Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXIII

[FIRE DRURY]

Reasons why Talbot's value was low in 2015:


- No RFA years left
- On a 1-year contract, which limited negotiations for the acquiring team
- Talbot was a career backup at the time
- Other, younger (cost-controlled) goalies on the market

Edmonton didn’t underpay for Talbot. How often have back up goalies with expiring contracts and decent stats get traded for top picks or top prospects?

In hindsight that was a solid trade for us when it comes down to value.

 

[bobbop]

McQuaid to Leafs seems like a good possibility.

I think I'm the only one here that wants McQuiad to stick around for another season.

I can see him returning as a UFA this summer

 

[Wind Waker]

Jost + Col 1st 2019 + Ott 3rd + Conditional Col 2nd 2020 (If Col makes WCF or if Hayes re-signs)

for

Hayes + Lettieri

We'd have to add something for that, Lettieri doesn't bump the trade value from us up at all.

 

[aufheben]

Did Chiarelli literally just give Mikko Koskinen the same contract he gave Talbot three years ago?

 

[Beacon]

One thing I feel many people here lose sight of is that a GM does not always have the clear opportunity to make their team better. It's easy to sit here and play Monday morning quarterback and say we should have traded for this person or should have signed that Ufa but they miss out more often than make the move. GMJG is in the easy part tight now, accumulating assets.... And I think he is doing a good job but the hard part is knowing when to start making that Uturn to start becoming competitive. You need to start doing it before it's crystal clear you have the right parts and you have to be decisive about it. It's what I feel most GMs screw up.... They are too scared to make a mistake and aren't bold enough.

The Rangers are nowhere near done with the asset accumulation stage. Right now, even if 100% of the youth hits their ceiling, the team will still need to acquire talent as UFAs. But 100% of the youth won't hurt their ceiling, not even close to 50%, probably not even 20%.

Here's an optimistic scenario:

1. One of Chytil or Kratsov becomes a first liner.
2. One of Chytil/Kravtsov, Lias, Howden becomes a strong second liner.
3. One more of them a middle 6 forward and one becomes a random scrub NHLer without much trade value.
4. One of Vinni, Gettinger, Meskanen, Barron turns into a middle 6 player. Maybe one more 4th liner in the bunch.
5. One of Fontaine, Gropp, Fogarty, Nieves becomes a good 4th liner.

That's 4 in the top9, 2 fourth liners. Zib, Butcher, Vesey, Fast, Strome is another 5 for 11 total (MZA, Kreider, Hayes will be traded or not resigned). Still pretty bad up front and need at least one more first liner.

On defense, Shatty and Smith will leave.

1. Skjei, Pionk are players.
2. One or two of Hajek, Rykov, Lindgren make it.
3. One or both of K'Andre or Lundkvist make it.
4. Possibly one lesser talent like Keane, Gross, Crawley, Rag, Bigras makes it.

Still need at least one more first pair guy. And it could, and probably likely wil go worse than what I wrote:

1. Kravtsov and Chytil become middle 6 guys who are ok, but not great on the second line.
2. Lias becomes Malhotra.
3. All lower prospects (Vinni, Nieves, Meskanen, Barron, Gropp, Gettinger, Fontaine, Crawley, Bigras) fail.
4. Only one of Hajek, Rykov and Lindgren has an NHL career, and that's on the third pair.
5. Fast begins to fade as he approaches 30.
6. Vesey and Strome prove it was just a good half a season and go back to being 4th liners with little trade value.
7. One of K'andre or Lundkvist becomes a 4D, the other cant transition to the NHL.

The outcome is 2 decent, but not great forwards and one such defenseman.

This scenario isnt even worst case, it is a very possible scenario. We need to acquire more talent, particularly of the high risk, high return variety.

Hayes, Zuccarello, can wach bring a first and a B prospect; Names a second. Tampa will give us 1 or 2.

Shatty, Smith, Staal will bring back a first or a second each, depending on how good they will last. Kreider fetches a first plus a good prospect.

That's 6 top-62 picks this year and next. JG can go for high risk draftees become of such great odds of someone working g out if you have that many early picks.

 

[pld459666]

3rd round pick is pretty crappy for a 3rd year player in his mid 20’s on pace for a 40~ point season.

With his failure to live up to the pre-NHL hype combined with the warts to his game, I fail to see too many teams willing to part with a 2nd rounder, although I will be the first to admit it is possible.

 

[SA16]

Can someone please explain to me why Kyle Dubas, who is perceived as being this new young analytical GM, is going to be interested in trading for a player who goes against everything he theoretically values in McQuaid?

 

[wafflepadsave]

Jost is 20. 20! Sign me up please.

Yeah he just needs to get stronger and he will be good.

 

[Edge]

I explained for almost 4 years now how the return was fair, considering Talbot being a backup, and his contract situation not being ideal and people always responded how Talbot is a starting goalie. Even if he was, he wasn't at the time of the trade.

Now, 3.5 years later Talbot is losing out to Koskinen, who isn't a worldbeater. I've been thinking a lot about what nyr2k2 said about Benoit Allaire. How good is he really? What has he really done aside from Lundqvist?

Al Montoya, Chad Johnson, Cam Talbot, Antti Raanta, Dan Blackbun, Jason Missiaen, Matt Zaba, Brandon Halverson, Mackenzie Skapski.

At some point, we have to look at the fact that he has not really "elevated" any goalie's level aside from Lundqvist and if that's the case, how much of that is on Lundqvist just being an elite talent?

I think it depends on how you look at it.

The fact that most people couldn't pick most of those names out of lineup before they came through the organization, but two became NHL starters after being Rangers is pretty significant.

Then you have two who became long-time NHL backups who played a combined 350+ NHL games.

Then you have one who lost to injury, and another who was never the same after an injury.

That's actually a very good track record as far as goalies are concerned.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Can someone please explain to me why Kyle Dubas, who is perceived as being this new young analytical GM, is going to be interested in trading for a player who goes against everything he theoretically values in McQuaid?

He signed or gave a PTO to Tom Sesito a few weeks ago

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Can someone please explain to me why Kyle Dubas, who is perceived as being this new young analytical GM, is going to be interested in trading for a player who goes against everything he theoretically values in McQuaid?

Probably because he’s one guy, and I’m sure there are some people in his front office who are advocates of “physicality”. I wouldn’t expect a guy like Dubas to hire a bunch of “yes men” to agree with every player evaluation he makes.

 

[NYRKing]

I explained for almost 4 years now how the return was fair, considering Talbot being a backup, and his contract situation not being ideal and people always responded how Talbot is a starting goalie. Even if he was, he wasn't at the time of the trade.

Now, 3.5 years later Talbot is losing out to Koskinen, who isn't a worldbeater. I've been thinking a lot about what nyr2k2 said about Benoit Allaire. How good is he really? What has he really done aside from Lundqvist?

Al Montoya, Chad Johnson, Cam Talbot, Antti Raanta, Dan Blackbun, Jason Missiaen, Matt Zaba, Brandon Halverson, Mackenzie Skapski.

At some point, we have to look at the fact that he has not really "elevated" any goalie's level aside from Lundqvist and if that's the case, how much of that is on Lundqvist just being an elite talent?

Two things:

1. At the time the return for Talbot was underwhelming based on the market. Good back-ups were fetching first rounders, and there was a solid rumor FLA offered a first for talbot which we refused. I mean hindsight, but two years ago Talbot had a great season and the Oilers were thrilled.

2. The coaching argument you use against Allaire is the same for any coach. Is he a product of the players? I would say the answer is always yes to an extent, but at the same time they absolutely have an impact on the success of the talent and the less talented. Talbot, Raanta, Johnson were all 'unknowns' who flourished in our system and while working with Allaire. I also believe each have credited some of there success to his coaching.

 

[Matz03]

I explained for almost 4 years now how the return was fair, considering Talbot being a backup, and his contract situation not being ideal and people always responded how Talbot is a starting goalie. Even if he was, he wasn't at the time of the trade.

Now, 3.5 years later Talbot is losing out to Koskinen, who isn't a worldbeater. I've been thinking a lot about what nyr2k2 said about Benoit Allaire. How good is he really? What has he really done aside from Lundqvist?

Al Montoya, Chad Johnson, Cam Talbot, Antti Raanta, Dan Blackbun, Jason Missiaen, Matt Zaba, Brandon Halverson, Mackenzie Skapski.

At some point, we have to look at the fact that he has not really "elevated" any goalie's level aside from Lundqvist and if that's the case, how much of that is on Lundqvist just being an elite talent?

Goalies don't magically go thru the Allaire school and graduate to be legit starters, instead you can say as soon as the guys left their games took a downturn while away from Allaire. To stay at the top they need to keep getting the best coaching. Biron, Johnson, Raanta, Talbot, even Pavelec though he wasn't here long enough all were solid backups prior to leaving this team. The minor league guys you listed don't really count, it's well documented that Allaire doesn't spend much time at all with minor leaguers and prospects. He's mostly working with guys in the NHL.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Can someone please explain to me why Kyle Dubas, who is perceived as being this new young analytical GM, is going to be interested in trading for a player who goes against everything he theoretically values in McQuaid?

Because at times their players have been pushed around with no repercussion. Analytics dont calculate injuries due to buffoonery.

 

[DutchShamrock]

I got into various podcasts. Lots of former players trading stories and just emphasizing how important locker room chemistry is. Having a voice that demands effort and accountability. Some articles lately recalling off ice issues, leadership and personalities.

Kind of lost in the analytic shift is the human side of hockey. It's amazing how important a lower tier player can be to a winning equation, and it's really just some weird alchemy. So when people crap on McQuaid or Scott Thornton or Brent Sopel, I think it's kind of important to keep in mind this isn't as simple as adding an EA sports rating to a team and the metrics improve proportionally.

 

[Kocur Dill]

The Rangers are nowhere near done with the asset accumulation stage. Right now, even if 100% of the youth hits their ceiling, the team will still need to acquire talent as UFAs. But 100% of the youth won't hurt their ceiling, not even close to 50%, probably not even 20%.

Here's an optimistic scenario:

1. One of Chytil or Kratsov becomes a first liner.
2. One of Chytil/Kravtsov, Lias, Howden becomes a strong second liner.
3. One more of them a middle 6 forward and one becomes a random scrub NHLer without much trade value.
4. One of Vinni, Gettinger, Meskanen, Barron turns into a middle 6 player. Maybe one more 4th liner in the bunch.
5. One of Fontaine, Gropp, Fogarty, Nieves becomes a good 4th liner.

That's 4 in the top9, 2 fourth liners. Zib, Butcher, Vesey, Fast, Strome is another 5 for 11 total (MZA, Kreider, Hayes will be traded or not resigned). Still pretty bad up front and need at least one more first liner.

On defense, Shatty and Smith will leave.

1. Skjei, Pionk are players.
2. One or two of Hajek, Rykov, Lindgren make it.
3. One or both of K'Andre or Lundkvist make it.
4. Possibly one lesser talent like Keane, Gross, Crawley, Rag, Bigras makes it.

Still need at least one more first pair guy. And it could, and probably likely wil go worse than what I wrote:

1. Kravtsov and Chytil become middle 6 guys who are ok, but not great on the second line.
2. Lias becomes Malhotra.
3. All lower prospects (Vinni, Nieves, Meskanen, Barron, Gropp, Gettinger, Fontaine, Crawley, Bigras) fail.
4. Only one of Hajek, Rykov and Lindgren has an NHL career, and that's on the third pair.
5. Fast begins to fade as he approaches 30.
6. Vesey and Strome prove it was just a good half a season and go back to being 4th liners with little trade value.
7. One of K'andre or Lundkvist becomes a 4D, the other cant transition to the NHL.

The outcome is 2 decent, but not great forwards and one such defenseman.

This scenario isnt even worst case, it is a very possible scenario. We need to acquire more talent, particularly of the high risk, high return variety.

Hayes, Zuccarello, can wach bring a first and a B prospect; Names a second. Tampa will give us 1 or 2.

Shatty, Smith, Staal will bring back a first or a second each, depending on how good they will last. Kreider fetches a first plus a good prospect.

That's 6 top-62 picks this year and next. JG can go for high risk draftees become of such great odds of someone working g out if you have that many early picks.

Agreed on all but Names and Fast. They could play a role similar to Skrudland/Keane hopefully moreso like Montreal and Dallas than their time in NY.

They have a stabilizing factor to consider for the longterm health of th team and locker room.

 

[Edge]

A few thoughts:

I think Allaire makes goalies better. How much better probably depends on the player. But I don't think he's necessarily going to turn water into wine either. I don't think any coach does that. But a good coach does help a player elevate their game. I think Allaire is a very good goalie coach.

Regarding the Talbot return --- I think the market was what it was. I know there were some random rumors of first round picks floating around out there, but I don't really buy that. I think a second round pick was the market for Talbot. I definitely feel that the perceived value to a Talbot trade was the precursor to the McD trade and some of the other deals we're expected to make in the comings week --- in some cases the return couldn't match what some posters were hoping for it, even if that was never reasonably on the table.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

With his failure to live up to the pre-NHL hype combined with the warts to his game, I fail to see too many teams willing to part with a 2nd rounder, although I will be the first to admit it is possible.

I don't recall him being hyped that much. A 3rd round pick will likely fail to even make the league. Personally, I wouldn't trade Vesey for just, anything.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

A little off topic and I don’t know if anyone has mentioned this, but on the 31 Thoughts podcast, they interviewed Chayka and Marek was asking him about how high they rated Keller and mentioned the Rangers specifically trying to maneouver to take him, so here’s a second source to Maloney mentioning it

Edit: He also said the Coyotes did have a deal in place to swap picks with Edmonton if Columbus didn’t take PLD

 

[Tawnos]

A few thoughts:

I think Allaire makes goalies better. How much better probably depends on the player. But I don't think he's necessarily going to turn water into wine either. I don't think any coach does that. But a good coach does help a player elevate their game. I think Allaire is a very good goalie coach.

