Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLII

[Beacon]

Using prior pick position from 20-30 years ago is completely irrelevant to hockey as it is today, and I really wish it'd stop being used for future draft analysis and probabilities. Look at the list of 9th overall picks I posted earlier this morning. Scouting has gotten better. Hockey has drastically changed. Binning these different eras in hockey together as though they're equivalent is idiotic.

And that's ignoring the fact that focusing strictly on who was chosen at what positions is terrible analysis to begin with.

Every year we are told scouting is better so the past is irrelevant and it never pans out that way. Maybe very marginally. The difference is that you're now judging hyped up scouting reports to players whose reality you saw in their prime. But when they are 19, you assume every kid will only get better and their ceiling will be their reality no later than their 21-22 birthday. By the time you realize you're wrong, you're onto the next hyped up scouting report.

When Del Zotto scored 37 points as a teenage rookie defenseman and Grachev was hyped to no end, they were proof that 2008 scouting was great unlike 1998 or 1988 scouting. Today, MDZ and Grachev are viewed as proof of the failure of scouting a decade ago.

In a decade, you'll think the same thing about how 2019 scouting is awful.

 

[Calad]

Panarin or no, I have a fairly hard time seeing this team being playoff contenders in 19-20 or 20-21. A lot of the team has a lot of growing to do. Playoffs means what, 96-100 points? Where the hell is that coming from.

Your position presupposes A LOT (he doesn't fall off badly ~ever, he can maintain focus and a high level while playing functionally meaningless games for a long time, doesn't get hurt, finds chemistry which doesn't happen all the time if you're being honest about things, the team is able to deftly manage contracts and the cap without his cap hit hurting them) while accounting for little. You just sort of assume he'll always be good and thats as far as it goes (???)

I agree that we aren't going to be sniffing playoffs next year, the year after is dependant upon a lot of things but considering the anchors on D it isn't likely. Theres always a risk involved in signing a player, but the payoff with Panarin is worth the risk compared to all the other players available this year, or even the following two years. We have $43 million in contracts coming off the books over the next 2 seasons, the cap will rise probably around $7-8 million in that time (seattle expansion windfall similar to Vegas'), and the team will have large number of ELCs and (reasonably cheap) 2nd contracts for at least the next 3 years, if not longer. I don't have any concerns about the salary cap, and if we end up running into problems with it its likely because all of our prospects exploded and perform at or beyond their expectations, which would be a wonderful problem to have.

 

[Greg02]

Panarin or no, I have a fairly hard time seeing this team being playoff contenders in 19-20 or 20-21. A lot of the team has a lot of growing to do. Playoffs means what, 96-100 points? Where the hell is that coming from.

Your position presupposes A LOT (he doesn't fall off badly ~ever, he can maintain focus and a high level while playing functionally meaningless games for a long time, doesn't get hurt, finds chemistry which doesn't happen all the time if you're being honest about things, the team is able to deftly manage contracts and the cap without his cap hit hurting them) while accounting for little. You just sort of assume he'll always be good and thats as far as it goes (???)

It will be the third season for players like Chytil, Howden, Andersson. Second for Kakko (probably) who seems likely to have an immediate impact. Plus Zib and Buch. It shouldn't require all pieces to fall into place to have a competent offense that year. To me, the big question is what does Shesterkin become, and how quickly? The defense will probably be a mess in 20-21 still, but it wouldn't be shocking to me if some of our pieces click into place and we push for a playoff spot anyway.

 

[Beacon]

You want the team to have a worse season next year so we'll end up with another top 5 pick.

We already ARE worse than last year. We were 8th worst with Hayes and Zuccarello. We were 2nd worst without them. The presumption that they can finish around #5 is based on a couple rookies contributing more than last year. If Kakko and Kravtsov need time and Chytil won't improve, we may finish last or at least bottom-3, but I'm hoping Kakko gets 40-50 points, as will one of Chytil or Kravtsov.

I do not want a bottom-5 pick. I want to make the playoffs next year, but do it because Kakko+Kravtsov+Chytil got 170 points next year. I just don't find that scenario likely in 2019-20.

But if we make the playoffs based on our youth and not UFAs, nothing will make me happier.

However, if I have the choice to draft another top prospect who may be as good as Kakko or at least better than Kravtsov vs drafting at #12 and having an overpriced UFA, I prefer Kakko or Kravtsov+.

 

[DanielBrassard]

We already ARE worse than last year. We were 8th worst with Hayes and Zuccarello. We were 2nd worst without them. The presumption that they can finish around #5 is based on a couple rookies contributing more than last year. If Kakko and Kravtsov need time and Chytil won't improve, we may finish last or at least bottom-3, but I'm hoping Kakko gets 40-50 points, as will one of Chytil or Kravtsov.

I do not want a bottom-5 pick. I want to make the playoffs next year, but do it because Kakko+Kravtsov+Chytil got 170 points next year. I just don't find that scenario likely.

So if I have the choice to draft another top prospect who may be as good as Kakko or at least better than Kravtsov vs drafting at #12 and having an overpriced UFA, I prefer Kakko or Kravtsov+.

I would damn sure hope that's the case considering Andersson had 6 points and Chytil and Howden both scored less than 30, and after the TD Andersson and Chytil didn't score much at all. And Kakko should be able to put up around 40 points.

 

[eco's bones]

While it's true a team always needs to have young blood coming in every year there are multiple ways of building, rebuilding, retooling, semi-building (however anyone wants to frame it) a team. The fact of the matter is that no two teams are alike---and there never will be two teams that are alike. There is no true blueprint even if there might be some commonalities in how a team becomes a winner.

The fact is you can also put a terrific unbeatable team together and then they're not so terrific and unbeatable--as an example this year's Tampa Bay team. What else this year tells us is that a team outside the playoffs for years and years can go on a run even if the overall talent level of the team is not the greatest but team chemistry is and I would offer Carolina as an example of that. St. Louis also was a dumpster fire in the first third or so of the season.

The Rangers are going to have a lot of talent in years to come--just thinking that we're adding Kakko (Hughes), Fox, Kravtsov and Shesterkin this year is a major talent infusion to a fairly substantial group of already pretty young and talented guys and this crap that just adding one single 28 year old Russian winger is going to open the floodgates and destroy everything we're doing is just ridiculous dogmatic nonsense to me. There is no one right way--there are lots of ways that can turn out the right way but there's no telling either as Tampa Bay found out this year.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Every year we are told scouting is better so the past is irrelevant and it never pans out that way. Maybe very marginally. The difference is that you're now judging hyped up scouting reports to players whose reality you saw in their prime. But when they are 19, you assume every kid will only get better and their ceiling will be their reality no later than their 21-22 birthday. By the time you realize you're wrong, you're onto the next hyped up scouting report.

When Del Zotto scored 37 points as a teenage rookie defenseman and Grachev was hyped to no end, they were proof that 2008 scouting was great unlike 1998 or 1988 scouting. Today, MDZ and Grachev are viewed as proof of the failure of scouting a decade ago.

In a decade, you'll think the same thing about how 2019 scouting is awful.

That's not what I'm doing at all, and I said this before: there's more and more access to these prospects. We have insights to their training, every game, etc. This doesn't detract from my point that the way you constantly harp on these probabilities as if they're fact are complete bogus.

Besides, to answer your first point. Literally look at the list I posted this morning. Are you really going to act like those 9th overalls from this past decade are the same from the prior two decades? That's my main point. You keep bringing up data from 20-30 years ago. It doesn't matter anymore. Either re-do the analysis or stop bringing it up.

 

[Beacon]

I have no use for the way the Oilers have done things...

The Oilers are an awful example. They didnt just screw up rebuilding through high picks, they screwed up everything: later round drafting, trades, player development, UFAs.

Give them Hall, Barzal and Eberle instead of Larsson, Lucic and Spooner, and they are probably Cup contenders today. Their issues aren't caused by the fact that they drafted McDavid and Draisaitl instead of signing Andrew Ladd and Eric Staal. Their issues are caused by the general mismanagement.

 

[SA16]

It is not a false dichotomy, these are the only 2 realistic choices, the rest is fantasy.

1.Since we are a crap team, we might need to outbid better teams by a good margin. Since 100% of GMs would want to add him, to sign Panarin, we'd need to offer a contract that 30 other GMs think is crazy (or at least 28-29 GMs if another bad team offers crazy money also). Think about it, why wouldn't a good team sign him and become a contender unless the contract we offer is insane in their mind..

1. He has expressed interest in only playing in a few locations (FLA/NYR/CHI/LA). We know location is very important to him. This is the exact same thing as Tavares who took 2M less than other teams offered him to go back home to Toronto. The biggest contract is not the top priority for everyone.

2. Not every team has the cap space. I'm sure teams like Pittsburgh/Tampa Bay/Toronto/Winnipeg would love to have him. They can't.

So yea your whole "30 GMs need to think it's crazy" is blatantly incorrect. There's only maybe five teams that have any chance based on having the cap space to afford him and him being interested in their area. It doesn't matter if Columbus wants him and offers him the most money and 8 years. He doesn't want to be there.

 

[Michal]

Kakko's scored 5 goals (including 2 ENG) in 2 games at WC in Slovakia. He is brilliant. Who knows who will be 1OA this year...

 

[Beacon]

This doesn't detract from my point that the way you constantly harp on these probabilities as if they're fact are complete bogus.

