Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XXII

[mas0764]

These guys show us it's possible to win without a PPG 1C. Like ROR.

ROR isn't proving your point, dummy. The one year he won he was 0.94 ppg. I said PPG or nearly that. That counts.

No it doesn't Patrice Bergeron isn't a PPG guy most years. He's a Selke candidate and does everything else well.

Bergeron was "merely" 0.71 ppg on a team that also had Krejci (0.83 ppg).

So ok, we can go that route then. Find me a Bergeron (0.71 with Selke defense) and Krejci (0.83 ppg, also getting Selke votes).

You are flat out ignoring the teams that have done it

There are none. No one has done it.

You want to try to use Boston as an example?

Great. I'm all for it.

Please. I beg you. I would love to go get a Krejci and Bergergon at 0.8 ppg and Selke defense. That fits my definition of 1C.

 

[brakeyawself]

But I said to win you need a 1C playing at a 1C level.

ROR was on that level when the Blues won.

Interestingly, perhaps you are making my point. ROR is not really on that elite level even though he played elite that year and they won.

Conversely, the Blues don't look like they are going back any time soon.

So to repeat.... you really do need the truly elite guys, like Toews, Crosby, etc.

By the way, you know how many times Toews had a PPG season? ONCE in his shortened 2012 season. He scored 48 points in 47 games. Yet Toews is like the ideal.

So you are just talking out of your behind.

 

[brakeyawself]

ROR isn't proving your point, dummy. The one year he won he was 0.94 ppg. I said PPG or nearly that. That counts.



Bergeron was "merely" 0.71 ppg on a team that also had Krejci (0.83 ppg).

So ok, we can go that route then. Find me a Bergeron (0.71 with Selke defense) and Krejci (0.83 ppg, also getting Selke votes).



There are none. No one has done it.

You want to try to use Boston as an example?

Great. I'm all for it.

Please. I beg you. I would love to go get a Krejci and Bergergon at 0.8 ppg and Selke defense. That fits my definition of 1C.

Boston, Chicago, Blues, Devils are all examples. Just stop. You are making yourself look stupid.

And Brayden Point only did it once in his career too. Not the year they won the cup.

 

[mas0764]

Boston, Chicago, Blues, Devils are all examples. Just stop. You are making yourself look stupid.

And Brayden Point only did it once in his career too.

I said, and I quote, "Point per game or nearly point per game offensive dominance combined with excellent if not Selke level defense." I never said it had to be exact.

Still waiting for you to show me the teams who won a Cup without a player playing at that level.

The Blues with O'Reilly, the Bruins with Bergeron and Krejci, and Chicago with Toews all fit my definition.

The Devils are ancient history.

If you want to salvage your dumb argument I'm happy to bridge the gap here with you and we can agree that we merely need a Toews or a Bergeron and Krejci.

Those players were all 0.8 ppg or higher and playing Selke defense when they won their Cups.

Those are all elite 1Cs. We need one. There is no other way that ends up with the Rangers winning Cups.

I'm stupid. Not the guy who said 100 point Eric Staal was "decent," when he won with the Hurricanes.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

No one would have argued that the Blues had the proper quality of C's to win the cup before they actually did.

The revisionist history there is hilarious to me. It's like when people point to Vegas not being able to get over the hump because of their C's while ignoring that they actually finished 3rd in the league in GPG during the regular season, actually scored at a higher rate 5v5 during the playoffs than the eventual champion and really got eliminated because their PP was straight ass and weren't able to overcome MAF literally giving a game away in the CF.

 

[SA16]

No one would have argued that the Blues had the proper quality of C's to win the cup before they actually did.

The revisionist history there is hilarious to me. It's like when people point to Vegas not being able to get over the hump because of their C's while ignoring that they actually finished 3rd in the league in GPG during the regular season, actually scored at a higher rate 5v5 during the playoffs than the eventual champion and really got eliminated because their PP was straight ass and weren't able to overcome MAF literally giving a game away in the CF.

Maybe they would have had a better powerplay if they had good centers.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Maybe they would have had a better powerplay if they had good centers.

I will fight you.

 

[Fitzy]

Maybe they would have had a better powerplay if they had good centers.

Circular logic.

 

[mas0764]

No one would have argued that the Blues had the proper quality of C's to win the cup before they actually did.

So what?

The fact is that they didn't win until they had a player play like an elite center. Playing Selke level defense and scoring 0.94 points per game.

It's no coincidence that they won when that happened.

The better point you seem to be trying to make is that maybe it can come out of nowhere from a player you don't expect to play that way.

Maybe. We got anyone on our roster like that?

Chytil perhaps.

I'm not betting our Stanley Cup hopes on it.

The revisionist history there is hilarious to me. It's like when people point to Vegas not being able to get over the hump because of their C's while ignoring that they actually finished 3rd in the league in GPG during the regular season, actually scored at a higher rate 5v5 during the playoffs than the eventual champion and really got eliminated because their PP was straight ass and weren't able to overcome MAF literally giving a game away in the CF.

1Cs cover a lot of warts.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

No it doesn't Patrice Bergeron isn't a PPG guy most years. He's a Selke candidate and does everything else well.

These guys show us it's possible to win without a PPG 1C. Like ROR.

You are flat out ignoring the teams that have done it and are stating I'm the one that is ignoring history. They be ultimately be outliers, but they show it's not impossible.

We don't need a PPG center. You are wrong. The END.

I would wager a Selke type C is more of a need than a PP/G C. One of many reasons I’m not sold on building around Zibanejad.

 

[mas0764]

I would wager a Selke type C is more of a need than a PP/G C. One of many reasons I’m not sold on building around Zibanejad.

History would show that if you have a Selke guy who isn't putting up damn near a PPG, they have to be more like a 0.8 ppg guy with that Selke defense.

 

[Chalfdiggity3]

Trading for a couple prospects would make sense.

How? They are unproven.

How could you want Krebs over Larkin.. Larkin is already a top 25 center in the league. Your are then hoping on magic beans that we have a diamond in that prospect.

 

[Chalfdiggity3]

You are on the right track but I do not love Larkin as a solution. I at least am not ready to offer any prospect of substance for him like Nils or Kravstov. If I'm not giving up those guys for Eichel then I'm not giving them up for Larkin.

I do not believe that this would be the deal or even one that the rangers would go for since it was Detriots asking price. Now obviously since the draft is over already i havent heard much from @Edge since then.

But if you can trade strome at the deadline for assets and use those along with some of our own to get larkin im all in. I wouldnt trade Kravy or nils but if you can move our 1st and a lesser prospect like jones. How do you not for a top 25 center who is just turning 25?

That then gives you Larkin and Chytl. You can even move Zibs then for more assets..

 

[mas0764]

How? They are unproven.

How could you want Krebs over Larkin.. Larkin is already a top 25 center in the league. Your are then hoping on magic beans that we have a diamond in that prospect.

Acquiring someone who is "unproven," isn't the same as hoping on magic beans.

You can safely project guys with some amount of certainty.

Larkin to me is a bad combination of nearing contract extension, not great offensively, and approaching the age where I'm actually thinking he's too old to grow with Kakko and Lafreniere.

He's not a "no," on any single of those issues but all three of them together are less than ideal for me. He's 25 when I'd prefer someone like 21-23. He's about to need a huge new contract. And he's only 0.75 and 0.52 ppg the past two seasons and I think his defense is a bit overrated.

I just.... don't see an elite center there. I see a high end #2. Maybe guys like Lundell and Krebs aren't either but they are at least cheap with room to grow. Why would I want a guy whose days of being a good contract value are now over?

 

[brakeyawself]

I said, and I quote, "Point per game or nearly point per game offensive dominance combined with excellent if not Selke level defense." I never said it had to be exact.

Still waiting for you to show me the teams who won a Cup without a player playing at that level.

The Blues with O'Reilly, the Bruins with Bergeron and Krejci, and Chicago with Toews all fit my definition.

The Devils are ancient history.

If you want to salvage your dumb argument I'm happy to bridge the gap here with you and we can agree that we merely need a Toews or a Bergeron and Krejci.

Those players were all 0.8 ppg or higher and playing Selke defense when they won their Cups.

Those are all elite 1Cs. We need one. There is no other way that ends up with the Rangers winning Cups.

I'm stupid. Not the guy who said 100 point Eric Staal was "decent," when he won with the Hurricanes.

I just did. I said, Toews would be the ideal. Someone who has a complete game but isn't necessarily a PPG player. ROR would be fine, similar, but lesser mold. Point did it ONCE. Bergeron ONCE.

You said the last 20 years, Devils won in the last 20 years. So did Chicago, Blues and Boston.

You specifically said "Point per game or nearly point per game offensive dominance" So no, they don't all fit your description. You are like a wall. A really naive and obnoxious wall, who gets everything wrong.

And no they weren't all actually at 0.8 or higher. Go back, check again. And even if they were, that's not "nearly", "NEARLY" would be 0.9 or higher.

And I said Staal had some great years, but he's not a PPG or near a PPG player for his career. And there is no way to tell if a player will be that when you need them.

And it's not like I said, just throw any Joe Shmo on the 1st line. I'm pretty sure everyone I named has top 6 potential. And the guys you are naming are all 9-10 mil per year players. You want ACTUAL PPG players.

I'm off. Keep talking to yourself if you want. Your point was ruined, get over it.

 

[Tawnos]

Larkin is 2 years from contract extension. You acquiring him now, you're conceivably getting 7-8 years of prime (though not elite) 1C play from him. As opposed to Zibanejad, who is more like 3-4 years.

 

[brakeyawself]

I would wager a Selke type C is more of a need than a PP/G C. One of many reasons I’m not sold on building around Zibanejad.

100% no 10000000000000000000000000000000000000% (in case you didn't know, those are equal! Unless you are dealing with individual units.)

 

[brakeyawself]

Larkin is 2 years from contract extension. You acquiring him now, you're conceivably getting 7-8 years of prime (though not elite) 1C play from him. As opposed to Zibanejad, who is more like 3-4 years.

But Larkin isn't really a PPG player...... I wouldn't even call him a "near PPG player"...... I guess that's settles it, Larkin isn't good enough.

Yea I am being sarcastic, I think Larkin would be a great fit. I just still don't see him leaving Detroit. But hey, anything's possible.

 

[Chalfdiggity3]

Acquiring someone who is "unproven," isn't the same as hoping on magic beans.

You can safely project guys with some amount of certainty.

Larkin to me is a bad combination of nearing contract extension, not great offensively, and approaching the age where I'm actually thinking he's too old to grow with Kakko and Lafreniere.

He's not a "no," on any single of those issues but all three of them together are less than ideal for me. He's 25 when I'd prefer someone like 21-23. He's about to need a huge new contract. And he's only 0.75 and 0.52 ppg the past two seasons and I think his defense is a bit overrated.

I just.... don't see an elite center there. I see a high end #2. Maybe guys like Lundell and Krebs aren't either but they are at least cheap with room to grow. Why would I want a guy whose days of being a good contract value are now over?

When did 25 become to old to grow? You talk about him like hes 34yo. The contract i believe would be around 6-7 m. which i believe is worth it. You then have chytl and Larkin to be with our top wingers for years. Larkin is the do it all player, can win faceoffs, and play defense, and can put up points. I think thats the type of player we should be targeting.

It is magic beans because they are unproven lol. I dont want to take a chance on it ex our own Lias Anderson not being able to hack it.

Only hockeysfuture would people want a prospect over a proven commodity who is still only 24yo. Even if hes 25.. i dont see how he is to old.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I would wager a Selke type C is more of a need than a PP/G C. One of many reasons I’m not sold on building around Zibanejad.

I don't really think one is any more of a need than the other in general. For this team as it is right now (as in with Zib)? Yes we need the defensively conscious player, but if you're replacing Zibanejad with that player, you're going to be looking long and hard to replace what Zibanejad brings to the table, which I'd wager is probably tougher to do because a non covid impacted Zibanejad has basically paced close to 60 goals for large chunks of the last 2 seasons (41 in 57 in 2019-20, 21 in his final 29 games last year.)

I'm not interested in locking him up for anything over 5 years (I'm confident that he'll still be at the very least, decent by the end of it where he may not be worth the money in years 4 and 5, but you're getting out of the contract before he really starts to nose dive) but guys who score 40+ in this league are very rare.

Writing all of that out just made me really annoyed that Ryan Strome is still here. They need someone who can be more of a "match up" C instead of using Zibanejad in that role. Maybe Chytil will get that responsibility in a 3C position, but I hate the idea of checking lines.

 

[brakeyawself]

This is such a crap show.

Anyway, if our wingers turn out to be as good as expected, we could probably take a 65 point center, with Selke qualifications and turn that player into a "near PPG" player.

And my ideal center would be Austin Matthews right now No wait, ok, McDavid would be my ideal. But Matthews would be my runner up. And I still say our best plan is to hope that Matthews chooses free agency and if he does, give him the world.
If you’re going to pay 9+ per year for a center it might as well be one who’s guaranteed to be worth it. Even if it’s really 11+ per.

But barring that, I think we need to be a bit creative and look at all other plausible options. Which might mean finding a guy who doesn't excite everyone but plays a complete, 200ft, solid game, but isn't necessarily know for their "offensive dominance".

 

[Edge]

Key clarification

They haven't had any?

My limited understanding of them isn't what I'd call detailed, in-depth discussions to this point. Parameters, an idea of what both sides are thinking. But I don't think they've sat down and really gone through details to this point.

 

[brakeyawself]

I don't really think one is any more of a need than the other in general. For this team as it is right now (as in with Zib)? Yes we need the defensively conscious player, but if you're replacing Zibanejad with that player, you're going to be looking long and hard to replace what Zibanejad brings to the table, which I'd wager is probably tougher to do because a non covid impacted Zibanejad has basically paced close to 60 goals for large chunks of the last 2 seasons (41 in 57 in 2019-20, 21 in his final 29 games last year.)

I'm not interested in locking him up for anything over 5 years (I'm confident that he'll still be at the very least, decent by the end of it where he may not be worth the money in years 4 and 5, but you're getting out of the contract before he really starts to nose dive) but guys who score 40+ in this league are very rare.

Writing all of that out just made me really annoyed that Ryan Strome is still here. They need someone who can be more of a "match up" C instead of using Zibanejad in that role. Maybe Chytil will get that responsibility in a 3C position, but I hate the idea of checking lines.

For this season yea. But I still have faith in Chytils long term outlook.

 

[bleedblue94]

Good to see people won't be able to keep playing the wait till next summer and sign couturier nonsense. We need to make a hockey trade to get a center...

 

[brakeyawself]

You know, I saw a pic of Messier and he looks good for like 60. Just sayin......

There’s also this Glenn Murray guy who’s probably still playing men’s leagues games in Chelsea, Manhattan. I think we should send a scout.