Toggle sidebar

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
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fitzy said:
It is, but there aren't too many teams out there, good or bad, who don't have some players on the roster who are still useful, but overpaid.

Problem is we already have two of those in Trouba and Kreider, but they can both be gone in 3 seasons.
Click to expand...

How are both Trouba and Kreider "gone in 3 seasons? Trouba still has 5 years on his contract. Kreider 6. Even if their NMC's run out those years, that is no guarantee we could trade them. I'm not sure when their NMC's are done actually. But I think we have to consider their entire contract for now and not just when their NMC runs out.

I mean, as it stands right now, does anyone think we are going to re-sign Panarin after his contract is up at the end of the 25-26 season? Personally I do not think so. And that's going to be even more of an issue if we have Zibs under contract still. We are going to need substantial cap space cleared in the next 5-6 years anyway. That 26 season, both Panarin and Trouba comes off.
 
Fitzy said:
Thing is, if Nils Lundkvist or Schneider take off like a rocket, they're gonna get paid eventually. Probably in that same 3 years time, as it turns out.

NYR can't spend 25 million dollars just on the right defense. The stars align pretty well with a culling that offseason.
Click to expand...

I think if/when it gets to that point, the Rangers wouldn't have a hard time moving Trouba. I also don't know if Lundkvist or Schneider are looking at huge contracts on their next deal. Not with Adam Fox eating 25-30 minutes per night.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH, McSauer, NYR Viper and 2 others
brakeyawself said:
How are both Trouba and Kreider "gone in 3 seasons? Trouba still has 5 years on his contract. Kreider 6. Even if their NMC's run out those years, that is no guarantee we could trade them. I'm not sure when their NMC's are done actually. But I think we have to consider their entire contract for now and not just when their NMC runs out.

I mean, as it stands right now, does anyone think we are going to re-sign Panarin after his contract is up at the end of the 25-26 season? Personally I do not think so. And that's going to be even more of an issue if we have Zibs under contract still. We are going to need substantial cap space cleared in the next 5-6 years anyway. That 26 season, both Panarin and Trouba comes off.
Click to expand...

I believe both NMCs expire in three seasons.

And, at that point if they are inhibiting giving contracts to better players, there's no shame in attaching a pick to them to move them along. It happens all the time.

Panarin has another 5 years, which is much much further down the road than I think is worth even looking at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LokiDog
Fitzy said:
Thing is, if Nils Lundkvist or Schneider take off like a rocket, they're gonna get paid eventually. Probably in that same 3 years time, as it turns out.

NYR can't spend 25 million dollars just on the right defense. The stars align pretty well with a culling that offseason.
Click to expand...

All though, if both Schneider and Lundqvist "take off like a rocket", I am not so sure we will be able to keep both long term. One of them would undoubtedly have to move to LD. In which case they are also competing with Miller, Jones and Robertson. If say Jones and Miller also take off, it's going to be a very difficult situation. Robertson I think will be the kind of player, kind of like Lindgren, who will be able to be squeezed in more readily. But ultimately what we are talking about is, IF ALL our guys "take off like a rocket", there's 3 spots for 5 players. And I think of that group, Schneider is the one most likely to be "untouchable". Which means 4 guys are going to be fighting over 2 roster spots. Which is why I don't even think it gets to that point and we end up trading at least one, maybe two of this group before that time arrives. Who those 2 will be, I have no idea. Could realistically be any of Miller, Jones, Lundkvist, Robertson or Lindgren. Unless Lindgren and or Robertson are cool with playing 3rd pair minutes, which they might be.
 
Fitzy said:
I believe both NMCs expire in three seasons.

And, at that point if they are inhibiting giving contracts to better players, there's no shame in attaching a pick to them to move them along. It happens all the time.

Panarin has another 5 years, which is much much further down the road than I think is worth even looking at.
Click to expand...

I understand that. But that doesn't mean it will be possible in both of these specific cases. We could very well end up being stuck with one or both until the end of their contracts. I don't think we can today, given how much time is left until then, decide with any confidence that they'll both be moved on when their NMC's run out.
 
HatTrick Swayze said:
Damn, would have really liked to acquire Couturier.
Click to expand...

Same. He must really LOVE that team and/or city. Can't see any other reason he'd sign that contract. He must know he could have gotten a choice of other destinations in free agency, all probably paying similarly. It's disappointing. But at least I can sleep a bit easier knowing that he loves his situation, which means it was probably never in the cards for the Rangers.
 
