Speculation: Roster Building Thread 2019-20: Part XXVIII

[Avery16]

Those issues are absolutely real and could happen.

That's still not a reason to keep the lesser and aging goalie.

I believe you are assuming things that have yet to be established as fact.

 

[Vitto79]

I'm more and more on board with trading Strome and Kreider and re-signing Fast

the problem is who's in the top 6 then? its not pretty if both go

 

[Edge]

If you can get him for less than 7, I think you do it. Worry about the last two years of his contract 5 years from now. Him and Panarin on the left side for the next 5 seasons with Zib, Chytil, Kakko and whoever else can do a lot of damage.

If I could get him for 6x6, I swallow hard and do it. I still have some serious concerns, but that's the price point at which I am willing to take on those concerns.

Though I will say, I'm less concerned about the damage our offense can do, as I am with having the space to add the number of components we'll need to upgrade our house in the coming years. Because those upgrades are going to be a lot more expensive than people are banking on. I can almost promise you that.

 

[pld459666]

I'm not quite sure I see that correlation.

When Panarin signed he was 27 with 322 games under the hood (349 with playoffs).

When Kreider signs his next contract he will be 29 with 540 games under the hood (about 620 with playoffs).

That's a big difference --- to the tune of almost 3.5 seasons. And that's without considering that Panarin is an entire tier above Kreider --- which is a big reason we signed Panarin in the first place.

Playing 40 games a year until 23 as opposed to 70+ from the age of 18

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

My point being, most players even the really good/great ones have some sort of decline in production at about age 32-33, sometimes that starts a little earlier or later, but trying to gamble on that not happening or predicting when it will happen is a tough one. Which is why we see many of those gambles go poorly league wide. The GMs know this, which is why we heard last July/UFA time at least one of them anonymously said something like, he knew he was handing out some future bad contracts.

I think looking about 2-4 years down the road, the Rangers are probably going to need to gamble, not so sure they really need to do so anymore than they already have right at this juncture. Yet I also am not them, so who knows.

The selloffs, i start it with Stepan, were necessary because their system was empty. They've accumulated a ton of picks, prospects and now have the 4th best system in the league. I don't look at resigning Kreider as a gamble, I look at it as solidifying your top 6 for the next 5 years, while Panarin is Panarin. They still will probably need another wing to round it out, but I feel better trying to replace someone on Zib's right than I do trying to replace the guy to Zibs left. You have a guy to replace Kreider that's cheaper and younger, great, would love to hear who it is. But the 29th pick and B-prospect ain't that guy.

 

[BBKers]

If I could get him for 6x6, I swallow hard and do it. I still have some serious concerns, but that's the price point at which I am willing to take on those concerns.

Though I will say, I'm less concerned about the damage our offense can do, as I am with having the space to add the number of components we'll need to upgrade our house in the coming years. Because those upgrades are going to be a lot more expensive than people are banking on. I can almost promise you that.

I think CK21s retirement deal is at or close to $50M. Would he leave at least $14M on the table?

 

[pld459666]

I believe you are assuming things that have yet to be established as fact.

Are you indicating that Hank is not aging and is currently better than either Georgiev or Shesty today?

 

[Blue Men Group]

McDavid is out 2-3 weeks. These injuries are really starting to help us!

 

[Edge]

Playing 40 games a year until 23 as opposed to 70+ from the age of 18

Eh, but factoring in leagues and styles, I'm not sure the mileage Kreider logged before being able to drink is going to offset too much.

At the end of the day you're still talking about a lot more games at the top level, against the big boys, including 50 some odd games of grinding playoff hockey.

I mean six months ago I was told on many fronts how much of a difference that is for Panarin and why that was the smart investment. Now I'm hearing the complete opposite because we want to sign a player for whom we can't make that argument.

Either the years are all equal, or they aren't. But they can't be both depending on what we want in the moment.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

If I could get him for 6x6, I swallow hard and do it. I still have some serious concerns, but that's the price point at which I am willing to take on those concerns.

