SA16
Sixstring
Neither Panarin not Trouba are forcing Kreider out. I'm pretty sure they wanted to trade him regardless.
Speculation: Roster Building LX: The Return of Cap(tain) Crunch aka LB Bus Stop Theme
- Thread starter BBKers
- Start date
- Status
Neither Panarin not Trouba are forcing Kreider out. I'm pretty sure they wanted to trade him regardless.
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
Yeah, I get that.
What I don't get is giving out questionable contracts anyway when we didn't want to give one to Kreider.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
If you think he disappears "most of the season" then your opinions on Kreider don't hold much value.
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,984
- 13,652
SA16
Sixstring
The history of long term contracts to non elite level forwards as a UFA is very bad. The history of long term deals to physical forwards is also poor. There are a lot of things working against him long term.
Also we don't even know what Kreider wants and I personally don't have a great idea of what he would want. 7x7? 7x8? 7x9?
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
SA16
Sixstring
I can't imagine long term contracts to non elite level defensemen fare any better.
Pretty sure the ones for 25 year olds would age better than the ones to 29 year olds.
I didn't want to trade for Trouba anyway. I had specifically said I didn't think it made sense to trade assets and then give out a market value type deal as well. Now one of the assets was a negative so that mitigates it some.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
SA16
Sixstring
I disagree with extending Kreider on any non-short term deal. People make fun of them now but Eriksson, Ladd, Lucic, Backes, Okposo (product of JT), and Brown (lesser extent) were all really good players. Almost all 2 pts/60 players with tremendous on ice impacts who were all physical (other than Eriksson). I find them to be a very comparable group for Kreider at the time. Maybe they didn't have his speed but of course they won't be an identical. Every single one of those guys turned into an absolute disaster other than Brown who decided to become good against after becoming a 4th liner for 5 years. I don't really see why I should expect Kreider to do something significantly different than them.
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
I'm pointing out the obvious problem with krieder. When he is on he is great but most of the time he is not. Your entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine.
You're complaining about giving a 25yo #2 defenseman money to lock him up long term throughout his entire prime of his career.
Krieder is going to be gone since he will want to cash in and I'll be happy to get a I love krieder tattoo if in 4 years of his 7y 7m aav he is worth that contract.
SA16
Sixstring
I'm not concerned with Kreider being on and off. I find that to be overblown and the case for pretty much everyone. I'm concerned with him breaking down quickly into the new deal based on the majority of deals to players of his caliber.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
Don't disagree with any of that.
It's just that the more I think about it, the more I'm nervous about the Trouba contract. And if we were gonna be stupid anyway, I'd rather be stupid with Kreider. That's all I'm saying.
I could be wrong, but right now, ideally, we would have done neither. That's my first choice.
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
You may find it be over blown but if I'm giving 7m aav to a player, even when he is off he better be noticeable and contributing in other ways. The deal of 7 years I have a problem with bc I fully believe and expect his game to break down by year 4 of that contract and will be the new "we need to buy him out" contract.
Bob Richards
Mr. Mojo Risin'
Love Kreider but I feel a lot better about Trouba at 32 years old than I do about Kreider at 35+
kinger8998
Registered User
here's the complexity of the shattenkirk situation:
A) i find it mightily hard to believe that he has no value around the league. even at full salary for a small return. even more so at 50% retained for a bigger (but still small return).
B) it's going to be real difficult for him to have a resurgence in NY because all 3 of trouba, deangelo anf fox would be in line to receive PP minutes before him. even if fox starts in minors while shatty plays 3rd pair mins with hajek, the units would likely be some combination of: panarin, chytil, zibanejad, trouba, deangelo, buchnevich, kakko, kravtsov, kreider, skjei. shatty would be in tough to have a true resurgence to signifigatntly bump up his trade value without 1st PP mins or any PP mins at all.
B) that situation is complicated by his 10-team no trade list. obviously i have no clue. disregarding his no trade list, teams with the ability/need for a RHD to play on one of their PP units & 2nd/3rd pair at 3.3M, i'd say possible suitors would be nashville, tampa bay, vancouver, edmonton, montreal, winnipeg, colorado, los angeles and ottawa
lets evaluate all of these options:
---------------------------------------------------------------
first - the teams that are out of the equation: edmonton, winnipeg, ottawa, vancouver, montreal, los angeles. i'm going to go out on a limb and say any team that is either A) in canada or B) rebuilding is a no-go for shatty.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
second - the team that makes sense, but with a catch:
tampa bay
positive: was interested in shattenkirk when he was being shopped at deadline from st louis, but he declined to sign a long-term deal there. now that he's signed and played at home with the ranger,s would tampa be on his no-trade list, or would he be alright with finishing final 2 years in tampa trying to win the cup?
negative: tampa still has point to sign, and even with callahan on LTIR, will be tight up against cap after doing so.
potential trade:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To TBL[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]jan rutta
louis domingue[/TD]
[TD]shatty @ 50%[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
tampa would be left with ~9.6M to sign erne and point...rangers would have yet another goalie when they don't need one. simple solution, place on waivers and he could be claimed, or head to minors and backup shestyorkin, or call up shest, trade georgiev, and let domingue play minors with huska
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
finally - the two teams that are viable options, with minimal concerns:
Nashville
positive: juts traded away subban, needs a better powerplay after struggling last season. has the cap space, as well as the means for a blockbuster deal, or a small deal.
negative: shatty would have to share second PP duties with ellis/josi, wouldn't be sole runner of powerplay
possible deal #1:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To NSH[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]santini[/TD][TD]shatty @ 50%
buff 3rd 2021[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
this seems ludacris, but rangers would have to sweeten pot because nashville can afford to bargain for it. rangers need to clear salary and nashville would know it
possible deal #2:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To NSH[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]tolvanen
turris @ 50%
granlund
weber
2020/2021 1st[/TD]
[TD]kreider
shattenkirk @ 50%
howden
fast
2021 3rd (BUF)
2020 3rd[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
this was difficult, it ends up being the rangers shedding 1M in salary, but they give up howden and 2 3rds in order to do so. lots of things to consider with both teams eneding to ake collateral deals/signings, so just look at the trade from both perspectives (first is nashville airchair, second is rangers):
NSH-NYR Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps nashvilles roster is very strong and deep. cap compliant with room for improvements at deadline too.
NYR-NSH Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps no buyouts for NYR, didn't want to take turris, but to shed a bad deal you must take one too. more term with turris, but i think he can rebound for 2-3 years if placed on a line with tolvanen and buch. obviously a deal closer to the 1st is more likely, but imagine the shock if a blockbuster like this happened...
colorado
positive: potential here for a blockbuster and a small deal.
negative: shatty would have to share 2nd PP duties with one of girard/makar
potential deal #1:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To COL[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]zadorov[/TD][TD]shatty @ 50% retained[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
rangers only clear 125K in cap space, but by other moves, they still can get cap compliant through other moves, avoiding buyouts.
potential deal #2:
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]once again, smaller deal is more likely but an overly optimistic rangers fan can try.
again, take a look at outcome of blockbuster for both clubs (col first, rangers second):
COL-NYR Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps colorado looks scary good in this. would be powerhouse if goaltending holds up
NYR-COL Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps rangers a bit young, but the guys get their ice time. have enough space to sign veteran stopgap if they falter out of gates. could have even help off on trading names
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anyways this took way too long, bears no fruit and is completely hypothetical. trade values are likely way off too lol. just figured theres ways to trade kreider and shattenkirk while as opposed to attaching smith to kreider and weighing him down too much. i dont think shattenkirk being attached in these ways would hurt value of deal too much. just want to avoid buyouts at all costs
A) i find it mightily hard to believe that he has no value around the league. even at full salary for a small return. even more so at 50% retained for a bigger (but still small return).
B) it's going to be real difficult for him to have a resurgence in NY because all 3 of trouba, deangelo anf fox would be in line to receive PP minutes before him. even if fox starts in minors while shatty plays 3rd pair mins with hajek, the units would likely be some combination of: panarin, chytil, zibanejad, trouba, deangelo, buchnevich, kakko, kravtsov, kreider, skjei. shatty would be in tough to have a true resurgence to signifigatntly bump up his trade value without 1st PP mins or any PP mins at all.
B) that situation is complicated by his 10-team no trade list. obviously i have no clue. disregarding his no trade list, teams with the ability/need for a RHD to play on one of their PP units & 2nd/3rd pair at 3.3M, i'd say possible suitors would be nashville, tampa bay, vancouver, edmonton, montreal, winnipeg, colorado, los angeles and ottawa
lets evaluate all of these options:
---------------------------------------------------------------
first - the teams that are out of the equation: edmonton, winnipeg, ottawa, vancouver, montreal, los angeles. i'm going to go out on a limb and say any team that is either A) in canada or B) rebuilding is a no-go for shatty.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
second - the team that makes sense, but with a catch:
tampa bay
positive: was interested in shattenkirk when he was being shopped at deadline from st louis, but he declined to sign a long-term deal there. now that he's signed and played at home with the ranger,s would tampa be on his no-trade list, or would he be alright with finishing final 2 years in tampa trying to win the cup?
negative: tampa still has point to sign, and even with callahan on LTIR, will be tight up against cap after doing so.
potential trade:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To TBL[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]jan rutta
louis domingue[/TD]
[TD]shatty @ 50%[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
tampa would be left with ~9.6M to sign erne and point...rangers would have yet another goalie when they don't need one. simple solution, place on waivers and he could be claimed, or head to minors and backup shestyorkin, or call up shest, trade georgiev, and let domingue play minors with huska
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
finally - the two teams that are viable options, with minimal concerns:
Nashville
positive: juts traded away subban, needs a better powerplay after struggling last season. has the cap space, as well as the means for a blockbuster deal, or a small deal.
negative: shatty would have to share second PP duties with ellis/josi, wouldn't be sole runner of powerplay
possible deal #1:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To NSH[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]santini[/TD][TD]shatty @ 50%
buff 3rd 2021[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
this seems ludacris, but rangers would have to sweeten pot because nashville can afford to bargain for it. rangers need to clear salary and nashville would know it
possible deal #2:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To NSH[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]tolvanen
turris @ 50%
granlund
weber
2020/2021 1st[/TD]
[TD]kreider
shattenkirk @ 50%
howden
fast
2021 3rd (BUF)
2020 3rd[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
this was difficult, it ends up being the rangers shedding 1M in salary, but they give up howden and 2 3rds in order to do so. lots of things to consider with both teams eneding to ake collateral deals/signings, so just look at the trade from both perspectives (first is nashville airchair, second is rangers):
NSH-NYR Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps nashvilles roster is very strong and deep. cap compliant with room for improvements at deadline too.
NYR-NSH Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps no buyouts for NYR, didn't want to take turris, but to shed a bad deal you must take one too. more term with turris, but i think he can rebound for 2-3 years if placed on a line with tolvanen and buch. obviously a deal closer to the 1st is more likely, but imagine the shock if a blockbuster like this happened...
colorado
positive: potential here for a blockbuster and a small deal.
negative: shatty would have to share 2nd PP duties with one of girard/makar
potential deal #1:
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]To NYR[/TD][TD]To COL[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]zadorov[/TD][TD]shatty @ 50% retained[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
rangers only clear 125K in cap space, but by other moves, they still can get cap compliant through other moves, avoiding buyouts.
potential deal #2:
| To NYR | To COL |
| zadorov jost 2020 1st or Kaut +2021 2nd | shatty @ 50% retained kreider 2020 3rd (DAL) 2021 3rd (BUF) |
again, take a look at outcome of blockbuster for both clubs (col first, rangers second):
COL-NYR Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps colorado looks scary good in this. would be powerhouse if goaltending holds up
NYR-COL Blockbuster - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps rangers a bit young, but the guys get their ice time. have enough space to sign veteran stopgap if they falter out of gates. could have even help off on trading names
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anyways this took way too long, bears no fruit and is completely hypothetical. trade values are likely way off too lol. just figured theres ways to trade kreider and shattenkirk while as opposed to attaching smith to kreider and weighing him down too much. i dont think shattenkirk being attached in these ways would hurt value of deal too much. just want to avoid buyouts at all costs
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
Why are you nervous about giving a 25yo #2 defenseman that contract that runs through his entire prime?
I was all in the camp of rebuilding the methodical way. I still want us to play hard and grow but be a lottery team and get a top 5 pick to get our franchise center. Continue to 2 more years of that which we continue to stockpile more assets and by year 3 with all the bad contracts gone. Be rocking and rolling to greatness. But we signed the breadman and got trouba so our rebuild has went in fast forward. So half the fans think we can contend while the other half me included thinks we are still rebuilding and after next season we will start being a competitive team
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
Haha, imagine someone other than me wanting me to represent their online presence.
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
He's really not a great player (he's a good player), it really wasn't a need, and we really couldn't afford it.
Barnaby
Registered User
All contracts come with risk, and I didn’t even want Panarin...I wasn’t crazy about Trouba either, but I see that as a bigger need and more difficult to fill position.
... but giving Kreider the 7 year deal he likely wants would be a lot more questionable.
Kreider is older, has likely peaked, and doesn’t have the upside of the other two... my guess is he’ll be in year 3-4 getting 40 points and be immovable. I doubt that’s the case with Panarin or Trouba. I certainly get wanting to play the long game though if you didn’t want any of the above, just don’t really get choosing to invest in Kreider instead.
Last edited:
kinger8998
Registered User
i thought i did half decent on the big trades, they are difficult to gauge. been gettign A LOT of heat from colorado fans on cap friendly lol, also some angry isles fans saying they make no sense. i mean they make a bit of sense to me, if any of you have questions feel to criticize and ask for an explanation. not like this would happen, juts tryinf to be creatve
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
A top pairing, two-way, physical, RH defenseman with size wasn’t a need? Are you kidding? It was literally THE need with our Lollipop Guild on the right side throughout the organization...
Damn it, I hate it when you transition into off-season @Machinehead.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
- Nov 2, 2011
- 7,967
- 8,338
Aside from age, I'd say the next best argument is that we have more impact Forwards ready to go and take Kreider's minutes than we do Defensemen.
- Status
