Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XX

[Ndurpressure]

My concern about the next phase of the rebuild is the exposure of the young guys. Between Howden, Chytil, Buchnevich, Pionk, having Hayes and Zucc and Kreider and whoever else could be traded around not only pushes them down the depth chart allowing for (more) favorable, manageable matchups, but also provides on-ice watch-and-learn training, which i think is important. If we take these guys out of the lineup, its going to be an over-matched free-for-all, and entirely up to Quinn to teach next level technique and and strategy... Its a dangerous proposition.

So, while im all for the tear down (to an extent), i think we could play two games at the deadline, the second being taking on some higher-priced vets and their contracts with additional draft-pick compensation, which allows for more restocking and also to retain a semblance of on-ice mentorship. I figure some of the teams unloading the vets, who are competitive, could use the space to make their own deadline, win-chasing moves or to free up space for next year, etc.

here are some candidates (without guessing at potential retention amounts) and the years after this they have remaining.

Cory Perry - 8.625 - 2
Jason Spezza - 7.5 - 0
Loui Erikkson - 6.0 - 3
Nick Bjugstad - 4.1 - 3

Just a few ideas.

 

[Edge]

Also- how much of his slump is this malaise, and how much is the injury?

Injury could be part of the current problem.

But it still wouldn't account for sub-par performances to end last year and start this year.

Then we'd have to factor in his comments, comments made by Rangers brass at the end of last season about leadership for the team, the response to the "shoot more" comments earlier in the season. At some point a pattern starts to emerge.

Now, it doesn't make him a bad guy or a criminal by any stretch. But it does tend to feed into some the push-back he's been receiving for a while.

 

[NYR Viper]

I would do it but the real issue is they don't need a center and they want scoring. I think dundon essentially gave the marching orders the to value offense over defense so Fox isn't off limits. I don't think 6 points is a problem either. There is pressure to win and score. He isn't a hockey savvy owner that appreciates the game and the development curve. And as Jas pointed out the other day, Waddell.

I think a team like Carolina would be more likely to look to trade and sign Hayes so it wouldn't just be for this year. At that point, their 1st this year, and possibly next year, would be on the table.

 

[East Coast Bias]

I would do it but the real issue is they don't need a center and they want scoring. I think dundon essentially gave the marching orders the to value offense over defense so Fox isn't off limits. I don't think 6 points is a problem either. There is pressure to win and score. He isn't a hockey savvy owner that appreciates the game and the development curve. And as Jas pointed out the other day, Waddell.

Yeah I was looking at Carolina's lines earlier and totally forgot Staal cause he's injured.

Buffalo seems like the ideal spot for hayes. They need a center, they have multiple 1st rounders.

 

[Ola]

The whole Zuccarello situation is very strange when you consider two things:

1. He's very likely to be traded to a Stanley Cup contender within the next 6 weeks
2. He's in a contract year in which he can sign with anyone he'd like come July

Why the moping? I wouldn't be surprised if he heads back to Europe after this season. One thing is for certain, his on-ice play and off-ice demeanor is hurting his trade value, and that should piss any Ranger fan off.

How much is he moping? According to himself he might possibly unintentionally have let the 'moping' affect his game. Hockey players are up and down all the time. How much better would Zucc have played if he had a full NMC? Its not like I would have been surprised if he had a similar crappy stretch even if he had a full NMC.

 

[Avery16]

It’s foreseeable as a probability, not as a guarantee. Taking risks isn’t always a bad move, particularly when you’re in win-now mode. In the Rangers case, they got 3 solid seasons from him in the midst of what really was a 4 year window, and then some valuable assets for the rebuild once we reached that point. The trade, at this point, can easily be looked at as: the Rangers acquire 3 solid seasons and 2.5 weaker seasons of Nash, Buchnevich, most of K. Miller, Lindgren, Strome, and Beleskey for Dubinsky, Anisimov, Erixon, and Rychel. That’s not so bad when measured against the risk.

That contract prevented us from addressing our top 4 D, which in my opinion, along with keeping Torts for too long, cost us a Cup. It didnt get us a Cup either.

 

[Avery16]

Injury could be part of the current problem.

But it still wouldn't account for sub-par performances to end last year and start this year.

Then we'd have to factor in his comments, comments made by Rangers brass at the end of last season about leadership for the team, the response to the "shoot more" comments earlier in the season. At some point a pattern starts to emerge.

Now, it doesn't make him a bad guy or a criminal by any stretch. But it does tend to feed into some the push-back he's been receiving for a while.

Wasn't it a nagging, recurring injury? Didnt it start last season or in pre-season?

 

[I Eat Crow]

Skjei should be made available before Zibanejad is.

Agree. This defensive corps is an abomination even with Skjei. If the Rangers can truly get Nylander out of Toronto for Skjei, Zuccarello, and a sweetener, I would do it.

Skjei is a weird player in a weird place to me. He's signed for four more years after this one. He'll be in his late 20's at the conclusion of this deal. Is he really a part of the future as a part of the next wave of talent when the team is ready to contend again? The Rangers have Miller, Lindgren, Hajek, Ragnarsson, and Gross as players that can legitimately play in the NHL one day. Add Bigras too as a bottom pairing stopgap the next couple of years.

The Rangers are counting on Miller to be that top pairing, all situations defenseman that McDonagh was. They need to be really careful with how they handle him. Don't ruin him by throwing him onto a shit team. Let him marinate at least one more year at Wisconsin and re-evaluate. His development is more important to the future of the franchise than any other prospect they currently have. Even over Andersson, Chytil, Kravtsov, et al. Don't f*** this up.

 

[Edge]

Trading for Nash was a move for a player at the right time. However, it didn’t last. He wasn’t enough to close the deal, and then that contract prevented us from taking another meaningful run for the remainder of it, for which he was a shell. We would have been better off with Dubinsky and Anisimov. Maybe still not good enough, but better.

The timing of the Nash gamble made sense, but the deal itself didn't work out.

In Nash's case, I'd probably say one of the lessons to be learned is also about personality.

The Rangers were looking for someone to put the team on his back and really serve as a driving force. I'm not sure Nash, even if his skill remained intact, was going to ever quite fit that mold. Nash, even in his best days, always seemed more comfortable being just one of the guys --- even if his skills dictated that was not going to be the expectation.

 

[Tawnos]

That's why I think those deals make more sense when you're closing in on your window, or in it.

Past a certain point, you're paying more for a players past accomplishments than future ones. But those deals are easy to justify if you're getting some overlap in prime years with your window.

In our case, we're going to be signing guys who, even if everything falls into place, are going to be exiting those prime years just as we start entering our window, to say nothing about where the ability goes as we venture further into that window of time.

There's a tendency to approach these things like we're entering the summer of year three, as opposed to entering the one year anniversary of the letter.

Maybe. On the other hand, the Rangers have a good amount of strong assets from the last 3 drafts. Howden, Hajek, Rykov, and Lindgren are all 2016 picks. Plus our own picks from the 17 and 18 drafts. In a way, it’s almost as if we’re entering year 4 of the process. But rebuilds can easily take 5-7 years. The last Rangers rebuild (not tank) lasted 7 years from 2004-2010. So we’ve still got a couple of years at least.

 

[Edge]

Wasn't it a nagging, recurring injury? Didnt it start last season or in pre-season?

Perhaps, but I'm not sure that would still explain some of Zucc's comments and the Rangers comments.

So yes, if we look at straight performance, it could be a factor --- though it hasn't been mentioned as part of the ongoing narrative. But there's still the other areas to account for.

 

[NYR Viper]

Yeah I was looking at Carolina's lines earlier and totally forgot Staal cause he's injured.

Buffalo seems like the ideal spot for hayes. They need a center, they have multiple 1st rounders.

That and because they have other teams' 1st rounder, they can make a move VERY early because if Buffalo, for some reason, doesn't make the playoffs this year, they won't be sending their 1st this year. They could frame it like:

The middle of their (3) 1st rounders in 2019 + BUF 1st '20 + Nylander for Hayes with an extension

 

[Tawnos]

That contract prevented us from addressing our top 4 D, which in my opinion, along with keeping Torts for too long, cost us a Cup. It didnt get us a Cup either.

You talk like the Rangers felt a strong need to make multiple changes in the top-4 and they weren’t content with McDonagh, Girardi and Staal taking 3 of those slots. Guess what? The only changes they ever wanted to make was to get more offense in there. They wanted to keep the core 3. Rick Nash did not prevent them from signing Dan Boyle or trading for Keith Yandle.

 

[East Coast Bias]

That and because they have other teams' 1st rounder, they can make a move VERY early because if Buffalo, for some reason, doesn't make the playoffs this year, they won't be sending their 1st this year. They could frame it like:

The middle of their (3) 1st rounders in 2019 + BUF 1st '20 + Nylander for Hayes with an extension

What about without an extension? Cause I've never seen a team get another 1st for an extension. Usually it's like a 4th rounder if they sign the guy.

I think we need to focus on a straight Hayes trade, b/c the condition of re-signing won't exceed the trade value in itself.

 

[Edge]

Maybe. On the other hand, the Rangers have a good amount of strong assets from the last 3 drafts. Howden, Hajek, Rykov, and Lindgren are all 2016 picks. Plus our own picks from the 17 and 18 drafts. In a way, it’s almost as if we’re entering year 4 of the process. But rebuilds can easily take 5-7 years. The last Rangers rebuild (not tank) lasted 7 years from 2004-2010. So we’ve still got a couple of years at least.

I think the Rangers have done a good job of re-creating a 2016 draft for themselves, but there's also a lot of holes in that 2017 draft. We had the two firsts, but then didn't pick again until significantly later in the draft.

By the 2020 draft we should have a decent idea of what we have, don't have, and a reasonable stockpile of talent.

 

[Avery16]

Agree. This defensive corps is an abomination even with Skjei. If the Rangers can truly get Nylander out of Toronto for Skjei, Zuccarello, and a sweetener, I would do it.

Skjei is a weird player in a weird place to me. He's signed for four more years after this one. He'll be in his late 20's at the conclusion of this deal. Is he really a part of the future as a part of the next wave of talent when the team is ready to contend again? The Rangers have Miller, Lindgren, Hajek, Ragnarsson, and Gross as players that can legitimately play in the NHL one day. Add Bigras too as a bottom pairing stopgap the next couple of years.

The Rangers are counting on Miller to be that top pairing, all situations defenseman that McDonagh was. They need to be really careful with how they handle him. Don't ruin him by throwing him onto a **** team. Let him marinate at least one more year at Wisconsin and re-evaluate. His development is more important to the future of the franchise than any other prospect they currently have. Even over Andersson, Chytil, Kravtsov, et al. Don't **** this up.

Also, Skjei is 25 and has taken a step backwards in his development. Its understandable, he never should have been expected to step into top-pairing minutes at this point. However, he will be entering his prime once we're ready to compete and his prime isn't looking like a top-pairing D. We have several LD coming up in the next couple seasons, and his value might never be higher than it is currently.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

With Ottawa looking like they are probably trading Duschene we could be into the same problem we had last year with McDonagh and Karlsson. I really thought Hayes would be a hit in Winnipeg but I cant believe they wouldnt want Ducehene instead. Maybe Colorado would be the spot for Hayes? This year is critical for the rebuild

 

[EpicDing]

I'm of the opinion this team isn't even thinking of competing, or even gettting into the playoffs, til 21-22, when all of Hank, Staal, Smith, and Shattenkirk come off the books. And I'm ok with that. If we're gonna rebuild, may as well take the time to do it right.

 

[Avery16]

You talk like the Rangers felt a strong need to make multiple changes in the top-4 and they weren’t content with McDonagh, Girardi and Staal taking 3 of those slots. Guess what? The only changes they ever wanted to make was to get more offense in there. They wanted to keep the core 3. Rick Nash did not prevent them from signing Dan Boyle or trading for Keith Yandle.

Nash certainly wasn't the only mistake we made. And yeah- Boyle was about the best we could do, given Nash's contract. Boyle wasn't even close to being enough. Nash's contract was absolutely a major factor in whether or not we could've retained Yandle. Imagine if we had been able to extend Yandle and still trade McD? Skjei would be where he belongs. We might not have signed Shattenkirk OR Smith.

 

[mulli25]

I would very much quietly offer up Skjei around the league

I'd do it with a megaphone

 

[Tawnos]

Nash certainly wasn't the only mistake we made. And yeah- Boyle was about the best we could do, given Nash's contract. Boyle wasn't even close to being enough. Nash's contract was absolutely a major factor in whether or not we could've retained Yandle. Imagine if we had been able to extend Yandle and still trade McD? Skjei would be where he belongs. We might not have signed Shattenkirk OR Smith.

The Rangers could have easily re-signed Yandle if they wanted to and Boyle was their target right from the moment they decided to let Stralman walk. Nash's contract didn't impact either of these things.

And extending Yandle wouldn't have prevented the need to rebuild.

 

[Avery16]

The Rangers could have easily re-signed Yandle if they wanted to and Boyle was their target right from the moment they decided to let Stralman walk. Nash's contract didn't impact either of these things.

And extending Yandle wouldn't have prevented the need to rebuild.

On your first point, if I had the time, there’s easily about a half dozen period articles that claim otherwise

 

[NYR Viper]

What about without an extension? Cause I've never seen a team get another 1st for an extension. Usually it's like a 4th rounder if they sign the guy.

I think we need to focus on a straight Hayes trade, b/c the condition of re-signing won't exceed the trade value in itself.

Generally there is a conditional pick. For example, Buffalo acquired SJ's pick via a conditional pick sent to them last yer for Evander Kane.

 

[RangerBoy]

Gorton has the 2nd most money invested on D(AAV) in the NHL behind San Jose.

$27,188,333.

 

[Thirty One]

Gorton has the 2nd most money invested on D(AAV) in the NHL behind San Jose.

$27,188,333.

Are you suggesting it's not money well spent?