Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XXII

[Edge]

He would have been a hell of a trade chip.

He would've been a good one. I think he needed one more productive season to truly maximize his value, but the Rangers were definitely eyeing him as a chip.

 

[Vitto79]

The trade has nothing to do with Blais and everything to do with Kakko and Kravtsov.

True it’s all about the young RW but Blais could be an important bottom 6 piece

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Most people here are smarter than that, too. It's obvious why the trade was made.

Yeah. You have a 1st overall and 2nd overall pick, both wingers, who are ready to break out. You have a top 5 player in the league, also a winger. You just locked up Kreider to a 7 year deal with a NMC. You also have Kravtsov who is a highly touted winger prospect. It's quite clear that Buchnevich was going to be the odd man out, even if you disagree with it. But the disingenuous arguments being made are infuriating.

"They replaced him with nothing!"

Lafreniere and Kakko ready to fill his role is not nothing. His return was poor value, sure, but that's what the market yielded.

"They could've held onto him and traded him at the deadline"

A team with playoff aspirations is not going to hold onto a top 6 player with the intention of trading him at the deadline.

"Tom Wilson broke the Rangers and they replaced Buchnevich with Goodrow, Blais and Reaves!"

Just total BS.

Those players were added to add more tough to play against depth for down the lineup, Buch is being replaced by Kakko/Lafreniere. It's just infuriating to read the endless complaints about this that aren't really based in reality or good faith.

And I say all this as one of Buch's biggest fans.

 

[brakeyawself]

Exactly. This fact that is so conveniently ignored by hockey writers makes me want to slam my head on the wall.

I can understand being underwhelmed with the return for Buch and calling it a bad trade, but the people who are blowing it our of proportion are crazy. We're not replacing Buchnevich with Blais. Blais is an add to play down the lineup and fortify the depth while they expect Lafreniere, Kakko and Kravtsov to improve and be able to fill Buchnevich's role.

I think that completely misses the point of why people hate the Buch trade. It has nothing to do with losing Buch on its own. And it has little to nothing to do with acquiring Blais.

It's the fact that they traded an asset with a relatively good value in Buch, for what most people deem a lower value in the 2nd round pick and Blais. It's asset management that people have an issue with. Just because we didn't need Buch, doesn't mean we needed to take the first offer thrown at us just to clear that space. He was an RFA. Meaning he wasn't costing us any money and he was moved as soon as possible, when there were still a few months ahead in which Drury could have looked for a better offer. Now if he feared that the Blues offer would be gone in a month and that no other team would have been interested or something, I guess I could understand why he might pull the trigger. But it's THAT specific judgement, that this was the best deal that was going to appear, and that if he didn't accept we would have only gotten worse offers later, which people are questioning and skeptical about.

At least if you are going to criticize their critique/opinion, don't strawman their argument.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I think that completely misses the point of why people hate the Buch trade. It has nothing to do with losing Buch on its own. And it has little to nothing to do with acquiring Blais.

It's the fact that they traded an asset with a relatively goof value in Buch, for what most people deem a lower value in the 2nd round pick and Blais. It's asset management that people have an issue with. Just because we didn't need Buch, doesn't mean we needed to take the first offer thrown at us just to clear that space. He was an RFA. Meaning he wasn't costing us any money and he was moved as soon as possible, when there were still a few months ahead in which Drury could have looked for a better offer. Now if he feared that the Blues offer would be gone in a month and that no other team would have been interested or something, I guess I could understand why he might pull the trigger. But it's THAT specific judgement, that this was the best deal that was going to appear, and that if he didn't accept we would have only gotten worse offers later, which people are questioning and skeptical about.

At least if you are going to criticize their critique/opinion, don't strawman their argument.

It's not strawmaning. Go read coverage on The Athletic, on Blueshirt Banter, on hockey twitter. The points I'm arguing against are absolutely the arguments being made.

You can be underwhelmed by the value in the Buch trade and also understand the logic behind it from a roster building perspective. Instead the overwhelming reaction is that the value was bad and the Rangers have their brains broken and had a horrible offseason because of it.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

I think that completely misses the point of why people hate the Buch trade. It has nothing to do with losing Buch on its own. And it has little to nothing to do with acquiring Blais.

It's the fact that they traded an asset with a relatively goof value in Buch, for what most people deem a lower value in the 2nd round pick and Blais. It's asset management that people have an issue with. Just because we didn't need Buch, doesn't mean we needed to take the first offer thrown at us just to clear that space. He was an RFA. Meaning he wasn't costing us any money and he was moved as soon as possible, when there were still a few months ahead in which Drury could have looked for a better offer. Now if he feared that the Blues offer would be gone in a month and that no other team would have been interested or something, I guess I could understand why he might pull the trigger. But it's THAT specific judgement, that this was the best deal that was going to appear, and that if he didn't accept we would have only gotten worse offers later, which people are questioning and skeptical about.

At least if you are going to criticize their critique/opinion, don't strawman their argument.

An asset is only as valuable as what the market dictates.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Yeah. You have a 1st overall and 2nd overall pick, both wingers, who are ready to break out. You have a top 5 player in the league, also a winger. You just locked up Kreider to a 7 year deal with a NMC. You also have Kravtsov who is a highly touted winger prospect. It's quite clear that Buchnevich was going to be the odd man out, even if you disagree with it. But the disingenuous arguments being made are infuriating.

"They replaced him with nothing!"

Lafreniere and Kakko ready to fill his role is not nothing. His return was poor value, sure, but that's what the market yielded.

"They could've held onto him and traded him at the deadline"

A team with playoff aspirations is not going to hold onto a top 6 player with the intention of trading him at the deadline.

"Tom Wilson broke the Rangers and they replaced Buchnevich with Goodrow, Blais and Reaves!"

Just total BS.

Those players were added to add more tough to play against depth for down the lineup, Buch is being replaced by Kakko/Lafreniere. It's just infuriating to read the endless complaints about this that aren't really based in reality or good faith.

And I say all this as one of Buch's biggest fans.

Great post. Save it.

 

[Edge]

@Edge

In the sake of trying to adjust the conversation AGAIN away from ADA, any rumblings on whether, as TC approaches, Drury will use some of the extra cap space this offseason on an expiring vet to grab a pick? Say Koskinen or someone like that? Or all quiet there?

All quiet.

Right now the working theory among other teams is that the Rangers are going to try to maintain flexibility in anticipation that players of interest become available once the season starts.

 

[redwhiteandblue]

I started mine in Elementary school

Growing up in the era when the internet was still figuring itself out... wild. There used to be this like... backdoor of twitter... might have actually just been a # but it was Twitter After Dark. As JD would say... oh baby.

 

[brakeyawself]

This is my biggest gripe. We keep talking about the development of of young guys like KK and LaF but a key part of that is establishing rapport with your linemates. Having to face turnover potentially next year at the center position could set this back. I would have preferred to have a definite plan in place (resign Zibs/acquire Strome replacement) this season so the development starts in full. Also who knows what Chtyl will turn into. It is not unrealistic to think he is better suited for forward not center. If that is the case next off season will result in several roster changes at center. Not ideal. Continuity is important in the development.

Um. I am not knocking long term chemistry, like over the course of years, but in the long run, that's a relatively lesser concern than say, over the span of a full season or making the "correct" or beneficial moves right now. And especially with the salary cap, consistency like you are suggesting is SO rare to begin with.

Last season, especially the first half of the season, Quinn juggled the lines with seemingly no apparent goal. And that at times appeared to cause problems with chemistry. Over the course of a season, that is where chemistry is the most important. But year to year, in the modern NHL, it's just not completely realistic.

We all ready know we are going to have major turn over if we look 5 years ahead. It's not a matter of "if" but only "when". So something like long term chemistry, in the way you are describing it, is near the bottom of the priority list. Right where it should be.

It sucks if you lose a player that had great chemistry with certain teammates, but it's just reality. Show me any team that has that kind of consistency in the modern NHL and is more successful because of it. At best, you're looking at situations where 2 out of 3 of any specific line have played together for numerous seasons, providing that long term chemistry. Maybe a few teams have 1 line of guys that they have managed to keep together, but beyond that, it's just to realistic.

So managing the cap in the long term, and providing the right combination of players is far more important than season to season "chemistry". When a new player is added to a team, they hopefully have the preseason, training sessions and the beginning of the season to work out chemistry issues. And usually, that's all the amount of time it requires to get chemistry up to an adequate level to compete during the season.

The relationships you are describing though, are a very special and rare thing. It's just not something you can really put too much stock in relative to all the other decisions that need to be made. And if you can forge one of those relationships, your team is lucky, and again, it's usually between just 2 players. Sometimes 3, but far more rarely. The goal then has multivariate dependency, and you can't focus on something like that too much. Which is why teams will always be looking to upgrade for a whole multitude of reasons.

As far as Chytil goes, they've been grooming him for 4 seasons now, as a center because they believe he can and will play center. They aren't just doing it for the heck of it. And I see no reason yet to believe they are wrong. He's improved every single season so far, defensively and offensively and he's only like 21. Which means he will keep getting better. Based on ATOI, Chytil was our best center last season. Our BEST complete center. I am not sure what else you can ask for given the situation. I think Quinn did mismanage the team to an extent though, but Chytil at center is not one of those mismanaged aspects.

 

[Kodiak]

"Rock-a-bye baby,
on the tree top,
when the price drops,
the talks will resume."

Man, you're killing me with this. You could have easily flipped those last two lines and maintained the rhyme scheme. I know it's the offseason and all, but let's maintain some level of pride in what we do, even if it is just filling time until training camp.

 

[rangers1314]

All quiet.

Right now the working theory among other teams is that the Rangers are going to try to maintain flexibility in anticipation that players of interest become available once the season starts.

This makes sense.

Do you think the long play is still making a run at Larkin? Perhaps around the deadline?

 

[Kocur Dill]

If Drury made his off season moves today, as opposed to when they were made, I think they would have fallen in a bit of a different light.

Every year there is a boatload of high flying speculations, of course, but reality is that there is so little mobility in this league.

All GMs more or less closed shop three weeks ago. We saw some action, more than usual. The Seth Jones trade is big. The OEL trade was far from a given. But soooo many teams did very very few moves. My point is just, if Drury wanted to get things done — he probably had a lot fewer options than we imagined…

To be honest. It seems every player we chased or got were players that were targeted with a role in mind. I can't be mad at that as it is something I, personally, have wished for from our front office for a long time.

I don't like going after "the premier" guy just because we have the assets or cap space when there are so many holes elsewhere in the line-up. I'm not just talking Eichel either.

• Drury chose Goodrow over Coleman.
• Denault was desired, but at our price/term.
• Buchnevich, all aspects considered, was considered expendable. In return, maybe not the most prolific return, but Blais was a "targeted" player with intent.
• Reaves, we over paid a bit. But again, a targeted player that was "out there" but by no means being shopped. We had to make the efforted ask thus, overpay. His locker room leadership IMO was valued as much as his pedigree on the ice. And, I believe he is active in charity too which NYR has always valued.

For decades we always threw money at the top FA at his position and filled in the holes with bargain-basement reclamation projects, instead of targeting the right mix of guys that potentially fit all the holes better.

 

[brakeyawself]

It's not strawmaning. Go read coverage on The Athletic, on Blueshirt Banter, on hockey twitter. The points I'm arguing against are absolutely the arguments being made.

You can be underwhelmed by the value in the Buch trade and also understand the logic behind it from a roster building perspective. Instead the overwhelming reaction is that the value was bad and the Rangers have their brains broken and had a horrible offseason because of it.

Well I usually don't read that kind of trash. I am suggesting you are strawmanning the arguments of many people here, for which the deal is an example of poor asset management and rushed decision making and has little to nothing to do with Buch moving on which most of the people here, that discussed this, seem to have expected to happen anyway. Personally, I didn't think there was any way we started this season off with Buch on the team. And while I would have liked getting a middle 6 center, I never expected Eichel or any other huge signing either. I feel like anyone using that argument about the Buch deal, probably also is surprised we didn't make a trade for Eichel or like, I don't know, name your luxury center that we don't need. At most I think Buch could have landed us a nice middle 6 center. Didn't even have to be as good offensively as Buch. But anyway, stop reading rags maybe.

Why anyone would read the Athletic. They push clickbait even more than Youtubers.

 

[brakeyawself]

An asset is only as valuable as what the market dictates.

Yea, but unfortunately none of us have any clue what the actual market for Buch would have dictated. And because of how early and quickly Drury accepted that trade, many have wondered if Drury had any actual notion of what the market would have dictated over the following 2-3 months after that deal.

If he had held off from accepting, seeing what else was out there or what other teams might have eventually been interested, and everything was around the same price, then we could more safely assume that just was the correct market value. But none of us here have any way of knowing that, and it's questionable how much Drury knew that too.

And yes, I am sure Drury does have more information than we do. But that doesn't automatically mean he got the best deal possible. I personally would have thought we could get a 1st round pick at least and possibly a player like Blais with it. But anyway, both sides of this debate are dealing completely in speculation anyway.

 

[Edge]

This makes sense.

Do you think the long play is still making a run at Larkin? Perhaps around the deadline?

I get the sense the approach remains to lurk and monitor.

I don't have an idea one way or the other on how they're approaching Zibanejad though.

 

[brakeyawself]

This makes sense.

Do you think the long play is still making a run at Larkin? Perhaps around the deadline?

I can't see Yzerman moving Larkin no matter what Red Wing fans think of him as their center. I know Wing Fans have been bashing him for over a year now. And in their favor, he hasn't produced so great the past two seasons. But then, he's also had some of the worst winger combinations in the NHL over those two seasons. He's had very little help around him. Mantha has been stagnating for years in Detroit and was and even is, not the player many hoped he would be. Zadina is still a project and while he looks better defensively than many thought he'd be, he still hasn't proven to be the offensive dynamo people expected. S0 I am not really shocked that Larkin had two subpar seasons. But in context, I don't think it's fair to lay that all on Larkin. For some reason Wings fans have given Zadina an infinite amount of room to disappoint, but based on the same reasons, they have given Larkin zero.

Ultimately, I don't think Yzerman sees things or thinks so short sighted. And I don't think they named Larkin captain just to get rid of him in a few years. If Larkin comes in to this season, after having a full preseason, training camp and with player upgrades around him and still has a bad season, well then I think there will be far more reason to worry about him from the Detroit perspective. But as of now, I really don't think Larkin is going anywhere. And I fully expect he will have a much better season in 21-22, than he did the previous two. Yzerman to me is one of the best GMs in the league and has one of the best eyes and minds for talent analysis and team building. Or at least, most of the moves and draft picks he makes I can see he has a clear vision that is often close to reality.

 

[Kocur Dill]

All quiet.

Right now the working theory among other teams is that the Rangers are going to try to maintain flexibility in anticipation that players of interest become available once the season starts.

With us going int the Denault direction, whatever smoke being thrown about "Not being serious" on Eichel, and your comments a few months ago about Larkin. The notion crossed my mind if Larkin was a wait-and-see at the TDL after seeing for 3/4 of a season what some of the kids can or can't do before then and make a choice on them vs him.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

I started mine in Elementary school

You should be happy you didn’t have to deal with this shit.

Do you know how difficult it was trying to watch porn!? Or what happened to your connection when some called or picked up the phone?

 

[Vitto79]

I think Ryan Donato on a PTO or cheap 1 year is worth a look

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Good to know the plan is to go into our third straight season running 3 centers who play pretty much the exact same game

the fact that they’re going into the season with both Mika and Strome as UFA’s is not ideal

 

[Tob]

You should be happy you didn’t have to deal with this shit.

Do you know how difficult it was trying to watch porn!? Or what happened to your connection when some called or picked up the phone?

He's from Canada. We had to bash 3 rocks together with an ethernet cable taped to an antenna and hope for the best.

 

[EpicDing]

Good to know the plan is to go into our third straight season running 3 centers who play pretty much the exact same game

the fact that they’re going into the season with both Mika and Strome as UFA’s is not ideal

By some accounts Goodrow will be 3C.

 

[Vitto79]

I’d take that Svech contract for Zib

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Svechnikov’s contract is a decent comparable for Kakko and then Drury will somehow get Kakko signed for 8.5 million per for 5 years next summer lol