Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part VIII: Autumn in New York

[bernmeister]

And the cap improvement helps us how? How are we using that cap space?

Because...

1.) The free agents available aren't making us better
2.) To acquire big buck players and use the cap space, means giving up assets you hold so dear

You honestly believe Chytil or Andersson will bring more to this team than Nash?

Again with the foolish win now, instant gratification.
Have the cap space on hand. UNARGUABLY
1) If a free agent worth having comes along, cap space is not an issue.
2) what you say on #2 is typically true but there are exceptions to the rule that come along, and we don't have to look to go top top dollar.

More importantly, as I have explained several times,
you have cap space
you can extend more of the younger core for longer term at less cost per year avg.
Whether you keep a JT Miller or you move him, he is worth more because he is on the most reasonable deal you can get for decent term while he is/approaches his prime. Thus his value is maximized, if he is kept or traded.

Aside from that, what if Detroit, for example, becomes so desperate they must move deadwood, and would take Staal off our hands for the right amount of cap relief? What if 12mil ish taking on less bad deadwood for 8ish mil from us including Staal moves him?
You need to first be prepared to have that cap space.
You don't make yourself a hostage to circumstance.
Get ahead of the curve, not behind.
And as I said before, if you wait and he gets injured, you're screwed.

And yes, I see 20ish rookies LA and FC who are high talented, have already played in serious competition abroad, have little wear and tear, to both be more useful to us, cap issues aside, than Nash.

Nash is NOT used up by any means.
Just over 30 is not the same as approaching 40.
No reason to believe he turns into Chris Drury breakdown city 2.0 this year.

However, let's be honest.
He plays hard, he gets injured, nagging things here and there.
Not a crime.
But I'd rather have the young talented guys active over the older talented guy, particularly in this case with these guys.

 

[Revel]

Oh please.

Normal people that are hot ****ing garbage at their jobs get fired.

Sorry, man. The is so not true. Socially adept workers that are hot ****ing garbage at their jobs tend to stick around. I've seen it time & time again.

Solid workers that are socially awkward get ridden and taken advantage of. I've also seen this time & time again.

Just my experience.

 

[bernmeister]

Dude, there is a huge difference between a website like the NY Post (which is an actual news medium, and HF Boards which is a forum with fans talking about hockey

The Post is not the bastion of journalism.
That said, the point is I think they make the rounds across the board, not ignoring everything else besides the big names.

 

[Mikos87]

Sorry, man. The is so not true. Socially adept workers that are hot ****ing garbage at their jobs tend to stick around. I've seen it time & time again.

Solid workers that are socially awkward get ridden and taken advantage of. I've also seen this time & time again.

Just my experience.

This is very common. Actually read a few interesting books on the matter, and have a few new correlatory arrows in my quiver as a result.

It has a lot to do with something called in-group, out-group bias in conjunction with another factor I won't list since I'd be dropping a golden nugget for some would-be mimics... There are a couple of special little lurkers I'd like to give a shout out to... they know what I mean (Hey guys!).

It's org cultural... when you are dealing with halfwits, it's a matter of collusion (labeled as collaboration), and value judgments placed on optics rather than substance.

I will say this, in recent months I figured a way to avoid this garbage all together after vowing I would to someone.

The case studies I looked at were in the UK dealing with Polish workers and how poorly the latter were treated based on their status... it was ****ing horrendous... I felt like going Geralt of Rivia on their *****.

The top tier growth companies have programmatic methods of weeding this out, it's something that the Paypal mafia have worked on going back to the late 90s.

 

[bernmeister]

....

By signing Shattenkirk, the Rangers are definitely in win-now mode.

HUGE NO.
You think just having the capacity to win games = winning = win now.
This is foolish.
If the measure were to merely have a cup competitive team, regardless of how nominally competitive, then yes.
But as has been pointed out here, the Stanley Cup is a zenith objective.
Only the best of the best are truly cup competitive.

So instead of a half ass cup run NOW, let's build and add more quality assets as fast as possible SOON.
And we have a chance to be a dominating team w/legit cup chance.

So, to answer your question:
No, it would not be useful to trade Zuccarello and Smith for younger assets. And you want to retain salary on those contracts? Smith is signed for 4(!) more years. You are willing to retain money for the next 4 seasons?

I disagree, if the talent quality returned is high enough, that is the key.
2 guys who are elcs 20ish or less, one of them a top 3, the other a good first, and Pitlick at 25 an early second like a late 1st.
You are giving up all kinds of age
Only way Dallas lets considers that, is if draft picks go with the vets
The only exception to that would be as explained, let the club save cap which = flexibility which enables them to recover the youth without the picks.

So yes, I eat that much cap to save/deny Stars top pick(s) while we get high end return.

 

[bernmeister]

You make it sound as if Marc hasn't already--he should be taking a course in patriotism. Marc Staal doesn't have to do anything except play hockey if and when his coaches put him in the lineup and to show up to practice (barring injury) whenever the team has one of those. He's signed a legally binding contract with certain additions/conditions with the New York Rangers and his end of it now is to show up at training camp in good enough condition to pass his physical and then make himself available to play to the best of the ability (barring injury and even if he sucks) from thereon. The certain conditions include the Rangers not being able to send him down to the minors or trade him to another team without his consent. He's met his conditions. He's passed the physical and as far as I know has made every practice and he's played two preseason games. What's this crap about his ego? If you had a job that you liked and maybe you thought you were doing pretty well even if maybe as you got older you were a little slower than when you were younger--would you go to your boss and tell him for the good of the company to pay you less or to fire your ass? That would be absurd and what if your boss isn't so good as he use to be either? Would he let himself go?

We are on the same page.
I am not looking to disparage Staal. He has been a good and faithful solider.

If he wants to simply honor the terms of his contract, I do not begrudge him his pay for it.
All I'm saying if he wants MORE than that, if he thinks he is entitled to play, then I have a problem.
If his spot is competitive, which it is this year, he has to beat out the competition and earn it.

If he can cut the mustard, great.
If not, give him something easier to handle.
If he can't cut that, then he has to sit.
That can be done tactfully, politely, respectfully.
BUT he cannot put his desire ahead of the team.

I trust we agree.

 

[Revel]

This is very common. Actually read a few interesting books on the matter, and have a few new correlatory arrows in my quiver as a result.

It has a lot to do with something called in-group, out-group bias in conjunction with another factor I won't list since I'd be dropping a golden nugget for some would-be mimics... There are a couple of special little lurkers I'd like to give a shout out to... they know what I mean (Hey guys!).

It's org cultural... when you are dealing with halfwits, it's a matter of collusion (labeled as collaboration), and value judgments placed on optics rather than substance.

I will say this, in recent months I figured a way to avoid this garbage all together after vowing I would to someone.

The case studies I looked at were in the UK dealing with Polish workers and how poorly the latter were treated based on their status... it was ****ing horrendous... I felt like going Geralt of Rivia on their *****.

The top tier growth companies have programmatic methods of weeding this out, it's something that the Paypal mafia have worked on going back to the late 90s.

Mikos - If you can PM me with the book titles, I would greatly appreciate it. This topic interests me as well.

Sorry for the non-hockey posts, guys. I tend to do that now & again. Carry on...

 

[bernmeister]

I get the cap logic here, but man some guys have to be sacred and Zucc is one of those guys if anyone ever was.

If he weren't performing, okay, forget the emotional attachment and think strictly cap-wise, but the guy is a stud, he helps his line go, he helps our scorers score, he's repeatedly taken team friendly deals and if he's not the heart and soul of the team himself, he's gotta be close.

This isn't like a Callahan situation where you can see the downfall on the horizon but he's a good guy who is important to the team's identity - Zucc has light NHL mileage on him, he had a fantastic year last year and shows no signs of slowing down, doesn't play an overly physical or punishing game.

Again, I get the point you're making from a strictly business standpoint, but the current guys on the team are people and there is some emotional angle at play. Especially with Step out, Nash and Staal likely out next year... might be wise to hold on to the well liked vet who is earning his money and then some to retain some stability and concept of meritocracy.

I appreciate that you get what I said from a biz standpoint.
In that regard, I tried to connect the dots and I believe I succeeded.
You are saying no, not on the merits of what I suggested, but on the basis of emotional attachment to Zuc.

I like Zuc, and he HAS shown he plays larger than his size and deserves a roster spot.
IMO that is not the focus of discussion applicable.
The ? is, is the team better off dealing Zuc + for max return, which builds, and hope for a Chapman back to Yankees scenario in 2 years, only better*? Or are we better off just keeping him, but ignoring financial reality.

If we do it my way, there is a risk he may find comfort elsewhere, or may get a number we can't match. But if we did this my way and tried to drive down the salary of the young core and add to that quality younger elcs, then maybe you can't afford to give Zuc 7m ish +; *but you can make room for upwards of 5 easy, if he really wants to be here.

Fair discussion, and I just want to do the steady way with consistent build. May not be as fast, but likely to work since, logically, you have a similar team but more, not less assets.

 

[Machinehead]

You haven't worked in Washington DC I gather....

I said normal people.

Politicians aren't even people.

 

[bernmeister]

Bern I was not asking if you would have traded for Messier at 31 years of age like we did. I was asking if you would have traded Messier away. Messier was 34 when we won the cup. He was 33 when we missed the playoffs the season before our cup. You seem to be among a handful of posters that feels we should trade players over 27 years of age. So would you have traded Messier at age 33 after we missed the playoffs in 1993?

Sorry to have misunderstood your question.
If I remember correctly, this is not a true parallel, because at that time, we did not have the same cap reality. Rangers could go hog city on the payroll, and it was their own affair. So in those circumstances, I would have kept him barring an insane return.

Were the cap reality we have now applicable then, in that case I would still have looked for a profitable enough return, but I would have tried to weigh both Messier's salary and that of the return. Remember a bit and then some of those days, but not salaries, and imagining what the return on a trade would be and what that salary might be, and no hard decisions in that regard.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

The Messier thing was a different era. He was considered beat up after the 1990-91 season and it was seen as a huge risk back then. Plus the word around the hockey industry was that Rice was going to be a 30G-30A type power forward.

As for Nash? Yeah can't really trade him now. Won't get back fair value. As I've said the most I see him returning is a Brandon Prust type prospect and a 3rd or 4th rounder. Only this year left of that contract.

 

[RangerBoy]

The Rangers are in "win now" mode with this team? This roster screams legitimate Stanley Cup contender in 2017-18. All of my little friends are attacking me and the mods are looking the other way. Typical.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

The Rangers are in "win now" mode with this team? This roster screams legitimate Stanley Cup contender in 2017-18. All of my little friends are attacking me and the mods are looking the other way. Typical.

I'd say the goal is to be competitive and make the playoffs, but not necessarily win now mode. For example, I don't see them doing a St. Louis or Yandle type trade at all for a center even if they're somehow leading the Division come March.

 

[Avery16]

http://nypost.com/2017/09/25/how-rangers-unknown-has-fought-way-to-roster-contention/

 

[Ola]

The Rangers are in "win now" mode with this team? This roster screams legitimate Stanley Cup contender in 2017-18. All of my little friends are attacking me and the mods are looking the other way. Typical.

We shouldn't throw in the towel, but we should build towards next season. Andersson and Chytil will be in NYR if not sooner so after Christmas in the 18/19 season. Contributing. The kids will help on defense. We will have cap space, the CDN is at 0.81 towards the Cap.

One of Zucc and Nash should be here, IMO Gorton should look to move the other.

Gorton should IMO definitely look to move Brendan Smith sooner rather than later. Send him back to DRW for a 2nd?

We should get rid of Marc Staal.

There cannot be many teams that are more "set" in terms of depth on the roster 5-10 years down the road than we are right now, roughly in terms of depth-chart:
Kreider; Zib; Zucc/Nash
Miller; Hayes; Buch
Fast; Andersson; Vesey
Chytil; Nieves; Lettieri; Fontaine
McD;Shatty
Skjei;Smith
Graves; DeAngelo
Bereglazov; Pionk

18 skaters dress per night. Counting players among the above that can play at least 5 and up to 10 years -- that basically already is there, that aren't merely fanciful expectations -- by my count we have basically 15 of 18 position have very capable and solid placeholders in them.

Of course you cannot count like that, in real life there will be a bigger turnover. Stuff will happen. But still, its an indication. We are in very good shape IMO due to the off-season Gorton had.

We can question if the above depth chart has what it takes to not only be a top 8 contender over a number of years, but actually go all the way. But OTOH, if it seems like it doesn't, Gorton has all the mobility in the world to gun for someone that could put us over the top if that someone becomes available.

 

[Irishguy42]

http://nypost.com/2017/09/25/how-rangers-unknown-has-fought-way-to-roster-contention/

Battle level? Are we the Islanders now? Is Capuano secretly our coach?

 

[haohmaru]

The Rangers are in "win now" mode with this team? This roster screams legitimate Stanley Cup contender in 2017-18. All of my little friends are attacking me and the mods are looking the other way. Typical.

You tend to view opinions that differ from yours as "attacking". You have a lot of insightful post and great information but, by now, your skin should be a little bit thicker. There's nothing wrong with having meaningful discourse about the Rangers and people having views that done line up with yours. Doesn't make either of you wrong.

 

[Ori]

We`ve a D day here at Normandy `glance` directly at @RangerBoy `grin` Maybe we have too few mods?
A `win now` mode is up for debate - we might need that sniper in the next summer 2018 draft.

 

[offdacrossbar]

if i look into the future a few years from now, theres a solid core here. all the key young core guys now will be prime vets and this defense seems to be taking shape for the next 5 yrs. once shesty arrives things will be alot clearer. this team is building for the future right now. defense and strong center ice wins championships.

the problem is and continues to be the same right now though (minus girardi), our highest paid players mostly all either suck or are only average. cant win that way.

 

[NYR Viper]

if i look into the future a few years from now, theres a solid core here. all the key young core guys now will be prime vets and this defense seems to be taking shape for the next 5 yrs. once shesty arrives things will be alot clearer. this team is building for the future right now. defense and strong center ice wins championships.

the problem is and continues to be the same right now though (minus girardi), our highest paid players mostly all either suck or are only average. cant win that way.

I think that will change within a year. Gorton made a few very significant strides this off-season but it's a long-term plan. Nash will either be re-signed at a much lower cap hit or gone and they will have a better idea of what the plan is for Staal. again, they didn't require the cap space from Staal's buyout this off-season so I can see why Gorton was hesitant to buyout both Girardi and Staal.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Did I really just read that we should get rid of Smith already?

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Did I really just read that we should get rid of Smith already?

And to trade him back to Detroit at that. For only a draft pick, despite them being severely cap strapped. So not only stupid for us, but even stupider for Detroit.

I swear, I have no idea what some people on here are thinking sometimes.

Oh, some prospects look like they could be NHL ready after a few preseason games. Better trade the newly signed, established NHL D who was our best defenseman during the playoffs.

 

[Fugazy]

Did I really just read that we should get rid of Smith already?

You're god damn right. (Walter White voice)

 

[Ori]

Did I really just read that we should get rid of Smith already?

Yeah Smith`s camp is awful. I know it`s preseason, but I`m worried for him unless he find a way to improve his game. I hope he is not injured or too busy with wedding plans, and too little time to prepare
for a new season. Hopefully Smith improve the next couple of games in regular season.

 

[Off Sides]

I like Smith, I liked him before he was traded here. He brings a certain physical push back this team needs. I watched him in Detroit play with a couple different partners, on different sides. I think he is a better LD and especially if he is paired with a partner who can transport the puck. He was the LD with Green for a while and that was by far Detroit best pair that year.

With that said, I still did not like the cost to acquire him, being that he was going to get a contract like he did, which I think is an over payment for what I believe is a player better suited to LD where the Rangers already have two above him.

I think should he play RD this whole year, with 2nd pair minutes, assuming Skjei is his partner, I think Skjei is going to have to be pretty darn good for them to really be looked at as a success. Similar to how they were in the playoffs, yet even better. I think that is possible but also this is going to be an up and down year for several players who are going to be asked to play more often against a level of opposition they have not faced before.

Does not mean I think the Rangers should move him, just that without a good amount of improvement from both he and Skjei I think they may be viewed a little differently as the season goes on.