Though I will say, I'm less concerned about the damage our offense can do, as I am with having the space to add the number of components we'll need to upgrade our house in the coming years. Because those upgrades are going to be a lot more expensive than people are banking on. I can almost promise you that.

But by that rationale wouldn't it be more expensive to have to go out and trade for or sign a FA to be your first/second line LW? Because I don't see that guy anywhere in their system currently

You probably have peak Panarin for another 5 years. We really gonna waste 2, probably 3, of those solidifying the top 6?

 

[True Blue]

If I could get him for 6x6, I swallow hard and do it. I still have some serious concerns, but that's the price point at which I am willing to take on those concerns.

Though I will say, I'm less concerned about the damage our offense can do, as I am with having the space to add the number of components we'll need to upgrade our house in the coming years. Because those upgrades are going to be a lot more expensive than people are banking on. I can almost promise you that.

That is exactly where I am at. With all the same concerns. But to me, if he loves the rangers to take that contract, that just sounds like smart business.

And yes, there are still upgrades that will be needed and those will cost both dollars and prospects.

 

[Edge]

I think CK21s retirement deal is at or close to $50M. Would he leave at least $14M on the table?

I don't believe he will, and I think that's a big part of the problem that goes beyond whether one falls into the "sign" column, or the "trade" column.

That's why we need to find out what the actual numbers are.

Let's say there are 50 people in favor of signing Kreider on here.

I'd be curious to see how the popularity of the concept changes as we go from 6x6 all the way up to 7x7. Because I'm not sure it's the same number of people at both price points.

 

[Off Sides]

The selloffs, i start it with Stepan, were necessary because their system was empty. They've accumulated a ton of picks, prospects and now have the 4th best system in the league. I don't look at resigning Kreider as a gamble, I look at it as solidifying your top 6 for the next 5 years, while Panarin is Panarin. They still will probably need another wing to round it out, but I feel better trying to replace someone on Zib's right than I do trying to replace the guy to Zibs left. You have a guy to replace Kreider that's cheaper and younger, great, would love to hear who it is. But the 29th pick and B-prospect ain't that guy.

Panarin, Trouba, Fox, DeAngelo, Zbad, were all acquired one way or another, I did not know they would be Rangers, or were even available to be Rangers.

I did not know who or if any of the prospects including Kakko, Chytil, Fox, etc, etc would be NHL ready, or be good.

How would I know if they can or can not find a cheaper, younger guy to replace Kreider?

I do know, or at least I think I know, that if they keep Kreider that any possible other option is likely off the table.

 

[pld459666]

Eh, but factoring in leagues and styles, I'm not sure the mileage Kreider logged before being able to drink is going to offset too much.

At the end of the day you're still talking about a lot more games at the top level, against the big boys, including 50 some odd games of grinding playoff hockey.

I mean six months ago I was told on many fronts how much of a difference that is for Panarin and why that was the smart investment. Now I'm hearing the complete opposite because we want to sign a player for whom we can't make that argument.

Either the years are all equal, or they aren't. But they can't be both depending on what we want in the moment.

I am a big believer in that less wear and tear early leads to a longer shelf life.

I'm not arguing against the signing by using the limited NHL miles.

 

[JimmyG89]

You have to wonder if Edmonton makes a big move to get a winger while McDavid is down. Drai and RNH centering the top 6, but they could use another winger with this group right now.

They did have the interest in Buch at the draft, but I'm not sure the Rangers would make this move mid-season, while also moving out Kreider at some point.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Panarin, Trouba, Fox, DeAngelo, Zbad, were all acquired one way or another, I did not know they would be Rangers, or were even available to be Rangers.

I did not know who or if any of the prospects including Kakko, Chytil, Fox, etc, etc would be NHL ready, or be good.

How would I know if they can or can not find a cheaper, younger guy to replace Kreider?

I do know, or at least I think I know, that if they keep Kreider that any possible other option is likely off the table.

Panarin, Trouba and Fox were all linked to the Rangers before they got here. They’ll still have a first round pick this season. How does keeping Kreider hinder them from drafting another kid in the top 15 this year?

And if you don’t know how you’re going to replace your third most important/productive forward on the team, maybe hold off on trading him for a third line player and a kid who is realistically three years away from even making the team?

 

[NYR Viper]

What's your limit with Fast? Are you going above 3AAV?

I wouldn't. Probably 4 years x $2.75-3m. If he wants to cash in then that makes my decision on keeping/trading him easier

 

[Edge]

But by that rationale wouldn't it be more expensive to have to go out and trade for or sign a FA to be your first/second line LW? Because I don't see that guy anywhere in their system currently

You probably have peak Panarin for another 5 years. We really gonna waste 2, probably 3, of those solidifying the top 6?

To the first point, no, I don't think it's inherently more expensive. It might be, but if it is, it's likely because it's a player who is also younger and with odds of maintaining his level for a while.

But it could be a guy who comes in $6.25 m, and that extra $750 k is part of the space that's used to pay for a guy who fills another position.

The question is really about how you want to use your money.

Let's say you have $100 to prepare an evening with friends

Do you want a $100 bottle of wine and no spread?

Or a $80 bottle with some nice appetizers?

Or is your approach to go with a $60 bottle of wine, some appetizers, and a nice meal?

Different people will have different approaches. It's more a matter of how you allocate the funds. So you might sign Kreider for $7 million, but than go with a cheaper option on LD. Or you might go with another LW at $6 million, and go with a more expensive option on LD.

That's also why I am more comfortable with Kreider at 6x6 than 7x7, but the former might not be an option.

I don't think finding a second line LW at $6 million is going to be a monumental task. Now, I fully admit that the LW we bring in probably wouldn't be as good as Kreider. But the question for me is whether that replacement LW has to be as good if the lower price point allows me the freedom to build a better, more complete roster. And I don't think he has to be. My goal isn't to replace Kreider attribute for attribute, by goal is increase the overall number of attributes on my entire roster.

If I can do that with Kreider at $6 million, sure I am open to that possibility.

 

[SA16]

I think you should probably consider that Zucker is having a bad year and while yea he probably will start scoring well with Crosby it's not exactly necessary given Dominik Simon scores over 2 pts/60 with Crosby at league minimum in the first place. His shot rate has completely fallen off a cliff this season and I don't know why that is but he is very much not playing like the same guy has has been in the past.

 

[Edge]

I am a big believer in that less wear and tear early leads to a longer shelf life.

I'm not arguing against the signing by using the limited NHL miles.

That's fair, I would just caution that a year and a half in age, and 300+ games in the NHL is a significant difference.

Consider for a second that you could literally take Brady Skjei's entire NHL resume to this point, add it to Panarin's at the time of his signing, and you still wouldn't have as many games played as Chris Kreider when he signs his next contract.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

To the first point, no, I don't think it's inherently more expensive. It might be, but if it is, it's likely because it's a player who is also younger and with odds of maintaining his level for a while.

But it could be a guy who comes in $6.25 m, and that extra $750 k is part of the space that's used to pay for a guy who fills another position.

The question is really about how you want to use your money.

Let's say you have $100 to prepare an evening with friends

Do you want a $100 bottle of wine and no spread?

Or a $80 bottle with some nice appetizers?

Or is your approach to go with a $60 bottle of wine, some appetizers, and a nice meal?

Different people will have different approaches. It's more a matter of how you allocate the funds. So you might sign Kreider for $7 million, but than go with a cheaper option on LD. Or you might go with another LW at $6 million, and go with a more expensive option on LD.

That's also why I am more comfortable with Kreider at 6x6 than 7x7, but the former might not be an option.

I don't think finding a second line LW at $6 million is going to be a monumental task. Now, I fully admit that the LW we bring in probably wouldn't be as good as Kreider. But the question for me is whether that replacement LW has to be as good if the lower price point allows me the freedom to build a better, more complete roster. And I don't think he has to be. My goal isn't to replace Kreider attribute for attribute, by goal is increase the overall number of attributes on my entire roster.

