Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXVII – Fortnight, Not Fortnite

[True Blue]

What about McD, he offered something no other defender could have offered.

McD was trending downwards at the time of the trade. And has for a few years.

I guess where we differ, I don't think Kreider at ages 33-35 or even 36 with a clause is going to be worth it and I think by that juncture the Rangers are going to be wishing they had that extra cap space they may have used on Kreider.

I guess I am making a choice about who it is that leads the team out of the rebuild.

 

[True Blue]

Exactly. If anything I'm more convinced he stays w SJS

You and me both

 

[RGY]

ICYMI:

https://nypost.com/2019/02/10/caps-and-restrictions-are-not-needed-for-every-little-loophole/




Always felt this way.

But can we get NSH 1st plus Tolvanen for Hayes? Maybe add Vesey to him?

 

[Thirty One]

But can we get NSH 1st plus Tolvanen for Hayes? Maybe add Vesey to him?

u trolling?

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

The goalies?

I would think if Hank is being started less and less, eventually he may not want to stay around. Not that I think he'd want to be traded, more so I wonder if at some point he would retire? Is his last season with 5.5M left owed really worth him staying around should he be backup at that point considering he already would have over ~103M in career earnings?

Yes.

What is it with people falling over themselves to try and move on from Hank. Until he's not good anymore and someone can take the job from him, we should all be happy to have him.

 

[RGY]

u trolling?

Always.

But seriously, zucc for Tolvanen is unlikely...so what about Hayes?

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Always.

But seriously, zucc for Tolvanen is unlikely...so what about Hayes?

Put yourself in Nashville's shoes...would you trade Tolvanen for Hayes? Pretty easy no.

If Tolvanen was the only way to get Panarin, I might do that if I was Nashville but definiltey not for Kevin Hayes.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I think the Evander Kane contract is possible if not more. 7x7 with an only 3 team can trade to clause.

7 years would take Kreider to the age of 36. Do the Rangers really want to have Kreider on their cap at ages 33-34-35 maybe even 36 with that type of cap hit and clause?

I think I'd sign Kreider at 7x7. As long as he doesn't have a full NMC of course.

Maybe they can get him 7.25x6 or 7.5x5. That was the JVR deal, right? I think that's a fair comparable.

I don't worry too much about the cap hit, the cap is going to keep going up, especially with another new team and with the US television rights being up in a couple years, that next deal is going surely be much bigger and will jolt the cap up. We could be looking at a 100m cap a couple years into Kreider's next deal.

 

[Thirty One]

Always.

But seriously, zucc for Tolvanen is unlikely...so what about Hayes?

I think Hayes for Tolvanen is in the realm of realism, adding the first in though?

Vesey back to Nashville is what set off my troll senses.

 

[RGY]

Put yourself in Nashville's shoes...would you trade Tolvanen for Hayes? Pretty easy no.

If Tolvanen was the only way to get Panarin, I might do that if I was Nashville but definiltey not for Kevin Hayes.

Kevin Hayes is going to put up 50+ points this season. Big body at center that can play in all situations. Can play wing too. Sure Panarin is an elite scorer but Hayes has a lot of value all around. Plus CBJ may not move Panarin at all while in a playoff run, he is there rental essentially. So now youre looking at Hayes vs Stone. I think Hayes has the edge because of what he can offer all around. Has more playoff experience too.

Tolvanen for Hayes is not out of the question

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I think we could get Tolvanen for Hayes, but I seriously doubt a 1st would come back as well.

Maybe like Hayes and Fast for Tolvanen and a 3rd.

 

[RGY]

So youre comparing Mika to the elite players that have hit 60 and 70 points this year already? Cmon that is just unreasonable.

He is 25 years old. Last year he missed 10 games and finished with 47 points at age 24. The year before he missed 26 games and finished with 37 at age 23. He scored 51 at age 22.

He is finally healthy and his progression of production is back on track. And this season while playing on a poor rangers team that has no depth therefore opposing teams have the luxury of zeroing in on his line. And for a period his wingers were Namestnikov and Fast.

Look at the whole picture before putting together your judgement of him.

He is easily a 60 point player moving forward and he absolutely slots in when this team is competitive again.

This was my response back on January 18th to another poster willing to ship out Zibanejad so easily.

He is now at 54 points on the season. He can finish with 65+. Heck of a year on a team that is young and does not have the depth of scoring behind him. Teams can focus on him and Kreider and they are still producing. Kreider is at 42 points. Likely will finish with 55+ with 30 goals.

We need to keep these two.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Put yourself in Nashville's shoes...would you trade Tolvanen for Hayes? Pretty easy no.

If Tolvanen was the only way to get Panarin, I might do that if I was Nashville but definiltey not for Kevin Hayes.

Yes. I would. Hayes is only 26. He has PO experience. He could be signed long term if they so choose.

This isn't a 32 year old Rick Nash. This is a 2C in his prime. The 1st is a bit much but Tolvanen + 2nd/3rd for Hayes is very fair.

 

[Off Sides]

McD was trending downwards at the time of the trade. And has for a few years.

I guess I am making a choice about who it is that leads the team out of the rebuild.

I think at some point over his next contract Kreider will be trending downward too. If he does I'm not so sure he is the one they should be attaching themselves to to help lead them out of the rebuild.

If they want to use him while he is still in his prime, I can understand that part of the idea, yet that means they also are going to need to import a ton of other players who are in their primes while he is still in his.

I just think if they are going to allow for the rebuild to more or less happen from their draft and development, most of that was drafted in 2017-2018 and will be in 2019 and beyond, it's going to take them at least 2-4 years from draft to NHL prime, maybe even longer as it took Zbad and Kreider to reach theirs. In 3, 4, 5, 6 year from now, Kreider is going to be in that age area where it's pretty uncommon that player is still in his prime. By then if anything is leading them out of the rebuild it's likely to be those draft/developed players more so than Kreider.

If they need him to try to develop those players that is another debate, one which would also have to include why they did not need McD, Hayes etc to do so or if they could use other cheaper, less risky contracts to do so in the mean time.

 

[Thirty One]

Speaking of Hayes' playoff experience... it isn't great. I wonder how much that will play.

 

[JohnC]

Yes.

What is it with people falling over themselves to try and move on from Hank. Until he's not good anymore and someone can take the job from him, we should all be happy to have him.

This board historically romanticizes the idea of keeping and defending the players that don’t come close to living up to their contracts.

The all timer that not only lives up to his contract, but is also probably immovable, isn’t afforded the same treatment for some reason.

 

[GAGLine]

Why the different arguments for Hayes?

I mean if they are moving him to bolster the future instead of using him to build around, why will that not apply to Kreider next year when he effectively has the same term left as Hayes does right now?

Kreider is our best winger once Zucc is gone. Maybe we end up bringing Zucc back, and maybe that changes the conversation around Kreider, but for now it looks like he will be our only legitimate top 6 winger heading into next year. Chytil will probably be moved to center and may or may not be ready for top 6 minutes next year. Buchnevich has yet to establish himself as a consistent top 6 player. Kravtsov will be a rookie and after him, we don't have much. Hayes is the 2nd best center on the team, and we have depth behind him in Chytil, Howden and Andersson. We may also draft another center with our 1st this year. Maybe none of those players will be ready for a top 6 center role next year, but one of them should be able to fill that spot by the time we are ready to compete.

That's not to say that we shouldn't trade Kreider. By all means, if we get the right deal, do it. But we have the luxury of time with Kreider. A lot can change between now and the next trade deadline.

 

[Lundy HOF]

I think signing Erik Karlsson is becoming a real possibility

If this team wins the draft lottery and walks away with Hughes or Kakko. I have to admit, I be less opposed to it.

Adding Hughes, EK and Panarin + some youth taking the next step would a massively different team.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

It's not unrealistic or out of the question but I feel it's improbable. If NSH is parting with ET, I think they are looking for a bigger fish to fry than Hayes. Like Panarin, Stone or even Duchene.

 

[pld459666]

I think we could get Tolvanen for Hayes, but I seriously doubt a 1st would come back as well.

Maybe like Hayes and Fast for Tolvanen and a 3rd.

How about Hayes and Zuccs (both at 50% retained) for Tolvanen, the 1st and a conditional 1st in 2020. 2nd if they do not reach cup. Converts to a 2020 1st if they get to finals

 

[RGY]

If this team wins the draft lottery and walks away with Hughes or Kakko. I have to admit, I be less opposed to it.

Adding Hughes, EK and Panarin + some youth taking the next step would a massively different team.

Maybe re-sign Hayes as well. They can move out one or two of Nams/Vesey/Strome for cap flexibility. Although I like Strome.

Would be amazing if we landed Tolvanen. You could have Tolvanen/Chytil/Kravtsov next year with Panarin and Hayes added in.... wow

 

[RGY]

It's not unrealistic or out of the question but I feel it's improbable. If NSH is parting with ET, I think they are looking for a bigger fish to fry than Hayes. Like Panarin, Stone or even Duchene.

Again Panarin may not even be available.

I see more value with Hayes over Stone.

Duchene the argument is there

 

[RangerBoy]

It isn't an ideal situation, but we need to be sure that Shesty is the real deal before we trade Georgie, and we aren't going to get much for Georgie now or at the draft. The longer we can wait to make that decision, the better. If nothing else, maybe he increases his value.

By this time next season.

 

[True Blue]

If they need him to try to develop those players that is another debate, one which would also have to include why they did not need McD, Hayes etc to do so or if they could use other cheaper, less risky contracts to do so in the mean time.

Because if you are rebuilding, then you cannot keep everyone. Some players need to be moved to replenish assets.

I think at some point over his next contract Kreider will be trending downward too. If he does I'm not so sure he is the one they should be attaching themselves to to help lead them out of the rebuild.

Everyone will. But you cannot have a team of 20 year olds for a successful rebuild to work.

 

[SA16]

Kreider should be traded for a good offer and then the money should be reinvested in Stone or Panarin. The contracts will be within 3M of each other. The other two are far better players. And the other two are slightly younger. There is no way that say 8M Kreider is more valuable than 11M Stone/Panarin+additional first round pick+additional top prospect+whatever. If Kreider was not already on the team and you had the option to say...sign Panarin/Stone OR sign Kreider but it cost offersheet compensation say a 1st+2nd+3rd would anyone seriously take Kreider?