Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXII

[Kovalev27]

It's not even a low IQ debate, it's a matter of whether it's enough to carry him if the physical stuff slides --- which it likely will.

It's not a low vs. high debate, it's a checklist of skills across the board that exist beyond his skating.

If I'm going to bet on someone into their 30s, on a large, multi-year contract, that will have a movement clause, I feel like I need to be sold on more than his skating and physical gifts.

so the net front presence literally elite net front presence. Best in the league doesn’t matter to you here when talking IQ or having to be sold on more?

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

I don't recall Kreider playing this consistently well for as long a period of time in the past. Isn't that his rap? That he is capable of skating blithely round and round contributing minimal to nothing?

Which Kreider will the majority of his new contract see. If the Rangers were guaranteed that the recent level of play would be the game to game expected play from Kreider for years, then signing him might be a good thing.

If you sign him to an extension, you sign him with the expectations that he's going to be the same 50ish point player he's been the last few years. Not a 70 point guy. Maybe he reaches 30 goals this year or the next few, I don't think that's unreasonable. But to expect a 40 goal guy is pointless. Personally, I think he's worth $6/$6.5 per for the next 5 or 6 years considering everything else he brings to the table.

Even the most pro Kreider guys wouldn't advocate giving him the max. But if he's willing to take less to stay, he's worth it. If not, he goes.

 

[Edge]

so the net front presence literally elite net front presence. Best in the league doesn’t matter to you here when talking IQ or having to be sold on more?

I think that net presence you mentioned is a primary contributor as to why someone should be concerned about the mileage on his body.

And how many guys in their 30s do we refer to when discussing net presence?

 

[nyr2k2]

Trade him, let him know why you're doing it (I'm sure he understands, anyway), and tell him you hope to bring him back. Make him what you consider a fair offer and if he chooses to go elsewhere, so be it.

 

[Kovalev27]

I think that net presence you mentioned is a primary contributor as to why someone should be concerned about the mileage on his body.

And how many guys in their 30s do we refer to when discussing net presence?

league is nothing like it used to be in terms of standing in front of the net on the PP.

His only real lengthy injury was a freak one. Had nothing to do with wear and tear

And the premier net guy before him joe Pavelski is still getting big money contracts at 38 and he can’t even skate.

 

[Edge]

league is nothing like it used to be in terms of standing in front of the net on the PP.

His only real lengthy injury was a freak one. Had nothing to do with wear and tear

And the premier net guy before him joe Pavelski is still getting big money contracts at 38 and he can’t even skate.

It doesn't have to be like it was, it's still the tightest area of the ice. We can't on one hand talk about how valuable that area is, and how rare it is to find someone who can own it, and then discount why it's valuable and rare --- because gaining and maintaining that ground comes with a higher cost.

And I am well aware of Pavelski's contract, and I wouldn't be willing to give one to him either.

 

[Kovalev27]

It doesn't have to be like it was, it's still the tightest area of the ice. We can't on one hand talk about how valuable that area is, and how rare it is to find someone who can own it, and then discount why it's valuable and rare --- because gaining and maintaining that ground comes with a higher cost.

And I am well aware of Pavelski's contract, and I wouldn't be willing to give one to him either.

pavelski is 10 years older is the point lol

and yes it’s extremely rare to find someone who can do the job so how are you not making it an important piece of evaluating Kreiders worth to the team?

 

[Vitto79]

how much longer for Lemiuex to return?

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

That’s not what I asked you though the odds to beat aren’t as great when you’re talking about elite skaters in this league. They play alot longer than those that just rely on strength or skill. Kreider is both strong and an elite skater and has carved out a role as THE top net front presence in the league. While also being the fastest guy not named mcdavid. That’s all going way by the time he’s 34 35? I doubt it. Certainly not in the next 3 to 5 years. But again most teams have guys in the last year or two of deals that have declined. You can’t let everyone go because maybe at the end of their contracts they won’t be the same guy they are at the beginning.

I'm not saying he's going to become Milan Lucic once he hits 30, I just don't think it's worth the risk with Kreider. The potential for a decline in play is just one piece of it. There are so many other considerations that have to be accounted for, like having to sign the younger players to their next deals in 2-3 years

I'll continue to maintain that if Kreider was on another team, 95% of people not even be kicking around the idea of signing him as a UFA.

If the team was a year or two ahead of this rebuild process, maybe I could get behind signing Kreider because presumably in that scenario they'd be contending. Sorry but the timing of this just doesn't line up for me

 

[NYROrtsFan]

You constantly have to try to predict future ability from a player. That's what you give contracts for. I'd 100% move Kreider for a lot of the reasons listed above. His speed is going to drop off, that's not debatable. I also don't think he is good enough in other areas to make up for it. As also mentioned above, I think Panarin is the best example of someone who will never drop off as harshly because the things that make him a great player are mostly above the neck. He'll get slower, but he'll figure out ways to produce. Not to the level he does now, but at a productive level.

Kreider is a great guy though and the locker room contribution is super important. I think some people underrate that quality in general in sports but it's huge. Culture is just as important as ability.

 

[Tawnos]

You can't predict, so much as you try to evaluate the risk/reward and your odds of success.

I think people focus on the unpredictability aspect of sports and treat it like it's some kind of great mystery that isn't present in almost every aspect of daily life.

We can't predict when anyone will die. But who do you think is more likely to last longer, the 350 pound guy with high blood pressure and a smoking habit, or the guy who's in shape and lives a clean lifestyle?

The latter can drop dead while jogging, or get hit by a car, but most people would still see him as the safer bet.

In some or fashion, most debates on contracts come down to a lot of the same principles.

You can't evaluate odds for success accurately, is my point. The determining factor here isn't something like habits. The determining factor is genetics, which we do not know enough about in this regard to evaluate. Kreider being in such good shape isn't going to prevent him from falling off a cliff at 29 if that's what his genetics dictate. He's got the same likelihood of it happening even if he were just average for an NHL player in terms of conditioning. The debate is frankly meaningless.

The problem is that only trend that exists here is smaller players who play a physical game (i.e. Callahan) tending to decline earlier. There is no trend for anyone else. If you don't have a trend, there's no real chance of evaluating risks in way that gives your the odds you're looking for. There is no trend here, therefore I consider it a fools errand.

 

[Edge]

pavelski is 10 years older is the point lol

and yes it’s extremely rare to find someone who can do the job so how are you not making it an important piece of evaluating Kreiders worth to the team?

I know Kreider has worth. In fact I've routinely said two things:

1. What he brings is not easily replaced.

2. The aspects that we like about his game, are exactly the aspects that make him attractive to other teams.

I think Kreider has value to the team. I am not comfortable with that being rewarded in his 30s, over a 7 year/$40 million+ contract.

I think the problem with Kreider is that it's not a love or hate debate, or a value vs. no value debate.

Clearly, there's value. Clearly, there's are things to love. The question is how much is someone comfortable paying for that value, or what they love? And how long are they willing to pay for it?

The problem with signing any 29 year old UFA is the balance between paying for their reputation, vs. paying for their future. And each player rates differently on that scale and generates varying levels of comfort.

At 5 years and $25 million, that comfort level is greater than at 7 years and $49 million. In this case, I think the price tag is going to look at a lot closer to the latter contract, than the former. And I'm not terribly comfortably with the latter.

 

[Kovalev27]

He’s not on another team though. That’s what I mean as well. He’s proven he can be a big weapon next to mika in New York City. Not easy to do. He’s built that foundation here our players look up to him. It’s not signing another guy off another team and hoping he can be good.

we know what he brings here.

we’ve got a ton of money avail very soon. Not worried about signing our young guys. We have literally 2 big money contracts that go past next season. That’s all. We’re fine. 6.5-7 mil is not a ton of money with the Cap where it is these days.

 

[Edge]

You can't evaluate odds for success accurately, is my point. The determining factor here isn't something like habits. The determining factor is genetics, which we do not know enough about in this regard to evaluate. Kreider being in such good shape isn't going to prevent him from falling off a cliff at 29 if that's what his genetics dictate. He's got the same likelihood of it happening even if he were just average for an NHL player in terms of conditioning. The debate is frankly meaningless.

The problem is that only trend that exists here is smaller players who play a physical game (i.e. Callahan) tending to decline earlier. There is no trend for anyone else. If you don't have a trend, there's no real chance of evaluating risks in way that gives your the odds you're looking for. There is no trend here, therefore I consider it a fools errand.

See, I disagree.

Genetics is part of the equation, but we aren't looking at two guys working at a desk. We're talking about wear and tear, the type of game they play, strengths and weaknesses of that game, and the value we assign to those attributes monetarily.

Let's assume genetics is an unknown, I'm not totally convinced that the mileage and other factors make it a good investment.

 

[Fitzy]

Kreider brings a decent amount of things that don't necessarily show up on the stat sheet. That said, it doesnt fly under the radar and he's going to get paid like it.

7x7 is what I expect him to get on the market, and we have an income tax problem.

I don't think thats a good term and price tag to lock up a 2nd line player. We' be locking in too much of the roster and not leaving any flexibility for non-bridge contract extensions and more targeted free agent acquisitions.

It sucks because of his lengthy career here but it sucked with Zuccarello too. Didn't mean it was the wrong move to trade Zucc.

 

[cheech70]

Trade him, let him know why you're doing it (I'm sure he understands, anyway), and tell him you hope to bring him back. Make him what you consider a fair offer and if he chooses to go elsewhere, so be it.

Yes like the Yankees did with Chapman...Kreider and Fast trade them both and try to resign on July 1st after trading Strome and Pavel at draft.

 

[Edge]

The concern with Kreider for me is re-signing other players, like Zibanejad.

And there's that whole other aspect, which we've touched on, but aren't focusing on for this point in the conversation.

With Kreider and Panarin, we are talking about $20 million tied up in two LWs, for the better part of the next decade.

And yes, the cap will go up over that time, but this is also a team that is young and whose contracts are going to come due over that time. ADA is just the tip of the iceburg.

If Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, etc. are as good as we think they are, or as good as they're looking to be thus far, that's going to cost us.

So even with money being freed up, you're going to have some big contracts handed out over the next several years --- especially if this team finds success.

 

[Tawnos]

See, I disagree.

Genetics is part of the equation, but we aren't looking at two guys working at a desk. We're talking about wear and tear, the type of game they play, strengths and weaknesses of that game, and the value we assign to those attributes monetarily.

Let's assume genetics is an unknown, I'm not totally convinced that the mileage and other factors make it a good investment.

Well, I don't want to resign him for anything more than 4 years. Or 5 at the most.

The effects of wear and tear on an individual are 100% determined by genetics. Same thing is true with physical strengths and weaknesses.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I know Kreider has worth. In fact I've routinely said two things:

1. What he brings is not easily replaced.

2. The aspects that we like about his game, are exactly the aspects that make him attractive to other teams.

I think Kreider has value to the team. I am not comfortable with that being rewarded in his 30s, over a 7 year/$40 million+ contract.

I think the problem with Kreider is that it's not a love or hate debate, or a value vs. no value debate.

Clearly, there's value. Clearly, there's are things to love. The question is how much is someone comfortable paying for that value, or what they love? And how long are they willing to pay for it?

The problem with signing any 29 year old UFA is the balance between paying for their reputation, vs. paying for their future. And each player rates differently on that scale and generates varying levels of comfort.

At 5 years and $25 million, that comfort level is greater than at 7 years and $49 million. In this case, I think the price tag is going to look at a lot closer to the latter contract, than the former. And I'm not terribly comfortably with the latter.

Just a thought, and I think people seem to overlook this, but, Kreider currently has an AAV of $4.6 million. I don’t think increasing that another $2 million or so is going to be the breaking point that some do, especially when the salaries of Staal, Smith and Lundqvist are coming off the books, and salaries such as Skjei and Buchnevich could be moved. I don’t believe that additional $2 to 2.4 million is the hurdle people are making it out to be.

 

[True Blue]

I don’t think increasing that another $2 million or so is going to be the breaking point that some do, especially when the salaries of Staal, Smith and Lundqvist are coming off the books, and salaries such as Skjei and Buchnevich could be moved. I don’t believe that additional $2 to 2.4 million is the hurdle people are making it out to be.

I agree but think that management's issue is going to be be more term than anything else. A 5 year $32.50m deal would work. But take it to 7 years and say $49m?

 

[Edge]

Well, I don't want to resign him for anything more than 4 years. Or 5 at the most.

The effects of wear and tear on an individual are 100% determined by genetics. Same thing is true with physical strengths and weaknesses.

Eh, within reason.

Yes, some people are better genetically equipped to age better, but some positions and roles in the NHL are going to take their toll no matter what.

But as you said, genetics being an unknown, the question becomes how much are you willing to gamble on a contract that will take you through nearly 3 presidential elections. And that's ultimately what the debate is going to come down to.

It's not whether Kreider has value, or whether he can bring value to the team. It's how much, how long, and who are you willing to move in order to find out.

 

[Kovalev27]

You have a better shot at resigning Mika if you put a good team around him than you do fireselling every guy over 27 years of age.

 

[NYRangers0723]

If you sign him to an extension, you sign him with the expectations that he's going to be the same 50ish point player he's been the last few years. Not a 70 point guy. Maybe he reaches 30 goals this year or the next few, I don't think that's unreasonable. But to expect a 40 goal guy is pointless. Personally, I think he's worth $6/$6.5 per for the next 5 or 6 years considering everything else he brings to the table.

Even the most pro Kreider guys wouldn't advocate giving him the max. But if he's willing to take less to stay, he's worth it. If not, he goes.

I think Kreider loves it here and would take less. But gotta give him a fair offer. 6 million per year at least is fair

 

[Fitzy]

Just a thought, and I think people seem to overlook this, but, Kreider currently has an AAV of $4.6 million. I don’t think increasing that another $2 million or so is going to be the breaking point that some do, especially when the salaries of Staal, Smith and Lundqvist are coming off the books, and salaries such as Skjei and Buchnevich could be moved. I don’t believe that additional $2 to 2.4 million is the hurdle people are making it out to be.

Half of our forwards are currently making under a million dollars. That isn't going to be the case forever.

Sure, we can look at any individual raise and say it isn't a big issue. But we need the whole picture in context- Kreider's age and contribution relative to his salary cap, Kreider's position in the lineup's worth relative to other positions, as well as his potential deadline return in a trade, part of which I suspect will be contingent on his re-signing with the acquiring team.

It all adds up to you've got to REALLY like Kreider for the stars to align to the degree that you want to extend him.

 

[cheech70]

Backstrom at 9 + over 5 years is more of a risk than Kreider 7 x 7