Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLIII

[Ghost of jas]

You can get a younger player on a better contract.

Yes it’s an assets vs no assets to acquire thing, but there’s less risk involved and we can play all the prospects/picks.

Part of the asset accumulation Gorton has undergone is to be able make the type of deals you’re talking about.

 

[TheBPA]

You can get a younger player on a better contract.

Yes it’s an assets vs no assets to acquire thing, but there’s less risk involved and we can play all the prospects/picks.

You’re getting a player who’s a little bit younger on possibly a better contract.

To me, that’s not worth giving up premium assets, which is what it will take.

 

[SA16]

Are there any examples of these top level young players on good contracts that we would be able to trade for realistically (as in, not some sort of scam trade like Seguin when Boston traded him or Zibanejad). Who are the reasonable targets and what are we looking at giving up? Is there anyone at this point outside of William Nylander?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

You’re getting a player who’s a little bit younger on possibly a better contract.

To me, that’s not worth giving up premium assets, which is what it will take.

If we're talking Trouba? Yeah you're right.

But someone like Nylander?

 

[kovazub94]

The logic is being cautious.

Why would we send what would almost certainly be a large package to acquire a defenseman who has missed the equivalent of a full season out of the six seasons hes played?

And we're either trading roster players or picks/prospects for Trouba. The latter is the opposite of what a rebuilding team should do. And the former? This team could be a disaster until Trouba is in his late 20s (even with Trouba and without losing our few NHL caliber players to get him) and we're hoping age is going to make him more durable?

Also the idea that we dont have a #1RD in the system is asinine the same way it was asinine when we definitely didn't have a future #1LD anywhere when we had McDonagh in the system. We don't know what we have in some of these players, but we should have a better idea after this season, which is the point. And that is even assuming we need to commit big money and term to a star on the right side, a position so critical it was occupied by Dan Girardi the last time the team had any success.

Honestly there is nothing appealing at this stage about trading prime assets for an injury prone player with an uncertain contractual status aside from being able to say we traded for a player that earned his #1RD merit badge.

The logical thing would be to keep doing what is working. Stop chasing big names and labels and continue building towards sustained success.

Asinine? Nice, there's a large segment of this board that would support this course of action and we've supported it with well thought out reasoning but maybe it's just your english is not rich enough to come up with a better description so I will let it slide.

On the other hand, you then support your argument by listing McDonagh who had a pedigree of a top-10 pick to begin with (and who the Rangers lucked out in obtaining via extremely one-sided trade)? Are you counting on another similarly lucky trade to happen? Or the Rangers getting another top-2 pick specifically in the draft where one of very top picks would be a RD defenseman, or willing to wait for another 5 years development IF similar to McD per your example?

 

[DutchShamrock]

How many times do we have to rehash the same conversation that the reason that no top teams have top UFA is because outside of John Tavares last year there has not been any under this CBA? Give it a few years and I bet the conversation completely changes with that when teams with Tavares/Karlsson/Panarin end up in the conference finals.

I guess as long as facts are misrepresented, the conversation has to be rehashed. There is a "never available before" free agent every year. Just because that player doesn't look elite in hindsight doesn't change how that player was viewed and coveted in the summer he was UFA.

 

[kovazub94]

We've heard lots about how the teams in the Final Four don't have the big cap hits. What RangerBoy doesn't want you to know, however, is that the teams aren't build on top 5 draft picks, either. I could only count 4 players among the 4 teams that were drafted by them in the top 10. Two of them aren't even close to driving the bus, either.

Andrei Svechnikov - 2nd overall
Alex Pietrangelo - 4th overall
Haydn Fleury - 7th overall
Logan Couture - 9th overall

Can't use this year as an example the same way you can't refer to bad rebuilds via drafts by Oilers (or Buffalo, Florida, Arizona etc). Only refer to years when Pens and Chicago won without mentioning that their rebuild was in a rut for years.

 

[SA16]

I guess as long as facts are misrepresented, the conversation has to be rehashed. There is a "never available before" free agent every year. Just because that player doesn't look elite in hindsight doesn't change how that player was viewed and coveted in the summer he was UFA.

There is?

Radulov was one in 2017 coming off a 54 point year?
Frans Nielsen/Loui Eriksson/David Backes/Andrew Ladd/Kyle Okposo were in 2016?
Andrej Sekera/Mike Green were in 2015?
Matt Moulson/Mike Cammalleri/Brooks Orpik/Paul Stastny/Thomas Vanek were in 2014?
Mike Ribeiro (33 years old)/Nathan Horton/Valterri Filppula were in 2013?

I'm not seeing it. Not a single one of those players were seen as elite at the time they were a FA. The only one even coming off a point/game season was Ribeiro in 48 games. That's pretty much every FA who signed at least for 5M/year from 2013-2017. These guys were coveted because they were the best available in their year and teams want to make moves to get better but they are obviously nowhere near a JT or Panarin.

 

[DutchShamrock]

There is?

Radulov was one in 2017 coming off a 54 point year?
Frans Nielsen/Loui Eriksson/David Backes/Andrew Ladd/Kyle Okposo were in 2016?
Andrej Sekera/Mike Green were in 2015?
Matt Moulson/Mike Cammalleri/Brooks Orpik/Paul Stastny/Thomas Vanek were in 2014?
Mike Ribeiro (33 years old)/Nathan Horton/Valterri Filppula were in 2013?

I'm not seeing it. Not a single one of those players were seen as elite at the time they were a FA. The only one even coming off a point/game season was Ribeiro in 48 games. That's pretty much every FA who signed at least for 5M/year from 2013-2017. These guys were coveted because they were the best available in their year and teams want to make moves to get better but they are obviously nowhere near a JT or Panarin.

I'm not playing this game. "This CBA"? That's absurd. It fits your narrative. How many teams won a cup with a UFA playing a major part... in this CBA? Uh oh, no Hossa, no Neidermeyer. Looks like UFAs are a no win move.

Chalk it up to a win for you because I'm not chasing the moving target.

 

[SA16]

I'm not playing this game. "This CBA"? That's absurd. It fits your narrative. How many teams won a cup with a UFA playing a major part... in this CBA? Uh oh, no Hossa, no Neidermeyer. Looks like UFAs are a no win move.

Chalk it up to a win for you because I'm not chasing the moving target.

Can you then explain to me how it is fair to look at prior CBA when one of the main things changed in the CBA is free agency rules?

Do you think it is a fluke that the quality of FA dropped almost instantly when they allowed teams to re-sign their own players to 8 year deals but only give outside players 7 years?

I have never moved the target and you can search every post I've made on the subject and I always refer specifically to this CBA.

 

[haohmaru]

You misconstrued my point, which is that Trouba likely won't be the same player he was last year when we're ready to compete. So we should save the assets and apply them when necessary (assuming one of our prospects doeesn't emerge as a top pairing RD).

I don't think Trouba is as great as people make him out to be. I realize he'll cost a lot and this package probably won't even be enough, but I'm not interested in sacrificing assets for a player like him, who will possibly be entering his downside by the time we're ready to compete.

If you assume we are competing in 2-3 years...Trouba will be 28 or 29, with a lengthy injury history. We just watched multiple D-Men - Klein, Staal, Girardi, etc. - hit major walls as they entered their late 20's. I'd rather not give another long-term commitment to a guy who could be entering a downswing once we're ready to compete.

Also, while injuries can appear at anytime, they are more likely to do so with players who have histories of them. So I think it's accurate to speculate under such a scenario. Which is why I would be against signing EK.

I think there's probably just as much evidence that D's peak in their late 20's as anything counter to that. If Trouba is peaking in 3 years then that's in your window at his peak. Girardi is actually a poor example for you to use since his best years (and only Norris trophy votes) were years 27 & 28. Klein, at his best, is a 4/5 D so not really comparable. Stralman had his best years at 28-30. Chara developed into a monster in his late 20's. Carslon, Caps, had his two best years (so far) at 28 & 29. And on and on.

Speculating about our competitiveness - yay or nay - three years down the road is pure folly unfortunately. Neither you nor I have any idea which of our draft crop will meet or exceed expectations and which won't work out at all, who we'll re-sign, who we'll sign as UFA's, who we'll trade for, etc... We won't recognize half the roster in 3 years from today in all likelihood. I'd say, though, that if it's taking another 3 years to be "competitive" (everyone seems to have a different definition of this word) then I'd say that our rebuild isn't going as well as Gorton would've hoped.

 

[haohmaru]

There is?

Radulov was one in 2017 coming off a 54 point year?
Frans Nielsen/Loui Eriksson/David Backes/Andrew Ladd/Kyle Okposo were in 2016?
Andrej Sekera/Mike Green were in 2015?
Matt Moulson/Mike Cammalleri/Brooks Orpik/Paul Stastny/Thomas Vanek were in 2014?
Mike Ribeiro (33 years old)/Nathan Horton/Valterri Filppula were in 2013?

I'm not seeing it. Not a single one of those players were seen as elite at the time they were a FA. The only one even coming off a point/game season was Ribeiro in 48 games. That's pretty much every FA who signed at least for 5M/year from 2013-2017. These guys were coveted because they were the best available in their year and teams want to make moves to get better but they are obviously nowhere near a JT or Panarin.

Ribeiro had A LOT of baggage, too.

JT isn't a great elite UFA to use either because he came into free agency essentially with two teams in mind. One if you're an Islander fan.

Panarin is unique in that regard for sure. Still not 100% behind it though even if we have a chance at it.

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

Keep Shattenkirk
Get rid of Staal and Smith



I'm firmly on that boat

 

[Leetch3]

Ribeiro had A LOT of baggage, too.

JT isn't a great elite UFA to use either because he came into free agency essentially with two teams in mind. One if you're an Islander fan.

Panarin is unique in that regard for sure. Still not 100% behind it though even if we have a chance at it.

everyone has panarin as a lock for florida or wanting to play in NY or LA, so not sure how thats much different than tavares with the limited teams

 

[haohmaru]

everyone has panarin as a lock for florida or wanting to play in NY or LA, so not sure how thats much different than tavares with the limited teams

We'll see. I think a lot of what we've seen/heard so far with Panarin has been a whole lot of conjecture and very little substance.

 

[effen]

Keep Shattenkirk
Get rid of Staal and Smith
I'm firmly on that boat

Keep all 3 and stop kicking the can down the road.

 

[JimmyG89]

The thing with the final 4 squads is that they have a core foundation that has been built over YEARS. We don't really have any of that, with the exception of Carolina.

Sharks have had their top guys for a long time. Karlsson was an add as a season long rental. They retooled. Meier and Labanc are their young guns, with Hertl. They stuck with everyone, except for Marleau. This is kind of a last push for this squad, maybe one more season.

Bruins have their core from their cup, but retooled. Pasta, Heinen, DeBrusk, McAvoy, Carlo. This is the fruits of the trades they made in 2015. Amazing that they could have ended up better (we all know the meme).

Blues have their core group but also retooled. Dunn, Parayko, Thomas, Fabbri (who is hurt again). They made two big trades involving 1st rounders (O'reilly and Schenn) and signed some vets to fill in holes. Binnington made them tho. They finally got goaltending after all these years.

Canes are the one team that has drafted in the lotto all the time, small market and dealt their pieces that got more expensive. They actually got goaltending this season and went on a run. Always high in CF%. but their goalies tanked them.

We don't fit ANY of these categories. We don't really have the model of any of those teams. We blew up our roster and are overturning it rapidly. Over the course of 2 years, we're going from being in the 2nd round with just about all the parts of that team gone. In two years, we are looking at Zibanejad, Buchnevich, and Skjei as the remaining players.

We're kind of building a team like Winnipeg, lotto picks, with one being a #2 pick. Lots of 1st rounders, size, a top G prospect or two. That was a final 4 team last year. Just everyone needs to understand, we might become St. Louis or Carolina depending on the goaltending and that is could be over the next 5 years.

So while we could get into a playoff spot in 2 years time, unless we are looking at having our players develop like Crosby/Malkin/Letang/MAF, we're not gonna be a cup team with our core at 23. If we are, we won't be the norm.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

what is Simmonds worth at this point in his career?

Cheap tradeable contract that you can hope to move at the deadline.

 

[Ola]

Are there any examples of these top level young players on good contracts that we would be able to trade for realistically (as in, not some sort of scam trade like Seguin when Boston traded him or Zibanejad). Who are the reasonable targets and what are we looking at giving up? Is there anyone at this point outside of William Nylander?

I think getting all three of good, young and good contract is aiming a bit to high.

If you go to nhltradetracker.com it’s not hard to find examples of players being fairly young and without having bad contracts being moved quite frequently. Duchene, Turris, Domi, Montour, Karlsson, Skinner and the likes.

 

[haohmaru]

So while we could get into a playoff spot in 2 years time, unless we are looking at having our players develop like Crosby/Malkin/Letang/MAF, we're not gonna be a cup team with our core at 23. If we are, we won't be the norm.

