Depending on the price it's hard for me to agree that somehow adding Kane wouldn't improve this team. Kane's a talent right up there with the Crosby's, ovechkins, datsyuks, bergerons etc. An era defining talent. He's not Claude giroux, he's much bigger than that. Add in the fact that he hasn't had two top line linemates ever in his career and it's just crazy to me to think he wouldn't be a difference maker for us.
Speculation: Roster Building Thread: New Season Edition
- Thread starter Gardner McKay
- Start date
- Status
The problem isn’t that he’s a top talent, it’s that we have potential top talents in any spot he likely should play. Him playing on the third line would be my personal Choice, give Chytil a massive boost of talent, but then vk moves to the left(which I think he can do).
But what assets are we giving up?
A better fourth line would be my personal wishlist, let us see what rhydal can do, and what it looks like fully healthy, but a deeper team likely goes further
If Chytil comes back strong the Rangers can do a lot better than Kane in a trade. Kane just doesn't make sense. With Chytil traded the rangers biggest need is going to be a center better than Chytil and Goodrow is not that player. ROR is interesting but he'd be a pure rental which would be a tough pill to swallow.
I'd love him on 3rd line too, but in all likelihood he'd play opposite Panarin. That said, Laf (back on his natural side) and Chytil going as they're going would make for a very dangerous 3rd line as well. I just can't see Kane being a redundancy on this team. He'd be the most gifted offensive player on the roster maybe outside of Panarin and Fox, and I'm not sure I'd go that far personally.
I believe he's cost prohibitive, and I'm not suggesting we should trade for him. I'm just saying that I think people are really underrating Kane here. A little too much xG chart reading. The dude is not a PP specialist. He's a superstar.
SA16
Sixstring
I think by the trade deadline we will know if our "potential top talents" are worth playing in the top six in a playoff run. He has one year left. If they have to move down the lineup at the end of the year that's not a big deal.
Rangers will be sellers at the deadline. The east is to good this year and the rangers are not that good. Shesty looks terrible most games this year. He gets outplayed by most goalies. Our scoring is little to Kim existent. The defense looks lost. Halek, Blais, Reaves, carpenter and Vesey will all be gone. Everyone will get there wish. The young players from The pack will be up here.
We don’t need more elite top end scoring? We’re one injury away from Vesey, Blais or Goodrow in the top six again. 5-2 loss against the Bruins, but we need more muckers and grinders? Come on.
McRanger92
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2017
- 13,517
- 25,217
I see you waited until the Rangers lost to one of the few teams better than us in the league to reply to this. Very sneaky.
Adding Kane doesn’t fix what’s wrong with this team, adding a defenseman does.
irishlaxburger2
Registered User
The Bruins depth vs our depth was on serious display tonight, and it wasn’t pretty. The reality is in the NHL, there’s only so much room for big contracts. That means you need to make the bottom of your lineup as cost-effective as possible. We have the high priced guys. We have the guys on ELCs. We even have some great players on low cost second contracts.
The big issue is our low priced depth is absolute garbage against good teams. We desperately need a cheap, veteran defenseman to sure up our 7. Someone that can mentor the bottom pair and even push into the top 4 if someone isn’t playing well. Boston has Anton Stralman for $1m. We’ve made the idiotic decision to ride with Libor Hajek.
Goodrow, Blais, Carpenter, and Reaves are all replacement level players. The lack of cost efficiency when you sum up all those cap hits is egregious. You can’t build depth with so many bad low-priced contracts. Not to mention, their inconsistency requires us to carry an extra F most nights. Motte is literally what people thought Goodrow would be, except without the salary premium of a Cup winner. Rydahl could do exactly what Carpenter does and also is waivers exempt. Two really poor decisions there.
Drury did an incredible job at the deadline last year getting the most out of depth acquisitions to sure up holes. He was dreadful in attempting to do the same this off-season. A lack of cap space I guess can be blamed, but sometimes you need to make the tough decision to move contracts that need moving instead of just accepting them as requirements (ie. Reaves). In a flat cap world, the fringes of your lineup need to be close to perfect. Ours are really, really bad. It’s the difference between a good team and a great one, like Boston.
The big issue is our low priced depth is absolute garbage against good teams. We desperately need a cheap, veteran defenseman to sure up our 7. Someone that can mentor the bottom pair and even push into the top 4 if someone isn’t playing well. Boston has Anton Stralman for $1m. We’ve made the idiotic decision to ride with Libor Hajek.
Goodrow, Blais, Carpenter, and Reaves are all replacement level players. The lack of cost efficiency when you sum up all those cap hits is egregious. You can’t build depth with so many bad low-priced contracts. Not to mention, their inconsistency requires us to carry an extra F most nights. Motte is literally what people thought Goodrow would be, except without the salary premium of a Cup winner. Rydahl could do exactly what Carpenter does and also is waivers exempt. Two really poor decisions there.
Drury did an incredible job at the deadline last year getting the most out of depth acquisitions to sure up holes. He was dreadful in attempting to do the same this off-season. A lack of cap space I guess can be blamed, but sometimes you need to make the tough decision to move contracts that need moving instead of just accepting them as requirements (ie. Reaves). In a flat cap world, the fringes of your lineup need to be close to perfect. Ours are really, really bad. It’s the difference between a good team and a great one, like Boston.
We’re 4-4-2 in our last 10, out-scored 32-24 in that time. I’m not advocating for Kane per se, but I do think we need to add to our top-six.
I do NOT think we need to add to our 4th line.
irishlaxburger2
Registered User
With how many players we’re carrying - partly due to injuries, partly to do with bad decision-making - there’s no room to fit another top 6 player.
As it stands now, two teams could retain 50% of Kane and we wouldn’t be able to fit him unless we sent considerable cap space the other way. And what player(s) would that be?
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
irishlaxburger2
Registered User
I agree we painted ourselves into a corner with some bad contracts. I don’t think we aren’t without options on some of those.
AGAIN- I’m not advocating we acquire Kane. I disagreed with the notion that we don’t need to improve our top-six.
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
I guess Tampa, Toronto, Colorado, Florida, Pittsburgh, and Washington, should just pack it up. Their seasons are over, they’ll be sellers, their GMs suck.
irishlaxburger2
Registered User
Nobody is saying we suck. In fact, I called our roster good.
It’s just not great due to some really boneheaded decisions at the bottom of the lineup. And unlike a few of those teams you mentioned, we’re on pace to have no cap room to fix it at the deadline.
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
Literally every post is saying we are not a good team because of X, Y, or Z. We have an elite winger, probably too 5-10 offensive player in the league, one of the best C, D, and G in the league, and that’s without mentioning our developing players, Kreider, Trocheck. The team had to fill 3-4 spots on guys making $800K or less. Welcome to the salary cap NHL. Every team is doing it. The team is fine, it’s Nov 3 and we are in the thick of it.
egelband
Registered User
- Sep 6, 2008
- 16,154
- 14,991
13-93-24
10-16-74
20-72-12
26-21-91
75
79-23
6-8
55-4
25
Just try this, GG, when Chytil and VK are healthy.
10-16-74
20-72-12
26-21-91
75
79-23
6-8
55-4
25
Just try this, GG, when Chytil and VK are healthy.
bleedblue94
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2004
- 9,884
- 10,907
I have absolutely no information that this is on anyone's radar, but I just keep getting this feeling that IF the rangers decide they can't have Jones and Fox in the top 6 together Jones would be an ideal target for the leafs since their current d core can't break the puck out at all or transition to their forwards. Jones seems like a dubas type skill player. I have no clue what the leafs have that helps the rangers right now. The other place I could see is van for hoglander but with Hughes already there I would be surprised. This stretch for Jones w Lindgren hurt will be important for him here me thinks
We need chytil back more than people realize. He makes this more than a 2 line team simply by eating minutes. I said this is the game thread but slowly and I think inadvertently this org has slipped into a leafs type roster that is so top heavy with no depth. I mean we have mock rosters WHEN HEALTHY popping up now with a guy we waived out of camp on the 3rd line. We have no depth here.
mrmovies779
The Greatest Teacher,Failure is.
- Feb 5, 2013
- 7,787
- 8,104
Barnaby
Registered User
What they envisioned when he was signed might not be what they envision his ideal role to be today. Things change. I don’t think they see him as an ideal 3C though I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see him as a 3rd line wing.
For what it’s worth, when they signed him, I believe the idea was he’d be a 3rd line winger who brought versatility - slide up, down, or play center while bringing intangibles and a guy whose won. I think they knowingly overpaid for that. However, as I said above, things change over time. Gomez was signed to center Jagr and it didn’t take long to see that wasn’t going to be his fit in the end.
17futurecap
Registered User
- Status
Ad
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Australian Open - Women Veronika Kudermetova vs Olivia GadeckiWagers: 3Staked: $1,300.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-