Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIX

[Ghost of jas]

I don’t think the Jets and a potential Stars pick gets them into the top 10.

I think the only way they get into the top 10 is to either trade directly in, or be close enough that a team might be willing to trade down.

Fortunately, for what you prefer, I don’t think a team trades out of that range for 21 and 28.

However, the Rangers could trade up from either slot with the inclusion of a second. I’d say 2-4 picks is most likely the value. So the Rangers could look to slide up to 17 or 24.

I’m becoming very content with Newhook being the target, based on the current wisdom of him more likely being available outside the top ten.

 

[True Blue]

Why wouldn’t Trouba test free agency? Literally, no reason for him not to.

He’ll maximize his salary while having his choice of where he plays.

Chevy isn’t going to trade him for pennies on the dollar. If Gorton is truly interested, wait another year and try and sign him. We don’t need him here next season. Keep our assets.

I have been thinking about this and I think that you are right. I think that the Jets will be all in next year, especially after a first round exit this year. I think that they risk keeping Trouba. Cannot see them being interested in a trade that involves speculative futures and not a similar good, young player.

As for Trouba himself, what reason is there for him not to see what he can and will get? He is going to get a max years deal, in the neighborhood of $8m. Why not do it where he wants to?

As for Gorton, if he truly is all hot and heavy about Trouba (which I somehow doubt) that gives you another year to see what you have under the hood, what comes out of this year's draft and what does next year's draft look like. THEN, if he is truly intrested, at that point it would cost nothing but money and no assets given up. There is absolutely zero reasons to bring Trouba here for next year.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I've said it before and I'll say it again; it would be horrible asset management to trade the Jets 1st and the Stars first to move into the top 10, let alone adding more to it. Keep all of the draft picks and pick BPA all the way through and go with that. In a draft this deep, quantity is much better, especially if you have 2 OA.

Quality>Quantity for this team.

They have a deep system that still lacks real firepower. Kakko helps a ton, but another pick inside the top 10 pushes them to another level.

 

[Riche16]

I look at guys like Panarin like Knights, Rooks, Bishops, and Queens.

If your pawns are not setting up your attack, or poising some sort of threat, those special pieces won’t do much on their own.

Getting the 2OA pick on top of all the other assets Gortons drafted and acquired is the equivalent of nailing a Caro Kano opening after 1.e4.

I don’t know what the “correct” answer is. Maybe it is signing Panarin and trading for Trouba. Or, maybe it’s doing neither and stay the course of building from within.

I’ve seen us try and sign mercenaries to fill our voids one too many times. I’m at a point in my life where I have the patience to see this team do something different.

I think we’ve acquired enough “good” assets where Gorton feels we have enough pieces to go swinging this draft. If that includes moving guys like Kreider, Skjei, Andersson, then so be it.

Especially hard to hire mercenaries to fill roles when those roles are undefined / unknown right now.

 

[ElLeetch]

Mika sounds like exactly what we need. What would it take from Calgary to make the trade (with Monahan as our main piece)?

a main piece better than Monahan

McIlraiths NHL career unfortunately ended with his knee injury. Lost too much mobility and foot speed. Had to play a different game thereafter - aka dying breed hockey. Bad luck for the Rangers. Broken record...

No shit.

McIlraith and Jessiman have a similar story. Both lost critical developmental years, and leg injures that hurt their speed in an ever-faster game, just as the speed game in the NHL was becoming a thing.

Then there are the Cherepanovs, the Chenerskis, the Blackburns, etc...

 

[ElLeetch]

Quality>Quantity for this team.

They have a deep system that still lacks real firepower. Kakko helps a ton, but another pick inside the top 10 pushes them to another level.

yep. we've stacked up on multiple 1st and 2nds over the last two years. It was necessary to rebuild our depth. But there are only so many 2nd line/2nd pair players a team can carry. we need to take a shot or two at elite talent. Kakko is one. We need to look to manufacture a way to get a second.

 

[Edge]

I’m becoming very content with Newhook being the target, based on the current wisdom of him more likely being available outside the top ten.

There's an argument to be made that if you can grab Newhook at 21, maybe grab a kid like Dorofyev at 37 and trade 58 for Fox, and add all that on top of Kakko at 2, that you've just pulled off the draft day with the most diverse potential.

 

[East Coast Bias]

You're right. My apologies. I forgot that all players become useless once they hit 30.

They become useless when they’re paid above ELC. You have a 3-4 window for players and then they’re too expensive. Have to make it count.

 

[Edge]

If we're trading into the Top-10, it's going to cost Kreider or Skjei. Our two late 1sts (if the DAL pick pans out) aren't going to get us there.

Given that reality, I think it might make more sense to trade down and take as many swings as possible in the 2nd and 3rd rounds with the makeup of this draft.

Interestingly enough, I can't recall the last time the Rangers traded down. At the very least, I know it hasn't happened in the last 30 years.

Personally, I have a feeling that we're going to end up moving up, even if it isn't into the top 10.

I could very easily see a scenario where the Rangers are sitting in the 18-21 range and decide a guy they like is on the board at 14 or 17 (something along those lines). I could see one of their second rounders being in play.

Frankly, if I'm sitting at 18 and Newhook is on the board at 14, you bet I'm calling Arizona.While he could be there at 18, but I'd rather have a bird in the hand at that point.

 

[BKGooner]

There's an argument to be made that if you can grab Newhook at 21, maybe grab a kid like Dorofyev at 37 and trade 58 for Fox, and add all that on top of Kakko at 2, that you've just pulled off the draft day with the most diverse potential.

To me this is the best case scenario - adding potentially great payers and sacrificing minimal assets. If this is the Rangers draft, i will do a back flip and land into a James Brown split. It also gives Gorton latitude to make a pure hockey trade involving Kreider if he is so inclined.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Interestingly enough, I can't recall the last time the Rangers traded down. At the very least, I know it hasn't happened in the last 30 years.

Personally, I have a feeling that we're going to end up moving up, even if it isn't into the top 10.

I could very easily see a scenario where the Rangers are sitting in the 18-21 range and decide a guy they like is on the board at 14 or 17 (something along those lines). I could see one of their second rounders being in play.

Frankly, if I'm sitting at 18 and Newhook is on the board at 14, you bet I'm calling Arizona.While he could be there at 18, but I'd rather have a bird in the hand at that point.

As they did with Miller last year. Agreed.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

McIlrath wasnt good at anything besides fighting and being physical around his net and in his corners. His quickness was always an issue and while the injury didnt help it cant be used as an excuse anymore, he has had enough time to prove himself after the injury. He is an AHL player, we did a terrible job in that draft. Let.... It.....Go.

 

[Edge]

I think there was a large group of people who were concerned about McDonagh, too.

I feel like that's kind of lost in this discussion.

The concerns about McD, and they were concerns shared by the Rangers, was when McD's durability started to drop. (And that doesn't take into account that his average also dropped because the Rangers voluntarily left him out a few occasions either to rest for the playoffs, or because the TDL was approaching. In both cases, that was a strategic decision rather than a necessity.)

So comparing McD after the concerns began to Trouba doesn't negate the point expressed by those with concerns, it probably reinforces the point.

 

[Matt Rentfree]

Interestingly enough, I can't recall the last time the Rangers traded down. At the very least, I know it hasn't happened in the last 30 years.

Personally, I have a feeling that we're going to end up moving up, even if it isn't into the top 10.

I could very easily see a scenario where the Rangers are sitting in the 18-21 range and decide a guy they like is on the board at 14 or 17 (something along those lines). I could see one of their second rounders being in play.

Frankly, if I'm sitting at 18 and Newhook is on the board at 14, you bet I'm calling Arizona.While he could be there at 18, but I'd rather have a bird in the hand at that point.

If we can manage to net Kakko and Newhook out of this draft, they can use the rest of the picks on goaltenders for all I care and I'm still running away laughing.

 

[offdacrossbar]

McIlrath wasnt good at anything besides fighting and being physical around his net and in his corners. His quickness was always an issue and while the injury didnt help it cant be used as an excuse anymore, he has had enough time to prove himself after the injury. He is an AHL player, we did a terrible job in that draft. Let.... It.....Go.

rehashing the McIlrath thing is such a waste

given time, um sure there will be calls to require him and see how he does on the 1st pair.

enough already. yeesh.

I have been thinking about this and I think that you are right. I think that the Jets will be all in next year, especially after a first round exit this year. I think that they risk keeping Trouba. Cannot see them being interested in a trade that involves speculative futures and not a similar good, young player.

As for Trouba himself, what reason is there for him not to see what he can and will get? He is going to get a max years deal, in the neighborhood of $8m. Why not do it where he wants to?

As for Gorton, if he truly is all hot and heavy about Trouba (which I somehow doubt) that gives you another year to see what you have under the hood, what comes out of this year's draft and what does next year's draft look like. THEN, if he is truly intrested, at that point it would cost nothing but money and no assets given up. There is absolutely zero reasons to bring Trouba here for next year.

everything i have read indicates he wants out and they know that. his days there are numbered.

winny has 2 maybe 3 legit d prospects ready to move up. they are stacked. they have depth.

hes available for the best offer. if yo uwnat something you go out and get it. if you wait around, you may never get the chance.

we should kick the tires on jake trouba.

 

[offdacrossbar]

I’m becoming very content with Newhook being the target, based on the current wisdom of him more likely being available outside the top ten.

yep.

kid would seem to be exactly the player we should target and he may well be there for us.

hes a legit C1 prospect. high talent and high end wheels. going to BC for probably 2 years before being ready to teen pro. time line works.

ive been saying all along.

kakko/newhook/one of the 2way euro dmen who skate well and that 1st round is a complete success.

 

[Tawnos]

I have been thinking about this and I think that you are right. I think that the Jets will be all in next year, especially after a first round exit this year. I think that they risk keeping Trouba. Cannot see them being interested in a trade that involves speculative futures and not a similar good, young player.

As for Trouba himself, what reason is there for him not to see what he can and will get? He is going to get a max years deal, in the neighborhood of $8m. Why not do it where he wants to?

As for Gorton, if he truly is all hot and heavy about Trouba (which I somehow doubt) that gives you another year to see what you have under the hood, what comes out of this year's draft and what does next year's draft look like. THEN, if he is truly intrested, at that point it would cost nothing but money and no assets given up. There is absolutely zero reasons to bring Trouba here for next year.

Except for the fact that a max deal in his first UFA eligible year takes him to 34 instead of 33 like getting him now would. Plus, if you want the player, you don't risk him going for free agency and possibly signing elsewhere. Look, I'm nothing if not a patient person, but patience isn't a clear cut virtue in all situations. I think this is one of them where it probably isn't.

I'm in agreement that I don't see the Jets wanting young players, but I think there's a question on which would be better for the next 3-4 years... having Trouba or keeping Myers and finding a good 2LD option. In that sense, them trading Trouba for a package that includes Skjei does make a lot of sense for them.

 

[Edge]

a main piece better than Monahan


No ****.

McIlraith and Jessiman have a similar story. Both lost critical developmental years, and leg injures that hurt their speed in an ever-faster game, just as the speed game in the NHL was becoming a thing.

Then there are the Cherepanovs, the Chenerskis, the Blackburns, etc...

You know it's funny, in McIlrath's case, my concerns were there before the knee injury.

I feel like the knee injury stands out for more people, because they probably weren't following him before the incident. But his his D+1 and D+2 seasons did not see the types of leaps and bounds the Rangers, or most observers would've hoped for.

And in typical fashion, there were defenders who cited everything from Moose Jaw's system, to defensive defenseman needing longer to develop, to some obscure stats that I can't even remember as this point. So you just smile and nod because there's only so much you can debate a point before there's nothing left to add.

But McIlrath was, at the very least, not exactly lighting the world on fire prior to the knee injury. Without a doubt the injury certainly didn't help his cause, but much like Jessiman the D+1 season and D+2 seasons were not great, even before the "turning point" that most people remember. I just think it makes for a nice line in the sand, rather than the gradual process it was as it unfolded.

Dylan McIlrath would've been okay if he was drafted 9 years prior. He would've had a Mike Komisarek type career and done his thing. But like Komisarek, he was part of that sweeping and fast-moving change that occurred in that 2012-2014 time frame.

That two year span was something to behold. Usually change comes with time, but I'd argue the time period between 2010-2014 had as much change as some entire decades experience.

And in that time period we saw the outlook for two prospects completely change. Almost overnight McIlrath saw his path to the NHL become more difficult, and Brady Skjei saw his career prospects prosper.

 

[Matt Rentfree]

You know it's funny, in McIlrath's case, my concerns were there before the knee injury.

I feel like the knee injury stands out for more people, because they probably weren't following him before the incident. But his his D+1 and D+2 seasons did not see the types of leaps and bounds the Rangers, or most observers would've hoped for.

And in typical fashion, there were defenders who cited everything from Moose Jaw's system, to defensive defenseman needing longer to develop, to some obscure stats that I can't even remember as this point. So you just smile and nod because there's only so much you can debate a point before there's nothing left to add.

But McIlrath was, at the very least, not exactly lighting the world on fire prior to the knee injury. Without a doubt the injury certainly didn't help his cause, but much like Jessiman the D+1 season and D+2 seasons were not great, even before the "turning point" that most people remember. I just think it makes for a nice line in the sand, rather than the gradual process it was as it unfolded.

Dylan McIlrath would've been okay if he was drafted 9 years prior. He would've had a Mike Komisarek type career and done his thing. But like Komisarek, he was part of that sweeping and fast-moving change that occurred in that 2012-2014 time frame.

That two year span was something to behold. Usually change comes with time, but I'd argue the time period between 2010-2014 had as much change as some entire decades experience.

And in that time period we saw the outlook for two prospects completely change. Almost overnight McIlrath saw his path to the NHL become more difficult, and Brady Skjei saw his career prospects prosper.

From what I understand, the whole reason he had as much interest in him as he did was that he didn't start playing organized hockey until he was 15, and every year he grew by huge leaps - until he was drafted - then he stagnated.

 

[Edge]

If we can manage to net Kakko and Newhook out of this draft, they can use the rest of the picks on goaltenders for all I care and I'm still running away laughing.

Well certainly if we can't come away with Zegras, Newhook would be the next center on my list.

Of course, after his playoffs and his work for Team Canada, I think Newhook might start climbing on lists again.

I've always had him at either 8 or 9 all season. So getting him in the teens would be a great value pick IMO.

 

[Edge]

From what I understand, the whole reason he had as much interest in him as he did was that he didn't start playing organized hockey until he was 15, and every year he grew by huge leaps - until he was drafted - then he stagnated.

Yes, that is correct.

They loved the potential of his feet because he had primarily focused on soccer as a youth and (incorrectly) assumed that he would put the pieces together. However, the one thing that they may have truly overestimated was his hockey IQ.

As McIlrath drew more difficult assignments, and the quality of his support case (admittedly) declined, that shortcoming was exposed a bit more.

 

[Edge]

To me this is the best case scenario - adding potentially great payers and sacrificing minimal assets. If this is the Rangers draft, i will do a back flip and land into a James Brown split. It also gives Gorton latitude to make a pure hockey trade involving Kreider if he is so inclined.

Personally, I'm hoping that Craig Button's mock draft is accurate and Zegras is on the board as Minnesota comes up. See if we can get into that slot.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

In case anyone is interested, I created a list of teams trading up using only draft picks in the salary cap era:




The ones most relevant to our current situation are probably these:

 

[Edge]

In case anyone is interested, I created a list of teams trading up using only draft picks in the salary cap era:




The ones most relevant to our current situation are probably these:

So it reaffirms what we've talked about:

• 3-5 is usually the range of slots you can move up, with four being the sweet spot

• The cost is typically a second, sometimes a third if the move-up is smaller

 

[SA16]

So it reaffirms what we've talked about:

• 3-5 is usually the range of slots you can move up, with four being the sweet spot

• The cost is typically a second, sometimes a third if the move-up is smaller

This is true but at the same time I don't believe very many teams have had the quantity of picks that we can have to move up. A potential 19/28/37 package is not something that is generally even an option. Most teams looking to move up from 8 from say 19 will only be able to offer something like pick 50 as their next best pick (barring trading an additional first next year).