Larry Brooks: Rangers season at crossroads--already

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

How did the caps looks early last year in a new system... how did they finish?

They lost to a stone-age neanderthal team in the first round.

 

[OverTheCap]

No one was expecting the Leafs to be so bad that year. Boston probably thought they'd be picking 7th or later.

They were anticipating 6-8 range which isn't so shabby. Boston is really good at drafting and assessing talent anyway, so it was a shrewd move for them to trade Kessel (who was bound to be overpaid) for two first rounders and a second rounder even if they weren't guaranteed a top 5 pick. If the Rangers want a shot at drafting higher, that's one way to do it, but it's probably too risky and outside-the-box for them to even consider it.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

How did the caps looks early last year in a new system... how did they finish?

Where's this team's Ovechkin?

 

[Jabroni]

Where's this team's Ovechkin?

The closest thing to him? Concussed.

 

[aufheben]

Where's this team's Ovechkin?

Rick Na--ah ****...

 

[NickyFotiu]

We would have to lose enough games to draft Kessel at #4, develop him over 4 years and then trade him after 4 years for 2 lower draft picks (Seguin since traded) and Hamilton.

What if a Kessel type player is not available at #4?

What if any of those picks become busts?

Did any of those players really make the Bruins win a cup?

Anyway I'm all about winning so how do we plan to get the number 1 pick?

 

[The Gloaming]

They were anticipating 6-8 range which isn't so shabby. Boston is really good at drafting and assessing talent anyway, so it was a shrewd move for them to trade Kessel (who was bound to be overpaid) for two first rounders and a second rounder even if they weren't guaranteed a top 5 pick. If the Rangers want a shot at drafting higher, that's one way to do it, but it's probably too risky and outside-the-box for them to even consider it.

Aside from some good play in the Tampa series, Seguin didn't do much in their cup run. And now they traded him and some spare parts for Eriksson.

 

[LeetchisGod]

Aside from some good play in the Tampa series, Seguin didn't do much in their cup run. And now they traded him and some spare parts for Eriksson.

They also had seguin playing out of position because of bergeron and kreici. Now that he's back at center in Dallas, we'll see what he's made of.

 

[NickyFotiu]

They also had seguin playing out of position because of bergeron and kreici. Now that he's back at center in Dallas, we'll see what he's made of.

Bergeron is great but they didnt have to draft him up high. He was a 2nd round pick. I think Krecii was as well. Plus Marchand in the 3rd round.

 

[savebyrichter94]

We would have to lose enough games to draft Kessel at #4, develop him over 4 years and then trade him after 4 years for 2 lower draft picks (Seguin since traded) and Hamilton.

What if a Kessel type player is not available at #4?

What if any of those picks become busts?

Did any of those players really make the Bruins win a cup?

Anyway I'm all about winning so how do we plan to get the number 1 pick?

What if we keep doing what we've been doing? Isn't that also fair to ask? You basically want to play it safe out of fear of the unknown. History rewards those that take risks and those that are willing to pay the price to get to the ultimate goal. If losing for a few years does that then who cares? It's not about getting the number one pick it's about allowing the team to finish where it naturally should during a down period, sucking it up and making picks in positions that have greater odds of yielding the skill we lack on a yearly basis. Boston built through the draft, made a shrewd move in trading kessel and made a smart UFA signing in Chara.

 

[OverTheCap]

Aside from some good play in the Tampa series, Seguin didn't do much in their cup run. And now they traded him and some spare parts for Eriksson.

Boston still has Dougie Hamilton from the Kessel trade and Seguin is still a solid player in his own right even though he was traded.

Regardless, the general premise of my OP was how a team can go about trying to acquire high draft picks without tanking and not so much about Seguin specifically.

 

[NickyFotiu]

What if we keep doing what we've been doing? Isn't that also fair to ask? You basically want to play it safe out of fear of the unknown. History rewards those that take risks and those that are willing to pay the price to get to the ultimate goal. If losing for a few years does that then who cares? It's not about getting the number one pick it's about allowing the team to finish where it naturally should during a down period, sucking it up and making picks in positions that have greater odds of yielding the skill we lack on a yearly basis. Boston built through the draft, made a shrewd move in trading kessel and made a smart UFA signing in Chara.

Boston built through the draft, trades and FA just like all the other teams. What they did not do is lose on purpose or have extremely bad seasons enough to get a #1 overall pick to win. The Kessel trade was at best a small contributor to their cup. The guys they drafted in the 2nd round and 3rd round played a much bigger role.

Losing for a few years is no guarantee of winning. We lost for years. So have many other teams but lets do it your way and plan to lose. I asked you before how do you implement your plan to lose?

Do you trade our best players (Lundy, McD, Hags, Stepan, Staal, etc?)

Do you tell them team not to win?

You have 100% control of the franchise and you are now given permission to lose. So how do you implement your plan to lose for a few years?

 

[savebyrichter94]

Boston still has Dougie Hamilton from the Kessel trade and Seguin is still a solid player in his own right even though he was traded.

Regardless, the general premise of my OP was how a team can go about trying to acquire high draft picks without tanking and not so much about Seguin specifically.

Your premise was correct except the team and the fan base have to accept this and be willing to part with players that actually have value. Unfortunately most fans want to keep every homegrown player we draft, regardless of skill level so good luck convincing people that giving up a stepan type player is a way to help build this team

 

[savebyrichter94]

Boston built through the draft, trades and FA just like all the other teams. What they did not do is lose on purpose or have extremely bad seasons enough to get a #1 overall pick to win. The Kessel trade was at best a small contributor to their cup. The guys they drafted in the 2nd round and 3rd round played a much bigger role.

Losing for a few years is no guarantee of winning. We lost for years. So have many other teams but lets do it your way and plan to lose. I asked you before how do you implement your plan to lose?

Do you trade our best players (Lundy, McD, Hags, Stepan, Staal, etc?)

Do you tell them team not to win?

You have 100% control of the franchise and you are now given permission to lose. So how do you implement your plan to lose for a few years?

Again, I never said lose on purpose or that you need to have the #1 pick but just keep repeating it even though I keep refuting it. Yea those players were found in later rounds but not by us? How come? Why can other teams find these players and we can't?

What I did say was you let the kids play, make smart, cheap UFA signings and let that team finish were it naturally should given its talent level. Not keep propping the team up just so it's good enough to win a playoff round or two. When you accumulate assets then you can start making trades after you assess what you have and if need be you go out and get the one or two missing pieces through free agency! That way you have cost controlled talent and don't need to pay through the nose to get it !

I never said tell them to lose, you just let them play and let the chips fall where they may. If this season is a failure maybe we should trade some of our best players. Some of them are approaching 30 and haven't won anything yet. You can never keep everyone, some will have to go eventually, that's just reality. You have short windows to compete in sports, if that window closes you have to regroup and start the process over. Should we shell out monster long term contracts for Callahan, Girardi and Lundqvist just to keep winning a round or two? If they can't get it done, you ship em out and recoup assets. You can't handicap the team further by overpaying for diminishing returns.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Again, I never said lose on purpose or that you need to have the #1 pick but just keep repeating it even though I keep refuting it. Yea those players were found in later rounds but not by us? How come? Why can other teams find these players and we can't?

What I did say was you let the kids play, make smart, cheap UFA signings and let that team finish were it naturally should given its talent level. Not keep propping the team up just so it's good enough to win a playoff round or two. When you accumulate asserts then you can start making trades after you assess what you have and if need be you go out and get the one or two missing pieces through free agency! That way you have cost controlled talent and don't need to pay through the nose to get it !

I think we have found good players later on in the draft (Lundy, Stepan, Cally, Hags, Fast)

I'm sincerely not being critical of your plan. I'm just trying to nail down what it is. You said let the kids play but then imply you would trade the kids like Stepan that we have already drafted. How long does your plan take? Is Lundy a part of it? What place do we end up drafting in your plan? Do you keep the guys we already drafted?

 

[Championship*]

We would have to lose enough games to draft Kessel at #4, develop him over 4 years and then trade him after 4 years for 2 lower draft picks (Seguin since traded) and Hamilton.

What if a Kessel type player is not available at #4?

What if any of those picks become busts?

Did any of those players really make the Bruins win a cup?

Anyway I'm all about winning so how do we plan to get the number 1 pick?

What if your mother never met your father?
What if the sun doesn't come up tomorrow?
What if the Rangers get sold and moved to Atlanta?

And to answer your question, yes, Seguin and Horton (a byproduct of the Kessel Trade along with Gregory Campbell) helped them win the cup.

 

[NickyFotiu]

What if your mother never met your father?
What if the sun doesn't come up tomorrow?
What if the Rangers get sold and moved to Atlanta?

And to answer your question, yes, Seguin and Horton (a byproduct of the Kessel Trade along with Gregory Campbell) helped them win the cup.

Sounds like a lot of hypothetical dots starting around 2003 being connected and correlated to imply a causation of a master plan for the Bruins to win a cup.

I will ask again how do you get us to win a cup if you are named Rangers GM? Please be specific. Thanks.

 

[Championship*]

Sounds like a lot of hypothetical dots starting around 2003 being connected and correlated to imply a causation of a master plan for the Bruins to win a cup. So I will ask again how do you get us to win a cup if you know how. Please be specific. Thanks.

Actually, I'd like to hear your plan.

And the dots aren't hypothetical, it's a fact. Bad enough to draft Kessel, trade Kessel for 2 1sts, gives Boston the freedom to trade their own 1st in a deal for Horton/Campbell. Seguin, Campbell and Horton all help them to win a cup. Causation.

 

[Synergy27]

A quick question for those in the "suck and draft studs" camp, how many dynamic, game-changing, take the whole team on their back offensive players are there in the NHL?

 

[Championship*]

A quick question for those in the suck and draft studs camp, how many dynamic, game-changing, take the whole team on their back offensive players are there in the NHL?

Quickly off the top of my head:
Crosby
Malkin
Stamkos
Ovechkin
Tavares
Kane
Toews
Bergeron
E. Staal
Nash
Perry
Karlsson
Sedins
Hall
Giroux
Datsyuk
Neal
Zetterberg
and of course, Hertl

 

[Synergy27]

Quickly off the top of my head:
Crosby
Malkin
Stamkos
Ovechkin
Tavares
Kane
Toews
Bergeron
E. Staal
Nash
Perry
Karlsson
Sedins
Hall
Giroux
Datsyuk
Neal
Zetterberg
and of course, Hertl

So, assuming I don't critique your list at all, roughly half the teams in the league have a dynamic, game-changing threat. A couple lucky teams have several guys in that category. Why doesn't every team have at least one?

 

[LeetchisGod]

People aren't going to want to hear it but trading Lundqvist is a potential strategy for improving this team long term. Particularly if we could get a quality goaltending prospect, a high quality forward prospect and a first round pick in return. Play guys like kreider, miller, fasth and lindberg. Without Hank we are a lottery team and perhaps the ping pong balls bounce our way and we end up with reinhart. I would also love to get a first round pick for MDZ. What use is an offensive d-man who can't quarterback a powerplay and can't shoot? I would take my chances with three first round picks in the upcoming draft.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Actually, I'd like to hear your plan.

And the dots aren't hypothetical, it's a fact. Bad enough to draft Kessel, trade Kessel for 2 1sts, gives Boston the freedom to trade their own 1st in a deal for Horton/Campbell. Seguin, Campbell and Horton all help them to win a cup. Causation.

Seguin helped them win a cup? Yes. Caused them to win a cup? Not by a long shot. The 2nd round picks, the 3rd round picks, Tim Thomas in goal and Chara cause them to win a cup. Cambell and Horton had nothing to do with Kessel

My plan is the same plan every real GM has. We keep trying to improve our team every chance we get via the draft, trades and FA. Not pretend that we can plan to lose and be guaranteed that we will luck out in to great players for sure and the time to develop them all in to a champion team.

I told you my plan but you seem reluctant to tell us your plan to lose. How are you going to do it? How long will it take? What will you do with all the guys we already drafted and Lundy?

 

[savebyrichter94]

I think we have found good players later on in the draft (Lundy, Stepan, Cally, Hags, Fast)

I'm sincerely not being critical of your plan. I'm just trying to nail down what it is. You said let the kids play but then imply you would trade the kids like Stepan that we have already drafted. How long does your plan take? Is Lundy a part of it? What place do we end up drafting in your plan? Do you keep the guys we already drafted?

I never said to trade Stepan, I was talking about the older core players that are soon to be UFA and maybe some of our mid level players/prospects. Go back and read my post, I must have edited it after you read it so I think you missed the last paragraph of it. How do I know where we end up drafting? That's the beauty of sports, you never know. Maybe a team of younger, hungrier players led by new leadership like Stepan and MCD succeeds more than this team or maybe they don't and we end up picking in the top 10'a few times, it's better then getting to the dance but never being good enough to win. Yea, it's a risk to take but risks need to be taken. Playing it safe only lands you with a safe team made up of safe players that while good are never going to match up against other teams legit, top line talent. The only way to get that talent is through the draft and trades. The higher you pick and the more times you do so increases your odds of finding assets you either keep or use as trade bait for more talent and picks! You also, like Boston, have to find players in later rounds. We have found some but not any that are on a Bergeron, Kreci or even Lucic level. Step, Hags and Cally are good players but they don't change a game the way those guys do! Hank was our one and only true steal in a later round.

 

[Championship*]

People aren't going to want to hear it but trading Lundqvist is a potential strategy for improving this team long term. Particularly if we could get a quality goaltending prospect, a high quality forward prospect and a first round pick in return.

I don't like it, but I can't say I disagree with it.

I've said before and I'll say it again. Lundqvist is one of the greatest Rangers of all time, but he's the reason the Rangers have been Mediocre and not horrid.