Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLIII
- Thread starter Fugazy
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
regardless of which side you fall on, i can't think of a more pointless debate than when the rebuild officially started. there could not be a more meaningless piece of information. it has absolutely zero relevance on when the rebuild will be complete...
the only thing that matters is the current state of the team which I see as most of the key players have played 1 season or have yet to play in the NHL and WHEN they determine that the team is ready to move forward to the next phase and be aggressive...
a rebuild isn't a set timeline where you do this in year 1, that in year 2, etc and by calling it year 4 instead of year 3 it magically speeds the process forward. its a fluid process that needs to be evaluated constantly and various points. what happens in year 2 is dependent on what happened in year 1. the results in a given year could leap the process ahead, or it could slow it down if things don't go well but there is no set time frame.
and on the flip side there is no way to know for sure when the team is ready to move forward, there is no qualifications or check boxes to know. alot of it will be gut feel...but that's why gorton, drury, JD and company get paid the big fishnagels...
but when that time comes and they make the decision to add pieces to the current team to be aggressive, that will be when it happens. what you consider as the start of the rebuild simply determines how long in retrospective that it took. so if it makes you feel better saying we are 1 1/2 years in or 3 years in or 10 years in go for it. but that doesn't change where the team stands today and when that next phase will happen
the only thing that matters is the current state of the team which I see as most of the key players have played 1 season or have yet to play in the NHL and WHEN they determine that the team is ready to move forward to the next phase and be aggressive...
a rebuild isn't a set timeline where you do this in year 1, that in year 2, etc and by calling it year 4 instead of year 3 it magically speeds the process forward. its a fluid process that needs to be evaluated constantly and various points. what happens in year 2 is dependent on what happened in year 1. the results in a given year could leap the process ahead, or it could slow it down if things don't go well but there is no set time frame.
and on the flip side there is no way to know for sure when the team is ready to move forward, there is no qualifications or check boxes to know. alot of it will be gut feel...but that's why gorton, drury, JD and company get paid the big fishnagels...
but when that time comes and they make the decision to add pieces to the current team to be aggressive, that will be when it happens. what you consider as the start of the rebuild simply determines how long in retrospective that it took. so if it makes you feel better saying we are 1 1/2 years in or 3 years in or 10 years in go for it. but that doesn't change where the team stands today and when that next phase will happen
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
If it is indeed the Rangers plan to to eschew UFA and really take another year to acquire another high-end draft pick, Kakko should be left in Liiga so his contract slides another season. That way when the team is truly ready to compete, hopefully by 2022-2023 we can have Kakko on his ELC still.
Greg02
Registered User
- Jun 28, 2009
- 4,539
- 4,050
That's never going to happen. Rangers are going to make decisions based on what is best for his development and cultivating a positive long term relationship with a potential home-grown superstar, not service time manipulation.
the problem with that is how good kakko is will be a HUGE factor in when the team is ready to move forward. so if he's not in the NHL you are just delaying that decision potentially
eco's bones
Registered User
IMO it started with the Stepan deal but it doesn't even matter as far as I'm concerned. Someone wants to say Feb. 2018--fine and dandy--I don't care. How much time this will or is supposed to take is neither here or there. Whether or not Panarin becomes a Ranger--still there are going to be even more older players on the way out the next couple years and the team is likely going to be the youngest team in the league next year and probably the year or two afterwards. Most people would call that rebuilding but at least some here think it would be some kind of betrayal signaling the end of all their dreams which IMO is ridiculous. Whether or not Panarin becomes a Ranger doesn't mean we'll have to trade a single one of our kids or draft picks--doesn't mean we can't try to acquire more younger players and draft picks or even just hold on to the ones we have. Signing Panarin doesn't mean we close down our kids development. Signing Panarin doesn't mean squat except that we've got a damn good hockey player that will probably help some of those kids get better quicker. It doesn't mean we'll have to trade Andersson--it doesn't even mean we'll have to give up on Crawley or can't re-sign Halverson--though I probably wouldn't do that anyway.
eco's bones
Registered User
I agree if the plan is just to throw him out there in the shittiest situation possible. I'd leave him in Finland and I'd be leaving Kravtsov in Russia in that case too.
Last edited:
so we didn't learn anything from Boyle and Shattenkirk. Ok then.
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
I think the benefits of having him on an ELC when the team is ready to compete outweighs waiting another year. Let him destroy Liiga for another season, bring him in as a 19-year old like Pettersson and have him still cost controlled when it will really count.
eco's bones
Registered User
I have to say that I looked at last year positively and that even before we won the lottery. The record was shit but the compete was there and like it hasn't been in a long time. I expect the team will be better next year. You have a coaching staff that knows what it wants and will constantly push the players to perform better and I expect our younger players to be better and take on more responsibilities. I don't look at guys like Howden, Chytil and Andersson as babies anymore. They've had a year and know what the league is about now and what's it going to take to be better. They have a summer to prepare and get stronger for the new season acting on that experience. Do I think the Rangers will make the playoffs? Probably not but I don't see them as a bottom 5 either and f*** Zucc and Hayes being gone--this is an opportunity for players to seize and if you want something--how bad do you want it? IMO Kakko should be good enough to replace one of them anyway. So people being down on this team is WTF to me. I think we should push it as hard as we can and go for it and let the chips fall where they will.
Pettersson only stayed over for another year because he weighed 3 pounds, nor was he even close to as accomplished as Kakko is heading into the draft.
Leaving him over seas would be dumb. Let him come over and get acclimated now. If he's as good as advertised, we'll have no problem building a team around him, ELCs or not.
first off people need to stop talking about ELC like we are building for a 3 year window and when those ELC contracts end we can't win anymore. chicago and pittsburgh won multiple cups after giving their guys huge raises. kakko and kravtsov are being brought in so we can be good for 10-15 years, not for the 3 year window that they are on their ELC. and there is still more kids to come. so you might not have kakko on his ELC but you might have miller, lundqvist and the 2020 1st still on one. it doesn't matter...
but I think you missed my point about waiting another year...one of the most important things that will determine the decision of when to move forward is when guys like kakko and kravtsov show that they are ready to be top players and odds are they won't be as rookies just cause rarely are players that good in their first year. so if you push back their rookie year a year, then you are pushing back that decision a year. all you are doing is making them a year older. that 1st year will still be played before it happens imo
there is also a potential downside to delaying that 2nd contract...
mikko rantanen played in the nhl in his D+1 year, but only played 9 games with the Avs (0 points), then played in the AHL and the WJC which made his contract slide...D+2 year he played 75 games and had 38 points...then he busted out in year D+3 with 84 points in 81 games and then 87 points in 74 games in year D+4 which was the final year of his ELC...
so he's now a RFA...how much more $$ will the avs have to pay him coming off back to back 80 point seasons then if he only had 1 good year? sure last year they had him on a great deal but they didn't win. so did it really benefit them long term if now the 2nd deal is alot more $$??
maybe it won't impact his deal...but just saying there are risks both ways, same with bridge deals vs long term deals on the 2nd contracts
mikko rantanen played in the nhl in his D+1 year, but only played 9 games with the Avs (0 points), then played in the AHL and the WJC which made his contract slide...D+2 year he played 75 games and had 38 points...then he busted out in year D+3 with 84 points in 81 games and then 87 points in 74 games in year D+4 which was the final year of his ELC...
so he's now a RFA...how much more $$ will the avs have to pay him coming off back to back 80 point seasons then if he only had 1 good year? sure last year they had him on a great deal but they didn't win. so did it really benefit them long term if now the 2nd deal is alot more $$??
maybe it won't impact his deal...but just saying there are risks both ways, same with bridge deals vs long term deals on the 2nd contracts
Riddle me this...If the Rangers are adverse to giving Panarin seven years because of his age, it really doesn’t make any sense to sign Kreider (who is six months older) to a seven (or even six) year contract that wouldn’t kick in until a year from now. Does it?
Yet who provides veteran presence and leadership in the top six? Mika can’t do it all by himself.
Yet who provides veteran presence and leadership in the top six? Mika can’t do it all by himself.
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
Wyshynski is a great comedian but not a great hockey analyst. Karlsson was on ice for almost every goal the sharks gave up in the playoffs. Everyone always points at the Rangers. That’s one move that would really shock me.
Ghost of jas
Unsatisfied
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
I was being sarcastic. But it's a fair point and will be really interesting to see who fills that role without Kreider and Panarin if he signs elsewhere
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
I will say that I personally feel the 2020 draft is the close of that chapter for this organization. And the path between now and then is still very important for this team.
I think even most people who are cautious and don’t think the time is right, tend to feel that’s there’s one more year of this. So while I can’t speak for others, I don’t view this current phase of being cautious as everlasting. It has more days behind it than ahead of it. But that’s also why I don’t want to go off that path, because we are so close to wrapping up this particular phase.
Last edited:
After reading the Athletic’s article on Trouba, my thoughts are that only three of the seven teams on the list — Rangers, Philadelphia and Detroit — are really in a position to trade for Trouba. I’m sure there are a couple of others not mentioned. That will affect the return he can bring back.
The best alternative for the Jets is probably keep him as a one year rental.
I’d hate like hell to see him end up in Philadelphia.
I definitely would rather investigate the cost for Trouba over the cost for EK.
Heck, I would rather look into a hockey trade for other defenseman out there. I would even consider PK Subban if NSH was willing to retain salary. I do think PK can still play and produce, but it would have to be the right price.
But Colin Miller would be a better choice on the low end. Someone also mentioned Cernak the other day.
Don’t trade for Malkin. See what it would take to have Panarin come here and go from there.
I would like for them to move Vesey and Nams salaries. Then sign Hagelin for the bottom lines. Re-sign Kreider.
Defense will be the trickiest part of the offseason.
NYR Viper
Registered User
I’m all aboard the Colin Miller train. Only issue being that he doesn’t exactly offer something different than Shattenkirk or DeAngelo right now. If they can move Pionk and Shattenkirk he’s a guy I’d be very interested in.
GlasgowNewYorkRanger
Registered User
- Dec 7, 2017
- 774
- 841
- Status
