Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXI - Let's make a deal

[Siddi]

I think if I was doing a fantasy draft, and all the NHL's goalies were available to me, there are probably somewhere between 10 and 15 I would pick at this point ahead of Lundqvist. Even with the poor performances you mentioned, I would probably still pick those two names, at this point, before I would pick Lundqvist.

Longterm or win now situation? Longterm, I would understand. Win now, never.

Hank is outperforming basically everyone when looking at the advanced stats while being on a bottom feeder.

 

[RGY]

Phil is just the messenger here but apparently Freidman said this stuff on the latest episode of his podcast



The stuff about Georgiev being in their plans long term would line up with what @Edge is saying regarding Hank potentially retiring

And the Kreider part, I'll believe it when I see it. Until he's still on the roster after the deadline passes, I think he's gone

Its either them trying to drive up the price for Kreider or they really are undecided on letting him go. He clearly has an impact on this team both on the ice and off. He has taken on that leadership role since really when McDonagh left and they started getting younger.

The next 3-4 weeks of hockey will play a factor too.

 

[Fitzy]

If the choices are Strome at 4.5 or Kreider at 7 I know which way I'm leaning.

 

[Edge]

Not that I think Lundqvist is elite at this stage in the game, but would teams like, say, Boston, Dallas, and Washington mask some of his shortcomings?

It's not unreasonable to say that Henrik is still a bona-fide starter in this league and just because you have a long list of goalies you'd start before him doesn't mean there isn't ample evidence to support a much shorter list.

Like, I gotta wonder just on this why Bobrovsky would be ahead of him? Is that just going forward beyond this season. Even then that's a weird ranking. Holtby, too, for that matter...

I definitely think there are teams that would mask Lundqvist's shortcomings, absolutely.

I think Lundqvist can still start for quite a few teams in this league. Like I said, depending on how much time I sit down and think about it, he's still in the upper half, maybe close to the upper third of goalies in the league.

What am I looking? A combination of things, some of which give certain guys the benefit of the doubt beyond the first half of this season. So things like consistency, mobility, how they're getting beat, the defense and system in front of them, the quality of competition to this point, etc.

And again, I don't think it's a matter of Lundqvist not finding success elsewhere. I think it's a matter of finding the sweet spot where there would be an opening in a place he'd want to play. And I don't know if there's many, if any options, that meet that criteria.

The issue is not whether Lundqvist can still play in the NHL. I think that's been emphasized to death at this point. The question is whether he will be happy with his role, and the direction the Rangers are taking, and subsequently whether he prefers that role, a role elsewhere, or to retire before he gets to a point where he feels like he isn't competing against his own standards.

And to that last point, I think there's a 30-40 percent chance that might happen.

 

[Siddi]

Speaking of, I just looked at advanced stats, and beyond the fact that advanced goalie stats are somewhat murky (even by the admission of many advanced stats peeps), I'm not really sure what data you're pointing to. Because there are several measures by which Lundqvist doesn't even have the best advanced stats on his team or in his division, let alone outperforming basically everyone.

 

[Edge]

Longterm or win now situation? Longterm, I would understand. Win now, never.

Hank is outperforming basically everyone when looking at the advanced stats while being on a bottom feeder.

Well, long-term is what teams are going to be looking at. That's the whole basis of roster building.

As for win-now, he would probably rank higher, but that's not the landscape we're looking at.

 

[RGY]

If the choices are Strome at 4.5 or Kreider at 7 I know which way I'm leaning.

What if the choice was

Strome-Kreider-Tuch-+

over

Buch-Skjei

 

[Siddi]

Well, long-term is what teams are going to be looking at. That's the whole basis of roster building.

As for win-now, he would probably rank higher, but that's not the landscape we're looking at.

Yes, I understand that but your initial question for me was if I believed Hank to be elite right now in 2020 which my answer to that said question was, yes, by the standards of the NHL today. Which the stats prove.

 

[Fitzy]

What if the choice was

Strome-Kreider-Tuch-+

over

Buch-Skjei

With our prospect depth at defense I'd trade Skjei for a 7th tomorrow if it got him off the cap.

 

[mulli25]

Anyone watched Vaakanainen this year? Thoughts on him coming over as part of a deal for Kreider?

I know we tend to project a lot of depth at LD, but to me, its still a massive weakness until proven otherwise.

 

[Edge]

Well, long-term is what teams are going to be looking at. That's the whole basis of roster building.

As for win-now, he would probably rank higher, but that's not the landscape we're looking at.

And on HDSV% he ranks 8th for goalies with a minimum of 10 games, MDSV% he ranks signficantly lower, and on GSAA he ranks 15th.

The ironic thing is that stats show he does better with high danger shots compared to his peers than medium or low danger shots.

So, again, add it all up, and we're right in that 10-15 range I talked about.

 

[Edge]

Yes, I understand that but your initial question for me was if I believed Hank to be elite right now in 2020 which my answer to that said question was, yes, by the standards of the NHL today. Which the stats prove.

And I just sent several other stats saying otherwise.

Which is part of the problem with the whole advanced stats for goalie argument in the first place.

Which is why, I said initially, if you think he's elite there's not much else to discuss.

I tell you that you'd be hard pressed to find anyone, within the Rangers or the league, who would classify Lundqvist as elite at this stage. But you're entitled to feel that way.

 

[Fireonk]

Makes no sense. Bracco is 22 and can't make the NHL. There must be a reason for it. A 5'11 forward at 22 isn't worth close to Georgiev. I'd much rather do Smith, Georgiev for Jankowski, Bennett and a first. Our bottom 6 needs to be fixed quick. It blows.

Smith has no value. No way you are getting all that for Georgiev and a cap dump.

 

[TheDirtyH]

I definitely think there are teams that would mask Lundqvist's shortcomings, absolutely.

I think Lundqvist can still start for quite a few teams in this league. Like I said, depending on how much time I sit down and think about it, he's still in the upper half, maybe close to the upper third of goalies in the league.

What am I looking? A combination of things, some of which give certain guys the benefit of the doubt beyond the first half of this season. So things like consistency, mobility, how they're getting beat, the defense and system in front of them, the quality of competition to this point, etc.

And again, I don't think it's a matter of Lundqvist not finding success elsewhere. I think it's a matter of finding the sweet spot where there would be an opening in a place he'd want to play. And I don't know if there's many, if any options, that meet that criteria.

The issue is not whether Lundqvist can still play in the NHL. I think that's been emphasized to death at this point. The question is whether he will be happy with his role, and the direction the Rangers are taking, and subsequently whether he prefers that role, a role elsewhere, or to retire before he gets to a point where he feels like he isn't competing against his own standards.

And to that last point, I think there's a 30-40 percent chance that might happen.

That's all sensible, if a bit away from the 'long list' of starters you'd pick over him at the moment. I'm curious too to see how things play out and agree with your takes about Lundqvist's pride and self-evaluation putting him on a timeline we might not expect.

That said, there's a couple reasons for me why I'm still comfortable at this point with a plan moving forward with both Igor and Hank in the picture. The first is that Igor has only played two games. He looks like the real deal, but after two games, real deal more approximates to NHL-ready than superstar or even #1 goalie. By seasons end that could change, but I tend to like to let these things settle over time. The second reason is that in the NHL today the classic 60-40, starter-backup split doesn't really exist on real contenders. The teams that went deepest last year all split games much closer to 40-40. Rask, Bishop, Binnington, and even less elite-tiered starters showed demonstrably improved stats through the year and into the playoffs when their splits were smaller and they played as part of a tandem. In that sense, it's not, at this point, a given that Lundqvist would be a backup--this year, next year, or even beyond. For me, the issue rises when we start to compete for a playoff spot again and get in. Who's playing in the post-season? I don't think Henrik could sit those games out.

 

[Kovalev27]

You know what’s elite? This sweet sexy brand new #72.

 

[RGY]

With our prospect depth at defense I'd trade Skjei for a 7th tomorrow if it got him off the cap.

If they could turn Buch into a competent LD and a depth forward that would be the ideal tradeoff moving forward. Maybe they grab Carrier in the deal with LV to offset the money.

Kreider-Zib-Tuch
Panarin-Strome-Fast
Lemmy-Chytil-Kakko
Howden-Mckegg-Carrier
Smith

???/Hajek-Trouba
???/Hajek-DeAngelo
Lindgren-Fox
Staal

Or

They could get a forward for Buch that plays more of the north-south game to push Fast down to the 4th line, try DeAngelo at LD and bring up Keane.

Hajek-Trouba
DeAngelo-Fox
Lindgren-Keane
Staal

 

[LaffyTaffy]

Lias A. to Detroit is a definite possibility. Interest and ties there. LA too

Assuming nothing is imminent because the Rangers want to play hard to get, who do you think those teams would be willing to part with??

 

[LaffyTaffy]

View attachment 305681 View attachment 305679 You know what’s elite? This sweet sexy brand new #72.

Gotta attach an NSFW warning

 

[Kovalev27]

Gotta attach an NSFW warning

seriously careful opening this thread right now boys nothing but fire to see haha

 

[LaffyTaffy]

If I am being completely honest, I think I would add to Lias to get Joe Veleno from Detroit. I'd also be happy with Jonathan Berggren.

From LA, Akil Thomas or Jaret Anderson-Dolan would probably be my realistic targets.

 

[Edge]

That's all sensible, if a bit away from the 'long list' of starters you'd pick over him at the moment. I'm curious too to see how things play out and agree with your takes about Lundqvist's pride and self-evaluation putting him on a timeline we might not expect.

That said, there's a couple reasons for me why I'm still comfortable at this point with a plan moving forward with both Igor and Hank in the picture. The first is that Igor has only played two games. He looks like the real deal, but after two games, real deal more approximates to NHL-ready than superstar or even #1 goalie. By seasons end that could change, but I tend to like to let these things settle over time. The second reason is that in the NHL today the classic 60-40, starter-backup split doesn't really exist on real contenders. The teams that went deepest last year all split games much closer to 40-40. Rask, Bishop, Binnington, and even less elite-tiered starters showed demonstrably improved stats through the year and into the playoffs when their splits were smaller and they played as part of a tandem. In that sense, it's not, at this point, a given that Lundqvist would be a backup--this year, next year, or even beyond. For me, the issue rises when we start to compete for a playoff spot again and get in. Who's playing in the post-season? I don't think Henrik could sit those games out.

Well, 1/3 to 1/2 still amounts to 10-15 players, so when we're talking about calling someone elite, and I'm looking at that many guys I'd pick ahead of him, I consider that a fairly long. But admittedly, I'm not really interested in debating the definition of the word long.

As for the future, I think the difference is that the Rangers have both Georgiev and Shesterkin. If they had one or the other, I think the scenarios people are describing are more likely. But when you have both? That complicates things a bit. Especially, when you have the Rangers sending signals that they like both guys and want them here for the long haul.

At the end of the day, one of two things is going to happen:

1. Lundqvist remains and shares time with Shesterkin. Georgiev is moved.

2. Lundqvist leaves and Shesterkin and Georgiev share time.

I don't see a scenario where Shesterkin is moved and Lundqvist/Georgiev remain the tandem.

If I had to guess, based on little things I've heard coming from different places, I think the Rangers would prefer option 2. But it's not entirely in their control.

So, again, if I had to put numbers on paper, I'd say there's a 60-70 percent chance of scenario 1 happening, and a 30-40 percent chance of option 2 happening,

 

[True Blue]

Is the role we described what he wants? Eh, that part I'm not sure about.

Agreed. I still do not know how willing is he to retire after this year.

 

[TheDirtyH]

It's all about the fan in me, but I'd be so disappointed to see Henrik pushed to retire by the organization before he's actually stopped adding value on the ice. Especially after watching their loyalty to some pretty pathetic on-ice performers the last two decades. But it is what it is. Personally would rather see Georgiev moved, but 'it's a business' after all.

 

[Kovalev27]

You’re going to know very soon if hank is going to retire or not. We go past the deadline with Georgiev still here and even more so with Kreider still here my guess is hank is done. We are not going to do this 3 goaltender thing very long. It’s awful for the goalies. There is very little practice time this time of year. Georgiev is just sitting in the press box. We’ve got a long break coming up soon. Shesterkin will probably go down at some point soon for a game or two while Georgiev and hank split a weekend or something like that but this won’t last long. It can’t.

 

[Edge]

Well, again, the comments aren't to say Lundqvist retiring is the most likely scenario.

It's to say that it's probably more likely than people suspect, especially if they think there's a zero chance.

The odds are against Lundqvist retiring. It's just not quite the blowout that I think some might believe.