Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXII

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
haveandare said:
Ideally through the draft. If through trades for our best pieces, let's get players who are young and have longer futures with us. Larsson is 26 already and despite the praise you're giving him, isn't all that special a player imo. I'm not sure how much offense he has in him. He hasn't broken 20 points in almost 5 years, that's not a high ceiling for a d-man with offense. Puljujärvi is a totally different thing than Larsson, his age is right at least. But he's a risk and definitely not one worth moving a Kreider at his absolute peak for.
Click to expand...

I am going with headlines since this post covers two topics and will be long as usual... ;)

The blue-line should be built before a group of forwards is assembled
I can't get that approch to add up. We draft a nuke forward this summer. 2019. 2020 and 2021 we take nuke Ds. Ds aren't carrying their teams by the time they are 22 y/o. It takes more than 4 years. 5-6 normally, if not a year or two longer before a young D is really ready to be a goto No 1 guy. Then they have longer careers. If we count on the kid we drafting getting it done super fast -- in 5 years -- the first guy is ready in 2025 and the second in 2026.

In almost all cases, if we look at successful rebuilds, its younger forwards back-up'ed by a more experienced blueline. Right? I think there is a reason for that. The other way around can be very problematic. A blueline is so important for a team, it must be steady. And you can only get there by going through going pains. You don't want those young forwards first to go through a couple of tough years when they break into the league and then -- in addition -- go through 4-5 more tough years when a blueline is built under them. The result just isn't going to be good.

Duncan Keith and Brent Seabrook was 24-25 when Chicago drafted Pat Kane. That is perfect age from my POV.

D age is forward years minus 3, at the very least
Its also important to remember that Ds won't start to break down when they are 28-29 like forwards. All over the league we have Ds playing into their mid-30s. I would at least say that D years should be counted as forward years minus 3.

Ie a defensemen age 26 is 100% comparable to a forward aged 23, in general of course. If a forward starts to trend downwards around 29 these days on average maybe, the same age is 32 for a D.

If we look at the new generation of Ds that have entered the league after 05', there is no way these guys will be out of the NHL at the age of 31-32.

Burns is leading Ds in scoring and he is 34. Giordano is 2nd in D scoring and he is 36. Letang 32. Yandle 33. 6th and 8th in D scoring. Suter us 34. Buff is 34. There are sooo many good Ds coming up behind that generation, Carlson, Karlsson, Doughty and co. They are 29-30 now, no way they won't be around playing top minutes for another 4-5 years at the very least. Many of them past that too probably. Also depends on how much hockey you play, those long PO runs wears on players of course.

So I don't for a second believe that an Adam Larsson wouldn't be able to play a good 8 more years in this league, with a slight downward trend staring in year 7-8...

I get where you are coming from, I would be totally against getting a Vlad Tarasenko for the same reason, but I wouldn't apply it to a D that turned 26 two months ago. Like its not even unlikely that a top D that is 26 today will last longer than like a forward like Brett Howden that is 21. Many forwards tackle off in their late 20s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kovazub94 and Ori
jas said:
@Edge and I have discussed this (as have others). I'm sure the Rangers are open to listening on Kreider, but, the thought is, it's going to cost the other team looking to acquire him. He's an impact player, as opposed to an elite player. He's a player whose line is immediately better when he's on it. My price is a top prospect - Glass, Tolvanen, Kaut, Borgstrom - for example - another quality prospect and an unprotected first. Or a quality prospect and two unprotected firsts. Otherwise, I'm signing him to a 6 year deal in the area $7 million per. You can't win if Kreider is your best player, but if the current version is your 3rd or 4th you can.
Click to expand...

Kreider falls into that weird category I call the "ultimate support player."

These are the guys who impact the play, impact the game, make their linemates better, but aren't necessarily the focal point of a team, or necessarily a team's best player. Like you said, they are typically the third best player, sometimes the fourth. On really good teams, they might even be a little lower. But they are incredibly valuable, and teams are always looking for those guys.

The risk is that there's a tendency to want to over-project those guys, and look at the them as the guy in in that number one or two slot on the list of your team's best players. But when you find one, you usually try to keep them.

If you decide to move someone like that, someone like Kreider, you HAVE to ask for a hefty return --- for exactly the reasons I stated in the second paragraph. When we talk about the Rangers being open to listening, it's about hearing other teams out. They need to at least know what the market is for Kreider.

Whether the Rangers ultimately decide to sign Kreider long-term, or trade him, it should be made after a feel for what he might be worth around the league.
 
When you get excited about a package from Edmonton with their 1st round pick, as yourself what that package looks like with a pick that isn't a lottery pick. Does it get you just as excited for the package?

Kreider to Edmonton makes them a more formidable team. They a great winger for McDavid and they get to move RNH or Draisaitl to the 2nd line full time. They could absolutely sneak into the playoffs with him on the roster and a couple other guys getting healthy. Bouchard and Yamamoto are good but not great prospects. Puljujarvi is a buy low candidate, not a centerpiece.

There's really nothing that gets me excited from Edmonton for Kreider.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pld459666, Lias Andersson, jas and 1 other person
Trxjw said:
When you get excited about a package from Edmonton with their 1st round pick, as yourself what that package looks like with a pick that isn't a lottery pick. Does it get you just as excited for the package?

Kreider to Edmonton makes them a more formidable team. They a great winger for McDavid and they get to move RNH or Draisaitl to the 2nd line full time. They could absolutely sneak into the playoffs with him on the roster and a couple other guys getting healthy. Bouchard and Yamamoto are good but not great prospects. Puljujarvi is a buy low candidate, not a centerpiece.

There's really nothing that gets me excited from Edmonton for Kreider.
Click to expand...

I'd take their first as part of a deal, but it wouldn't be the centerpiece for the reasons you just stated.

I also happen to like Nurse a lot and would want him as part of the deal. Then we'd have to decide on a prospect and/or another pick, or some combination of the two.
 
Vinny DeAngelo said:
source.gif


Everyone here overrates kreider because hes home grown.. Hes basically fully grown at 27 and hes only played 80+ once and hasnt score more than 53..

SELL HIGH
Click to expand...
I'm uncertain on the right path with Kreider. I'm on board with some of your post. For all his tools, I would like to have seen better results so far and the fact that he's putting it together now, I get the sentiment to sell high.

But I don't see that trade as a sell high offer. The 1st drops in value drastically as they probably take it out of lottery status with Kreider. Pool party is far from a legit long term player. Bouchard is probably the most valuable piece but he is no guarentee.

I need an offer that hurts Edmonton. Something that makes it clear they sacrificed future success for results now. I don't see that piece in their organization now.

Maybe that's overvaluing him still, but at the same time we don't have to trade him. I maintain my position of strength on this front and force teams to pry him away.
 
DutchShamrock said:
I'm uncertain on the right path with Kreider. I'm on board with some of your post. For all his tools, I would like to have seen better results so far and the fact that he's putting it together now, I get the sentiment to sell high.

But I don't see that trade as a sell high offer. The 1st drops in value drastically as they probably take it out of lottery status with Kreider. Pool party is far from a legit long term player. Bouchard is probably the most valuable piece but he is no guarentee.

I need an offer that hurts Edmonton. Something that makes it clear they sacrificed future success for results now. I don't see that piece in their organization now.

Maybe that's overvaluing him still, but at the same time we don't have to trade him. I maintain my position of strength on this front and force teams to pry him away.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't know if Edmonton would be my first choice as a trading partner. But they tend to come up because they are looking for a forward, and Kreider on that team just seems like an obvious fit.
 
Edge said:
I'd take their first as part of a deal, but it wouldn't be the centerpiece for the reasons you just stated.

I also happen to like Nurse a lot and would want him as part of the deal. Then we'd have to decide on a prospect and/or another pick, or some combination of the two.
Click to expand...

I'm back and forth on Nurse. You can see the talent and potential, and he's been red hot lately, but I'm not entirely sold. Not to mention I think dealing him plus the first and another piece for Kreider might be too crazy even for Chia to do. Could be other parts involved of course but that's tough deal to make at the deadline. What a shit show it would be if Chia made that deal only to have Kreider walk as a UFA.
 
Trxjw said:
When you get excited about a package from Edmonton with their 1st round pick, as yourself what that package looks like with a pick that isn't a lottery pick. Does it get you just as excited for the package?

