Speculation: Roster Building Thread 2019-20: Part XXVI

[Shesterkybomb]

Well, at the earliest, that point is two years out.

Which is a big part of my point, this doesn’t need to be a right now decision.

May not need to be but if we want to be a more rounded team going forward it's the right time to do it considering he is having a career year in a contract year. If you can add a 70 point forward and Keane/Lindqvist + Fox can make up some of Deangelos points it's a net gain.

 

[Edge]

Based on what? He had 30 points last year. You are fine criticizing me for saying Fox is legit after only playing less than 50 games but you are fine unloading the brinks truck for DeAngelo who is having a career year in a contract season, up until this season his peak was 30 points, maybe he gets the contract and takes his foot off the gas, it happens every year to someone after a contract year.

I am fine taking the chance on a player who will, by the time we sign him, have played 120 games scoring at a 60 point pace, over a season a half.

I am less fine taking a chance on REPLACING him with a player who has scored at a 46 point pace for 80 games.

Again, this isn’t an either/or situation. You keep trying to turn it into one, but the debate isn’t about keeping ADA or keeping Fox. It’s about keeping both, for at least the time being, and then seeing what they do.

Your lack of desire to do THAT, and the reasoning behind that desire is what I am critical of.

 

[Edge]

May not need to be but if we want to be a more rounded team going forward it's the right time to do it considering he is having a career year in a contract year. If you can add a 70 point forward and Keane/Lindqvist + Fox can make up some of Deangelos points it's a net gain.

But that’s the problem, you don’t KNOW that it’s a career year. You FEAR it is a career year.

And that fear is driving you to want to make a decision sooner, rather than waiting and actually knowing what we have.

You’re treating your assumptions as fact and wanting to move accordingly.

I am treating your assumptions as an unknown and want to find out.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I am fine taking the chance on a player who will, by the time we sign him, have played 120 games scoring at a 60 point pace, over a season a half.

I am less fine taking a chance on REPLACING him with a player who has scored at a 46 point pace for 80 games.

Again, this isn’t an either/or situation. You keep trying to turn it into one, but the debate isn’t about keeping ADA or keeping Fox. It’s about keeping both, for at least the time being, and then seeing what they do.

Your lack of desire to do THAT, and the reasoning behind that desire is what I am critical of.

I'm not saying either or...I'm saying I dont wanna pay DeAngelo 6+ mill to play 3rd pair d. That money would be better spent on an area of need, we can plug an entry level player in the 3rd rd spot. Up until this year DeAngelo was a throw in in trade deals, it's time to move while his value is the highest it's ever been before we bomb it with a high contract attached to it.
I have a question, what do you see tony signing for?

 

[NYR Viper]

I'm not saying either or...I'm saying I dont wanna pay DeAngelo 6+ mill to play 3rd pair d. That money would be better spent on an area of need, we can plug an entry level player in the 3rd rd spot. Up until this year DeAngelo was a throw in in trade deals, it's time to move while his value is the highest it's ever been before we bomb it with a high contract attached to it.
I have a question, what do you see tony signing for?

When was he a throw in?

 

[Edge]

I'm not saying either or...I'm saying I dont wanna pay DeAngelo 6+ mill to play 3rd pair d. That money would be better spent on an area of need, we can plug an entry level player in the 3rd rd spot.

And I am saying that until we are paying ADA $6m to be a third pair defenseman, it doesn’t exist in reality - it’s an assumption. And it’s a BIG assumption at that.

And if I am going to make a move of this magnitude, that can change the trajectory of this team for a long time, involving a player of ADA’s age, ability and results, I do not want to ASSUME.

I want to KNOW.

Because the stakes are too high to make a move like this, at this time, with the reasoning you are offering.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

@Edge starting off this new thread with a bang.

 

[Edge]

@Edge starting off this new thread with a bang.

And typing of all this while walking down the street in Center City Philadelphia. It’s amazing I haven’t accidentally killed myself.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

But that’s the problem, you don’t KNOW that it’s a career year. You FEAR it is a career year.

And that fear is driving you to want to make a decision sooner, rather than waiting and actually knowing what we have.

You’re treating your assumptions as fact and wanting to move accordingly.

I am treating your assumptions as an unknown and want to find out.

