Speculation: Roster Building Thread 2019-20: Part XXIX

[mas0764]

Forsberg, Point, Nurse, Jones, Barkov, Hertl, Lindholm, Trocheck, Rielly, Zibanejad are all currently slated to maybe become UFAs that summer too.

We should have that summer circled on our calendar and it's possibly the best reason yet why we should not give Kreider $7m.

Because I'd rather give 10+ to one of those guys and New York is gonna be an awfully attractive market with guys like Kakko, Panarin, Fox, Kravtsov, Sherterkin, etc, as your teammates.

 

[mas0764]

What is this nonsense? Chytil is a center, Kakko is a RW, Kravtsov has yet to show he can consistently score in the AHL and you have him replacing Kreider's production? And an unknown kid at an unknown position in the the 20 draft falls into the "already" "very soon" or "in not too long???" I get being optimistic about prospects, but this is wildly and unrealistically optimistic.

Chytil is probably a center but can play wing, Kakko can play LW, Kravtsov is an "unknown" but he's a very highly regarded prospect. If being highly regarded isn't worth anything, then we might as well trade our top 10 pick for some journeyman. After all, we'd rather known NHL production than "risk" a pick on a potential star prospect.

Speaking of nonsense.

There is nothing unrealistic about saying Kreider projects to be not one of our top-4 wingers within 2-3 years.

He's simply not that good. Panarin is already better, Kakko will be better, and Kravtsov will probably be better. If anyone else comes along (either Chytil being moved to wing, or another draft pick panning out, or even Buchnevich improving), Kreider will no longer be in our top 2 lines.

 

[Tossed Medal]

Also, if Kreider remains a 50 point player, he's probably no better than our 4th best wing and quite possibly less than that in the near future.

Panarin, Kakko, Kravtsov, possibly Chytil, and possibly whoever our first round pick is this year, all have a great shot at surpassing him on the wing, somewhere between "already," "very soon" or "in not too long, certainly way before the extension is up."

If you extend Kreider for 7 years, you are gonna end up with a third line winger being paid those top dollars by the middle of that deal at the latest, most likely. And not only because Kreider will decline. He very well may keep his value. We are just going to have better players than 50 point (or 45 point) Chris Kreider.

Value of a player goes beyond the stat sheet . Zibanejad took the next step playing with Kreider . Their synergy can not be discounted . Chytill , snd def KK are nowhere near being as impactful mad CK . Kaako is still 3-5 years away from being impactful if at all . At this point he is a one dimensional non defending and unable to play a high energy shift at the NHL level . He should be in the AHL tbh . Losing CK sets this team back he is a unique player to this roster who drives play makes our PP work and sets the example off and on the Ice .

 

[Fitzy]

The true Galaxy Brain take here would be to trade Kreider, Strome, and Fast and use that money to sign Taylor Hall.

If you like McKegg on the 3rd line that is the only true solution.

 

[Tossed Medal]

Chytil is probably a center but can play wing, Kakko can play LW, Kravtsov is an "unknown" but he's a very highly regarded prospect. If being highly regarded isn't worth anything, then we might as well trade our top 10 pick for some journeyman. After all, we'd rather known NHL production than "risk" a pick on a potential star prospect.

Speaking of nonsense.

There is nothing unrealistic about saying Kreider projects to be not one of our top-4 wingers within 2-3 years.

He's simply not that good. Panarin is already better, Kakko will be better, and Kravtsov will probably be better. If anyone else comes along (either Chytil being moved to wing, or another draft pick panning out, or even Buchnevich improving), Kreider will no longer be in our top 2 lines.

Kravstov has bust written all over him . Another perimeter player that will be in most NHL coaches doghouse because he can’t play a physical Game and plays an east west style that doesn’t win in the SCPO

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Chytil is probably a center but can play wing, Kakko can play LW, Kravtsov is an "unknown" but he's a very highly regarded prospect. If being highly regarded isn't worth anything, then we might as well trade our top 10 pick for some journeyman. After all, we'd rather known NHL production than "risk" a pick on a potential star prospect.

