Speculation: Roster Building Thread DCLXXXVI:

[Rick Nash 61]

Yup, they have 23M in cap space with only Zib and Fast of their own to sign, but they're not gonna OS anyone, its like a stupid unwritten rule.

Ah ok I was wondering why it didn't happen more often. Gorton should just be a savage and do it, Edmonton won McDavid for nothing **** them

 

[darko]

Ah ok I was wondering why it didn't happen more often. Gorton should just be a savage and do it, Edmonton won McDavid for nothing **** them

Payback is a *****. If Gortin offer sheets Drai just wait til our players hitting RFA status.

 

[BBKers]

If we go the Shattenkirk rebuilding on the fly route - I would like to see something like this:

Resign UFA B Smith at $4.25M x 4
Resign RFA M Zinbad at $5.5 M x 7
Resign RFA J Fast at $2M x 3
Resign RFA N Jenssen at $0,7 M x 1
Sign UFA Shattenkirk ~ 6 M
Sign UFA Grigorenko >2 M
Sign UFA A Nilsson at ~1 M

Trade M. Staal (some money retained) + Graves + 2nd 2018 for E Kane

Kreider - Zib - Buch
Kane - Miller - Zucc
Vesey - Hayes - Nash
Grabner - Grigorenko - Puempel/Jensen/Nieves

Fast starts on LTIR
L Anderssons fate for this season decided in camp. If he shows he can compete - a trade to clear a roster spot might be necessary.

McD - Shatty
Skjei - Smith
Holden - D´Angelo/Bear/Pionk/Kampfer

Hank
Nilsson

COMPARISON
E Kane < D Stepan
Grigorenko = Lindberg

Shatty >> Girardi
Rookie D < M Staal (not certain)
Nilsson < Rantaa (not certain)

More guys likely trending upwards than downwards as well
A better team if Hank does not regress IMO
Bigger, stronger and younger
Will it bring us over the top?
Likely not
But our holes are almost all filled save for a real #1C

 

[ETTER DE]

First post. Been reading here for several years.

Ryan O`Reilly, could he be a target? Could be a top dog on Rangers, instead of living in the shadows of Eichel. Would cost a lot though.

Or don`t the Rangers and Sabres trade with each other?

 

[Ola]

It's interesting because Chicago just traded Hjalmersson with 2 years left because they were afraid of his next contract. Same with Panarin. They are regretting the Seabrook deal for sure. Suter is one that has worked out so far but he was UFA at 28, not 30 like McDonagh will be. Giordano was resigned long term and I think that's a contract they will regret pretty soon. Unless McDonagh is willing to discuss a 5 year deal, I'd be inclined to consider moving him now.

Obviously the return would need to be exceptional.

I'd probably look at something like:

Honka + Heiskenen + DAL 1st + DAL 2nd

I think Suter is a very good yardstick for what type of UFAs to go after. He is very involved every shift he is on the ice. Always having the puck on his stick, can log a ton of ice time. Very typical No 1 D.

Chara is another one, but he is so unique, but a huge prescense on the ice every time he is on it.

Like can you imagine playing a team with Suter or Chara (in his prime at least) on it and not notice them a lot during the game? No it's impossible. It's like playing us and not noticing Hank. Compare that to Shattenkirk, Brad Richards and so forth.

Save the ammo until a top guy becomes available.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Interesting.

Nash (50% retained) for Panarin obviously hahaha

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

Its 3 days into the tampering period and weve literally heard nothing concrete other than trying to get Smith done. Also the Rangers wanting to give the kids more responsibilty which is why bobby mac said that about Shatt. Then they're kicking the tires on Thornton, Marleau and Kovy?? Makes no sense

 

[Dijock94]

What about Grigorenko as our 3C?

 

[pld459666]

What about Grigorenko as our 3C?

God no.

4th line sheltered minutes, yeah. 3rd line? PUKE

 

[Dijock94]

Either way we lost two centers, and he fits the age group were building towards.

 

[bernmeister]

First post. Been reading here for several years.

Ryan O`Reilly, could he be a target? Could be a top dog on Rangers, instead of living in the shadows of Eichel. Would cost a lot though.

Or don`t the Rangers and Sabres trade with each other?

WELCOME to da Boards
no ROR, multiple reasons

Sam Reinhart looks available

 

[kovazub94]

Here's a couple of thoughts after trying to catch up on what's been posted here:

1. If Gorton decides to sign Shattenkirk (not saying he would but if this the path he chooses) I'd rather give all 7 years for lower average salary and then consider him an amnesty buyout in 4 years

2. Before the 2016-17 season started I said that we could expect 2-3 good seasons out of 5 from Lundqvist. Didn't expect that he will have a down season right away but there's not reason to think that the premise remains - he definitely could have a rebound season coming up

3. Can't wait for July 1 to see what direction JG takes and what "rebuilt on a fly" means to him

 

[RGY]

Here's a couple of thoughts after trying to catch up on what's been posted here:

1. If Gorton decides to sign Shattenkirk (not saying he would but if this the path he chooses) I'd rather give all 7 years for lower average salary and then consider him an amnesty buyout in 4 years

2. Before the 2016-17 season started I said that we could expect 2-3 good seasons out of 5 from Lundqvist. Didn't expect that he will have a down season right away but there's not reason to think that the premise remains - he definitely could have a rebound season coming up

3. Can't wait for July 1 to see what direction JG takes and what "rebuilt on a fly" means to him

Agreed on point 1.

Going into year 6-7 if his game has really fallen off then use a buyout on him.

But the bottom line is I dont see his game falling off in the next 3-4 years, which is essentially the remainder or Hanks career. He is RHD PP QB that we have not had in over a decade. I really an warming up to DeAngelo and *what he can be, but he is not that now. Let Shatty take charge first and transition the responsibilities to DeAngelo.

 

[DutchShamrock]

It's interesting because Chicago just traded Hjalmersson with 2 years left because they were afraid of his next contract. Same with Panarin. They are regretting the Seabrook deal for sure. Suter is one that has worked out so far but he was UFA at 28, not 30 like McDonagh will be. Giordano was resigned long term and I think that's a contract they will regret pretty soon. Unless McDonagh is willing to discuss a 5 year deal, I'd be inclined to consider moving him now.

Obviously the return would need to be exceptional.

I'd probably look at something like:

Honka + Heiskenen + DAL 1st + DAL 2nd

Is that why they really traded Hjalmersson though? I thought they were in cap hell and he was just one of the bigger salaries that they were able to move. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong because I could have missed it.

I just don't see McDonagh as an issue. Even at 30. Girardi has multiple teams courting him, Staal would have a few teams looking at him if he was UFA. I wouldn't be surprised if the NTC is the only thing holding up a trade at 50%. But McDonagh is going to be a problem at 30?

Ultimately, I agree. I would trade anyone for the right return. I would hold out for a legit #1, young center though. We seem to be building up our D prospects.

 

[bernmeister]

Here's a couple of thoughts after trying to catch up on what's been posted here:

1. If Gorton decides to sign Shattenkirk (not saying he would but if this the path he chooses) I'd rather give all 7 years for lower average salary and then consider him an amnesty buyout in 4 years
.....3. Can't wait for July 1 to see what direction JG takes and what "rebuilt on a fly" means to him

too much risk
$ aside
buying out that much not likely gonna involve some amnesty, but standard buy out;
gonna have major sized dead cap consequence

only option is overpay, but ONLY 1yr deal
if he gives us a stopgap, pay a whole 8m x1

 

[DutchShamrock]

Agreed on point 1.

Going into year 6-7 if his game has really fallen off then use a buyout on him.

But the bottom line is I dont see his game falling off in the next 3-4 years, which is essentially the remainder or Hanks career. He is RHD PP QB that we have not had in over a decade. I really an warming up to DeAngelo and *what he can be, but he is not that now. Let Shatty take charge first and transition the responsibilities to DeAngelo.

Here's another wrinkle: I would consider more years and more money as long as there was no NTC/NMC attached to the contract. We'll get another expansion team soon. Probably amnesty buyouts. Who knows what gets defined and negotiated in the next CBA, NMC's might be protected against buyouts or something we aren't sure of. The next brilliant GM move will be getting more flexibility with player movement.

 

[BringBackLibertys]

Agreed on point 1.

Going into year 6-7 if his game has really fallen off then use a buyout on him.

But the bottom line is I dont see his game falling off in the next 3-4 years, which is essentially the remainder or Hanks career. He is RHD PP QB that we have not had in over a decade. I really an warming up to DeAngelo and *what he can be, but he is not that now. Let Shatty take charge first and transition the responsibilities to DeAngelo.

3-4 years for him to transition? Come on. The kid broke into the NHL last year. You all talk about him needing to grow up more, but then want to shelter him from responsibilities. Give the kid the reins, we brought him in, he is a younger version of Shatty, we now have no reason to spend silly amounts of money on Shatty. We HAVE our RH PP QB, we just need to let him grow into the role guys.

 

[RGY]

3-4 years for him to transition? Come on. The kid broke into the NHL last year. You all talk about him needing to grow up more, but then want to shelter him from responsibilities. Give the kid the reins, we brought him in, he is a younger version of Shatty, we now have no reason to spend silly amounts of money on Shatty. We HAVE our RH PP QB, we just need to let him grow into the role guys.

Theres no reason to throw him into the fire.

You do realize that has been the development issue with the Oilers, Coyotes, and Sabres for several years? Or have you just not been paying attention? Just because a KID broke into the NHL doesnt mean you should throw him to the wolves and say 'oh well let him work through the growing pains'. No. Thats so naive and shortsighted. The reasons why our younger players have done a good job transitioning and growing as NHL players is because there was a good core of players/vets ahead of them on the depth chart to take on not just simply "minutes" but all the big assignments while the kids proved themselves and moved up. Miller, Hayes, Skjei, Kreider, Fast, Buch, and even Hagelin as well.

So dont be so ridiculous in putting the weight of the world on the kids shoulders in NYC. Its absolutely asinine. Maybe the transition of the "reigns" takes only 2-3 years. But he should not have the role this upcoming year.

 

[nyr2k2]

I'd much rather Burmistrov than Grigs.

 

[BringBackLibertys]

Theres no reason to throw him into the fire.

You do realize that has been the development issue with the Oilers, Coyotes, and Sabres for several years? Or have you just not been paying attention? Just because a KID broke into the NHL doesnt mean you should throw him to the wolves and say 'oh well let him work through the growing pains'. No. Thats so naive and shortsighted. The reasons why our younger players have done a good job transitioning and growing as NHL players is because there was a good core of players/vets ahead of them on the depth chart to take on not just simply "minutes" but all the big assignments while the kids proved themselves and moved up. Miller, Hayes, Skjei, Kreider, Fast, Buch, and even Hagelin as well.

So dont be so ridiculous in putting the weight of the world on the kids shoulders in NYC. Its absolutely asinine. Maybe the transition of the "reigns" takes only 2-3 years. But he should not have the role this upcoming year.

What is asinine is spending 7x7 on a piece that will be redundant in about 1 year. We can trot out plenty of other people that while not great can be our right point on the PP if he ends up being not ready. Smith being a perfect example, while not great, he has the vision to pass the puck to the right person.

 

[GAGLine]

Here's a couple of thoughts after trying to catch up on what's been posted here:

1. If Gorton decides to sign Shattenkirk (not saying he would but if this the path he chooses) I'd rather give all 7 years for lower average salary and then consider him an amnesty buyout in 4 years

2. Before the 2016-17 season started I said that we could expect 2-3 good seasons out of 5 from Lundqvist. Didn't expect that he will have a down season right away but there's not reason to think that the premise remains - he definitely could have a rebound season coming up

3. Can't wait for July 1 to see what direction JG takes and what "rebuilt on a fly" means to him

1. Shattenkirk may not take a lower AAV to get 7 years, but if he does, it won't be significantly lower. There are no more amnesty buyouts. There may be after the next CBA, but I wouldn't count on it. Shattenkirk's contract will almost certainly be front loaded, which means a regular buyout will hurt a lot.

2. I think Hank will rebound, but he needs help. The defense has to be better.

3. I'm interested to see that too, but we have to remember what Mike Tyson said: Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face. Just because Gorton has a plan, doesn't mean it's going to unfold that way. He may plan to deal for a #1 center or a #1 RHD, but the deal may never happen. He may plan to sign a certain free agent, but that free agent may decide to sign somewhere else. It's important to keep in mind that what he's trying to do and what he actually accomplishes aren't always the same thing.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Theres no reason to throw him into the fire.

You do realize that has been the development issue with the Oilers, Coyotes, and Sabres for several years? Or have you just not been paying attention? Just because a KID broke into the NHL doesnt mean you should throw him to the wolves and say 'oh well let him work through the growing pains'. No. Thats so naive and shortsighted. The reasons why our younger players have done a good job transitioning and growing as NHL players is because there was a good core of players/vets ahead of them on the depth chart to take on not just simply "minutes" but all the big assignments while the kids proved themselves and moved up. Miller, Hayes, Skjei, Kreider, Fast, Buch, and even Hagelin as well.

So dont be so ridiculous in putting the weight of the world on the kids shoulders in NYC. Its absolutely asinine. Maybe the transition of the "reigns" takes only 2-3 years. But he should not have the role this upcoming year.

Naive and short sided would be throwing 7 years and a ton of money at a free agent because you're afraid of a young player failing.

Also, he'll be fine on the PP. It's the one portion of the game where he's actually looked good in the NHL. 5 on 5 is where he'll need to be sheltered, they can sign a cheaper player to have that covered.

Shattenkirk isn't happening.

 

[BringBackLibertys]

Naive and short sided would be throwing 7 years and a ton of money at a free agent because you're afraid of a young player failing.

Also, he'll be fine on the PP. It's the one portion of the game where he's actually looked good in the NHL. 5 on 5 is where he'll need to be sheltered, they can sign a cheaper player to have that covered.

Shattenkirk isn't happening.

Where is the Amen Brother button? I need to hit it.

 

[RGY]

What is asinine is spending 7x7 on a piece that will be redundant in about 1 year. We can trot out plenty of other people that while not great can be our right point on the PP if he ends up being not ready. Smith being a perfect example, while not great, he has the vision to pass the puck to the right person.

You have no idea what his contract is going to be. If it is 7x7 then he wont be signing with us. If its closer to $6 million then I am willing to bite the bullet. Shattenkirk's game is not falling off in the near future. Its **** poor to put DeAngelo in a position of #1 D responsibilities. It is a disservice to his personal development.

We had ZERO offensive RHD of any quality for the last several years. Now we have the chance to have two and people are seriously *****ing about it? When all it would cost us is dollars? Because he would be "redundant?" I didnt know we should put all our chips in the middle and only have one available for us to strategize and compete with.

 

[GregSirico]

Naive and short sided would be throwing 7 years and a ton of money at a free agent because you're afraid of a young player failing.

Also, he'll be fine on the PP. It's the one portion of the game where he's actually looked good in the NHL. 5 on 5 is where he'll need to be sheltered, they can sign a cheaper player to have that covered.

Shattenkirk isn't happening.

You don't think Shattenkirk is coming here?