Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXII

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
  • We're expeting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.

What to do with Kreider?


  • Total voters
    197
Status
Not open for further replies.
First off, why is Toronto moving a cost controlled, young player? Secondly, you think you're getting Nylander for the same package you got for a 32 year old, soon to be UFA, concussed, Rick Nash for? Stop it, please.

Have you even looked at their cap situation? Toronto Maple Leafs - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

They are totally screwed this coming offseason. Too many big long term contracts and a bunch of RFAs need to be resigned. As soon as they signed Marner to the contract that they did Nylander became the obvious option to get them out of cap hell for the 2020 off season. Actually even after trading Nylander they will be in a cap hell. lol

Also trading let's say Lundkvist+Georgiev+1st is a much better deal than for Nash. And the rangers didn't HAVE to trade Nash. Nylander will have to be traded. They will be leveraged.
 
Cmon Viper, 7 years?? Let’s be a little more realistic than that.

If you really believe Kreider wont be just as effective over the next 3-4 years then I dont know what to tell you. Thats your opinion and your right.

And I for one have said I would not be okay with a 7 year deal. 6 would make me cringe but i could live. I agree with @Kovalev27 that you could buy him out for that last year, WORST CASE scenario. Even 2 years early if need be.

But we have $26 million coming off the books in 2 years. You could move Buch and Skjei’s salaries. New TV deal. Cap increases.

I agree that I am not so much concerned over years 1 and 2. It's years 5, 6 and 7 that really are my sticking point.

For me it's a combination of age and duration of contract. I refuse to hand out a 7 year deal to almost any 29 year old UNLESS the team is legitimately contending right now and their window is the next 3 years. Like SJ just did with Karlsson. They don't care so much about the back-end of the deal because they goal is to win a Cup in years 1-3. The Rangers are not in that scenario, not even close.

If he was 27 to start this deal, I'd be somewhat amenable to a 6 year deal. He's 29 and most likely asking for 7 years (as he should!). That is a bridge I'm unwilling to even begin building.

And listen, I get where you're coming from. I love watching Kreider play. We've all watched him grow and develop and followed his progression like the the insane group we all are. That's probably why he in particular tugs at heartstrings more than players like McDonagh (not drafted by the Rangers), Miller (dealt much younger), Nash (trade), Grabner (UFA)m Hayes (UFA), and Zucarello (UFA).
 
  • Like
Reactions: RGY
Where has it been said that he is willing to stay for less? Just because Shattenkirk and Panarin did it doesn't mean he will. Team discounted deals are rare. This is the chance for a pay day for players.

Just because Kreider keeps himself in incredible shape doesn't mean he ages differently. If father time starts to hit then not much you can do. Usually speed is the first thing that starts to go when you get older and that is Kreider's number one attribute. If he loses his speed, then he's mediocre at best.
actually it’s not just his speed so that’s bullshit. You even said certain guys can keep in shape into their 30’s and Kreider has already proven he can come back from a serious injury quicker than expected without skipping a beat. Plus I don’t know for sure if he would take less but I believe he would
 
Have you even looked at their cap situation? Toronto Maple Leafs - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

They are totally screwed this coming offseason. Too many big long term contracts and a bunch of RFAs need to be resigned. As soon as they signed Marner to the contract that they did Nylander became the obvious option to get them out of cap hell for the 2020 off season. Actually even after trading Nylander they will be in a cap hell. lol

Also trading let's say Lundkvist+Georgiev+1st is a much better deal than for Nash. And the rangers didn't HAVE to trade Nash. Nylander will have to be traded. They will be leveraged.

Highway robbery by Dubas. He just earned dem fake glasses.
 
I agree that I am not so much concerned over years 1 and 2. It's years 5, 6 and 7 that really are my sticking point.

For me it's a combination of age and duration of contract. I refuse to hand out a 7 year deal to almost any 29 year old UNLESS the team is legitimately contending right now and their window is the next 3 years. Like SJ just did with Karlsson. They don't care so much about the back-end of the deal because they goal is to win a Cup in years 1-3. The Rangers are not in that scenario, not even close.

If he was 27 to start this deal, I'd be somewhat amenable to a 6 year deal. He's 29 and most likely asking for 7 years (as he should!). That is a bridge I'm unwilling to even begin building.

And listen, I get where you're coming from. I love watching Kreider play. We've all watched him grow and develop and followed his progression like the the insane group we all are. That's probably why he in particular tugs at heartstrings more than players like McDonagh (not drafted by the Rangers), Miller (dealt much younger), Nash (trade), Grabner (UFA)m Hayes (UFA), and Zucarello (UFA).

No one, not even the hardest of hardcore Kreider fans (like I) is saying sign him to 7x7 deal. Not a one. We're all saying try and find something that works for both sides. Get creative, more money, less term, higher signing bonus, whatever.

At the end of the day, if he's looking to squeeze the most out of his next deal, it won't be here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: belford22
No one, not even the hardest of hardcore Kreider fans (like I) is saying sign him to 7x7 deal. Not a one. We're all saying try and find something that works for both sides. Get creative, more money, less term, higher signing bonus, whatever.

At the end of the day, if he's looking to squeeze the most out of his next deal, it won't be here.

I just don't see the bridge extending from the 4 years I want to give him from the 7 years he and his agent should want. But like I said, I understand the desire to keep him around in the short term
 
No one, not even the hardest of hardcore Kreider fans (like I) is saying sign him to 7x7 deal. Not a one. We're all saying try and find something that works for both sides. Get creative, more money, less term, higher signing bonus, whatever.
So you’re praying he takes a discount essentially

Not a good plan for success
 
Stockpiling assets to be prepared when a top young player becomes available is exactly where we should be right now, and Kreider adds to that. It is the reason why we were able to up and pull the trigger on trading for Trouba. It would put us in line to grab a top player that becomes available for whatever reason in the next year or two, and those guys do pop up. Right now we are cementing the rebuild.

Exactly this. There are players that are not happy where they are and we could move on those teams with the assets that we currently have.

AA in Detroit is one of them. Wanted to be paid more last time and never got that. You never know the relationship with Yzerman at this point, but he's an option. He's someone that could replace Kreider's speed element.

Same thing with teams in a cap crunch. While we don't have a ton coming off the books this offseason, we still have 15M in open space for next season. Yes, DeAngelo needs to be paid, but even if that is a 6x6, that's still 9 million with the luxury of having some more ELCs on the way. Toronto is the obvious one. Vegas is another. These teams have needs on defense, even with Toronto having their kids coming up. Arizona is right to the cap. Is Hall really a rental only for them? If he signs, they'll need to make a move.

Trading a Kreider allows them to have flexibility to get in on those discussions and hold those team's feet to the fire. Yes, other teams can do this too, but do they have the pure amount of assets the Rangers do? Most won't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alluckks
So you’re praying he takes a discount essentially

Not a good plan for success

I'm saying Max Pac and JVR both took less, different circumstances but not every player goes for the max. I don't know what's in Kreider's head though. I think you can make the case for taking less money to play here for the Rangers.

I just don't see the bridge extending from the 4 years I want to give him from the 7 years he and his agent should want. But like I said, I understand the desire to keep him around in the short term

I think 4 is not very realistic. 5 years is more than ok. Is it for him? I don't know. Does he bet on himself that he'll earn another multi year contract at 34? Maybe. We'll see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: belford22
No one, not even the hardest of hardcore Kreider fans (like I) is saying sign him to 7x7 deal. Not a one. We're all saying try and find something that works for both sides. Get creative, more money, less term, higher signing bonus, whatever.

At the end of the day, if he's looking to squeeze the most out of his next deal, it won't be here.
This
 
  • Like
Reactions: belford22
I’d keep him with Panarin and trade him in the summer. Bigger pool of teams will be looking for centers. He’s an rfa no need to move him yet.

Assuming they're looking to trade him, yes you keep him with Panarin. Boost those points and hope some team is dumb enough to not realize that playing with Panarin is skewing his value

so no concerns that the chemistry between panarin/strome might be special and no guarantee panarin will have the same chemistry with another player? if pushed, i'd lean to also say that panarin is simply so good that it doesn't matter who his linemates are. but at the same time wouldn't hate knowing that he fits with chytil and/or kakko before moving on from strome.
 
Consider also that it's not really that unfeasible, given our asset pool, that we could acquire a much better player than Kreider to fill that top 6 void. If you assume Panarin, Zibanejad, Kakko, Kravtsov, and Chytil have permanent or soon to be permanent spots in that top 6, to say nothing of Strome, what's to stop us from sending out Kreider to return a first and prospect package in return, and then sending out our own first, the Kreider first, and another of our higher-end defenseman prospects, and moving up in the first to get someone like Stutzle?

I mean, maybe the question is "What about next year?" but I'd submit the answer to that is: Who cares? We would have a wonderful looking young top 6 that is gonna score and score and score in buckets in the future. Not to mention our defense is full of scoring puckmoving types in DeAngelo, Fox, even Miller and Lundkvist.

Here's the thing, I wouldn't view trading Kreider as the final answer.

Another poster asked me earlier if a top six without Kreider and featuring two young wings is my strategy, and the answer is no, it's not.

Trading Kreider or keeping him isn't the end-game. In other words, it's not the goal. Nor is acquiring picks, prospects and ammo. Those aren't goals, those are tactics.

The goal is to build out a complete team.

And to that achieve that goal, there are many different approaches and opinions on approaches.

Some people think that involves Kreider, others don't.

But I don't think the Kreider himself is the end-game, regardless of where one falls in the discussion.

In a world where nothing is guaranteed, and all of us are taking guesses on the best approach, it comes down to whether or not you think you can get closer to your goal (building a complete, winning team) with Kreider, or without Kreider.

In other words, which bag of mystery are you more comfortable reaching into.

Personally, because of the factors I've already stated, I do not believe the Kreider mystery bag gives us our best chances.

But even as someone who is in the pro-trade camp, I do not believe that trading Kreider is the final answer. It might be part of the answer, based on the ammo we get back and how we use it. But whether he stays or goes, there's follow-up moves that will become necessary. I think those moves are easier without that contract, and with some of the ammo we get back. But it won't, by itself, put us at our goal.
 
Everything you are saying is all fair. But I’ll add one more thing. The tv deal. 7 mil against the cap after that tv deal could look like peanuts in year 6 and 7 of this potential contract. You just can’t plan that far out imo.

potentially...and if the cap takes a big jump when we are ready to compete that is awesome news. but we don't know how that will look.
 
Well you have been say people who might be interested in keeping Kreider under the right circumstances are being “short sighted”.

Yes. That's my opinion. And it was based off of posters saying that he was needed to help the team NOW. So in my opinion that is a short sighted stance.
 
Nylander is one of the best 2nd line centers in the league. Meanwhile the rangers are stacked on RD. You gotta give to get.

I'm not sure that he has ever played center in the NHL...obviously thats cause of the team he has, but its still an unknown if he'd be a center elsewhere or a winger. and thoughts on that could drastically change his perceived value
 
I'm not sure that he has ever played center in the NHL...obviously thats cause of the team he has, but its still an unknown if he'd be a center elsewhere or a winger. and thoughts on that could drastically change his perceived value
Which is fine since the rangers are more in need of wingers anyway. FYI, he started off as a center though before Tavares got signed though and that was when he was putting up 60 point seasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leetch3
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad