Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XVI

[Trxjw]

There’s that timing aspect that’s so important.

It’s not that the Rangers will never make a move again, or that they’ll hold on to every player who is currently a prospect. That’s unrealistic, even if it is fun to dream.

It’s more a matter of when, than if. And when will depend on who emerges, who doesn’t, and a host of other factors.

With more assets, the hope is for additional players, additional depth and additional options. The goal would be to deal from a position of strength, and not rob Peter to pay Paul.

Bingo. A guy like Hajek doesn't have a load of value right now but when he's a 22/23 year old top-4 defensemen who's battling Miller and Skjei for ice time on the left side? Then he becomes a very attractive piece for a team that needs to bolster their blue line and has a young scoring winger to spare.

There will inevitably be kids we hang on to that never become anything. There will be some "woulda, coulda, shoulda" moments where we lament the fact we didn't cash in on a kid sooner as we watch him go back overseas or hit the waiver wire. We're just not going to draft every piece on a roster that hopefully wins a few cups in the next decade. That all being said though, I really like the talent that's pouring into this org right now.

 

[bobbop]

Why would a low end 2C yield a terrific return?

Because a team that has a need and a chance to win it all will overpay for a guy who they think can put them over the top.

 

[Waivers]

Very impressed by Hayes this year, I mean lights out impressed, and I was the biggest Hayes critic. I’ve been waiting for this trend to fade but he’s making it really tough for the Rangers to deal him. If Hayes is putting up 65 points this year *and* he is as defensively responsible as he has been, I would almost not want to trade a 65 point center unless we’re getting a top winger or a top pairing defenseman. My problem is that I don’t trust him enough to be on this roster for 5 consecutive years and also put up equal or better numbers year over year - he doesn’t strike me as a consistent enough player who could achieve that. Kreider? Sure, no questions asked - he is getting extended, or so I hope. Fast will get extended too because he’s a silent and effective player, which won’t really draw much attention during the Trade Deadline next year - Fast is a bottom 6 guy too so the Rangers shouldn’t have to unload their pockets for him either. Plus I think many Rangers fans are skeptical in general handing out long term commitments with high cap hits to players and it just doesn’t work out.

But on the other hand when Hayes was rewarded more ice time later last year and all of this year, he has proved his worth.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Because a team that has a need and a chance to win it all will overpay for a guy who they think can put them over the top.

It's all about catching a team in that 1-3 year win now window. Tampa, Toronto, Nashville, Boston, San Jose, and Winnipeg are all there.

I'd say Colorado is about a year away because they really don't have much outside the top line, and need to commit to a goalie, but will have another lotto pick next year. Calgary also has an aging goalie.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Here's the thing with Hayes. Sometimes it's better to keep the players you have than trade them just for the sake of trading them if the value isn't fair.

I look at Neil Smith's last few years and Sather's first few years. There were plenty of good pieces that were traded that either stayed status quo or improved.

Hayes still probably has 5 prime years left. If another center becomes available in 2-3 years, that's a situation to revisit then.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

I’m spoiled..

We’re, Spoiled...

There are some real superstars on our forum that make you see things clearly from different perspectives.

I’m so confused.. But in a good way.....

 

[Ola]

Very impressed by Hayes this year, I mean lights out impressed, and I was the biggest Hayes critic. I’ve been waiting for this trend to fade but he’s making it really tough for the Rangers to deal him. If Hayes is putting up 65 points this year *and* he is as defensively responsible as he has been, I would almost not want to trade a 65 point center unless we’re getting a top winger or a top pairing defenseman. My problem is that I don’t trust him enough to be on this roster for 5 consecutive years and also put up equal or better numbers year over year - he doesn’t strike me as a consistent enough player who could achieve that. Kreider? Sure, no questions asked - he is getting extended, or so I hope. Fast will get extended too because he’s a silent and effective player, which won’t really draw much attention during the Trade Deadline next year - Fast is a bottom 6 guy too so the Rangers shouldn’t have to unload their pockets for him either. Plus I think many Rangers fans are skeptical in general handing out long term commitments with high cap hits to players and it just doesn’t work out.

But on the other hand when Hayes was rewarded more ice time later last year and all of this year, he has proved his worth.

Yeah, and its certainly a win-win because the way he is playing team's are taking notice. If traded the return will be that much better.

I do wonder if whatever 5-6m offer from Hayes is still on the table, keep this up for a year and he is looking at 7-8m on July 1 and not 5-6m.

 

[RangerBoy]

Next week is the NHL BOG meeting.

With 2021-22 looking like the first season for Seattle according to what Elliotte Friedman wrote yesterday.

The expiring NMC's don't have to be protected. That came up with Dennis Wideman. Calgary didn't have to protect him and the expiring NMC. Same rules again.

Lundqvist, Staal and Shattenkirk are expiring contracts and their NMC don't have to be protected. The Rangers don't have to waste a spot on D.

The Rangers can protect Georgiev and Shestyorkin is exempt(2 year pro after 20-21). There may be an issue getting enough playing time for Lundqvist and both of them for the next two seasons. It strengthens the Rangers hand for a Georgiev deal. They aren't forced to trade him. Ottawa, Edmonton, Calgary, Philly, Carolina, Detroit, St. Louis and Florida could all use upgrades in goal. Nashville signed Rinne to a 2 year extension a few weeks ago. He got a NMC. 19-20 and 20-21. Expiring. They can protect Saros. It takes Faros off the trade market.

Andersson, Chytil and Howden have to be protected. No exemptions. 3rd year pros. Hajek and Lindgren are not exempt.

21-22 is a better scenario for the Rangers. They have to leave 3 spots open for their kids at forward(they can't load up with vets thinking Andersson,Chytil and Howden are exempt), they don't have to waste a protection slot on Staal and Shattenkirk(no buyout money on the cap for Staal) and they can protect Georgiev if he hasn't been moved.

For the people keeping track, I was here today. Don't mark me as being absent.

The Rangers haven't had a player lead the NHL in scoring in a very long time.

 

[Ola]

We are playing well now but I think we are walking a fine line. We are not recovering from a bad couple of weeks. I still think this season will end with a sell-off and a pick around 8-12. But who knows...

...And in addition, I don't think there is any reason to have a sour taste if we do end up making the POs not getting that top pick. The core we are rebuilding this team around is here or in the system already. Unless this rebuild is supposed to be a 7-8 year thing. Kids we draft next summer and the year after that can realistically start to have a big impact around the mid/early 2020s. We are tanking and we are still better today than EDM and co have been the last decade and a half, the reason for that is the winning culture we have. I think the experience of a successful season and POs would be immense for Howden, Skjei, Lias, Chytil, Pionk, TDA, Geo, Buch, Vinny L and co. That is worth the difference between like picking 18-19 instead of 11-12 or whatever.

I think we have learnt this season that FOA is just not an option that you can opt to take if you want to. The road to that price is also very long and its not easy at all to get there.

 

[DutchShamrock]

Next week is the NHL BOG meeting.

With 2021-22 looking like the first season for Seattle according to what Elliotte Friedman wrote yesterday.

The expiring NMC's don't have to be protected. That came up with Dennis Wideman. Calgary didn't have to protect him and the expiring NMC. Same rules again.

Lundqvist, Staal and Shattenkirk are expiring contracts and their NMC don't have to be protected. The Rangers don't have to waste a spot on D.

The Rangers can protect Georgiev and Shestyorkin is exempt(2 year pro after 20-21). There may be an issue getting enough playing time for Lundqvist and both of them for the next two seasons. It strengthens the Rangers hand for a Georgiev deal. They aren't forced to trade him. Ottawa, Edmonton, Calgary, Philly, Carolina, Detroit, St. Louis and Florida could all use upgrades in goal. Nashville signed Rinne to a 2 year extension a few weeks ago. He got a NMC. 19-20 and 20-21. Expiring. They can protect Saros. It takes Faros off the trade market.

Andersson, Chytil and Howden have to be protected. No exemptions. 3rd year pros. Hajek and Lindgren are not exempt.

21-22 is a better scenario for the Rangers. They have to leave 3 spots open for their kids at forward(they can't load up with vets thinking Andersson,Chytil and Howden are exempt), they don't have to waste a protection slot on Staal and Shattenkirk(no buyout money on the cap for Staal) and they can protect Georgiev if he hasn't been moved.

For the people keeping track, I was here today. Don't mark me as being absent.

The Rangers haven't had a player lead the NHL in scoring in a very long time.

View attachment 159117

I know there is arena news from Seattle that implies the start for them would be 2021 but a part of me wonders how much of this is gamesmanship with the CBA talks. No way the league has the expansion team start the year of a potential lock out.

They may announce the start date next week, but if it is left open I'll be curious if the league goes back to the earlier start if the two sides can avoid re-opening the CBA. I also wonder if Friedman is getting fed a narrative from the league.

Just a small detail I'm following.

 

[hpNYR]

The idea that you need to tank and have a top 5 pick in the draft in order to ice a Stanley Cup champion down the road is pure lunacy. Bergeron, Marchand, Lucic, Kopitar, Brown, Quick anybody? All of these guys were key integral parts of their respective Stanley Cup teams. Doughty is the only player between the 2 franchises to be a home grown top 5 pick and part of a SC core. Seguin wasn’t impactful in 2011 for Boston.

Let’s not forget rebuilds are not just done via a draft either. You have others tools at your arsenal whether it’s trades ( Rask, Carter) or FA signings (Chara, Willie Mitchell).

Some may love to look at the Pitsburghs and the Chicago’s of the league. Now they’re talking Buffalo , who has been at the bottom for how long? I’d like to also look at the Kings and Bruins of the NHL.

A winning culture and a winning environment IMO is far more important than a top 5 pick.

 

[DutchShamrock]

Not to side track this thread on the Seattle issue: Seattle Center arena will be ready for NHL team in 2020, Seattle mayor says

The Seattle mayor says the arena will be ready in 2020. I think Bettman is leaking a 2021 start to take away leverage from the union during talks. If the CBA re-opens and the 2020 season start is in jeopardy, huge advantage to the players in negotiations.

My personal hope is both sides decline their option to re-open or they come to terms on an extension. At that point Seattle's arena will suddenly be on track for 2020.

2021 would be nice for the expiring contracts but we would have a bunch of young players eligible for the expansion draft that we have to protect. Not sure what date is better ultimately.

 

[Glennsoe]

In an interview with a Norwegian hockey site, zuuc says he's prepared and thinks that his time as a Ranger is coming to an end very soon. He's pretty much just waiting for it to happen.

He also says he doesn't have too many years left as a player and the way thing are going with the Rangers rebuild maybe if he's traded to a contender and wins the cup then it would've been perfect for his career.

Zuccarello om NHL-overgang: – Forberedt på at det kommer til å skje

 

[NYR Viper]

Next week is the NHL BOG meeting.

With 2021-22 looking like the first season for Seattle according to what Elliotte Friedman wrote yesterday.

The expiring NMC's don't have to be protected. That came up with Dennis Wideman. Calgary didn't have to protect him and the expiring NMC. Same rules again.

Lundqvist, Staal and Shattenkirk are expiring contracts and their NMC don't have to be protected. The Rangers don't have to waste a spot on D.

The Rangers can protect Georgiev and Shestyorkin is exempt(2 year pro after 20-21). There may be an issue getting enough playing time for Lundqvist and both of them for the next two seasons. It strengthens the Rangers hand for a Georgiev deal. They aren't forced to trade him. Ottawa, Edmonton, Calgary, Philly, Carolina, Detroit, St. Louis and Florida could all use upgrades in goal. Nashville signed Rinne to a 2 year extension a few weeks ago. He got a NMC. 19-20 and 20-21. Expiring. They can protect Saros. It takes Faros off the trade market.

Andersson, Chytil and Howden have to be protected. No exemptions. 3rd year pros. Hajek and Lindgren are not exempt.

21-22 is a better scenario for the Rangers. They have to leave 3 spots open for their kids at forward(they can't load up with vets thinking Andersson,Chytil and Howden are exempt), they don't have to waste a protection slot on Staal and Shattenkirk(no buyout money on the cap for Staal) and they can protect Georgiev if he hasn't been moved.

For the people keeping track, I was here today. Don't mark me as being absent.

The Rangers haven't had a player lead the NHL in scoring in a very long time.

View attachment 159117

Protected Lists
* Clubs will have two options for players they wish to protect in the Expansion Draft:
a) Seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender
b) Eight skaters (forwards/defensemen) and one goaltender
* All players who have currently effective and continuing "No Movement" clauses at the time of the Expansion Draft (and who to decline to waive such clauses) must be protected (and will be counted toward their club's applicable protection limits).
* All first- and second-year professionals, as well as all unsigned draft choices, will be exempt from selection (and will not be counted toward their club's applicable protection limits).

Player Exposure Requirements

* All Clubs must meet the following minimum requirements regarding players exposed for selection in the Expansion Draft:
i) One defenseman who is a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons.
ii) Two forwards who are a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons.
iii) One goaltender who is under contract in 2017-18 or will be a restricted free agent at the expiration of his current contract immediately prior to 2017-18. If the club elects to make a restricted free agent goaltender available in order to meet this requirement, that goaltender must have received his qualifying offer prior to the submission of the club's protected list.

Rules for 2017 Expansion Draft


Zibanejad
Kreider (assuming he is re-signed)
Fast (assuming he is re-signed)
Howden
Chytil
Andersson
Gettinger (?)

Assuming traded not re-signed:
Namestnikov
Strome (?)
Vesey
Hayes
Zuccarello

Pionk
ADA
Skjei
Hajek (if he makes it)
Lindgren (if he makes it)

That leaves:
Staal
Shattenkirk
Smith

Hank
Georgiev

From my viewpoint, they're missing (2) forwards to expose, as well as risking the issue of losing Hajek/Lindgren to expansion for nothing. This also assumes the Rangers don't sign someone (like a Panarin) to a long-term deal this off-season, otherwise one of the forwards mentioned can not be protected.

Also, if they re-sign Strome, that would mean a forward must be exposed. Perhaps that was one of the reasons for trading for Strome? He may be a good candidate, if he hovers around 30-35 points, to be available in expansion?

 

[Kovalev27]

Yeah we all know. Guy is playing with ZERO heart/effort the last year or so.

 

[Tawnos]

Here's the thing with Hayes. Sometimes it's better to keep the players you have than trade them just for the sake of trading them if the value isn't fair.

I look at Neil Smith's last few years and Sather's first few years. There were plenty of good pieces that were traded that either stayed status quo or improved.

Hayes still probably has 5 prime years left. If another center becomes available in 2-3 years, that's a situation to revisit then.

Sometimes it is better to keep a player than trading him just to do it, but this isn’t one of those situations. The Rangers still need to stockpile picks and prospects. I think this should be the last year they do, but it needs to happen.

At worst, Gorton should take the best offer he gets on deadline day. Same situation as Stepan. I think we got less than full value for him, but the deadline to trade him was draft day and the Coyotes made the best offer.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Rules for 2017 Expansion Draft


Zibanejad
Kreider (assuming he is re-signed)
Fast (assuming he is re-signed)
Howden
Chytil
Andersson
Gettinger (?)

Assuming traded not re-signed:
Namestnikov
Strome (?)
Vesey
Hayes
Zuccarello

Pionk
ADA
Skjei
Hajek (if he makes it)
Lindgren (if he makes it)

That leaves:
Staal
Shattenkirk
Smith

Hank
Georgiev

Wouldn't they have to protect Staal and Hank?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

In an interview with a Norwegian hockey site, zuuc says he's prepared and thinks that his time as a Ranger is coming to an end very soon. He's pretty much just waiting for it to happen.

He also says he doesn't have too many years left as a player and the way thing are going with the Rangers rebuild maybe if he's traded to a contender and wins the cup then it would've been perfect for his career.

Zuccarello om NHL-overgang: – Forberedt på at det kommer til å skje

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[NYR Viper]

Wouldn't they have to protect Staal and Hank?

The way RB Was talking, he said expiring NMC's so maybe they don't have to be protected?

 

[Edge]

Here's the thing with Hayes. Sometimes it's better to keep the players you have than trade them just for the sake of trading them if the value isn't fair.

I look at Neil Smith's last few years and Sather's first few years. There were plenty of good pieces that were traded that either stayed status quo or improved.

Hayes still probably has 5 prime years left. If another center becomes available in 2-3 years, that's a situation to revisit then.

I hear you, but there's the whole NMC angle to consider.

If we're looking at a scenario where it's straight salary, I think the whole concept of trading him down the line becomes a bit more viable. But I honestly don't see a scenario where Hayes doesn't have a pretty significant movement clause, to go along with a pretty high salary.

Someone is going to make good on the idea of him continuing to improve and probably pay at least a slight premium for that gamble. More than likely it will be a team that can live with him maintaining the status quo, but is willing to hedge their bets on him going further. Said team will likely be close to, entering, or looking to jump start their window by plugging him in behind a first line, core center.

The challenge with many of the scenarios in which we keep Hayes, is that they tend to view him in a vacuum. Signing Hayes will have ripple effects throughout the organization. It will impact how we play or utilize Chytil and Andersson, and it will impact who we can or can't potentially add after we most likely re-sign Kreider.

I think the wishful thinking is that we re-sign Hayes, Andersson and Chytil either prove themselves or don't, and then we deal from a position of incredible strength. Unfortunately, it would be very difficult, if not close to impossible to truly gauge Andersson and Chytil as centers with Zibanejad, Hayes and Howden entrenched or becoming entrenched on the roster.

Let's say we played them both on the wing. There are three likely outcomes - 1. They either prove they belong and at some point we have to gamble on moving one or both back to center. 2. They stick at wing. 3. One or both guys don't stick long-term (least likely scenario).

Let's assume that one of the first two scenarios transpires. Let's even assume that Chytil and Andersson both stick as wingers and look damn good doing so. I'm still not totally sure that Zibanejad-Hayes as a 1-2 punch is good enough. At best, I feel like it's on the cusp. And that's not taking into account the depth and additional chips we again by moving Hayes.

Let's also remember that in the above scenario both Zibanejad and Hayes would both have movement clauses at that point (because we can't forget Zibanejad's is about to kick in after this season). So it's not going to be nearly as easy to pivot if we decide to go a different direction. So it's not like we can just move Hayes or Zibanejad and then take the gamble to move Chytil and and Andersson to center.

So, again, we have to consider certain factors beyond just the annual salary.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

The idea that you need to tank and have a top 5 pick in the draft in order to ice a Stanley Cup champion down the road is pure lunacy. Bergeron, Marchand, Lucic, Kopitar, Brown, Quick anybody? All of these guys were key integral parts of their respective Stanley Cup teams. Doughty is the only player between the 2 franchises to be a home grown top 5 pick and part of a SC core. Seguin wasn’t impactful in 2011 for Boston.

Let’s not forget rebuilds are not just done via a draft either. You have others tools at your arsenal whether it’s trades ( Rask, Carter) or FA signings (Chara, Willie Mitchell).

Some may love to look at the Pitsburghs and the Chicago’s of the league. Now they’re talking Buffalo , who has been at the bottom for how long? I’d like to also look at the Kings and Bruins of the NHL.

A winning culture and a winning environment IMO is far more important than a top 5 pick.

Kings don’t belong in this conversation.

They moved Schenn (a top 5 pick) for Richards and Johnson (top 3 selection) for Carter. Having those level of players in the bank is what allowed them to make those moves.

They lost a ton from the beginning of the lockout till they landed doughty (well even after, they took schenn at 5 the next season.) That “losing” culture is only a problem if you let it become one, that will never happen here and it takes more than one rough season.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Kings don’t belong in this conversation.

They moved Schenn (a top 5 pick) for Richards and Johnson (top 3 selection) for Carter. Having those level of players in the bank is what allowed them to make those moves.

They lost a ton from the beginning of the lockout till they landed doughty (well even after, they took schenn at 5 the next season.) That “losing” culture is only a problem if you let it become one, that will never happen here and it takes more than one rough season.

JMFJ was drafted by Carolina though, Kings acquired him for Gleason and Bélanger, and the "3rd overall" shine had definitely worn off a lot by the time he was traded for Carter.

 

[Tawnos]

Kings don’t belong in this conversation.

They moved Schenn (a top 5 pick) for Richards and Johnson (top 3 selection) for Carter. Having those level of players in the bank is what allowed them to make those moves.

They lost a ton from the beginning of the lockout till they landed doughty (well even after, they took schenn at 5 the next season.) That “losing” culture is only a problem if you let it become one, that will never happen here and it takes more than one rough season.

Jack Johnson wasn't a Kings 3rd OA. They had 3 top-5 picks, but one of them was Hickey.

I think that guy's point, though, is that you can get elite, core pieces outside of the top-5.

 

[Edge]

A few thoughts on the whole top-3 pick debate.

I would hesitate to use the words "have to" in any of the points.

You don't have to have a top 3 pick to find an elite talent.

You don't have to have a top 3 pick to win a championship.

But I will say that I do think it tends to make things considerably easier and increase your odds substantially when done right.

In other words, I think your odds of long-term success are significantly better when you take a step back for a season or two and walk away with a top pick that has a higher likelihood of producing an elite talent, than to push forward and try and make it work with picks in the 10-20 range. Especially if you have a scouting department that knows what its doing.

In the Rangers case, I certainly think they do.

In Edmonton or the Islanders' case? Yeah, not so much.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

JMFJ was drafted by Carolina though, Kings acquired him for Gleason and Bélanger, and the "3rd overall" shine had definitely worn off a lot by the time he was traded for Carter.

Oh for sure, but he spent like 3 seconds in carolina’s system.

He was still pretty highly touted when he was traded.

I get the OP’s point, but I don’t think it was presented honestly. Having those players who were selected in the top 5 were crucial to building their team.

Boston is the only team that really bucked that trend, but they had a bunch break right for them. A healthy Vancouver steamrolls that team.