Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIV
- Thread starter Krams
- Start date
- Status
Sempiternal
Registered User
- Jul 5, 2014
- 3,460
- 1,944
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
The Panarin argument has been exhausted, but FWIW, there's a reason 2 teams will have let him go. He's quite clearly not a guy you build around.
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
Would really depend on who is still on the board at that pick and who we took with our own selection. Byram and then a chance to get one of the top centers? Maybe, but I think the Rangers view Buchnevich as part or the long term solution.
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
I'd be hesitant to give up on Buchnevich who seems to be coming into his own right now. It's a fine offer, but I think I'd pass.
If Buch is the player he seems to be now (and loads of credit to Quinn here) - there's a good chance he could be a 30/20 guy as early as next season. I don't think that's much of a stretch and I'm not so confident we'd get a better player than him at #7/10. It's a risk I'd probably be unwilling to take, especially since we are adding another first (albeit a late one) to boot.
eco's bones
Registered User
I might but I'm not crazy about your 3rd--that's the Islanders pick not your own--so it's probably in the 80's. Make it your 1st and 2nd for Buchnevich and the Jets 1st and it looks a lot better.
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,984
- 13,650
Change the Jets 1st to Tampa's 1st/2nd and I grit my teeth, but accept.
I was watching the Avs-Hawks last night. Gord Miller and Joe did the game. They were discussing the Duchene trade. Miller said Joe Sakic spent the weekend watching the USNTDP. Gorton was there on Friday night. I am sure they saw each other at the game. A little trade discussion maybe. The Rangers spent so much time scouting the Avs and their AHL team.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
No, I'm saying IF they sign Panarin THEN they should trade Kreider if the deal brings back a Hayes+ package to accumulate more assets for the 2020 draft which is supposed to be strong.
You keep Kreider, and don't sign Panarin, then you don't get those assets and you're in the same situation again next February. Panarin costs you nothing but cap space this summer.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Of course they'd be more confident - would you be more confident playing with Sydney Crosby or some 3rd line schlub center? I think Buchnevich would benefit greatly from playing with Panarin - but that's just a hunch and I'm still not advocating for it. I'm 50/50 as to whether they should pursue him or not but I'm not going to ignore the positive aspects of bringing him here.
eco's bones
Registered User
On the subject of Panarin--I'm not against it but I wouldn't give him $10 mil per though and FWIW there's not many teams that could afford that either. I'd be thinking more in the realm of $7.5 or 8. If he wants to play for the Rangers badly enough that's still a boatload of money.
Karlsson I'm pretty leery of. I have a bias against players who have extensive injury histories. Giving long term contracts to such players can come back to bite you in the ass. Those players more often than not decline faster than others. When it comes to long term contracts to a UFA--when you're talking about someone between 25 and 27 it's not nearly as bad as someone who has already hit 30.
Apart from that and whether or not we do anything with Panarin--I'd be looking at the UFA market for shorter term--1-2 year deals--players I could move at the deadline if necessary for other assets. We've got 10 picks this year and 10 picks next year but 3 of the picks next year are 7ths.
The other thing I'm holding on to Kreider.
Karlsson I'm pretty leery of. I have a bias against players who have extensive injury histories. Giving long term contracts to such players can come back to bite you in the ass. Those players more often than not decline faster than others. When it comes to long term contracts to a UFA--when you're talking about someone between 25 and 27 it's not nearly as bad as someone who has already hit 30.
Apart from that and whether or not we do anything with Panarin--I'd be looking at the UFA market for shorter term--1-2 year deals--players I could move at the deadline if necessary for other assets. We've got 10 picks this year and 10 picks next year but 3 of the picks next year are 7ths.
The other thing I'm holding on to Kreider.
TheBloodyNine
Pure Bred Soviet Savage
Your point was cautioning that you could walk away with a non-elite player at the top of the draft, but you still have a better chance of walking away with an elite player at the top of the draft than you do either a)later on in the draft (15-30)or b)getting that player in free agency (which costs a heck of a lot more in the long run). Further, to my point, it's quite clear that Strome should not have been picked there, but if you look at the Islander's drafting in the first round for the majority of the cap era, it makes sense. Good scouting departments aren't going to make that mistake.