How's looking at actual draft results bogus, but making uber-optimistic statements unsubstantiated by any evidence not?

Besides, to answer your first point. Literally look at the list I posted this morning. Are you really going to act like those 9th overalls from this past decade are the same from the prior two decades?

Like I said, looking at recent players is just scouting reports and hype. You take a player and assume he only gets better, just as we did with MDZ following his 37 point season as a 19 year old.

 

[Mac n Gs]

How's looking at actual draft results bogus, but making uber-optimistic statements unsubstantiated by any evidence not?



Like I said, looking at recent players is just scouting reports and hype. You take a player and assume he only gets better, just as we did with MDZ following his 37 point season as a 19 year old.

My post was literally looking at actual draft results, like what?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Kakko's scored 5 goals (including 2 ENG) in 2 games at WC in Slovakia. He is brilliant. Who knows who will be 1OA this year...

It’ll be Hughes.

When you’re the guy for as long as he has been the guy, it’s hard to pass on that.

Plus everyone will be going nuts after Hughes shreds France tomorrow.

 

[ETTER DE]

In fact, they were signed in the same offseason that Marchand and Lucic were drafted, and when Rask(drafted in 05) was traded for. Bergeron was 20. Of course, we all know who was at the helm for these moves

Bergeron was drafted at #45, Lukic at #50 and Marchand #71. Do not pretend that Gorton or whoever drafted these players thought they would be much more than rooster players. If so they would have been picked in the first round, not second and third.

 

[Calad]

My post was literally looking at actual draft results, like what?

He seems to be an olympian in mental gymnastics

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

He seems to be an olympian in mental gymnastics

Ironically, gymnasts are often on a high (pommel) horse

 

[Calad]

Bergeron was drafted at #45, Lukic at #50 and Marchand #71. Do not pretend that Gorton or whoever drafted these players thought they would be much more than rooster players. If so they would have been picked in the first round, not second and third.

Bergeron was drafted in 03 and started playing in the NHL that year. The season prior to the 06 draft he had 73 points in 81 games. Kessel was also drafted 5th overall in 06. The point being they were clearly still in the middle of a rebuild, yet Gorton still felt it was appropriate to add elite UFA talent anyways.

 

[Beacon]

My post was literally looking at actual draft results, like what?

I looked at the results of draftees in the same spot, gave you the median number of games played and points scored, and showed how many total players at the draft spot became long term NHLers.

 

[Beacon]

Bergeron was drafted in 03 and started playing in the NHL that year. The season prior to the 06 draft he had 73 points in 81 games. Kessel was also drafted 5th overall in 06. The point being they were clearly still in the middle of a rebuild, yet Gorton still felt it was appropriate to add elite UFA talent anyways.

I thought Panarin is a once in a lifetime elite UFA, which is why we can't wait until the kids mature? You mean other All Stars were available before and will be available again once our kids are 23+?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Bergeron was drafted at #45, Lukic at #50 and Marchand #71. Do not pretend that Gorton or whoever drafted these players thought they would be much more than rooster players. If so they would have been picked in the first round, not second and third.

Lukic is totally a rooster.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Bergeron was drafted in 03 and started playing in the NHL that year. The season prior to the 06 draft he had 73 points in 81 games. Kessel was also drafted 5th overall in 06. The point being they were clearly still in the middle of a rebuild, yet Gorton still felt it was appropriate to add elite UFA talent anyways.

Chia was pulling the strings behind the curtains on those signings.

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

I'm not so sure. If Kakko continues this absolute tear against NHLers, I'm going to have my username to like "Jack Cuse" or something.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I thought Panarin is a once in a lifetime elite UFA, which is why we can't wait until the kids mature? You mean other All Stars were available before and will be available again once our kids are 23+?

Has anyone actually said he's once in a lifetime? What people have said including me is that he's an elite UFA, and that elite UFA's don't make it to UFA very often, especially since the new CBA as evidenced by the fact that only Tavares has made it since then.

 

[SA16]

Has anyone actually said he's once in a lifetime? What people have said including me is that he's an elite UFA, and that elite UFA's don't make it to UFA very often, especially since the new CBA as evidenced by the fact that only Tavares has made it since then.

To answer your question - no. Nobody has said that.

 

[Beacon]

Has anyone actually said he's once in a lifetime? What people have said including me is that he's an elite UFA, and that elite UFA's don't make it to UFA very often, especially since the new CBA as evidenced by the fact that only Tavares has made it since then.

Cool. So we can sign a star who will make it to UFA around the time Kakko is 20-24, when he, along with Chytil, Kravtsov and K'Andre, are at least close to his prime. We can use the star UFA when his best years intersect with our kids' prime, not when we waste his best years while our kids are rookies.