Speculation: Roster Building Thread 2019-20: Part XXIX

[Edge]

At this point it wouldn't shock me if they already made an offer and his camp said no.

I think there's a very good possibility that you are correct.

I also think there's a very good possibility that the numbers are right where they suspected they'd be and there's a hesitation to go that route.

Like we're seeing on here, I wouldn't assume the unanimous opinion within the room either. It might be 6-4 or 7-3 in favor of a direction, but I'd be shocked if its 10-0 for either approach.

 

[Kovalev27]

And I’ll tell you another thing. If we’re bringing back another package for our star players like Howden or hajek even that doesn’t move the needle for us now or later quite frankly.

 

[NikC]

7x7 sign me up

plenty of guys on the roster I’d blow out before worrying about paying my best players what they’re worth.

and I know everyone cringes when I say it but it’s the truth and it’s part of any business decision, at the end of the day if he can’t do his job in 4 5 years we will buy him out like we and others have done a million other times. It’s hardly end of the world type money.

If he wanted 10 mil and his name was Taylor Hall you’d say goodbye

but I’m far more concerned about giving multiple years to guys like Fast and Strome and Buchnevich who’s barely in shape as a 24 year old let alone when he’s 25 26 and wants term

This. Trading Kreider for a late first rd and a prospect is terrible, and keeping Smith, Staal, Fast, Strome, and Buchnevich? Lol.

 

[Bruner4329]

if you want to give me reasons for trading him that revolve around what the assets might be or who he’d be holding back that’s one thing and I’d have those discussions but when the reason being that in year 5 he might break down it’s just the least legit reason for trading him imo

This to me is the most important aspect of this whole discussion. Along with the point you are making I still have not seen an answer to this question, Who do we have in the pipeline that can replace him? Our organization depth at the wing is not good. So to replace him you either have to trade to get an equal or close to equal player or sign one as a FA. Both will cost you dollars as well. Honestly I rather trade BS or ADA because we do have some good defense prospects that could step in and not create a huge drop. I also have no issue trading Strom. I think there are players you can get and plug in that would do just fine.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

And I’ll tell you another thing. If we’re bringing back another package for our star players like Howden or hajek even that doesn’t move the needle for us now or later quite frankly.

I'd expect this team to use some of the assets they get this deadline (and some of the ones they already have) to add NHL bodies.

Use your highest pick, but everything else should be available to improve your NHL roster.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

I think there's a very good possibility that you are correct.

I also think there's a very good possibility that the numbers are right where they suspected they'd be and there's a hesitation to go that route.

Like we're seeing on here, I wouldn't assume the unanimous opinion within the room either. It might be 6-4 or 7-3 in favor of a direction, but I'd be shocked if its 10-0 for either approach.

Whether they're at the take or leave it stage, I don't know. But I just don't believe numbers haven't been exchanged and I'm not buying reports they just started talking last week.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

This. Trading Kreider for a late first rd and a prospect is terrible, and keeping Smith, Staal, Fast, Strome, and Buchnevich? Lol.

There's significantly more nuance to this situation than what you're saying here though

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

And I’ll tell you another thing. If we’re bringing back another package for our star players like Howden or hajek even that doesn’t move the needle for us now or later quite frankly.

Eh, trading our star players has also netted us ADA, Lemieux, and the picks that became Miller, Lundkvist, and Trouba.

 

[Ken1994]

I think there's a very good possibility that you are correct.

I also think there's a very good possibility that the numbers are right where they suspected they'd be and there's a hesitation to go that route.

Like we're seeing on here, I wouldn't assume the unanimous opinion within the room either. It might be 6-4 or 7-3 in favor of a direction, but I'd be shocked if its 10-0 for either approach.

I am sure Edge and others would know whether this is true better than me, but I have always assumed that GMs give contracts of length knowing that the player will likely under-perform the back end and preferring to deal with it later rather than paying more now. And I am not horrified by reasonable dead cap numbers (though it is obviously not optimum to have any dead cap). If I am reading Spotrac right, the four teams to reach the Stanley Cup semi-finals last year had hits from dead cap, buried salary and retained salary as follows: Carolina-$10.9 million, Boston and San Jose-$6.2 million each, and St. Louis-$2.9 million.

 

[SA16]

This could actually be a blessing in disguise for Montreal as they now can use the LTIR option for the duration of the deal

Not so sure it's a blessing in disguise that they just lost the best defenseman on their team.

 

[Thirty One]

Not so sure it's a blessing in disguise that they just lost the best defenseman on their team.

It's really disguised.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

You know who's a UFA this summer, Jimmy Vesey

Reunion time for Jimbo Slice?

 

[Edge]

I am sure Edge and others would know whether this is true better than me, but I have always assumed that GMs give contracts of length knowing that the player will likely under-perform the back end and preferring to deal with it later rather than paying more now. And I am not horrified by reasonable dead cap numbers (though it is obviously not optimum to have any dead cap). If I am reading Spotrac right, the four teams to reach the Stanley Cup semi-finals last year had hits from dead cap, buried salary and retained salary as follows: Carolina-$10.9 million, Boston and San Jose-$6.2 million each, and St. Louis-$2.9 million.

Almost all do.

What I'm not sure about is whether the length on the back-end is as much of a concern, as the money being tied up on the front end.

A few days back (maybe a week), I said I floated the idea of a 6x7 deal to a few people and that generated an interesting response --- basically indicating that it was something that was or would be a legit option.

So that leads me to believe that the Rangers could be comfortable going longer, and watching Kreider potentially slide from top 16 to top 25, top 35, to top 50, etc.

Toward the end, if needed, they would potentially but out a 7th year.

Again, I don't have anything concrete, but I am getting the sense the Rangers might be most interested in the flexibility of the front end of the contract than the commitments of the backend.

 

[offdacrossbar]

resign #20 for 7 more years at 7 mil

or

trade him for a 1st and a prospect ( standard fair for a rental) PLUS the cap space to resign YOUNGER players who will have a greater impact both short term and long term. we can also reallocate that $$ for adding an impact FA who can fill a hole.

the numbers support this decision. players drop off dramatically after 27 yrs of age and the dreaded long term contract with NTC is usually to be avoided at all costs.

if its really 7/7 then its a no brainer.

7/5 and a LNTC OR 5/7 and im listening

 

[EpicDing]

You know who's a UFA this summer, Jimmy Vesey

Reunion time for Jimbo Slice?

Like we need another whipping boy

 

[haohmaru]

 

[Mac n Gs]

I posted this on the Kreider thread and will go on record here. My best offer would be $6x6 with a full NMC clause as the sweetener. Not a penny more.

I'm really iffy on the NMC, but I can understand the Rangers going that route if Kreider takes the 6x$6M. I personally wouldn't do it, but I could at least live with it. If they opt for that type of deal, I'd rather see it be a NMC in years 1-4 and a limited NTC in year 5 and 6.

 

[NYSPORTS]

who do we have in the pipeline that can replace him? Our organization depth at the wing is not good. So to replace him you either have to trade to get an equal or close to equal player or sign one as a FA.

Guessing any name we give you’ll shoot down so I’ll counter with asking how many teams win without a Chris Kreider?

I’m a big Morgan Barron supporter and feel the plethora of defensive options supersedes the few spots available so some will be moved for whatever this team needs.

I’m no fan of tying up long term contracts in a Kreider type players when he is going to be 29 years old.

 

[BBKers]

Not so sure it's a blessing in disguise that they just lost the best defenseman on their team.

Short term, yes maybe. Long term that contract is awful. A killer

 

[mas0764]

Am I crazy? This team is taking shape.

We finally have a overflow of top6 talent. We have arguably the 'best/most promising' Right Side on defense. We have a legitimate heir to HL.

Our bottom6 can use some stabilization along with our LHD. Barron is a nice piece that would be added soon. Hopefully Howden can develop into a key cog in this area.

Forget Rykov, Lindgren and Hajek.. We still are waiting on Miller, Robertson and Jones.... I personally think Robertson will be a massive piece to the puzzle.

Not really, we don't.

I'd say we need two more young top 6 pieces.... with one being fine as a longer term project than the other. One replaces Kreider/Buch in the top 6 relatively soon, the other to eventually replace someone like Panarin or Zibanejad, could be a plus third liner till that time comes.

 

[mas0764]

Depends. Does this scenario include trading skjei and fast?

Also does his contact include a full nmc? Or a partial?

Jesus, dude.

 

[mas0764]

Case in point, I think a lot more people are willing to go to 7x7 then we probably suspect.

I've only seen 3 say yes.

 

[Trxjw]

Kreider continues to be hard for me to evaluate without knowing what else is out there. When it's Kreider or "no Kreider and desperately hunting for a replacement" that kind of skews things. But if losing Kreider frees up the assets and space to bring in a younger power winger, or they have their eyes on a really good prospect of a similar mold, then it changes the landscape in a significant way. Kreider is a unique player, but I don't believe he's the only option on the table to fill the hole he would be leaving.

 

[mas0764]

And I’ll tell you another thing. If we’re bringing back another package for our star players like Howden or hajek even that doesn’t move the needle for us now or later quite frankly.

Might if it's a Miller or Lundkvist-type selection with the first, though, especially if it's a forward.

 

[Richard Banger]

Jesus, dude.

Ah yes the typical empty reply from another clueless poster.