Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part VII: Now with less frenzy!

[LORDE]

I'm against Free Agents THIS year, and I'm not keen on trading for UFA's-to-be so that we can sign them (although if the 8th year costs an extra 2nd rounder, that's OK with me). I'm not saying all of our guys are home runs, but there's a good chance we have enough pieces to make this thing work. if Andersson, Chytil, and a couple of the mid round guys play out closer to their potential ceiling rather than their potential floor, you can't be afraid of Free Agency, especially if a guy like Panarin is there next offseason (2019). a PPG winger does not come around often, and like others have stated, he has fewer NHL miles on him

Yes I agree.

We need to know what we have. If Panarin wants to come here without us spending assets then I'm fine with it as long as we are adding him as a piece to put us near the top.

If the young guys don't make strides (at the NHL level) this season there's really no point.

I am NOT interested in getting back to mediocre or middling or 1st round exits. If Panarin or any other UFA would get us to that point I'd stay away.

I have a feeling that we won't make the playoffs this coming season and I'm fine with that.

We should reassess after this season and see what we have, what we don't and go from there.

 

[Beer League Sniper]

Yes I agree.

We need to know what we have. If Panarin wants to come here without us spending assets then I'm fine with it as long as we are adding him as a piece to put us near the top.

If the young guys don't make strides (at the NHL level) this season there's really no point.

I am NOT interested in getting back to mediocre or middling or 1st round exits. If Panarin or any other UFA would get us to that point I'd stay away.

I have a feeling that we won't make the playoffs this coming season and I'm fine with that.

We should reassess after this season and see what we have, what we don't and go from there.

With Hank in net, we're never going to suck enough to have a reasonable chance at drafting a player of Panarin's ilk. You need to be at the very top of the draft to get the surefire studs. Sure, there are a few elite players in the NHL that were drafted outside the Top-5, but it's not many.

I guess my point is that I don't see how development of our youngsters factors in at all when deciding to sign elite talent. You're so unlikely to get these guys in the draft, you don't pass on them if they want to join your team. Panarin is going to have his choice of destination. If we're on his list, you make your strongest pitch to get him.

 

[LORDE]

With Hank in net, we're never going to suck enough to have a reasonable chance at drafting a player of Panarin's ilk. You need to be at the very top of the draft to get the surefire studs. Sure, there are a few elite players in the NHL that were drafted outside the Top-5, but it's not many.

I guess my point is that I don't see how development of our youngsters factors in at all when deciding to sign elite talent. You're so unlikely to get these guys in the draft, you don't pass on them if they want to join your team. Panarin is going to have his choice of destination. If we're on his list, you make your strongest pitch to get him.

No winning this argument but he's 36... I'm not sure it's accurate.

My point is that IF Hank is good this year again, but no one else is I have zero interest in adding a UFA to get us back to middling.

I won't debate what Panarin is. But we have to consider what he will be when we are contenders again... I realize he's young and I also said if it's just money I'm ok with it but we should be timing out or UFA grabs to augment the team we draft(ed) and developed.

If we draft 1-5 next draft and Panarin still wants to come here for $ I'd be ok w it. That would get us X many more 1st & 2nd rounders... by that time we should know more about what we have as far as prospects.

 

[Kovalev27]

Hank has been very very pedestrian the past couple seasons. He’s had some great streaks but overall he’s not keeping us out of the bottom five if the team is bad. Those days are over. I actually don’t expect him to play more than 50 games this season

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Hank has been very very pedestrian the past couple seasons. He’s had some great streaks but overall he’s not keeping us out of the bottom five if the team is bad. Those days are over. I actually don’t expect him to play more than 50 games this season

I would say I’m positives Hank plays minimum 50 games this season, barring injury of course. No way a rookie coach in Quinn doesn’t roll him like a starter.

Last season I don’t think he was even that pedestrian, I think he was good until the all star break and then after the letter the team was so bad it’s hard to really evaluate him overall with not only the horrible defensive system but now AHLers executing it in front of him.

Two years ago was really the only season that wasn’t him being good anymore and even then he has the AV asterisk. I know it’s coming (hopefully not soon) but I’m not ready to say it’s here yet. Even a not great but just average and competent defensive structures front of him could vault him back to kind of latter end of his prime level. You never know with a guy like Hank as hard as he works and how well he takes care of himself. He could have another 3 seasons of above leave average play in him.

My point is, even Hank aside, this team is most likely not going to be bad enough to tank away the season. I think they most likely finish around where we did last season maybe 9-12pick range. We’re going to need some luck to go our way to get a top 3 pick IMO.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Hank aside, this team is probably the 2nd worst in the league after Ottawa.

With him playing at a similar level to last year? They'll finish anywhere between 5-10 before the lottery. Finishing 12th would require them to jump 4 teams that finished ahead of them in the standings last year (they actually had the 8th worst record.) At most I can see that number increasing to 2 (NYI, Carolina if the goaltending tanks) and Chicago almost certainly finishes ahead of them.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

If you are (meaning front office) competent then this is a competitive advantage to use in building a roster. Note how before Yzerman there hadn't been a lot of discussion on this for FL/TX teams.

On the other hand how do you neutralize advantages in places like NY, LA, Toronto and Chicago in terms of additional potential income from advertising?

The other markets don’t have that Oh La La Sassoon money...

 

[Zibanejbread]

Down the stretch, after we traded a bunch of assets, yes, we were awful; however, the Shattenkirk and Kreider injuries played a huge part in the downfall.

(With that win, Rangers had a 20-13-4 record, notching 60 percent (44) of a possible 74 points. They were in third place in the Metropolitan Division and were on a roll, having gone 19-8-2 in the preceding 29 games. Kreider missed 24 games. The record while he was out? 7-16-1. They only gained 31 percent of a possible 48 points.)

Prior to that, we were in contention. We're bringing back (mostly) the same team - no declining Nash or HR hitter in Grabner on offense, but Names and Spooner could provide more consistency and similar offensive output. No McDonagh, but a healthy Shattenkirk and (hopefully) rejuvenated Smith could provide some stability on the back end. Plus, Pionk held up well in too many minutes at the end of last year. Claesson is also a solid option over Kampfer. I think we're going to be better than many think, especially if the team learns/buys into Quinn's system early on.

Not saying we're a playoff team, but I'd be surprised if we're bottom 3 in the East or bottom 5 overall.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Down the stretch, after we traded a bunch of assets, yes, we were awful; however, the Shattenkirk and Kreider injuries played a huge part in the downfall.

(With that win, Rangers had a 20-13-4 record, notching 60 percent (44) of a possible 74 points. They were in third place in the Metropolitan Division and were on a roll, having gone 19-8-2 in the preceding 29 games. Kreider missed 24 games. The record while he was out? 7-16-1. They only gained 31 percent of a possible 48 points.)

Prior to that, we were in contention. We're bringing back (mostly) the same team - no declining Nash or HR hitter in Grabner on offense, but Names and Spooner could provide more consistency and similar offensive output. No McDonagh, but a healthy Shattenkirk and (hopefully) rejuvenated Smith could provide some stability on the back end. Plus, Pionk held up well in too many minutes at the end of last year. Claesson is also a solid option over Kampfer. I think we're going to be better than many think, especially if the team learns/buys into Quinn's system early on.

Not saying we're a playoff team, but I'd be surprised if we're bottom 3 in the East or bottom 5 overall.

There are too many qualifiers in your post though. I could easily use the injury argument for a team like the Habs or the coaching one for the Isles, who just hired a coach that could take a group of one legged Argentinian nuns and turn them into a top 15 team in goals against.

Kreider and Shattenkirk's injuries played a part, but the truth is they were playing horrible hockey even when they were winning.

Declining Nash was still a 20 goal scorer each of the last 2 years, a mark eclipsed only once by Namesnikov and Spooner combined (last year, when Nam was playing with Stamkos and Kucherov.) Grabner averaged about 30 goals (over an 82 game season) here, thats a ton of production that they have to make up.

Not going to even touch on McDonagh. Thats a loss that we're just not filling next year.

I have zero doubt that the defense will improve though, AV was a moron and you can't run a system dumber than the one he ran. But it would be foolish to think that it won't come at the expense of the offense (which was bottom third in the league last year despite AV's "genius".) The thing with systems isn't so much about having guys buy in, but having the players to execute it. We're not going to un-AV ourselves overnight, especially since we have practically the same roster we had as the one that dressed for that April ass whoopin at the hands of the Flyers.

I look at the season that Detroit just had and think that is the most likely (and probably best) scenario. Lose more often than you win with out getting your teeth kicked in on the regular while working in young players and still being in a decent enough position to have the lottery fall your way and not catastrophic if it doesn't.

 

[Richard Banger]

Mcd sucked Ass for us this past season. I think we'll be a close wild card team this year. Probably just miss the playoffs

 

[Zibanejbread]

There are too many qualifiers in your post though. I could easily use the injury argument for a team like the Habs or the coaching one for the Isles, who just hired a coach that could take a group of one legged Argentinian nuns and turn them into a top 15 team in goals against.

Kreider and Shattenkirk's injuries played a part, but the truth is they were playing horrible hockey even when they were winning.

Declining Nash was still a 20 goal scorer each of the last 2 years, a mark eclipsed only once by Namesnikov and Spooner combined (last year, when Nam was playing with Stamkos and Kucherov.) Grabner averaged about 30 goals (over an 82 game season) here, thats a ton of production that they have to make up.

Not going to even touch on McDonagh. Thats a loss that we're just not filling next year.

I have zero doubt that the defense will improve though, AV was a moron and you can't run a system dumber than the one he ran. But it would be foolish to think that it won't come at the expense of the offense (which was bottom third in the league last year despite AV's "genius".) The thing with systems isn't so much about having guys buy in, but having the players to execute it. We're not going to un-AV ourselves overnight, especially since we have practically the same roster we had as the one that dressed for that April ass whoopin at the hands of the Flyers.

I look at the season that Detroit just had and think that is the most likely (and probably best) scenario. Lose more often than you win with out getting your teeth kicked in on the regular while working in young players and still being in a decent enough position to have the lottery fall your way and not catastrophic if it doesn't.

Literally everything in this thread the last 2 months comes down to an "if"...
"if" the prospects develop... "if" we sign Panarin/Karlsson/Seguin next offseason... "if" Hank is still Hank... "if" the new system will work... "if" we have the right personnel, etc.
We don't know what the f*** is going to happen. I was simply stating MY OPINION on what I think the current construction of the roster will do. If I wanted to get into an argument over it, I would've quoted you. I appreciate your insight, but (as someone who's a natural pessimist), I guess we see differently. Only time will tell. Goodnight.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Mcd sucked Ass for us this past season. I think we'll be a close wild card team this year. Probably just miss the playoffs

He was our best defender by quite a bit.

Skjei played well for us once McD was IR'd and eventually traded but if he sucked ass, what does that say about the rest of the guys who are still here?

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Hank aside, this team is probably the 2nd worst in the league after Ottawa.

With him playing at a similar level to last year? They'll finish anywhere between 5-10 before the lottery. Finishing 12th would require them to jump 4 teams that finished ahead of them in the standings last year (they actually had the 8th worst record.) At most I can see that number increasing to 2 (NYI, Carolina if the goaltending tanks) and Chicago almost certainly finishes ahead of them.

I just don't see them as that bad. If they're mostly healthy and get very good to great goaltending and have a decent defensive structure, I still see them surprising people.

So much can happen this season, it can really go any way. Remember they stunk last October and then were tied for first place in November. It was really that post-Winter Classic to trade deadline stretch that took them out of contention. Even after the trade deadline they didn't phone it in until the last two weeks of the season and that was with like 3 proven NHL DMen and 2.5 lines.

 

[Vitto79]

I think they will finish around the same cause the D is blah. Hanks gonna flip a lot of games w that group

 

[Inferno]

The Islanders Canucks senators and habs are all worse.

 

[DutchShamrock]

The habs won't have Weber most of the year and will get a lesser immediate return for pax. Price is injury prone and overrated. Add them to the list of worse teams.

 

[Ghost of jas]

The Islanders Canucks senators and habs are all worse.

The Islanders will finish ahead of the Rangers. So will the Canucks.

 

[Kovalev27]

I don’t think we’ll be bad to start. Gorton kept the same team didn’t do anything. So there’s plenty of veterans in this lineup.

The question will be what happens around the deadline. If he sells Hayes Zucc smith Spooner namestnikov we should then fall off a cliff. It’s what we should do but who knows.

I think we’ll be hovering around where we were last year at the same time the letter went out so it will interesting to see what happens st that point

 

[Richard Banger]

He was our best defender by quite a bit.

Skjei played well for us once McD was IR'd and eventually traded but if he sucked ass, what does that say about the rest of the guys who are still here?

That the system was ass. Staal isn't good pionk was a rookie ADA was misused and shattenkirk was hurt. Our top 4 will do just fine without McD.

 

[Ghost of jas]

The forward group is mediocre, the defense is bad and the goalie is another year older...the head coach has no head coaching experience at the NHL level, a team that was the worst in the league after January 1, and only subtracted pieces, while not adding depth...boy does that scream team that fights for a playoff spot!

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I’m in the minority, but I think Vancouver is clearly better than we are, on paper at least.

 

[NYR Viper]

I’m in the minority, but I think Vancouver is clearly better than we are, on paper at least.

I think we will also see teams like the Islanders and Canucks who have a more veteran line-up that will grind out some victories that the Rangers will lose.

 

[Irishguy42]

That Islanders lineup couldn't grind their way out of a wet paper bag that was lying on it's side. Open.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

That Islanders lineup couldn't grind their way out of a wet paper bag that was lying on it's side. Open.

On paper, I think grinding is just about the only thing they can do.

It’s one line, eberle, and a whole bunch of bottom six.

 

[Off Sides]

Do the Rangers end up with a better record if they play the prospects, or if they play the vets and leave the prospects down in the AHL? By vets I mean Holland, McLeod, Beleskey.

I guess I see it, I want the Rangers to have better lottery odds, I also want to see their better prospects yet those two things kind of contradict one another as I think their best prospects probably make the team a little better than they would be without them.

Since I think the lottery odds are more imperative, and I'm not sure the prospects are really ready anyway, and if they are not on the roster for 40 games they do not accrue a season towards UFA status, I kind of have to go with actually wanting to see Holland, McLeod, Beleskey make the roster since I can not have it both ways.