Kreider to Edmonton makes them a more formidable team. They a great winger for McDavid and they get to move RNH or Draisaitl to the 2nd line full time. They could absolutely sneak into the playoffs with him on the roster and a couple other guys getting healthy. Bouchard and Yamamoto are good but not great prospects. Puljujarvi is a buy low candidate, not a centerpiece.

There's really nothing that gets me excited from Edmonton for Kreider.
Click to expand...

I'd need at least the following to seriously think about trading Kreider:

Nurse/Yamamoto/2019 1st

or Nurse/2019 1st/2020 1st.
 
Trxjw said:
I'm back and forth on Nurse. You can see the talent and potential, and he's been red hot lately, but I'm not entirely sold. Not to mention I think dealing him plus the first and another piece for Kreider might be too crazy even for Chia to do. Could be other parts involved of course but that's tough deal to make at the deadline. What a **** show it would be if Chia made that deal only to have Kreider walk as a UFA.
Click to expand...

And for those reasons I am starting off with the "crazy" to start the conversations.

I'd let the market talk me down from that price.

The risk with Nurse is worth it for me --- especially considering his age. That's my "gamble" on the play. But if i'm going to gamble, I at least want the chance to walk away with more than pocket change.
 
Last edited:
We already know the value for Kreider at the deadline next year is going to be roughly a first, good prospect, and mid round pick. That's pretty much what all the top rentals have gone for recently. If the team doesn't plan to re-sign him he should definitely be traded this year because the haul will be significantly larger. They should be making the decision on whether or not to re-sign him right now and not waiting to see how things play out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Sides, East Coast Bias, HatTrick Swayze and 3 others
I would certainly consider Edmonton’s 1st as the centerpiece of a deal for Zucc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jas
SA16 said:
We already know the value for Kreider at the deadline next year is going to be roughly a first, good prospect, and mid round pick. That's pretty much what all the top rentals have gone for recently. If the team doesn't plan to re-sign him he should definitely be traded this year because the haul will be significantly larger. They should be making the decision on whether or not to re-sign him right now and not waiting to see how things play out.
Click to expand...

I agree.

If they are going to move him, that time is quickly approaching. If they are going to sign him, that tome is also approaching — though not quite as quickly.
 
Trxjw said:
I'm back and forth on Nurse. You can see the talent and potential, and he's been red hot lately, but I'm not entirely sold. Not to mention I think dealing him plus the first and another piece for Kreider might be too crazy even for Chia to do. Could be other parts involved of course but that's tough deal to make at the deadline. What a **** show it would be if Chia made that deal only to have Kreider walk as a UFA.
Click to expand...
Chiarelli will be lucky to be GM when Kreider walks. He can't plan that far ahead.

He has to move significant cap to fit guys coming off of IR. Cap that he blew through with Lucic and Draisaitl. One was a disaster and the other is a good player that he just paid like a generational talent way too early.

Adding help one marginal player at a time is going to lead to another playoff miss and walking papers. He will ultimately send up a prayer and just roll the dice because no one is helping him. It's not like he is in Pittsburgh and someone will hand him a first line wing with salary retained for extra.

Looking at it from that perspective, he is ripe for a fleecing but he lacks the ammo to acquire the pieces. It's almost irresponsible for the owner to allow him more time. PC is going to mortgage years of the future on a bad return, years that he will spend collecting salary sitting at home.
 
duhmetreE said:
I'd take 2019 Kreider over those 3 in their Ranger forms. Should have been more specific and said skater.
Click to expand...

Re watch our two PO series against Montreal and Ottawa and the problem with Kreider gets very apparent.

Kreider has done a great job getting to where he is today compared to where he was when we drafted him. But the fact remains that Kreider — so far in his career — has been waaay to inconsistent when it matters the most. Players like him should — must — be the opposite, it should be Kreider time when it matters the most.

It’s easy to forget, but it wasn’t just that he was 3+1 in those 12 games against pretty weak opponents — he disappeared completely for 2-3 games at the time.

I definitely wouldn’t rule out that Kreider takes another step and learns to be consistent, he needs improvement all over really. But like he is still inconsistent. Some nights he is a guy that can lead a young team and alone have a big impact. But you still get a week here and a week there when he isn’t.

Against everything we have seen from Kreider I do think it’s a bit of an illusion to paint up a picture of a guy who is worth more than others scoring twice as much as him. You can’t say that about a guy who lets a Radulov be 5x as valuable as him in a PO series or let’s a Hoffman be 15x as valuable as him in another PO series.
 
Edge said:
Kreider falls into that weird category I call the "ultimate support player."

These are the guys who impact the play, impact the game, make their linemates better, but aren't necessarily the focal point of a team, or necessarily a team's best player. Like you said, they are typically the third best player, sometimes the fourth. On really good teams, they might even be a little lower. But they are incredibly valuable, and teams are always looking for those guys.

The risk is that there's a tendency to want to over-project those guys, and look at the them as the guy in in that number one or two slot on the list of your team's best players. But when you find one, you usually try to keep them.

If you decide to move someone like that, someone like Kreider, you HAVE to ask for a hefty return --- for exactly the reasons I stated in the second paragraph. When we talk about the Rangers being open to listening, it's about hearing other teams out. They need to at least know what the market is for Kreider.

Whether the Rangers ultimately decide to sign Kreider long-term, or trade him, it should be made after a feel for what he might be worth around the league.
Click to expand...

As we've discussed, the Rangers don't have to move Kreider. I'm okay with the listening. But, I want a potential high end piece coming back, in addition to others quality pieces, and I just don't see that with Edmonton. Kaut, Bokk, even a Vesalainen look more intriguing than what Edmonton has to offer, I'm okay with moving Hayes for quality pieces that increase the overall dept wit a lottery ticket thrown in. I need more for a Kreider deal. To me, a Kreider trade with Edmonton instantly makes them better, and I'm not even sure the Rangers are better in the long term. There 's a fit for Edmonton, but not the Rangers,
 
  • Like
Reactions: wafflepadsave
Edge said:
And for those reasons I am starting off with the "crazy" to start the conversations.

I'd let the market talk me down from that price.

The risk with Nurse is worth it for me --- especially considering his age. That's my "gamble" on the play. But if i'm going to gamble, I at least want the chance to walk away with more than pocket change.
Click to expand...

Can definitely agree with you there. I'd start in the stratosphere with my ask and go from there.

Nurse also opens up a lot of possibilities for what to do with Skjei. Deal from the forward group to improve the D, then deal from the blue line to improve the forward group. See if you can come out ahead on both fronts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edge
Once again the over pricing of our assets is rampant... Just prepare to be disappointed if you expect what these people are all talking about for a return
 
DutchShamrock said:
Chiarelli will be lucky to be GM when Kreider walks. He can't plan that far ahead.

He has to move significant cap to fit guys coming off of IR. Cap that he blew through with Lucic and Draisaitl. One was a disaster and the other is a good player that he just paid like a generational talent way too early.

Adding help one marginal player at a time is going to lead to another playoff miss and walking papers. He will ultimately send up a prayer and just roll the dice because no one is helping him. It's not like he is in Pittsburgh and someone will hand him a first line wing with salary retained for extra.

Looking at it from that perspective, he is ripe for a fleecing but he lacks the ammo to acquire the pieces. It's almost irresponsible for the owner to allow him more time. PC is going to mortgage years of the future on a bad return, years that he will spend collecting salary sitting at home.
Click to expand...

That's fair and I can see the logic there. Chia does need to focus on the now. Perhaps the angle from Gorton is that Chia pays the premium for Kreider and Gorton helps him out with his cap situation. Not Lucic of course but maybe there's another avenue there.
 
Trxjw said:
Can definitely agree with you there. I'd start in the stratosphere with my ask and go from there.

Nurse also opens up a lot of possibilities for what to do with Skjei. Deal from the forward group to improve the D, then deal from the blue line to improve the forward group. See if you can come out ahead on both fronts.
Click to expand...

The possibilities, or potential “next moves” are also intriguing to me.

A year ago I would’ve said that sliding Skjei back into a second pairing role would help him considerably. Today, I’m not as sure about that, but it remains a possibility.

But even the opposite approach, moving him, has its own share of windows it could potentially open. Especially if the Rangers end up with someone like Byram in the first.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom