Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXI

[Lundy HOF]

Serious question...

If the Rangers don’t make a big FA splash for Panarin and/or EK as an example and we also don’t win the draft lottery. Assume we pick 6-8.

Next season our kids get a little more mature, a little better, we add Kravtsov, etc. Odds are next year we will likely pick in a similar spot, I doubt we will be exponentially worse next season even without Hayes and Zucc.

Is the goal to never pick top 3 and just hope we hit a fat home run on the picks we do have? Or is the goal to just build a team of all really good players, top to bottom and win before we have to pay everyone? Or should we look to draft as well as we can given where we pick and supplement through FA the rare times top talent makes it there?

I find myself waivering between “yes get Panarin!” Vs “no stay the course”. I would love to pick JG’s brain that’s for sure.

 

[haohmaru]

I think for a 60 point winger, that's a fair return.

Without conditions, I think a 2nd and 3rd is underwhelming

But that's my onion

A 2nd and a 3rd is very underwhelming. My argument has, and will always be, that that wasn't enough for the guy who clearly wanted to play his entire career here and bled Ranger blue. That 2nd and 3rd will very likely not end up being remotely what Zuccarello was and the fact that they dealt him likely means he won't sign here again. And I really wouldn't blame him. If he signs with Dallas or they go past the 2nd round, great. Then it's a better return. If it's a 2nd and a 3rd then it's not enough. I understand, to some degree, why they did it. It's not the move I would've made for a whole host of reasons and they aren't all related to statistics. He's a glue guy and you need guys like that on your team through a rebuild and to win a Cup.

I'm really curious what the summer will bring.

 

[Waivers]

@RangerBoy made a nice post earlier about Gorton's analysis:



"If there's a younger player around the league that we can go get, we have the assets to go and get"

"Unconventional" and draft picks as currency, perhaps offer sheeting is more of a reality than not.

 

[True Blue]

Yes our farm is deeper now compared to 2005-06 or even 06-07, but there is no Young Hank here. Throwing big money at UFA's before really having a feel for what you have would be a massive mistake. Getting the right player at the wrong time is a thing.

We have a winner.......

 

[Winston2018]

I keep using the new CBA and the Expansion draft as a time frame reference in regards to upgraded talent level. Dry powder in the form of Salary Cap space and a desirable farm team can get us a superstar or 2 in there near prime during the readjustments needed in the new CBA and Expansion considerations.

 

[Tawnos]

A 2nd and a 3rd is very underwhelming. My argument has, and will always be, that that wasn't enough for the guy who clearly wanted to play his entire career here and bled Ranger blue. That 2nd and 3rd will very likely not end up being remotely what Zuccarello was and the fact that they dealt him likely means he won't sign here again. And I really wouldn't blame him. If he signs with Dallas or they go past the 2nd round, great. Then it's a better return. If it's a 2nd and a 3rd then it's not enough. I understand, to some degree, why they did it. It's not the move I would've made for a whole host of reasons and they aren't all related to statistics. He's a glue guy and you need guys like that on your team through a rebuild and to win a Cup.

I'm really curious what the summer will bring.

People have said this before, and I'll give you the same response. That 2nd and 3rd are more likely to contribute to a Cup win than Zuccarello. It's about this moment, his age and league-wide longevity trends. If he was 2 years younger, I would absolutely agree with keeping him on.

As for glue guys being important for a rebuild, I agree with you to an extent. Chris Drury is a really good example of a player who had a major impact on the young players the Rangers were developing. Staal, Girardi, McDonagh, Callahan, and Dubinsky were all HEAVILY influenced by Drury. The thing is... the Rangers still need to be in asset gathering mode, so it's a tough balance to strike. No one executes a rebuild perfectly, so there will be/or already have been mistakes made. Is this one of them? Maybe. Is it worth the gamble? In my opinion, absolutely.

And just so you know, if you didn't already, I'm not a statistics person in the sense that I believe in the team formula being more important than the collection of individuals and that players who have little statistical value can nonetheless have a positive impact on the ultimate result.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

People have said this before, and I'll give you the same response. That 2nd and 3rd are more likely to contribute to a Cup win than Zuccarello. It's about this moment, his age and league-wide longevity trends. If he was 2 years younger, I would absolutely agree with keeping him on.

As for glue guys being important for a rebuild, I agree with you to an extent. Chris Drury is a really good example of a player who had a major impact on the young players the Rangers were developing. Staal, Girardi, McDonagh, Callahan, and Dubinsky were all HEAVILY influenced by Drury. The thing is... the Rangers still need to be in asset gathering mode, so it's a tough balance to strike. No one executes a rebuild perfectly, so there will be/or already have been mistakes made. Is this one of them? Maybe. Is it worth the gamble? In my opinion, absolutely.

And just so you know, if you didn't already, I'm not a statistics person in the sense that I believe in the team formula being more important than the collection of individuals and that players who have little statistical value can nonetheless have a positive impact on the ultimate result.

Spot on.

People compare the 2nd and 3rd to Zuccarello today, but that's not the comparison that's relevant. Compare it to 35-year old Zuccarello in 2022.

 

[NernieBichols]

Karlsson is already showing signs of breaking down. The pts are still there but the nagging injuries have begun. I want to keep giving DeAngelo those mins. Karlsson blocks him. I no longer think Karlsson makes sense for us

This injury right now certainly makes one who was on the fence lean a certain way. But the combo of future uncertainty and rushing back last year and the move and all that. He just might not have totally gotten his body right yet. Sports history is filled with guys who looked done and were done and then guys who got healthy or fixed a certain body part and strengthened it. If karlsson is one of the latter you look back saying that guy was available and injury questions made us balk and now it’s 7 years later and he’s still one of the best ever. Let’s just say the entire league is alil wary and wants karlsson to go short term on big cash until he proves his body is right. Maybe that makes a 3-4 yr deal appealing. If healthy he’s a top 10 difference maker in the league, get a solid highly competitive team and then you have legitimate difference makers. Keep the games low in scoring, zone time and tenacious forecheck and than have 2-3 real difference makers that turn nothing or legit opportunities into goals. That’s the name of the game In the playoffs. One more year of non-playoff hockey maybe for high picks, but then in 2020-2021 everyone’s gonna be pushing for/expecting a playoff berth and some playoff experience and the like and your talking pick #16-23 anyway. Plus we’re likely to have had close to 30picks in 3yrs, 36 or so in 4. Big UFAs on short term big money deals don’t hurt the big picture at all going forward, last year/this year, yes. Trading futures to make a run before your time will. Keeping players through UFA will.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

People have said this before, and I'll give you the same response. That 2nd and 3rd are more likely to contribute to a Cup win than Zuccarello. It's about this moment, his age and league-wide longevity trends. If he was 2 years younger, I would absolutely agree with keeping him on.

As for glue guys being important for a rebuild, I agree with you to an extent. Chris Drury is a really good example of a player who had a major impact on the young players the Rangers were developing. Staal, Girardi, McDonagh, Callahan, and Dubinsky were all HEAVILY influenced by Drury. The thing is... the Rangers still need to be in asset gathering mode, so it's a tough balance to strike. No one executes a rebuild perfectly, so there will be/or already have been mistakes made. Is this one of them? Maybe. Is it worth the gamble? In my opinion, absolutely.

And just so you know, if you didn't already, I'm not a statistics person in the sense that I believe in the team formula being more important than the collection of individuals and that players who have little statistical value can nonetheless have a positive impact on the ultimate result.

It is important for rebuild to have the right vets sprinkled in the lineup to help the young players. They have to be hard workers, with leadership quality and enjoy helping out younger guys.

 

[Fitzy]

It’d have to be, because we probably won’t be able to afford a decent 2nd or 3rd line.

I think we could- half the benefit to a youth rebuild is you have players producing on ELC contracts and RFA reduced contracts. Namestnikov-Strome-Vesey is a Good third line. Chytil Kravtsov Andersson and Howden have second line potential. Maybe Buchnevich if he sticks around. That's rapidly approaching a full forward lineup.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

I really like the idea of converting some of our Dmen to wingers.

 

[Leetch3]

I really like the idea of converting some of our Dmen to wingers.

lol thats an awful idea

 

[Tawnos]

It is important for rebuild to have the right vets sprinkled in the lineup to help the young players. They have to be hard workers, with leadership quality and enjoy helping out younger guys.

I feel like this is something people say more than is totally accurate. Sure, you have instances like Bill Guerin in Pittsburgh. But if you look at successful rebuilds like the Blackhawks and Kings, they had vets, but they weren't really many high quality leadership types among them. Look at those teams rosters in Toews' and Doughty's rookie years, respectively. Not much there.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

lol thats an awful idea

why? We have a lot of Dmen depth and little wing depth.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

I feel like this is something people say more than is totally accurate. Sure, you have instances like Bill Guerin in Pittsburgh. But if you look at successful rebuilds like the Blackhawks and Kings, they had vets, but they weren't really many high quality leadership types among them. Look at those teams rosters in Toews' and Doughty's rookie years, respectively. Not much there.

I just looked there were plenty of solid vets.

 

[Bob Richards]

why? We have a lot of Dmen depth and little wing depth.

I feel like filling your weak wing depth with career defensemen will leave you with weak wing depth lmao

 

[Tawnos]

I just looked there were plenty of solid vets.

Brett Sopel, Yanic Perreault, Martin Lapointe, and Robert Lang strike as a group of solid vets? In terms of leadership ability?

Lapointe maybe, but they traded him.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

I don’t even buy this at all, sounds like LeBrun thinks Sather is still running the show. I can’t see Rangers going hard after both. Maybe if the Rangers get Hughes they might harder on Panarin, but Rangers aren’t two big FAs away from contention. So I’m going to scoff at this report.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

@RangerBoy made a nice post earlier about Gorton's analysis:



"If there's a younger player around the league that we can go get, we have the assets to go and get"

"Unconventional" and draft picks as currency, perhaps offer sheeting is more of a reality than not.

A offer sheet wont happen as long as Sather is here. He is as old school as it gets.

They may however, trade for a guy who another team cannot afford. That OTOH, is what I expect them to do this summer.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I don’t even buy this at all, sounds like LeBrun thinks Sather is still running the show. I can’t see Rangers going hard after both. Maybe if the Rangers get Hughes they might harder on Panarin, but Rangers aren’t two big FAs away from contention. So I’m going to scoff at this report.

To me, the bigger question is what do they do if/when they whiff on both of them?

Do they scour the secondary market? Do they stay put and focus on making trades? None of the above?

 

[Kovalev27]

I keep coming back to mcAvoy and dougie Hamilton. I think we have our eyes on both situations

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

My dream scenario:

• Rangers win the lottery and draft Hughes.
• Kreider is resigned 7×$49MM.
• Panarin is signed 7×$70MM.
• Zucc resigns with Dallas (Extra 2020 #1).
• Tampa wins the cup (Third #1 this year).
• Dallas pulls off a miracle and makes the WCF on Zuccs shoulders (Fourth #1 this year).
• Some combo of assets moved for a young top pairing Dman.

You then have a top 6 of:

Kreider - Zbad - Kravstov
Panarin - Hughes - XXXX

Then some combo of (whoever not moved for the aforementioned top pairing D) Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Names, Vesey, Lemieux, Boo, Fast, Strome and Buch to fill the 2nd line RW and bottom 6. Whoever of Names/Vesey/Fast/Strome that dont fit in get dealt.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

To me, the bigger question is what do they do if/when they whiff on both of them?

Do they scour the secondary market? Do they stay put and focus on making trades? None of the above?

Let the re-build continue on it’s natural course by signing cheap, solid veterans. No reason to accelerate the process when you don’t have any of the top young talent contributing at a high level. Once Chytil, Kravtsov, Andersson, and whoever this year 1st are contributing, then you can sign a big FA. My point is the Rangers aren’t a Panarin and EK away from contending, but even make a classic Sather move when that has never worked.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Let the re-build continue on it’s natural course by signing cheap, solid veterans. No reason to accelerate the process when you don’t have any of the top young talent contributing at a high level. Once Chytil, Kravtsov, Andersson, and whoever this year 1st are contributing, then you can sign a big FA. My point is the Rangers aren’t a Panarin and EK away from contending, but even make a classic Sather move when that has never worked.

I agree, I'm just curious as to what the FO will do.

I think the market itself will save them from making a huge splash, but can they be patient enough to stay away from that secondary group?

 

[kovazub94]

I definitely don't want both, but the same problem exists with Minnesota as did with the Richards contract. They go for so long that they're fundamentally a problem. Also, you use UFAs to supplement your top-end talent... they can't be your only top-end players. Minnesota hasn't developed any.

I'm just not sure if it matters if you wait to get the top-end talent or you bring in the players before.

You use exactly the perfect example of what course of action the Rangers should be afraid of when talking about the dreaded middle. It’s not Edmonton or Arizona vs Pens or Hawks. Minnesota is an example where front office overestimated its prospect pool quality and readiness and dipped into UFA market when they shouldn’t have. I was all for bringing Panarin but it’s not about him, it’s about the rest of the team including the upcoming prospects. Even if the Rangers win the lottery and able to land one of top 2 in the upcoming draft IMHO it’s only half of prerequisite to pursue Panarin. They also must secure a legitimate all situations young 1RD to build from.