Roster Building thread - Part X - (TDL edition)

[bernmeister]

Keep the Lindgren contract as short as possible. Another 3 year contract. One year of group II. Two years of group III. $4M-$4.5M. He will want some of NTC clause in years 2 & 3. The salary cap will be approaching $100M in the summer of 2027. Lindgren will still be under 30. He will get another decent contract.

$87.675M 2024-25
$92M 2025-26

CBA expires after 25-26. New CBA will be negotiated. The set formula coming out of Covid will be gone.

nope

should have sold high before
do NOT extend.
deal
NOW
avoid Girardi II

Offensively they are scary but defensively? I'm not sure I love their group. And going through what will likely be a gauntlet of long, grueling series' out West will take it's toll.

I don't really see an 'easy' matchup this year. Just keep winning and playing well and let the chips fall where they may. They will have to beat good teams to move on every round. It's the nature of parity.

A fair assessment, tho their D is not subpar/atrocious
Howev, their netminder can e an equalizer

 

[TGWL]

You can compare using the link below. This morning I compared how the Rangers were 5v5 against the rest of the league. Last season the Rangers scored a total of 273 goals where 59 were power play and 8 were short handed. So 206 5v5 goals. Through 74 games Rangers have 190 5v5 goals.

I didn't go through every team, but from what I can see the Bruins, Devils, Knights, Oilers, Leafs, Stars, Kraken, Sabres and Panthers had more 5v5 goals last season.

So last season Rangers finished w the 10th most 5v5 goals. They are sitting at 6th now.

2022-23 NHL Summary | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the Eastern, Western Conference and Playoff series Standings, Statistics, Leaders and more for the 2022-23 NHL season on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

As it has been pointed out, these numbers are off. Rangers are in 16th for 5 on 5 goals scored, or you can adjust that for games played if you like, but it doesn't change much. We finished with 182 last year, 10th place. However, we're 4th during the month of March, so that's a good sign.

 

[TominNC]

It’s the playoffs. People act like every regular season game it life or death. Playoffs just magnify that. But in the playoffs style doesn’t matter just winning the game.

Rangers have show they can beat anyone. Can they do that for stretches of time? We’ll see. That’s why the playoffs are so intense.

 

[Beer League Sniper]

Yeah don’t want Tampa first round. I know Machinehead says we match up better, but there is just some things that need to be avoided and that’s one of them, lol.

I think the last gasp for that TBL core is going to be a first round upset, followed by getting swept. I don't want to face them in the first round.

 

[Mac n Gs]

I like Kakko. He just needs a change of scenery. Try to find players on other teams in the same situations. The team isn't happy with them. There is an issue with the coach. Torts and Farabee. The current management team didn't draft that player. Farabee. The other team doesn't want to pay that player. The player the Rangers acquire will be here for a while. The Rangers have traded all of their picks but as long as the Rangers have good young players on their roster, they will be fine. Those draft picks aren’t replacing those players.

Kakko on the Panthers would great for him. They play that big and heavy game. Lundell would be very good on the Rangers if Chytil can't resume his playing career.

Othmann at less than $900,000 for two more seasons can replace Kakko on the 3rd line. The Rangers use Kakko to fill another need.

Byram wanted more playing time. I was listening to EF on 32T a few weeks ago. I call him EF because I sent him a note a twitter and sent me a DM using EF to close out the message. He said a few Avs players told him Byram wouldn’t reach his full potential playing on the Avs with Makar and Toews ahead of him. They had a need at center ever since Kadri left two summers ago. Mittelstadt solves that need.

I was reading a Detroit Red Wings mailbag at The Athletic before the trade deadline. Their Wings beat writer Max Bultman wrote Kakko could be an option for the Wings this summer. He wrote Kakko would be worth a 1st round pick. The Wings do have some good prospects. The Rangers need a roster player.

The 2024 first round pick should be in play for a roster player if it's possible.

The Rangers have traded away all of their picks in 2nd and 3rd in 2024, 2025 and 2026 for rentals and removing Nemeth's contract. If the Rangers make the Cup finals and Roslovic plays 50% of the playoff games, the pick becomes a 3rd in 2026 instead of a 4th.

Trading the other future first round picks is not a sustainable philosophy.

What about Cole Perfetti? He's not getting any opportunities under Bowness right now, and Bowness would trust Kakko way more because of his defensive game. He does the same thing with Nik Ehlers for some reason, who may honestly be one of the most underrated RW in the league. Could be a good change-of-scenery move for both players, Perfetti has shown he can play C, and Perfetti has scored at the NHL level already too.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

What can Kakko+Lindgren+2024 1st return?

 

[mas0764]

I swear the Rangers would win the Cup and you’d say it was a fluke and be disappointed because you wanted to win multiple cups and don’t think they’re good enough.

Well I do want to win more than one Cup and if we happen to win one, there will be analysis of what we need to do to win another.

Disappointed in winning one? No.

 

[Flan the incredible]

After reading over probably 1000s of posts about Lindgren in the last few years I noticed something kind of interesting. The people who want him signed in the offseason all say the same thing. He is a heart and soul guy, the team loves him, he has great chemistry with Fox etc. None of that actually describes his game plus Fox is a superstar are we acting like no one can play with him? Fox being as smart as he is with his talent can probably play with most players.

The people who want him traded talk about his game. He is terrible on offense as he doesn't have a good shot, not great at passing, skating is mediocre, cant stick handle so he usually just dumps the puck in an area that another Ranger cant get to while under pressure etc. They talk about his durability as he gets drilled more than anyone else on the team, gets knocked out of the game but he keeps coming back to play hurt. Is that even a good thing? Lastly this year especially his defense hasn't been good as he is out of position a lot and people are getting behind him. A

I challenge everyone to go back and read the threads and notice the difference. The pros are almost entirely things that can't be measured and the cons are almost always about his skill and performance. If you spoke with anyone about him and left off his name and described him as a player it doesn't sound good. Does he skate well....no. Does he shoot well....no. Does he pass well....no. Is he physical....no he usually gets destroyed. Does he block a ton of shots....no and usually he gets hurt when he does. Is he an amazing shutdown dman....no but he does play with one of the best dmen in the game and I think he has great chemistry.

I just dont understand it.

 

[noncents]

What can Kakko+Lindgren+2024 1st return?

blais + 2nd

 

[mas0764]

You cherry pick your example, I’ll cherry pick mine. Goes to show there’s not one way to do things and one guaranteed result. However it has been years since the rebuild here so why continue to harangue us with complaints.

Mine is not cherry picked. All the best teams almost exclusively draft the best talent high in the draft or otherwise are active until they have acquired top forward talent. That's the rule.

The exception is teams that are incompetently managed. You citing the exception is fearmongering. It's disingenuous.

You can make plenty of valid arguments that we could have a good-faith discussion over. "People want us to be Buffalo," or "we will become Buffalo," is not one of them.

No one wants that and we will never become that. To insinuate anyone wants that or that there is any chance we become that is a lie.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Need to trade Lindgren just for the sheer need to continue the Rick Nash trade tree.

 

[mas0764]

One of the things they pay a lot of mind to is who's hot and cold going in.

Last year, our xGF% was around middle of the pack and then absolutely tanked for Bedard the last 20 games.

This year, our rolling xGF% has roared straight uphill the last 10-15 games. Although, one of the main reasons it's done that is back in the lineup (sorry).

I do get the sense they are playing better as a team right now.

I still don't think it's great and wouldn't peg them among the true clear cut favorites, but I'd say we have a puncher's chance that I wouldn't have really given them last year.

 

[mas0764]

After reading over probably 1000s of posts about Lindgren in the last few years I noticed something kind of interesting. The people who want him signed in the offseason all say the same thing. He is a heart and soul guy, the team loves him, he has great chemistry with Fox etc. None of that actually describes his game plus Fox is a superstar are we acting like no one can play with him? Fox being as smart as he is with his talent can probably play with most players.

The people who want him traded talk about his game. He is terrible on offense as he doesn't have a good shot, not great at passing, skating is mediocre, cant stick handle so he usually just dumps the puck in an area that another Ranger cant get to while under pressure etc. They talk about his durability as he gets drilled more than anyone else on the team, gets knocked out of the game but he keeps coming back to play hurt. Is that even a good thing? Lastly this year especially his defense hasn't been good as he is out of position a lot and people are getting behind him. A

I challenge everyone to go back and read the threads and notice the difference. The pros are almost entirely things that can't be measured and the cons are almost always about his skill and performance. If you spoke with anyone about him and left off his name and described him as a player it doesn't sound good. Does he skate well....no. Does he shoot well....no. Does he pass well....no. Is he physical....no he usually gets destroyed. Does he block a ton of shots....no and usually he gets hurt when he does. Is he an amazing shutdown dman....no but he does play with one of the best dmen in the game and I think he has great chemistry.

I just dont understand it.

In prior seasons Lindgren graded out very well as a shut down defenseman. Legit first pair.

Was that a product of playing with Fox? I dunno but this year he's playing with Fox and he's awful.

Lindgren has a history of always being a net negative offensive player but this is the first year he's not a solid top 4 player defensively.

Trouba has always been garbage defensively. Always. And since the moment Fox ascended, Trouba's value as an offensive player has been essentially eliminated. The argument for Trouba has always been intangibles, which has been another way of saying "He sucks but we like him anyway."

Trouba should go at all costs. Swindle a GM, pay another GM to take him, buy him out, whatever. Get him gone.

Lindgren is way more affordable and I could see the hope that he rebounds into a solid third pair defender at least. I would also be exploring trades - but I get it. If he's cheap and they think they can solidify a down-lineup spot with him, fine. They just can't keep putting him next to Fox and they can't lock themselves into a NMC.

 

[noncents]

Mine is not cherry picked. All the best teams almost exclusively draft the best talent high in the draft or otherwise are active until they have acquired top forward talent. That's the rule.

The exception is teams that are incompetently managed. You citing the exception is fearmongering. It's disingenuous.

You can make plenty of valid arguments that we could have a good-faith discussion over. "People want us to be Buffalo," or "we will become Buffalo," is not one of them.

No one wants that and we will never become that. To insinuate anyone wants that or that there is any chance we become that is a lie.

I think if you're disputing the opposing argument on grounds of realism, ie that it's not valid to bring up Buffalo or Arizona because the situations with those franchises are so different that it's disingenuous, then I could contend that it's similarly disingenuous to bring up the smart franchises in this league who achieve long term contention by way of "full rebuild."

For what it's worth, I agree with the theory that rebuilding and bottoming out is the best way to contend in this hard cap system.

But I don't believe that a full rebuild is realistic in this market, for a number of reasons. I think this franchise will always have to find ways to parlay their natural advantages into competitive edges, and capitalize by drafting smart and trading smart. They also need to be lucky.

So while I agree with the idea that they could have done a better job with the rebuild, I don't think bemoaning that it didn't happen is any less irrational than using Buffalo as a counterpoint. NYR just doesn't do rebuilds.

 

[TominNC]

Mine is not cherry picked. All the best teams almost exclusively draft the best talent high in the draft or otherwise are active until they have acquired top forward talent. That's the rule.

The exception is teams that are incompetently managed. You citing the exception is fearmongering. It's disingenuous.

You can make plenty of valid arguments that we could have a good-faith discussion over. "People want us to be Buffalo," or "we will become Buffalo," is not one of them.

No one wants that and we will never become that. To insinuate anyone wants that or that there is any chance we become that is a lie.

No one wants to be what Buffalo has become, but it’s a risk of a total rebuild. Not guarantees that a total rebuild becomes Colorado. Top picks aren’t always stars (Kakko). It’s a risk you take. I like the more middle road we took. It’s been a competitive team and this year it’s worked in our favor. Only one team wins the cup. It doesn’t make everyone else a total failure. You need to take legit shots at it. I think we are.

 

[Machinehead]

I do get the sense they are playing better as a team right now.

I still don't think it's great and wouldn't peg them among the true clear cut favorites, but I'd say we have a puncher's chance that I wouldn't have really given them last year.

Last year, we knew we had the Devils, and our rolling xGF and their rolling xGF were headed in such different directions that it looked like the jaws of life.

I have my preferences but none of the matchups this year bother me as much as that one did.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

After reading over probably 1000s of posts about Lindgren in the last few years I noticed something kind of interesting. The people who want him signed in the offseason all say the same thing. He is a heart and soul guy, the team loves him, he has great chemistry with Fox etc. None of that actually describes his game plus Fox is a superstar are we acting like no one can play with him? Fox being as smart as he is with his talent can probably play with most players.

The people who want him traded talk about his game. He is terrible on offense as he doesn't have a good shot, not great at passing, skating is mediocre, cant stick handle so he usually just dumps the puck in an area that another Ranger cant get to while under pressure etc. They talk about his durability as he gets drilled more than anyone else on the team, gets knocked out of the game but he keeps coming back to play hurt. Is that even a good thing? Lastly this year especially his defense hasn't been good as he is out of position a lot and people are getting behind him. A

I challenge everyone to go back and read the threads and notice the difference. The pros are almost entirely things that can't be measured and the cons are almost always about his skill and performance. If you spoke with anyone about him and left off his name and described him as a player it doesn't sound good. Does he skate well....no. Does he shoot well....no. Does he pass well....no. Is he physical....no he usually gets destroyed. Does he block a ton of shots....no and usually he gets hurt when he does. Is he an amazing shutdown dman....no but he does play with one of the best dmen in the game and I think he has great chemistry.

I just dont understand it.

Is it possible to have sex with an hfboards post

 

[mas0764]

I think if you're disputing the opposing argument on grounds of realism, ie that it's not valid to bring up Buffalo or Arizona because the situations with those franchises are so different that it's disingenuous, then I could contend that it's similarly disingenuous to bring up the smart franchises in this league who achieve long term contention by way of "full rebuild."

For what it's worth, I agree with the theory that rebuilding and bottoming out is the best way to contend in this hard cap system.

But I don't believe that a full rebuild is realistic in this market, for a number of reasons. I think this franchise will always have to find ways to parlay their natural advantages into competitive edges, and capitalize by drafting smart and trading smart. They also need to be lucky.

So while I agree with the idea that they could have done a better job with the rebuild, I don't think bemoaning that it didn't happen is any less irrational than using Buffalo as a counterpoint. NYR just doesn't do rebuilds.

I think that's arguing two separate things.

One person is positing "we could end up as Buffalo." No, that's not true. We couldn't. If we are trying to rebuild into a Cup winner, that's an impossible outcome for us. Not only is it untrue, the poster making the claim knows it's untrue, frankly, but is just saying it to try to whip up support because he doesn't like rebuilds. The truth is that he likes competitive hockey quicker and is cool with it if we are just a good playoff team ("not every season that ends without a Cup is a failure.")

But it is true that "full rebuild" is generally the best way and its therefore what we SHOULD have done. Which is all I'm saying. When the question is asked "Why don't people love this team as much as they should" that is the answer. Because we eschewed the smart, best way, in favor of the quickest way back to contention that is also the way most full of potholes that will derail you.

I also agree that under current management, we will never choose the full rebuild way. But that's not the argument. The answer to "what should we have done," or "why don't people fully buy into this team," have the same answer: A full rebuild was required and we didn't do it.

If the question is instead "Given that Rangers management will never allow a full rebuild because they are impatient, what's the next best approach?" or "Given that Rangers management will never allow a full rebuild, did they do the best they could with an abbreviated rebuild?" then we are having a different conversation with different answers.

FWIW I don't think the market really has much of anything to do with it. The fans are not going to stop spending their dollars on the sports teams. There is no danger of that (again, NYC is not Buffalo or Arizona). The problem is that there is this NYC mythos, though, and the media in the city panders to it, and thus the ownership panders to it, and thus the fanbases get in line. It's a vicious cycle. It needs a strong willed owner to come in and say "F this, you guys be patient and I'll build a winner, and I'll put up my money to do so while you wait." If someone did that and was successful, NYC would love them.

The Rangers have had plenty of postseason success, just no Cup wins. It needs to break the cycle of demand for second round playoff teams. It needs to break the fixation on "just get in and why not us?" Because if you don't know in advance that its you, it's probably not, that's why.

But I agree there is no stomach in the NYR front office for that approach. The letter was a step in that direction, and then it was aborted.

 

[mandiblesofdoom]

Another interesting thing with the xG business ... recently it seems Valiquette has been giving us better grades than free sites like NaturalStatTrick ... Valiquette's numbers are based on more thorough criteria,and so they should be a better predictor.

It would be interesting to line them up & see what the deal is.

Eg, Valiquette gave us a 3.64-2.65 xG win v Arizona (the score was 8-5). NST had us up only 3.15-2.9.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Another interesting thing with the xG business ... recently it seems Valiquette has been giving us better grades than free sites like NaturalStatTrick ... Valiquette's numbers are based on more thorough criteria,and so they should be a better predictor.

It would be interesting to line them up & see what the deal is.

Eg, Valiquette gave us a 3.64-2.65 xG win v Arizona (the score was 8-5). NST had us up only 3.15-2.9.

I don't know what his criteria is but I do know that vally's people go back and triple check their work.

NST has been my least favorite of the free sites. I love all of the different data sets they provide but I think they miss way too many things.

 

[SA16]

No one wants to be what Buffalo has become, but it’s a risk of a total rebuild. Not guarantees that a total rebuild becomes Colorado. Top picks aren’t always stars (Kakko). It’s a risk you take. I like the more middle road we took. It’s been a competitive team and this year it’s worked in our favor. Only one team wins the cup. It doesn’t make everyone else a total failure. You need to take legit shots at it. I think we are.

The Colorado rebuild wasn't even a success. Their first early pick was Duchene at 1.3 in 2009. They won the Stanley Cup in 2022. I would not call a 13 year plan a success. That was MacKinnon's 9th year. These "rebuilds" take so long to yield results there is no way to know if another plan would have worked better. They went through 3 head coaches and 3 GMs in that time period.

 

[IDvsEGO]

I think that's arguing two separate things.

One person is positing "we could end up as Buffalo." No, that's not true. We couldn't. If we are trying to rebuild into a Cup winner, that's an impossible outcome for us. Not only is it untrue, the poster making the claim knows it's untrue, frankly, but is just saying it to try to whip up support because he doesn't like rebuilds.

But it is true that "full rebuild" is generally the best way and its therefore what we SHOULD have done. Which is all I'm saying. When the question is asked "Why don't people love this team as much as they should" that is the answer. Because we eschewed the smart, best way, in favor of the quickest way back to contention that is also the way most full of potholes that will derail you.

I also agree that under current management, we will never choose the full rebuild way. But that's not the argument. The answer to "what should we have done," or "why don't people fully buy into this team," have the same answer: A full rebuild was required and we didn't do it.

If the question is instead "Given that Rangers management will never allow a full rebuild because they are impatient, what's the next best approach?" or "Given that Rangers management will never allow a full rebuild, did they do the best they could with an abbreviated rebuild?" then we are having a different conversation with different answers.

FWIW I don't think the market really has much of anything to do with it. The fans are not going to stop spending their dollars on the sports teams. There is no danger of that (again, NYC is not Buffalo or Arizona). The problem is that there is this NYC mythos, though, and the media in the city panders to it, and thus the ownership panders to it, and thus the fanbases get in line. It's a vicious cycle. It needs a strong willed owner to come in and say "F this, you guys be patient and I'll build a winner, and I'll put up my money to do so while you wait." If someone did that and was successful, NYC would love them.

The Rangers have had plenty of postseason success, just no Cup wins. It needs to break the cycle of demand for second round playoff teams. It needs to break the fixation on "just get in and why not us?" Because if you don't know in advance that its you, it's probably not, that's why.

But I agree there is no stomach in the NYR front office for that approach. The letter was a step in that direction, and then it was aborted.

I don’t think it was changed until we got the Laf pick.
That draft changed our direction.

 

[mas0764]

No one wants to be what Buffalo has become, but it’s a risk of a total rebuild.

That's not the risk for us.

Not guarantees that a total rebuild becomes Colorado. Top picks aren’t always stars (Kakko). It’s a risk you take.

No guarantees that a total rebuild becomes Colorado, but the downside simply doesn't exist for a big market team like NYR.

We basically have had the worst case scenario happen for our rebuild. All our top picks have underachieved, yet we are still such an attactive location that Panarin and Fox demanded to come here and we have a playoff team.

That will always happen. We're the Rangers. There is always some star that wants to come play here. We are left off everyone's No Trade List.

The full rebuild even in failure probably ends up as a mid playoff team if you are NYC. Which is barely worse than what we've been the past two years.

Meanwhile you can't become Colorado or Tampa without a full rebuild and their star power.

I like the more middle road we took. It’s been a competitive team and this year it’s worked in our favor. Only one team wins the cup. It doesn’t make everyone else a total failure. You need to take legit shots at it. I think we are.

Not every season that you don't win the Cup has to be classified as a "failure," but for the Rangers who haven't won since 1994, and only once since 1940, it's time to be done with the moral victories of making the playoffs or winning a playoff round or two. We've seen that.

The middle road over and over again gets you exactly what we've gotten. One Cup in 30+ years (or really, 80 years, but I won't speak to how the team was run before 1994).

It was time to be aggressive and we punted. The most likely outcome is more of the same. But for impatient fans, just being able to witness playoff hockey and having "as good a shot as anyone," is good enough. That's not good enough for me anymore. I want a better shot than others and I'm willing to wait for it.

 

[NYR Viper]

I am looking squarely at Arizona as a MAJOR Player for Lindgren. Young team looking for veteran leadership. They have basically no defensive depth and a million draft picks.

 

[pld459666]

I do get the sense they are playing better as a team right now.

I still don't think it's great and wouldn't peg them among the true clear cut favorites, but I'd say we have a puncher's chance that I wouldn't have really given them last year.

We have beaten the other best teams in the league

What is this team NOT doing that you don't have them in that grouping?

The Rangers are as good as ANY team in the league. ANY TEAM.