Draft R4 #106: Rangers select LW Kalle Väisänen

[Amazing Kreiderman]

 

[bobbop]

Lol.

I am a history buff and you made me think of this.

Why Arkansas Is Never Pronounced 'Ar-Kansas'

might be of interest to no one but I wonder about these things and tend to look them up.

Well if you live in Wichita, Kansas (I did) the river that runs through town is pronounced the AR-Kansas

 

[Casper The Soy Ghost]

Yes, as stated Suomi is also a surname. Not super common, but still. The funnier one is Reijo Ruotsalainen (played for the Rangers 81-86), his last name literally translates to "Swede".

Regarding funny names and their translations. - Something that is way more fun, Subban names literally translates to ''The bitch'' in swedish. Such a suiting name for him.

 

[Larrybiv]

Anyway, I think Vaisanen is a sneaky good pick. Could be a real bruising bottom 6 player in the long run. And this is why you don't trade top 6 forwards like Buch for a player like Blais. Because players like that are readily available in most drafts round 2-7, or through free agency.

I liked Buch too, but its been said time and time again. Drury wanted the cap space and wouldnt have been able to get the guys he wanted come deadline, along with...... it's really not fair to evaluate as Blais WAS someone needed for the PO's, just didn't work out that way.
Even with Buch, the Blues got eliminated BEFORE we did. So who really won the deal?

 

[brakeyawself]

I liked Buch too, but its been said time and time again. Drury wanted the cap space and wouldnt have been able to get the guys he wanted come deadline, along with...... it's really not fair to evaluate as Blais WAS someone needed for the PO's, just didn't work out that way.
Even with Buch, the Blues got eliminated BEFORE we did. So who really won the deal?

Blues "won" the deal and it's not even close. None of what you stated changes that, none of what you stated makes it a good deal. People keep repeating, time and time again, that Drury wanted cap space, because they're trying to make excuses about a bad deal.

Drury could have still traded Buch. Just for a better deal. It's not like there is only two options, bad deal or keep. And he made the trade very fast when there was plenty of time before the season was to start. And I would say a majority of people were either a) shocked the deal came so fast or b) shocked another move didn't follow, as most people who thought they understood what he was doing and why the deal happened so fast, assumed it was because another deal was coming.

The Blues going out in the playoffs has zip to do with Buch. And us making it to the semis had zip to do with Blais. And it's a team game. So them getting eliminated BEFORE we did, is totally irrelevant. And even if Blais did play, it would still be irrelevant. It also doesn't mean we would have gone out earlier if we had Buch, arguably the complete opposite if anything because we had Vatrano as our first line RW. I've never heard an argument like that. They have Buch and went out earlier therefor we didn't need Buch and also would have gone out earlier just because we had Buch? That seems to be the rational behind that statement,. And that's absurd.

We wouldn't have had to add Vatrano if we had Buch. Heck, we probably wouldn't have had to add Vatrano if we had Kravtsov. But that's another story. Vatrano was terrific for us. But Buch is a far better player and he easily would have been our top RW all season. And we would have been a better team for it.

There isn't a whole lot of weight to your argument. As far as cap space in the future, yea, we had an issue and we still have an issue without Buch. But all that means is Drury needs to manage the cap space. It doesn't mean Buch specifically had to be traded as he could have tried to make cap space another route. And it has nothing to do with the return we got on Buch if we were trading him. So again, completely irrelevant.

Another year without Kakko making a jump in his offensive production, all though he was good in the playoffs. But that doesn't mean he is going to be good in the regular season all of a sudden. Vatrano is Vatrano, not the kind of player you want in your top 6 year in year out if you want to compete. Kravtsov might actually end up playing for us now because Drury is going to need a cheap RW. So All the drama and bad blood from last year, not having him when we needed him most of the year, all for naught. And now we might have to bring back a player that felt completely offended by the GM. As things stand, going into next season, Buch would still be our clear number 1 RW and our best RW without a doubt. Now we will have more cap space if we want, not resigning a couple of guys or whatever, but it will still be incredibly tight. So he's going to have to shift funds around either way.

But again, none of that has anything to do with the incredibly lackluster return we got for our best RW and a player we badly needed. So I stand by everything I stated. Getting a 1st round pick in that deal would have made all the difference in the world. And it's far closer to what Buch is worth. All though, I think he's actually worth even more than that.

 

[Baldbassa51]

Drury has done a fantastic job since taking over, not sure how you don't see that. Isn't he a finalist for GM of the year? There was no way to fit Buchnevich under the salary cap going forward and also extend others (Kakko, Lafreniere, Miller, Schneider) in the future. I was not in the room, but I'm sure the Blues deal was the best offer on the table. Do you really think Drury passed up better offers? A lot easier to second guess moves from your couch. If Blais had played a full season, not sure you would be feeling the same. Also Buchnevich, Kakko and Kravtzov are all similar skill set. Team cannot win with all high skill players and no grinders. Don't forget Buchnevich taking bone headed penalties at the worst times. Looking to pass on 2-1 or 3-2 breakaways when he had open shots. Or when he did finally shoot, missing the net and allowing the other team to go down and have a great scoring opportunity. He was a good player, but the $ needed to be spent elsewhere on the roster. Personally I'm looking forward to seeing more ice time for the Kids line going forward. Could not happen with Buchnevich still on the roster.

 

[Larrybiv]

Blues "won" the deal and it's not even close. None of what you stated changes that, none of what you stated makes it a good deal. People keep repeating, time and time again, that Drury wanted cap space, because they're trying to make excuses about a bad deal.

Drury could have still traded Buch. Just for a better deal. It's not like there is only two options, bad deal or keep. And he made the trade very fast when there was plenty of time before the season was to start. And I would say a majority of people were either a) shocked the deal came so fast or b) shocked another move didn't follow, as most people who thought they understood what he was doing and why the deal happened so fast, assumed it was because another deal was coming.

The Blues going out in the playoffs has zip to do with Buch. And us making it to the semis had zip to do with Blais. And it's a team game. So them getting eliminated BEFORE we did, is totally irrelevant. And even if Blais did play, it would still be irrelevant. It also doesn't mean we would have gone out earlier if we had Buch, arguably the complete opposite if anything because we had Vatrano as our first line RW. I've never heard an argument like that. They have Buch and went out earlier therefor we didn't need Buch and also would have gone out earlier just because we had Buch? That seems to be the rational behind that statement,. And that's absurd.

We wouldn't have had to add Vatrano if we had Buch. Heck, we probably wouldn't have had to add Vatrano if we had Kravtsov. But that's another story. Vatrano was terrific for us. But Buch is a far better player and he easily would have been our top RW all season. And we would have been a better team for it.

There isn't a whole lot of weight to your argument. As far as cap space in the future, yea, we had an issue and we still have an issue without Buch. But all that means is Drury needs to manage the cap space. It doesn't mean Buch specifically had to be traded as he could have tried to make cap space another route. And it has nothing to do with the return we got on Buch if we were trading him. So again, completely irrelevant.

Another year without Kakko making a jump in his offensive production, all though he was good in the playoffs. But that doesn't mean he is going to be good in the regular season all of a sudden. Vatrano is Vatrano, not the kind of player you want in your top 6 year in year out if you want to compete. Kravtsov might actually end up playing for us now because Drury is going to need a cheap RW. So All the drama and bad blood from last year, not having him when we needed him most of the year, all for naught. And now we might have to bring back a player that felt completely offended by the GM. As things stand, going into next season, Buch would still be our clear number 1 RW and our best RW without a doubt. Now we will have more cap space if we want, not resigning a couple of guys or whatever, but it will still be incredibly tight. So he's going to have to shift funds around either way.

But again, none of that has anything to do with the incredibly lackluster return we got for our best RW and a player we badly needed. So I stand by everything I stated. Getting a 1st round pick in that deal would have made all the difference in the world. And it's far closer to what Buch is worth. All though, I think he's actually worth even more than that.

Okay, okay, okay......you made your point. Felt like I was betting a tongue lashing from my Father. (R.I.P)
Bottom line, yes they won that deal. Drury didnt have to make that move, and wondering if something else fell through.
Regardless of the future cap issues and whether or not Buch would fit into it, Drury DID NOT deal from a position of strength, (his talent) and should have found a different way, or gotten a pick, I agree. OK? Feel better?

 

[bobbop]

Another draft pick under contract

 

[RangersFan1994]

Viktor Stalberg upside??? Good comparison?

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Curious if he spends next year in Finland.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Curious if he spends next year in Finland.

He isn't AHL eligible based on the IIHF-NHL transfer agreement.

If TPS refuses the offer to keep him, then it changes and he could report to Hartford.

FWIW:

This same rule prevented Karl Henriksson in 2021-22, Adam Edström and Adam Sýkora in 2022-23 from playing for the Wolf Pack prior to their EU season ending.

 

[McRanger92]

Can he skate?

 

[RangersFan1994]

He isn't AHL eligible based on the IIHF-NHL transfer agreement.

If TPS refuses the offer to keep him, then it changes and he could report to Hartford.

FWIW:

This same rule prevented Karl Henriksson in 2021-22, Adam Edström and Adam Sýkora in 2022-23 from playing for the Wolf Pack prior to their EU season ending.

So why did they sign him early if he can’t play for Hartford?

 

[cwede]

So why did they sign him early if he can’t play for Hartford?

happens all the time - such as
BMB is signed but played OHL this season
Henriksson, Sykora, Edstrom were all signed prior to their most recent seasons back in Europe

 

[GAGLine]

So why did they sign him early if he can’t play for Hartford?

There's no benefit to waiting. If the player wants to sign and the Rangers want to sign him, there's no reason not to get it done.

With him signed, we get a chance to see him in camp next year, to see where his game is at and what he needs to work on. If he isn't ready and TPS isn't willing to release him, then we will loan him back to TPS for the year.

From the player's perspective, he just got a check for 85k (signing bonus).

 

[NYR Viper]

Can he skate?

Yes he skates well. Similar skating to Edstrom and Chmelar. Big guy who skates well (not just for his size)

 

[UnSandvich]

I remember being pretty impressed with his play at the WJC a couple years ago

 

[Hunter Gathers]

He isn't AHL eligible based on the IIHF-NHL transfer agreement.

If TPS refuses the offer to keep him, then it changes and he could report to Hartford.

FWIW:

This same rule prevented Karl Henriksson in 2021-22, Adam Edström and Adam Sýkora in 2022-23 from playing for the Wolf Pack prior to their EU season ending.

I think it'd be good for him to get another year in Finland regardless if possible.

I wasn't referring to this year, but next year. I forget if he can play in the AHL next year or not. I'd prefer to loan him back to TPS next year even if he's AHL-eligible.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I think it'd be good for him to get another year in Finland regardless if possible.

I wasn't referring to this year, but next year. I forget if he can play in the AHL next year or not. I'd prefer to loan him back to TPS next year even if he's AHL-eligible.

The transfer agreement only affects the first year of a player's ELC.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

The transfer agreement only affects the first year of a player's ELC.

Thanks, AK.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Thanks, AK.

Also worth noting that in 2022, the IIHF transfer agreement was updated. The biggest change is that the Swiss leagues are now subject to the transfer agreement. In terms of the parameters for the situation that applies to Väisänen here, the age is raised from 22 to 24 (section 4.1 b)

Anyone drafted in 2022 or later is subject to the age 24 regulation.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Also worth noting that in 2022, the IIHF transfer agreement was updated. The biggest change is that the Swiss leagues are now subject to the transfer agreement. In terms of the parameters for the situation that applies to Väisänen here, the age is raised from 22 to 24 (section 4.1 b)

Anyone drafted in 2022 or later is subject to the age 24 regulation.

View attachment 845604

So, essentially, THIS year counts as "during the first year of [his] NHL contract[]?"

I think that's where I am confused the most.

 

[RangersFan1994]

Can he play for Hartford before the playoffs start to get a few games in before regular season ends? I know he cant play in the playoffs.

 

[E-Train]

delete

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Can he play for Hartford before the playoffs start to get a few games in before regular season ends? I know he cant play in the playoffs.

He can join the Wolf Pack on a PTO this season because his season in Finland has concluded.

So, essentially, THIS year counts as "during the first year of [his] NHL contract[]?"

I think that's where I am confused the most.

The ELC starts on July 1st. So 2024-25 is the first year of his ELC. He is AHL eligible in 2025-26, unless TPS releases him. Then he'll be AHL eligible for 2024-25.