Speculation: Roster Building Thread 2019-20: Part XXIX

[GoAwayPanarin]

For what has to happen for the Rangers to make the playoffs, yeah, not little faith.

NO FAITH

ye of realistic expectations.

 

[haveandare]

Fine, so I'll go with the paramters others have made in support of Kreider.

He's something like 16th in goals for LWs over the last (5?) years, or something along those lines. So whatever lines he plays on, with whoever, you are paying him like the 16th highest goal scoring left winger in the game --- or around that level.

Do you need to spend the extra money for that, or is the better allocation of money finding someone who maybe ranks 25th, and then using the difference in price to upgrade another area? I think there's a good argument to be made for the latter.

And as you said, Kreider is very good, but not elite. That doesn't strike me as someone we "have" to have, or that represents the only, or even the best path forward.

Just checked the stats, he's 14th in goals from LWs since 2015-16. Just for conversation's sake, #25-30 in order are Guentzal (6m), Connor (7.1m), Perron(4m), Tkachuk(7m), Pearson(3.75 from 2017) & Killorn (4.45 from 2016).

The difference in money there varies of course. Perron is on a sweet deal, can't say I know enough about him or that deal to say if there's some reason he signed for so little compared to guys who are seemingly his peers. Pearson & Killorn are cheap, but signed 3 and 4 years back respectively. Not sure what they'd make now. I'd guess less than 7m, how much less I don't know.

Point being, the difference in pay there isn't very big for the most part. There are some guys on real gems of deals in that range, as there are in all ranges, but for the most part guys who have signed recently make 6-7m. For those cheaper guys, can we get them? When they're due new deals in a year or two, how much will they want?

Imo how much a specific player is needed is about a lot more than just how good they are. It's some combination of that, what potential replacements are in the system or on on the market, what goals the team has, etc. In this case, Kreider is very good but not elite, there is no potential replacement in the system, and the team's goals are to start improving and bringing along the young core in a year or two at most. All of those things combine in my eyes to make him a pretty necessary piece. I'm not saying he's the only path forward, I'm saying we have him now, he's very important to this team, and the ideas about replacing him are being made out to be a hell of a lot easier and more realistic than they really are. These available, underpaid top 6 players who score in a very narrow range and want to be paid significantly less than 7m in the near future aren't easy to identify let alone trade for, let alone trade for at a price that is less painful than keeping Kreider.

 

[pld459666]

I posted this in the Kreider thread, but I know the two audiences don't necessarily overlap:

Let's do an informal poll of everyone and see where people are at.

We all know what he brings, his strengths, flaws, usage, etc. etc. We also know what we want him to sign for. At the end of the day, let's put all of that on the shelf.

The offer for Kreider is not 6x5, or 6x6, or 6x7. He doesn't want that.

The offer is $6.75-$7M for 7 years, with a NMC. That's what his camp wants.

Do you sign the deal, yes or no? (Because at the end of the day, that's what this debate is about --- how much are you willing to pay).

I would say no, I would not sign him to that deal

 

[offdacrossbar]

I would say no, I would not sign him to that deal

im right there with you

 

[Edge]

Just checked the stats, he's 14th in goals from LWs since 2015-16. Just for conversation's sake, #25-30 in order are Guentzal (6m), Connor (7.1m), Perron(4m), Tkachuk(7m), Pearson(3.75 from 2017) & Killorn (4.45 from 2016).

The difference in money there varies of course. Perron is on a sweet deal, can't say I know enough about him or that deal to say if there's some reason he signed for so little compared to guys who are seemingly his peers. Pearson & Killorn are cheap, but signed 3 and 4 years back respectively. Not sure what they'd make now. I'd guess less than 7m, how much less I don't know.

Point being, the difference in pay there isn't very big for the most part. There are some guys on real gems of deals in that range, as there are in all ranges, but for the most part guys who have signed recently make 6-7m. For those cheaper guys, can we get them? When they're due new deals in a year or two, how much will they want?

Imo how much a specific player is needed is about a lot more than just how good they are. It's some combination of that, what potential replacements are in the system or on on the market, what goals the team has, etc. In this case, Kreider is very good but not elite, there is no potential replacement in the system, and the team's goals are to start improving and bringing along the young core in a year or two at most. All of those things combine in my eyes to make him a pretty necessary piece. I'm not saying he's the only path forward, I'm saying we have him now, he's very important to this team, and the ideas about replacing him are being made out to be a hell of a lot easier and more realistic than they really are. These available, underpaid top 6 players who score in a very narrow range and want to be paid significantly less than 7m in the near future aren't easy to identify let alone trade for, let alone trade for at a price that is less painful than keeping Kreider.

The difference in pay can vary, but so do some of the ages. So let's even assume we are close on money, the total scenario could look somewhat significant.

So you could be looking at paying 29 year old Chris Kreider $7 million until he's 36.

Or you could be looking at paying a 26 year old $6 million until he's 31. What if the latter also doesn't come with as air-tight of a movement clause?

So depending on how this looks, that appeal starts to shift quite a bit.

With regards to next contracts, sometimes that year, or even two, that you don't have to pay them can make a big difference. So these are things we have to at least consider.

 

[Edge]

I would say no, I would not sign him to that deal

I would not sign that deal either.

I would do 6x6. I don't think Kreider would.

But I want to start nailing us down to a specific scenario, because otherwise there's too many options to debate and it gets off track.

 

[JimmyG89]

Why would we use raw goal totals for this when not every player is going to have as many games played due to entering the league at a later date? I made the cutoff as playing 200 games over that time, which should allow us to see players that are beyond their ELC. Can't really compare contracts at that rate.

If we use goals per game since 15/16, Kreider sits at 18th, tied with Landeskog and Johnny Hockey.

I think 7x7 is too much. Shave a year and shave .5 of the deal and I think it is more palatable.

Oddly enough, a player that comes up with similar stats is Anders Lee. A few more goals, a few less assists. Provides leadership, size, net front. Currently 29 (which is what Kreider will be on 7/1) Lee signed for 7x7, but with a NTC, not a NMC.

I'd point to Kreider and say if he wants a NMC instead of the same deal Lee got, he needs to take slightly less money. That's a contract perk. You control everything in terms of where you play. We could work with the 7 year deal if you're going to shave some salary off the top of that to get the NMC.

We may not like the Islanders, but the impact of Lee and Kreider is kind of the same. Lee isn't as gifted a skater as Kreider, but production is the name of the game, and it's pretty damn close.

 

[GAGLine]

I would not sign that deal either.

I would do 6x6. I don't think Kreider would.

But I want to start nailing us down to a specific scenario, because otherwise there's too many options to debate and it gets off track.

Would you do 7 AAV x 5 years?

 

[NYR Viper]

Would you do 7 AAV x 5 years?

Yes, I'd sign that today if that was on the table.

 

[Edge]

Would you do 7 AAV x 5 years?

My gut reaction is no, but I would consider it. Having said that, I feel obligated to point out that would mean Kreider left $14 million on the table. So I am really trying to avoid scenarios that benefit us disproportionately.

 

[NYR Viper]

The difference in pay can vary, but so do some of the ages. So let's even assume we are close on money, the total scenario could look somewhat significant.

So you could be looking at paying 29 year old Chris Kreider $7 million until he's 36.

Or you could be looking at paying a 26 year old $6 million until he's 31. What if the latter also doesn't come with as air-tight of a movement clause?

So depending on how this looks, that appeal starts to shift quite a bit.

With regards to next contracts, sometimes that year, or even two, that you don't have to pay them can make a big difference. So these are things we have to at least consider.

I know you were just spitballing but do you really think Strome gets $6m? That's concerning to me

 

[Edge]

I know you were just spitballing but do you really think Strome gets $6m? That's concerning to me

I think he gets in the $5 million range. I could see a similar salary to Miller.

