Ryan McDonagh
J.T. Miller

for

Vladislav Namestnikov
Brett Howden
Libor Hajek
2018 1st round pick
2019 2nd round pick (conditional)

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

So now we know Namestnikov had no trade value, while JT Miller was worth a first, a higher one than the Rangers got from the Bolts (Lundkvist).

So 2 average NHL players (Howden, Hajek) and an ok prospect (Henriksson) for Mcdonagh. The Bolts didn't win anything yet either. Not great for either team.

I implore you to look at returns for other defensemen

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

In my opinion, the trade was:

Ryan McDonagh
J.T. Miller

for

Vladislav Namestnikov
Brett Howden
Libor Hajek
2018 1st round pick
2019 2nd round pick (conditional)

Big, if true

 

[Miamipuck]

More like this:

 

[Embryo]

Was so happy to see this, Namestnikov has done NOTHING in New York for the Rangers, he has been as invisible as anyone I've ever seen with his kind of hype. Matt Cullen-level bad. Great move by Gorton, we will not miss Namestnikov AT ALL!!! AT ALL!!!!!!