Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XVI

[TheDirtyH]

I guess if I'm moving ADA, I'm looking for someone who is maybe closer to ADA's level.

Let's for argument's sake say that ADA, for one reason or another, is the guy the Rangers decided to move. Let's also say that he doesn't fall off his current pace: 20+ goals and 60+ points.

To me, warts and all, that's pretty dynamic for a defenseman. And at 25/26 years of age, that's not necessarily something that's going to quickly fade.

So I'm looking for a package that includes a player in a similar age range who brings something dynamic to the table. Or I'm looking for a package where the combination we receive collectively makes us more dynamic as a team.

Alex Tuch is a good player. But to me, he's not necessarily a dynamic player. I feel like we'd be trading for something we "hope" happens, and at some point I think we have to move away from trading established for hope. Now, if it's Tuch+ I am listening. But if ADA is the player he's showing himself to be, the return has to be more than Tuch.

Yeah, I mean, trading a perennial 20+ goal 60+ point defenseman would be an absurd thing to do.

But like, why say Tuch is the "hope" player when you're basing this all off the "Let's also say" that Tony continues to score at this rate he's doing over a 25 game clip?

It's funny to hear this bc I see Tuch as more of a sure thing than Tony. I only just moved from the West Coast so I watched most all of the Vegas's games the last two seasons and he's stood out not just as a player with upside but as a rare young winger with his physical profile who understands how to impact the game with it consistently.

But at the end of the day, if that's how you see Tuch and how you see ADA, of course it doesn't make sense.

Personally see them as pretty identical as far as what's proven and what's still there to either expand or decrease their potential.

 

[JimmyG89]

Alex Tuch is right handed Kreider with slightly better puck skills. I think he'd be a welcomed addition to this roster, but at this rate, I do not see Vegas moving a player of his caliber. He fills a nice role on that roster.

 

[TheDirtyH]

Alex Tuch is right handed Kreider with slightly better puck skills. I think he'd be a welcomed addition to this roster, but at this rate, I do not see Vegas moving a player of his caliber. He fills a nice role on that roster.

Yeah it's funny but I thought about suggesting initially that we'd have to add slightly

 

[Kovalev27]

Any trade involving the Rangers moving a player under 23 doesn't make sense at all.

of course it does if it’s trading a guy that doesn’t fit the long term strategy for a player that very well might. Not every kid we draft is going to play for this team. You can’t keep everyone under 23. Not realistic

 

[JimmyG89]

Yeah it's funny but I thought about suggesting initially that we'd have to add slightly

If it is DeAngelo for Tuch, I'm not really sure there is an add. Puck moving RHD is a big need for a majority of teams. Vegas actually could really use one.

Unless Glass takes a huge stride throughout this season, Tuch is probably a difficult player to move for that franchise, even if DeAngelo really helps their backline.

I'm also not keen on moving DeAngelo at this time. He's come into his own and is producing at levels that many thought he could not get to anymore.

 

[Edge]

Yeah, I mean, trading a perennial 20+ goal 60+ point defenseman would be an absurd thing to do.

But like, why say Tuch is the "hope" player when you're basing this all off the "Let's also say" that Tony continues to score at this rate he's doing over a 25 game clip?

It's funny to hear this bc I see Tuch as more of a sure thing than Tony. I only just moved from the West Coast so I watched most all of the Vegas's games the last two seasons and he's stood out not just as a player with upside but as a rare young winger with his physical profile who understands how to impact the game with it consistently.

But at the end of the day, if that's how you see Tuch and how you see ADA, of course it doesn't make sense.

Personally see them as pretty identical as far as what's proven and what's still there to either expand or decrease their potential.

I think it's primarily because ADA is building off an upward trend from the last two years and this feels like more of a continuation of that trend.

With Tuch, I'm not seeing that trend continue. If anything, I'm seeing a continuation of the second half of last season where he scored 4 goals after January 21., not including 1 goal in 7 playoff games.

The hope is that Tuch can get back to 20 goals and 50 points, let alone a 3o goal, 60 point level.

I also freely admit that I believe ADA is far more likely to be a 20 goal, 60 point defenseman than Tuch is to be a 30/60 guy.

I like Tuch, but I don't think he's a potential game-changing option to be strategically deployed. I think ADA is, or is at least very close to being one.

 

[Kovalev27]

Lundkvist is a very, very good prospect. But I think there's always the inherent risk that the "next guy" is even better. And we all know that isn't necessarily the case.

Right now ADA and Fox are both doing very well in the NHL, and they'll both be coming of age in the next for seasons.

Lundkvist could very well be better than either, but for all his talent that's still a pretty tall ask. Push comes to shove, the Rangers will probably lean toward keeping the players they know can translate their talents and are closer to hitting their peak and maximizing their talents.

Now having said that, if it's ADA and Fox the Rangers go with over the long-haul, they're not going to give Lundkvist away either. He would certainly be used as a primary piece in a deal of significance.

This is spot on

 

[Tawnos]

of course it does if it’s trading a guy that doesn’t fit the long term strategy for a player that very well might. Not every kid we draft is going to play for this team. You can’t keep everyone under 23. Not realistic

"you can't keep everyone under 23"... sure you can.

I don't think it's smart for rebuilding teams to give up on young players. That's what Ottawa did with Zibanejad.

 

[TheDirtyH]

I think it's primarily because ADA is building off an upward trend from the last two years and this feels like more of a continuation of that trend.

With Tuch, I'm not seeing that trend continue. If anything, I'm seeing a continuation of the second half of last season where he scored 4 goals after January 21., not including 1 goal in 7 playoff games.

The hope is that Tuch can get back to 20 goals and 50 points, let alone a 3o goal, 60 point level.

I also freely admit that I believe ADA is far more likely to be a 20 goal, 60 point defenseman than Tuch is to be a 30/60 guys.

I like Tuch, but I don't think he's a potential game-changing option to be strategically deployed. I think ADA is, or is at least very close to being one.

That's fair. Tuch got bumped down after the Stone trade and then has barely been healthy this season so I wouldn't read too much into trends on that. I also think he's absolutely a potential game changer in the way Kreider has been for us.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

I like Tuch a lot and would love to have him here.. But not for ADA.

 

[Edge]

That's fair. Tuch got bumped down after the Stone trade and then has barely been healthy this season so I wouldn't read too much into trends on that. I also think he's absolutely a potential game changer in the way Kreider has been for us.

You know it's funny, I've seen Kreider come up a few times, and I'm seeing the comparisons --- both for positive, and frankly, not so positive reasons.

At the end of the day, I have to ask myself, which type of player is harder to find: a 20/50 type forward, or a 20/60 type RHD? So in that regard it's ADA.

Then I have to ask myself, who do I think is more dynamic, Tuch or ADA? I find ADA to be the more dynamic player --- he's a tone setter.

It's game 7 and we're heading to OT. Who do I want on the ice to try and win me the game? Gotta go with ADA there.

So in my mind, I start tallying it up, and I just don't think there's enough there for me to make that deal straight up.

 

[Tawnos]

I like Tuch a lot and would love to have him here.. But not for ADA.

I'd love for him to be a Ranger, but there's a tangential personal connection. My closest friend's sister graduated high school with him. They were both voted most likely to succeed... she's an incredibly talented singer and theater actor. He very much has lived up to the expectation. Her life has taken a much different path. Which isn't to say she doesn't have a good life, just that she hasn't been successful in that respect.

I enjoy giving her crap about that and it'd be even better if he were a Ranger

 

[TheDirtyH]

I like Tuch a lot and would love to have him here.. But not for ADA.

I just thought of it randomly last night and man I'm glad I brought it up. Fascinating because while I expected no one to agree with it, I didn't see this line of reasoning coming at all.

Maybe I need to re-think ADA because while I'm obviously a big fan of Tuch, it seems I'm not nearly as high on ADA as many here are. To be fair though, I call it a good hockey trade for a reason. I like both players a lot, but think the teams' needs and their depth at the respective positions make it a great fit.

Thanks for indulging the thought though, especially @Edge

 

[LokiDog]

We’re doing a lot of shiny new toy syndrome in discussing which of our roster RHD is the odd man out due to guys in the pipeline. There is no guarantee that any guy in the pipeline right now is a legitimate NHLer yet, let alone one who could supplant a guy like Fox or DeAngelo if they continue trending as they are.

If it comes down to money and balancing cap space by having an ELC player come in then you worry about that when said ELC player is ready. Right now, no one is truly NHL ready. If you give DeAngelo a large contract and he continues to be the player who earned it, and then Lundkvist looks like he can step in two years from now, there will be buyers for a guy like DeAngelo who has term on his contract. You don’t move him now to preempt a prospect eventually being his equal or being ready for significant NHL minutes.

Look at Chytil, Andersson or the play level of Hajek and Howden. Just because a guy like Lundkvist is ready to make his NHL debut in a year or two doesn’t mean he steps in as cleanly as Adam Fox. He’s much more likely to go up and down to the AHL or have some struggles. I’m not so quick to ship out a 23 year old RHD who scored at a 41 point pace last year and is on a 63 point pace this year (not to mention 26 goal pace) because we have Keane looking close to being a 6/7 or Lundkvist almost ready to come to NA for the first time.

 

[Kovalev27]

"you can't keep everyone under 23"... sure you can.

I don't think it's smart for rebuilding teams to give up on young players. That's what Ottawa did with Zibanejad.

no literally you can’t. There are only so many spots in the lineup.

and let’s not play games here lias Andersson is nowhere near who Mika Zibanejad was. It was an awful trade by Ottawa one that should never have happened. Lias Andersson does not have any of Mika’s skill. We’d be trading for the guy with far more upside which frankly would correct the mistake we made in drafting a potential third liner in the first place

 

[Tawnos]

no literally you can’t. There are only so many spots in the lineup.

and let’s not play games here lias Andersson is nowhere near who Mika Zibanejad was. It was an awful trade by Ottawa one that should never have happened. Lias Andersson does not have any of Mika’s skill. We’d be trading for the guy with far more upside which frankly would correct the mistake we made in drafting a potential third liner in the first place

You're making it sound like the Rangers will develop more players to fill out a lineup than there are lineup spots. That's not going to happen, and by the time they do develop more, some of those currently under 23 won't be anymore, plus the Rangers won't be rebuilding.

The point isn't that Andersson is as good as Zibanejad. The point is that Andersson still has plenty of development opportunity available to him. 21 isn't the time to give up on it.

By all means, you look to acquire JP, but not at the expense of another young player.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

I just thought of it randomly last night and man I'm glad I brought it up. Fascinating because while I expected no one to agree with it, I didn't see this line of reasoning coming at all.

Maybe I need to re-think ADA because while I'm obviously a big fan of Tuch, it seems I'm not nearly as high on ADA as many here are. To be fair though, I call it a good hockey trade for a reason. I like both players a lot, but think the teams' needs and their depth at the respective positions make it a great fit.

Thanks for indulging the thought though, especially @Edge

It's by no means a bad idea. Tuch isn't a dime a dozen player. He's young, talented, power forward who's also signed long-term to a fair contract. If we're trading ADA, that's a great target. I like the idea. I just wouldn't move ADA right now unless it's for someone who has that next-level ceiling we need up front.

 

[doomscroll]

Now that we know Panarin turns an average 3rd line into a competitive 1st line on a nightly basis, it makes sense to reconsider the needs to make this team consistently competitive.

I’m very excited to see if we get something like this for the top-nine tonight:

Kreider - Zibanejad - Buchnevich
Panarin - Strome - Fast
Lemieux - Chytil - Kakko

If time and chemistry favor the Rangers, the top-nine could essentially be lines 1a, 1b, and 2.

 

[Kovalev27]

You're making it sound like the Rangers will develop more players to fill out a lineup than there are lineup spots. That's not going to happen, and by the time they do develop more, some of those currently under 23 won't be anymore, plus the Rangers won't be rebuilding.

The point isn't that Andersson is as good as Zibanejad. The point is that Andersson still has plenty of development opportunity available to him. 21 isn't the time to give up on it.

By all means, you look to acquire JP, but not at the expense of another young player.

not necessarily giving up on him. I’m trading him for a player that makes more sense for us. As I’ve already stated you can’t keep every guy because there are only so many spots. As it is there isn’t a spot for Andersson at center in the top 9 for him. Won’t ever be above Mika or Chytil or Howden or even Strome. There will be more guys coming so before 23 he already doesn’t have a center spot unless he stays in the A. So trading him to sure up a position we need help in makes more sense than keeping him just because he’s under 23.

 

[Tawnos]

not necessarily giving up on him. I’m trading him for a player that makes more sense for us. As I’ve already stated you can’t keep every guy because there are only so many spots. As it is there isn’t a spot for Andersson at center in the top 9 for him. Won’t ever be above Mika or Chytil or Howden or even Strome. There will be more guys coming so before 23 he already doesn’t have a center spot unless he stays in the A. So trading him to sure up a position we need help in makes more sense than keeping him just because he’s under 23.

Perhaps he or someone else shifts to the wing. Perhaps not. How long is Strome for this organization? What if Andersson comes back from this AHL stint and plays markedly better than Howden?

It's too early in this process to be making a trade like that.

 

[LokiDog]

Now that we know Panarin turns an average 3rd line into a competitive 1st line on a nightly basis, it makes sense to reconsider the needs to make this team consistently competitive.

I’m very excited to see if we get something like this for the top-nine tonight:

Kreider - Zibanejad - Buchnevich
Panarin - Strome - Fast
Lemieux - Chytil - Kakko

If time and chemistry favor the Rangers, the top-nine could essentially be lines 1a, 1b, and 2.

I agree with these lines but god do I wish we had someone to slot in to that spot over Fast. Yes, he hustles and wins some pucks to keep possession a live but he has no hands or finish and if he did that line could have significantly more points over the last stretch.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Hand up, I don't think DeAngelo will hit 60 points at any point in his career

 

[LokiDog]

Hand up, I don't think DeAngelo will hit 60 points at any point in his career

I don’t think that’s an outlandish statement. I only mentioned it because that’s where his pace is right now. Still, seems like he’s a good bet to hit 50 and young 50+ point RHD still don’t grow on trees.

 

[doomscroll]

I agree with these lines but god do I wish we had someone to slot in to that spot over Fast. Yes, he hustles and wins some pucks to keep possession a live but he has no hands or finish and if he did that line could have significantly more points over the last stretch.

That’s true, I’d like to see Chytil and Kakko with Panarin; maybe Lemieux-Strome-Fast could be a serviceable third line, with the top-six being more complete.

 

[TheDirtyH]

You know it's funny, I've seen Kreider come up a few times, and I'm seeing the comparisons --- both for positive, and frankly, not so positive reasons.

At the end of the day, I have to ask myself, which type of player is harder to find: a 20/50 type forward, or a 20/60 type RHD? So in that regard it's ADA.

Then I have to ask myself, who do I think is more dynamic, Tuch or ADA? I find ADA to be the more dynamic player --- he's a tone setter.

It's game 7 and we're heading to OT. Who do I want on the ice to try and win me the game? Gotta go with ADA there.

So in my mind, I start tallying it up, and I just don't think there's enough there for me to make that deal straight up.

The comparisons are pretty spot on. I mean the first time I saw him play I thought I was watching Kreider again. Not many 6'3"-6'4" wingers who can fly down the ice like the two of them. He's adept in front of the net. And he plays an honest game, understanding his role and how best to create time and space for his teammates and chaos in the attacking zone and the neutral zone.

Where I'm coming from is that Alex Tuch is already a 20 goal 50 point winger. He has plenty of room to grow and who's to say his absolute peak isn't closer to 35-75? ADA's best season has him at 10-40 prorated. So maybe his absolute peak is 20-60 but it seems really optimistic to just call him that. Like, it feels like you're comparing best case scenario for ADA to a flatlining Tuch. They have nearly identical gp, ADA's actually older by six months or so, and Tuch is the only one with a full season.

As far as dynamic goes or game 7 scenarios, Tuch had 6 goals and 10 points as a 21-yo rookie in 20 games. He's absolutely got game-breaking potential with his ability to carve teams between the blue lines and his presence and ability in the crease.

Anyway, fair to say we disagree.