Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XIV

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
SingnBluesOnBroadway said:
Foote. It was Foote I meant, not Raddysh
Click to expand...

Although RD is definitely a harder position to find players for, I wonder how much the Rangers were interested in Foote. They were trading the organization's best skater and he is an LD. They might have been looking for a D that could potentially replace McDonagh specifically.
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway said:
Foote. It was Foote I meant, not Raddysh
Click to expand...

Yeah I honestly don’t know if Foote was in the conversation.

I can say I’ve never heard his name come up, not even once, anywhere in the conversations about what transpired between the Rangers and Bolts.

I can’t say it didn’t happen, but it would seem strange that I haven’t heard it at all.

There are a few names that pop in there from time to time, from the Boston trade, from the Tampa trade, but Foote has never been one of those names. It’s...odd.
 
Pitt would have to give up a first to go with sprong to get him in the division. No question.
 
I'm not totally sold on Sprong. If he's the centerpiece, I feel like we could probably find something better (unless the + attached to Sprong was like a 1st and 2nd or something it won't be).
 
By the end of the season that Pitt first rounder is in the 27-31 range for sure. It’s nothing too special. To get a top 6 guy from a division rival you’re going to pay. Plus they’ll need us to eat money. Sprong is venturing into questionable waters right now as it is.

I’d say sprong and a first for 50% retained Zucc is a solid deal for both sides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
I think the ask for Zucc is very likely to include a first.

The debatable part is whether the Rangers go for safety or more of a homerun swing with the second component.

Someone like Sprong has more question marks, but also a potentially better payoff. (Assuming the Rangers like him as much as this board does).
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
Edge said:
I think the ask for Zucc is very likely to include a first.

The debatable part is whether the Rangers go for safety or more of a homerun swing with the second component.

Someone like Sprong has more question marks, but also a potentially better payoff. (Assuming the Rangers like him as much as this board does).
Click to expand...

If we get Sprong, that would be amazing for me as a Dutchman.
 
Kovalev27 said:
By the end of the season that Pitt first rounder is in the 27-31 range for sure. It’s nothing too special. To get a top 6 guy from a division rival you’re going to pay. Plus they’ll need us to eat money. Sprong is venturing into questionable waters right now as it is.

I’d say sprong and a first for 50% retained Zucc is a solid deal for both sides.
Click to expand...

I think a package like Sprong+1 is what we should be looking for regardless of whether it's in division.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown and Mac n Gs

Attachments

  • 7345DC07-D301-4A5C-BB23-252359E3496C.gif
    7345DC07-D301-4A5C-BB23-252359E3496C.gif
    1.1 MB · Views: 9
  • Like
Reactions: mrmovies779 and Amazing Kreiderman
Tawnos said:
I think a package like Sprong+1 is what we should be looking for regardless of whether it's in division.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that seem a little steep for a rental? The going rate last year for a guy like Nash was a 1st + Lindgren (who was a tier below Sprong, IMO).

Basically if the Rangers get a player like Sprong, I would think a 1st would be out. Same thing goes with Puljujaarvi if he was included from Edmonton.
 
NYR Viper said:
Doesn't that seem a little steep for a rental? The going rate last year for a guy like Nash was a 1st + Lindgren (who was a tier below Sprong, IMO).

Basically if the Rangers get a player like Sprong, I would think a 1st would be out. Same thing goes with Puljujaarvi if he was included from Edmonton.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I don't think it's totally unreasonable including retaining half.
 
NYR Viper said:
Doesn't that seem a little steep for a rental? The going rate last year for a guy like Nash was a 1st + Lindgren (who was a tier below Sprong, IMO).

Basically if the Rangers get a player like Sprong, I would think a 1st would be out. Same thing goes with Puljujaarvi if he was included from Edmonton.
Click to expand...

Zuccarello is a tier above Nash. Nash was producing as a high-end third liner/low-end second liner. Zuccarello produces as a high-end second liner/low-end 1st liner. Believe it or not, he's top-15 in points per game among RWs over the last 3 years. He's also cheaper in salary.

Higher tier rental should get you a higher tier prospect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown and Mac n Gs
Tawnos said:
Zuccarello is a tier above Nash. Nash was producing as a high-end third liner/low-end second liner. Zuccarello produces as a high-end second liner/low-end 1st liner. Believe it or not, he's top-15 in points per game among RWs over the last 3 years. He's also cheaper in salary.

Higher tier rental should get you a higher tier prospect.
Click to expand...

I don't think GMs see Zuccarello as a higher tier rental than Nash, despite producing more points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miamipuck, Barnaby, kovazub94 and 3 others
Tawnos said:
Zuccarello is a tier above Nash. Nash was producing as a high-end third liner/low-end second liner. Zuccarello produces as a high-end second liner/low-end 1st liner. Believe it or not, he's top-15 in points per game among RWs over the last 3 years. He's also cheaper in salary.

Higher tier rental should get you a higher tier prospect.
Click to expand...
There seemed to be a lot more interest in Nash than Zucc last year. Wasn't what I was expecting, but what seemed to be the case.
 
NYR Viper said:
Doesn't that seem a little steep for a rental? The going rate last year for a guy like Nash was a 1st + Lindgren (who was a tier below Sprong, IMO).

Basically if the Rangers get a player like Sprong, I would think a 1st would be out. Same thing goes with Puljujaarvi if he was included from Edmonton.
Click to expand...
It seems like Pitt is looking to make a move sooner than later. So yes, it's a rental but for 60 games instead of 20. It will be a late first coming from the pens. I guess the question is what Sprong's value is right now considering some of the attitude issues coming around.

We also should not take it for granted that Gorton is focusing on picks. He has a value on more developed players.
 
NYR Viper said:
Doesn't that seem a little steep for a rental? The going rate last year for a guy like Nash was a 1st + Lindgren (who was a tier below Sprong, IMO).

Basically if the Rangers get a player like Sprong, I would think a 1st would be out. Same thing goes with Puljujaarvi if he was included from Edmonton.
Click to expand...

I think it depends on how you view it.

Let's assume the Boston first and the Pittsburgh firsts are essentially a wash.

It probably comes down to how both teams view a guy like Sprong vs. Lindgren.

Both are second round picks, Lindgren was 20 and and two years removed from his draft. Sproing would be 22 and and four years removed from his draft.

Sprong is certainly more skilled, but comes with more question marks at this point. It could also be argued his flaws are a little more established at this point.

I think if Sprong were a former first round pick the balance might be a little harder to strike, but I'm not sure if the value is quite as far apart as some might believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom