Roster Building Thread - Part XI (Off-season edition)

[TGWL]

Because it wasn't. It was 12 years ago

Bro, don't go and tell me it's already 2024...

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

View attachment 896522

Every time I see Buchy's name I feel a deep rage inside my soul

 

[noncents]

Every time I see Buchy's name I feel a deep rage inside my soul

yup.

yet people still handwave it or try to justify it. it's noncents.

if they keep buch, they can't sign goodrow reaves and nemeth.

it was The Move that ruined us.

 

[bhamill]

yup.

yet people still handwave it or try to justify it. it's noncents.

if they keep buch, they can't sign goodrow reaves and nemeth.

it was The Move that ruined us.

I handwave it because its years ago now and constantly rehashing it does NOTHING constructive, we ALL know it was a bad trade. Somehow we still made it to the ECF TWICE, so "ruined" may be a tad hyperbolic. Also, we keep him we can't sign Trocheck... I'll take Vinnie over him every day of the week and twice on Sunday, at a slightly lower cap hit to boot.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

yup.

yet people still handwave it or try to justify it. it's noncents.

if they keep buch, they can't sign goodrow reaves and nemeth.

it was The Move that ruined us.

I don’t think people try to hand wave it.

People just don’t want to focus on something that’s done and want to find a path forward.

I hate the trade as well and miss Buchy. But it is what it is

 

[effen]

yup.

yet people still handwave it or try to justify it. it's noncents.

if they keep buch, they can't sign goodrow reaves and nemeth.

it was The Move that ruined us.

Doesn't happen if the team defends each other. They didn't. Country club rot had already set in.

Too pretty to do anything other than hug Tom Wilson and pray the officials saved them after he punched a guy in the face when he was pinned down and then tried to murder Panarin.

Even worse was the reply was a scripted fight next game where Brendan Smith got his ass beat. Wow that really showed him.

 

[TominNC]

So much nonsense. "Country club rot" Hell of a club if it keeps showing up in the CF. Fans still beating themselves up over trades from years ago too. Assuming one thing would happen but ignoring that other things may not have. Etc

 

[noncents]

I handwave it because its years ago now and constantly rehashing it does NOTHING constructive, we ALL know it was a bad trade. Somehow we still made it to the ECF TWICE, so "ruined" may be a tad hyperbolic. Also, we keep him we can't sign Trocheck... I'll take Vinnie over him every day of the week and twice on Sunday, at a slightly lower cap hit to boot.

this is the typa stuff i mean.

we paid more for goodrow reaves and nemeth than buch cost the next year. and we had room for the troch to strome salary increase.

you wanna tell me it's unproductive to keep rehashing buchnevich and you're tired of it? Fine. i get it. it is indeed what it is.

but don't keep spewing nonsense justification like "we wouldn't have been able to afford trocheck." that's just straight up incorrect from dollars and cents perspective. it's just false.

 

[bhamill]

this is the typa stuff i mean.

we paid more for goodrow reaves and nemeth than buch cost the next year. and we had room for the troch to strome salary increase.

you wanna tell me it's unproductive to keep rehashing buchnevich and you're tired of it? Fine. i get it. it is indeed what it is.

but don't keep spewing nonsense justification like "we wouldn't have been able to afford trocheck." that's just straight up incorrect from dollars and cents perspective. it's just false.

Saying its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Trocheck must mean you also think its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Goodrow, Reaves and Nemeth... If you are going to do it to further your narrative, you should expect the opposing analogous circumstance... You're applying a double standard. The entire point of me posting that was if you are going to make those sorts of assumptions, you have to allow other assumptions that are in the same vein but are not so supportive of your contention.

 

[noncents]

So much nonsense. "Country club rot" Hell of a club if it keeps showing up in the CF. Fans still beating themselves up over trades from years ago too. Assuming one thing would happen but ignoring that other things may not have. Etc

you can't make any assumptions about hypothetical situations unfortunately.

so while i get that it's easy to say "we can't understand how anything affects anything else" and subsume all arguments to that nether, i think that's lazy.

There are different types of mistakes that FOs can make, as regards FA/cap management, and they generally have different valences of effect on a teams fortunes or results.

If you sign bad talent, you probably have to waste more assets to get rid of it. See: trading 2 2nds to dump Nemeth. This isn't ideal but isn't a death knell in a vacuum. A pattern of this can be though.

if you overpay for good to decent talent, you can manage around it. Panarin a good example.

if you overpay for bad talent, it's very tough to win a cup because high salary players are generally deployed more so as to recoup that cost. it's f***ed up.


The most important mistakes a front office can make, however, is to have an inside track (leverage via RFA for example) to sign good talent at good value and to not do so. Drafting and development of actual top line or top pair talent is such a crapshoot, the only thing that can be controlled is to SIGN YOUR ELITE TALENT. you can miss miss miss all day, and supplement with FA. but when you have young talent in house, you have to lock it down.

We had a top line forward and got rid of him for no justifiable reason. That's the biggest type of mistake.

 

[noncents]

Saying its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Trocheck must mean you also think its nonsense justification to say we wouldn't have been able to afford Goodrow, Reaves and Nemeth... If you are going to do it to further your narrative, you should expect the opposing analogous circumstance... You're applying a double standard. The entire point of me posting that was if you are going to make those sorts of assumptions, you have to allow other assumptions that are in the same vein but are not so supportive of your contention.

dude it was the same offseason.

do you think letting strome go and signing troch were unrelated? of course not.

the point is that there is no justification, at the time or since, that stands up to logical analysis. The idea of trading buch was always and will forever be a bad one.

 

[effen]

So much nonsense. "Country club rot" Hell of a club if it keeps showing up in the CF.

That's a very cool story, but that squad didn't defend each other all year and I can only assume CF means "didn't make the playoffs club".

 

[effen]

dude it was the same offseason.

do you think letting strome go and signing troch were unrelated? of course not.

the point is that there is no justification, at the time or since, that stands up to logical analysis. The idea of trading buch was always and will forever be a bad one.

We have had this conversation before, but you keep memory holing James Dolan firing upper management during the f***ing season because of their attitudes towards the Wilson incident and failures to adequately build a team that would defend each other.

It directly led to the offseason edict of getting some Gritty McGrits who aren't very good at hockey which in turn led to there not being money for Buchnevich. These are very connected things.

 

[TominNC]

Still muttering about ancient history. Time to look forward

 

[n8]

View attachment 896522

I'm glad Erixon retained some value in this trade but man, what a terrible trade that was. Rangers thought they were getting the 2012 version of Adam Fox. Granted, I don't have a lot of faith in our scouts, especially not circa 2011 (they didn't scout Erixon very well) but William Karlsson, Nikita Kucherov, Vincent Trocheck, Adam Lowry all available at those picks.

Still muttering about ancient history. Time to look forward

It is the way of a Rangers fan.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

I'm glad Erixon retained some value in this trade but man, what a terrible trade that was. Rangers thought they were getting the 2012 version of Adam Fox. Granted, I don't have a lot of faith in our scouts, especially not circa 2011 (they didn't scout Erixon very well) but William Karlsson, Nikita Kucherov, Vincent Trocheck, Adam Lowry all available at those picks.


It is the way of a Rangers fan.

This “ancient” trade is still hurting us now .

 

[bhamill]

dude it was the same offseason.

do you think letting strome go and signing troch were unrelated? of course not.

the point is that there is no justification, at the time or since, that stands up to logical analysis. The idea of trading buch was always and will forever be a bad one.

Of course they were not unrelated. But they weren't the only two things related in all of this. If we had kept Buch HE would have needed HIS 5.8mil AAV contract and we would NOT have signed Trocheck.... for me Troch is far superior. Does that make it a less awful trade? Nope.
I'm not justifying ANYTHING. I'm just saying if you want to follow the cascade of events that stemmed from trading Buch, there are bad and GOOD. Just pointing out the Goodrows and Nemeths but pretending it wasn't why we could afford Trocheck is only admitting to HALF the reality of it...
But if that's what you want to do, have at it. I've made my point, I don't need to belabor it. Like some folks do with the Buchnevich trade.

 

[JohnC]

So much nonsense. "Country club rot" Hell of a club if it keeps showing up in the CF. Fans still beating themselves up over trades from years ago too. Assuming one thing would happen but ignoring that other things may not have. Etc

Country club is basically the most lazy analysis a person can make about a team that underperforms based on certain expectations.

 

[NickyFotiu]

this is the typa stuff i mean.

we paid more for goodrow reaves and nemeth than buch cost the next year. and we had room for the troch to strome salary increase.

you wanna tell me it's unproductive to keep rehashing buchnevich and you're tired of it? Fine. i get it. it is indeed what it is.

but don't keep spewing nonsense justification like "we wouldn't have been able to afford trocheck." that's just straight up incorrect from dollars and cents perspective. it's just false.

Never thought we traded Buch for Reeves, Nemeth and Goodrow. Always thought we traded Buch to open up a top 6 RW spot for KK and Krav. The trade was a mistake but have you seen our cap? We do not have Reeves, Goodrow or Nemeth anymore and we still would have a lot of trouble fitting Buch in today. Hindsight being 20-20 I would not do the trade but it isn't about money. Its because KK and Krav did not live up to top 6 RW hopes as of today. All teams have bad trades. We got McD for Gomez. We got Zibs for Brass. I do not know any teams that do not have bad trades or bad drafts. With that said we have had a pretty darn good team the last 3 seasons including leading the NHL in points this season so its not all bad imo.

 

[CTTribe73]

I feel like we talk about this sort of stuff a lot around here. This is pretty interesting from the CA perspective.

‘Anywhere but Canada’: How a tax ruling could hobble pro teams north of the border

The ruling on John Tavares' signing bonus could have far-reaching implications for future pros contemplating a deal with a Canadian team.

www.nytimes.com

The after tax take home vs gross salary differential examples provided are absolutely unconscionable. And that does not even account for escrow. These guys are doing okay but at the same time they're getting absolutely destroyed by the government.

This argument from CRA is the REAL kick in the balls, though:

The second argument the CRA makes potentially has wider implications for pro athletes with similar deals.

Tavares’ contract specifies that his bonus is dependent on him playing games to the best of his ability, reporting to training camp, and keeping in good physical condition. If Tavares retires, withholds his services, or leaves the Leafs without consent, he breaches his contract and would be forced to repay a portion of the bonus.

Because the specific obligations Tavares has under the contract are performed during the season, the Canadian tax authority says that money is actually not an inducement to sign a contract — but rather a payment for services provided.

That puts a target on non-resident athletes playing in Canada who have similar bonus structures.

 

[Guyute]

Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.

 

[haohmaru]

Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.

He's not worth that amount of trouble.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.

I think they'd have to wait a full season before resigning him...however, as haohmaru stated, ain't worth the trouble. If Rangers could pull off ANY deal, they should run in the opposite direction as fast as they can.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.

I don't think they are allowed but if they do Im taking a vacation from this board for 7 days lol

 

[GAGLine]

Would the Rangers be able to trade Trouba with a prospect or pick to someone like Calgary, have Calgary buy him out, then re-sign him at a cheaper AAV or is that cap circumvention? I think technically the Rangers are allowed to re-sign a player that ANOTHER team buys out.

In that scenario, Calgary wouldn't be able to buy him out until next June. For the 2nd buyout window, the player has to have been on the team's roster as of the last trade deadline.