Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XL

[egelband]

Spot on.

But let’s not neglect what an impact Renney had as well. You can make an argument that he’s the one that really pioneered the whole rebuild.

You look at those teams in the mid 2000’s and it’s easy to praise guys like Nylander, Jagr, and Straka...

But when you look at how much Renney got out of plugs like Orts, Betts, and dmen like Rozy and Malik... I feel like you just have to tip your hat to him.

That team felt like a “team”. They were schooled defensively. And they played 60 minutes of hard hockey most nights.

Renney wasn’t the coach that would have brought us a Cup.. But he was an integral part of our rebuild.

I kind is see some Quinn in him....

I think "shelf life" with a guy like Tortorella is real. And maybe Renney, too. I don't know. I wasn't really paying attention those days. But I don't see why Quinn can't be a long-term guy. He appears to me to have a lot of range. He's not a one-truck pony. He has been good with three beers and the kids and I don't think he's a bridge-burner.

 

[haohmaru]

If Henry was so highly revered why were 72 players picked ahead of him? Not all that familiar with Henry so I'm genuinely curious why he's being mentioned as a Miller-level expectation guy.

 

[NYR Viper]

My issue, like I’m sure many others, isn’t Staal. He’s a solid veteran on this team. My issue is he, Skjei and Smith on the left side is putrid at a position (LD) that isn’t that difficult to at least be good at organizationally. There are tons of decent LD’s out there every year. Move Smith. Move Skjei. I’m fine rolling Staal out as a bottom pairing and main PKer while young guys like Rykov, Hajek and Lindgren grow.

 

[Tawnos]

If Henry was so highly revered why were 72 players picked ahead of him? Not all that familiar with Henry so I'm genuinely curious why he's being mentioned as a Miller-level expectation guy.

He had a HUGE jump in progression the season after we drafted him, which is much like Miller.

But like I said in my post, Miller’s absolute peak potential is to be a Norris Trophy contender, while Henry’s was a decent 1st pairing D. Miller is clearly a tier higher prospect than Henry was.

I do think Henry deserved a shot at some NHL time that he never got. He was decent in Hartford. To me, he’s one of those cases where you had to hit the timing exactly right to continue his development and the Rangers didn’t. Player development was not a strength of the team then.

 

[Fitzy]

One thing that we've discussed less as NYR have been stockpiling prospects and we talk about UFA signings is the degree to which previous contending NYR teams have been bolstered by players acquired non-traditionally.

Zuccarello was a UDFA
Girardi was a UDFA
Hayes was stolen after his NCAA career, which basically cancelled out the McIlrath pick
McDonagh was a gamble addition in a trade who essentially cancelled out the Cherepanov pick
Stralman was signed off a trial, as was Pouliot.

We had some pretty good 'fortune' during our runs to cancel out some really bad development, draft, and free agent decisions. Will we be able to repeat that as our new core players develop?

 

[Matt4776]

One thing that we've discussed less as NYR have been stockpiling prospects and we talk about UFA signings is the degree to which previous contending NYR teams have been bolstered by players acquired non-traditionally.

Zuccarello was a UDFA
Girardi was a UDFA
Hayes was stolen after his NCAA career, which basically cancelled out the McIlrath pick
McDonagh was a gamble addition in a trade who essentially cancelled out the Cherepanov pick
Stralman was signed off a trial, as was Pouliot.

We had some pretty good 'fortune' during our runs to cancel out some really bad development, draft, and free agent decisions. Will we be able to repeat that as our new core players develop?

Yep. We got McDonagh, who was a top-10 d-man in the league for his (very short) prime. Girardi was a first-pairing d-man for us for awhile, albeit in a different era, before he became a player who was overused when the game passed him by. Stralman was a 1st-pairing quality d-man during our cup-run (and the years that followed in Tampa). Got a quality top-6 forward in Zucc for free.

Hayes wasn't on the team for our cup run or our good teams under Torts, but he did help us in 2014-15, and I'm still convinced that team at least makes the cup if our entire defense wasn't playing on one leg and Zuccarello wasn't injured.

We probably won't get this lucky again with non-traditional players. We got 3 first-pairing d-men and two top-6 forwards. But, we will get our chances. As a place where hockey players will always want to play, we'll get our chances. Maybe it'll be Fox as early as this year or next. Maybe one of Rykov or Lindgren (who were considered throw-ins in their deals) becomes a solid NHLer. Anytime a college UFA breaks loose, we'll have a realistic chance at them given our stature, especially as long as Quinn is here. We'll still get our chances at the lotto tickets... we just gotta hope they hit.

But frankly, we shouldn't need them to hit as much as we did then. Our prospect core is better than it was in the mid/late 2000s. Way more first rounders. Got Kakko and at least one more first rounder in June, though I think it'll end up being at least two more with Kreider likely being shipped/Dallas maybe advancing. Maybe it'll be another top-10 pick. Kakko, Kravtsov, and Miller all have a far better chance of being elite players than any prospects we had/drafted during that sans Cherepanov. Hell, maybe even Chytil too. Not to mention if we trade into the top-10 again this year, and whatever we get next year.

This isn't to say everyone is sure to work out or our rebuild as a whole will definitely work out. But, at the very least, we won't be dependent on our lottery ticket non-traditional players to become the carriers of our team. If we can snag a couple that become great role players, we're in great shape. As you noted, last time we needed them to be the foundations of our team (minus Hayes). Huge difference.

EDIT: I will say MDZ post rookie-year probably is in that Kravtsov/Miller category as well. Forgot about him. But point still stands.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

@Beacon i agree with you 3/4 of the time, but when I disagree BOY do I disagree.

Henry wasn’t CLOSE to Miller in terms of perceived upside. He was hyped, sure, but even back then, it was obvious there was a fair bit of helium involved. Started out as an okay prospect, had a nice year post draft, but in context, we’re talking about a guy who started out at maybe Lindgren-level and then MAYBE advanced to Hajek-level — before falling off again.

 

[Beacon]

I do agree that we thought things were looking up in 1999 and we were very wrong. There are really two ways to go about this. One is to act as if your plan with your youth is going to go right (the optimistic approach). The other is to assume it won’t and to wait until you’re sure you have the pieces you want (the pessimistic approach). I don’t think there’s anything wrong with either approach, though personally I tend to be more of an optimist, with some prudence. The Rangers should not be signing a slew of UFAs right now like the 99 team did. But if one right guy is there? Sure, they should go after him.

I don't think it's a pessimistic approach. It's a wait and see approach. I haven't been more optimistic than now since the early 90s. Certainly more optimistic than after the second lockout when we totally half-assed it. But assuming some will bust and some will be late bloomers is merely realism.

I'm just against signing UFAs now. If your team wins more games because you paid a UFA, you're cheating the rebuild. You need to acquire youth until the team succeeds because the kids are doing well. Luckily, that's exactly what Gorts is doing so far. He understands the need not to half-ass the most important part of building a Cup winner - acquiring young playes when they're young and cost controlled.

 

[True Blue]

Show me how this works under the cap.

In EA sports, being bought out does not mean dead cap space. And why are you worried about cap space anyway? It's not your money.

 

[True Blue]

Can we please stop putting players at center who aren't a center?

Could you please stop clouding the picture with facts? Besides, we all know that Nieves is the true #1 center and Kravstov is coming here to be the #1 D.

 

[Matt4776]

Could you please stop clouding the picture with facts? Besides, we all know that Nieves is the true #1 center and Kravstov is coming here to be the #1 D.

 

[Beacon]

If Henry was so highly revered why were 72 players picked ahead of him? Not all that familiar with Henry so I'm genuinely curious why he's being mentioned as a Miller-level expectation guy.

Well, 74 players were picked before Buchnevich. In 2011, we drafted Kim Jonsson last overall at the time when there were 11 rounds. He went on to have a 10 year career.

I think I overreached by saying Henry was as good as K'Andre. Probably a bit worse, but he was thought to have a lot of potential also. He went from 31 points in D-1 to 83 in D+1, along with 151 PIM. He was regarded as a very good prospect.

 

[bobbop]

The first half wasn't good at drafting either. He was lucky to get here at a time when a lot of future All Stars were already on the team, and then lucked into Zubov and Weight in later rounds. In all his drafts from 1989 to 1999, he got one good player (Kovalev) in the first round. All other first rounders were total busts or 3/4 line role players. Since it takes time for draftees to mature, his misses weren't obvious until the second half of the 90s when he stripped the team of all the young talent in awful trades. Weight, Amonte, Zubov, Nedved, Kovalev, York, Savard all were sent away for lesser, older players (except Savard who was traded for Lundmark, who was technically younger, but was a bust).

His trades early on were better. The trades of Messier and Gartner (getting him, not trading him away) worked out well. The signing of Graves worked out. Nicholls for Sandstrom and Granato was a loss though. Pretty much every trade after the Cup was a loss. Also, Neil Smith forgot - FORGOT! - to put Ray Sheppard on the restricted FA list and he became unrestricted. The guy was already a young second liner who was obviously going to be a first liner, and he went on to score almost 100 points for Detroit.

His biggest move (Messier) worked out and that's all anyone remembers anymore, but his overall tenure was awful. I suspect if he did nothing and just kept all our budding stars, we would've won more than one Cup. There was just too much talent there. By 1992, the team had 10 guys whowould go on to play in multiple All Star Games in the future. It's pretty amazing that this team had only one Spring when it was viewed as a serious contender. Again, it worked out that one spring, but we had such a plethora of talent and then our window was one season?

He won the Stanley Cup in 1994.

 

[duhmetreE]

Buyout Staal or trade him to whoever wants him. < insert Staal to Carolina proposal here >
Trade Shattenkirk to VGK/TOR/WPG for whatever they'd offer
Kreider + Vesey +? for Turcotte/Zegras
Picks + Pionk/Shatty?/Strome? for Trouba/Risto

Panarin Zibs Buch
Kravtsov Lias/Strome Kakko
Lias/Strome Howden Chytil
Lemiuex Boo Fast

Skjei Trouba/Risto
Hajek ADA
Rykov Fox

 

[egelband]

One thing that we've discussed less as NYR have been stockpiling prospects and we talk about UFA signings is the degree to which previous contending NYR teams have been bolstered by players acquired non-traditionally.

Zuccarello was a UDFA
Girardi was a UDFA
Hayes was stolen after his NCAA career, which basically cancelled out the McIlrath pick
McDonagh was a gamble addition in a trade who essentially cancelled out the Cherepanov pick
Stralman was signed off a trial, as was Pouliot.

We had some pretty good 'fortune' during our runs to cancel out some really bad development, draft, and free agent decisions. Will we be able to repeat that as our new core players develop?

Don't most teams have a few guys acquired in unusual ways? I think it's clear the rangers do well with college free agents. Better than other teams. But I think other teams do just as well or better with undrafted free agents and tryout types. Not to be a buzzkill. Just don't think the rangers will be getting a special amount of help from those pipelines going forward. Though adding Fox would seem to be a great coup.

 

[bobbop]

If the team doesn't make a sincere attempt to sign players and improve the team, they are cheating the paying customers.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

If the team doesn't make a sincere attempt to sign players and improve the team, they are cheating the paying customers.

Are they cheating them if they’re as open as the Rangers have been about what they’re doing?

 

[bobbop]

Are they cheating them if they’re as open as the Rangers have been about what they’re doing?

I don’t think the two are incompatible.

 

[Beacon]

Buyout Staal or trade him to whoever wants him. < insert Staal to Carolina proposal here >
Trade Shattenkirk to VGK/TOR/WPG for whatever they'd offer
Kreider + Vesey +? for Turcotte/Zegras
Picks + Pionk/Shatty?/Strome? for Trouba/Risto

Panarin Zibs Buch
Kravtsov Lias/Strome Kakko
Lias/Strome Howden Chytil
Lemiuex Boo Fast

Skjei Trouba/Risto
Hajek ADA
Rykov Fox

Every year people here project rookies into the top-6 and it never works out. Yet, no lesson is learned. No trend is seen. Every time the question is, "what does rookie Kravtsov have to do with rookie Kreider/Miller/whoever" (who needed time in the minors and on bottom lines first). No, Kravtsov will not play in the top-6. Neither will Lias. And no, Gorton doesn't want to sign Panarin, nor does Panarin want to come to a rebuilding team. But if your lineup was thrown out there in October, it would be awful. God awful. Bottom 5 in the league. Because even if Kravtsov, Lias, Chytil, Hajek, etc all reach their ceiling one day, that day will not be when they are rookies and/or teenagers. Next year, they will not be good because outside of a few very special players (who usually get drafted 1OA or 2OA), almost no teenage rookie instantly becomes an above average NHLer.

 

[aufheben]

what the hell, fanatics? one of these is not like the others...
View attachment 221961

Yeah who the hell is going to buy a Ryan Strome jersey?

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

If the team doesn't make a sincere attempt to sign players and improve the team, they are cheating the paying customers.

is anybody forcing the customers to pay?

 

[DutchShamrock]

If the team doesn't make a sincere attempt to sign players and improve the team, they are cheating the paying customers.

Ok, that's a fair stance. The issue I have is I'm not sure what this team looks like in a few seasons when this group of prospects either graduate to the NHL or fizzle out.

To me, a hurdle of the cap world is paying someone too much when you have cheaper options. Its compounded by NTCs too. I'm averse to grabbing a high cost wing, for the sake of competitiveness now, and then finding out in 2 years that we have too many top 6 wings and the downward trending expensive wing has a NMC.

Sure, you can use that argument any time to justify no free agents. Personally, I think this team's crystal ball is at its murkiest. We'll know a lot more in a season or two. Then let's do it. Specifically with Panarin, I'm not thrilled about adding him with Kreider, Buchnevich, Kakko and Kravtsov in the organization. Wing is probably the position we can project the best. Grabbing a center or RHD makes more sense but a bulk of the pro-panarin crowd never push for that. So it has that feel of add for the sake of adding move.

The caveat I concede is that if they trade Kreider first, then I can understand.

 

[ETTER DE]

Big win for Dallas, it was nervy at the end but since they hanged on for this one they have -- every -- opportunity to take this series. Maybe its still basically a coin-flip, but a pretty good one to be a part of for us.

And almost as importantly, Zucc had a great game. That should bode well for their decision on whether to keep him or not.

MZA bringing the MSL return, wouldn't that have a nice ring to it.

Apparently Zuccarello has decided that he will test the UFA market.

 

[cheech70]

Maybe it would be beneficial if the young Rangers had a mentor who has a great shot and had 2 goals and a game winning assist in a highly competitive Stanley Cup playoff game. Would you like your bread toasted and would you like butter or some virgin olive oil for your bread sir?

 

[kovazub94]

Obviously you decided to respond without even reading. You judge prospects at the time based 20/20 hindsight. You assume they are great today because you assume none will bust. Do you think anybody in the summer of 1999 felt that all 3 of our 1998 and 1999 top-10 picks will be busts? Yes, today you're very smart and you know that Brendl, Lundmark and Malhotra were a waste, but do you think anybody viewed them that way in 1999?

1. In 1999, Burke Henry was at least equal to K'Andre today.
2. Holmqvist was viewed similarly to Shesterkin, maybe slightly below.
3. Brendl was seen as superior to Kakko. Neil Smith said he'd have taken him first overall if he had that pick, and a good number of neutral observers agreed. Kakko is viewed as a good first liner, but not necessarily a superstar, whereas the hype around Brendl was that he was a superstar.
4. Malhotra was viewed as better than Lias at the same age. He made the NHL as an 18 year old and was pretty decent.
5. Mike York looked far better at the time than Howden today. Not in the same ballpark.
6. Lundmark was a 9OA pick, just as Kravtsov was, except Lundmark was not viewed as a reach by anybody.
7. Bryan Swanson was easily superior to Morgan Barron. He had much more than a point per game in all 4 college seasons, finishing with 232 points in 167 NCAA games. The season before we went on a big UFA shopping spree, he had 66 points in 42 games.




We have 7 picks, not 9 or 10. Yes, one is a #2 overall, but Brendl was seen as arguably the most talented player in the 1999 draft. Again, it is widely known that Smith would've taken him first overall if that was the pick he had.


I'm not saying 2019 is like 1999, but we also don't know that 2019 will be just like 1990 when most prospects made it - though even then first rounders Rice (1989) and Stewart (1990) were busts. Even when your prospects work out amazingly, you still have some high profile misses.

It’s actually you who decided to respond without reading. The bolded part of my text was specifically about D. Read that sentence again. Your timeline is also off as the two ‘99 prospects were just drafted by the Rangers while now Chytil, Kravtsov and Andersson just finished their first and second post-draft years. More reasonable to be optimistic now, no? The rest of your response starts with comparison of Brendl to Kakko, so I will excuse myself from going deeper down this rabbit hole.