Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part LVIII

[kovazub94]

I'm admittedly biased, and don't want to trade ADA, so that plays into it. However while Lindholm is a good player on a good contract I think he's being overrated on here and there's no guarantee he's going to be the center a lot of people seem to think he is. It would make sense if you can get him for Buch because of the cost controlled contract I guess but other than that, or for a package of picks and prospects. Other than that I'd look elsewhere.

An extended Buchnevich could make it an equitable deal for Calgary and I’m an admitted Buchnevich fan.

 

[Mikos87]

@jas is doing a bang up job to take some of the load off @Edge !

Yeah real nice job of summarizing and reiterating on those posts. Makes these threads a lot easier to follow. Appreciate it @jas

 

[Raspewtin]

if we're going for a forward that kinda sorta plays center I'd rather Nylander than Lindholm especially because the best part of Lindholm is his contract.

 

[LeetchisGod]

if we're going for a forward that kinda sorta plays center I'd rather Nylander than Lindholm especially because the best part of Lindholm is his contract.

I believe Lindholm brings more to the table regarding defense and faceoffs which are much bigger needs.

 

[Leetch3]

if we're going for a forward that kinda sorta plays center I'd rather Nylander than Lindholm especially because the best part of Lindholm is his contract.

has nylander ever played center in the NHL? I'm pretty sure Lindholm was a full time center until this season...nylander is better offensively, but not in other areas.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I believe Lindholm brings more to the table regarding defense and faceoffs which are much bigger needs.

Lindholm really is nothing special defensively, and that has been as a RW. Not sure where the idea he is some 2-way stud is coming from. Faceoffs? Not a big deal at all, who really cares.

 

[DanielBrassard]

if we're going for a forward that kinda sorta plays center I'd rather Nylander than Lindholm especially because the best part of Lindholm is his contract.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

There's zero chance Tony gets anywhere near 7/8 million a year for his next deal

None

And if DeAngelo for Lindholm is the framework for a deal, I think Calgary adds slightly, but I don't think it's something earth shattering. Maybe they add a 2nd or something. Tony's true value is tough to pin down but I think whoever they trade him for will not be equal value in some peoples eyes.

That's just the way it goes

Yeah, and people who are saying such things are a) not properly valuing Lindholm's performance to date and b) taking into account his contract, which is incredibly team-friendly and an asset in and of itself.

 

[Mikos87]

Here’s what I expect...

The Rangers will be very conservative with money and contracts. They will not go long term with Strome and probably won’t go long term (4+) with DeAngelo. Lemieux will get squeezed. Fast will be resigned. Now that they have some cap maneuverability, they won’t want to give it all away tomorrow.

They will investigate trading Georgiev if the price is right. San Jose and Chicago seem like likely candidates to me.

The Rangers will sort through the free agent market and look for reasonable help for left defense and the bottom six.

And trades will be investigated. The Rangers will only trade for players that can be part of the core. Extra points for reasonable contracts. Lindholm, Hanifin, Krebs, Glass would all fit that model. Very tough to predict trades but I can’t imagine that Gorton doesn’t have at least one fairly important deal in his near future.

The Rangers are in a good position. They have a boatload of assets. The major renovation pillars are in place.

This is the fun part of the rebuild.

I’ll shoot @Kupo . Good phrasing of the question, honored and appreciate it.

Ada: all about his demands. IMO the smart move for Tony would be a shorter term deal that gets him to UFA. The league will course correct on ownership groupings the next three years, and he can keep cashing in.

Strome: he’s Brassard 2.0. Dude is a good utility guy even if he’s not in the 2nd line center hole. But... you can’t have him check.

Lemeuix: I like certain elements, but I think there are better 4th liners out there. There are most consistent options that you can find for what he brings. I trade him for a pick.

Buch: Tradebait imo. Like his productivity a lot. He’s a legit home grown top 6 guy, and I know other teams think he can score 30. Hasn’t shown that scoring ability in NY outside of his good buch streaks. Well his good buch streaks are going to net $6M in market value if he keeps it up. Rangers will have bigger signings then, so you’ll trade him anyway. You move him for an upgrade.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

if we're going for a forward that kinda sorta plays center I'd rather Nylander than Lindholm especially because the best part of Lindholm is his contract.

You're not a fan of 27-51-78 in 81 GP and 29-25-54 in 70 GP plus good analytics and FO numbers along with C/RW flexibility...?

 

[kovazub94]

if we're going for a forward that kinda sorta plays center I'd rather Nylander than Lindholm especially because the best part of Lindholm is his contract.

Is Nyls available? Is there a link to the discussions between Leafs and Rangers?

 

[Raspewtin]

I believe Lindholm brings more to the table regarding defense and faceoffs which are much bigger needs.

Nylander has admittedly taken far fewer faceoffs over the course of the last three years than Lindholm (about half) but has a similar win percentage (52.8% v.s. 52.3%) but neither of them are full time centers.

I also disagree that Lindholm's defense is anything special. It's just okay. Nylander isn't anything special defensively either but he's far better than Lindholm at basically everything else.

 

[Edge]

@Edge any sense of what Calgary is targeting in a trade with NYR?

If they are trading Gaudreau I could actually understanding why they'd want Buch. But that would make a trade with us contingent on a the Gaudreau return.

I get why a team would be interested in ADA. But the rumors around the Flames are about re-tooling to be more of a playoff-sturdy group. Does ADA fit into that? I feel like you trade for ADA if you need an offensive D. PPQB. But not sure you do it if you're trying to be more robust in the playoffs.

In the past I know they really liked Buch and had some interest in Andersson.

 

[Raspewtin]

You're not a fan of 27-51-78 in 81 GP and 29-25-54 in 70 GP plus good analytics and FO numbers along with C/RW flexibility...?

I didn't say I'm "not a fan" just that he's not my ideal target.

His analytics aren't really good jsyk, they're fine. Like, break even fine.

Also he's pretty mediocre at ES scoring. For reference over the last three years he has 1.79 p/60. Jesper "murders offense" Fast has 1.56. Not to say that's bad but it's not as good as his last two seasons especially would have you believe. Buchnevich scores more than him at ES and we're adding to him to get Lindholm

 

[Raspewtin]

has nylander ever played center in the NHL? I'm pretty sure Lindholm was a full time center until this season...nylander is better offensively, but not in other areas.

Yes but less than Lindholm

Nylander is not really better than Lindholm defensively but he's for sure better offensively and at driving the play where Lindholm is honestly a passenger. He had one year of big power play production but he's consistently mediocre at ES.

 

[Leetch3]

it would be extremely helpful if there was a site that tracked which position guys played each game instead of just having a roster that lists 8 guys on a team as centers lol

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Nylander would cost a ton in a trade.

his contract is also pretty great though.

 

[duhmetreE]

it would be extremely helpful if there was a site that tracked which position guys played each game instead of just having a roster that lists 8 guys on a team as centers lol

thats what @Amazing Kreiderman is for

 

[Raspewtin]

Nylander would cost a ton in a trade.

his contract is also pretty great though.

Yes of course, but I'd feel much better paying up for Nylander than Lindholm, which is really my feelings at the end of the day.

 

[NYRangers16]

Courtesy of @Edge. The Rangers and Flames have had a lot of discussions for a while now, and reportedly, both Lindholm and Hanifan have been asks from the Ranger side. (And they haven’t been rebuffed.). The Flames have expressed interest in Buchnevich, Hajek and Andersson.

I’m totally fine with that 3 for 2 even if other pieces are added.

 

[NYRangers16]

It’s only cap room. That’s like, not even a real asset.

When we lose a player we want because of it, then you’ll realise how much of an asset it is.

 

[Edge]

The draw to Lindholm is that he can take face offs and play center, slide to the RW if needed, perform on the PowerPlay (which we always seem to shit on until our guys struggle to do so), and he plays a two way game.

I would disagree about the passenger aspect of his play. If anything, I think he’s the subtle type that actually makes the flashier options perform better.

And looking at how this team is shaping up, all of those things check a box.

 

[BroadwayHustle]

Yes of course, but I'd feel much better paying up for Nylander than Lindholm, which is really my feelings at the end of the day.

The problem is where what assets align with what the Leafs are looking for? We don't have a shutdown D to give them for Nylander unless they somehow wanted Trouba (lol)

 

[Leetch3]

When we lose a player we want because of it, then you’ll realise how much of an asset it is.

that reply was sarcastic...99.9999% of his posts are bitching about how we are going to lose a player cause we signed trouba lol

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Nylander would cost a ton in a trade.

his contract is also pretty great though.

You got your wish, name change?