Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XIII (Nanaki edition)

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
GAGLine said:
I'm not sure why the Kings would trade a pending UFA for a pending UFA. If Lindgren is going just for cap purposes, then we'd have to add something significant, and we won't have the space to re-sign Gavrikov.
Click to expand...
Apologies I meant swap him in the lineup not a trade. I would assume its 2 different transactions unless the kings wanted to sign him long term which I doubt highly.

I also agree there is probably not enough caps pace to sign him next year unless other pieces are moved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAGLine
NYR94 said:
https://x.com/i/web/status/1849515215605391424
Click to expand...

Yea I would say this is a good example of why sample size matters. There's probably random lines that have these sort of numbers to start every year. Top lines are less likely to have 0 GA at this point since they've played many more minutes. Can't check by date but there were 27 lines that got 50+ minutes together last year that allowed 0 GA.

The Bruins seem to not believe it either considering they've already broken up this Beecher-Kastelic-Koepke line for today's game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnowblindNYR
RangerBoy said:
The right decision was made. The Rangers need Mancini's size, strength and reach. Jones is the 7th D. If someone gets hurt, Jones will play. Jones wasn’t getting through waivers.
Click to expand...
the decision to let mancini develop at the NHL level is questionable. he's toolsy but raw and saddling him with lindgren is going to require that he takes on some real responsibility.
 
SA16 said:
Yea I would say this is a good example of why sample size matters. There's probably random lines that have these sort of numbers to start every year. Top lines are less likely to have 0 GA at this point since they've played many more minutes. Can't check by date but there were 27 lines that got 50+ minutes together last year that allowed 0 GA.

The Bruins seem to not believe it either considering they've already broken up this Beecher-Kastelic-Koepke line for today's game.
Click to expand...

But would you be surprised if Lavi goes back to Fox-Lindgren at some point despite Fox-Miller being much better analytically?
 
SnowblindNYR said:
But would you be surprised if Lavi goes back to Fox-Lindgren at some point despite Fox-Miller being much better analytically?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't but I also don't think Fox/Miller being better analytically necessarily means they are better for the team, Just for example, with equal playing times for ease if you had:

Pair A/B- 60 xG%
Pair C/D - 40 xG%

Or you could have

Pair A/C - 50 xG%
Pair B/D - 50 xG%

The net result for the team is the same even though you broke up the best pairing. You can still always go back to that pair in key situations.

I also would not say that Fox/Miller necessarily is better analytically after 6 games. Fox/Lindgren have had sequences of similar results too. They had a 6 game stretch in Nov 2022 with a 72 xG%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: leetch99 and Gluten Free Breadman
SA16 said:
I wouldn't but I also don't think Fox/Miller being better analytically necessarily means they are better for the team, Just for example, with equal playing times for ease if you had:

Pair A/B- 60 xG%
Pair C/D - 40 xG%

Or you could have

Pair A/C - 50 xG%
Pair B/D - 50 xG%

The net result for the team is the same even though you broke up the best pairing. You can still always go back to that pair in key situations.

I also would not say that Fox/Miller necessarily is better analytically after 6 games. Fox/Lindgren have had sequences of similar results too. They had a 6 game stretch in Nov 2022 with a 72 xG%.
Click to expand...

1) That's only if you play the pairs an equal amount of time.

2) Schneider-Trouba has been better than Miller-Trouba.

3) Lindgren has regressed since 2022.

4) Small sample size is a legit point but wouldn't you say that Miller is the better player right now and a better fit than Lindgren.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnSandvich
SnowblindNYR said:
1) That's only if you play the pairs an equal amount of time.

2) Schneider-Trouba has been better than Miller-Trouba.

3) Lindgren has regressed since 2022.

4) Small sample size is a legit point but wouldn't you say that Miller is the better player right now and a better fit than Lindgren.
Click to expand...

1. Only in this given example. It can be unequal TOI but if the difference in xG% is such you can still net the same result.
 
Hockey Club from Utah will probably claim Chad considering they're without two RHD for the next several months
 
SnowblindNYR said:
But if that first pair is really good they can give them uneven usage to make sure they come out on top.
Click to expand...

Yea I’d keep miller there. I just don’t think, in general, it’s necessarily the case that the best individual pair is the best for the team as a whole. In the playoffs it likely is cause you can really bump up the top pair usage to levels you won’t in the regular season
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnowblindNYR
GAGLine said:
I disagree for several reasons.

1) The Cuylle-Chytil-Kakko line is fine. They will score in the playoffs, the same way the Laf-Chytil-Kakko line did 2 years ago. Maybe better. If you don't want Cuylle or Kakko scoring in the playoffs, then sure, moving them to the 4th line would do that.

2) There's a good chance Perreault will join the team at some point, so he can be that guy if we need him. If not, we have Othmann and Berard in case there are injuries.

3) Who are you getting to play RW and how much will that player cost? In the past 2 years, look at the players we have brought in at the deadline to play RW. Have any of them really made a difference? Smith was our move to fix the RW spot and is fitting in. Laf is Laf, and the third line is producing.

4) We have limited assets. I'm not interested in wasting a 1st round pick on a rental just so that player can cannibalize another player's production. We're the highest scoring team in the league. If our offense falls off a cliff, then we can address it.
Click to expand...
I'm still pessemistic then about Kakko's continued production. Cuylle had a good offensive run last year but it seemed to stall. Both players were offensive black holes in the playoffs last year.

I didn't say 1st round pick, but it is a legitimate spot to consider, and also I think the most obvious spot if you had to pick one barring injuries.

Perreault maybe could make the jump similar to Kreider post-college playoffs many moons ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom