Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLI

[True Blue]

If that's the best offer? Yes.

At that point he may have more value to the Rangers than as trade bait.

 

[FartMilk]

Maybe my original post was unclear. I was not commenting on who would be backup, who would be kept, who would go. I was merely commenting on the fact that, from what I've seen in the past, I do not think Henrik will be a good backup -- nothing more.

I'm sure the first year of a Shesterkin/Lundqvist tandem would be a more generous split, but Shesty as starter.

I could see Hank getting 30-40 the first year, and the next year the number going down, but commenting on his ability to be a backup, I still point at his stats versus Georgiev's. It's not that much worse in all honesty, and this is the worst year of his career in terms of inconsistent starts and play.

The thing is, who would be a good backup if not Georgiev and Lundqvist?

 

[FIRE DRURY]

Would rather a middle-six F on an ELC

I don’t see teams eager to give up a young middle-6 winger for Geo.

 

[mas0764]

Kind of bored this morning--lets play the guessing game while changing up the subject.

Georgiev some believe he gets a first--some believe he gets multiple picks--say a 2nd and 3rd.

Thinking of a few teams that could be looking for a long term future goalie--2 teams jump out in Ottawa and Detroit ( rock city ).

Ottawa multiple assets in the first round--most likely second and third picks or maybe they move up or slide. Detroit one first round pick--most likely in the top three. So lets say the draft plays out as Ottawa--1 Detroit--2 and Ottawa--3 again this is all subjective to the really draft.

I read in the Atlantic ( almost positive ) I believe weeks ago an article on how and if the Rangers can move up into the top 5 and if they thought that if the Rangers packaged both first rounds could they jump up. Now the article didn't believe it was enough to jump up that high.

So rolling out the crazy thoughts:

Would both first round picks plus Georgiev be enough to jump up to Ottawa third pick or Detroit's ? Dream scenario but highly unlikely. Some might even say this is way to much.

Now the possibilities:

Both Ottawa and Detroit have multiple second round and third round assets. Would Ottawa be will to trade their own second and pick and Winnipeg's third round pick for Georgiev--or would Detroit be will to part with their own second round pick and the Sharks third round pick ? Again I would always try to a better package but I don't believe either team would trade a first round pick that high or entertain trading 2 second round picks which leads me to ask is Georgiev worth a second and third round picks ? As I'm writing this I could see Ottawa making that kind of move more then Detroit. Ottawa has a ton of draft capital this year but each team does have multiple assets in both rounds.

I defer to the draft experts to tell me if there are players in the draft whom the Rangers could/would target if this happened. I'm not a draft expert and if the draft does not have highly rated players through-out each round maybe this is not the right move.

If and a big if this happened the Rangers would have 2--first round picks/ a second round pick and 3--third round picks.

Georgiev is one player whom the Rangers could pick up additional assets. I like Georgiev hell I'm not even sure I want to trade him but if Shesty number 1 and the Rangers don't want to move on from Hank we can't go with the crazy 3 goalie rotation again.

Which leads us back to deal or no deal.

Ok flame on.

I've speculated - completely uninformed, mind you, but speculated - that I could see a team like Ottawa saying "YES" to giving up the worse of their two picks (let's say their own pick is 2nd overall and the Sharks is 3rd overall, so we get the 3rd overall) in a deal like this:

To Ottawa:

Georgiev
Buchnevich
13th overall (Rangers own pick)

To New York:

3rd overall (used to select, as an example, Tim Stutzle)

....

The why for the Senators: Ottawa is a barren, depleted franchise. They have no goalie prospects, their starter is 38, and they are damn sure not gonna use the 2nd or 3rd overall pick on one. They have a middle-of-the-pack prospect pool and are short one of their own top picks from last year that they foolishly traded away. They need to make up on assets. They already have a top pick to land a franchise center in Byfield. They can either have Stutzle at 3, or, they can get a 3-for-1 deal in which they can still land a top-6 caliber support forward in the draft, and add another sub-25 year old support forward in Buchnevich, AND land their #1 goalie of the future in Georgiev. This is the quickest path back to relevance and for a small market team this is important.

The why for the Rangers: The Rangers are overflowing with non-elite prospects and youth throughout. They have a #1 goalie already and a plethora of backup options in the pipeline. Lundqvist is even still here. The Rangers top-6 wing situation is almost assuredly set in stone moving forward with Panarin, Kreider, and Kakko seizing three of the four top-6 wing roles, with Buchnevich's departure opening a spot for Kravtsov when he arrives, and until then, Chytil, Gauthier, Fast, and Lemieux offer plenty of competent options to fill that last spot. What the Rangers potentially lack to join the ranks of the future elite is star power... while they can already boast a core that will certainly be a consistent playoff competitor, an additional surefire stud, preferably at center, will truly insulate them against injury or decline from Zibanejad or Panarin moving forward. Meanwhile, Buchnevich has no realistic path to important top-6 minutes/role while Kreider, Panarin, and Kakko remain on the roster, and all are signed long term, and while Chytil and Kravtsov remain preferred prospects. Someone who is not Buchnevich will grab that spot in the near future. But, on the flip side, Chytil is not a sure thing at center, so other than Zibanejad, the Rangers lack a true second elite center, which might be all that separates them from achieving Pittsburgh-Chicago levels of league dominance in the future. Buchnevich is completely expendable to them, as is Georgiev given Shesterkin's presence, as is any non-star forward they would acquire at 13 (would similarly be squeezed out of the top-6 wing spots unless they are a hit at center).

If I were the Rangers, I'd even consider adding a D prospect. The things they are giving up are completely redundant in such a deal, and the thing they'd be gaining (about as sure a thing to be a #1 center in Stutzle as you'll find outside of Crosby and McDavid) is the last piece of their puzzle for the next decade.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I've speculated - completely uninformed, mind you, but speculated - that I could see a team like Ottawa saying "YES" to giving up the worse of their two picks (let's say their own pick is 2nd overall and the Sharks is 3rd overall, so we get the 3rd overall) in a deal like this:

To Ottawa:

Georgiev
Buchnevich
13th overall (Rangers own pick)

To New York:

3rd overall (used to select, as an example, Tim Stutzle)

....

The why for the Senators: Ottawa is a barren, depleted franchise. They have no goalie prospects, their starter is 38, and they are damn sure not gonna use the 2nd or 3rd overall pick on one. They have a middle-of-the-pack prospect pool and are short one of their own top picks from last year that they foolishly traded away. They need to make up on assets. They already have a top pick to land a franchise center in Byfield. They can either have Stutzle at 3, or, they can get a 3-for-1 deal in which they can still land a top-6 caliber support forward in the draft, and add another sub-25 year old support forward in Buchnevich, AND land their #1 goalie of the future in Georgiev. This is the quickest path back to relevance and for a small market team this is important.

The why for the Rangers: The Rangers are overflowing with non-elite prospects and youth throughout. They have a #1 goalie already and a plethora of backup options in the pipeline. Lundqvist is even still here. The Rangers top-6 wing situation is almost assuredly set in stone moving forward with Panarin, Kreider, and Kakko seizing three of the four top-6 wing roles, with Buchnevich's departure opening a spot for Kravtsov when he arrives, and until then, Chytil, Gauthier, Fast, and Lemieux offer plenty of competent options to fill that last spot. What the Rangers potentially lack to join the ranks of the future elite is star power... while they can already boast a core that will certainly be a consistent playoff competitor, an additional surefire stud, preferably at center, will truly insulate them against injury or decline from Zibanejad or Panarin moving forward. Meanwhile, Buchnevich has no realistic path to important top-6 minutes/role while Kreider, Panarin, and Kakko remain on the roster, and all are signed long term, and while Chytil and Kravtsov remain preferred prospects. Someone who is not Buchnevich will grab that spot in the near future. But, on the flip side, Chytil is not a sure thing at center, so other than Zibanejad, the Rangers lack a true second elite center, which might be all that separates them from achieving Pittsburgh-Chicago levels of league dominance in the future. Buchnevich is completely expendable to them, as is Georgiev given Shesterkin's presence, as is any non-star forward they would acquire at 13 (would similarly be squeezed out of the top-6 wing spots unless they are a hit at center).

If I were the Rangers, I'd even consider adding a D prospect. The things they are giving up are completely redundant in such a deal, and the thing they'd be gaining (about as sure a thing to be a #1 center in Stutzle as you'll find outside of Crosby and McDavid) is the last piece of their puzzle for the next decade.

That doesn't move you up 10 spots.

Maybe it puts you in a position to get Rossi (who is also a stud) but as usual it takes a team who wants that package and is willing to move down.

 

[mas0764]

That doesn't move you up 10 spots.

Maybe it puts you in a position to get Rossi (who is also a stud) but as usual it takes a team who wants that package and is willing to move down.

I'd also do that deal for Rossi, FWIW, but I was identifying Ottawa as the team most likely to assign great value to Georgiev. Hell, maybe if two teams jump them in the lottery and they end up picking 2nd and 5th, this is more palatable to them (ie, to give up the 5th overall).

But yeah, of course it takes another team finding the deal you are offering enticing. I've stated why I think giving up a Stutzle or Rossi might be enticing to Ottawa, though, if they are getting back a starting goalie in Georgiev, a slot-in top-6 wing option in Buch, and pick 13 which is likely to be another middle-6 wing or center option. And as I said, I'd also consider sending out a D prospect, though with this haul I'd be choosy. We can't possibly keep them all anyway. What, I'd rather wait and then piecemeal them off like Joey Keane for more Julien Gauthiers? Hell no. Sweeten this pot and get a Rossi or Stutzle.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

I'm sure the first year of a Shesterkin/Lundqvist tandem would be a more generous split, but Shesty as starter.

I could see Hank getting 30-40 the first year, and the next year the number going down, but commenting on his ability to be a backup, I still point at his stats versus Georgiev's. It's not that much worse in all honesty, and this is the worst year of his career in terms of inconsistent starts and play.

The thing is, who would be a good backup if not Georgiev and Lundqvist?

I'm not looking at him compared to anyone else. And I'm not commenting on who should or shouldn't be the backup.

I'm just making a personal observation based on what I've seen of Henrik over his career as a Ranger -- and that is he's always been sharpest with a lot of work. That is why I don't see him being an effective backup.

 

[mas0764]

Stepan and Raanta got you Anthony DeAngelo AND 7th overall in a weak-ish draft, but that only required one reach to push a quality talent down to 7 (which unfortunately did not end up happening).

I think 13, Buch, and Georgiev is as least as valuable a package. And if we're not asking for a DeAngelo also, why can't that fetch a 3rd or 5th overall?

Who knows. I'm saying I don't think a deal like this is completely unrealistic. The Rangers should be offering it at the very least.

 

[mas0764]

I think it would have to be a very specific situation for someone to trade down out of the top 5. For example if Ottawa gets the 4th and 5th picks, would they trade 5th overall for 10th overall (NYR), Georgiev, and Lias? I'm not sure either team makes that trade, but I wouldn't mind Gorton taking a shot in that situation.

The Rangers would be crazy to say no to that deal though.

This is like the 2017 draft. The top tier is very solid and you shouldn't be worrying about the likelihood of busts. After a certain point it drops off and you have more questions.

By 10 or 12 in this draft there are a few more questions (though not nearly as much as in 2017 after #6 overall), but from the Rangers point of view, I'm eyeing the likelihood of getting a Pettersson, not the risk of losing out on some middle-6 players and a goalie who will never be my starter.

 

[mas0764]

Early on, alot of scouts were saying Kakko/Hughes would not be top 5 in this draft which speaks to how amazing this class is touted to be. If that is true, Ottawa is poised to walk away from this draft with one of the best prospect pools. No way are they trading up imo.

What scouts are saying that?

I don't think that's true at all.

If anyone is a half-tick ahead it's Lafreniere, but by all accounts Kakko and Hughes are roughly right there, if not slightly ahead of, Byfield, Stutzle, Holtz, Raymond, and Rossi.

But that's not a slight on anyone. This draft has top-talents that go much deeper than last year's did, which ended right after Hughes and Kakko. I think Byfield, Stutzle, Holtz, Rossi, and maybe Raymond, some people are saying he's falling, but certainly the first 4 of those names are probably at least equal to if not superior to Dach/Turcotte/Cozens/Zegras.

 

[mas0764]

i don’t think that is possible unless Carolina has to decide which first round pick to allocate towards the Rangers before the lottery.

Incorrect, but it is really unlikely.

If the Carolina pick wins the lottery at #1 overall, and Toronto either wins the lottery or ends up naturally a top-10 pick (like by being eliminated in the play-in round and having other teams upset the favorites and leapfrog them in the draft order), Toronto keeps their first round pick, and therefore Carolina HAS to give us their own. Which is then #1 overall.

 

[FartMilk]

I'm not looking at him compared to anyone else. And I'm not commenting on who should or shouldn't be the backup.

I'm just making a personal observation based on what I've seen of Henrik over his career as a Ranger -- and that is he's always been sharpest with a lot of work. That is why I don't see him being an effective backup.

That's why I do point at his stats. This season he essentially was a backup and his starts are still starter worthy considering league average.

I think the three goalie carousel has f***ed with Hank's mind, so knowing his role is cemented would probably assure him some peace of mind there.

There's also the debate about quality of competition. Who played against the better teams, Georgiev or Lundqvist?

I dunno if the stats or metrics back this up, but it seemed to me like the team always played like shit in front of Hank as well. It was like clockwork. Purely eye test though.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

I dunno if the stats or metrics back this up, but it seemed to me like the team always played like shit in front of Hank as well. It was like clockwork. Purely eye test though.

This is something we can agree on 100%...

 

[True Blue]

I've speculated - completely uninformed, mind you, but speculated - that I could see a team like Ottawa saying "YES" to giving up the worse of their two picks (let's say their own pick is 2nd overall and the Sharks is 3rd overall, so we get the 3rd overall) in a deal like this:

To Ottawa:

Georgiev
Buchnevich
13th overall (Rangers own pick)

To New York:

3rd overall (used to select, as an example, Tim Stutzle)

Even if Ottawa was to say yes, I do not see Gorton trading assets for pure futures at this point. I think that those types of trades are over. He is not going to trade 50 points or so of production for a prospect.

 

[mas0764]

What scouts are saying that?

I don't think that's true at all.

If anyone is a half-tick ahead it's Lafreniere, but by all accounts Kakko and Hughes are roughly right there, if not slightly ahead of, Byfield, Stutzle, Holtz, Raymond, and Rossi.

But that's not a slight on anyone. This draft has top-talents that go much deeper than last year's did, which ended right after Hughes and Kakko. I think Byfield, Stutzle, Holtz, Rossi, and maybe Raymond, some people are saying he's falling, but certainly the first 4 of those names are probably at least equal to if not superior to Dach/Turcotte/Cozens/Zegras.

Ok, so I went back and looked at Pronman's rankings of the last two classes, I was a bit wrong by time it got to the Turcotte/Zegras/Cozens ranking, but right on how Lefreniere/Hughes/Kakko/Byfield stack up.

He'd have them in tiers as such..... within the tiers, neither he nor I have them ranked, so they are only grouped by tiers. His tiers as a prospect rank as - Special (Projects as one of the very best players in the league), Elite (Projects as an impact player, someone who is top 10-15 percent in the NHL at his position), High-End (Projects as a first-line forward, a top-pair defenseman or a top-10 starting goaltender), Very Good (Projects as a top-six forward, top-four defenseman or starting goaltender in the NHL), and Legit (Projects to play in the bottom half of a lineup).

Special
Lafreniere (2020)
Hughes (2019)

Special/Elite Bubble
Byfield (2020)
Kakko (2019)

Elite
Turcotte (2019)
Byram (2019)
Caulfield (2019)

Elite/High End Bubble
Stutzle (2020)
Raymond (2020)
Perfetti (2020)
Zegras (2019)
Cozens (2019)

High End
Holtz (2020)
Drysdale (2020)
Askarov (2020)
Rossi (2020)
Boldy (2019)
Broberg (2019)
Dach (2019)
Newhook (2019)
Podkolzin (2019)

So that's 1-1 in special talents, and 1-1 in special/elite talents. But 2019 seems superior in elite through high end talent (basically the end of the first-liners/first-pairers), outnumbering 2020 by a 10-7 margin.

So..... the Rangers need to get inside that top 8 or 9 or so.

 

[mas0764]

Even if Ottawa was to say yes, I do not see Gorton trading assets for pure futures at this point. I think that those types of trades are over. He is not going to trade 50 points or so of production for a prospect.

Maybe so, but to me that simply makes no sense. It shouldn't be looked at as "50 points," because we aren't talking about just this year when you made a trade. It's the cumulative time spent with the team that should be a little more measured.

Besides, I think the Rangers are (1) a playoff team with or without Buch next year, and (2) NOT a Stanley Cup team with or without Buch next year. To me he matters very little and is in the grand scheme of things pretty irrelevant to them. He might be the difference in seeding or winning a round maybe. But to keep him because it's important to be a 4 seed rather than a 6 seed is mind boggling to me when you could otherwise be shopping him with Georgiev and ANOTHER future/prospect (ie the 13th pick) for a chance to get an impact first liner in 2 years.

There's like no loss and all gain.

 

[NYSPORTS]

Incorrect, but it is really unlikely.

If the Carolina pick wins the lottery at #1 overall, and Toronto either wins the lottery or ends up naturally a top-10 pick (like by being eliminated in the play-in round and having other teams upset the favorites and leapfrog them in the draft order), Toronto keeps their first round pick, and therefore Carolina HAS to give us their own. Which is then #1 overall.

i thought we get the lower of the two. Ok, something to hope for

 

[mas0764]

i thought we get the lower of the two. Ok, something to hope for

We do get the lower of the two if Carolina has two to pick from. If Carolina only has one first round pick, though, we get that one.

And Carolina only gets a second 1st round pick if Toronto is outside the top 10. If Toronto wins the lottery (say, 2nd overall), Toronto keeps it's own lottery pick. Carolina then only has one pick (say, the first overall). It then must give us it's first round pick.

This is all really unlikely though.

 

[NYSPORTS]

We do get the lower of the two if Carolina has two to pick from. If Carolina only has one first round pick, though, we get that one.

And Carolina only gets a second 1st round pick if Toronto is outside the top 10. If Toronto wins the lottery (say, 2nd overall), Toronto keeps it's own lottery pick. Carolina then only has one pick (say, the first overall). It then must give us it's first round pick.

This is all really unlikely though.

got it, thank you. I didn’t realize Toronto keeps the pick inside of 10. Lot to root for in Round 1 and the lottery.

 

[Tawnos]

I was sure there were 6 teams in '39-'40....did I miss something?

There were 7 teams in 39-40. The New York Americans didn't fold until 1942. There were actually 10 teams in the NHL in the late-20s and early 30s. And before that, the NHL competed for the Cup with the PCHA and WHL. 6 teams in 1942-43 was the first time so few teams were ever competing for the Cup as a pro trophy.

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

i don’t think that is possible unless Carolina has to decide which first round pick to allocate towards the Rangers before the lottery.

I don't think it's for Carolina to decide. I mean yes, we're supposed to get the lower of the Canes'/Leafs' pick, but if the Leafs get in the top-10 and it is protected, Toronto automatically gives up their 1st in 2021 to the Canes, while Carolina has to give us their first round pick this year. Perhaps Toronto has the option to either keep that top-10 overall pick and give their 2021 unprotected first rounder to Carolina or give that top-10 pick to Carolina, but I can't imagine they would relinquish a top-10 pick.

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

It's weird how a team that has won 4 cups in a century is hated by so many.

The existence of the Devils and Islanders franchises are essentially an "FU" to the Rangers. A team that caters only to Long Island deserves to be a franchise? They have one of the smallest fanbases in all of sports! Are they passionate? Yes, very much so. But they can barely sustain themselves because there's no market for a Long Island team.

Same can be said for the Devils. If you're a football fan in New Jersey, you're either a fan of the Giants or the Eagles (and sometimes Jets and Cowboys). Why does New Jersey need a hockey team? Look how many teams are in the area. The Devils and Islanders are simply not necessary and should be relocated.


But I'm going off on a tangent. Like someone said earlier, a lot of it has to do with Sather and how we've gotten pretty much any player we wanted. I mean look at the free agents, professional, international and college, we've signed. We've blown every other franchise out of the water because players want to sign here and the Rangers almost always get what they want.

 

[Avery16]

At that point he may have more value to the Rangers than as trade bait.

loan him to the Liiga until the market is better for us

 

[FartMilk]

It's always been odd to me that the New York metro area has three teams in the least popular league/sport of the big four and not three teams in baseball, basketball or football.

You'd think if anywhere had two or even three hockey teams it would be Toronto.

The Devils existence makes no sense to me, and they're the only NJ sports team (no, not considering the Giants or Jets for many reasons).

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

It's always been odd to me that the New York metro area has three teams in the least popular league/sport of the big four and not three teams in baseball, basketball or football.

You'd think if anywhere had two or even three hockey teams it would be Toronto.

The Devils existence makes no sense to me, and they're the only NJ sports team (no, not considering the Giants or Jets for many reasons).

Correct. I know Islanders and Devils fans hate to hear it, but from a purely financial and logical standpoint, the Islanders and Devils should've been relocated years ago. And yes, the Belmont Arena is a HUGE mistake.

But at least it's is not my money!