Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XX

[Avery16]

keane and shesty

 

[Dijock94]

You can afford to pay Fast that money if you're getting Kreider and Skjei off the books, as ODC suggested. Particularly if you then find a way to move out some or all of Smith's money, and whatever we do with Staal. You can absolutely afford $3M for Fast, who is very effective at what he does and provides some stability for what is becoming (somehow) an even younger team. 3x3 I do in a heartbeat. 4x3 I do as well with the idea you can probably trade him in year 3 of that deal when his salary is a pittance relative to the cap and he's still 30/31.

And yeah, that's what I meant about Georgiev/Shesterkin--before it was tough to justify getting rid of Georgiev for cheap to make room for an untested but phenomenal prospect, but if Goergiev struggles then that decision is made easier.

I disagree. He’s not that difficult to replace, so am I moving Skjei and assets to get Smiths contract off the books? No. If I’m moving Skjei and Smith’s cap hit I’m signing Kreider not Fast.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I disagree. He’s not that difficult to replace, so am I moving Skjei and assets to get Smiths contract off the books? No. If I’m moving Skjei and Smith’s cap hit I’m signing Kreider not Fast.

You say Fast is not difficult to replace yet, the Rangers can't seem the develop many bottom 6 players like him.

 

[Off Sides]

I feel as if the better deals Gorton has made have come during the summer, not so much at the deadlines. Not that I think he has been bad at the deadlines, more so I question the quality within the supply of what is available at every deadline.

Teams who are renting are not usually going to give up all that much in terms of prospects they love or current players they want for their playoff run.

Yet in the summer once they are forced for whatever reason to reshuffle, sometimes a Zibanejad or a Fox situation comes about, even continues, hence the Strome trade early this season.

I'm not great at stating it, but at the deadline picks are available, does not mean they need to use them to draft.

At the draft, into the summer, and even into the season, players become available as teams try to reshape their roster while dealing with the cap, dealing with players who want out, or will not extend, or will not extend long term, etc

I see more opportunity to trade for long term quality pretty much at any other time than the deadline. While I do not love the Trouba contract (would not have been my personal target), he is at least somewhat of a quality player (just to give another example of a player that became available only after the trade deadline where they parleyed the pick from Hayes back into Trouba)

Then again if some team is offering a prospect who really projects to be at least a top 6F or top 4D it's not like I'd take the pick instead.

 

[Dijock94]

You say Fast is not difficult to replace yet, the Rangers can't seem the develop many bottom 6 players like him.

Fogarty Gettinger And Lettieri are all options. In a cap world ou have to know when it’s prudent to resign players and when it isn’t. If you could resign Fast for 2 million I would be all for it but we won’t be able to, so his next contract will end up wasting much needed cap space. Edit: Nieves as well.

 

[Avery16]

I don't think resigning Henrik is a good move.

Would def re-sign Hank to a backup contract if he were amenable.

 

[nyr2k2]

i want fast moved for cap space and to allocate the $$ elsewhere. hes a very good bottom 6'er who quinn loves to play on line 1.

no question hes a solid performer but that spot and that $$ can go to a player who younger and less expensive for the same or better result. plus, time to add some size to that bottom 6.

sadly, jesper must go.

smith is a boat anchor unless hes bought out. same for staal.

i think 1 calendar year from now, shestyorkin will be clearly better than hank and also georgie for that matter.

this kid is the real deal.

Over the last 15, 20 years, how many guys like Fast have we developed? How many guys have we signed to do what he does that actually worked out? Do we have anyone in the system currently that is ready to step into his role and do what he does?

My answers are 1) almost no one, 2) very few, and 3) no.

If guys like Fast were easy to come by, our bottom six wouldn't have been utter garbage for most of the past 20 years. I get it if you're ready to move on from Jesper, but let's not pretend like he's so easily replaceable--we have no one in the system and to sign someone to do what he does, you'll have to basically pay the same price.

 

[nyr2k2]

I disagree. He’s not that difficult to replace, so am I moving Skjei and assets to get Smiths contract off the books? No. If I’m moving Skjei and Smith’s cap hit I’m signing Kreider not Fast.

I mean you could move Skjei and Kreider and still sign Fast without majorly impacting anything else. But whatever. I was responding to someone who listed a bunch of guys they'd move; I just said from his list of guys I'm fine with it, except I'd keep Fast. You can configure your roster however you'd like. Just be ready for an even worse bottom six since there's literally no one ready to step into it. We'll end up signing guys that will likely be terrible.

 

[JimmyG89]

Over the last 15, 20 years, how many guys like Fast have we developed? How many guys have we signed to do what he does that actually worked out? Do we have anyone in the system currently that is ready to step into his role and do what he does?

My answers are 1) almost no one, 2) very few, and 3) no.

If guys like Fast were easy to come by, our bottom six wouldn't have been utter garbage for most of the past 20 years. I get it if you're ready to move on from Jesper, but let's not pretend like he's so easily replaceable--we have no one in the system and to sign someone to do what he does, you'll have to basically pay the same price.

Grabner was the last time we got one of those in UFA. I would keep Fast personally. Does too many things well and can fit into multiple spots in the lineup. Although looking at the list of UFA, there are some solid depth options that could be available. If you let someone like Fast walk, you'll probably have to sign 2 guys that hit free agency.

Beyond that, Fast is a guy that has earned a lot of respect in the room from teammates. Keeping someone like that around is good for the overall team morale.

 

[nyr2k2]

Fogarty Gettinger And Lettieri are all options. In a cap world ou have to know when it’s prudent to resign players and when it isn’t. If you could resign Fast for 2 million I would be all for it but we won’t be able to, so his next contract will end up wasting much needed cap space. Edit: Nieves as well.

I am Fogarty's biggest fan but the guy will be 27 headed into next season with 14 NHL games and 0 points to his credit. Really? He's Fast's replacement? Lettieri will be 25 with a half-season to his credit and 8 points. When he's not scoring he's completely worthless. He hasn't earned a look this season. Both Fogarty and Lettieri are almost sure bets to be gone from the organization next year. And if we kept them and made them core components of our bottom 6, we'd be f***ed since Fogarty is probably not an NHL player in any capacity and Lettieri is horrible. This is reminiscent of people clamoring for Gilmour to take regular shifts. Nieves will also be gone.

Gettinger may able to play on the fourth line in the next year or so, but he's not there yet. And he's never going to be as good as Fast, coming from someone who was a fan of his before we even drafted him.

 

[Dijock94]

I mean you could move Skjei and Kreider and still sign Fast without majorly impacting anything else. But whatever. I was responding to someone who listed a bunch of guys they'd move; I just said from his list of guys I'm fine with it, except I'd keep Fast. You can configure your roster however you'd like. Just be ready for an even worse bottom six since there's literally no one ready to step into it. We'll end up signing guys that will likely be terrible.

That’s fine, and I would like to keep Fast if there was no salary cap. My argument is that the second we resign Fast he now becomes a negative asset in a cap world.

 

[Avery16]

Fogarty Gettinger And Lettieri are all options. In a cap world ou have to know when it’s prudent to resign players and when it isn’t. If you could resign Fast for 2 million I would be all for it but we won’t be able to, so his next contract will end up wasting much needed cap space. Edit: Nieves as well.

Can’t do worse than Smith and McKegg, at least now that Glass retired.

 

[Avery16]

I am Fogarty's biggest fan but the guy will be 27 headed into next season with 14 NHL games and 0 points to his credit. Really? He's Fast's replacement? Lettieri will be 25 with a half-season to his credit and 8 points. When he's not scoring he's completely worthless. He hasn't earned a look this season. Both Fogarty and Lettieri are almost sure bets to be gone from the organization next year. And if we kept them and made them core components of our bottom 6, we'd be ****ed since Fogarty is probably not an NHL player in any capacity and Lettieri is horrible. This is reminiscent of people clamoring for Gilmour to take regular shifts. Nieves will also be gone.

Gettinger may able to play on the fourth line in the next year or so, but he's not there yet. And he's never going to be as good as Fast, coming from someone who was a fan of his before we even drafted him.

Fast isn’t a 4th liner in Quinn’s system

 

[Dijock94]

I am Fogarty's biggest fan but the guy will be 27 headed into next season with 14 NHL games and 0 points to his credit. Really? He's Fast's replacement? Lettieri will be 25 with a half-season to his credit and 8 points. When he's not scoring he's completely worthless. He hasn't earned a look this season. Both Fogarty and Lettieri are almost sure bets to be gone from the organization next year. And if we kept them and made them core components of our bottom 6, we'd be ****ed since Fogarty is probably not an NHL player in any capacity and Lettieri is horrible. This is reminiscent of people clamoring for Gilmour to take regular shifts. Nieves will also be gone.

Gettinger may able to play on the fourth line in the next year or so, but he's not there yet. And he's never going to be as good as Fast, coming from someone who was a fan of his before we even drafted him.

We also signed Mckegg for what 700k dollars this offseason to be a bottom six forward? Nieves similar cap hit. Those are the types of salaries we need on our bottom six, not 4.35 for Smith and 3.5 for Fast. That’s a huge waste of valuable cap space, and the exact reason we can’t even consider keeping all of our RFAs and Kreider already.

 

[nyr2k2]

Fast isn’t a 4th liner in Quinn’s system

What I propose on a message board has no bearing on real life. Right? So I prefer to talk about these guys in terms of what I think they are and how they should be used. I think Fast is a valuable third/fourth line player. I'm not going to advocate walking away from him because Quinn is an idiot and wants to use him as something more. In my vacuum, I can value players away from their coaches.

 

[JimmyG89]

Fast isn’t a 4th liner in Quinn’s system

It's not Quinn's system, it's the hand he's being dealt. Who on lower lines should be playing more? You want Howden in the top 6? Kakko has gotten rotated in and out of it. He's still 18 and until last night hadn't score in nearly 2 months.

Smith has been on the 3rd line at times. Brendan Smith, a defenseman, has played on our 3rd line.

We don't have the depth to have Fast play a role he'd crush. He does solidly in his role at this time, but I'm sure Quinn would love to have him on the 3rd or 4th line because it means we have more depth up front than we do now.

 

[nyr2k2]

We also signed Mckegg for what 700k dollars this offseason to be a bottom six forward? Nieves similar cap hit. Those are the types of salaries we need on our bottom six, not 4.35 for Smith and 3.5 for Fast. That’s a huge waste of valuable cap space, and the exact reason we can’t even consider keeping all of our RFAs and Kreider already.

McKegg and Nieves are terrible. If your plan is to just sign a bunch of guys that are terrible, why not sign no one and just play with nine forwards? Honestly. Those guys suck. We have Michael Haley, too, why not mention him?

And I think Fast is a third/fourth line player, not strictly a fourth. Also, I didn't say $3.5--not sure where you're coming up with that number. And everyone knows Smith is black hole; I don't think anyone is saying otherwise so I don't know why he's relevant to discussion about Fast.

 

[Edge]

If Buch isn’t even doing what Miller did here, what makes you think he’s a PPG player in TB or Vancouver?

Miller with the Rangers - 341 games played, 172 points, ppg = .504

Buchnevich with the Rangers - 219 games played, 123 points, ppg = .56 ppg

Let's even take out the 56 games Miller played at a younger age than Buch (because I know that counter argument is coming), so we look at just ages 21-24:

Miller checks in at .57 ppg, Buch still checks in at .56 ppg.

Miller is a little heavier on the goals, Buch on the assists.

I could go into their respective styles, usage and debate the 2012-2017 Rangers vs. the 2016-2020 version, but for the sake of brevity I think the above more or less gets the point across on its own.

 

[NYR Viper]

I'll say this, with another team joining the NHL very soon, these quality 3rd/4th line players will be a bit harder to come by. There will be more jobs and the same number of people to fill them. I'd go up to about $2.75m for Fast on a 4 year deal.

 

[JimmyG89]

I'll say this, with another team joining the NHL very soon, these quality 3rd/4th line players will be a bit harder to come by. There will be more jobs and the same number of people to fill them. I'd go up to about $2.75m for Fast on a 4 year deal.

Identical deal to the one Hagelin signed this offseason.

 

[Edge]

I'll say this, with another team joining the NHL very soon, these quality 3rd/4th line players will be a bit harder to come by. There will be more jobs and the same number of people to fill them. I'd go up to about $2.75m for Fast on a 4 year deal.

It's such a tricky area where those types.

On the one hand, it can be easy to overpay them. On the other hand, I think there's a mindset that they're easy to replace. Then we let them go and that loss is immediately felt as we try to find a replacement for the guy we just lost.

I'm in the camp that it comes down to the terms, and the potential return trade value. Right now at forward, we have Kravtsov potentially being on the horizon, and maybe Barron. But we're not exactly flush with forward prospects pushing for spots in the immediate future. So even if we move Fast, I don't think our approach is going to involve calling Kravtsov up. It would likely lead to another move.

 

[Dijock94]

McKegg and Nieves are terrible. If your plan is to just sign a bunch of guys that are terrible, why not sign no one and just play with nine forwards? Honestly. Those guys suck. We have Michael Haley, too, why not mention him?

And I think Fast is a third/fourth line player, not strictly a fourth. Also, I didn't say $3.5--not sure where you're coming up with that number. And everyone knows Smith is black hole; I don't think anyone is saying otherwise so I don't know why he's relevant to discussion about Fast.

The relevance of this is the salary cap implications. If we hope to ice a competitive roster in a few years Fast would be a 4th kind forward. And I brought up 3.5 because that is my estimate on what it would cost to extend him as a UFA. So just because we don’t have better options means we have to be the ones that would sign him to a bad value contract for the role he plays on a quality nhl roster?

 

[Edge]

We also signed Mckegg for what 700k dollars this offseason to be a bottom six forward? Nieves similar cap hit. Those are the types of salaries we need on our bottom six, not 4.35 for Smith and 3.5 for Fast. That’s a huge waste of valuable cap space, and the exact reason we can’t even consider keeping all of our RFAs and Kreider already.

I feel like the gap between McKegg and Fast is almost as large as the gap between Fast and where we're using him on too many nights. So I don't think the McKegg/Nieves approach is the better path.

As for Smith, that's more of trying to salvage something, anything, from that contract. It's not really a strategy per se.

 

[NYR Viper]

It's such a tricky area where those types.

On the one hand, it can be easy to overpay them. On the other hand, I think there's a mindset that they're easy to replace. Then we let them go and that loss is immediately felt as we try to find a replacement for the guy we just lost.

I'm in the camp that it comes down to the terms, and the potential return trade value. Right now at forward, we have Kravtsov potentially being on the horizon, and maybe Barron. But we're not exactly flush with forward prospects pushing for spots in the immediate future. So even if we move Fast, I don't think our approach is going to involve calling Kravtsov up. It would likely lead to another move.

And that makes sense. As you have said, it all depends.

If the Rangers can return what we were discussing in this thread earlier, say Heinen + Frederic for Kreider well I'd feel more comfortable trading Fast and moving on for fear of overpaying (once I determined what he and his agent were asking for was an over payment in my eyes).

Also, what happens with Andersson is another one. Does he come back and play well in Hartford as we know he can tothe point that he is the NHL by the end of the year? Does he get traded and the piece coming back is a young NHL player like him for the end of this season or next (say Gauthier or Puljujaarvi). In which case the bottom-6 is all of a sudden filled with (3) more bodies that aren't here now.

OR

Is Kreider traded for a 1st and a very young raw prospect who is a couple of years away. In which case, as you stated there aren't a lot of players knocking on the door and Fast's presence is more required at that time.

 

[Dijock94]

I feel like the gap between McKegg and Fast is almost as large as the gap between Fast and where we're using him on too many nights. So I don't think the McKegg/Nieves approach is the better path.

As for Smith, that's more of trying to salvage something, anything, from that contract. It's not really a strategy per se.

Ok and I agree with you but I disagree with the idea of giving Fast his UFA contract and end up having him take up that much of our cap and playing a bottom 6 role.