It does all come down to personality. I think the point on a specialized coach like that is, when he finds someone he clicks with, the results can be incredible. There is always the possibility that he won't click with Shestyorkin, but we will cross that bridge when it comes.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

A little off topic and I don’t know if anyone has mentioned this, but on the 31 Thoughts podcast, they interviewed Chayka and Marek was asking him about how high they rated Keller and mentioned the Rangers specifically trying to maneouver to take him, so here’s a second source to Maloney mentioning it

Edit: He also said the Coyotes did have a deal in place to swap picks with Edmonton if Columbus didn’t take PLD

Did Marek ask him how he still has a job?

Can't stand Chayka.

 

[Thirty One]

Did Marek ask him how he still has a job?

Can't stand Chayka.

He probably didn't.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

He probably didn't.

Can confirm: He did not

 

[Crease]

Goalies don't magically go thru the Allaire school and graduate to be legit starters, instead you can say as soon as the guys left their games took a downturn while away from Allaire. To stay at the top they need to keep getting the best coaching. Biron, Johnson, Raanta, Talbot, even Pavelec though he wasn't here long enough all were solid backups prior to leaving this team. The minor league guys you listed don't really count, it's well documented that Allaire doesn't spend much time at all with minor leaguers and prospects. He's mostly working with guys in the NHL.

Agree. Goalie coaches can be very hands on, and tending involves a lot of muscle memory. So when you have a new coach telling you to do this, don't do that, and try this, it's going to change your results. Ideally for the better, but sometimes not. It's very much like pitching coaches tinkering with throwing mechanics. It can be problematic when you have good results with your own style but the coach insists that his approach will be better in the long run, but you can't make the transition.

 

[Lion Hound]

The Rangers are nowhere near done with the asset accumulation stage. Right now, even if 100% of the youth hits their ceiling, the team will still need to acquire talent as UFAs. But 100% of the youth won't hurt their ceiling, not even close to 50%, probably not even 20%.

Here's an optimistic scenario:

1. One of Chytil or Kratsov becomes a first liner.
2. One of Chytil/Kravtsov, Lias, Howden becomes a strong second liner.
3. One more of them a middle 6 forward and one becomes a random scrub NHLer without much trade value.
4. One of Vinni, Gettinger, Meskanen, Barron turns into a middle 6 player. Maybe one more 4th liner in the bunch.
5. One of Fontaine, Gropp, Fogarty, Nieves becomes a good 4th liner.

That's 4 in the top9, 2 fourth liners. Zib, Butcher, Vesey, Fast, Strome is another 5 for 11 total (MZA, Kreider, Hayes will be traded or not resigned). Still pretty bad up front and need at least one more first liner.

On defense, Shatty and Smith will leave.

1. Skjei, Pionk are players.
2. One or two of Hajek, Rykov, Lindgren make it.
3. One or both of K'Andre or Lundkvist make it.
4. Possibly one lesser talent like Keane, Gross, Crawley, Rag, Bigras makes it.

Still need at least one more first pair guy. And it could, and probably likely wil go worse than what I wrote:

1. Kravtsov and Chytil become middle 6 guys who are ok, but not great on the second line.
2. Lias becomes Malhotra.
3. All lower prospects (Vinni, Nieves, Meskanen, Barron, Gropp, Gettinger, Fontaine, Crawley, Bigras) fail.
4. Only one of Hajek, Rykov and Lindgren has an NHL career, and that's on the third pair.
5. Fast begins to fade as he approaches 30.
6. Vesey and Strome prove it was just a good half a season and go back to being 4th liners with little trade value.
7. One of K'andre or Lundkvist becomes a 4D, the other cant transition to the NHL.

The outcome is 2 decent, but not great forwards and one such defenseman.

This scenario isnt even worst case, it is a very possible scenario. We need to acquire more talent, particularly of the high risk, high return variety.

Hayes, Zuccarello, can wach bring a first and a B prospect; Names a second. Tampa will give us 1 or 2.

Shatty, Smith, Staal will bring back a first or a second each, depending on how good they will last. Kreider fetches a first plus a good prospect.

That's 6 top-62 picks this year and next. JG can go for high risk draftees become of such great odds of someone working g out if you have that many early picks.

I think this is a pretty accurate assessment/prediction of what could be. Only thing i would disagree with is the Shatty/Smith/Staal piece. I don't see clubs offering up a first for Staal or Smith. Staal has been better this season. But i would still question if he is actually tradeable at this stage. Getting back a 1st to me is never going to happen. Same for Smith for obvious reasons. If, Shatty can play a little more consistent and drive his PP numbers up a bit i can see him getting a better return. Bigger name, reclamation project sort of trade.