Bruins "core" in 2011 being Marchand, Chara, Bergeron, & Krejci?

Marchand was 22
Krejci was 24
Bergeron was 25
Lucic was 22
Seguin was 19
Wheeler was 24
McQuaid was 24
Horton was 25

Every one of those guys played 20+ games with the exception of Seguin who played 13. That's a pretty young group of players don't you think?

 

[JimmyG89]

Bruins "core" in 2011 being Marchand, Chara, Bergeron, & Krejci?

No, that's their core NOW. Marchand was not a core roster player. He was a 3rd liner for that team that went off in the postseason. McQuaid was a 3rd pair D. They traded Wheeler that season. They added all kinds of vets. They had Marc Recchi and Michael Ryder on their roster. Chris Kelly was a huge piece for them. Tim Thomas willed that team to win tons of game. Rask was the backup. Their top players on defense? Chara, Seidenberg, Ference, and Boychuk. Kaberle was added at the TDL, but another veteran.

And you ignored the end piece of that. We'd be outside of the norm. This Bruins team having their top 3 scorers in the postseason be between 22-25 is not normal. Bergeron was also in his 7th season. Krejci his 4th. We'd be asking one of our young centers to be like that in 3 years. It's not the norm.

 

[McRanger]

Asinine? Nice, there's a large segment of this board that would support this course of action and we've supported it with well thought out support but maybe it's just your english is not rich enough to come up with a better description so I will let it slide.

English should be capitalized, whether it's the language or the muffins. Also pointing out spelling and grammar mistakes (especially in the age of typing with your thumbs) instead of refuting points is usually a sign you should stop arguing.

On the other hand, you then support your argument by listing McDonagh who had a pedigree of a top-10 pick to begin with (and who the Rangers lucked out in obtaining via extremely one-sided trade)?

McDonagh wasn't a top 10 pick (he was 12th) and his scoring at Wisconsin did not lead ANYONE to assume he was a #1 defenseman, unless your requirements for a number one D do not include offense. If McDonagh was a #1 D then Fox (who scored more points this year than McD did in his college career) is also a #1D along with Miller and probably Lundkvist.

Are you counting on another similarly lucky trade to happen? Or the Rangers getting another top-2 pick specifically in the draft where one of very top picks would be a RD defenseman, or willing to wait for another 5 years development IF similar to McD per your example?

I'm not counting on anything.

I am waiting to see how the players we have develop before deciding its a good idea to spend a ton of assets on an injury prone player who is a UFA in one season to fill a need we might not have.

I doubt I could spell out the logic any clearer than that.

 

[NYRKING30]

I think getting all three of good, young and good contract is aiming a bit to high.

If you go to nhltradetracker.com it’s not hard to find examples of players being fairly young and without having bad contracts being moved quite frequently. Duchene, Turris, Domi, Montour, Karlsson, Skinner and the likes.

I think he means who's available now that we could do that for or I would have said the same you said and added Hall,Kessel,Zibby himself (IDK why he doesn't agree there),Hamilton,Forsberg,Jones,Johansen,Kane,Drouin,Sergachev,Domi,Panarin,O'reilly, etc. It happens enough.

 

[haohmaru]

No, that's their core NOW. Marchand was not a core roster player. He was a 3rd liner for that team that went off in the postseason. McQuaid was a 3rd pair D. They traded Wheeler that season. They added all kinds of vets. They had Marc Recchi and Michael Ryder on their roster. Chris Kelly was a huge piece for them. Tim Thomas willed that team to win tons of game. Rask was the backup. Their top players on defense? Chara, Seidenberg, Ference, and Boychuk. Kaberle was added at the TDL, but another veteran.

And you ignored the end piece of that. We'd be outside of the norm. This Bruins team having their top 3 scorers in the postseason be between 22-25 is not normal. Bergeron was also in his 7th season. Krejci his 4th. We'd be asking one of our young centers to be like that in 3 years. It's not the norm.

I see what you're saying.

Yeah, the Rangers went this route in the past but finally figured out their core wasn't good enough and that's why we're here today. The question is who are they identifying as their core (Zibanejad, Kreider, Buchnevich, Skjei, etc... or the next group - Chytil, Andersson, Kakko/Hughes, Miller, etc....) and what pieces are they going to add and when.

 

[bobbop]

I've read up on local newspapers for about half dozen teams that say they need scoring and I have not seen Kreider's name mentioned as a trade candidate once. Surprising and a little troubling.