Roster Building Thread - Part XIII (Nanaki edition)

[Boris Zubov]

Anson Carter on the TNT pregame just talked about how spoiled players are when they play for the Rangers.

#Country club vibes confirmed.

 

[eco's bones]

Have we *ever* tried Schneider with Fox?

He can play LD effectively.

He's defensively responsible.

Is an above average skater who can keep up with Fox and cover him so he can take more chances.

Has no problem playing Bad Cop. Not that Fox is a wimp, but you dont want him in the box or injured.

Can pass effectively. Is a rare throwback that has an effective slapper. To play offhand and be that option for Fox is a huge asset. Playing off hand with his back to the boards is a cheat to get back on defence quicker.

Fox is being held back by having to be a "complete" defensman becasue of inadequate partners on this roster.

Miller should have been a good fit. Hes athletic enough. Has offensive instincts. But lacks defensive zone reading, has no will to be the Bad Cop, and clearly wasnt effective when given the opportunity.

I know we have a pleathora of issues. But getting the D figured out should be paramount.

Before we go haphazardly plugging in whatever vet scraps some other GM "may" be willing to trade for whoever we can jimmy-rig out the door through a contract loophole.

It may be prudent to exhaust ALL options.

At a minimum, we "could" ride out the season with...

Miller-Trouba
Schneider-Fox
Jones-Mancini (sheltered 8-10m/per/g)

Then re-evaluate if Trouba and/or Miller need to be moved, and we have the 10% cap overage to work with as well as UFA, Draft, summer inactivity.

Get assets now for Lindgren. He's a worthwhile rental and the room (kids we want to take leadership at some point) needs him elsewhere. IMO, he makes too much to be resigned and giving him a salary reduction isnt gonna work for multiple reasons.

And honestly, i'd seriously consider taking the C from Trouba and putting it on Trocheck. He'd be my interm Captain till contract runs out and hopefully one of the kids steps up then. There is nothing written in stone that a player cant be stripped of the Captaincy while they are still on the roster. Im pretty sure they did it to Marleau in SJ iirc and he was the drafted golden boy there.

Just my $0.02c

FWIW getting 3 pairs of defense that work well is the best idea. Our 3 best D right now are Fox, Schneider and Jones. Sticking Fox with Schneider kind of means that one pair is going one problem and the other pair is going to have two problems.

Really Miller can play better. Lindgren is best with Fox. Trouba was best with Miller but if Miller is going to play like shit then that f***s that all up.

Also though some of our forwards haven't been helping out enough either and Mika for one has been atrocious.

 

[LokiDog]

When somebody said they'd never seen this before during their Ranger fandom, the 92-93 team immediately came to mind. I was a kid then. Team coming off a President's Trophy run, losing to the eventual SC champs and really talented, they started off "ok" in the first month but nothing ever really came together and the wheels came off as the season went along. Injuries played a part (The famous Leetch injury) but it's still crazy how that team missed the playoffs entirely. That year sandwiched in between two of the best seasons in franchise history.

NHL-wise and more recently you can look at the Pens who in 15-16 came out the gate slow to only take off and win the cup after Sullivan took the helm. Hell, the Panthers had one of the best regular seasons of all time in 21-22. Hired Maurice for the following year, then friggin backed their way into the playoffs (needed Isles and Pens BOTH to lose on last day of season!) to get hot and go to the finals, before winning it last year.

Note: not saying this team compares to those Rangers teams, nor the Pens/Panthers. But shit can spiral for a multitude of reasons despite talent being present.

It’s interesting to talk about the 92-93 team right now (our 24-25)… I think some parallels were drawn last year to the ‘94 team because of the anniversary, but there’s the potential for it to be our 91-92 parallel. How many significant players were moved the very next year (92-93, our 24-25), leading to the ‘94 win?

A lot were at the ‘94 TDL but a good handful happened in ‘93. We’re coming off of a President’s Trophy win but looking like we could easily crater out of the playoffs and looking at a window to make some big changes.

Immediately after winning the President’s Trophy in 91-92, over the next 12 months the Rangers traded Gartner for Andersson, a young Weight for Tikkanen, Darren Turcotte and James Patrick for Larmer and Kypreos. They also traded Amonte and Marchant at the following TDL.

Gartner, Weight, Amonte, Patrick, Turcotte, Marchant over ~18 months. That’s a lot of turnover. That’s Panarin, Trochek, Kakko, Chytil, Trouba, Lindgren.

Not looking at anything that happened prior to the 91-92 resident Trophy, like acquiring Mess or signing Graves.

President’s Trophy in 91-92.
Missed playoffs in 92-93.
Traded six significant players.
Stanley Cup in ‘94.

 

[eco's bones]

Kind of glad that Kakko made the Finnish team. IMO he's been a pretty good player this year. Also glad that none of Kreider, Trocheck and Miller made the USA team. None of them have played all that well and others deserve it more. Also the rest might be good for some of them.

It will be interesting to see how Mika does with Sweden. Maybe he gets his act together and his focus back.

 

[Jim Ramsay]

Kind of glad that Kakko made the Finnish team. IMO he's been a pretty good player this year. Also glad that none of Kreider, Trocheck and Miller made the USA team. None of them have played all that well and others deserve it more. Also the rest might be good for some of them.

It will be interesting to see how Mika does with Sweden. Maybe he gets his act together and his focus back.

Kreider Tro and Fox all made the USA squad

 

[LokiDog]

Anson Carter on the TNT pregame just talked about how spoiled players are when they play for the Rangers.

#Country club vibes confirmed.

I’ve called it out in my posts for years and had plenty of people agree, but a solid handful of people call it a completely unfounded conspiracy theory. I’m certain these anecdotes have come directly from other players in the past as well, and the perceived attitude/behavior of the tenured players reinforces it whole heartedly.

 

[RangersFan1994]

Kind of glad that Kakko made the Finnish team. IMO he's been a pretty good player this year. Also glad that none of Kreider, Trocheck and Miller made the USA team. None of them have played all that well and others deserve it more. Also the rest might be good for some of them.

It will be interesting to see how Mika does with Sweden. Maybe he gets his act together and his focus back.

Miller didn't make anything. Kreider Trocheck made USA

 

[will1066]

What we need is Kreider matched against Zibanejad in a USA Sweden game and kill the bromance vibes.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Trocheck and Kreider will likely be on the same line, the 4th - possibly with Brady Tkachuk

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Why let these same players dictate that they get a new coach every other year?? The whole act is old and disappointing at this point.

Some players just need to be purged

Don't disagree but moving Kreider and Trouba isn't going to make Panarin Trochek and Miller, Lindgren and Lafreniere get back to a playoff level. There's an issue team wide right now, that usually points to the staff and while I agree they are coach killers, you can't throw the season away because it's dumb to keep losing coaches. I look at Boston and St.Louis right now, both teams benefitted from coaching changes this year. Laviolette also has a short shelf life, usually 2 years so it might be best to cut bait and look for someone with a better vision for the team now. Not sure who, coach Q is the one everyone will talk about.

 

[Boris Zubov]

It’s interesting to talk about the 92-93 team right now (our 24-25)… I think some parallels were drawn last year to the ‘94 team because of the anniversary, but there’s the potential for it to be our 91-92 parallel. How many significant players were moved the very next year (92-93, our 24-25), leading to the ‘94 win?

A lot were at the ‘94 TDL but a good handful happened in ‘93. We’re coming off of a President’s Trophy win but looking like we could easily crater out of the playoffs and looking at a window to make some big changes.

Immediately after winning the President’s Trophy in 91-92, over the next 12 months the Rangers traded Gartner for Andersson, a young Weight for Tikkanen, Darren Turcotte and James Patrick for Larmer and Kypreos. They also traded Amonte and Marchant at the following TDL.

Gartner, Weight, Amonte, Patrick, Turcotte, Marchant over ~18 months. That’s a lot of turnover. That’s Panarin, Trochek, Kakko, Chytil, Trouba, Lindgren.

Not looking at anything that happened prior to the 91-92 resident Trophy, like acquiring Mess or signing Graves.

President’s Trophy in 91-92.
Missed playoffs in 92-93.
Traded six significant players.
Stanley Cup in ‘94.

I'm the first one who made the 92-93 comment a week or so ago. However, the only parallels I drew from that season was a President's trophy winner followed up with the next season going off the rails. Honestly the 23-24 Rangers have more in common with the 97-98 Rangers than the 92-93 Rangers as far as roster construction is concerned.

Both the current team & the 97 team went to the ECFs & came into the season with a playoff hangover. Both had a 1C who was on a sharp decline & unable to produce at their former levels. Both teams had/have an elite 1D along with bunch of spare parts constructing the rest of the defense...both with zero structure in place & a clueless coach unable or unwilling to make any adjustments.

Even though their season went off the rails, the Rangers in 93-93 had an elite 1C at the tail end of his prime, elite wingers in Gartner, Graves, & Amonte & arguably the best player in franchise history in Leetch. (Gartner for Anderson didn't happen til the deadline in '94). That problem that team had was 2 separate major injuries to their best player & a locker room issue between the captain & the head coach regarding play style. That team was neither spoiled nor entitled.

Neil Smith started to purge youth for vets....some trades were short-sighted, but hard to argue with the results. However, he had the 3 major pieces in place, an elite 1C, an elite 1D & a stud Goalie. Even though the current Rangers have 2 of those, finding a new 1C is going to be a huge challenge. Going to be a bigger challenge if they relent to the contract demands of the goalie.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I'm the first one who made the 92-93 comment a week or so ago. However, the only parallels I drew from that season was a President's trophy winner followed up with the next season going off the rails. Honestly the 23-24 Rangers have more in common with the 97-98 Rangers than the 92-93 Rangers as far as roster construction is concerned.

Both the current team & the 97 team went to the ECFs & came into the season with a playoff hangover. Both had a 1C who was on a sharp decline & unable to produce at their former levels. Both teams had/have an elite 1D along with bunch of spare parts constructing the rest of the defense...both with zero structure in place & a clueless coach unable or unwilling to make any adjustments.

Even though their season went off the rails, the Rangers in 93-93 had an elite 1C at the tail end of his prime, elite wingers in Gartner, Graves, & Amonte & arguably the best player in franchise history. (Gartner for Anderson didn't happen til the deadline in '94). That problem that team had was 2 separate major injuries to their best player & a locker room issue between the captain & the head coach regarding play style. That team was neither spoiled nor entitled.

Neil Smith started to purge youth for vets....some trades were short-sighted, but hard to argue with the results. However, he had the 3 major pieces in place, an elite 1C, an elite 1D & a stud Goalie. Even though the current Rangers have 2 of those, finding a new 1C is going to be a huge challenge. Going to be a bigger challenge if they relent to the contract demands of the goalie.

They really had 2 elite dmen with Zubov

 

[Boris Zubov]

They really had 2 elite dmen with Zubov

Zubov was a rookie who went through a ton of growing pains in 92-93. He came out of nowhere in '93-94 & was absolutely outstanding, but nobody in the summer of '93 had him leading a Stanley Cup winner in regular season scoring.

 

[Jim Ramsay]

Don't disagree but moving Kreider and Trouba isn't going to make Panarin Trochek and Miller, Lindgren and Lafreniere get back to a playoff level. There's an issue team wide right now, that usually points to the staff and while I agree they are coach killers, you can't throw the season away because it's dumb to keep losing coaches. I look at Boston and St.Louis right now, both teams benefitted from coaching changes this year. Laviolette also has a short shelf life, usually 2 years so it might be best to cut bait and look for someone with a better vision for the team now. Not sure who, coach Q is the one everyone will talk about.

No offense, but I dont know how anyone can see this group over the past few years rinse and repeat with multiple coaches and still say "there's another coach out there with a better 'vision'"

 

[RGY]

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I'm the first one who made the 92-93 comment a week or so ago. However, the only parallels I drew from that season was a President's trophy winner followed up with the next season going off the rails. Honestly the 23-24 Rangers have more in common with the 97-98 Rangers than the 92-93 Rangers as far as roster construction is concerned.

Both the current team & the 97 team went to the ECFs & came into the season with a playoff hangover. Both had a 1C who was on a sharp decline & unable to produce at their former levels. Both teams had/have an elite 1D along with bunch of spare parts constructing the rest of the defense...both with zero structure in place & a clueless coach unable or unwilling to make any adjustments.

Even though their season went off the rails, the Rangers in 93-93 had an elite 1C at the tail end of his prime, elite wingers in Gartner, Graves, & Amonte & arguably the best player in franchise history in Leetch. (Gartner for Anderson didn't happen til the deadline in '94). That problem that team had was 2 separate major injuries to their best player & a locker room issue between the captain & the head coach regarding play style. That team was neither spoiled nor entitled.

Neil Smith started to purge youth for vets....some trades were short-sighted, but hard to argue with the results. However, he had the 3 major pieces in place, an elite 1C, an elite 1D & a stud Goalie. Even though the current Rangers have 2 of those, finding a new 1C is going to be a huge challenge. Going to be a bigger challenge if they relent to the contract demands of the goalie.

Ehhhh kind of leaving out a few pretty big details here.

Messier bolted after that season. They tried to pull the OS on Sakic to replace him that summer and it nearly worked (and had it, it would have changed the trajectory of everything.)

Last year's team didn't have any major departures nor was their run to the ECF really a surprise (the 97 Rangers didn't have home ice in any of their series and were a f***ing mash unit by the time they got to the Flyers series. I hesitate to call it a cinderella run but they knocked out a heavily favored team in NJ the round before.)

OTOH, the effort made to sign Sakic was more of an effort to improve the roster than anything that occurred last summer. This is basically the same team+Reilly Smith. All the weaknesses from last year still exist and the Trocheck line that ate last year hasn't been nearly as good this year. All the additional noise as made for quite the cluster f***.

Despite that, I don't think the current situation is any where near as dire as things were in 97-98. The guys who are set to be here long term are better than anything those teams had and if/when the time comes, they'll be able to clear salary one way or another (even if its in the form of players who they aren't exactly rushing out of the door.)

I don't trust the current GM to do those things though or at least do them well enough to the point where this can be a quick turn around. I don't think he deserves the chance to do it either.

@will1066 CALL THE HFDOCS!

Serious note: This looks bad.

 

[Boris Zubov]

Ehhhh kind of leaving out a few pretty big details here.

Messier bolted after that season. They tried to pull the OS on Sakic to replace him that summer and it nearly worked (and had it, it would have changed the trajectory of everything.)

Last year's team didn't have any major departures nor was their run to the ECF really a surprise (the 97 Rangers didn't have home ice in any of their series and were a f***ing mash unit by the time they got to the Flyers series. I hesitate to call it a cinderella run but they knocked out a heavily favored team in NJ the round before.)

OTOH, the effort made to sign Sakic was more of an effort to improve the roster than anything that occurred last summer. This is basically the same team+Reilly Smith. All the weaknesses from last year still exist and the Trocheck line that ate last year hasn't been nearly as good this year. All the additional noise as made for quite the cluster f***.

Despite that, I don't think the current situation is any where near as dire as things were in 97-98. The guys who are set to be here long term are better than anything those teams had and if/when the time comes, they'll be able to clear salary one way or another (even if its in the form of players who they aren't exactly rushing out of the door.)

I don't trust the current GM to do those things though or at least do them well enough to the point where this can be a quick turn around. I don't think he deserves the chance to do it either.

Look there's no perfectly identical comparable. I didn't omit those details to be dishonest, obviously they played a HUGE reason why that '97 team struggled, but the positional parallels are valid.

I don't think it's a stretch if you want to compare the Trouba drama to the Messier drama. Obviously they're not identical, but clearly this team is still dealing with the fall out from the summer, just like the Messier hangover did to that team. The Sakic situation was one unto itself, plus we had LaFontaine signed as his replacement when Sakic re-upped in Denver. Ironically, you can draw a decent comparison to his situation & Chytil's.

Clearly this roster is better than that 97-98 roster, but honestly that team fell into roster hell almost immediately...currently constructed, this team is in roster purgatory. Clearly not good enough to win, but nowhere near bad enough to tank either.

 

[will1066]

@will1066 CALL THE HFDOCS!

Serious note: This looks bad.

looks like Karlsson accidentally slew footed him

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Look there's no perfectly identical comparable. I didn't omit those details to be dishonest, obviously they played a HUGE reason why that '97 team struggled, but the positional parallels are valid.

If you want you can compare the Trouba drama to the Messier drama. Obviously they're not identical, but clearly this team is still dealing with the fall out from the summer, just like the Messier hangover did to that team. The Sakic situation was one unto itself, plus we had LaFontaine signed as his replacement when Sakic re-upped in Denver. Ironically, you can draw a decent comparison to his situation & Chytil's.

Clearly this roster is better than that 97-98 roster, but honestly that team fell into roster hell almost immediately...currently constructed, this team is in roster purgatory. Clearly not good enough to win, but nowhere near bad enough to tank either.

Didn't mean to insinuate that you did. You aren't that kind of guy.

I guess my response was really a long winded way of saying that I don't think you can really draw comparisons from one group to the other. Different starting points and different problems.

I don't think this team needs to tank either but I wouldn't completely write off a bottom 10 finish either. Thats not a talent thing but the potential for shit to unravel here is f***ing real. This is beyond just a poor stretch, it's a poor stretch with the same problems with out superior performances to cover them up + some guys apparently being butt hurt as f***.

 

[Boris Zubov]

Didn't mean to insinuate that you did. You aren't that kind of guy.

I guess my response was really a long winded way of saying that I don't think you can really draw comparisons from one group to the other. Different starting points and different problems.

I don't think this team needs to tank either but I wouldn't completely write off a bottom 10 finish either. Thats not a talent thing but the potential for shit to unravel here is f***ing real. This is beyond just a poor stretch, it's a poor stretch with the same problems with out superior performances to cover them up + some guys apparently being butt hurt as f***.

Actually I can't stand when writers or fans try to compare teams from different eras or use circumstances of past results from 30 years ago to predict the future. We all saw that this past spring when everyone was comparing the Kreider hatty to Messier's & screaming it made us a lock to win it all. Shit like that makes me want to puke.

Thanks for calling me out & making sure I never do this again.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Things very rarely happened according to script. You have all kinds of hopes but shit happens and much more often than not they get dialed back. Last year the regular season was just fantastic beyond anything that I and I'm sure others were expecting which naturally led to bigger hopes for the postseason which started out great too.

Coming off of that with pretty close to the same team expectations for this year were pretty high but so far the regular season compared to last year has been opposite day. I'm kind of expecting some moves are going to be made. It might not be the most underwhelming players because those guys might be the hardest to move. Shit happens.

What I will say is the Rangers aren't going to punish their team into success. Shit don't work that way. You punish your workforce (and we're not just talking about a hockey team) and you almost always end up with even worse results and you create animosity and resentment. So what you do do needs to be thoughtful or considered. It seems to me that this team has lost some faith in itself. That might go on for a while or even take this entire year to get over......consider also that the 1993 Rangers team had underwhelming performances from any number of players including their big stars and did not make the playoffs.

If the theory that guys like Brooks is putting out there that there's a revolt against Drury was making hockey moves then they should punish them and I'll take worse results. Because that is players purposely playing poorly to stick it to Drury.

Just watched the 04 Red Sox documentary on Netflix. Highly recommend. The Rangers have some similarities to that team. Point being, the season isn’t over and the Rangers are too good

I have thought about that quite a bit but that team had to trade for defensive help.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

No offense, but I dont know how anyone can see this group over the past few years rinse and repeat with multiple coaches and still say "there's another coach out there with a better 'vision'"

All he has to do is get away from man on man d, work on the breakout and stop overplaying guys that aren't earning their ice time. I also think that moves should be made but moves won't fix the rest of the players and you can't get rid of all the players. Example, getting rid of kreider and trouba will not affect how Lafreniere plays much.

 

[RangersFan1994]

What if fans started to yell fire Drury at games? What do you think the outcome would be if Dolan was at one of those games?

 

[Shesterkybomb]

What if fans started to yell fire Drury at games? What do you think the outcome would be if Dolan was at one of those games?

Canned

 

[bleedblue94]

possibly. I do not know what he will command but 5-6 years 6.5-7ish may be doable. Still only 28 years old

he fits the exact prototype we need.

In my dream world we'd land him and B.Tkachuk while emptying out the soft core

So you would have Trocheck and him both as older players with long term contracts to be mid 6 centers? I don't agree with that.