Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part LXII

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
DanielBrassard said:
Even if he is slightly better overall than Strome with the cost it will likely take to acquire him, IMO not worth the potential slight upgrade.
Click to expand...

And there where we disagree. I personally don’t think the overall package is a slight upgrade or that the results would be a minimal difference.

I’m far more comfortable putting my money on Monahan betting 30/45/75 on this roster for the next 3 years than I am betting on Strome posting 20/50/70 over that same stretch. And that’s if I was only going off of offensive stat lines. When I start factoring in other considerations, that gap grows for me.

I’m also more comfortable with a lineup a year from now that features Monahan. Lundkvist and whatever resources we utilize from trading Strome than I am with Strome and ADA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doriva, eco's bones, JCProdigy and 9 others
Edge said:
And there where we disagree. I personally don’t think the overall package is a slight upgrade or that the results would be a minimal difference.

I’m far more comfortable putting my money on Monahan betting 30/45/75 on this roster for the next 3 years than I am betting on Strome posting 20/50/70 over that same stretch. And that’s if I was only going off of offensive stat lines. When I start factoring in other considerations, that gap grows for me.

I’m also more comfortable with a lineup a year from now that features Monahan. Lundkvist and whatever resources we utilize from trading Strome than I am with Strome and ADA.
Click to expand...

Edge, is it fair to say that if we keep 22 overall, we're likely to go with a guy we really like instead of picking the best player available? I know you mentioned Lapierre and Grieg, but could you see those guys being the pick even if someone, who is expected to go earlier, slips?
 
Edge said:
And there where we disagree. I personally don’t think the overall package is a slight upgrade or that the results would be a minimal difference.

I’m far more comfortable putting my money on Monahan betting 30/45/75 on this roster for the next 3 years than I am betting on Strome posting 20/50/70 over that same stretch. And that’s if I was only going off of offensive stat lines. When I start factoring in other considerations, that gap grows for me.

I’m also more comfortable with a lineup a year from now that features Monahan. Lundkvist and whatever resources we utilize from trading Strome than I am with Strome and ADA.
Click to expand...
That's fine. I just don't see Monahan as being much different. He has been awful defensively, he doesn't kill penalties, he's not a physical player, and he's not a good skater. Amd when he's not on PP1, which he likely wouldn't be on the Rangers, he's going to have a tough time living up to the stat line you have set out for him. Strome would as well most likely but he is going to have a cheaper cap hit and won't cost us assets. If we are going to trade ADA, Buch or whatever, I'd like to see a definitive upgrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rangeri, TheDirtyH and Off Sides
Ranger Spice said:
Edge, is it fair to say that if we keep 22 overall, we're likely to go with a guy we really like instead of picking the best player available? I know you mentioned Lapierre and Grieg, but could you see those guys being the pick even if someone, who is expected to go earlier, slips?
Click to expand...

I think it's always important to remember that the guy we really like is almost always the guy we think is the best player available.

I think that's where the disagreements come in --- some people don't agree that their pick was the best player available. But the Rangers do.

And it's also important to note that best player available doesn't always mean most talented, or highest offensive potential, or sometimes even the best player at the time of the draft.

It's typically more nuanced than that. But the Rangers won't skip a guy they have ranked 10th for a guy they have ranked 17th. The guy they take will be the highest on their list, it just might not be the highest on this board's list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pld459666, canadian tuxedo, Leetch3 and 1 other person
Edge said:
I think it's always important to remember that the guy we really like is almost always the guy we think is the best player available.

I think that's where the disagreements come in --- some people don't agree that their pick was the best player available. But the Rangers do.

And it's also important to note that best player available doesn't always mean most talented, or highest offensive potential, or sometimes even the best player at the time of the draft.

It's typically more nuanced than that. But the Rangers won't skip a guy they have ranked 10th for a guy they have ranked 17th. The guy they take will be the highest on their list, it just might not be the highest on this board's list.
Click to expand...

As we've seen in the past (like Lias Andersson). But I mean you seem pretty adamant on Grieg or Lapierre. Do you think it's Grieg or Lapierre come hell or high water?
 
Serious question, do the Rangers think DeAngelos value is at its absolute highest right now?

Because I’ll be honest I’d much rather ride out another year with Tony on the team than trade him for Monahan.

I mean I get it, I’ve been saying for a while I think his value is inflated by fans. But do they think he’s never going to be more valuable to them than he is right now?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cmox, HatTrick Swayze and mas0764
3 years until Monahan hits UFA, Rangers should get him and give up the 3 same years they could keep ADA for ?

Or they could plan for when Kakko would be 22 in three years and Laf 21 and on the last year of his entry level. Maybe they could even trade ADA within those 3 year for something they would know they'd need at that time instead of making trades now for something they think they may need, but do not know if they will really need once that time comes into play.
 
DanielBrassard said:
That's fine. I just don't see Monahan as being much different. He has been awful defensively, he doesn't kill penalties, he's not a physical player, and he's not a good skater. Amd when he's not on PP1, which he likely wouldn't be on the Rangers, he's going to have a tough time living up to the stat line you have set out for him. Strome would as well most likely but he is going to have a cheaper cap hit and won't cost us assets. If we are going to trade ADA, Buch or whatever, I'd like to see a definitive upgrade.
Click to expand...

Part of me wonders though how much of the pushback is because of the fondness for ADA, and not because of glaring flaws with Monahan.

If I took ADA out of the conversation, and asked people if they'd rather keep Strome over Monahan, I don't think we see a lot of the comments about them being even remotely close. Most people would be talking about how much of an upgrade Monahan is over Strome for the roster.

But the concept of trading ADA I think makes us downgrade Monahan's ability and instinctively want to push his perceived contributions closer to the Strome level. We don't like the value for ADA, so we kind of dock points off the grade we'd normally assign Monahan.

In other words, just as we can talk ourselves into accepting a move by being overly optimistic, we can talk ourselves out of accepting moves by being overly pessimistic. We see this quite a bit with guys we draft. About two days after they're selected, we often talk ourselves into being okay with the pick. Whereas before the draft, we had entire lists ready for why a certain player shouldn't be the pick.

I think moving ADA isn't just about the turn, it's about the overall roster balance. If you think you can get a center back who compliments the wings you have, there's added value there. Then you factor in the assets you get from moving Strome, and the overall savings you get from having Lundkvist in the lineup as soon as next year.

So it's not just that you're looking at ADA for Monahan. Instead you're looking at one possible scenario such as:

ADA at $5 million (15 goals, 65 points)
Strome at $5 million (20 goals, 70 points high end)

$10 million, two players, 135 points

vs.

Monahan at $6 million (30 goals, 65 points low end)
Lundkvist at $1 million ( 5 goals, 30 points rookie season, likely up from there)
Assets acquired for Strome (be it prospects, picks, or even a LD with equivalent value of 5 goals and 30 points at $3 million)

$10 million, three players, 125 points

So maybe you sacraficed 10 points, but the overall net gain was finding your second line center, bringing in a top RD prospect, and then getting the veteran LD you wanted --- for the same price point. Yeah you lost 10 points overall, but maybe the roster balance is better.

Obviously that's a very, very crude example, but it's designed to illustrate more of a concept than anything else.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pld459666, brians1128, Doriva and 9 others
Edge said:
Part of me wonders though how much of the pushback is because of the fondness for ADA, and not because of glaring flaws with Monahan.

If I took ADA out of the conversation, and asked people if they'd rather keep Strome over Monahan, I don't think we see a lot of the comments about them being even remotely close. Most people would be talking about how much of an upgrade Monahan is over Strome for the roster.

But the concept of trading ADA I think makes us downgrade Monahan's ability and instinctively want to push his perceived contributions closer to the Strome level. We don't like the value for ADA, so we kind of dock points off the grade we'd normally assign Monahahan.

In other words, just as we can talk ourselves into accepting a move by being overly optimistic, we can talk ourselves out of accepting moves by being overly pessimistic. We see this quite a bit with guys we draft. About two days after they're selected, we often talk ourselves into being okay with the pick. Whereas before the draft, we had entire lists ready for why a certain player shouldn't be the pick.

I think moving ADA isn't just about the turn, it's about the overall roster balance. If you think you can get a center back who compliments the wings you have, there's added value there. Then you factor in the assets you get from moving Strome, and the overall savings you get from having Lundkvist in the lineup as soon as next year.

So it's not just that you're looking at ADA for Monahan. Instead you're looking at one possible scenario such as:

ADA at $5 million (15 goals, 65 points)
Strome at $5 million (20 goals, 70 points high end)

$10 million, two players, 135 points

vs.

Monahan at $6 million (30 goals, 65 points low end)
Lundkvist at $1 million ( 5 goals, 30 points rookie season, likely up from there)
Assets acquired for Strome (be it prospects, picks, or even a LD with equivalent value of 5 goals and 30 points at $3 million)

$10 million, three players, 125 points

So maybe you sacraficed 10 points, but the overall net gain was finding your second line center, bringing in a top RD prospect, and then getting the veteran LD you wanted --- for the same price point. Yeah you lost 10 points overall, but maybe the roster balance is better.

Obviously that's very, very crude example, but it's designed to illustrate more of a concept than anything else.
Click to expand...
Is it DeAngelo for Monahan, or are you also hearing speculation over several other players between NYR/CGY?
 
Ranger Spice said:
As we've seen in the past (like Lias Andersson). But I mean you seem pretty adamant on Grieg or Lapierre. Do you think it's Grieg or Lapierre come hell or high water?
Click to expand...

I think they're in serious consideration. I feel confident they're in the Rangers top 20. But I don't know where they are in that top 20.

So they could have Guhle at 13, Lapierre at 14, and Greig at 15. But they could also have Grans at 12 as one of the mystery players I don't know about. And in that case, Grans is the pick, regardless of how much they like Guhle, Lapierre and Greig.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leetch3, Ranger Spice and Brooklyn Rangers Fan
aufheben said:
Is it DeAngelo for Monahan, or are you also hearing speculation over several other players between NYR/CGY?
Click to expand...

In talks to this point, spread over many months, Buch has come up, ADA has come up, Andersson has come up, and Hajek has come as being of interest to the Flames.

For the Rangers, Lindholm has come up, Hanifin has come up and Monahan has come up --- though they supposedly like Lindholm more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnowblindNYR, jas and Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom