Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XX

[Avery16]

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.

I forgot about Haley.

 

[Edge]

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.

Are we talking a 2019 Carl Hagelin type deal? A little more? I can live with that.

Are we talking closer to the deal Hagelin signed back in 2015? I start to climb out of my comfort zone.

It really all depends on what price point and term we're talking about.

 

[NYR Viper]

Are we talking a 2019 Carl Hagelin type deal? A little more? I can live with that.

Are we talking closer to the deal Hagelin signed back in 2015? I start to climb out of my comfort zone.

It really all depends on what price point and term we're talking about.

Fence sitter

 

[Edge]

Fence sitter

Hahaha.

The challenge with debating potential contracts is that it's difficult to do without details.

I can't go on a lot and buy a car, or negotiate on price, unless I have a reference point.

If I'm proposing $10,000 on a brand new $30,000 car, that conversation isn't going to last long. If they're asking $25,000, and I was thinking $20,000, now we have a conversation.

 

[nyr2k2]

The last time I remember having a really good bottom six was when we made the Cup. Pouliot, Hagelin, Fast, Moore, Boyle, Dorsett.

Pouliot: $1.3M
Hagelin: $2.25M
Fast: ELC
Moore: $1M
Boyle: $1.7M
Dorsett: $1.63M
Total: $8.78
Total % of cap: 13.65%

Say you have Fast at $3M and Howden at $900K. That's 4.6% of the cap. So to replicate the 2013-2014 spending, you'd still have $7.6M for the other four guys which would likely include a couple mil for Lemieux, and maybe other ELCs like Chytil or Kravtsov.

I'm not advocating for spending money on third and fourth liners for fun. I'm advocating for building a legitimately good bottom six that can make a real difference, where $3M for Fast isn't a big deal and he helps solidify the usefulness of those bottom six forward. Those guys on that 2013-2014 team really carried us at times and were often the difference in games. If we had a glut of guys ready to jump into these spots maybe I'd feel differently, be we don't so I don't.

 

[wafflepadsave]

yes fixed.

thats what i meant lol

fast is a fine player. not sure that money isnt better spent elsewhere. would seem a good solid pickup for a playoff bound team looking for a bottom six player just as you described. its a cap thing as much as opening up a spot for a more effective value bottom 6 player who can do much the same for less $$.

as for shestyorkin, its his time. a year to get used to the angles and smaller NA rinks and hes shown with his numbers hes good to go. backing up hank early, splitting 60/40 mid season and eventually taking over the #1 spot seems about right.

georgie is a good piece to a larger deal. he may well be #1 material but not here.

Trade fast and if he wants to come back in July, sign him if it makes sense.

 

[Ghost of jas]

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.

Maybe drafting a few instead of overstocking LDs and drafting a goalie in the second round could remedy that?

 

[Deleted member 23124]

Trade fast and if he wants to come back in July, sign him if it makes sense.

Trade him === YES.

Resign him === Not a chance!!

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

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.

The players you listed, at this point - and likely forever - are warm bodies. Fast is a really underrated player - a rare jack of all trades on a roster that doesn't have many players fitting that ilk. He very well may be priced out, but lets not act like he's easily replaceable to a bottom 6 that is already brutal.

 

[Edge]

Maybe drafting a few instead of overstocking LDs and drafting a goalie in the second round could remedy that?

Depends. None of those guys would likely be pushing for spots right now, so it wouldn't really solve the problem for a while.

But I've always been of the belief its easier to turn value into value than it is to turn garbage into value.

So if we've able to identify talent and value, I'd rather trade from a position of abundance (like one of our young LD that progresses), then to try and draft a forward who isn't likely to serve in the role anyway, just because he's a forward.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

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

We haven't had anywhere near enough depth under Quinn to even identify what a 4th liner should be.

 

[Avery16]

We haven't had anywhere near enough depth under Quinn to even identify what a 4th liner should be.

I think the answer is something that gets less than 6:00/GP

 

[True Blue]

But given the current cap situation, the second he even indicates me might be pricing himself out, the Rangers will be almost forced to cut bait.

Agreed. If he thinks that the Rangers are paying him $7m, he has another thing coming. But the thing is that they do not need to find out now. He is an RFA. The Rangers can take him to arbitration where they will submit market comps and I doubt that one of the will be $7m. And that would allow them to see if he can do it again. But if he is wants to play ball, albeit with a very good raise, there is a deal to be had. But if he is here, then IMO, BOTH Buch and Kreider are not.

I think we're essentially saying the same thing, but the voices of ardent lovers and haters of Strome are being amplified. It's wise to not get emotionally attached to specific players, especially now.

Again, agreed. I just cannot stand the "anyone can just do the same exact thing" narrative.

 

[True Blue]

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.

None of those 4 are remotely close to Fast. Not that I am saying bring him back at all cost, but let's not try to say that there is a very easy replacement in the system.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I think the answer is something that gets less than 6:00/GP

I think that has more to do with the paper thin NHL-caliber depth on this team. Depth and rolling 4 capable lines is more important than ever in today's NHL. I'd have to believe Quinn would enjoy doing that, if he had the players to do so.

 

[nyr2k2]

I think the answer is something that gets less than 6:00/GP

Fast should get 7-10 mins 5v5 and then a bunch of PK time. End up between 10-13 minutes most nights. He also starts in the defensive zone something like 60% of the time so he's not getting prime minutes and opportunities or anything.

 

[Fitzy]

I think the answer is something that gets less than 6:00/GP

No player that is a top PK choice is likely to play that little on average.

That's the kind of TOI that goes to useless 4th liners that can't play the PK, such as Haley.

Fast plays 2:45 a game on the PK alone. Even if we estimated his ES time down to a 6 minute a game 4th line ES shift, thats still far more.

 

[NYR Viper]

The beauty of Fast as well is that he can be a placeholder in the case of injuries on any line and not look out of place. On a young where the coach may want to send a message or teach a young player when they make a mistake that versatility is valuable. It's part of the reason I would be for re-signing Strome for 4 years as well. His versatility he has shown from the 4th line to the top-line has value on a team learning as they go for the coaching staff.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Maybe 2020 is the year they acquire Sergachev

Right guys.....

 

[True Blue]

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.

I agree. And that is how the look of a lineup can be changed.

 

[B17 Apricots]

I'd rather buyout Staal than Smith, unless it's absolutely necessary to get his money off the books I actually wouldn't be opposed to keeping him as a 4th liner. I'd like to see Lettieri up but he's a guy I'd rather see up in the lineup with some skill rather than the bottom line but I'm not sure were ever gonna get a chance to see that or if he could even hang in that role.

 

[Avery16]

Fast should get 7-10 mins 5v5 and then a bunch of PK time. End up between 10-13 minutes most nights. He also starts in the defensive zone something like 60% of the time so he's not getting prime minutes and opportunities or anything.

I’m making a joke about how Quinn plays rookies and retreads on the 4th line, not commenting on Fast’s usage.

 

[aufheben]

Lol @ Montreal going dumpster diving in desperation mode

 

[Trxjw]

While I agree with much of that, the pick versus the already drafted prospects part, I think much of that depends on how they perceive this next draft, and how they perceive whoever maybe available from those 14-16 drafts and who may be avaible as the add on instead of say a 2nd rounder.

For example say they do take back a 2nd, likely a late one instead of say Bennett, can they somehow find another Fox type using that late 2nd if they also combine it with their own 2nd?

For sure if there is another Fox like player (say a forward instead) who may become available, I'd want the picks to make that sort of deal should it come about as those two 2nds, or one 2nd and Bennett is not worth as much as a Fox like player.

I guess I think at the deadline the already drafted players being made available from those who are renting are almost always going to be like secondary or B level types, where as during the summer leading up to the draft teams start to think about, well things like do I have to trade a Fox? Something they were not going to trade at a deadline because they still had time to try to sign him, and were more focused on the playoffs at hand.

Seems like GMs wait until they are absolutely desperate to trade anything of real value, and I'm not sure those teams feel the desperation to do so at the trade deadlines where as during the summer that desperation starts to manifest itself.

Well regardless of how you view the potential of the pick one thing holds true: The NHL body will contribute sooner than the pick will. The Rangers have a pretty deep prospect pool built up, extra picks in this year's draft, and will likely add a future asset or two in the Kreider deal regardless of that "extra" add. So while this may be a deep draft in some circles, it's still not likely to produce a player who can come in and skate in any capacity next year.

I'm not sure how many Fox deals are out there. That was a pretty unique situation that worked in the Rangers' favor. If you think about it, getting a 1st round pick and a cost controlled player, who is more of a known quantity than an additional pick, is a pretty steep price to pay for a player who is likely to play 30 games for you. So I think we can certainly wish for more, but we shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth either.

Depending on how the season shakes out, it's very well possible that the Rangers will be shopping the best winger available. We should get a good haul regardless of the individual pieces.

 

[Trxjw]

Agreed. Either way, I think we're at the point in the rebuild where the centerpieces of such deals can't be a pick or a prospect that are years away from (potentially) being something. The question is do you really want to make a potential problem child or player with other issues the centerpiece of a Kreider deal.

I mean they can be the center piece, but the expectation shouldn't be that the Rangers are absolutely going to make said picks or develop said prospects. Say they get a package like Jost and a 1st from Colorado. They could very well turn around and package that 1st with Buchnevich and Andersson for a good young defensemen. Remember when the Rangers added Lemieux, teams were already calling Gorton to see if he was available in a trade because some of them had no idea he could be had.

So while I'm all for picking up a reclamation project in a Kreider deal, I don't necessarily think he'll be the centerpiece. I also don't believe that the pieces added in that deal will be finalized for some time. Just like how the Nash deal evolved over time into Lindgren, Miller, and Strome when it started as Spooner, Lindgren, and a late 1st.