Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXII

[GoAwayPanarin]

Kreider has a year left on his contract. We, or any team we trade him to, can't negotiate a new contract until July 1st. So if we are trading him at/before the draft, him re-signing won't be part of the equation.

Well publicly...

Things can and always do happen behind closed doors.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Stone put up 62 point in 59 in Ottawa.

I don't see Kreider getting that sort of return.

If they can not bring back a top prospect, and the Rangers have to go down a tier in prospects...

I'd much rather see the Rangers use him to move up and try to draft a player who could be a top tier prospect.

I like Howden, Hajek, Lindgren, Lemieux, as much as anyone, (well likely close to as much as anyone), yet gambling that they could get a tier or two higher than that by moving up in the draft, if it cost Kreider and the Jets 1st, I think are sort of the gambles they need to take if that is available.

Ottawa also had zero leverage and, well....they’re Ottawa. Not to mention that the market at the trade deadline and the market at the draft can be two entirely different things.

Now, overall, I’m with you - I think that expecting a Brannstrom level prospect for Kreider is likely wishful thinking. That said, he is absolutely the type of guy I could see 4 or 5 teams being completely enamored with - even more so than a guy like Stone. Imagine Kreider next to McDavid or Scheifele and Wheeler? That changes the dynamic of those teams, IMO. If Gorton can create a bidding war for Kreider, I like our chances of getting an excellent package.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Kreider has a year left on his contract. We, or any team we trade him to, can't negotiate a new contract until July 1st. So if we are trading him at/before the draft, him re-signing won't be part of the equation.

I thought they can talk, but he can’t sign anything until July 1

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

No, it can't be. a guy thought to be your main weapon sure as **** should be expected to be scoring 30 perenially.

Who said Kreider is or should be our “main weapon”? People are calling him a first liner - there are first liners who are the fourth or fifth best player on a team.

 

[True Blue]

Don't know. Again, I have a job but regardless, a first line player proves it, he doesn't score 20 in 30 and 6 in the next 30...

That's the second time you said that. First time I stayed away from it. You can't have a cop out like that. If you have the time to log in, read and type a response, you have the time to come up with something other than a line like that. Otherwise, it just appears that all you are capable of doing is making statements out of your tukhus and not having a shred of ability to provide any data to back up your assertion.

 

[Rangers in 7]

side note i love how buch starts playing well and responding to quinn and no one talks about it, he has a bad game and people on here get their pitch forks out.....i thought he had an excellent game last night and his last 8-10 games have all been very good imo

 

[Edge]

There’s a pretty big part of me that feels like relying on Mika and Kreider to be first liners on a team trying to make a run is a bad idea, mainly because of how they’re putting up career years now that they’re getting so much more ice time than they’ve historically gotten

It can cut both ways, and has, depending on different examples we use.

You can make a sound argument that the numbers go up as the supporting case takes shape around them, because they're no longer the primary focus of the opposition.

You can make a sound argument that the numbers do down as they aren't thrown out there more frequently.

It's the same mentality when you trade for someone. Sometimes a player thrives in a situation and takes it to another level. Other times what seems like a great fit fizzles out and doesn't materialize.

 

[Off Sides]

Ottawa also had zero leverage and, well....they’re Ottawa. Not to mention that the market at the trade deadline and the market at the draft can be two entirely different things.

Now, overall, I’m with you - I think that expecting a Brannstrom level prospect for Kreider is likely wishful thinking. That said, he is absolutely the type of guy I could see 4 or 5 teams being completely enamored with - even more so than a guy like Stone. Imagine Kreider next to McDavid or Scheifele and Wheeler? That changes the dynamic of those teams, IMO. If Gorton can create a bidding war for Kreider, I like our chances of getting an excellent package.

I just don't see it

I think if the Rangers are going to play a game where they are trying to line up Kreider with a team who is going to extend him, they are still more or less ending up with the Hajek/Howden level prospect. Maybe they get something else in there but it's not going to be a 9-14 draft pick

Mostly I think should the Rangers be looking for already drafted prospects they are going to be looking at the middle 6F, not top pair D ceiling types, and I just don't see that as good enough.

If that is the case, I'd rather see them try to gamble by using a non extended Kreider to try to move up, should that team not be on his no trade list, and even if they have to include the Jet or Tampa 1st* to do so.

 

[East Coast Bias]

2019 and people still confused that a 30 goal scorer doesn't score .36 goals in every game.

 

[GAGLine]

I thought they can talk, but he can’t sign anything until July 1

I don't think there's anything in the CBA that prevents them from discussing it, but I don't know that it would have much, if any, effect on what we'd get back for him. If I'm a team trading for him, I would be paying for 1 and only 1 year. And if I'm Kreider, I'm not in any rush to extend with a team I have yet to play for.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

side note i love how buch starts playing well and responding to quinn and no one talks about it, he has a bad game and people on here get their pitch forks out.....i thought he had an excellent game last night and his last 8-10 games have all been very good imo

Agreed, although some people have recently praised him for his play.

I’d like to see Buch start hanging out with ADA + Lemieux. Learn how to play with a chip on his shoulder.

When he’s emotionally involved he’s a completely different player.

That’s a reason why I loved the addition of Lemieux. There were more “talented” prospects in WPG but that kids character just rubs off on his peers.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

2019 and people still confused that a 30 goal scorer doesn't score .36 goals in every game.

It’s truly mind blowing. “Yeah, I’ll take the guy who scores every other game”. Yeah, I’m sure all of us would love to have OV or Gretzky, too bad there’s only two of them.

 

[Edge]

I just don't see it

I think if the Rangers are going to play a game where they are trying to line up Kreider with a team who is going to extend him, they are still more or less ending up with the Hajek/Howden level prospect. Maybe they get something else in there but it's not going to be a 9-14 draft pick

Mostly I think should the Rangers be looking for already drafted prospects they are going to be looking at the middle 6F, not top pair D ceiling types, and I just don't see that as good enough.

If that is the case, I'd rather see them try to gamble by using a non extended Kreider to try to move up, should that team not be on his no trade list, and even if they have to include the Jet or Tampa 1st* to do so.

I see the phrase "That's not good enough" used quite a bit around here, and I can't help but feel it falls into a bit of a weird zone.

Trading established for the unknown is usually very difficult to get a return that feels like enough --- especially when it's your guy. The returns for other teams' guys don't usually feel that way, but I've yet to encounter fan bases who consistently feel they received great value for their better players. There's almost always mixed emotions.

That's understandable, because trading for the unknown seldom provides comfort.

But the object of trading established players rarely comes down to getting an exact match for talent at the time of the trade. Usually it's about timing, contracts, depreciating values, or a combination of multiple factors. But it's very hard to go into a situation, even with a superstar who has term left on his deal, and feel like you're coming out ahead.

That's not to say it doesn't happen, especially with time, but in the immediate time frame before and after the deal, there's typically an underwhelming feeling.

In that sense, any trade involving Chris Kreider will likely stir up similar feelings. It's why the concept of rebuilding always seems more appealing in theory than in reality.

Even if the Rangers got fair market value for Kreider, I'd say it's extremely unlikely someone here would come away overjoyed.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Kreider's value at the draft is going to be about on par with what Milan Lucic's value was when Boston traded him to LA with one year left on his deal. A mid 1st. LA likes to play heavy hockey and Lucic was a great fit on paper.

A lot of Western Conference teams would love to add Kreider. It's a rat race out there. Perhaps Dallas would be interested if they don't make the Western Conference Finals? Their pick will likely be in the 16-19 range. Dallas has a few decent prospects that would level out the return to value. Kreider to Dallas for 16-19 overall and Jason Robertson.

 

[Edge]

Kreider's value at the draft is going to be about on par with what Milan Lucic's value was when Boston traded him to LA with one year left on his deal. A mid 1st. LA likes to play heavy hockey and Lucic was a great fit on paper.

A lot of Western Conference teams would love to add Kreider. It's a rat race out there. Perhaps Dallas would be interested if they don't make the Western Conference Finals? Their pick will likely be in the 16-19 range. Dallas has a few decent prospects that would level out the return to value. Kreider to Dallas for 16-19 overall and Jason Robertson.

I think if you're looking to get a high pick, it would take multiple deals.

You'd probably get a mid-first for Kreider. If you wanted to move up, you'd then have to take that mid-first, pair it with other assets (other firsts, a prospect, etc.), and then you can see if it's possible to move up a few slots.

So if you get the 20th pick for Kreider, you're might target the 15th pick for the 20th and a second or some other sweetner. Or maybe the 12th pick for the 20th, a later first and an asset.

But you wouldn't get into the top 10 for Kreider alone.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Carp is having a live Q&A from 12 - 1 if anyone is interested. You need to be subscribed to The Athletic.

 

[Edge]

Carp is having a live Q&A from 12 - 1 if anyone is interested. You need to be subscribed to The Athletic.

I think we should charge him to have a Q&A with us.

 

[NYR Viper]

Nashville still has their 2019 and 2020 1st's. If they dn't win this year, the pressure will be on for next year. Kreider would fit them to a 'T'

 

[Off Sides]

I see the phrase "That's not good enough" used quite a bit around here, and I can't help but feel it falls into a bit of a weird zone.

Trading established for the unknown is usually very difficult to get a return that feels like enough --- especially when it's your guy. The returns for other teams' guys don't usually feel that way, but I've yet to encounter fan bases who consistently feel they received great value for their better players. There's almost always mixed emotions.

That's understandable, because trading for the unknown seldom provides comfort.

But the object of trading established players rarely comes down to getting an exact match for talent at the time of the trade. Usually it's about timing, contracts, depreciating values, or a combination of multiple factors. But it's very hard to go into a situation, even with a superstar who has term left on his deal, and feel like you're coming out ahead.

That's not to say it doesn't happen, especially with time, but in the immediate time frame before and after the deal, there's typically an underwhelming feeling.

In that sense, any trade involving Chris Kreider will likely stir up similar feelings. It's why the concept of rebuilding always seems more appealing in theory than in reality.

Even if the Rangers got fair market value for Kreider, I'd say it's extremely unlikely someone here would come away overjoyed.

My not good enough is related to the ceilings of said prospects.

Nothing wrong with them, just they are not going top move the needle all that much.

To me the Rangers going after already drafted prospects is going to return the similar level prospect they did already receive these past two deadline.

Overall, eventually that may be good enough to build a decent team, or trade some of them for the next Nash (to again use something the Rangers did) but it's not enough for them to really build something that is going to keep up with a Leafs style rebuild.

I think they have to be braver and gamble more if they are not going to be drafting as early as many of these other teams.

To me it's not they are not getting enough back, they are but they are getting what the market dictates, yet them deciding to take back what the market dictates instead of adding more value on their side to maybe put themselves into a higher tier in the market, I have yet to see them do besides them trading up last draft to get Miller.

If they can use Kreider and some later pick to move up and get another Miller tier prospect, that is more or less what I think they should be looking at rather than for them to wait for the market to dictate that Kreider is worth a rental like return, or wait until the market dictates since he is asking for so much in an extension the trade return goes back down to a rental like return.

I like that Gorton is patient and all, but there are other times where even if by being patient he gets the desired outcome, that is still less than he could maybe get by just pulling the trigger before the market deems worth.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I think we should charge him to have a Q&A with us.

Too true

 

[I Eat Crow]

I think if you're looking to get a high pick, it would take multiple deals.

You'd probably get a mid-first for Kreider. If you wanted to move up, you'd then have to take that mid-first, pair it with other assets (other firsts, a prospect, etc.), and then you can see if it's possible to move up a few slots.

So if you get the 20th pick for Kreider, you're might target the 15th pick for the 20th and a second or some other sweetner. Or maybe the 12th pick for the 20th, a later first and an asset.

But you wouldn't get into the top 10 for Kreider alone.

Agree. Acquiring a mid 1st for Kreider that can be used as capital with the surplus of 2nd rounders to move up to the late top 10/early teens may be the way to go if it can be done. What if a guy like Boldy drops to 9 or 10? Do the Rangers really like a guy like Broberg or Soderstrom?

Walking away with one of Byram, Cozens, Dach, Turcotte, or Zegras and one of Boldy, York, Soderstrom, or Krebs would make me very, very happy.

 

[Edge]

Agree. Acquiring a mid 1st for Kreider that can be used as capital with the surplus of 2nd rounders to move up to the late top 10/early teens may be the way to go if it can be done. What if a guy like Boldy drops to 9 or 10? Do the Rangers really like a guy like Broberg or Soderstrom?

Walking away with one of Byram, Cozens, Dach, Turcotte, or Zegras and one of Boldy, York, Soderstrom, or Krebs would make me very, very happy.

I'll sound like a broken record saying this, but I'd rather come away out of this draft with less picks, but have them be higher, than more picks. I have a different approach to this year than I did in 2018.

I'd love to add a pick in the 12-15 range and come away with someone who compliments whoever we take with our top pick.

In this draft, I'd rather pick 6th, 13th and 50th, than 6th, 28th, 31st, and 40th and 50th.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I'll sound like a broken record saying this, but I'd rather come away out of this draft with less picks, but have them be higher, than more picks. I have a different approach to this year than I did in 2018.

I'd love to add a pick in the 12-15 range and come away with someone who compliments whoever we take with our top pick.

In this draft, I'd rather pick 6th, 13th and 50th, than 6th, 28th, 31st, and 40th and 50th.

My absolute dream scenario for this draft is getting one of the centers/Byram with our pick, then moving up for a dynamic talent like Kaliyev or Brink.

Now is the time. We have the ammo.

 

[Edge]

My absolute dream scenario for this draft is getting one of the centers/Byram with our pick, then moving up for a dynamic talent like Kaliyev or Brink.

Now is the time. We have the ammo.

That's what I'd love to do.

I'd love to grab Byram and then come away with someone like Newhook, Kaliyev, Caufield, Dorofeyev, etc.

Or come away with someone like Cozens, Dach, Turcotte, Zegras and then come away with Broberg, York, or a winger.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Re: the Lucic trade, I’d argue that the amount LAK paid for only one year of Lucic, plus the subsequent ROI, would hinder any GMs from paying that much for Kreider on draft day.

If Gorton wants to trade him because he’s worried about his aging curve, then I understand it. I don’t blame him for not wanting the risk of having a $6M+ checker a few years into that deal.

That being said, if they do move Kreider, I’d really like to see them make a trade (potentially separate from a Kreider deal) for a player in the 23-25 age range to grow with this core. Lemieux was a good start, but I think they’re still lacking that current top-end talent at forward outside of Zibanejad.

The progress Buchnevich has made in 2019 has been very promising, and if I were Gorton, I try to lock him up long-term to keep his cap hit lower.