- Jan 18, 2012
- 35,409
- 54,164
Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXVIII
- Thread starter aufheben
- Start date
- Status
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
Buying out Shattenkirk would be a ridiculous maneuver.
Not sure how much I believe this is a genuine effort to re-sign Zucc and Hayes, more than a leak to gain some leverage.
Not sure how much I believe this is a genuine effort to re-sign Zucc and Hayes, more than a leak to gain some leverage.
- Jan 18, 2012
- 35,409
- 54,164
Conditional 3rd for Puijjujujiuri. If he scores 20 in 2020 it becomes a 2nd. Similar outline to the Yakupov trade.
Shattenkirk @ 50 and Fast for Lililkjijigren; or just Shattenkirk for whatever they offer, could use another 7th
Shattenkirk @ 50 and Fast for Lililkjijigren; or just Shattenkirk for whatever they offer, could use another 7th
Last edited:
For this to be done is a no-brainer. You need all the cards on the table.
I was actually thinking the other day — and note, I don’t want to see this nor believe in it, but just to get all the cards on the table — how could we look if we went ‘all-in’ next season?
I think we probably can produce three kids within the system now that can help us next year. Kravtsov of course, but also a depth forward and a depth LD. I think that Virta and Rykov are closest in line, but there are of course others who would push them. Vinny L, Lindgren, Hajak, Meskanen and so forth.
Erik Karlsson and Artemi Panarin could be considered. But as a fact we would only have about 5m left in cap space if we resigned Zucc and Hayes and the RFAs (Buch, Tony D and Pionk).
I think the big value could be had in trades. Look at the Skinner trade. A 2nd in 19’ and a 3rd in 20’. This is of course the reason for why this option would be selected, nobody wanting the expose themselves by making moves really brings the value on the trade market down. We could open up cap space by buying Smith and Strome out and trading Namestnikov for like a 3rd round pick.
The starting point would be something like:
Kreider-Zib-Zucc
Vesey-Hayes-Buch
Kravtsov-Chytil-Fast
Howden-Lias/Boo-Virta
Skjei-TDA
Rykov-Pionk
Staal-Shatty
Say 6-8m in cap space. We could probably add two good players in trades, like say a Hoffman or someone like that. Think it could be a PO team. Don’t think it’s worth it to abdndon the tanking for.
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
Why is everyone in such a rush to dump Shattenkirk? I also think we should move him, if the price is right, but for a mid-round pick....that's absurd.
His contract is hardly an albatross, it's only good for another two years and he is finally healthy and playing well. It would be moronic to let him go for anything less than a 1st or, possibly a 2nd + prospect (depending on the prospect).
His contract is hardly an albatross, it's only good for another two years and he is finally healthy and playing well. It would be moronic to let him go for anything less than a 1st or, possibly a 2nd + prospect (depending on the prospect).
The Rangers really, really need to move on with many of their players. They are winning games with a group of players who won't be here when the team is ready to contend. It would be a different story if the team was full of young players and they were all learning to play together. The performance of the young players on the Rangers team is up and down. I think Quinn has a lot to do with that. He talks about accountability. It doesn't apply to some of the veteran players who always get the benefit of the doubt. Always. Buchnevich had been in and out of the dog house all season. Pavel will be a healthy scratch soon in the near future. Chytil's ice time is all over the place. Their handling of Andersson was atrocious. They bring up Lindgren for some reason and send him back. The 11-7 lineup is weird.
Most importantly it’s the entire situation on the blueline where we have 3 other vets taking up spots plus Skjei, ie we only have 1 spot open for a kid on the blueline.
In addition, Shatty/Pionk/TDA are totally indentical players in terms of which role they thrive in. And only one of them can be served the ice time that will serve their development, or in Shatty’s case play, best. Like we saw Shatty will do absolutely nothing if he doesn’t get all those top offensive minutes. So if we want to get anything positive from Shatty whatsoever and maintain any kind of tradevalue we need to totally screw both TDA and Pionk’s usage. I just makes a heck of a lot more sense — in the stage we are in right now — to give the kids a shot and have a vet RD on the 3rd pair that can play some defensive minutes, as opposed to having a vet that blocks both kids we have.
Thirdly, once a vet really get past that ‘useless’ threshold there is no turning back. One more injury and Shatty is here for two more full years. Like how often has the term ‘his value can only go up!’ been uttered and has it ever been true? It seems like a downward trend rarely is broken.
Fourthly, looking at more or less — all — successful rebuilds, they have had a more mature blueline than forward group when getting out of it. Look at Toronto, they didn’t draft Matthews and after he was picked started to collect Ds that would bring them out of the rebuild. They got out of their rebuild on a platform of Ds that was already there. Winnipeg? The same. Chicago? The same. And so forth.
If you have an opening on D you ‘create’ a D that can be part of the future. Playing D in the NHL is so much about becoming comfortable with the speed and pressure. There are plenty of UDFAs and later picks that become OK Ds in this league. But you must have an opening to get that. We need more openings on D. Staal and Smith can probably not be traded...
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
I'm sorry, but this is just not a good take.
Your main points are:
A) Because his value is at it's peak -- How do you know that? And my argument wasn't that we SHOULDN'T move him, it's that it would be ridiculous to move him for a mid/late-round pick. I see some guys in here saying to dump him for a 7th. I mean, come on. This is insane. If all we are is getting a third for him, I have a hard time believing that's peak value. And if it is, we are better off keeping him. That's my point. If we can get a 1st, or 2nd+prospect then adios.
B) He is redundant with Tony D and Pionk. -- I just don't agree with this. Firstly, there is enough ice-time for the three of them. Pionk should not be playing first line minutes and if all we're getting is a mid/late round pick, I'd rather hold Shattenkirk and dump McQuaid for the same thing. We can also bench Smith and use him as the 7th or send him down. Staal, if it's possible, just dump him, if not, he can have his minutes reduced. It's easy to find minutes for the young guys on this team, while also understanding Shatty is probably our best D-Man ATM.
C) If a hole opens, it will be filled by someone who otherwise might not be noticed. -- I mean...this is just absurd. What happened last year? We ended up with garbage like O'Gara playing big minutes. Of all your points, this is by far the worst. Players don't just become NHL players because they get 'comfortable.' You know better than that. I also would prefer we avoid the yo-yoing that might happen should spots all of a sudden appear. There is no need to have Hajek, Lindgren, etc playing up here this year. They should get a full year of the AHL under their belt and come back next year with eyes on making the big squad.
Regardless, I don't see how anyone using any logic could determine it would best for the team to rid themselves of Shatty for a 3rd or....a 7th. I mean, come on. If you think that's peak value for a guy who is 2 years removed from being the hottest deadline acquisition, I just don't know what to tell you.
In fact, it seems quite clear to me that he is just now starting to rebuild his value, thus it is likely nowhere near what it could be should he maintain this play through until next deadline. Of course, that's a gamble, but it's one I sure would we willing to take if the only offer on the table right now is a 3rd rounder.
Blue Blooded
Most people rejected his message
It was just one game, but if 77-22 can perform at like 70% of what they did against the Sabres every night that's still an incredible pairing. DeAngelo looked very comfortable on the left side, especially in the offensive zone. Not only did Shatty and DeAngelo allow the team to set up a 5v5 powerplay in the Sabres' zone 4 or 5 times due to being extremely active on the blueline, constantly getting open and providing options and quickly and accurately moving the puck, but they were incredible at getting the puck in their own end and moving it up the ice. Not only were they better at pressuring the Sabres at zone entry, forcing dump-ins and turnovers, but they are both so calm under pressure that every time the Sabres dumped in the puck they effortlessly moved it up the ice which not only broke up the Sabres attack but led to a Rangers zone entry. I don't think the Sabres had the puck in the Rangers zone for more than 5 consecutive seconds against 77-22 in the first two periods. They had a few shifts in the third where the Sabres had a sustained attack, but they were all off a draw in the Rangers' end IIRC (could be wrong on this one).
Thing is they didn't even get the 60+ zone start ratio you usually see from offensively deployed defensive pairings, they had the same deployment ratio as Skjei-McQuaid.
I agree that you probably have to move one of them, but I think Pionk is the one you move. He struggles a lot more than the other two in a defensive role and I think you can get a very good return from him still. You might not get the most out of Shattenkirk in a defensive role, but he can slow down the game and limit scoring chances against if he's tasked with it and he isn't going to be completely overwhelmed the way Pionk is.
But speaking of UDFA RDs, what are your thoughts on Linus Hultström? He is dominating in the SHL on Djurgården's top pairing and is only 26. He was signed by the Panthers a few years back, but didn't play a single competitive game for the organization and was loaned to DIF both seasons of the contract - not sure what the story was there.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
I've said this throughout the season - if the returns aren't there for Hayes or Zuccarello, then they should just re-sign them and move along. Hayes is youngish C who's had a heck of a season and is playing like a 2C. Zooks is Zooks. If you're not getting enough back for them there's no reason to trade them. 45th-62nd pick and a middling prospect for Zuccarello isn't enough to move a guy that loves it here and has shown that pretty much throughout his career. I don't think his "decline" will be all that magnified. The smaller guys usually don't. If the phone calls for Hayes aren't including a 1st + blue chip prospect then I'm not moving him either. Rebuilding is about acquiring assets, it's also about making the team better. The Rangers have a lot of picks already coming up and probably more being stockpiled this deadline with McQuaid, possibly Namestnikov, and possibly others that we aren't aware of. The young defenseman are getting games and experience. A rebuild isn't only about future assets, it's also about hanging on to the right "veterans" and developing a winning culture. I'll admit that this team is more competitive than I thought they'd be and the effort, usually, is there.
Zooks and Hayes don't have to be traded. They only have to if it makes sense.
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
I often disagree with a lot of what you write, but this is more or less spot on how I feel.
I agree with RB in that I dont understand the Lindgren call up and then send down. He played well and we should have let him get more games in.
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
Agreed. But my only hope would be that they are trying to build some market for these older guys in the hopes someone will take them off our hands for playoff runs.
That is the only justification i could think of. McQuaid. Even Smith who hasnt been terrible.
I would deal Pionk too if someone would pay a decent price for him.
I would rather invest in Lindgren.
Also, with the quotes coming from Puljujarvi’s agent I would see if you can get him at a buy low price right now. Edmonton is a disaster
NYRFAN218
King
I really hope that Brooks article is an attempt to create leverage from management to get teams to pony up because doing what Brooks outlined would be a colossal f*** up.
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
Same. I also don't mind the cup of tea for Lindgren. I think it's good to give a player a bit of insight into the big show for a short time if they are performing well at the lower level. What I 100% don't want to see is a yo-yo situation or like what has happened with Andersson where he got shit minutes with shit players while here. A sidenote, but I thought he outperformed both Chytil and Howden when he was here.
Seems pretty obvious to me that this is exactly what this is.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
Why hello, Rangers front office planting a piece to goose the market less than a week and a half before the TDL.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Certainly could be that. It could just as well be that they're underwhelmed with what's being offered and assessing the future.
They've pulled the opposite stunt with guys they wanted to sign in the past by saying that they're engaged in trade talks. Happened with Zucc the last time he was a UFA to be, Girardi and Callahan (who eventually moved) too.
I have a reallllllllly tough time believing that JG is serious about extending either of those guys right now. It really doesn't make any sense, even if the offers are "under whelming" which shouldn't be a surprise, they are for everyone who is out there or else we'd see movement right now.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
The Rangers are a clueless organization. Is there a plan in place? They are all over the map. They trade Stepan for futures because they were concerned with where his game was trending. Are the Rangers rebuilding? No. The Rangers tried to acquire Bozak or sign Thornton to replace Stepan. Their plan wasn’t to give Hayes the added responsibility. Gorton signs Smith and Shattenkirk to 4 year contracts. Seven months later Gorton says the team will rebuild/ refresh/retool. The Rangers are really considering buying out both players less than two years after signing them? Why did they sign them?
The Rangers spent so much currency on using 1st rounders on centers and acquired another 1st rounder in the Tampa deal. If they keep Hayes, they have no room for their young centers to play for the a while. They have room for one young center to play in their top 9. Andersson’s agent should request for a trade out of the Rangers organization. Chytil will be stuck on the wing which isn’t his natural position. He is learning to play wing in the NHL and the coach says his level has dropped. Ok.
The Rangers spent so much currency on using 1st rounders on centers and acquired another 1st rounder in the Tampa deal. If they keep Hayes, they have no room for their young centers to play for the a while. They have room for one young center to play in their top 9. Andersson’s agent should request for a trade out of the Rangers organization. Chytil will be stuck on the wing which isn’t his natural position. He is learning to play wing in the NHL and the coach says his level has dropped. Ok.
I’m sure they have a plan they are just planting the seeds to get a better offer
No chance they sign These guys now
I agree Hayes goes to open playing time for kids
Zuc May return but on a team friendly deal but that’s it
No chance they sign These guys now
I agree Hayes goes to open playing time for kids
Zuc May return but on a team friendly deal but that’s it
- Status
Latest posts
-
HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #91: 2025 Trade Deadline edition- Latest: Habs 4 Life
-
-
Confirmed with Link: Utah HC signs G Karel Vejmelka to 5-year extension. ($4.5M AAV)- Latest: Prestigeworldwide
