Speculation: Roster Building Thread : Part XV (Light em up!)

[TominNC]

The last 3 years of Zib's contract (yet another Drury masterpiece) will force the Rangers to either retain or pony up significant sweeteners to get a deal done.

What sweeteners? Dolan going to build him a house in the new city? Free flights home? A few million under the table? Still not sure why Mika would leave the city he signed a long term contract to live in.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Let's not be history revisionists. A very large majority of people on here were cheering Drury when he signed Zib to his contract and what a bargin it was going to be.

 

[UnSandvich]

Let's not be history revisionists. A very large majority of people on here were cheering Drury when he signed Zib to his contract and what a bargin it was going to be.

Ehhhh, that quickly evaporated when people saw the clauses.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

Yeah the problem is they just aren’t very good either. Sometimes a player does all the right things and still ends up a bottom pair D or 3rd line forward.

The problem is that they do not play more than players that they are better than

 

[noncents]

an observation: lots of the people claiming GP is just another prospect are the posters who'd like to move Adam Fox. they don't value what these players bring.

BTW we have bottom 6 sandpaper and size coming. It's already begun to pepper in with Cuylle Berard and Edstrom.

 

[xsniper11x]

Let's not be history revisionists. A very large majority of people on here were cheering Drury when he signed Zib to his contract and what a bargin it was going to be.

Getting it done under 9 was viewed as a win after all the speculation it would take 10mm+, but that discount came in exchange for some iron clad clauses. I can’t blame Drury too much as no GM of a contending team is letting their 1C walk when they want to stay. Repeating the same for a goalie though was definitely a mistake.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

an observation: lots of the people claiming GP is just another prospect are the posters who'd like to move Adam Fox. they don't value what these players bring.

BTW we have bottom 6 sandpaper and size coming. It's already begun to pepper in with Cuylle Berard and Edstrom.

Gotta trade Fox for some size. What’s Yao Ming up to

 

[LokiDog]

an observation: lots of the people claiming GP is just another prospect are the posters who'd like to move Adam Fox. they don't value what these players bring.

BTW we have bottom 6 sandpaper and size coming. It's already begun to pepper in with Cuylle Berard and Edstrom.

I get that this is just how it is in general on HF and the internet-sphere, but those types of statements are way too black and white for my taste.

“They don’t value what these players bring.”

Is such a simplification. I mean, it also could certainly be true for some people. But isn’t it also possible that rather than “not valuing” something, they simply hold a philosophical difference when it comes to team building, and that philosophy may partially be that building around smaller, slower players is about as smart of a strategy as building from the net out.

Like… could it be possible to fully understand Fox’s value in a vacuum and simultaneously not want to continue building a roster of small-ish, slow-ish players? Fox - sub 6’, slow as molasses. Lafreniere - just 6’, pretty slow. Perreault - sub 6’, pretty slow. Regardless of how good these players may be individually, maybe some people see their value but aren’t overly keen on building a roster with an average height of 5’11 that would lose foot races to Joe Thornton and Jaromir Jagr - today.

Is that hyperbole? Yes. Is raising concerns about the team needing better skaters, or Fox having already seemed to have lost a step after having several prolonged post-seasons and playing through injuries “not valuing” the individual players? Or is it okay to have different opinions on the necessity/value of speed and dynamic skating ability in the NHL, etc?

 

[bernmeister]

If we give up anything of actual value for Miller I will implode.

don't worry, Miller not coming here, they will get way more elsewhere, and while I could see JT exercising his clause to a limited # of choices, I do not see that = a limited # of 1, only nyr

Zibanejad straight up or I'm not interested. Their headache for our headache.

yes IF that had any chance, but imo that is zero
I see Miller looking at contenders and of non-contend, Pens before us

Generally I agree but since Miller has a full NMC, I’m assuming he has to be willing or even wanting to come to NY for there to even be smoke to this. If Miller decided it was NYR or nowhere (for some reason… insanity, concussion related brain trauma, masochism, take your pick) that ruins Vancouver’s leverage and so if both guys are waiving their NMC, while I have no doubt we’re adding, it may be less than expected. Allvin loves his Swedes, so gambling on Zib to bounce back if Miller says he’ll only waive for NYR is an interesting wrinkle.

If is the biggest little word there is.
He is not gonna come back just b'c that would bail us out

We should give up Elias Pett and JTM narratives and see if there is any way, like I said, to get VAN to take zib half retained, possibly further retained, for small pieces

The point remains. GM’s see value differently than we do here. Mika is not the only player of his status struggling.

Irrelevant to what extent someone will take him -- not pay for him, just take him!

 

[duhmetreE]

I honestly don’t think Pettersson is even an option.

What are we offering? He also costs 11.6 against the cap

Zibs for JTM makes sense. A Pettersson trade would be much more complicated and need more moves. I also don’t see why Vancouver would move him over JTM

 

[Machinehead]

I'm relatively young and perfectly capable of operating streaming. I still prefer not to.

MLS went full streaming and is literally never on TV. I barely watch MLS anymore.

Apple TV is an absolute nightmare to operate. Even if it wasn't, I'm not gonna even take the 3 or 4 minutes to set up my PlayStation and scroll through menus when other leagues are on my TV in six seconds after pressing one button.

It's one thing of you wanna binge murder mysteries for six hours. Live sports should be on television.

 

[Raspewtin]

an observation: lots of the people claiming GP is just another prospect are the posters who'd like to move Adam Fox. they don't value what these players bring.

BTW we have bottom 6 sandpaper and size coming. It's already begun to pepper in with Cuylle Berard and Edstrom.

at this rate Othmann will be here sooner rather than later too so add him as well

and I know Oth and Cuylle get compared, but like, Othmann is a f***ing asshole. Cuylle every now and then has a borderline big hit but half of Othmann's hits are big and borderline, he talks a lot of shit too. I think regardless of how his skills pan out this season, this fanbase will really like him

 

[Machinehead]

I honestly don’t think Pettersson is even an option.

What are we offering? He also costs 11.6 against the cap

Zibs for JTM makes sense. A Pettersson trade would be much more complicated and need more moves. I also don’t see why Vancouver would move him over JTM

There has to be reason, independent of Miller, that Pettersson is available, or he wouldn't be.

 

[xsniper11x]

I get that this is just how it is in general on HF and the internet-sphere, but those types of statements are way too black and white for my taste.

“They don’t value what these players bring.”

Is such a simplification. I mean, it also could certainly be true for some people. But isn’t it also possible that rather than “not valuing” something, they simply hold a philosophical difference when it comes to team building, and that philosophy may partially be that building around smaller, slower players is about as smart of a strategy as building from the net out.

Like… could it be possible to fully understand Fox’s value in a vacuum and simultaneously not want to continue building a roster of small-ish, slow-ish players? Fox - sub 6’, slow as molasses. Lafreniere - just 6’, pretty slow. Perreault - sub 6’, pretty slow. Regardless of how good these players may be individually, maybe some people see their value but aren’t overly keen on building a roster with an average height of 5’11 that would lose foot races to Joe Thornton and Jaromir Jagr - today.

Is that hyperbole? Yes. Is raising concerns about the team needing better skaters, or Fox having already seemed to have lost a step after having several prolonged post-seasons and playing through injuries “not valuing” the individual players? Or is it okay to have different opinions on the necessity/value of speed and dynamic skating ability in the NHL, etc?

Yes, but that’s just the nature of roster construction. You don’t turn away elite level talents cause of flaws. You supplement elite talents with players that possess complimentary skillsets. Which means we need to be targeting burners and size that creates space for our elite playmakers to do their work.

 

[Fitzy]

The Rangers need a Mats Sundin type 1C much more than they need an Elias Pettersson type 1C

 

[Guyute]

There has to be reason, independent of Miller, that Pettersson is available, or he wouldn't be.

Sounds like they want him to grow up and take his career more seriously.

I think they will relent and trade Miller but use the threat of trading EP to send a message to him to get his shit together.

 

[noncents]

I get that this is just how it is in general on HF and the internet-sphere, but those types of statements are way too black and white for my taste.

“They don’t value what these players bring.”

Is such a simplification. I mean, it also could certainly be true for some people. But isn’t it also possible that rather than “not valuing” something, they simply hold a philosophical difference when it comes to team building, and that philosophy may partially be that building around smaller, slower players is about as smart of a strategy as building from the net out.

Like… could it be possible to fully understand Fox’s value in a vacuum and simultaneously not want to continue building a roster of small-ish, slow-ish players? Fox - sub 6’, slow as molasses. Lafreniere - just 6’, pretty slow. Perreault - sub 6’, pretty slow. Regardless of how good these players may be individually, maybe some people see their value but aren’t overly keen on building a roster with an average height of 5’11 that would lose foot races to Joe Thornton and Jaromir Jagr - today.

Is that hyperbole? Yes. Is raising concerns about the team needing better skaters, or Fox having already seemed to have lost a step after having several prolonged post-seasons and playing through injuries “not valuing” the individual players? Or is it okay to have different opinions on the necessity/value of speed and dynamic skating ability in the NHL, etc?

there is a disconnect between what you're saying and what you are saying you're saying.

You'd be very hard pressed to find someone on this board that doesn't think the Rangers need to get faster, or more aggressive. We all think that.

There's a lot of ways to accomplish that, but for some reason you're fixated on the idea of trading Perreault as the primary route to doing so. You are continually asserting implicitly that the absence of a Perreault trade is a team wide holistic commitment to only "building around" smaller slower skilled players. This is disingenuous because there are other players on this roster who can, should, and/or will be moved off the roster in the next 1-3 years. These roster holes can in theory be filled with the type of heavier meaner faster hockey player that you want to prioritize - and by the way, Drury has actually prioritized drafting that archetype. Hartford currently has 3-4 who could be on the big league team as soon as next year who fit that mold. An infusion of that style of player does not necessitate trading Perreault, nor does not trading him mean that we are hitching our wagons unduly to that style.

Secondly, you are arguing against the straw man that "Perreault is untouchable." While some may hold that to be true, a far greater number of us are arguing the slightly more nuanced opinion that we do not trust the current front office to get proper value for this asset. As we saw with the Buch trade, the Nemeth trade, the Kakko trade, we don't get good value. So GP is almost certainly worth more to us than what we'd get back - not just as a pure talent in a vacuum, but as a cost controlled pre-ELC asset.

That brings us to the final point here - Pettersson for Zib+Perreault. Getting younger at C by exchanging Zib for Pettersson is attractive to me. However, the disparity in cap cost between these players, plus the extreme diminishment in cost-controlled talent makes this a poor idea. We are not contending, nor will we be with Pettersson instead of Zib. We already have 2 11mm contracts on the books. In both the short and long term it's actually kind of a nonstarter: not just because Perreault is essentially our Panarin replacement at 11mm less, but because the issue with our team is our defense. We need an infusion of talent on our defense both young and old, cheap and costly. Look at what the Devils have done on the back end, supplementing young developing pieces with solid vets. That takes time. Pettersson is 26 now but to properly build a D core will take longer than that. I also believe Miller should be signed and Housley jettisoned but that's a different discussion.

Finally, the issue that I can't get past with your Pettersson idea is that, despite his production, he has many issues that you're looking past that are the same thing you profess we need to get away from: specifically softness, aggressiveness, and playoff production. 1 goal 5 ast in 13 postseason games last year, plus the off ice stuff. You're chasing points with an 11.6mm investment (see Panarin, A.) but the same metric means nothing when evaluating Perreault as a prospect because Corey Pronman didn't like his skating stride - something we have seen can be improved. Btw he's listed as 178 as a sophomore on BC website - 2 pounds heavier than Pettersson. Have you watched both players in depth? I like EP btw.

So - if you want to list some LHD or C that you think Perreault - whose compete factor, clutch factor, and even something like FO credibility is more attractive than you are giving credit for - is worth trading for, I'm all ears. But to continually imply that to not trade him is to commit to a team building ethos is just incorrect and it's the basis of your argument. Supplement his talent, which appears elite, with the type of players you're describing. Get younger, get faster, get bigger, get more aggressive, and most importantly, get f***ing better.

Perreault is that last one.

 

[LokiDog]

Yes, but that’s just the nature of roster construction. You don’t turn away elite level talents cause of flaws. You supplement elite talents with players that possess complimentary skillsets. Which means we need to be targeting burners and size that creates space for our elite playmakers to do their work.

I think that’s not entirely true. At some point, you do make a decision regarding roster construction beyond just accumulating these “elite talents”. At some point you say, okay we’ve earmarked Fox and Perreault as our two guys who are of sub-optimal size and only mediocre skaters, and then if you have another guy that fits that same bill you’re saying “okay, is he better than either Fox or Perreault? If yes, maybe we are considering moving one of those guys. If no, can we use them to get a player who fits a different need?”

Is that not also how roster construction goes? No one is ever (that I’ve seen - not gonna put words in/out of peoples’ mouths) saying let’s just get rid of this guy because he’s small or slow. It seems people are actively weighing the fact that “this player IS valuable” but WE need some different attributes, perhaps we can acquire them from a team that has more of a surplus on top six grit or speed, but not enough high end playmaking ability, for example.

 

[GAGLine]

The Rangers need a Mats Sundin type 1C much more than they need an Elias Pettersson type 1C

When Mika refuses to waive his NMC, he'll be just like Sundin.

 

[McRanger92]

Zibanejad and K'Andre for JT and a defenseman. Assuming Mika would waive (I dont buy the rumor but bear with me) what would we have to add to that?

For Pettersson it probably takes Lafreniere and Schneider realistically.

 

[TominNC]

I watch all the Mets, Rangers and even Jets games I want. But I live in Charlotte. I have streaming services. Better than cable was. And cheaper. Better than the MLB package and all their blackouts. Better than the NHL package. And I'm old. (I had my kids set it up)

Ugh. Every other post here "Assuming Mika waives"

Waste of time.

 

[duhmetreE]

Zibanejad and K'Andre for JT and a defenseman. Assuming Mika would waive (I dont buy the rumor but bear with me) what would we have to add to that?

For Pettersson it probably takes Lafreniere and Schneider realistically.

that's way too much.

 

[LokiDog]

there is a disconnect between what you're saying and what you are saying you're saying.

You'd be very hard pressed to find someone on this board that doesn't think the Rangers need to get faster, or more aggressive. We all think that.

There's a lot of ways to accomplish that, but for some reason you're fixated on the idea of trading Perreault as the primary route to doing so. You are continually asserting implicitly that the absence of a Perreault trade is a team wide holistic commitment to only "building around" smaller slower skilled players. This is disingenuous because there are other players on this roster who can, should, and/or will be moved off the roster in the next 1-3 years. These roster holes can in theory be filled with the type of heavier meaner faster hockey player that you want to prioritize - and by the way, Drury has actually prioritized drafting that archetype. Hartford currently has 3-4 who could be on the big league team as soon as next year who fit that mold. An infusion of that style of player does not necessitate trading Perreault, nor does not trading him mean that we are hitching our wagons unduly to that style.

Secondly, you are arguing against the straw man that "Perreault is untouchable." While some may hold that to be true, a far greater number of us are arguing the slightly more nuanced opinion that we do not trust the current front office to get proper value for this asset. As we saw with the Buch trade, the Nemeth trade, the Kakko trade, we don't get good value. So GP is almost certainly worth more to us than what we'd get back - not just as a pure talent in a vacuum, but as a cost controlled pre-ELC asset.

That brings us to the final point here - Pettersson for Zib+Perreault. Getting younger at C by exchanging Zib for Pettersson is attractive to me. However, the disparity in cap cost between these players, plus the extreme diminishment in cost-controlled talent makes this a poor idea. We are not contending, nor will we be with Pettersson instead of Zib. We already have 2 11mm contracts on the books. In both the short and long term it's actually kind of a nonstarter: not just because Perreault is essentially our Panarin replacement at 11mm less, but because the issue with our team is our defense. We need an infusion of talent on our defense both young and old, cheap and costly. Look at what the Devils have done on the back end, supplementing young developing pieces with solid vets. That takes time. Pettersson is 26 now but to properly build a D core will take longer than that. I also believe Miller should be signed and Housley jettisoned but that's a different discussion.

Finally, the issue that I can't get past with your Pettersson idea is that, despite his production, he has many issues that you're looking past that are the same thing you profess we need to get away from: specifically softness, aggressiveness, and playoff production. 1 goal 5 ast in 13 postseason games last year, plus the off ice stuff. You're chasing points with an 11.6mm investment (see Panarin, A.) but the same metric means nothing when evaluating Perreault as a prospect because Corey Pronman didn't like his skating stride - something we have seen can be improved. Btw he's listed as 178 as a sophomore on BC website - 2 pounds heavier than Pettersson. Have you watched both players in depth? I like EP btw.

So - if you want to list some LHD or C that you think Perreault - whose compete factor, clutch factor, and even something like FO credibility is more attractive than you are giving credit for - is worth trading for, I'm all ears. But to continually imply that to not trade him is to commit to a team building ethos is just incorrect and it's the basis of your argument. Supplement his talent, which appears elite, with the type of players you're describing. Get younger, get faster, get bigger, get more aggressive, and most importantly, get f***ing better.

Perreault is that last one.

Re the bolded in your post:

I am? I went back and looked - the first time I ever posted about Perreault being movable, his size or his speed was today at 12:48pm. I began this post at 4:59pm. So all of this “fixation” and “continual” agenda about moving Perrault began and took place within a solid 4 hours and 11 minutes.

What I actually said was, he’s 100% more tradable an asset than some people are acting like. And he is. More tradable than some people are acting like. More specifically I stated, a few times, but only in the past few hours - ever - that if you would turn down the opportunity to acquire Pettersson because you think Perreault is more valuable, you’re incorrect, and I stand by that.

I also have stated, very clearly, that I am not even a big Pettersson fan and that he’s being used as an example because he is the prime aged center that is ostensibly available right now, similar to Eichel a few years ago. I am discussing him because he is pertinent at the present moment in time, not because I specifically am targeting him myself. I even said that saying “I wouldn’t trade Perreault straight up for Pettersson” is as silly today as “I wouldn’t trade Kakko straight up for Eichel” was a couple years ago. And once again, from a team building perspective, we need prime aged top centers MORE than need undersized wingers, even if they are elite. You rather have Roope Hintz (not elite, but big, fast and very good) or Mitch Marner (definitely elite)? I’ll take Hintz. Which is why I said that it comes down to roster building as a philosophy. Marner should be the more coveted and valuable piece by almost all metrics, no? But he’s an undersized winger and Hintz fills a MUCH bigger need for us. Weird.

Interestingly, while you noticed my “fixation” and “continual” posting about how we need to trade Perreault (which constitutes a single afternoon of discussion) you’ve somehow missed the numerous posts where I have spoken to the perceived flaws you feel Pettersson has and why I don’t feel the same way. You somehow missed all of that information while inventing what sounds like must be dozens more posts I (never) made about getting rid of Perreault. It’s kind of sounding like a Twilight Zone episode.

 

[McRanger92]

that's way too much.

For Pettersson? I agree. It's why I think there is legs to the JT Miller stuff. Both teams moving closer to needing a change. If they ended up with JT while jettisoning Mika, it's a coup. I completely understand why Drury would want him. If the cost is something real (someone other than KAM, Mika, Kreider, Lindgren types) im out.

I dont see why Cabucks would trade EP instead of just giving what he wants and Moving his enemy.

 

[duhmetreE]

2025-2026
Panarin JTM Laffy
Cuylle Chytil Gabe
Bennett Trocheck Berard
Edstrom Carrick Rempe

dont ask about the defense.

hopefully we get Schaefer in the draft.
Maybe get a prospect for a Kreider trade? Buium? Bichsel?
Still think a trade for Walman makes sense but have no clue what his cost would be
as long as I do not have to see Lindgren getting top pairing minutes, it's an improvement.