Actually... if one of the targets is Grieg, they likely don't need to move off 22. Is there someone that is a bit out of ranger at 22 they'd consider moving up for?
I think staying at 22 is, and will remain a valid option if they keep the pick. I think there might be some guys they consider for a move-up, but overall I get the sense they feel someone will be there they really like.
And keep in mind that I only have some pieces of the puzzle. I'm sure there are other names they will consider at 22 that go beyond the list of players I know or suspect they like.
It would seem to reason that a Buch trade for someone like Lindholm who would fill another need would be open for discussion but not so much Buch for draft picks.
It confirms what I was told earlier this year --- the Rangers preference remains trading for roster players, or guys who are right on the cusp of an NHL roster. I don't think they are pursuing picks as their top choice.
@Edge any interest in a center like Monahan?
I do not believe they have an interest in Monahan or his salary at this time.
I'm pretty sure in past conversations that
@Edge has said the Rangers still see Lindholm as a center, so if you move Buch for Lindholm, you're playing him at center, with either Strome or Chytil moving to the wing.
I was told the Rangers believe in Lindholm's ability as a center, especially with the roster they are assembling. In that scenario the Rangers might be content to leave Chytil as a third line wing (especially if you're looking at Kreider being a linemate). They could also try him as a wing, or even move Lindholm back to RW if Chytil makes giant strides. Part of what they really like about Lindholm is the options.
Greig's rankings seem to be all over the place...I wonder if he is a guy that you just take at #22 or if he's your target, you could move back a few spots still get him and add a 2nd?
I'm going to venture a guess that if he's the Rangers guy they probably just take him and be done with it.I think the Rangers prefer to just go in, get their guys, and move on. I don't think there's a desire to trade down and risk losing whoever they target.
Is there a sense that the team doesn’t want to shake up things? Like, maybe nothing happens at all? I kind of lean toward just letting things shake out. See what materializes.
Or do you feel they have a specific agenda? A shopping list...?
I don't know if the team wants to shake things up, so much as make strong, targeted moves if they are available. It all depends on how the league responds this off-season.
If there’s interest in Lias, that indicates to me that last year could have been an anomaly. Or a learning experience. Maybe he‘s not a lost cause.
While there's an interest in Andersson, I would keep expectations modest. I don't think we're looking at a prime asset. I think you're looking at a package deal, a reclamation project, or someone else who has gone off the rails for his team.
I think its time to start simming Blake Biondi into our 3rd rounds given the latest info from
@Edge
I'd keep an eye on him starting in the third and fourth. But we'll see what happens. I have no idea where the Rangers have him, or who they have ahead of him.
I've had a few people ask me about Uncle Larry's latest article re: ADA. Long story short, I think ADA remains a legit candidate to be moved. However, I have no heard any concerns expressed about signing Lundkvist. However, I think Larry's missing a key point in his article. I would be very, very surprised if the Rangers moved ADA without having an agreement in place with Lundkvist. I can't see them running the risk of losing both, nor giving up that much leverage in discussions with Lundkvist's people. So I think there are a few steps that take place before ADA is magically shipped off to make room for Lundkvist.
