JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,076
- 17,715
Honestly Kreider is an INSANE price to pay to move up 10 spots man
We’d be better of trading him for a package
Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIII
- Thread starter BBKers
- Start date
- Status
We’d be better of trading him for a package
still no.
Splurging on 1 UFA would be incredibly stupid, splurging on 2 would be borderline malpractice.
They can't fit both with out basically having skeleton crew aside from them. You're not going to be able to build around them and name the last team to be successfully built around UFA's, I'll wait.
I think Kreider alone can get you into the mid teens provided that there is a team in that range who thinks this season was an anomaly and that he can help them get back to the playoffs.
Calad
Section 422
I'm failing to see why buying UFAs this offseason is a bad idea? We have 2 more seasons with a bunch of bad contracts and rookies, adding Panarin and Karlsson as vets for the kids to learn from and for the GM to build around is how to you improve a team. They are still going to be bad next season because we lack enough talent and the young players that do have talent lack enough experience. There are no UFAs in the 2 following years that are worth their salt to consider. So if we sign Panarin and Karlsson now, by the time the team starts looking towards the playoffs they will have ~4 years left on their contract, which would be better than signing a mediocre talent to a 6-7 year deal when that point comes. Your plan lacks any foresight my friend.
It doesn't.
Your plan lack foresight. Those guys are not going to turn this team into a contender in 2 years, probably even 3. On the low end, you're probably looking at 24 mill for those 2 (which is more capspace than we have, even if the cap goes up.)
we shouldn't care about UFA' over the next 2 years. trades will be available and I know "dURRR assets" but thats why we stock pile them, not to mention you'll be getting players on a good deal (well better deal) contract wise.
Your plan turns this team into the Minnesota Wild.
I don’t know man. I’d like to believe that, but given his UFA status I don’t see one of those teams passing on the guys in those mid-teens for a year of Kreider. I’d love to be wrong though.
I think it’ll be more than 10 spots, but I hear what both of you guys are saying.
That package deal you speak of might have been possible this deadline, or earlier in the year when CK wasn’t strictly a rental. Maybe I’m undervalueing him.
Guess we’ll see what Gorton has up his sleeve.
Calad
Section 422
Who said we're trying to turn this team into a contender by signing those two? After this next offseason/deadline, we will have no veterans on the team aside from Zibanejad. The team needs talent like no other, Panarin and Karlsson are top tier talent that we could add for free and start building the team around. We need good vets to insulate the youth from playing above their head and to mentor these kids. Gorton knows this, and he will pitch to these two with this plan knowing they won't be an immediate playoff contender and will still make a convincing case and could lure them both. Your plan is trying to turn us into the buffalo sabres
False.
The tertiary UFA market is filled with these guys. Thats the market they should be living in, not Wild'ing us to death. Gorton has done nothing to suggest that hes going to follow your blue print, lets not act like you're privy to information that the rest of us aren't.
I'm 100000000% behind trading some picks/prospects for nhl players on teams who have cap issues this summer like a Kapanen or who ever shakes loose out of Winnipeg. How that follows the Sabres path, I don't know but lets not act like Sabres have sat on their asses and just thrown the kids to the wolves, they've made some pretty big splashes that backfired.
But again let me ask you this since you avoided it the first time, Name me one team that has successfuly built around UFA's and also, how do you expect to fit both guys under the cap?
Assume a world in which the cap goes up by 2 mil, both guys come in at 24 mill a year combined (conservative) and our RFA's only take up 7 (also conservative)
I'll wait.
Calad
Section 422
Why do we want to sign a bunch of shit veteran placeholders? We want to build a team and a culture, those wont do that.
but tying up over a quarter of your cap space in free agents who are exiting their prime will?
Again, you avoided my questions.
1. Name a team that has successfully built around UFA's.
2. how do you fit those 2 under the cap?
SA16
Sixstring
Nobody has successfully built around UFA because prior to last year there were no UFA on that level for ten years. Saying it hasn’t happened so it won’t is lazy. Circumstances change. Hypothetically if the team was in this exact same spot and McDavid was a 28 year old FA because he wanted out of EDM you would advocate not to sign him because nobody has ever built around FA?
I'd make an exception for McDavid, health permitting.
Not for those guys.
Also it isn't really that lazy. Look at the teams who have won. They built the same way.
Not for those guys.
Also it isn't really that lazy. Look at the teams who have won. They built the same way.
Calad
Section 422
We have 5 forwards that have 1 year left, most of them are pieces that competing teams would take off our hands for a reasonable price. 24 million for the two is a pretty ridiculous number, and if we're giving both of them ~12 million each then its not as great of a move. Estimates from what i've seen is the cap is going up to ~83 million. We are rebuilding the team through the draft, and maybe my choice of words was poor, but there aren't better veteran UFAs becoming available in the next 2-3 years after this one. Next year (assuming no trades), 16 million comes off the books, the year after that, 25 million more comes off the books. We are drafting 5 players in the first two rounds this coming draft. We drafted 4 last year. We likely will get a few extra picks for the 2020 draft because we are in rebuild mode and have contracts to move. We have tons of prospects that haven't even signed their ELCs yet that would ideally be with the team in the next 2 years. We're gonna have to reach the cap floor anyways, so why not spend that money on premier talent?
I have news for you....
lol if you think you can get them both at 10 a year. the second Doughty inked his deal, EK was a lock for at least 12, maybe more.
Stone at 9.5 in Vegas likely means 11-12 for panarin in NY too.
OK even with an 83 million dollar cap, we'd have 22 before anything happens.
7 for RFA's leaves you with 15.
those too take up 24
You need to shed 9. Remember that you also need to replace the players you're sending out of town.
Calad
Section 422
If you say so, clearly no point in discussing as you won't be changing your mind. We have infinite players that we can play on ELCs if the cap requires it. Players will come to NY and play for the rangers, and not necessarily for the biggest contract, because the organization is first class and the city is unlike any other. I'd guess, if they do sign here, it would be for ~10 mill a season
SA16
Sixstring
As I said previously the highest paid FA getting 5+ years in the season before Tavares were:
2017 - Radulov (coming off a 54 point season)
2016 - Backes/Lucic/Okposo/Eriksson
2015 - Sekera
2014 - Orpik/Bolland
2013 - Horton
2012 - Suter/Parise
2011 - Richards (31 years old)
2010 - Paul Martin
2009 - Bouwmeester
Panarin is easily the second best forward available since 2009 after JT. Parise is close for sure but there were definitely concerns about his aging with his style of play. Richards too obviously but there's a 4 year age difference when they reached FA. There has been very very little top line quality.
So of course teams have not successfully built around FA. Outside of Suter/Parise/Richards there was nothing out there. Richards was a part of a team that went to the final (not that he was a major piece at that point). We have a sample size of one team that tried to build around FA in 10 years. You can not take anything from it. That one team has never gone far but has made the playoffs every year after not qualifying for four in a row. Twice they came in 2nd in their division.
*I wouldn't go after both Panarin and Karlsson. I'd just go for one. Getting two is a bit difficult with the cap and I'd rather also target guys like Johansson and Kapanen.
TheBloodyNine
Pure Bred Soviet Savage
Not sure how many teams people need to be beat over the head with this but once again: You do not build teams around Free Agents.
And now for something completely different. I want to trade Pionk to Tampa for Callahan and an asset or two. Anyone agree? And what could we get?
Calad
Section 422
Like i said, no point in discussing this with you. You are here to show how much smarter you are than everyone and stroke your ego, rather than a discussion about the options this team has available to it.
Generally I'd agree, but when is the last time players of Panarin/Karlsson's caliber become available?
Yeah I'm sure Panarin decidedly said he wants to make it to free agency just so that he can take a below market deal with the Rangers.
Ditto EK, though I doubt he even gets to free agency.
Getting those two at 10 million a year isn't an option, it's a fantasy. I've given you the opportunity to explain how they'll both be able to fit under the cap at market value while still being able to ice a team but you haven't been able to do it and then proceed to cry about it.
Calad
Section 422
TheBloodyNine
Pure Bred Soviet Savage
Calad
Section 422
We're building around the 8 1st round picks in 3 years, the UFAs are just a great addition to the foundation
TheBloodyNine
Pure Bred Soviet Savage
When you're committing 20-24 million to two players, that is building a team around them. It's not happening.
- Status
