Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLI

[Irishguy42]

Unsarcastically, but pretty much yes.

Yes. "Unsarcastically" was what I was looking for. Thanks!

 

[GAGLine]

Pretty sure all of this has more to do with his 4:01 increased ATOI this year compared to last year than anything he personally did. Also playing with an elite NHLer who could probably set up a wet paper bag to get a good shot on goal doesn't hurt.

Probably.

 

[LokiDog]

So this is where I get lost.

Strome in his first season with the Rangers, when extrapolated out over 82 games, was on pace for 43 points. Not earth shattering but not bad. That was mainly in a depth role while playing both center and wing.

Strome this year had 59 points in 70 games which extrapolated out is 69 points. That's playing prime minutes at both ES and PP and center most of the season.

That's very close to 2 full seasons of time in NY with an average point total, per 82 games, of 57 points. I' sure that's inflated by playing with Panarin this season but if he was re-signed, that is more than likely something that will remain.

I don't think Strome scoring at a 45-50 point pace over 82 games is that far-fetched.

Now if we look around the league at players recently signed as UFA's in that point range you see guys like Kevin Hayes, Mats Zuccarello, Matt Duchene, Jordan Eberle, Anders Lee, Chris Kreider, etc. When you start looking around the league at what some of these players are signing for, $5m for a guy like Strome isn't bad value.

I agree with everything you’ve written, but everyone’s concern is consistency and the fact that Strome’s raw point total is actually the MOST attractive thing about him. With guys like Hayes it’s two way play and production. Guys like Kreider or Lee it’s size and leadership with production. Strome actually leaves a ton wanting when you watch him, but produces. Now, that’s fine. That’s kind of the world we’re in; the numbers will ultimately be more important than those other attributes. But those guys all pretty much had a better track record of consistency and had hit their UFA window. Strome is an RFA without the track record but with intriguing upside because of the position he’s found himself in. I’d say Strome might be one of the most interesting and polarizing signing decisions of the past decade, at least for this team.

His chemistry with Panarin, especially if sustained at the exact level is enough on its own to want to sign him. Even if their production drops 10 points, him going from a 69 to 59 point player feels like a no-brainer. Heck a 50+ point player period, so there’s a lot of wiggle room there. But there’s concerns as well. Not only a contract year for Strome but a contract year in which, if he’d laid a 27 point egg, may have found himself getting his next contract in Liiga. He had a lot of reasons to work his hardest and put his best foot forward and then was given the ever-giving gift that is Panarin to boot. Securing a 4-5 year $25M future in the NHL versus looking for gigs in the KHL would probably motivate any young Canadian guy. Obviously, there’s no way to quantify that. I think Strome is well enough liked in the room and playing with a guy like Panarin is rewarding enough that he could at least maintain 50+ point status. Producing is fun. It feels good. If he gets to stick with Panarin I can see them maintaining the chemistry and exceeding expectations. The pedigree is there for Strome. Maybe he’s a late bloomer or needed a kick in the butt before putting it all together.

Either way, Strome doesn’t really bring those other attributes that the guys you listed do, so even if he’s a 50+ point player, he’ll remind most of a Sam Gagner type. He put up 41-50 points consistently until around 2016, including 37 in 67 and 38 in 48 one year. He was never truly coveted because despite producing he just wasn’t a very complete or valuable hockey player. I’m not saying they’re exact by any means; Strome’s year with Panarin clearly out classes anything Gagner ever did but Gagner was much more consistent in his younger career. I would like to see Strome polish his all around play if he’s going to become a fixture here. He’s likable enough and the fit is already there. Consistency is key, but I’m not as worried about his ability to be successful next to Panarin on a sustained basis as I don’t want a Sam Gagner as our 2C when the time comes to compete for a Cup. That’s not good enough.

 

[Avery16]

I guess we could live in fear of not having enough cap space and trade everyone this offseason? That way we are sure we never have to deal with that problem ever again

How do you go from not giving Strome an oversized contract to trading everyone this offseason? It’s hard enough to have serious discussions on here without all the pointless hyperbole.

Like it or not, living in the cap era means making choices. It means players like Strome can’t be committed to in a vacuum. It does have an effect on your ability to keep the rest of your roster. Keeping Strome doesn’t mean ADA is gone, but the two contracts will affect each other to some degree.

 

[Doctyl]

Without the benefit of Panarin, last year since the trade with the Rangers he was a .52 points per game player. Which, if continued, would make him a 43 point player. So there's that. If without Panarin, he is a mid-40ish point player, not really sure how he is a leach. In fact I am not really sure what that even implies. Are you saying that he is somehow costing Panarin points? Because Panarin was on pace to demolish his own records.

Most of us who have been pro resigning him have maintained that he seems to be a 40-50 point player, who morphs into a 70 point player when paired with one of the elite players in the league. Having such a player who has instant chemistry with your top players makes him a "leach"?

He’s a 30 point player who was on a sh% bender then got rewarded with an increase in ice time and a spot centering an MVP caliber player. He doesn’t augment Panarin’s game, he’s just along for the ride.

Also no one is talking about how he is a complete liability at everything other than putting up points with Panarin. If AP reverts from a 100 point player to an 85 point player, do you really think Strome is going to be worth 2C money? He straight up doesn’t do defense and he takes lazy offensive zone penalties left and right. All that is masked by Panarin’s year and you all want to hand this guy a reward for getting dragged around by a hart candidate?

 

[Doctyl]

Clearly someone has to be moved. But why do you insist that it is DeAngelo?

I think that it is Buchnevich

I would ship Strome out in a heartbeat to keep Buch.

 

[LokiDog]

People saying that Strome as a 45-50 point player is still desirable, to me, seem to be operating under the generality that players in this range are valuable. Yes, you have your Kreider’s, Lee’s, Hayse’s, Zuccarello’s, etc. and they are valuable. They bring well rounded games to the table and offer more than raw numbers, and they get long term contracts. There are also players in the NHL over the years like Sam Gagner or the aforementioned P.A Parenteau who produce but have very large and obvious holes in their games, and they always seem to be on 1-2 year deals, moving around as rentals, never very coveted despite the production.

Strome pretty much has to be a 60+ point player next to Panarin going forward in order to warrant a 5/5 contract or something like that. Otherwise it’s a lot like giving a Parenteau or Gagnet that type of deal. Never happens.

 

[LokiDog]

He’s a 30 point player who was on a sh% bender then got rewarded with an increase in ice time and a spot centering an MVP caliber player. He doesn’t augment Panarin’s game, he’s just along for the ride.

Also no one is talking about how he is a complete liability at everything other than putting up points with Panarin. If AP reverts from a 100 point player to an 85 point player, do you really think Strome is going to be worth 2C money? He straight up doesn’t do defense and he takes lazy offensive zone penalties left and right. All that is masked by Panarin’s year and you all want to hand this guy a reward for getting dragged around by a hart candidate?

I feel like I’m talking about that

 

[Avery16]

I'm not trying to make you upset but you're first post above is quite the hyperbole, no?

Its sarcastic, but where's the hyperbole?

 

[SA16]

People saying that Strome as a 45-50 point player is still desirable, to me, seem to be operating under the generality that players in this range are valuable. Yes, you have your Kreider’s, Lee’s, Hayse’s, Zuccarello’s, etc. and they are valuable. They bring well rounded games to the table and offer more than raw numbers, and they get long term contracts. There are also players in the NHL over the years like Sam Gagner or the aforementioned P.A Parenteau who produce but have very large and obvious holes in their games, and they always seem to be on 1-2 year deals, moving around as rentals, never very coveted despite the production.

Strome pretty much has to be a 60+ point player next to Panarin going forward in order to warrant a 5/5 contract or something like that. Otherwise it’s a lot like giving a Parenteau or Gagnet that type of deal. Never happens.

I was going to mention Gagner in addition to Parenteau but limited it to just one. Gagner had a bit more of a track record while Parenteau, like Strome, had good years when stapled to top guys (Tavares, Duchene) and other than that was mostly useless. The three of them are very similar one dimensional type players who can produce when you put them in a role like that. But you don't need to pay for that and they provide nothing else. Parenteau actually got a contract after his big year with JT 4-16. He then had a really good first year in Colorado and two years later was bought out.

Also my expectation - with or without Strome - is that Panarin will score at a lower rate next year.

 

[LokiDog]

I was going to mention Gagner in addition to Parenteau but limited it to just one. Gagner had a bit more of a track record while Parenteau, like Strome, had good years when stapled to top guys (Tavares, Duchene) and other than that was mostly useless. The three of them are very similar one dimensional type players who can produce when you put them in a role like that. But you don't need to pay for that and they provide nothing else. Parenteau actually got a contract after his big year with JT 4-16. He then had a really good first year in Colorado and two years later was bought out.

Parenteau is probably a better example, but Gagner was just the one who came to mind for me. Never quite hit the highs but was a consistent 40-50 point guy who occasionally paced for more. Parenteau matches up better, as you said.

Point being they’re not guys you wanna commit to long term even when they produce favorably because the rest of their game leaves so much to be desired. Strome really would have to stay a consistent 60+ point guy, year over year (or improve areas of his game) in order to compensate for his holes.

I also expect Panarin to come down to earth. 85-95 points. I’d love to see 100+ and it’s not that I don’t believe in how amazing he is, I just like to temper my expectations.

 

[NYR Viper]

I think of Josh Bailey moreso than PA Parenteau

 

[UnSandvich]

I would ship Strome out in a heartbeat to keep Buch.

This

 

[eco's bones]

Strome has a nice skillset and is well liked in the locker room and well liked by the coaching staff. If he's centering Panarin we can probably figure on 60 point seasons anyway.....and I prefer Mika on a different line than Artemi because both of those guys are not only legit 1st liners but guys who can carry their linemates. Keeping those two on separate lines gives the Rangers two very dangerous scoring lines and then you try to put them together as much as possible on the power play.

Speaking of the power play unit 1--the Rangers have a lot of different weapons and the players in place to make it work. Zibanejad and Panarin, Kreider with the net front presence and goal scoring ability, Strome and DeAngelo and then a bunch of excellent players to substitute with like Buchnevich and Fox and Trouba's not bad really and Chytil should get more power play time eventually too.....and we'll have Lundkvist sometime soon.

 

[eco's bones]

I think of Josh Bailey moreso than PA Parenteau

Bingo.

 

[aufheben]

Strome has a nice skillset and is well liked in the locker room and well liked by the coaching staff. If he's centering Panarin we can probably figure on 60 point seasons anyway.....and I prefer Mika on a different line than Artemi because both of those guys are not only legit 1st liners but guys who can carry their linemates. Keeping those two on separate lines gives the Rangers two very dangerous scoring lines and then you try to put them together as much as possible on the power play.

Speaking of the power play unit 1--the Rangers have a lot of different weapons and the players in place to make it work. Zibanejad and Panarin, Kreider with the net front presence and goal scoring ability, Strome and DeAngelo and then a bunch of excellent players to substitute with like Buchnevich and Fox and Trouba's not bad really and Chytil should get more power play time eventually too.....and we'll have Lundkvist sometime soon.

This is actually what concerns me more than anything else with losing Strome: the effect on the room. I'm not concerned so much with missing his production as I am with that that.

 

[aufheben]

I was going to mention Gagner in addition to Parenteau but limited it to just one. Gagner had a bit more of a track record while Parenteau, like Strome, had good years when stapled to top guys (Tavares, Duchene) and other than that was mostly useless. The three of them are very similar one dimensional type players who can produce when you put them in a role like that. But you don't need to pay for that and they provide nothing else. Parenteau actually got a contract after his big year with JT 4-16. He then had a really good first year in Colorado and two years later was bought out.

Also my expectation - with or without Strome - is that Panarin will score at a lower rate next year.

This is an idea people should get used to sooner rather than later.

 

[aufheben]

He isn’t eligible for a two year arb award if he is a year from UFA. Why would he voluntarily sign for two years? He could have another great year and get a huge UFA contract.

I've been asking this for weeks.

 

[Thirty One]

I've been asking this for weeks.

You seem to be asking the question for the exact opposite reason bobbop is.

A two-year deal would allow him to use his 19/20 success into a guarantee for two seasons while still allowing him to potentially take a big swing in UFA at age 28.

 

[aufheben]

You seem to be asking the question for the exact opposite reason bobbop is.

A two-year deal would allow him to use his 19/20 success into a guarantee for two seasons while still allowing him to potentially take a big swing in UFA at age 28.

His birthday is July 11th, so he'd actually be 29-years-old for all intents and purposes. I also expect this is the last year before Chytil overtakes him, so no big second year. Strome has already taken three 2-year deals, does he want a fourth or would he rather just get to a long-term UFA deal ASAP?

 

[Avery16]

This is actually what concerns me more than anything else with losing Strome: the effect on the room. I'm not concerned so much with missing his production as I am with that that.

How much are those qualities worth, and for how long can they be relied on?

 

[aufheben]

How much are those qualities worth, and for how long can they be relied on?

Not enough that I wouldn't still rather trade him.

 

[Thirty One]

His birthday is July 11th, so he'd actually be 29-years-old for all intents and purposes. I also expect this is the last year before Chytil overtakes him, so no big second year.

And you're willing to toss aside someone born on Slurpee day just like that?

If he believes that this might be the last year he gets to ride shotgun with Panarin, that would be a reason he might not want a 2-year deal. Does he? I don't know.

 

[bobbop]

Here's the upside argument. Loom at how long it took Mika to truly break out. Strome was drafted one pick earlier.

And I'll add something to the point about him being well liked. I had the chance to have a very long conversation with him at the NHL store and he couldn't have been nicer, more insightful or intelligent. I didn't impress easily. He was very impressive. If I was a scout interviewing him I would have given him very high marks

 

[Avery16]

Here's the upside argument. Loom at how long it took Mika to truly break out. Strome was drafted one pick earlier.

And I'll add something to the point about him being well liked. I had the chance to have a very long conversation with him at the NHL store and he couldn't have been nicer, more insightful or intelligent. I didn't impress easily. He was very impressive. If I was a scout interviewing him I would have given him very high marks

These might be true but they aren't by themselves good reasons to commit to Strome long-term.