Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XXXI
- Thread starter Fugazy
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
I dont see the sense in being so miserable about the past. I think if this team was outside of a playoff position, holding such a grudge would hold more weight.
Drury has been the GM for what 8 months total? Lets see how he does at the deadline
Cag29
94! I’m ready for more! LGR!
- Jul 18, 2018
- 1,226
- 1,035
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,857
- 13,012
We just saw Eichel traded for less than what a certain poster is saying we should trade for Karlsson. We are not trading that haul for Karlsson.
If we are packaging Chytil, Kravtsov and Jones or Lundkvist we are going to get a stud young forward because that’s what that package brings back.
Jones is a replacement for when Lundkvist is used at the trade deadline to upgrade the Rangers issues for the playoffs
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,857
- 13,012
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Who cares? Kupari has a whopping 7 points in 37 NHL games and the 1st is a roll of the dice. I don't love the Buch trade but this is absolutely meaningless in a "top young center" conversation.
Not with the shit package that you're offering they aren't. I don't get your constant issue with "grit" - I mean, have the Rangers improved over last year in nearly every facet of the team game? How's their record? Are they playing for each other more than last year? Blais, Hunt, Reaves, hell, even Nemeth can be essential components to a successful NHL team. You need role players that eat roster spots and don't cost an arm and a leg.
Sure it is.
The Eichel situation is an absolute outlier and you know it. It's not anything near what's par for the course and the risk is in that deal is still enormous.
Someone who hasn't arrived yet isn't a top center yet. Lambert hasn't played an NHL game yet. These aren't "top young centers" - your words. Who is available or being dangled that's a "top young center"? Larkin? He's going to cost more than your package if Detroit even has an inkling to move him. Teams hold onto top centers and the truly top/elite centers usually are resigned by the their teams - Crosby, Malkin, Barkov, Zibanejad, etc.. or they hit UFA and get their payday. If you are getting what we're talking about, a TOP young center, then it's going cost you an arm and a leg.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Like I said in my previous post, the Eichel situation isn't normal and an absolute outlier and there's still substantial risk involved for a player who might never be the same player again and might have a career ending injury on his first shift.
"Stud young forward" is different than "top young center". There's a world of difference. That package might bring you back a nice winger but it's not bringing back a top center. It just isn't.
I like Karlsson as a player, I'm not sure that he's a fit for the Rangers though and, no, I wouldn't trade that package for him either.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Nobody knows the parameters of this trade, who balked, what other pieces were involved, etc...
Even so, we're talking endlessly about guys that have yet to achieve anything for players that have a legitimate resume. I didn't like the Buchnevich trade either and I think we would've done better at the TDL but we'll never know.
Kupari, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, Lambert, and on and on aren't proven commodities yet at an NHL level. If you're trading for a top center with some kind of resume, you're paying a premium for it - especially if Strome is the guy you're upgrading from. He is what he is but he's also a top 30-ish scoring center in the league and pretty unappreciated around here.
I never said rental. I said upgrade for playoffs that could also mean beyond. Maybe a young center.
Chytil Kravtsov Lundkvist Georgiev for someone like Larkin, Horvat, Keller of that type of contract and player.
If Clayton Keller ever becomes available by the cheap management of the Coyotes, Rangers should be interested. He'd fit this team. Underrated player
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,857
- 13,012
I'm so tired of hearing how high end prospects are "rolls of the dice," and then watch them go on to be in demand contributors that the same posters will argue "teams won't trade because they are too valuable."
Zegras and Lundell won't be traded because young centers are too valuable, but Kupari is a roll of the dice. Talk out of both sides of mouth to justify the team's blunders and the status quo. Yeah, you have to identify which "rolls of the dice," are good bets to become "too valuable to trade," and then you have to go f***ing get one of them.
The team needs to address center with young talent. Until they do so they are failing their future.
We just saw the exact opposite. You can't be more wrong.
Of course it's an outlier but it's not like it will never repeat. If you are arguing the Rangers cannot pry MacKinnon out of Colorado with a "shit package," of Chytil, Kravtsov and Lundkvist then yes I agree. On the other hand that package absolutely trumps what Buffalo just got for Eichel.
When the next star is moved, and it happens despite being an "outlier," the Rangers would be wise to have retained the assets so they can pounce instead of wasting them on William Karlsson.
The Rangers are winning because they have a Norris winner, one of the top wings in the entire world, and a goaltender playing out of his mind and into the Vezina conversation. In general the Rangers are very average at 5 on 5 and it's a direct result of their lower lines being flat out incapable of generating possession or offense. It's why no one seriously believes they are winning the Cup this year or with this roster as-is. Well, except some of the homers on here who claim "just get in and anything can happen!"
The Rangers are not winning because they over-invested in grit, they are winning because they have elite talent that is maturing into its prime (Fox, Shesterin).
And the Rangers' foolish chasing of too much grit by trading Buch for grit and then pushing Kravtsov out has cost them dearly. Meanwhile the grit here that is making any sort of contribution is Hunt (low level free agent signing), Nemeth (low level free agent signing), and Reaves (acquired for a third round pick). Could left Blais in St Louis and traded Buch for something we actually needed.
No, none of it is.
Allow me to clarify. I'm not suggesting that the Rangers can pry Barkov and his new contract out of Florida for Lundkvist, Chytil, and Kravtsov. Florida loves Barkov and has no interest in moving him.
I'm saying the winds of change affect the various NHL franchises more often than people think and situations arise where you can win a bid for a star player who either wants out or the team wants him out, and those packages are usually no better than Lundkvist, Chytil, Kravstov, and a first, and in fact many times they are worse (see Eichel trade, which was much worse and just happened).
In the absence of that, the Rangers also have opportunities to grab talent that isn't a "top young center," just yet but is instead just a young center with potential who the team projects to be "top," someday - situations like this include Buch-f0r-8OA (Zegras) in 2019, Buch for Kupari and a first just this offseason, or trading up in the draft. At some point you might be able to make a hockey trade, sending maybe a young wing and a young defender for a young center like Lundell or Newhook.
In any case, the Rangers would be foolish to parlay the bulk of their tradeable assets for a 29 year old center who doesn't push them over the top as Karlsson would not, and only to let Strome walk (which would have to happen if Karlsson was acquired). It's a complete waste of assets and if you don't win the Cup this very season (which the Rangers aren't going to do most likely, because they simply aren't good enough at 5-on-5).
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,857
- 13,012
Think that package is too much for Horvat or Keller.
I don't even love all that for Larkin but its at least closer.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,999
- 6,372
But address it how? By undoing it? That trade is done. It’s over, Johnny. I mean I’m not saying you have to be happy about it but that ship has sailed and that’s that. As far as we know, nobody was offering any more for Buch at that time than we got.
And BTW, you can say the NYR should have accommodated VK, but simply assigning him to Hartford is certainly not “running him off.” He just ran off. Again. And hopefully he’ll be back. We shall see.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,999
- 6,372
Laf looking really good getting more minutes with better line mates. Who would have thought? Hahahaha.
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,857
- 13,012
The Buch trade? No, Edge reported the Kings offered Kupari and a first.
Blais is completely pointless for a team that already had traded for Goodrow and was lining up Reaves and Hunt acquisitions as well. And it's being proven right now as we are winning with him on IR. He is and was completely unnecessary.
In fact that trade is kicking our asses twice over, because not only did we pass on a future top six center and a first round pick (from a likely lottery team) for a player we had no need for, also the fact that we just had to accomodate Blais with a roster spot meant no room for Kravtsov and now we lost him as a result too.
So I'm going to continue to be mad about that ridiculous series of decisions by our GM.
I'll forgive the situation if he can rectify the situation by deftly maneuvering the situation to get another to top center or top center prospect in here and get Kravtsov back.
Last edited:
Again, we dont know the whole rumored deal with LAK. What would have the other components been? Acting like this was some huge waste of an asset is overkill.
Kravtsov, that discussion has been revisited over and over again. Move on.
- Jul 16, 2005
- 14,857
- 13,012
I don't need to know the whole deal. If that was the basic structure of the deal then it was criminal to pass on it. It's not overkill to complain about, you just don't like the team being called out for a shitty decision.
You asked where we've wasted assets. Those are two prime examples.
Swap out Blais and that second for Kupari, a first, and a spot on the roster for Kravtsov and this team is significantly better situated for the future. They have another top 6 winger, they have another top 6 center, and they have an extra first to go chase another center in this coming draft. Adding those three pieces (two young top six centers and a top 6 winger) basically finalizes a future core to build around. All for Blais, who is worthless to us.
Having two top 6 center prospects to turn to once Zibanejad and Strome have moved on would be invaluable to this team.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 4,999
- 6,372
I said at the time we made the deal. There was no explanation of why that trade offer didn’t go through either. They may have made it and pulled it or asked for something more. I don’t remember edge ever even saying the NYR turned it down. Do you? That’s an assumption. Though who knows, maybe they did. The first would be nice but would Kupari and his 7 points help this team more than Blais was? Subjective.
Regardless, it’s done. That trade can’t be addressed. There’s no resolution. Haha. Sure we can improve the team, and RW, but that particular trade is history. All done. Harp on it as much as makes you happy. It’s all good. But constantly bringing it up is really just flogging a dead horse. I’ll defer from commenting on it in the future. You have your right to vent, buddy.
I asked because I was baiting you into bringing up the Buch trade for the upteenth time. You’re relentless. No one said not to complain or be upset. But that time was in the summer. Its January and youre still bitching about it. I didnt like the trade. Hated it. Absolutely hated it. But it happened.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Player Discussion The Official Brock Boeser Risk Management Thread- Latest: sandwichbird2023