I go for the $25 bottle of wine, $50 bag of weed, and $25 worth of white castles.

But as far as the team, I look at it this way, they're solid on right D, they could use another guy on LD (maybe Deangelo slides over), and are solid in goal. I believe Zib and Chytil can be your one, two punch down the middle. But what they really lack are big, strong, fast wingers. This is what I keep coming back to. This is my concern with moving Kreider. Then add in everything else he brings to the team - the screening, the speed, the locker room presence, the role model to the younger players. His departure creates a vacuum. Yes, in theory you could find a guy for a little less money that does a little less, but why? Why ruin the chemistry he has with your #1 center ? Seems short sided to me to save 500k a year.

 

[Off Sides]

Panarin, Trouba and Fox were all linked to the Rangers before they got here. They’ll still have a first round pick this season. How does keeping Kreider hinder them from drafting another kid in the top 15 this year?

And if you don’t know how you’re going to replace your third most important/productive forward on the team, maybe hold off on trading him for a third line player and a kid who is realistically three years away from even making the team?

You are asking for definitive stuff, I am just giving examples of stuff no one knew was going to be definitive before it actually happened.

I'm not really concerned with not knowing exactly what will transpire, they have more info than I do. As long as they have assets, including cap space, to try to get the stuff they need when they really need it I'm pretty confident they'll figure it out.

If they deem Kreider a need right now and feel as if no future plausible replacement scenario will arise within whatever timeline they think they have, they'll probably try to extend him.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

I wouldn’t. They got #26OA and a good prospect. That’s basically what this board wants for Kreider except Zucker wasn’t a rental. Galchenyuk is terrible, even if he turns it around in Minnesota, he’s a UFA could sign somewhere else. Maybe Kreider is that much better than Zucker that it evens out but I don’t know.

Wasn't Addison considered by and large their BEST prospect? A team's best prospect, a 1st, and a talented reclamation project for an oft-injured solid 2nd line C with term sets up well for an auction of the only 1st line, playoff-tested wing on the market, IMO. Especially if the Rangers retain, which they almost certainly will.

We shall see.

 

[eco's bones]

The only reason Ranger fans would think Pittsburgh got fleeced in that Zucker deal is because of their disdain for Pittsburgh

It’s a fair deal

Part of the deal is taking a contract (Galchenyuk) off their hands that they didn't want. Zucker's a good player and he should put up good numbers playing with Crosby and/or Malkin. That said the Pens make the trade more for the now than for the future. They may be able to turn around in a couple years when he's to be a rental and get something decent back for him if they decide to do so. For now though they've pretty much have depleted the prospect depth in their organization. They have no 1st or 2nd this year as well. Boston is kind of doing the same. Both aging teams trying to keep their respective windows open.

Any case I don't like Pittsburgh and I like this deal because it says to me in 2/3/4 years the Rangers are going to be a team that's up and Pittsburgh is going to be one that's down. We've learned the hard way that you have to keep quality young players coming into your team year after year if you want sustained success. When you're always trading top picks and prospects eventually you choke off your own talent.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

You are asking for definitive stuff, I am just giving examples of stuff no none knew was going to be definitive before it actually happened.

I'm not really concerned with not knowing exactly what will transpire, they have more info than I do. As long as they have assets, including cap space, to try to get the stuff they need when they really need it I'm pretty confident they'll figure it out.

If they deem Kreider a need right now and feel as if no future plausible replacement scenario will arise within whatever timeline they think they have, they'll probably try to extend him.

I'm just asking what the plan is after you trade him. All you guys are so gung-ho about moving him, what comes after? I've seen people say Kravtsov can play LW, does he get the spot next year? Kakko? Do they want to be competitive next year? Do they want to try and win while Panarin is in his prime? Who do they have targeted to replace him? Like, if Morgan Barron projected to be Kreider's replacement, awesome. But at some point, you need to identify the players you want to go to war with. I'm not saying every piece is here, but you can't keep trading important pieces away because some mystery player might come available in two seasons. I keep saying it, fix what isn't working but don't ruin what is.