Speaking of nonsense.

Or how about you keep Chytil at center where he's developing and playing well and not force him on the wing? How about we let Kravtsov play a year in the AHL and have him show he can produce consistently before anointing him a sure-fire top 6 forward. Because right now he's just a prospect.

 

[NYR Viper]

Forsberg, Point, Nurse, Jones, Barkov, Hertl, Lindholm, Trocheck, Rielly, Zibanejad are all currently slated to maybe become UFAs that summer too.

Yep, I just plucked someone from that list. To me, that makes more sense to hold onto tat cap space and wait for a big fish that fits the need at that time

 

[mas0764]

Kaako is still 3-5 years away from being impactful if at all

Well if that's your opinion then I can see why you'd want to keep Kreider, but I do not share it remotely. I think KK overtakes Kreider possibly by next year and certainly the year after, and I think Kravtsov isn't far behind.

 

[mas0764]

Kravstov has bust written all over him .

Wow, ok then.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Kravstov has bust written all over him . Another perimeter player that will be in most NHL coaches doghouse because he can’t play a physical Game and plays an east west style that doesn’t win in the SCPO

I don't think he's a bust. But I'm not expecting him to replace Kreider next season either.

 

[mas0764]

Or how about you keep Chytil at center where he's developing and playing well and not force him on the wing?

I'm not forcing him on the wing. I prefer Chytil at center. But what if we acquire a center somewhere, who is better at center? Chytil can also play wing, and in that scenario, Kreider is down the depth chart.

How about we let Kravtsov play a year in the AHL and have him show he can produce consistently before anointing him a sure-fire top 6 forward. Because right now he's just a prospect.

No one is "annointing," him. But you have to make roster moves -- when it comes to placing yourself on the hook for $49m guaranteed, that you cannot easily move because he can't be released like the NFL and he can't be traded because it will have a NTC -- with an eye towards projecting what is happening next.

If we must pretend Kravtsov doesn't exist until he takes the NHL by storm, then why should I treat Kakko any different? He hasn't made any all star games yet. So why did we trade Zucc or Hayes, then? We were making room for these young guys to eventually come up.

You cannot lock in Kreider if it's gonna block players who are likely to be better. Not guaranteed, but likely. So if you are keeping Kreider, either the contract needs to work for eventually shifting Kreider down the lineup, or, you have to commit to Kreider and NOT Kravtsov. The latter is stupid and is antithetical to a rebuild, where the whole point is to get in younger, better, cheaper players to build around, since you already tried it with Kreider and it didn't work.

That leaves the former.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

I was supporting your POV

It was 4am and I was in another galaxy lol.

 

[mas0764]

I don't think he's a bust. But I'm not expecting him to replace Kreider next season either.

I don't expect him to replace Kreider next season. But I also don't care what happens next season. If we struggle because Kreider's production hasn't been adequately replaced, then I couldn't care less (I also think its possible that Kreider's production IS replaced, though not a guarantee).

I'm thinking about 2-3 years down the road when it's almost certain that Kreider isn't one of the best 4 wingers we have anymore.

 

[liv4socr20]

Kreider playing against 3rd pair pylons on 3rd line ES while remaining net front on pp will still produce 50 points even if he were demoted to 3rd line. IF this is the new norm for Kreider is a 5 year deal really the worst thing? 7 years definitely out. We’d be able to trade him in 3 years with retention if we had the internal options to take his place.

 

[SA16]

Skjei might get you in a conversation for Ehlers. Definitely not Connor.

I think Ehlers is a better player than Connor in the first place so I'm on board for that then.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

I'm not forcing him on the wing. I prefer Chytil at center. But what if we acquire a center somewhere, who is better at center? Chytil can also play wing, and in that scenario, Kreider is down the depth chart.



No one is "annointing," him. But you have to make roster moves -- when it comes to placing yourself on the hook for $49m guaranteed, that you cannot easily move because he can't be released like the NFL and he can't be traded because it will have a NTC -- with an eye towards projecting what is happening next.

If we must pretend Kravtsov doesn't exist until he takes the NHL by storm, then why should I treat Kakko any different? He hasn't made any all star games yet. So why did we trade Zucc or Hayes, then? We were making room for these young guys to eventually come up.

You cannot lock in Kreider if it's gonna block players who are likely to be better. Not guaranteed, but likely. So if you are keeping Kreider, either the contract needs to work for eventually shifting Kreider down the lineup, or, you have to commit to Kreider and NOT Kravtsov. The latter is stupid and is antithetical to a rebuild, where the whole point is to get in younger, better, cheaper players to build around, since you already tried it with Kreider and it didn't work.

That leaves the former.

Because, I don't know, Kakko actually made the team out of camp and is currently playing in the NHL and Kravtsov didn't/isn't? Maybe that's why you treat Kakko different?

And you don't have to commit to Kreider at Kravtsov's expense. If he makes the team next year he can play on the third line AS A RIGHT WING, just like Kakko is doing now. If he excels, he replaces Buch.

And Zucc was older, Hayes was a center. Does this really need to be explained?

 

[mas0764]

Kreider playing against 3rd pair pylons on 3rd line ES while remaining net front on pp will still produce 50 points even if he were demoted to 3rd line. IF this is the new norm for Kreider is a 5 year deal really the worst thing? 7 years definitely out. We’d be able to trade him in 3 years with retention if we had the internal options to take his place.

If the intention is to trade Kreider in 3 years, then his NTC protection better be minimal.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Kravstov has bust written all over him . Another perimeter player that will be in most NHL coaches doghouse because he can’t play a physical Game and plays an east west style that doesn’t win in the SCPO

Another iteration....

 

[Blueshirts777]

You are getting a top-9 or even top-6 prospect and a first back for Kreider. The first, given that we've been drafting well, is very likely another top-9 component on a cost-controlled contract (when it's signed).

Even if you get a top 9, which I doubt, saying that you will get another top-9 who's ready in 2 years with a late first pick isn't realistic.

 

[Off Sides]

Yep, I just plucked someone from that list. To me, that makes more sense to hold onto tat cap space and wait for a big fish that fits the need at that time

While many of them will probably be signed instead, it's also a possibility some of those teams end up in the rebuild where they sell them before they reach UFA, maybe even much like the Rangers did with McD, or when they received Yandle, MSL, they may have a year left of their current deals.

The bigger concern there is probably Zbad, Rangers have Panarin at LW, unless Chytil does some amazing stuff I'm not sure the Rangers have any replacement, and even if Chytil does amazing stuff, who replaces Chytil's roster spot?

 

[Trxjw]

Question:

Would anyone trade:

Kreider + $3m in cap space for 1st '20 + Frederic + Heinen + Gaudreau @ $10m cap hit in 2 years when the team is more in their window for winning

Because that $7m in cap space allocated to Kreider could be allotted to someone like Gaudreau when he reaches UFA.

Nah. I don't have a ton of interest in paying $22m to just the LW. We have a line driver on each of the top-two lines in Zibanejad and Panarin. I think we can fill in around them with talented, but more cost effective players. That doesn't mean a bunch of guys making $3m or less, but guys who are under the $7m mark that are legitimate top-six players.

 

[cheech70]

Question:

Would anyone trade:

Kreider + $3m in cap space for 1st '20 + Frederic + Heinen + Gaudreau @ $10m cap hit in 2 years when the team is more in their window for winning

Because that $7m in cap space allocated to Kreider could be allotted to someone like Gaudreau when he reaches UFA.

Ask the Knicks about allocating cap space to lure big time FA

 

[Trxjw]

I think Ehlers is a better player than Connor in the first place so I'm on board for that then.

To date I would agree, but I think going forward Connor will be a better player. Perhaps significantly so.

Though by "conversation" I do mean "depends on what significant piece you're adding to Skjei?"

 

[Bruner4329]

Chytil is probably a center but can play wing, Kakko can play LW, Kravtsov is an "unknown" but he's a very highly regarded prospect. If being highly regarded isn't worth anything, then we might as well trade our top 10 pick for some journeyman. After all, we'd rather known NHL production than "risk" a pick on a potential star prospect.

Speaking of nonsense.

There is nothing unrealistic about saying Kreider projects to be not one of our top-4 wingers within 2-3 years.

He's simply not that good. Panarin is already better, Kakko will be better, and Kravtsov will probably be better. If anyone else comes along (either Chytil being moved to wing, or another draft pick panning out, or even Buchnevich improving), Kreider will no longer be in our top 2 lines.

People never learn a lesson. You move Chytil to wing that is one less center we have and we do not have a lot of centers in the wings, if any. I think Kakko will work out eventually but at this point betting on Kravtsov is fools gold. He appears soft and had a hissy fit when being sent down. Not sure what his makeup is. And lets not forget some of you pushing for Lias as the number 2 center coming into this year when he hat a crappy season last year in Hartford. There were warts all over his game last year people ignored. You need to have some givens not a bunch of ifs.

 

[mas0764]

Because, I don't know, Kakko's actually made the team out of camp and is currently playing in the NHL and Kravtsov didn't/isn't?

So? Neither is as good as Kreider now.

I'm constructing a team for the future, not just next year. If you aren't also doing that, then I question your approach.

Any roster move you make has to be done with a projection of where your young players slot in for at least the intermediate future (2-3-4 years down the line).

I project Kakko to be a first liner and Kravtsov probably a second liner in that time frame. This is both the desirable and likely outcome.

If you don't think Kravtsov gets there, then maybe it makes sense to bring back Kreider long term, because you neither need the roster spot or expensive extension for Kravtsov's expiring ELC.

But if you think Kravtsov locks in to the second line as a 50-60 point player or more, and that is preferable to Kreider as Kravtsov projects to be a more dynamic offensive force, then that is one less spot for Kreider to occupy.

And you don't have to commit to Kreider at Kravtsov's expense. If he makes the team next year he can play on the third line AS A RIGHT WING, just like Kakko is doing now. If he excels, he replaces Buch.

I'm not talking about next year. I'm talking about down the line. My reasoning for Kreider being traded isn't based on what happens next year. It's based on the fact that within 2-3 years he will likely be not worth the money, but more importantly, no room in the top 6 for him.

And Zucc was older, Hayes was a center. Does this really need to be explained?

Does it need to be explained to you? If Kravtsov pans out, Kreider is literally no better than our fourth best winger, and if anyone else moves to that spot (which is likely), then Kreider is out of the top 6. This is the LIKELY scenario.

I'm not paying Kreider for 7 years to protect myself from UNLIKELY scenarios (ie, Kravtsov busts and we don't obtain any other top wingers with our assets in the coming 2-3 seasons).If I could get Kreider for 3 years, then that would be a bet-hedge that makes sense, because at the end of that time, I could let Kreider go if Kravtsov has panned out, or, I could re-sign Kreider if Kravtsov hasn't panned out. But Kreider won't sign for 3 years, so I have to project which option is more likely.

And this isn't even addressing the other elephant in the room which was just brought up: Even if guys like Kravtsov don't pan out.... better free agents are lurking in the near future.

No, no guarantee we get them. But the flexibility is more important than having Kreider, who, we know what he is. And it's nice, but.... not a needle mover.

I want needle movers before I go filling in my roster holes with support players like Kreider. We need at least one more needle mover at this point among our top 6 forwards. When we get that player in the system (and I hope it's someone like Holtz in this coming draft), I think the selling days will be over.

But for now, we must keep selling.