 

[haveandare]

The difference in pay can vary, but so do some of the ages. So let's even assume we are close on money, the total scenario could look somewhat significant.

So you could be looking at paying 29 year old Chris Kreider $7 million until he's 36.

Or you could be looking at paying a 26 year old $6 million until he's 31. What if the latter also doesn't come with as air-tight of a movement clause?

So depending on how this looks, that appeal starts to shift quite a bit.

With regards to next contracts, sometimes that year, or even two, that you don't have to pay them can make a big difference. So these are things we have to at least consider.

Yeah, I agree on that. The thing though too is we have Kreider now. The choice is sign him or not. The net cost of the entire thing is the contract cost.

This hypothetical younger, comparably productive player wanting about the same kind of money is going to cost us what to even acquire before dishing out that similar money? What would Krieder have cost 3 years ago? Is it better to give that up and then pay this similar cap hit or to just pay the cap hit to the older player who costs us nothing to acquire because he's already in the organization?

There are a lot of ifs and buts to any scenario. My point, in it's simplest form, is the he's very important and losing him makes improving in the short-mid term significantly harder to do barring some unlikely favorable outcomes occurring.

To answer the question about price, I wouldn't do the 6.75-7 for 7 years with an NMC that his camp wants. Having said that, if the terms of this were such that he'd only take his dream offer and isn't open to anything else at all, I think he'd already be gone or we'd at least have heard that the camps are way far apart and there's no chance of him staying. I'd seriously consider offers that bend from that original ask, either in caphit, term or clause.

 

[Richard Banger]

Would you do 7 AAV x 5 years?

I'd be fine with 7x6 honestly. Kreider is a player that is extraordinary hard to replace.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I play with the idea of trading him too, but I definitely have concern about the LD with him gone. Lindgren has made some major progress and we have a lot in the pipeline. I just feel like we're a year or two too early to be trading him.

If we do need to move out salary, I'd prefer to buy out Staal or Smith or both compared to trading Skjei for futures.

My thought process is that DeAngelo or Fox move to the left side, preferably Deangelo paired with Trouba, then Lindgren/Fox, Staal/Keane. I dunno.

 

[Edge]

To answer the question about price, I wouldn't do the 6.75-7 for 7 years with an NMC that his camp wants. Having said that, if the terms of this were such that he'd only take his dream offer and isn't open to anything else at all, I think he'd already be gone or we'd at least have heard that the camps are way far apart and there's no chance of him staying. I'd seriously consider offers that bend from that original ask, either in caphit, term or clause.

I probably have the opposite read on that situation.

If some of the proposals floated by us on here were on the table, he probably would've been signed already and we wouldn't be discussing this.

I don't think Kreider's ask has changed --- I think it's remained constant. Possibly the only constant in this whole situation.

 

[Edge]

Guys we're drifting right back into putting out the deals we want.

The deal on the table is 7x7, not 7x5 or 7x6.

It's 7x7 with a NMC. We're using what is widely seen as the market price for this question. Yes or no.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I dont think anyone here feels Kreider isn't a 6.5 mill player now, it's the future that's the issue and what it does to resigning guys like Fox, Kakko, Chytil, Shesterkin etc down the road. I can't get around the idea that we could add a good prospect and a pick for Kreider and not have his cap space holding up negotiations for guys like DeAngelo as he fits our timeline better.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Guys we're drifting right back into putting out the deals we want.

The deal on the table is 7x7, not 7x5 or 7x6.

It's 7x7 with a NMC. We're using what is widely seen as the market price for this question. Yes or no.

Nope...I'd keep the cap hit and get the assets.

 

[Richard Banger]

Guys we're drifting right back into putting out the deals we want.

The deal on the table is 7x7, not 7x5 or 7x6.

It's 7x7 with a NMC. We're using what is widely seen as the market price for this question. Yes or no.

Just because that's the asking price doesn't mean that's the contract he's going to get. I'm guessing Kreider minimum is going to be close to the 6.5x6 range.

 

[kovazub94]

Just checked the stats, he's 14th in goals from LWs since 2015-16. Just for conversation's sake, #25-30 in order are Guentzal (6m), Connor (7.1m), Perron(4m), Tkachuk(7m), Pearson(3.75 from 2017) & Killorn (4.45 from 2016).


The difference in money there varies of course. Perron is on a sweet deal, can't say I know enough about him or that deal to say if there's some reason he signed for so little compared to guys who are seemingly his peers. Pearson & Killorn are cheap, but signed 3 and 4 years back respectively. Not sure what they'd make now. I'd guess less than 7m, how much less I don't know.

Point being, the difference in pay there isn't very big for the most part. There are some guys on real gems of deals in that range, as there are in all ranges, but for the most part guys who have signed recently make 6-7m. For those cheaper guys, can we get them? When they're due new deals in a year or two, how much will they want?

Imo how much a specific player is needed is about a lot more than just how good they are. It's some combination of that, what potential replacements are in the system or on on the market, what goals the team has, etc. In this case, Kreider is very good but not elite, there is no potential replacement in the system, and the team's goals are to start improving and bringing along the young core in a year or two at most. All of those things combine in my eyes to make him a pretty necessary piece. I'm not saying he's the only path forward, I'm saying we have him now, he's very important to this team, and the ideas about replacing him are being made out to be a hell of a lot easier and more realistic than they really are. These available, underpaid top 6 players who score in a very narrow range and want to be paid significantly less than 7m in the near future aren't easy to identify let alone trade for, let alone trade for at a price that is less painful than keeping Kreider.

If Kreider was 24-25 you’d have a lot more posters agreeing with $7m being an acceptable price to pay. Not when we’re talking 29 to start the 7-year contract.

 

[haveandare]

I probably have the opposite read on that situation.

If some of the proposals floated by us on here were on the table, he probably would've been signed already and we wouldn't be discussing this.

I don't think Kreider's ask has changed --- I think it's remained constant. Possibly the only constant in this whole situation.

What are they meeting about or discussing then?

Do you think if they said we'll give you 6.6 for 7 years with an NMC he'd say no because it's not at least the 6.75 he asked for? I'm not saying that's a deal I even want, but just to illustrate that there's almost always some degree to which a party is willing to give in order to get the majority of what they want.

 

[Edge]

Just because that's the asking price doesn't mean that's the contract he's going to get. I'm guessing Kreider minimum is going to be close to the 6.5x6 range.

I'm not asking people what they think.

We have a thousand pages on what people think, suspect, feel, see, smell, hear, etc. And many of those are opinions are steered by personal feelings or what "we" want the situation to be.

I am trying to give us a tangible to react.

The deal on the table is 7x7.

 

[Edge]

What are they meeting about or discussing then?

Do you think if they said we'll give you 6.6 for 7 years with an NMC he'd say no because it's not at least the 6.75 he asked for? I'm not saying that's a deal I even want, but just to illustrate that there's almost always some degree to which a party is willing to give in order to get the majority of what they want.

I think they are willing to see how far he can go and how creative they can be.

I also think there is an element that plays into their trade negotiations.

I do not think they are discussing a $250k difference though.

 

[Ola]

we’ll see. I’m hoping for the best yet I’m a little uneasy that I see what you see. I was expecting a freight train, sharp shooter and elite passer.

Meanwhile in Jersey, Justin Bieber isn’t exactly reminding me of Crosby.

What Kakko has is an extremely quick mind along with great hands and he can also move really well in tight quarters.

I think Kakko has been really good on the PP and we focused more on giving him a top opportunity to boost his stats he could easily be up there with the 56 pts in 80 games that Eichel had his rookie season for example. John Tavares had 54 pts 82 games for NYI.

The shot can be improved and he will of course become more explosive and stronger as he mature physically. I also always keep harping about general stamina regarding these kids. It doesn't look like it when we watch NHLers night in and night out, but it takes a heck of a lot of work to get your conditioning to a level where you can skate for 40 seconds. I think that young players often is held back by simply being gassed for long period of shifts.