I'm not saying either or...I'm saying I dont wanna pay DeAngelo 6+ mill to play 3rd pair d. That money would be better spent on an area of need, we can plug an entry level player in the 3rd rd spot. Up until this year DeAngelo was a throw in in trade deals, it's time to move while his value is the highest it's ever been before we bomb it with a high contract attached to it.
I have a question, what do you see tony signing for?

Gents, @KreiderBomb is already on record saying he'd be okay with a bridge. And @Edge is already on record saying that once it's time to pay Fox, we then may have a potential issue that needs resolving.

So, essentially, this whole question is moot for 2-4 years if Tony is in fact amenable to a shorter-term deal for "compromise" money.

Here's the question: what happens if Tony isn't interested in a bridge and demands a Connor-like deal (or more)? I know where KB stands; @Edge what're your thoughts in that case?

 

[Shesterkybomb]

And I am saying that until we are paying ADA $6m to be a third pair defenseman, it doesn’t exist in reality - it’s an assumption. And it’s a BIG assumption at that.

And if I am going to make a move of this magnitude, that can change the trajectory of this team for a long time, involving a player of ADA’s age, ability and results, I do not want to ASSUME.

I want to KNOW.

Because the stakes are too high to make a move like this, at this time, with the reasoning you are offering.

The stakes arent high, worst case scenario you get a 70 point forward and Tony scores 60 point somewhere else again. Best case scenario you get the 70 point player and Tony gets benched for 20 games like he did last year and we dodge a big bullet and thank our lucky stars we never signed him to a long term deal that crippled our franchise.
You never answered what you thought Tony will want for a contract.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

And typing of all this while walking down the street in Center City Philadelphia. It’s amazing I haven’t accidentally killed myself.

This is why you’re angry. You’re in enemy territory. Tread safely, friend.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Gents, @KreiderBomb is already on record saying he'd be okay with a bridge. And @Edge is already on record saying that once it's time to pay Fox, we then may have a potential issue that needs resolving.

So, essentially, this whole question is moot for 2-4 years if Tony is in fact amenable to a shorter-term deal for "compromise" money.

Here's the question: what happens if Tony isn't interested in a bridge and demands a Connor-like deal (or more)? I know where KB stands; @Edge what're your thoughts in that case?

Personally I feel he will reject a bridge which is my main contention.

 

[Edge]

Gents, @KreiderBomb is already on record saying he'd be okay with a bridge. And @Edge is already on record saying that once it's time to pay Fox, we then may have a potential issue that needs resolving.

So, essentially, this whole question is moot if Tony is in fact amenable to a shorter-term deal "compromise" money.

Here's the question: what happens if Tony isn't interested in a bridge and demands a Connor-like deal (or more)? I know where KB stands; @Edge what're your thoughts in that case?

I do not have a problem giving him $6 million. But pushing beyond that would really require thought.

But until I know that, I am not moving him based on the assumption that he might ask for that. Like everything else, we need to verify it first. It can’t be because ADA has peaked, or is going to drop off, or that we think Fox might surpass him.

It has to be based off tangibles. A salary demand is a tangible. Fox passing him, at this juncture, is not.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I do not have a problem giving him $6 million. But pushing beyond that woolly require thought.

But until I know that, I am not moving him based on the assumption that he might ask for that. Like everything else, we need to verify it first. It can’t be because ADA has peaked, or is going to drop off, or that we think Fox might surpass him.

It has to be based off tangibles. A salary demand is a tangible. Fox passing him, at this juncture, is not.

I've said a long time ago I was fine with a bridge. A long term big money deal is a no.

 

[Tob]

Kotko's struggling in Montreal. Time to send Lias+ and start acquiring some friends for Kaapo.

 

[Edge]

This is why you’re angry. You’re in enemy territory. Tread safely, friend.

Not angry, just trying to emphasis the crux of the problem - which is both timing and a lot of assumption in place of actual occurrences.

I can’t move ADA based on the belief Fox may or may not pass him, and need a high salary in 2022, after ADA’s slipped to the third line and seen his offense drop to 35 points, despite apparently peaking.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Kotko's struggling in Montreal. Time to send Lias+ and start acquiring some friends for Kaapo.

i'm in, we can definitely use a gritty player who can drop the gloves like Kotkaniemi to round out our bottom six. Perfect replacement for Haley.

 

[Thirty One]

Kotko's struggling in Montreal. Time to send Lias+ and start acquiring some friends for Kaapo.

This is racism.

 

[Fitzy]

Personally I feel he will reject a bridge which is my main contention.

