Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part LXVII

[Doriva]

Ryan Murray for a 5th and Nate Schmidt for a 3rd probably highlights why ADA is still on the roster to this point.

Trade values just seem to be all over the place and I doubt we'd be getting fair value given his contract status, as teams are quite clearly reluctant to take on salary at the moment.

 

[pld459666]

Anyone who thinks this is a great deal for Vancouver needs to look at their CapFriendly. They are screwed.

Not seeing it.

2 under for this year coming with just Jake to sign

Next year they will have 27 million to work with .

Seems to me they are going to be fine

 

[liv4socr20]

Why does everyone think management is giving up on the season?

We’re essentially playing with the same team as last season - Fast with a full season of Shesty and another year of growth and experience from
The kids.

Contender? No. Competing for a playoff spot? Yes.

If we miss playoffs we get another lottery pick + 13 million off cap + easy expansion navigation +’a loaded farm to improve the roster

if we make playoffs we get another year of Playoff experience for the kids + 13 million off cap + easy expansion navigation + a loaded farm to
Improve the roster.

Management has more of a long term plan than they are being given credit for.

 

[SA16]

That guy is in no way close to good enough to be centering a top two line of a contender

they’re not that elite on the wing. Stone is elite. That’s where the elite on the wing ends.

Well it was good enough to work which is all that matters. In 276 minutes Stone-Stephenson-Pacioretty put up 323 CF, 204 CA, 22 GF, 7 GA. Why do you need a 6M Stastny to center that line? It was one of the best lines in the league with Stephenson.

I don't think Chandler Stephenson is a great player but why does it matter? It's the exact same reason I don't think we should pay a center to play with Panarin. The driving force on the line is the top wing. You don't need an expensive C to get very strong production. It is wasteful.

 

[Leetch3]

What about ADA for Brock Boeser?


Strome on a 1 year deal, possibly deadline dealt?
Howden+Hajek for Dunn or something like that (D market for sellers is down, Dunn is odd man out there both for expansion and with Krug filling his role but better now, Rangers have been connected via our insiders)

Kreider Zib Buch
Panarin Strome Boeser
Laf Chytil Kakko
Lemiuex Barron Gauthier
--> Laf, Kakko, and Barron exempt from expansion, let Strome walk or trade him, choose Lemmy and Gauthier for protection

Dunn Trouba
Lindgren Fox
Who knows
--> Fox exempt

interesting ideas but I don't think we can afford it...ADA/Boeser might be a wash cap-wise but I don't think you can also add Dunn without also moving Strome or Buch

 

[Leetch3]

You guys are talking about veterans and the Rangers let Fast walk for 2M AAV for 3 years, it’s insane. It’s exactly what the Rangers needed in their bottom 6.

and the rangers wanted him for 2 years, just not 3. almost everyone is getting a 1-2 year deal this year.

 

[Leetch3]

Has anyone heard about the NHL reducing the number of games being played before the season starts?. If the NHL decides to shorten the season, let's say from 82 games to 55-60. There is no way we will come close to having to pay the bonuses for all the ELC contracts. This would drastically change the cap structure for the Rangers and allow for more moves and other options.

there has been speculation that it would be a shortened season to avoid pushing back the following season but nothing is official...

it won't impact the cap structure though with regards to the cap structure cause the full amounts will still count to be in compliance on day 1. After day 1, it becomes virtually a non-issue regardless of the number of games but you need to be in compliance on day 1. Most of the guys have little shot at making their A bonuses. And for the big $$ B bonuses, its unlikely that Kakko earns any unless he becomes a superstar...and Lafreniere and Shesterkin can't both win the calder. so it really isn't going to be a problem at the end of the year...

but the big $$ bonuses are tied to year end awards so it doesn't matter how many games they play they will still give those out...

 

[Synergy27]

Crazy idea that I know will never happen, but why not play around with the “formation”? This is something that is very commonplace in soccer. Managers change the positions their players play and their planned locations on the field to achieve certain tactics based on the strengths/weaknesses of both their personnel and their opponents.

Half baked idea here for sure. Hockey, at least traditionally, is hugely dependent on solid positioning. I haven’t analyzed why, but I assume it is due to the rink size and speed of the game. But hell, it could also be a coaching revolution that the good old boys are way too scared to try out.

Is anyone aware of any “formation” experiments elsewhere in world hockey?

 

[426ers]

there has been speculation that it would be a shortened season to avoid pushing back the following season but nothing is official...

it won't impact the cap structure though with regards to the cap structure cause the full amounts will still count to be in compliance on day 1. After day 1, it becomes virtually a non-issue regardless of the number of games but you need to be in compliance on day 1. Most of the guys have little shot at making their A bonuses. And for the big $$ B bonuses, its unlikely that Kakko earns any unless he becomes a superstar...and Lafreniere and Shesterkin can't both win the calder. so it really isn't going to be a problem at the end of the year...

but the big $$ bonuses are tied to year end awards so it doesn't matter how many games they play they will still give those out...

Thanks for the information. So based on what you said they won't be paying the full bonuses and they still have a "somewhat" larger cushion to play with if need be.

 

[DutchShamrock]

Speaking of the season, the NHL is between a rock and a hard place. One story running around last week was the new CBA addressed the compensation for next season and if they play 1 or 82, salaries aren't prorated.

With the league's history, you almost wonder if Bettman threatens to cancel the season if there is no gate and the players insist on full compensation. But there is the looming TV deal and expansion. The NHL can't really afford either scenario.

The players can guarantee their payday, but this CBA demands 50% at some point. If we had 65 games and no gate AND full compensation, the cap would be flat for a decade.

 

[SA16]

Crazy idea that I know will never happen, but why not play around with the “formation”? This is something that is very commonplace in soccer. Managers change the positions their players play and their planned locations on the field to achieve certain tactics based on the strengths/weaknesses of both their personnel and their opponents.

Half baked idea here for sure. Hockey, at least traditionally, is hugely dependent on solid positioning. I haven’t analyzed why, but I assume it is due to the rink size and speed of the game. But hell, it could also be a coaching revolution that the good old boys are way too scared to try out.

Is anyone aware of any “formation” experiments elsewhere in world hockey?

Because hockey is always about "it's always been done this way" with very little room for experimentation. How long did it take before teams finally realized that 4F-1D PP units were far superior than having two dmen on the point?

 

[Leetch3]

Thanks for the information. So based on what you said they won't be paying the full bonuses and they still have a "somewhat" larger cushion to play with if need be.

during the season I don't think it is a concern...but that doesn't give them extra space during the offseason.

 

[kovazub94]

What about ADA for Brock Boeser?


Strome on a 1 year deal, possibly deadline dealt?
Howden+Hajek for Dunn or something like that (D market for sellers is down, Dunn is odd man out there both for expansion and with Krug filling his role but better now, Rangers have been connected via our insiders)

Kreider Zib Buch
Panarin Strome Boeser
Laf Chytil Kakko
Lemiuex Barron Gauthier
--> Laf, Kakko, and Barron exempt from expansion, let Strome walk or trade him, choose Lemmy and Gauthier for protection

Dunn Trouba
Lindgren Fox
Who knows
--> Fox exempt

I honestly don’t see a point. The Rangers don’t need to trade for RW. It pretty much forces them to then (immediately) trade Buch and still have a need for C beyond this season (even a bigger need if Howden is also shipped to get Dunn).

 

[FireGerardGallant]

Crazy idea that I know will never happen, but why not play around with the “formation”? This is something that is very commonplace in soccer. Managers change the positions their players play and their planned locations on the field to achieve certain tactics based on the strengths/weaknesses of both their personnel and their opponents.

Half baked idea here for sure. Hockey, at least traditionally, is hugely dependent on solid positioning. I haven’t analyzed why, but I assume it is due to the rink size and speed of the game. But hell, it could also be a coaching revolution that the good old boys are way too scared to try out.

Is anyone aware of any “formation” experiments elsewhere in world hockey?

I remember reading about the “torpedo system” of hockey a few years ago. It would be cool seeing more experimental tactics in Hockey but I doubt It’d ever happen. The way player contracts and prospects are set up in a sport like hockey rather then soccer I cant see it being too plausible for teams to create new unique systems that not every player can play.
Torpedo system - Wikipedia

 

[kovazub94]

Because hockey is always about "it's always been done this way" with very little room for experimentation. How long did it take before teams finally realized that 4F-1D PP units were far superior than having two dmen on the point?

I don’t think it’s about the sport being conservative as a choice. There are only 5 skaters so there are not a lot of options for a change in formation, still you see some variations in the defensive structures.

 

[426ers]

I remember reading about the “torpedo system” of hockey a few years ago. It would be cool seeing more experimental tactics in Hockey but I doubt It’d ever happen. The way player contracts and prospects are set up in a sport like hockey rather then soccer I cant see it being too plausible for teams to create new unique systems that not every player can play.
Torpedo system - Wikipedia

Herb Brooks " The motion system"

 

[duhmetreE]

We wont see a trade until after arbitration, no?

 

[Waivers]

and the rangers wanted him for 2 years, just not 3. almost everyone is getting a 1-2 year deal this year.

Is that your deterrent for not signing Fast? The extra year added to his contract? It's a 2 year versus a 3 year deal. He's been the most consistent Ranger in terms of you know what you were getting out of him each and every night, for years at a clip.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Honestly I think he's a back up plan, a 7th d, incase one of the young guys can't stick or if they have a rough patch. I feel they are hoping Miller( who i feel they think will play this year) or someone else will come in and play leaving Jack as the 7th dman. This might be where the shifting Deangelo or Fox to the left side came from as id be doubtful they would want a rookie playing with him so move Deangelo to play with Fox, Lindgren plays with Trouba, Smith on the right side( plays right side on the PK anyway) with Miller. Johnson comes in if Miller can't handle it. Im still not a fan of using Deangelo on his off side though, maybe it's Fox who does it. And if Miller proves he can handle it he might move up with Trouba, Lindgren with Fox, Smith and Tony. Thats just my opinion.

Lindgren Trouba
Fox Deangelo
Miller Smith

 

[Raspewtin]

Is that your deterrent for not signing Fast? The extra year added to his contract? It's a 2 year versus a 3 year deal. He's been the most consistent Ranger in terms of you know what you were getting out of him each and every night, for years at a clip.

no that's literally the reason they didn't sign him lol. larry and edge confirmed it.

 

[Waivers]

no that's literally the reason they didn't sign him lol. larry and edge confirmed it.

What a shame. I know they have their financials lined up for years in advance but just surprised they couldn’t squeeze him in on such a small delta. I’ll have to read up on the posts and the article from Larry.

 

[PuckLuck3043]

Is that your deterrent for not signing Fast? The extra year added to his contract? It's a 2 year versus a 3 year deal. He's been the most consistent Ranger in terms of you know what you were getting out of him each and every night, for years at a clip.

JD and JG already said they did not want to commit to 3 years even for 2 million. They will probably need every dollar to sign some important players at that time especially if the cap is still flat. It is what it is.

 

[Waivers]

JD and JG already said they did not want to commit to 3 years even for 2 million. They will probably need every dollar to sign some important players at that time especially if the cap is still flat. It is what it is.

I also didn’t put into context how ELCs, seemingly super inexpensive, but having a multitude of them with performance bonuses can be financially crippling. Pardon my ignorance, but this is something the Rangers will most likely deal with for the next 3 years, if all else remains?

 

[apoptygma]

What a shame. I know they have their financials lined up for years in advance but just surprised they couldn’t squeeze him in on such a small delta. I’ll have to read up on the posts and the article from Larry.

From what i have read Fast was at best lukewarm to sign with NYR aswell. He (and his agent) know he might be pushed down the depth chart and into a trade or Seattle before an eventual contract would end. I think Fast sees CAR as a more secure place to in fact stay with the team he signs with.

 

[PuckLuck3043]

I also didn’t put into context how ELCs, seemingly super inexpensive, but having a multitude of them with performance bonuses can be financially crippling. Pardon my ignorance, but this is something the Rangers will most likely deal with for the next 3 years, if all else remains?

The bigger problem is they will need to sign players coming off of ELC's and Mika will want big money if they decide to extend him. There are going to be a lot of tough decisions that have to be made so I could understand their reluctance to sign anybody right now beyond a year or 2.