Tawnos said:
Barkov is supposedly signing an extension soon (next month). Hasn't happened yet, but there's little chance he'll be on the market.

I looked at the link you posted. I don't see a single 1C option that's not 35+, which doesn't solve a longer term 1C issue.

If the Rangers solve this outside of the organization, it's going to be via trade and not free agency.
Click to expand...

What's the obsession with bringing in a long term, FINAL ANSWER, center? If guys like Bergeron or Malkin or whomever are still producing at a high level at 35, 36, 37 or whatever, why can't you sign them for a couple of seasons to bide time and keep looking? Sure, age matters. But it doesn't matter nearly as much as production. And that type of player is absolutely perfect if you need to gain an extra few years in your search while still competing at a high level.

And that still leaves the possibility, every season in between of other centers going to FA, drafting or trading. You can even do that more than once. You say "long term" like it means we need 1 guy for that entire time. It makes no sense to me personally.
 
Fitzy said:
Hajek isn't even a good AHL defenseman. He's not even a particularly good Czech league defenseman.

Don't know why they haven't figured this out yet.
Click to expand...

Modestly priced depth move/stopgap.

Anywhere from two to four of Jones, Robertson, Schneider and Lundkvist are going to be eating a ton of time down in Hartford.

But injuries and COVID are still a very real thing. Teams will likely be somewhat conservative with recalls and so you're probably looking at some combination of Tinordi, Hajek, and Bitetto filling in and plugging holes.
 
Fitzy said:
Hajek isn't even a good AHL defenseman. He's not even a particularly good Czech league defenseman.

Don't know why they haven't figured this out yet.
Click to expand...

I think they are just loading up on bodies. Plus, Hajek might be the kind of guy you can trade for a 4th round pick when teams are in need. I don't see it as a bad move necessarily. All though, I don't know if we needed Tinordi as much. Tuomanen is like 22-24 range and if he's worth a damn, he should be in the running for a depth role at some point also. On top of our other young D.
 
Let me ask this:

Why does Zibanejad get more than Couturier?


2016-17
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD][/TD]
[TD]G[/TD][TD]A[/TD][TD]P[/TD][TD]TOI[/TD][TD]FO%[/TD][TD]CF% Rel[/TD][TD]FF% Rel[/TD][TD]Games Played[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Zibanejad[/TD][TD]14[/TD][TD]23[/TD][TD]37[/TD][TD]17:04[/TD][TD]52.0[/TD][TD]6.2[/TD][TD]6.7[/TD][TD]56[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Couturier[/TD][TD]14[/TD][TD]20[/TD][TD]34[/TD][TD]18:27[/TD][TD]55.1[/TD][TD]2.1[/TD][TD]2.3[/TD][TD]66[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

2017-2018
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 272047 17:58 50.8 13.013.9 72
Couturier31 45 76 21:36 52.8 9.38.8 82
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


2018-2019
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 3044 74 20:34 49.6 5.65.7 82
Couturier 3343 76 22:08 57.1 9.610.5 80
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

2019-2020
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 41 3475 21:38 49.27.7 7.157
Couturier 2237 59 19:5059.7 8.97.6 69
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

2020-2021
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad242650 20:06 46.3 6.4 6.2 56
Couturier18 23 41 19:2056.9 8.79.1 45
[TBODY] [/TBODY]



They seem pretty much neck and neck in terms of stats with possibly a slight nod to Couturier in most things outside of scoring goals
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chalfdiggity3
brakeyawself said:
What's the obsession with bringing in a long term, FINAL ANSWER, center? If guys like Bergeron or Malkin or whomever are still producing at a high level at 35, 36, 37 or whatever, why can't you sign them for a couple of seasons to bide time and keep looking? Sure, age matters. But it doesn't matter nearly as much as production. And that type of player is absolutely perfect if you need to gain an extra few years in your search while still competing at a high level.

And that still leaves the possibility, every season in between of other centers going to FA, drafting or trading. You can even do that more than once. You say "long term" like it means we need 1 guy for that entire time. It makes no sense to me personally.
Click to expand...

I'm obsessed with it because no team wins a Cup without it. I think what you're saying makes sense for the 2C position, though. Just not 1C.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mas0764
NYR Viper said:
Let me ask this:

Why does Zibanejad get more than Couturier?


2016-17
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD][/TD]
[TD]G[/TD][TD]A[/TD][TD]P[/TD][TD]TOI[/TD][TD]FO%[/TD][TD]CF% Rel[/TD][TD]FF% Rel[/TD][TD]Games Played[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Zibanejad[/TD][TD]14[/TD][TD]23[/TD][TD]37[/TD][TD]17:04[/TD][TD]52.0[/TD][TD]6.2[/TD][TD]6.7[/TD][TD]56[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Couturier[/TD][TD]14[/TD][TD]20[/TD][TD]34[/TD][TD]18:27[/TD][TD]55.1[/TD][TD]2.1[/TD][TD]2.3[/TD][TD]66[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
2017-2018
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 272047 17:58 50.8 13.013.9 72
Couturier31 45 76 21:36 52.8 9.38.8 82
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

2018-2019
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 3044 74 20:34 49.6 5.65.7 82
Couturier 3343 76 22:08 57.1 9.610.5 80
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
2019-2020
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 41 3475 21:38 49.27.7 7.157
Couturier 2237 59 19:5059.7 8.97.6 69
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
2020-2021
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad242650 20:06 46.3 6.4 6.2 56
Couturier18 23 41 19:2056.9 8.79.1 45
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


They seem pretty much neck and neck in terms of stats with possibly a slight nod to Couturier in most things outside of scoring goals
Click to expand...

It's that "slight nod to Couturier in most things outside of scoring goals" that makes me prefer him to Ziban actually. All though in some things, I think the difference is more than "slight". I think Couturier brings a better complete game and to me that is important right now.

But I agree as far as pay, we shouldn't be giving Ziban more than Couturier. Sure, goals count. So let's say just based on that, at best they are equal or should be equal in terms of money. I would still rather have Couturier though.
 
Edge said:
To piggyback on this, if Zibanejad signed an 8 year deal, both Kakko and Lafreniere would still be in their 20s when it expired. So Zibanejad "sucking" the last 2-3 years would actually overlap with Kakko 26-29 years old and Lafreniere being 25-28 years old.

It's cause for concern.
Click to expand...

It's the entirety of my concern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mas0764
NYR Viper said:
Let me ask this:

Why does Zibanejad get more than Couturier?


2016-17
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD][/TD]
[TD]G[/TD][TD]A[/TD][TD]P[/TD][TD]TOI[/TD][TD]FO%[/TD][TD]CF% Rel[/TD][TD]FF% Rel[/TD][TD]Games Played[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Zibanejad[/TD][TD]14[/TD][TD]23[/TD][TD]37[/TD][TD]17:04[/TD][TD]52.0[/TD][TD]6.2[/TD][TD]6.7[/TD][TD]56[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Couturier[/TD][TD]14[/TD][TD]20[/TD][TD]34[/TD][TD]18:27[/TD][TD]55.1[/TD][TD]2.1[/TD][TD]2.3[/TD][TD]66[/TD][TD][/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
2017-2018
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 272047 17:58 50.8 13.013.9 72
Couturier31 45 76 21:36 52.8 9.38.8 82
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

2018-2019
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 3044 74 20:34 49.6 5.65.7 82
Couturier 3343 76 22:08 57.1 9.610.5 80
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
2019-2020
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad 41 3475 21:38 49.27.7 7.157
Couturier 2237 59 19:5059.7 8.97.6 69
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
2020-2021
GAPTOIFO%CF% RelFF% RelGames Played
Zibanejad242650 20:06 46.3 6.4 6.2 56
Couturier18 23 41 19:2056.9 8.79.1 45
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


They seem pretty much neck and neck in terms of stats with possibly a slight nod to Couturier in most things outside of scoring goals
Click to expand...

That will probably the argument the Rangers make. The counter argument could be focused on the shift that started in 2018-2019.

The next deal isn't likely to be as focused on 2016 as much as it'll be focused on the more recent seasons.
 
Edge said:
That will probably the argument the Rangers make. The counter argument could be focused on the shift that started in 2018-2019.

The next deal isn't likely to be as focused on 2016 as much as it'll be focused on the more recent seasons.
Click to expand...

fortunately for them, last season happened.

unfortunately for them, there’s a real chance that he goes nuts in a contract year and scores 50+. I’m actually expecting this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH, RGY and brakeyawself
Tawnos said:
I'm obsessed with it because no team wins a Cup without it. I think what you're saying makes sense for the 2C position, though. Just not 1C.
Click to expand...

St. Louis?

Zetterberg was pretty old when he won with the Red Wings.

Vegas seems to do just fine without a stud center.

Nashville made it to the finals without one.

Washington did it. And sure, Backstrom is good, Kuznetsov has his moments.

There's more than one way to skin a cat and win a cup.

And I still think you are underselling where Chytil will be in a few years time. Not saying I know he will be good enough to be a star 1C. But I think he at least has the 2C position locked down.

But either way, if you can sign a guy like Bergeron for 2 years, and his performance remains high, you don't think you can win a cup like that? Why does a guy need to be on a team for like 8 years in order to win? That's the part that I don't think makes sense. Sure you need a good 1C. But the idea that the player needs to be with your team for like 7 years doesn't add up. I'm just using Bergeron as an example.
 
Tawnos said:
I'm obsessed with it because no team wins a Cup without it. I think what you're saying makes sense for the 2C position, though. Just not 1C.
Click to expand...

All our options are drying up which sucks. I still am a firm believer that we need Larkin./ He is our answer now and for the future.
 
Uninstaaled said:
fortunately for them, last season happened.

unfortunately for them, there’s a real chance that he goes nuts in a contract year and scores 50+. I’m actually expecting this.
Click to expand...

That's why the talks could be very interesting.

Right now I tend to think there are decent odds the Rangers end up going a direction that includes neither Eichel or Zibanejad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clark Kellogg, wafflepadsave, Galvatron and 3 others
Chalfdiggity3 said:
All our options are drying up which sucks. I still am a firm believer that we need Larkin./ He is our answer now and for the future.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but good luck prying him away from Yzerman. Stevie knows what he has in Larkin. He named him captain for a good reason.
 
Fitzy said:
In 2016 the LA kings gave a 29 year old Anze Kopitar a 8x 10 million contract. The summer before, the Hawks re-signed 27 year old Jonathan Toews to a 8x10.5 million contract.

Neither of those deal has been a poor one for the team in question, because each club is more or less re-building now at the ass end of the contracts.
Click to expand...

I think that is all very, very arguable.
 
Chalfdiggity3 said:
All our options are drying up which sucks. I still am a firm believer that we need Larkin./ He is our answer now and for the future.
Click to expand...

I think other teams are hoping the Rangers think their options are drying up and that they make a panic move.

I don't know if the Rangers quite feel the same way at this point. I think they feel pretty confident that the options they have today aren't going anywhere immediately and that other options may also emerge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redwhiteandblue and brakeyawself
brakeyawself said:
St. Louis?

Zetterberg was pretty old when he won with the Red Wings.

Vegas seems to do just fine without a stud center.

Washington did it. And sure, Backstrom is good, Kuznetsov has his moments.

There's more than one way to skin a cat and win a cup.

And I still think you are underselling where Chytil will be in a few years time. Not saying I know he will be good enough to be a star 1C. But I think he at least has the 2C position locked down.

But either way, if you can sign a guy like Bergeron for 2 years, and his performance remains high, you don't think you can win a cup like that? Why does a guy need to be on a team for like 8 years in order to win? That's the part that I don't think makes sense. Sure you need a good 1C. But the idea that the player needs to be with your team for like 7 years doesn't add up.
Click to expand...

Its not about having a guy play 7 years for us. Its about having a guy young enough to grow with our talented wingers. Getting guys that are over the hill, past their prime, 35+ up category does not solve the issue. Malkin is a shell of himself and cant stay healthy, other option are what? Coutierer signed, Hertl has knee issues, we arent getting crosby, Kuz has cocaine issues and is another Tony D. Barkov is resigning. I like Zibs but he has issues not sure i want to give him a massive contract. So yea we need a guy who is in their mid 20's to grow with this team
 
  • Like
Reactions: mas0764
Uninstaaled said:
fortunately for them, last season happened.

unfortunately for them, there’s a real chance that he goes nuts in a contract year and scores 50+. I’m actually expecting this.
Click to expand...
100%. It's pay day. What happens if Gallant puts Zibs and Panarin together? Approach 60?

I can live with 5 years $10M. Bridge everyone besides the Fox's and Laf's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom