Speculation: Roster Building Thread LVII: On to Arbitration & the 2nd Buyout Window

[Tawnos]

Lmao what ever helps you sleep at night.

I can't think of a single team, athletics or otherwise, who benefit from rewarding underperforming employees, and in this case, an underperforming employee who is significantly worse than 8 or 9 of his peers in a position that only has 6 open slots.

You must have loved AV.

I sleep quite well at night, but it's not because I understand group dynamics better than a stranger on a message board. And I did like AV quite a bit until he lost the team (somewhere pretty early in the 17-18 season). 3 of the 4 years previous, his teams overachieved. That's a reflection of top-down leadership. And I've been a leader, both in a peer capacity and a top-down capacity. As a peer leader in a sales environment, I very rarely performed as well as the people around me in terms of metrics, but the whole team succeeded partially because of how well I did with that leadership. Then, because of that, I got promoted to more of a top-down position and succeeded there too, though I had to learn how. And in both situations, I was perfectly well able to teach people things I wasn't very good at myself. Top-down and peer leadership really are totally different animals.

I summed this stuff up about Staal in a post pretty recently in the Rykov thread. I said "Veterans don't teach young players puck skills, positional play, or decision making. That's up to the coaching staff. Veterans teach them how to survive the NHL, how to be a pro, how to conduct yourself on the ice and in the locker room. Coaches help with that stuff too, but the vets are the ones providing the example for the kids to learn from and follow. And no, a vet can't do it without being on the team and in the lineup."

The reason you can't do it without being in the lineup is because you never get to set the example for real. You can't show the kids what it takes to be a pro and consistency in things like effort and execution without being in the lineup regularly. By execution I mean going out there and doing what's expected of you, which is what the coaching staff is asking of you. I don't mean "playing well." Despite how much you might dislike the way Staal plays, he is going out there and doing what's expected of him pretty much 100% of the time. Young players can't follow the example of someone who is never setting the example.

Part of the reason why he gets looked to for these types of things, by the way, is his eye injury. The respect from other players has gotta be strong for the way he's been able to handle it and still be an NHL player.

Yes, Staal is not a very good player anymore, though I still believe he can hold down a 3rd pairing spot just fine. But he's better for the things we'd want him for than either Shattenkirk OR Smith would be. This is why he still holds value to the Rangers front office. That's why he holds value for me and for many other posters around here. Perhaps by this time next year, the youth will have taken a major step forward to where Staal's value in those regards are diminished, and maybe we buy him out then. For now, he should be kept on the team.

 

[pld459666]

Is it possible that Trouba would be willing to sign a Hayes type of contract?

Location for he and his GF are prime for her in the medical field.

Would he be willing to take a bit of a discount to help keep the team intact and allow it to grow together into a contender?

He just watched Panarin leave, depending on the reports, anywhere between 7-10 million on the table to sign here.

I wonder

 

[Rongomania]

Is it possible that Trouba would be willing to sign a Hayes type of contract?

Location for he and his GF are prime for her in the medical field.

Would he be willing to take a bit of a discount to help keep the team intact and allow it to grow together into a contender?

He just watched Panarin leave, depending on the reports, anywhere between 7-10 million on the table to sign here.

I wonder

I would imagine it would be in the Shattenkirk-Hayes realm - somewhere, team friendly.

There ain't no place better in the NHL to be a young millionaire with respect in your league, on an, on paper, red hot looking up and coming squad.

This is why we've seen millions left on quite a few negotiating tables in this city for this team ..

But if this kid gets 8 mil, bye-bye buchy, no?

 

[SA16]

I would imagine it would be in the Shattenkirk-Hayes realm - somewhere, team friendly.

There ain't no place better in the NHL to be a young millionaire with respect in your league, on an, on paper, red hot looking up and coming squad.

This is why we've seen millions left on quite a few negotiating tables in this city for this team ..

But if this kid gets 8 mil, bye-bye buchy, no?

Trouba getting 8M or 7M makes no difference to Buchnevich and really does not change what they have to do to clear space.

 

[MetalJaws]

Move Shattenkik to San Jose at half retained for a prospect. I'm not sure how high Joachim Blichfeld is on San Jose's radar but I'd be interested in that guy even if we had to move something else with Shattenkirk. Right shooting left wingers are gold in my books, dont understand why more players dont play their offwing, much easier to create shooting spaces.

I'm a righty, prefer the LW as well

I do as well, however you're a major liability in your own end if you don't possess high end backhand skill. Poorly receiving NHL caliber passes on your back hand on breakouts make you a turnover machine. It's substantially harder to breakout on your backhand at higher levels. D first!

 

[Rongomania]

Trouba getting 8M or 7M makes no difference to Buchnevich and really does not change what they have to do to clear space.

That's great, I just would be much more comfortable with JT getting 7. That'd be great. Gotta keep Butch for sure.

 

[RonaldNeptune]

I actually think first line center mins for Hartford under a new coaching staff with a good team might honestly be best for him. Take the pressure off.

Yea this was my thinking as well...Let him play in all situations and log big minutes while being a leader.

 

[bobbop]

Teams with the most cap space right now are:

Colorado
Winnipeg
Ottawa

The first two teams could absolutely see value in having a veteran defenseman like Smith on the roster. Colorado just shipped out Barrie, they have Makar and potentially Byrum. Obviously Byrum might not make the team this year but still.

Attach a 3rd or 4th round pick to him and you could entice those teams to take him on for only 2 more seasons.

Those are also teams that could be interested in Vlad Namestnikov. A solid depth winger who can also take some faceoffs.

Other teams that may like Names:

LAK
MIN
CAR
CGY

The Rangers probably have their feelers out there and are waiting on what those teams decide

Shattenkirk would be the better value for Colorado. He’s played there and they are a little short on the right side. There could be some there there.

The only way Ottawa takes Smith is if we sweeten the deal. No thanks.

 

[bobbop]

Buchnevich arb July 29th.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I sleep quite well at night, but it's not because I understand group dynamics better than a stranger on a message board. And I did like AV quite a bit until he lost the team (somewhere pretty early in the 17-18 season). 3 of the 4 years previous, his teams overachieved. That's a reflection of top-down leadership. And I've been a leader, both in a peer capacity and a top-down capacity. As a peer leader in a sales environment, I very rarely performed as well as the people around me in terms of metrics, but the whole team succeeded partially because of how well I did with that leadership. Then, because of that, I got promoted to more of a top-down position and succeeded there too, though I had to learn how. And in both situations, I was perfectly well able to teach people things I wasn't very good at myself. Top-down and peer leadership really are totally different animals.

I summed this stuff up about Staal in a post pretty recently in the Rykov thread. I said "Veterans don't teach young players puck skills, positional play, or decision making. That's up to the coaching staff. Veterans teach them how to survive the NHL, how to be a pro, how to conduct yourself on the ice and in the locker room. Coaches help with that stuff too, but the vets are the ones providing the example for the kids to learn from and follow. And no, a vet can't do it without being on the team and in the lineup."

The reason you can't do it without being in the lineup is because you never get to set the example for real. You can't show the kids what it takes to be a pro and consistency in things like effort and execution without being in the lineup regularly. By execution I mean going out there and doing what's expected of you, which is what the coaching staff is asking of you. I don't mean "playing well." Despite how much you might dislike the way Staal plays, he is going out there and doing what's expected of him pretty much 100% of the time. Young players can't follow the example of someone who is never setting the example.

Part of the reason why he gets looked to for these types of things, by the way, is his eye injury. The respect from other players has gotta be strong for the way he's been able to handle it and still be an NHL player.

Yes, Staal is not a very good player anymore, though I still believe he can hold down a 3rd pairing spot just fine. But he's better for the things we'd want him for than either Shattenkirk OR Smith would be. This is why he still holds value to the Rangers front office. That's why he holds value for me and for many other posters around here. Perhaps by this time next year, the youth will have taken a major step forward to where Staal's value in those regards are diminished, and maybe we buy him out then. For now, he should be kept on the team.

I don't really care about the first paragraph, but good for you.

However, This isn't a matter of him being worse than a few people in competition with him, it's a matter of him being worse than everyone in competition with him. Your belief in his ability to hold down a 3rd pair role is completely baseless, he struggled just as much against bottom line competition as he did against top line competition and it wasn't all Pionk's fault (Pionk away from Staal was much better than Staal away from Pionk.) His on ice impacts are detrimental to the team's performance, if your sales numbers has similar impacts you would have not been promoted to a leadership position, you would have been fired.

All those things you said in the Rykov thread are all things he can do WITH OUT PLAYING REGULARLY. Your sales business is not the same as a professional sports team and its a good thing in your case.

 

[SA16]

Shattenkirk would be the better value for Colorado. He’s played there and they are a little short on the right side. There could be some there there.

The only way Ottawa takes Smith is if we sweeten the deal. No thanks.

Smith at ~20% for Condon. Costs them an additional 3M total over two years for someone they will use as opposed to sit in the AHL. Saves us 2.2M in cap space this year and 3.5M next year. Can adjust retention amounts until something works. There is the potential issue of him actually accepting a trade there though with his NTC.

 

[wafflepadsave]

I actually think first line center mins for Hartford under a new coaching staff with a good team might honestly be best for him. Take the pressure off.

Speaking of which, I wonder what the hold up is with Hartford?

 

[Tawnos]

I don't really care about the first paragraph, but good for you.

However, This isn't a matter of him being worse than a few people in competition with him, it's a matter of him being worse than everyone in competition with him. Your belief in his ability to hold down a 3rd pair role is completely baseless, he struggled just as much against bottom line competition as he did against top line competition and it wasn't all Pionk's fault (Pionk away from Staal was much better than Staal away from Pionk.) His on ice impacts are detrimental to the team's performance, if your sales numbers has similar impacts you would have not been promoted to a leadership position, you would have been fired.

All those things you said in the Rykov thread are all things he can do WITH OUT PLAYING REGULARLY. Your sales business is not the same as a professional sports team and its a good thing in your case.

Group dynamics are essentially the same in sports, business, military, science, and anything else that involves teams of people working towards one goal. There might be huge differences in what is actually being done, but very little in the way group dynamics work.

I was consistently at or near the bottom of the sales rankers where I worked. They could have pretty easily replaced me with a better sales person at any point. Basically, you're wrong about how it went down there.

My belief that he can hold down a 3rd pairing spot isn't baseless. It's just based on things you reject as valid evaluation. Just like you reject people's real-life experience. I can back it up all day long.

And finally, the crux of these conversations and why I didn't want to get into it with you last week. I shouldn't have today either. Here's how the conversation goes. You: "These things can be done without Staal playing regularly." Me: "No they can't, and here's the reason why." You: "These things can be done without Staal playing regularly." Tell me HOW that would work. HOW can Staal be a peer leader without being a peer?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Group dynamics are essentially the same in sports, business, military, science, and anything else that involves teams of people working towards one goal. There might be huge differences in what is actually being done, but very little in the way group dynamics work.

I was consistently at or near the bottom of the sales rankers where I worked. They could have pretty easily replaced me with a better sales person at any point. Basically, you're wrong about how it went down there.

My belief that he can hold down a 3rd pairing spot isn't baseless. It's just based on things you reject as valid evaluation. Just like you reject people's real-life experience. I can back it up all day long.

And finally, the crux of these conversations and why I didn't want to get into it with you last week. I shouldn't have today either. Here's how the conversation goes. You: "These things can be done without Staal playing regularly." Me: "No they can't, and here's the reason why." You: "These things can be done without Staal playing regularly." Tell me HOW that would work. HOW can Staal be a peer leader without being a peer?

He doesn't have to participate in games regularly in order to be a "leader". If someone slacks off or needs to be pulled from the lineup, bam, you can insert him for a few games. If his true value is in showing up to the rink every day ready to work and providing insight on how to be a pro, they aren't going to be instilled on a game to game basis. Where it does happen? Between games.

I don't know why you keep bringing this up like it's some kind of mandatory mechanism for this team. It isn't.

Your belief that he can hold down 3rd pair minutes is baseless because it revolves around a bunch of nothing.

Staal against elite competition: -3.4 CF Rel, 42.90 GF%
Staal against Bottom line competition: -4.5 CF rel, 40.00 GF%

His numbers were worse against bottom line competition because he didn't have Zibanejad, Kreider and who ever was playing with them to prop his numbers (if we can call it that) against the stronger lines.

I reject your premise because it's bull shit, not valid evaluation.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

Your belief in his ability to hold down a 3rd pair role is completely baseless, he struggled just as much against bottom line competition as he did against top line competition and it wasn't all Pionk's fault (Pionk away from Staal was much better than Staal away from Pionk.)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this the general consensus about Girardi as well? Just because he may be useless here doesn't mean he can't do the job on another team.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this the general consensus about Girardi as well? Just because he may be useless here doesn't mean he can't do the job on another team.

I hope we get a chance to test that theory.

But Girardi was pretty horrendous in Tampa too. Maybe not NY horrendous but that because he got away from AV and well, Tampa was just a lot better than we were.

 

[Tawnos]

He doesn't have to participate in games regularly in order to be a "leader". If someone slacks off or needs to be pulled from the lineup, bam, you can insert him for a few games. If his true value is in showing up to the rink every day ready to work and providing insight on how to be a pro, they aren't going to be instilled on a game to game basis. Where it does happen? Between games.

I don't know why you keep bringing this up like it's some kind of mandatory mechanism for this team. It isn't.

Your belief that he can hold down 3rd pair minutes is baseless because it revolves around a bunch of nothing.

Staal against elite competition: -3.4 CF Rel, 42.90 GF%
Staal against Bottom line competition: -4.5 CF rel, 40.00 GF%

His numbers were worse against bottom line competition because he didn't have Zibanejad, Kreider and who ever was playing with them to prop his numbers (if we can call it that) against the stronger lines.

I reject your premise because it's bull ****, not valid evaluation.

Yeah, objective data is not the only valid form of evaluation. It’s only half of a truly solid evaluation of a player. But at least I’ll accept it as one valid form of evaluation, though Corsi is a particularly poor tool for the topic of evaluating defensemen.

Like I’ve already said, you can’t provide the example for people to follow if you aren’t there to provide that example. A person can provide a good example in practice all they want, but if the guys you’re doing it for don’t see you do it during the actual games, it won’t have any effect. If the hallmark of a mature and professional player is their consistency in execution and effort from game to game, you absolutely cannot provide that example if you aren’t playing game to game. It really does need to be instilled on a game to game basis.

So if you disagree with that, tell me how it would work to have it not be instilled on a game to game basis. How do players internalize the lessons without it? Tell me how that would work.

Every developing team, in any example sports or not, needs this from as many people as it can get to set these examples, until they get top graded out by the better performers who are at the same level when it comes to these things. That’s why I believe it’s mandatory mechanism. Having these kind of people as peer leaders is crucial for transitioning a team from the forming phase, through storming and into norming.

Granted, it’s not black and white. It’s a balance. You can top grade out a good intangible person with someone who isn’t as good, but better at objective performance. Making those determinations are the job of the top-down leader, in this case the coach, but it’s entirely a subjective decision.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

@Tawnos

I don't understand, you are writing a lot of words and fancy ones to essentially say Staal provides leadership and intangibles, right? I Agree with you that those things do exist. Thing is, you can find a player that provides those things every offseason for exponentially less than Staal's cost, no?

 

[SA16]

The Rangers have developed like one top pairing defenseman in Staal's time here and it was a number 12 overall pick so I'm not sure what mega impact he's actually having on anyone.

@Tawnos

I don't understand, you are writing a lot of words and fancy ones to essentially say Staal provides leadership and intangibles, right? I Agree with you that those things do exist. Thing is, you can find a player that provides those things every offseason for exponentially less than Staal's cost, no?

You can get it from McQuaid, who also is awful, for roughly league minimum in FA right now. Staal is already under contract though. It's not like they would sign him as is for 6M if he was available today. Or well you'd hope not but then you look at the Tyler Myers contract so..shrug.

 

[Tawnos]

@Tawnos

I don't understand, you are writing a lot of words and fancy ones to essentially say Staal provides leadership and intangibles, right? I Agree with you that those things do exist. Thing is, you can find a player that provides those things every offseason for exponentially less than Staal's cost, no?

Yes, if you want to break it down to the root of what I'm saying... what I'm doing is explaining how the whole thing with leadership and intangible actually works, though. I get the feeling quite often that people who pooh-pooh these things don't really understand the topic.

But we talk about this with Staal right now in terms of buying him out, rather than Smith or Shattenkirk. All three of these guys have no place on the long-term future of the team. All three are bottom-pairing D at best. So you have to look at what they provide in the short-term. What is the most important thing short-term for the Rangers? Their youth developing. Of their 3 different things they provide (Staal-intangibles, Smith-versatility, Shattenkirk-PP specialty), which would have the biggest impact on their youth developing? Easy, the guy with the intangibles. So he's the guy you don't buy out. And the guy with the prohibitive 2nd year of the buyout is the other guy you don't buy out.

And no, there aren't players who have the same intangible ability as Staal available for exponentially less every off-season. How many guys being signed for cheap are letter-wearing caliber? Pretty much none. Also, it's not as effective when it's a mercenary.

 

[Tawnos]

The Rangers have developed like one top pairing defenseman in Staal's time here and it was a number 12 overall pick so I'm not sure what mega impact he's actually having on anyone.

That's a false indicator. Is the reason we haven't developed any other #1D during Staal's time because Staal didn't provide enough leadership or because we didn't have another player with enough talent? Also, keep in mind for half of Staal's career, he was developing himself.

 

[SA16]

Yes, if you want to break it down to the root of what I'm saying... what I'm doing is explaining how the whole thing with leadership and intangible actually works, though. I get the feeling quite often that people who pooh-pooh these things don't really understand the topic.

But we talk about this with Staal right now in terms of buying him out, rather than Smith or Shattenkirk. All three of these guys have no place on the long-term future of the team. All three are bottom-pairing D at best. So you have to look at what they provide in the short-term. What is the most important thing short-term for the Rangers? Their youth developing. Of their 3 different things they provide (Staal-intangibles, Smith-versatility, Shattenkirk-PP specialty), which would have the biggest impact on their youth developing? Easy, the guy with the intangibles. So he's the guy you don't buy out. And the guy with the prohibitive 2nd year of the buyout is the other guy you don't buy out.

And no, there aren't players who have the same intangible ability as Staal available for exponentially less every off-season. How many guys being signed for cheap are letter-wearing caliber? Pretty much none.

How much would you sign Staal for if he was a UFA right now and you had no cap issues?

 

[Tawnos]

How much would you sign Staal for if he was a UFA right now and you had no cap issues?

Probably ~$3m... which is about what he'll get if we did buy him out and he signed somewhere else.

(I took exponentially less to mean bury-able salary level)

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

Probably ~$3m... which is about what he'll get if we did buy him out and he signed somewhere else.

(I took exponentially less to mean bury-able salary level)

No offense, but Staal would be lucky to get a 1 year, 1 mil deal when his contract ends lol

 

[Tawnos]

No offense, but Staal would be lucky to get a 1 year, 1 mil deal when his contract ends lol

People said EXACTLY the same thing about Girardi.