Speculation: Roster Building LX: The Return of Cap(tain) Crunch aka LB Bus Stop Theme

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I suppose that makes sense, but you're asking a lot for young players to drive play like Kreider does.

I don’t think it’s asking that much of a guy like Kakko to not just replace, but improve on Kreider’s impact. I mean Kakko is basically Kreider on steroids minus the straight line speed. He’s going to make a dominant Kreider shift look like a joke in comparison.

Not to disparage Kreider, I love him and hate that, logistically, we have to trade him. But I would take Panarin + Trouba over Panarin + Kreider all day moving forward from strictly a team building standpoint.

 

[bobbop]

so which poster would be best for this job?

I’d hire the Devils guy/gal. Their Twitter feed is pretty snappy.

 

[BBKers]

Chris Kreider has been a very good soldier for the organization. A remarkably good number 20 pick. But - alas - his justifiable monetary needs and likely inevitable demise will mean he fits in better with a ”win now team” that wants to go for it right now - rather than signing 7x7 with us. We have gone down that road rewarding our good - yet not elite - homegrown talent with some extremely “nice”, big long-term contract money. Nuff said here.

Regarding destinations - I always thought Toronto was a good fit, but also San Jose, Nashville, Tampa and Boston all first come to mind. Winnipeg, Vegas and St Louis too. Some of these teams might not be able to squeeze him in now, but come TDL his value and the amount of suitors (add all PO contenders - especially if we retain $) should rise significantly. In reality we could get a bonanza reward with an auction at 50%.

Buyout Smith and make another shrewd roster move now to get cap compliant without getting too butt hurt. Wait and capitalize on new opportunities as there will be plenty further down the road as the league will feel the real cap crunch when the RFA dust settles and (lots of) money needs to be shed. One cannot win every deal. Looking ahead twds the bigger picture - we are still in pretty good shape.

 

[Alluckks]

Exactly.

I think we're in for a rude awakening seeing this team without Kreider. They were halfway representative the first half of the year and the tank really got into gear when he ran into injury trouble. We're probably looking at something similar this year.

That would be fine if we were still doing the whole "we just started a rebuild" thing. Now this team is expensive. The last thing you want is to be expensive and laughably bad. That's how you end up in a bad transition period.

The team has put itself in a position where the standard of hockey has to start improving. Less Kreider makes our hockey worse. This is well documented.

I get that, and mostly agree. I think you were just getting away from the point you wanted to make when you chose to draw direct comparisons to Trouba and his contract. Or at least it distracted from it. If we re-signed Kreider you’ll hear no qualms from me, at least for years and even then that is speculation.

 

[Bluto]

If this team makes the playoffs and the young guys are key contributing factors... this will be a dangerous team.

 

[NYR Viper]

At the beginning g of the offseason if I was to tell you Gorton traded:

To NYR:
Panarin for 7 years at 11.6m
Trouba for 7 years at 8m
COL 1st ‘20
Travis Jost
Brendan Smith buyout

To COL:
Chris Kreider

To WPG:
20th overall
Neil Pionk

Would no one else be doing backflips?

Gorton is employing a similar strategy to what this organization has done before. He’s leveraged his ability to draw prime UFA’s while back-filling his organizational depth by moving 1 or 2 pieces out. They did the same thing with Gomez and Gaborik, obviously with slightly varying other circumstances but this method is one we’ve seen before. And this also began at the deadline where the team knew approximately what Hayes and Zuccarello would want and were able to move them both for futures.

 

[eco's bones]

I don't think it is a win now kind of thing. I think it is a cognitive choice for seizing a transition period opportunity. I said it at the start of this thread, but plenty of teams that rebuild fall flat on their face because they fail to transition properly. I know that this is not the perfect opportune timing that some wanted, but our front office made the call for these moves. And we haven't even seen the end result of the dominos now that these 'transition' moves are in place.

Sometimes I think people 'fret' over timing too much. What happened with Fox, Trouba and Panarin is that the Rangers saw an opportunity that if they missed might not come along again in a long time. In Trouba's case--he's a player only a couple years older than Pionk and unless Ville Heinola becomes a legit 1st pairing D this trade is a steal. As for Panarin--timing says we should have waited two years and then seriously re-entered the UFA market--problem was in two years there won't be a player like Panarin around but the OTOH the timing of getting Panarin should be great for the progression of Kakko or Kravtsov or both. When great opportunities come along smart GM's take advantage of them.

 

[BBKers]

At the beginning g of the offseason if I was to tell you Gorton traded:

To NYR:
Panarin for 7 years at 11.6m
Trouba for 7 years at 8m
COL 1st ‘20
Travis Jost
Brendan Smith buyout

To COL:
Chris Kreider

To WPG:
20th overall
Neil Pionk

Would no one else be doing backflips?

Gorton is employing a similar strategy to what this organization has done before. He’s leveraged his ability to draw prime UFA’s while back-filling his organizational depth by moving 1 or 2 pieces out. They did the same thing with Gomez and Gaborik, obviously with slightly varying other circumstances but this method is one we’ve seen before. And this also began at the deadline where the team knew approximately what Hayes and Zuccarello would want and were able to move them both for futures.

So Colorados 1st and Jost for Kreider eh?

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Panarin also takes most of the spot light away from these young high level forwards coming up in Kravstov and Kaako (to a lesser extent Chytil). They wont be relied on as much in their first couple of seasons. This should help their development an lessen any potential roadblocks.

 

[Wind Waker]

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:

To NYR	To COL
zadorov jost 2020 1st or Kaut +2021 2nd	shatty @ 50% retained kreider 2020 3rd (DAL) 2021 3rd (BUF)

[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

did you just spell ludicrous as ludacris

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

@Machinehead, to be clear, the situation with Kreider is ENTIRELY about term, AAV, and age. I love him as both a player and a Ranger, and were he willing to take the Shattenkirk contract, I’d gladly welcome him back. Then, you slot him in on the left side in your top 6 along with Panarin, give the right side to Kakko and Kravtsov, and deal Buch (whom I also love) for a haul, hopefully including a prime young center candidate. And if Kreider is still playing well when the deal is up, then we can talk about another 3-year deal thereafter.

But given the history of players of his ilk becoming a Lucic/Neal-like anchor, you simply can’t sign him to a long term deal. And given that same risk, it is incumbent on Chris to get that deal both for his and his family’s sake.

 

[offdacrossbar]

bottom line, and different from before when CK was one of our best players, he just isnt that guy anymore. this team is younger, more talented and needs to find value in long term deals.

if we could live without kevin hayes, we can live without CK for all the same reasons.

his time has come and gone. great home grown ranger.

we cannot afford that deal for 50 points. he must be dealt.

 

[RangerBoy]

Dave Maloney is another Kreider guy like Brooks.

Let us focus on what Kreider does well instead of nit picking his game.

Only problem is Dave does that with other players.

All of these guys have favorite players. They all like Kreider personally. They don't want to see him go. They have known him for a long time. Kreider has been here since 2012.

Maloney was also asked about the Rangers summer moves. That part wasn't posted on twitter. He said he hopes the Rangers didn't get ahead of themselves with signing Panarin. He doesn't believe the Rangers are a playoff team. He said Columbus was a much more deeper team last season than the Rangers will be this season and they qualified for the playoffs in game #81. He made the same comment about Panarin in one of the podcasts with John Giannone during the season. Maloney was walking patience and process last night. The expectations being a little too high.

I’m putting the first of a few slashes in place there because I don’t think it’s likely that Kreider and Buchnevich are on the opening night roster given the arrivals of Panarin, Kakko and Kravtsov. I don’t see Kreider or Buchnevich as a third-line winger – neither has a lot of defensive sense – but more importantly, I think Gorton will have to shed one of those now that the Rangers are over the cap after the Trouba ($8 million AAV for seven years) signing. Obviously, the caveat with Kreider, too, is that I don’t believe the Rangers are going to be interested in extending him for a Hayes-like deal of seven years at north of $7 million per before he heads to unrestricted free agency next July, when he will be 29. His age is only part of the issue, his continuing practice of disappearing and, at best, his inconsistency, being the other. Kreider could get even more dollars if he has a big year. It remains an option – assuming Gorton finds a way to otherwise massage the cap – to hold onto Kreider and sell him as a rental for a first-rounder plus at the deadline. But I don’t think Gorton wants a third consecutive deadline selloff. He also absolutely will not just give away an asset like Kreider.

Kreider has a modified no-trade clause, in which he submits a list of 11 teams to which he cannot be dealt. So it won’t be easy to deal him.

Buchnevich, meanwhile, is headed for arbitration, though I think the Rangers will find a way to sign him before the July 29 hearing. If they are trading Kreider, they’ll surely have Buchnevich in the lineup. If they aren’t, in my opinion, they probably won’t. And without Kreider, Buchnevich is in the top six.

The Rangers are trading Buchnevich to make the money work now and then trading Kreider in February?

Kreider could agree to waive his NTC for this season.

If the Rangers want to trade him and don't want to pay him, it might be time for Kreider to move on if there is a time on his 11 team list which wants to trade for him.

Gorton made a comment when they signed Panarin about continuing to talk with Keator and Kreider to see what's next.

Is there a team interested in trading for Kreider which is on NTC list or is there a team interested in extending Kreider?

What's next? The Rangers don't want to have Kreider under contract until he is 36.

There is no other alternative.

New York has a whole mess of overpaid defencemen, a Chris Kreider decision to make (he’ll be a free agent in 2020), and still have some RFAs to figure out after paying Jacob Trouba. There is some wiggle room there, particularly if they head down the buyout path, but a trade would be optimal. Vladislav Namestnikov seems an obvious candidate if they don’t terminate a defender’s contract.

The Rangers need more than $4M.

For teams with roster issues, the pressures outlined above serve as opportunities. These are the teams that will be checking in with the Penguins and Golden Knights and Rangers and Canucks, asking about players that wouldn’t be available if money wasn’t an issue.

It’s harder to get a read on these teams, since virtually every club in the league has some kind of roster need or want, and cap space isn’t a prerequisite for having a roster need. Tampa Bay, for example, has a good team and not much money but also has three signed goalies and a rumoured desire to add a right-shot defenceman.

 

[RangerBoy]

Gorton made this quote on July 1.

“Today’s obviously a big day for us, getting Panarin. And that’s what we’re thinking about right now. But in the next few days, we’ll start to figure out what’s next and where we go from here. Chris, in particular, a really good player, he’s a player we like a lot, and we’ll continue to talk to [agent] Matt Keator and Chris and see what’s next.’’

Rangers agree to deal with top free agent Panarin

The Rangers don't want to pay Kreider. 7 years. $7M. Maybe more if he breaks 30 for the first time in his career.

What is next?

Maybe talk to Keator and Kreider about waiving to a team on his 11 team NTC list. Maybe talk to them about signing an extension with another team as part of the trade.

We saw Zuccarello be miserable last season. The Rangers didn't want to pay him either. He was just waiting for them to trade him. He was hurt a lot too. Bad groin. His mind was somewhere else. He had already checked out.

The calendar is moving fast. July 23. Buchnevich's arbitration hearing is next Monday. The Rangers settle with him and a 48 hour window opens up 3 days after the settlement of that case.

Decision time is coming very soon.

 

[NYR Viper]

So Colorados 1st and Jost for Kreider eh?

Just spitballing

@BBKers why does this sound like something you may have heard whispers of?

 

[Leetch3]

@Machinehead, to be clear, the situation with Kreider is ENTIRELY about term, AAV, and age. I love him as both a player and a Ranger, and were he willing to take the Shattenkirk contract, I’d gladly welcome him back. Then, you slot him in on the left side in your top 6 along with Panarin, give the right side to Kakko and Kravtsov, and deal Buch (whom I also love) for a haul, hopefully including a prime young center candidate. And if Kreider is still playing well when the deal is up, then we can talk about another 3-year deal thereafter.

But given the history of players of his ilk becoming a Lucic/Neal-like anchor, you simply can’t sign him to a long term deal. And given that same risk, it is incumbent on Chris to get that deal both for his and his family’s sake.

I think this is 100% spot on. the rangers don't want to commit long term to Kreider just like they didn't want to with hayes and zuke. They decided that they don't want to pay kreider and then made other moves accordingly, those other moves aren't forcing a decision.

the odd or interesting thing though is that we really haven't heard anything about the negotations. everyone assumes that he'll get the hayes deal and he definitely gets that as a UFA easily, but we haven't heard anything about what his demands are or what the rangers are offering...I'd have to think that the rangers would LOVE to keep him on the right deal, and all indication is that kreider wants to stay. but how far apart are they? are they close enough that there is flexibility with how you structure the contract where kreider gets paid and the rangers are still comfortable with the deal? get the impression from gorton's tone when commenting on him that the gap is too big but its mostly speculation...

I think we can assume the rangers don't want to go 7 for 7...but are they worried more about the years or the AAV?

 

[Zibanejbread]

7 years?!

 

[NYR Viper]

Poile loves those long term contracts for depth guys. He did the same with Jarnkrok

And honestly, this is a good way to get cost certainty out of your key bottom-6 players. Sissons had a nice 30 point season last year

 

[SA16]

The Sissons deal is really bad. You do this too many times (they already did with Jarnkrok) you really start hurting your flexibility down the line. He's a strong defensive player who isn't very good offensively which is the exact type of player that once they start to fall off become completely useless.

 

[eco's bones]

@Machinehead, to be clear, the situation with Kreider is ENTIRELY about term, AAV, and age. I love him as both a player and a Ranger, and were he willing to take the Shattenkirk contract, I’d gladly welcome him back. Then, you slot him in on the left side in your top 6 along with Panarin, give the right side to Kakko and Kravtsov, and deal Buch (whom I also love) for a haul, hopefully including a prime young center candidate. And if Kreider is still playing well when the deal is up, then we can talk about another 3-year deal thereafter.

But given the history of players of his ilk becoming a Lucic/Neal-like anchor, you simply can’t sign him to a long term deal. And given that same risk, it is incumbent on Chris to get that deal both for his and his family’s sake.

The one caveat with this is he's not going to become a Lucic because Lucic was never really a great skater. Kreider is a gifted skater. Really if the Rangers could hang on to Chris on a Shattenkirk deal I'd be all for it too and yeah move Buchnevich and maybe Namestnikov then and think about which D you want to buy out. We can figure out ways to get the money but IMO Chris and his agent are going to have to work with us if that's going to be at all possible. That's what I hope but I'm resigned to him being moved along too.....but even as inconsistent as he is he's an important player...our best net front presence and the guy who can drive a defense back better than any other.

 

[Mikos87]

7 years?!

They love Scissons. Absolutely love that player. He's a 4th liner who can slot anywhere in the line-up. A valuable piece for sure, but 7 years is a sign of how much Nashville values the guy.

 

[SA16]

The one caveat with this is he's not going to become a Lucic because Lucic was never really a great skater. Kreider is a gifted skater. Really if the Rangers could hang on to Chris on a Shattenkirk deal I'd be all for it too and yeah move Buchnevich and maybe Namestnikov then and think about which D you want to buy out. We can figure out ways to get the money but IMO Chris and his agent are going to have to work with us if that's going to be at all possible. That's what I hope but I'm resigned to him being moved along too.....but even as inconsistent as he is he's an important player...our best net front presence and the guy who can drive a defense back better than any other.

Lucic's problem isn't really that he wasn't a good skater. He was just as good, if not better, than Kreider [as a player] during his time in Boston. His problem is that he has a major back condition.

Edit: Clarification.

 

[Levitate]

I don’t think it’s asking that much of a guy like Kakko to not just replace, but improve on Kreider’s impact. I mean Kakko is basically Kreider on steroids minus the straight line speed. He’s going to make a dominant Kreider shift look like a joke in comparison.

Not to disparage Kreider, I love him and hate that, logistically, we have to trade him. But I would take Panarin + Trouba over Panarin + Kreider all day moving forward from strictly a team building standpoint.

I don't think Kakko is going to have a Kreider-like impact in his rookie year but maybe.

That said, while losing Kreider will hurt in its own way, I don't think you can just look at it by itself and say "well team is going to nosedive without him" if for no other reason than Panarin is an incredible driver of play by himself and a better player than Kreider. He should more than replace what Kreider brought, analytics wise, and hopefully Kakko, Kravtsov, etc can add on to that since I suspect they'll both by real possession style players too.

Honestly it's more that if Kreider goes, Hayes is gone, Zucc is gone...you're replacing them with a superstar forward and some rookies and hoping the rookies can step up and see if that balances out or is better than it was, hard to say how thigns will shake out. Perhaps it's down to how well the rookies perform.

 

[NYR Viper]

$3m is the average NHL salary right now. Assuming the cap goes up over the nest 7 seasons, Sissons is going to be making less than league average and he's a good depth piece. 25-32 years old so it eats up his prime years.

 

[NYR Viper]

Lucic's problem isn't really that he wasn't a good skater. He was just as good, if not better, than Kreider during his time in Boston. His problem is that he has a major back condition.

Woah, Lucic was a good skater for his size, he was never Kreider