Not to mention the fact that the draft you picked, 2011, is one of the worst in recent history, and was thought as much at the time, and 2019 and 2020 have so far been universally praised for being strong.
The Rangers are going to be bad again next year. Their focus is already on the top of the 2020 draft.
The part in bold gets a bit dangerous. The are drafts that are "universally considered" to be strong or weak that turn out just the opposite. It's all up to how guys develop afterwards.
I'm not sold they're focusing on being awful next year. Gorton said eventually they'd look to use their assets to improve the team. That's kind of vague but can only mean so many things. It's just a matter of when. This off-season? Mid-season next year? Before the next draft? I have no clue what they're going to do or when, but I'm 50/50 on whether they anticipate being horrible next year. I guess we'll find out in the next few months. Maybe you're right.
GeorgeKaplan
Registered User
I think he’s already been ruled out for the next game, they’re kind of keeping everything at ‘day-to-day’, so there’s not all that much to go on
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,984
- 13,650
Colorado is another teams whose trade interests could intrigue the Rangers. They are going to miss the playoffs again. Ironically, they are becoming this decade's Ottawa Senators. A top end 1st line but lacking depth everywhere else. They need that 2nd line center and winger to have a deeper scoring lineup. They can throw a truck of money at Hayes to fill the gap at center. They were a Hayes finalist when he left school. Hayes and Colorado would be a good match for, um, many reasons.
Even with Makar coming, Colorado could use a top 4 LHD. Their right side is set next year with Makar, Barrie, and and Johnson. Their left side is Zadarov and who? They could make a good offer for Skjei. Kreider should also interest them. Would he sign long term there? Kreider extended could not Colorado's own 1st (about 8th to 12th overall). The Rangers throw in a small sweetener to get it done. One year of Kreider even with money retained and the Rangers have to add a bit more significant of a piece to get Colorado's 1st.
Kreider extended and Skjei for Barrie and Colorado's 1st. Barrie gets the Rangers another 1st and prospect at next year's deadline.
It’s a pipe dream, but who knows with the West. Nashville has been awful. Chicago one of the stronger teams lately. Winnipeg are up and down.
But it’s that 1st in 2020 that can become really valuable. The league is so close, who knows what’s happening before a season starts. Colorado got Ottawa’s 1st. The Islanders got the lottery pick from Calgary for Hammonic.
Dallas checks a lot of boxes for a potential collapsing team...
Chris Drury is so well connected. He played with 3 other GMs; Sakic, Blake and Botteril. I haven’t checked the assistant GMs, but so many are of the same generation. These guys knows each other.
Claude Lemieux is building up a sports agency. Recently hired Peter Forsberg. Brandon is of course a client.
There is always a bit of an X factor when you get a kid. I am sure we could feel a little extra comfort with Brandon. Chris and Claude was teammates when Brandon was like 0-4 y/o. There will be some stories.
We have already made the Graves trade.
Claude Lemieux is building up a sports agency. Recently hired Peter Forsberg. Brandon is of course a client.
There is always a bit of an X factor when you get a kid. I am sure we could feel a little extra comfort with Brandon. Chris and Claude was teammates when Brandon was like 0-4 y/o. There will be some stories.
We have already made the Graves trade.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
While I think you're on the right track, as of last night Colorado is actually in a PO spot. To be completely honest, I haven't watched a ton of Barrie myself so I don't know if the reports of his defense being bad are overblown. I don't know that this trade does anything for us in the short or long term. Trading Kreider and Skjei makes us Ottawa bad next year. I have no desire to ever be Ottawa level of awfulness. That is hard to recover from.
I like Barrie but don't see how he fits in with us at all.
But Skjei to Colorado is an interesting concept. We must open up a spot at LD, Skjei, Staal and Smith are signed for 2 more years. People say that Staal and Smith will be moveble after next season when they only have one year left, but I believe it when I see it.
Hajak is ready to play. So many LD prospects in the system.
But Skjei to Colorado is an interesting concept. We must open up a spot at LD, Skjei, Staal and Smith are signed for 2 more years. People say that Staal and Smith will be moveble after next season when they only have one year left, but I believe it when I see it.
Hajak is ready to play. So many LD prospects in the system.
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,984
- 13,650
Barrie doesn't fit us really unless Shattenkirk is shipped off somewhere. I was trying to think of a contract the Rangers could take on for Colorado to accommodate Kreider, Skjei. A
and Hayes' money in my hypothetical scenario.
The question regarding Skjei is if he can fetch more in that kind of deal where we would flop Barrie at the deadline for more futures, or if he had enough of value to get a 20 to 23 year old player in a hockey trade. That's why I'm not paid the big bucks and posting here.
The reason being is that you and I agree that the Rangers have a glut of LHD on the big club and in the system. Trading Skjei allows us to deal from a position of strength to address a weakness. Staal and Smith are boat anchors and will be here next year. Grit your teeth and embrace the suck until the end of their contracts or until the Rangers find a sucker for one or both of them. Hajek looked ready when he came up here. Will he be the same after the injury? Lindgren should get time with the NHL next year. Day looks like he may earn a cup of coffee with his good play of late in Hartford. And then there's Miller who is only a year or two away.
Sempiternal
Registered User
- Jul 5, 2014
- 3,460
- 1,944
Day-to-day is worrisome this time of year to an experienced fantasy hockey GM. Especially one who had Evgeni Malkin before. Haha, he could be back Wednesday or only play 2 more games this season.
Off Sides
Registered User
- Sep 8, 2008
- 9,755
- 5,585
I like the Boyle, Stralman, Brassard, Spezza type vets idea, short term, like two year term contracts.
Give the youth players to compete with, who can shelter them when their development gets bumpy, yet not put long term stuff in front of them.
We've see some steps from ADA, Buch, Chytil, much of which came after Hayes, Zucc, McQuaid were moved, I'd like to see more of a continuation of that idea rather than them be relegated back to being played behind other stuff.
Plus any two year term, those would end at the same time as Lundqvist, Staal, Shattenkirk, Smith, Beleskey
Lesser term, less risky, still get their vet stuff, yet all that vet stuff can be beaten out over those two years.
To me that is more of a pipeline type of build, as players leave the Rangers have replacements coming in from all this stockpiling. In the mean time if the youth beats them out initially, great, yet if not the Rangers do not have to push them all that hard as they have some vets who can take those spots until eventually someone does push them out.
After those two years they have tons of cap space to spend it anyway they wish, yet the rebuild has matured a little and they'll have a better idea what they have and do not have.
There is just not a lot of risk there with those two year terms, at worst those players fall off the map and they are stuck with them for two years, at best those players play well and can be extended year by year, or traded to a contender where they can go happily chase a Cup.
Rangers don't have to become Edmonton/Ottawa or whatever, not that I think that is a possibility (those teams have serious issues well beyond what the Rangers are dealing with), yet those sorts of moves lessen the perceived risk there, yet they are also still committing to all this stockpiling by leaving room for it to develop.
Give the youth players to compete with, who can shelter them when their development gets bumpy, yet not put long term stuff in front of them.
We've see some steps from ADA, Buch, Chytil, much of which came after Hayes, Zucc, McQuaid were moved, I'd like to see more of a continuation of that idea rather than them be relegated back to being played behind other stuff.
Plus any two year term, those would end at the same time as Lundqvist, Staal, Shattenkirk, Smith, Beleskey
Lesser term, less risky, still get their vet stuff, yet all that vet stuff can be beaten out over those two years.
To me that is more of a pipeline type of build, as players leave the Rangers have replacements coming in from all this stockpiling. In the mean time if the youth beats them out initially, great, yet if not the Rangers do not have to push them all that hard as they have some vets who can take those spots until eventually someone does push them out.
After those two years they have tons of cap space to spend it anyway they wish, yet the rebuild has matured a little and they'll have a better idea what they have and do not have.
There is just not a lot of risk there with those two year terms, at worst those players fall off the map and they are stuck with them for two years, at best those players play well and can be extended year by year, or traded to a contender where they can go happily chase a Cup.
Rangers don't have to become Edmonton/Ottawa or whatever, not that I think that is a possibility (those teams have serious issues well beyond what the Rangers are dealing with), yet those sorts of moves lessen the perceived risk there, yet they are also still committing to all this stockpiling by leaving room for it to develop.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,076
- 17,715
Completely agree. If Zuccarello re-signs with Dallas I’m gonna celebrate it like a playoff win.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
Value of: F With Speed and Size & D who can play both sides to EDM- Latest: Voodoo Glow Skulls
