Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part LIII

[GAGLine]

goligoski and hjalmersson make $5+ mil so I think they are a bit pricey given our cap situation and not really interest in giving up assets for a 35 year old to get the yotes to eat salary...

I think a Goligoski for Smith swap makes sense for both teams. Both players can play either side on defense, so no loss there. We get the better player, and Arizona saves 1.125 mil against the cap and 1.65 mil in real money.

 

[Leetch3]

I think a Goligoski for Smith swap makes sense for both teams. Both players can play either side on defense, so no loss there. We get the better player, and Arizona saves 1.125 mil against the cap and 1.65 mil in real money.

I think we'd need to first clear a decent amount of cap space in other moves to make sure we have the room needed before adding replacing smith with a guy with a higher cap hit. its not a bad idea but our cap space is so tight

 

[GAGLine]

I think we'd need to first clear a decent amount of cap space in other moves to make sure we have the room needed before adding replacing smith with a guy with a higher cap hit. its not a bad idea but our cap space is so tight

Yeah, adding even 1.125 mil will be an issue, as we have to trim as it is. I'd gladly trade them Staal instead, but Staal probably wouldn't agree to it, and it doesn't really help Arizona.

 

[kovazub94]

Yeah, adding even 1.125 mil will be an issue, as we have to trim as it is. I'd gladly trade them Staal instead, but Staal probably wouldn't agree to it, and it doesn't really help Arizona.

That’s why even the Rangers trade Smith for a more expensive replacement, they’d still need to move Staal’s salary and find a cheaper but more effective (duh) 3LD.

 

[Savant]

That’s why even the Rangers trade Smith for a more expensive replacement, they’d still need to move Staal’s salary and find a cheaper but more effective (duh) 3LD.

I think a Goligoski for Smith swap makes sense for both teams. Both players can play either side on defense, so no loss there. We get the better player, and Arizona saves 1.125 mil against the cap and 1.65 mil in real money.

The Rangers can add salary for this season as long as it expires in 2021.
Not sure why Arizona needs to save money though.

 

[GAGLine]

The Rangers can add salary for this season as long as it expires in 2021.
Not sure why Arizona needs to save money though.

We don't have enough cap space to sign the players we have, so we'll have to clear even more cap to add.

When has Arizona not needed to save money? A lot of teams will be looking to save money due to Covid, and Arizona is already spending a lot more than they usually do. They will be looking for ways to slash the budget.

 

[Cag29]

If you need to improve your pp then sure.

But not if you are looking at improving es play/top pairing, wasting your money there

Miller and Robertson will be much cheaper over the course of the next 5-6 seasons. I would either stick with Staal and Smith one more year or buy out Staal and sign a vet for 1-2 years at a much cheaper rate.

 

[Cag29]

Great Post!!!LGR!

 

[Cag29]

I was trying to say Great post to Mac an Gs!

 

[kovazub94]

Miller and Robertson will be much cheaper over the course of the next 5-6 seasons. I would either stick with Staal and Smith one more year or buy out Staal and sign a vet for 1-2 years at a much cheaper rate.

Miller, Robertson and Jones are still ways away and no guarantee that all of them become NHLers, let alone an upper echelon of LD. And post Smith and Staal the Rangers will have room for two LD (1LD and 2LD). As you noted Miller and Co. should be cheap in the near future so if the Rangers choose to bring one higher quality more expensive replacement on a longer term it could work just as well as a shorter term options. Reunanen is a wild card.

 

[kovazub94]

It's funny, the more I look at this roster, I start to think that the Rangers brass would be perfectly acceptable with 2020-21 being a transition year. Even if you don't factor in the shortened season due to COVID, a transition year allows them to get rid of their short-term financial restrictions and get a better picture of how some of their young pieces fit into their long-term core moving forward. Looking at their roster, it's surprisingly easy for them to just bring back essentially the same team and bank on natural player's progression being their added value for the offseason. There are some obvious caveats to this plan in order to deal with the flat cap issues: Staal needs to be bought out, Strome needs to be signed to a 1 year deal, and they need to get creative on Tony's next contract. Maybe they can figure out a way to sign him to a backloaded deal like McAvoy/Werenski within the bounds of the new CBA. The rest of the lineup can be filled out with cheap depth, but I think factoring in Lafreniere and natural progression from Buchnevich, Chytil, DeAngelo, Gauthier, and Kakko puts them in a good enough spot to still be competitive next year. They could roll a lineup like this:

Kreider-Zibanejad-Buchnevich
Panarin-Strome-Kakko
Lafreniere-Chytil-Gauthier
Lemieux-Howden-4RW

Smith-Trouba
Lindgren-Fox
Hajek-DeAngelo

Igor
Georgiev/Lundqvist

The lower-end depth is still really weak IMO, and they'd be banking on their top-6 carrying the load again. If this is meant to be a transition year, I think that ends up being a fair enough lineup. I also tried to not over-project younger guys like Barron and Miller winning spots, and it's obvious that LD is still a glaring need.

Agree. LD and 4C (you put it at 4RW) should be addressed in some fashion but otherwise there’s NO NEED to force any other roster changes.

 

[gravey9]

To me, Brendan Smith's presence on this team doesn't totally matter one way or the other. It will all come down to Staal and Lundqvist. I think Smith gets moved if Staal and Lundqvist contracts stay on the books next year.

But if he stays, I can actually see him signed back at the #7D for 1.1-1.5m after next season.

 

[Tawnos]

I think people get too caught up in semantics when it comes to "BPA" to me it basically boils down to you don't draft based on current needs EVER cause things can change in a hurry and you don't go out of your way to draft based on organizational needs. Position, style of play, etc can be used as tie-breakers between similar level players and if the one of the next players on your list covers multiple needs that is a bonus but you don't go out of your way looking for that position no matter what....if you have a center, winger and dmen pretty even and need a center than great take a center. but if you've got 10 wingers and dmen ahead of the next center you don't

Right, but doesn't the issue then become that, from guys ranked relatively evenly in terms of talent around the 20-25 picks, you're pretty much always going to have a center, winger, and defenseman in that mix? I mean, in many of the last 10 years, you've had all three of those picked 20-25. You don't really have to go out of your way looking for a player that fits the talent for a player drafted in that range who also fits the positional weakness.

If we're talking top-10... or even top-15... I definitely agree with you, because it in that range, you really are going out of your way to do it. I just don't think the concept holds as you get deeper in the draft.

 

[TopShelf86]

Miller and Robertson will be much cheaper over the course of the next 5-6 seasons. I would either stick with Staal and Smith one more year or buy out Staal and sign a vet for 1-2 years at a much cheaper rate.

A simple way to to endure those 2 contracts to bridge the gap while we wait for Miller and Robertson, provided they're ready

Is play smith mostly on the 4th line and limit Stalls minutes

If we have to keep them, then we have to create a situation where we limit how much they hold us back defensively. If theyee serious about winning games and making the playoffs, but cant trade or wont buy anyone out, then this has to happen.
Only thing is theyll have to sign a cheap FA that's reliable.

 

[cwede]

It's funny, the more I look at this roster, I start to think that the Rangers brass would be perfectly acceptable with 2020-21 being a transition year. Even if you don't factor in the shortened season due to COVID, a transition year allows them to get rid of their short-term financial restrictions and get a better picture of how some of their young pieces fit ... bring back essentially the same team and bank on natural player's progression being their added value for the offseason ...factoring in Lafreniere and natural progression from Buchnevich, Chytil, DeAngelo, Gauthier, and Kakko puts them in a good enough spot ...

i agree with this strongly
- get past the 4 large expiring Cap Hits and the Seattle draft,
- let the young roster players get more and varied usage and grow,
- find out more about what's in hand with this year's adds - Reunanen, Barron, Richards, Khodo
- keep close watch on the important and/or decision-pending kids in Europe and in NA

The ADA/Strome RFA situations may create the most roster uncertainty
IF they move ADA, an opportunity to add a long-term LHD, but great options will always be there later.
IF the move Strome, a fairly priced C, like a Haula, could be considered even for this year...

 

[Tawnos]

Miller and Robertson will be much cheaper over the course of the next 5-6 seasons. I would either stick with Staal and Smith one more year or buy out Staal and sign a vet for 1-2 years at a much cheaper rate.

It's one thing to want to bridge the gap with the vets we have until those guys are ready.

It's another thing to put a team on the ice that only has one LD capable of playing significant NHL minutes.

 

[Ola]

BPA exists, but it's not on a player-by-player basis. Certain players are grouped together as BPA, and within that group it's perfectly fine to go for organizational depth. Not so much what your NHL team is lacking, but what your prospect pool is lacking. Ironically, in our case that's the same (center)

Yeah and it’s also so much about philosophy, style and what not. Certain teams do well developing certain types of players. What is BPA in terms of potential vs likelihood to be able to play if called for? How are a goalie vs a 5’7 playmaker vs a 6’5 stay at home D measured against each other?

 

[Chytilmania]

Don't ever let it happen again. JK, I forgive you



It's funny, the more I look at this roster, I start to think that the Rangers brass would be perfectly acceptable with 2020-21 being a transition year. Even if you don't factor in the shortened season due to COVID, a transition year allows them to get rid of their short-term financial restrictions and get a better picture of how some of their young pieces fit into their long-term core moving forward. Looking at their roster, it's surprisingly easy for them to just bring back essentially the same team and bank on natural player's progression being their added value for the offseason. There are some obvious caveats to this plan in order to deal with the flat cap issues: Staal needs to be bought out, Strome needs to be signed to a 1 year deal, and they need to get creative on Tony's next contract. Maybe they can figure out a way to sign him to a backloaded deal like McAvoy/Werenski within the bounds of the new CBA. The rest of the lineup can be filled out with cheap depth, but I think factoring in Lafreniere and natural progression from Buchnevich, Chytil, DeAngelo, Gauthier, and Kakko puts them in a good enough spot to still be competitive next year. They could roll a lineup like this:

Kreider-Zibanejad-Buchnevich
Panarin-Strome-Kakko
Lafreniere-Chytil-Gauthier
Lemieux-Howden-4RW

Smith-Trouba
Lindgren-Fox
Hajek-DeAngelo

Igor
Georgiev/Lundqvist

The lower-end depth is still really weak IMO, and they'd be banking on their top-6 carrying the load again. If this is meant to be a transition year, I think that ends up being a fair enough lineup. I also tried to not over-project younger guys like Barron and Miller winning spots, and it's obvious that LD is still a glaring need.

I think a transition year is the smartest thing going forward. Let the contracts run out and see how the young kids, and even someone like Strome, develop. They should have answers by the end of the season as to who needs to be here long term. Then they can make decisions with VK, Miller, Nils, Barron, etc all the young guys.
If we sign a RW and bury Gauthier on the 4th all year we'll never know what his potential is. If we make a splash at LD then how are we fitting Miller and Robertson next season, or does that guy cut into cap space for someone else? Same goes for Center, let's see how Chytil does and let's bridge Strome. Maybe Chytil breaks out into a 2C and we only need a 3C. No need for big moves that may affect the cap.

 

[kovazub94]

I think a transition year is the smartest thing going forward. Let the contracts run out and see how the young kids, and even someone like Strome, develop. They should have answers by the end of the season as to who needs to be here long term. Then they can make decisions with VK, Miller, Nils, Barron, etc all the young guys.
If we sign a RW and bury Gauthier on the 4th all year we'll never know what his potential is. If we make a splash at LD then how are we fitting Miller and Robertson next season, or does that guy cut into cap space for someone else? Same goes for Center, let's see how Chytil does and let's bridge Strome. Maybe Chytil breaks out into a 2C and we only need a 3C. No need for big moves that may affect the cap.

I think LD is unlike other positions. There’s a room for one “import” that wouldn’t interfere with prospects opportunities unless you’re 100% sure without a doubt that Miller and Robertson will become full-timers by 2021-22.

 

[Edge]

I definitely feel we've entered, or are entering the transition phase. I also feel this this the phase people were most likely to overlook. In other words, we don't just go from rebuilding/accumulating to contending. Likewise, we don't just start going all-out to contend right now. It's going to be a bit more calculated at this point, as oppossed to balls to the wall.

I expect them to look into some veteran help, consider some trades, and pursue young NHL talent whenever possible. But I also think COVID will impact the landscape a little.

While I don't think the desire to move the Canes pick for young talent has changed, I don't know if there are going to be as many trade partners as there normally would've been. So it's quite possible you see the Rangers pivot a little in how they approach this offseason.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

It's one thing to want to bridge the gap with the vets we have until those guys are ready.

It's another thing to put a team on the ice that only has one LD capable of playing significant NHL minutes.

Well thats what we are doing, bridging the gap. Are you under the illusion that we are a cup contender by adding a LD? We aren't. Staal and smith can play and let their contracts run out, and we can insert Miller and Hajek from time to time for experience and the following year we start the march with our home grown d if they are deemed good enough. Lindgren will have 2 full seasons in by then.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Pornman released his 12th(Calgary) and 11th(Arizona) ranked teams today in his organizational breakdown. Rangers are top 10 as expected but I wonder if he would consider us top 5? Vancouver has to be #1, Buffalo, Toronto, Carolina, and Colorado must be in the mix. Maybe we can sneak in at 5? Find out next time on Dragon Ball Z.

 

[Leetch3]

Pornman released his 12th(Calgary) and 11th(Arizona) ranked teams today in his organizational breakdown. Rangers are top 10 as expected but I wonder if he would consider us top 5? Vancouver has to be #1, Buffalo, Toronto, Carolina, and Colorado must be in the mix. Maybe we can sneak in at 5? Find out next time on Dragon Ball Z.

whats his criteria/cutoff? is it only non-nhl prospects?

 

[Edge]

whats his criteria/cutoff? is it only non-nhl prospects?

I am also curious how he views system vs. drafting.

For example, Colorado has an impressive system/cupboard because they picked up some great young talent with lottery picks. But anything outside of the first round has essentially been non-existent for a while now. It's simply a matter of stockpiling top end prospects enough times.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Pornman released his 12th(Calgary) and 11th(Arizona) ranked teams today in his organizational breakdown. Rangers are top 10 as expected but I wonder if he would consider us top 5? Vancouver has to be #1, Buffalo, Toronto, Carolina, and Colorado must be in the mix. Maybe we can sneak in at 5? Find out next time on Dragon Ball Z.

Either way, pretty exciting to be sitting top 10 before the impact of a 1OA pick.