Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part LIV

[GoAwayPanarin]

Brodin seems like a good target for the team, but I want NO PART of any player 1 year from UFA. Let’s ask this, would anyone sign h as a UFA next year? Say $5m x 5 years?

In a heart beat.

That is a STEAL of a contract.

 

[NYR Viper]

It's possible he's moved for a second, though I don't think Greig will be there. My own feelings aside, I think he's going in the 20s.

I have to tell you, I really think he's a top candidate for the Rangers at 22 depending on how the board plays out. And I strongly suspect that his ranking on McKenzie's list was due at at least in part to feedback from the Rangers.

Obviously it's really hard to get a definite "this is the guy" confirmation before the draft, but I think Greig is near the top of their list for that pick.

He’d fill a hole in the organization for sure.

 

[Edge]

@Edge Any mention of how the left wing situation might be expected to resolve? Kreider to the 3rd line? Laf on the 3rd? Kreider to RW, maybe dependent on if Buchnevich is traded?

I didn't get the sense that the Rangers are too worried. It would appear they believe, and like the options they have.

Kreider could get a look on the right side, I also don't think they have a problem rolling him on the third if it means giving Chytil a legit weapon to play with. I think Laf could certainly take some shifts there. No one seemed offended by the concept of playing Panarin on the right side based on the type of player he is.

I do think there's a hesitation to move Buch with so many question marks right now, but I don't think it's something that would prevent them from making a move for a guy they really like.

 

[Edge]

I like everything about this. Just throw in a Georgiev trade and we’re golden.

Well if I'm going for my daydream scenario elite option: The Rangers get a top tier prospect without having to trade up, and then move Georgiev for a second and get yet another interesting talent there.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Don’t want him. For whatever that’s worth. I’d rather a different type of player for bottom six C.

I don't either, and I don't think this team is close enough to contender status that he'd be willing to come here either

 

[Mikos87]

If the Rangers retain 50% on Staal, and trade him to WPG for Dahlstrom and Comrie, they aren't a lot adding real dollars. $1.6M for $1.55M. So it's really $50K in added payroll for an NHL defenseman and $2.35M on a cap hit.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

If the Rangers retain 50% on Staal, and trade him to WPG for Dahlstrom and Comrie, they aren't a lot adding real dollars. $1.6M for $1.55M. So it's really $50K in added payroll for an NHL defenseman and $2.35M on a cap hit.

Hey I'm all for sending Staal where ever, but I can't see him accepting a trade to Winnipeg.

Think the only spots for him are Minnesota (to play with Eric and Zucc) or Philly, where he isn't too far from family.

 

[Harbour Dog]

Rangers like Fast, but they aren't chasing him for anywhere close to what his market price is likely to be.

If he comes back, it's a major (damn near stupid) discount.

A discount that would probably force us to then protect him and expose all of Gauthier, Lemieux, and Howden.

 

[Edge]

If the Rangers retain 50% on Staal, and trade him to WPG for Dahlstrom and Comrie, they aren't a lot adding real dollars. $1.6M for $1.55M. So it's really $50K in added payroll for an NHL defenseman and $2.35M on a cap hit.

I would say right now there isn't a ton of interest in Staal, even at 50 percent. I think the Rangers are probably stuck with him.

Anyone know the status of his movement clause at this point?

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Usually, sure. But my point is that I think ADA is special. A guy you regret moving. If they move him I would hope it’s not for the sake of housekeeping and they get someone equally or more special.

You just make sure what you are getting back is going to make you a better team. Deangelo had a lot of points but defensively not stellar.If you can get someone to pick up some points, fox gets some more on pp1, and you tighten up defensively, then you don't worry about Deangelo's 50 points. Trading from our strength to fill holes in the roster should end in a net gain especially when we have a guy in Lindqvist waiting to play the following year.

 

[Edge]

A discount that would probably force us to then protect him and expose all of Gauthier, Lemieux, and Howden.

Yeah, the only way I see him coming back right now is a crazy good discount and if a couple of those guys were moved in trades.

 

[Leetch3]

Brodin seems like a good target for the team, but I want NO PART of any player 1 year from UFA. Let’s ask this, would anyone sign h as a UFA next year? Say $5m x 5 years?

for that price absolutely but will he be that cheap?

 

[Leetch3]

No, he’s a placeholder.

then you don't trade for him giving up quality assets. you sign ufas as placeholders

 

[egelband]

This is gonna be Fast's biggest contract so it would be stupid to take less than he could earn.

A guy like Fast... I almost want him to get paid elsewhere despite realllllly wanting him to stay with the Rangers. Like, I’d rather he got big money with a contender than taking a cheap deal with us.

 

[NYR Viper]

Yeah, the only way I see him coming back right now is a crazy good discount and if a couple of those guys were moved in trades.

No Fast concerns me only from the fact that the bottom-6 could be all very young players.

Howden
Lemieux
Gauthier
Chytil
Lafreniere
_______

 

[Ghost of jas]

then you don't trade for him giving up quality assets. you sign ufas as placeholders

You also don’t commit five years to a placeholder.

 

[Irishguy42]

As of today, they are still in wait and see mode with Miller.

They think he has the physical tools for the NHL already, but there's belief the overall product likely needs fine tuning. I don't think they're eyeing him next to Fox or Trouba quite yet.

Makes sense considering he's more in-line of the 'boom/bust' vs 'sure thing' in regards to prospects.

He's the prospect who you put down in pencil, as opposed to pen, in the long-term write-up.

 

[Edge]

You just make sure what you are getting back is going to make you a better team. Deangelo had a lot of points but defensively not stellar.If you can get someone to pick up some points, fox gets some more on pp1, and you tighten up defensively, then you don't worry about Deangelo's 50 points. Trading from our strength to fill holes in the roster should end in a net gain especially when we have a guy in Lindqvist waiting to play the following year.

I think there's something in here that you bring up that we really need to consider.

If we trade ADA, we might not get a point for point return on him, or necessarily get someone who "wows" as much as ADA sometimes can.

I know that's not a popular answer, but it is one we have to keep in mind.

I'll use Lindholm and Hanifin as examples, just because it's come up. For the hell of it, let's say ADA and Buch are traded as part of a deal that brings back Lindholm Hanifin. Neither Hanifin or Lindholm is likely to "wow" this board or many Rangers fans. There's no guarantee the duo outscores ADA and Buch in Calgary --- especially if Lindholm is utilized as a second line center and a not first line RW.

However, it's quite possible that duo would be a better fit for the Rangers as the team is constructed, and it's possible they bring other aspects that don't show up on a stat sheet.

I say that because ADA could score 15 goals and 65 points and Buch could score 20 goals and 50 points, while Lindholm and Hanifin "only" post 25/65 and 10/35 next season. On paper, we didn't get as much production on a player by player basis. But it could still be the right move to do from a roster construction standpoint.

I use that as an example only. We can plug in other names as well, but the point would more or less hold true.

 

[haohmaru]

When Shattenkirk was bought out, management couldn't predict that a global pandemic would cause the cap not to go up, and that we would win the 1st overall pick and have to give that player full bonuses. Earlier in the year they were talking about the cap going up by as much as 4 mil.

Yeah - and that's why there should be another amnesty buyout period. Agree.

Still didn't like the signing and liked the buyout less.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

You also don’t commit five years to a placeholder.

I don't think its fair to categorize him as a placeholder.

Brodin is a really good defenseman capable of logging top minutes and assignments. He suffocates opposing offenses.

A 5 year deal would take him to his early 30's. At 5 mill thats a steal (he'll get more.)

 

[Edge]

Makes sense considering he's more in-line of the 'boom/bust' vs 'sure thing' in regards to prospects.

He's the prospect who you put down in pencil, as opposed to pen, in the long-term write-up.

He really is.

I know sometimes I sound like I am really hedging on Miller. And to an extent I am.

I think he's a hell of an athlete with an awesome upside. But I really see a kid whose physical tools are significantly ahead of his experience at this point.

Maybe he's such a freak athlete that he can pull it off. That would be awesome and I would love that.

But there's a distinct possibility that the Rangers prefer to ease into his talent pool rather than doing a cannonball dive.

 

[egelband]

I don't think its fair to categorize him as a placeholder.

Brodin is a really good defenseman capable of logging top minutes and assignments. He suffocates opposing offenses.

A 5 year deal would take him to his early 30's. At 5 mill thats a steal (he'll get more.)

In principle, not sure I want to trade for another big ticket player but if we did, this is definitely the kind of player I want with Trouba. Need a guy who is strictly defense-first.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I think there's something in here that you bring up that really need to consider.

If we trade ADA, we might not get a point for point return on him, or necessarily get someone who "wows" as much as ADA sometimes can.

I know that's not a popular answer, but it is one we have to keep in mind.

I'll use Lindholm and Hanifin as examples, just because it's come up. For the hell of it, let's say ADA and Buch are traded as part of a deal that brings back Lindholm Hanifin. Neither Hanifin or Lindholm is likely to "wow" this board or many Rangers fans. There's no guarantee the duo outscores ADA and Buch in Calgary --- especially if Lindholm is utilized as a second line center and a not first line RW.

However, it's quite possible that duo would be a better fit for the Rangers as the team is constructed, and it's possible they bring other aspects that don't show up on a stat sheet.

I say that because ADA could score 15 goals and 65 points and Buch could score 20 goals and 50 points, while Lindholm and Hanifin "only" post 25/65 and 10/35 next season. On paper, we didn't get as much production on a player by player basis. But it could still be the right move to do from a roster construction standpoint.

I use that as an example only. We can plug in other names as well, but the point would more or less hold true,

I'd hate that trade for the sole reason that Hanifin plays like he's empty inside.

If people hated Skjei, they'll reallllly hate Hanifin.

 

[Edge]

No Fast concerns me only from the fact that the bottom-6 could be all very young players.

Howden
Lemieux
Gauthier
Chytil
Lafreniere
_______

I think that's where someone like Kreider could bring some value to that role. Or if you land a Lindholm, you can move someone like Strome for a veteran bottom six forward who brings a completely different element, rather than flipping him for a pick/prospect.

That would be another one of those deals where it would look like a huge hit from a stat sheet perspective, but actually makes more sense from a team-building standpoint.

 

[Edge]

I'd hate that trade for the sole reason that Hanifin plays like he's empty inside.

If people hated Skjei, they'll reallllly hate Hanifin.

I think Hanifin, if nothing else, could be a guy who at least gets us from point A to point B.

Because unless we move a ton of prospects, we're still going to have Miller, Robertson, Reunanen, Jones, etc. potentially knocking on the door.

So he doesn't necessarily have to be a "five year piece" for us.