I’d imagine it’s hard to find a 1 for 1 LD swap that makes sense so I’d expect Lindgren back
The only question is a 1 yr arbitration taking him to ufa or say 3 yrs at 4ish
Roster Building Thread - Part XI (Off-season edition)
- Thread starter Leonardo87
- Start date
I’d imagine it’s hard to find a 1 for 1 LD swap that makes sense so I’d expect Lindgren back
The only question is a 1 yr arbitration taking him to ufa or say 3 yrs at 4ish
Guess it depends on your perspective. I’m of the belief that Lindgren is addition by subtraction, so I obviously don’t agree.
Have to replace him
I think the desire for change is making some overreact. He’s not a bum but if you want 1 yr then reevaluate next year I get it
KirkAlbuquerque
#WeNeverGetAGoodCoach
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,365
- 5,320
Well first I said EIGHTEEN TO TWENTY, NOT TWENTY, and there were 8 teams below that. The Flyers at 12%. But even if a pp with Laf and Fox on it can’t do better than 16% it’s still better than what our #1 powerplay does when it goes cold for 5 games in a series and prevents us from advancing to the next series. I don’t understand the resistance to having options, but you do you, bud.
Your obsession with refusing to understand how to there is a lot of real estate between putting a player our for EVERY penalty kill or NONE of them is truly monumental. Congrats on that. Hahahaha. Amazing.
kovazub94
Enigmatic
- Aug 5, 2010
- 12,998
- 8,754
A. As it was said to you the way to get out of PP slump was via playing more, not less. I also just showed to you that asking for 18%-20% out of your SECOND unit is quite a reach.
B. You’re obsessed with avoiding a pretty simple math or just looking up an average PK time per game realize what you’re proposing was not feasible (if not nonsense). There’s a reason PK time is allocated among 3 pairs of forwards on a game-by-game basis because there’s only only so little time to share..
In both instances it looks like you choose to continue debating just for the sake of it.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,365
- 5,320
A. How did that work out in the last two post seasons? That’s a fine idea in a regular season, but not in a series of seven games that you have to win a majority of to advance. You don’t have the runway for that sort of patience. Especially the further a series goes. The obstinate opposition to a fallback plan is pretty wild. Hahaha.
B. Kettle Black. If a player normally kills every penalty, say an avg of four a game and they normally are out for half of each, that’s four minutes. If you cut them back to an avg of one PK a game that is one minute. Are they still killing penalties? YES. Are they playing the same minutes? NO. They are playing three minutes less. And assuming a 20 min a game ATOI thats 15% less TOI and they ARE still killing penalties. THAT is simple math for most. How this is beyond your ability to reconcile is beyond me.
As I said, you do you.
SA16
Sixstring
The primary issue here is you're using "PP%" for different units. What does that even mean? If PP2 comes out for an 8 second shift are you going to say they are 0/1? In that case the average success rate for a PP2 is going to be very low, likely below 10%. You very obviously need to look at things on a per minute basis here. Even that isn't perfect because the success rate of PP2 getting a rare shift to start a PP will be far higher than their success rate when getting the second shift on a PP.
Second, the Rangers didn't have any forwards (other than Bonino who was cut) average over 2 minutes/game on the PK so you're talking about such a minimum about of ice time that you're cutting out per game. The Rangers were shorthanded 2.83 times/game. Zibanejad played 1:54/game on the PK. So he averages about 40 seconds per PK. Cutting out one PK, so 40 seconds of ice time is going to make some massive difference? He's also an extremely good scorer on the PK so cutting his ice time there is stupid. It's not entirely unheard of for players to score at a higher rate at 4v5 than 5v5.
Second, the Rangers didn't have any forwards (other than Bonino who was cut) average over 2 minutes/game on the PK so you're talking about such a minimum about of ice time that you're cutting out per game. The Rangers were shorthanded 2.83 times/game. Zibanejad played 1:54/game on the PK. So he averages about 40 seconds per PK. Cutting out one PK, so 40 seconds of ice time is going to make some massive difference? He's also an extremely good scorer on the PK so cutting his ice time there is stupid. It's not entirely unheard of for players to score at a higher rate at 4v5 than 5v5.
Last edited:
LOFIN
Registered User
- Sep 16, 2011
- 15,749
- 22,051
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
SA16
Sixstring
Only going 2 years on Schneider with such a low AAV has to make you think that Drury isn't too impressed with him.
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
Or the uncertainty of the Laff and Miller contracts next year.
I would have been slightly pleased if the offseason played out as it has + a Lindgren trade for an upgrade at that position even with the Trouba f***ery.
Could have been a massive leap forward had they replaced both of the top 4 issues but instead it looks like they'll both be back. Such a missed opportunity and one of them is going to be completely self inflicted.
Could have been a massive leap forward had they replaced both of the top 4 issues but instead it looks like they'll both be back. Such a missed opportunity and one of them is going to be completely self inflicted.
UAGoalieGuy
Registered User
If Weegar can indeed play the left side proficiently, a trade around Lindgren (younger player for a Flames team looking to rebuild and also could be a trade deadline asset for them) for Weegar could make sense.
Has anyone other than that one BS source even hinted at Weegar being available?
Been out of the loop the last few weeks.
Been out of the loop the last few weeks.
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
McRanger92
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2017
- 11,098
- 20,349
If Fox and lafreniere are mad about a potential Lindgren trade, they can blame the captain. They could hold onto Lindgren if Trouba and his contract were hell bent on staying.
Synergy27
F-A-C-G-C-E
If they're mad about a potential Lindgren trade then all that tells me is that they shouldn't go into management after they're done playing.
Popular players get traded all the time, thats a part of the business.
eco's bones
Registered User
The Rangers power play was not good against the Panthers but the two biggest factors the Rangers ended up 1st overall in the regular season was special teams and Igor in the second half of the year. Coaches coach to win for their own job security and the Rangers power play was close to the top of the league the entire year. I just don't see big changes coming to that next season. The only player not on the first unit who I could see busting into it is Lafreniere and if it's not because of injury the two players most most replaceable for Laf IMO are Mika and Trocheck but even so they're face-off guys. Kreider is needed for net front chaos, screens and tips and Fox and Panarin are puck distribution and they have the highest hockey IQ's.
But anyway it would have been better for us if the power play had been more of a factor but the bigger issue is the Panthers outplayed us throughout the series and FWIW they have a very good and dangerous pk. IMO our power play isn't an issue.....our overall play if we're going to go farther than the conference finals is going to have to improve. That might come at the expense of someone we use right now on our top power play unit though so it doesn't mean that guys who aren't on it now won't ever get the chance.
But anyway it would have been better for us if the power play had been more of a factor but the bigger issue is the Panthers outplayed us throughout the series and FWIW they have a very good and dangerous pk. IMO our power play isn't an issue.....our overall play if we're going to go farther than the conference finals is going to have to improve. That might come at the expense of someone we use right now on our top power play unit though so it doesn't mean that guys who aren't on it now won't ever get the chance.
Have to replace him NOW
and unless we get some crazy stupid good deal out of nowhere
from within
do not want to retain Lindgen another minute
should have already been dealt
his wear and tear is signif, everyone knows that
and the longer we keep him, the more that cuts into value of his return
Or,
we don't have lots of cap space to go long term now b'c we instead went w/mo expensive vets
which eat up cap