A bridge is what he would eventually get in arbitration anyways, so sooner or later he would have to accept.

 

[Ola]

Kotko's struggling in Montreal. Time to send Lias+ and start acquiring some friends for Kaapo.

Was thinking about this too (Kravy?).

But at the same time — how much damage had MTL done to Kotka’s future? It’s not good to rush kids to the NHL. It’s one thing with someone like Kakko. He can still turn it on and play his game for stretches. But Kotkaniemi was like a 0.5 PPG player in the Liiga when MTL rushed him over.

NHL teams are just really reckless with young talent.

 

[Edge]

The stakes arent high, worst case scenario you get a 70 point forward and Tony scores 60 point somewhere else again. Best case scenario you get the 70 point player and Tony gets benched for 20 games like he did last year and we dodge a big bullet and thank our lucky stars we never signed him to a long term deal that crippled our franchise.
You never answered what you thought Tony will want for a contract.

No, worst case scenario is you get the same 70 point winger you would’ve received for the package assets that didn’t include ADA, or need to, and Trouba-Fox-? isn’t better than what you have or could’ve had.

Which is why you need to wait and get more information before you make that trade. Because it’s not inherently the best asset management.

I think he'll ask for 3 years and $19.5 million. I think the Rangers will counter with 4 years and $20 million. I think they'll settle on four years and $24 million.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Not angry, just trying to emphasis the crux of the problem - which is both timing and a lot of assumption in place of actual occurrences.

I can’t move ADA based on the belief Fox may or may not pass him, and need a high salary in 2022, after ADA’s slipped to the third line and seen his offense drop to 35 points, despite apparently peaking.

Trading players is all about assumptions and projections, nobody has a crystal ball and sometimes if you wait to long you diminish your asset. You cant just hand someone 6-8 mill in a cap world and hope for the best after a career year in a contract year. Sometimes it's better to use that money and trade the asset for a player who better fits your organizational need. My feeling is we have rd players in place that allow us to trade Tony for a need up front before we have to pay him. I also feel given how Tony was strong armed into his crappy deal this year he will have no part of a discount or a bridge deal. It's not about Fox vs Tony it's about organizational depth, cap space and current team needs. If he wants a long term high money deal we have to move on.

My last post on this.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

My last post on this.

Promise?

 

[Alluckks]

Actually, TDA doesn’t have much value at all on the trade market. He can become a UFA after three more years and there is — nothing — you can do about it. Anyone trading for him right now would be held hostage until you pay him whatever he wants.

With TDAs stats line he will get a ton in arbitration. He doesn’t have to take any long term offer to make “more” short term.

I love TDA, but at 7-8m per year? Nobody will love him at that cost, and unless he is willing to take a “home-town discount”, that is how much he will cost. If he wants to get paid well for the coming three season and then go to Philly as a UFA, he can do that.

Gorton’s move to give a young upcoming RFA without arbitration rights like TDA a 1 year deal must be one of the top 3-5 dumbest moves the last 10 years in the NHL all categories, and it’s not even up for debate.

This is a horrifically bad take lol

 

[Edge]

Trading players is all about assumptions and projections, nobody has a crystal ball and sometimes if you wait to long you diminish your asset. You cant just hand someone 6-8 mill in a cap world and hope for the best after a career year in a contract year. Sometimes it's better to use that money and trade the asset for a player who better fits your organizational need. My feeling is we have rd players in place that allow us to trade Tony for a need up front before we have to pay him. I also feel given how Tony was strong armed into his crappy deal this year he will have no part of a discount or a bridge deal. It's not about Fox vs Tony it's about organizational depth, cap space and current team needs. If he wants a long term high money deal we have to move on.

My last post on this.

Everything is a balance of assumptions and facts. But when you have more assumptions than facts there’s a problem. If we have a list of “ifs” in front of our reasons, it should give us pause.

If ADA demands a crazy salary.

If Fox surpasses ADA.

If Lundkvist and Keane are the real deal.

If ADA’s offense plummets.

We need to replace a few of those ifs with tangibles.

Actually having a contract demand from ADA would be one tangible.

Seeing how Fox performs in his sophomore year is another tangible.

Seeing how Keane and Lundkvist progress is another tangible.

Seeing how ADA does down the stretch is another tangible.

Now we might not get all of these tangibles at once, but we have to at least get a few of them first.

We are not on a strict deadline; we can and will get some tangibles. That’s what we SHOULD do.