Arguing Buch, not Kreider.
Also, the number of wingers listed as centers is astronomical. Top put it in perspective, Artemi Panarin was listed as a center until a few weeks ago.
Speculation: Roster Building Thread 2019-20 Part XXV
- Thread starter Kakko
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Arguing Buch, not Kreider.
Also, the number of wingers listed as centers is astronomical. Top put it in perspective, Artemi Panarin was listed as a center until a few weeks ago.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Ha, missed the origin of that conversation. Usually this comes up about Kreider. That being said, 50 points as an RW would put you anywhere between 21-26 in scoring among RWs in each of the last 5 seasons. You still can't look at this only in terms of forwards.
You certainly want your 1RW to score more than that if you're going to have success. An RW who can consistently put up 50ish points is a bottom end 1st liner, top end 2nd liner. And, in response to the initial comment, there's nothing useless about that.
Oscar Lindberg
Registered User
Maybe a LD because the team has so many
Trading for Nurse also means moving Skjei, and I'm struggling to come up with a good match for a forward in a trade. Montreal would make alot of sense for Skjei but I'd want someone like Suzuki from them, and I doubt they'd be willing to do that
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
My argument for Kreider being a first-line LW is similar to my argument about Ryan McD being a number one defenseman.
IMO, they both are/were at that level. They just weren't the best guy at that level.
And I think that's always been something we've struggled with as a board when it comes to with certain guys. I can see Buch being the next guy we struggle with in that regard.
I dont think they would have to make the decision on Skjei until the offseason though. And if you get Nurse allowing Skjei to slot down, it could help Skjei’s game which in turn helps rehabilitate his trade value. He would be playing in the proper role.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
We've probably always struggled with it because we've so rarely had a guy who fits what people automatically picture when they hear top line player. I mean, when I hear first line LW, the guy that pops in my head is Ovechkin. For C, it's 90s Messier. For RW it's Jagr. For #1 D, it's Leetch. These are all superstars... hall of famers... and don't remotely represent the "average" first liner. In my lifetime, we've only occasionally had that kind of player in each of those positions... and some inconsistently (Gaborik and Nash). We have one now in Panarin.
Ironically, the post I was responding to was about Buch, but I didn't realize it
Oscar Lindberg
Registered User
You aren’t accounting for injuries and the liberal mislabeling of positions on NHL.com. Last year 26 labeled RWs hit the mark. That didn’t include Zucc, Shaw, Arvidsson, or Mantha on that pace. That also didn’t include Draisaitl, Reinhart, Pavelski, JT Miller who primarily lined up at RW last year. That’s just naming a few. There are even more left wingers labeled as centers: Stamkos, Giroux, Marchessault, Nyquist, Dzingel, etc. Everyone and their grandmother is a center on that site. That’s not the reality.
Last edited:
Except you cannot do it that way. You need to look at the forwards not as a conglomorate, but at their actual positions.
Let's take Kreider. Look at his average for last 5 years and compare it to rest of LW. What possibly argument are you going to put up that he is not a top line LW?
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
Let's establish a couple of basic operational truths when it comes to our roster, with a specific emphasis on our goaltending and defense:
The first truth is that one of Georgiev, Lundqvist and Shesterkin will not be on next season's opening night roster.
The second truth is that even if the duo ends up becoming Georgiev and Shesterkin, they will not be a tandem for the next 5 years. At best, you're looking at a couple of years, maybe three, even after factoring in the expansion draft. Both guys will be 24 to start next season. Whoever ultimately wins the battle will eventually start the majority of games. Whoever ultimately loses the battle will likely pursue opportunities elsewhere, sooner rather than later. They're not going to stick around in a backup role until they are 30 and into their UFA years.
The third truth is that the odds are incredibly slim of seeing ADA, Trouba, Fox and Lundkvist all starting on the same Rangers squad. I know some people love the idea of playing people on the off-side, and every one has their ideas on who gets moved. But we're not keeping all of them.
I get that there's a lot of love for creativity and outside the box thinking. That's fine. But if you want those things, go to an art museum. Because you're not going to find it to such a large extent on an NHL roster like ours. I'm sorry, but it just isn't going to happen.
The first truth is that one of Georgiev, Lundqvist and Shesterkin will not be on next season's opening night roster.
The second truth is that even if the duo ends up becoming Georgiev and Shesterkin, they will not be a tandem for the next 5 years. At best, you're looking at a couple of years, maybe three, even after factoring in the expansion draft. Both guys will be 24 to start next season. Whoever ultimately wins the battle will eventually start the majority of games. Whoever ultimately loses the battle will likely pursue opportunities elsewhere, sooner rather than later. They're not going to stick around in a backup role until they are 30 and into their UFA years.
The third truth is that the odds are incredibly slim of seeing ADA, Trouba, Fox and Lundkvist all starting on the same Rangers squad. I know some people love the idea of playing people on the off-side, and every one has their ideas on who gets moved. But we're not keeping all of them.
I get that there's a lot of love for creativity and outside the box thinking. That's fine. But if you want those things, go to an art museum. Because you're not going to find it to such a large extent on an NHL roster like ours. I'm sorry, but it just isn't going to happen.
For the third time, I was responding to your comment on Buchnevich being a top line player. He is not.
Kreider absolutely is.
Your comment on Buch:
kinger8998
Registered User
Pavel Buchnevich is not a first line winger. Say it louder for the people in the back? PAVEL BUCHNEVICH IS NOT A FIRST LINE WINGER!
He is not and will never be one with NYR. He can be produce like one if he's the complimentary piece on a top line with 2 elite players, but that will not happen in NY.
He is not and will never be one with NYR. He can be produce like one if he's the complimentary piece on a top line with 2 elite players, but that will not happen in NY.
If Buchnevich was a 50 point player, he would be considered a lower end top line wing on most teams and a very high second line wing on others. That's if you base it on points. Again, sort of like graduating form MIT but being ranked towards the back end. That does not change the fact that you graduated from MIT.
And the comment was that he was a useless 50 point player.
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
I would agree. I tend to view him as more of a second line winger, who could see a numbers boost if paired with the right players, in the right role.
Which opens up a whole other can of worms about first line players vs. players who happen to play on the first line.
But I really don't have time for that right now because I am hungry and need to grab lunch.
kinger8998
Registered User
Jesper Fast has the ability to play up the lineup, like he is being used as a placeholder until Kakko develops enough and gains enough confidence consistently to move into the top-6. Fast isn't producing any incredible numbers, but he's found success with Strome & Panarin and is not hurting the line.I would agree. I tend to view him as more of a second line winger, who could see a numbers boost if paired with the right players, in the right role.
Which opens up a whole other can of worms about first line players vs. players who happen to play on the first line.
But I really don't have time for that right now because I am hungry and need to grab lunch.
But is Jesper Fast a top-6 winger? No. He can play top 6 but he is a good third liner or an elite 4th liner.
Buchnevich I view as a good top-6, great 3rd liner. Could play on first line (elsewhere specifically), but is not a 1st liner. I have no issue with him in NY if he's paid like such a player. But anyone waiting for that 60-point breakout in NY will be waiting until the day Buch retires or gets moved. If we pay him off the assumption he''ll do that in NY it will be yet another contractual mistake by the org. I'm in camp trade Buch if the deal is over $4.5M
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
Why would he need to request one? He’s the GM.
Who would those players be....I recall people saying he needed to play with top players to produce....he's playing with top players and not producing.I would agree. I tend to view him as more of a second line winger, who could see a numbers boost if paired with the right players, in the right role.
Which opens up a whole other can of worms about first line players vs. players who happen to play on the first line.
But I really don't have time for that right now because I am hungry and need to grab lunch.
gravey9
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 2,945
- 6,331
I would agree. I tend to view him as more of a second line winger, who could see a numbers boost if paired with the right players, in the right role.
Which opens up a whole other can of worms about first line players vs. players who happen to play on the first line.
But I really don't have time for that right now because I am hungry and need to grab lunch.
I tend to agree with this. But as the Rangers have worked to find a few pairing with great chemistry -- Zib/Kreider and Strome/Panarin -- Buch has been the odd man out. He's basically been riding shotgun on lines where the other two players have very strong chemistry. I would argue that he's still found a way to be very noticeable offensively given that.
That said, Buch and Chytil have had tremendous chemistry whenever they've been paired. Can't speak to their D coverage as a unit. And I know we all like the kid line, but I do think Buch should be put with Chytil at some point. For whatever reason, they've got great chemistry.
eco's bones
Registered User
It's hard to justify giving very long term to a 2nd line winger putting up 45 point seasons. Especially ones who don't give you much else. He's stronger and more physical than he was--his defensive game has gotten better but none of those things are particular strengths of his. He's just brought those parts of his game to what's average for the league and it's in those areas where his real improvement has come---not so much his offensive game. He's about the same player he has been the last two/three years in that regard--not a better offensive player but a more dependable player away from the puck.
To me if he's not moved by the time his next contract comes around he's very likely to be moved then. I think the Rangers are alright with the kind of money he's making now and might be alright boosting that up to $4 to $4.5 but past that not really and nothing really long term either. 3 or 4 years at most.
eco's bones
Registered User
The two best players in that deal are Hopkins and Nurse.
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
Eh, I think he's been a little over the map, and there is that right role component. And that's reflected in him having a very typical 40 some odd point season.
I could see him jumping into the 50s or maybe hitting 60 is he's permanently fixed to one of those roles and rides out the ups and downs. I could see him producing like Namestnikov, or even Miller in certain settings around the league.
Last edited:
- Status
