Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIX

[pld459666]

I'm not moving 2OA for EP and the 40th

As good a player that EP looked this one year, its still just one year.

Fudge that.

That may represent fair value, but I'm not budging off the #2 pick for anything less than grand larceny

 

[East Coast Bias]

I'm not against trading Kreider, in fact I'd probably trade him, but the potential value in the standings being part of the return is not how this works.

If your Kreider trade is Kreider for X return + value added in being a worse team, you're doing it wrong. And I suspect, in that case your emphasis on "X" return would be lower.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

I'm not moving 2OA for EP and the 40th

As good a player that EP looked this one year, its still just one year.

Fudge that.

That may represent fair value, but I'm not budging off the #2 pick for anything less than grand larceny

I agree whole heartedly. It needs to be overpayment in order to get one of the top 2 picks. Overpayment is the only fair value. Especially when we hold 100% of the leverage in the deal.

 

[Gardner McKay]

I'm not moving 2OA for EP and the 40th

As good a player that EP looked this one year, its still just one year.

Fudge that.

That may represent fair value, but I'm not budging off the #2 pick for anything less than grand larceny

It isn't like Kakko has been billed to be the next Malkin or Eichel. I feel like if he turned into an EP, we would be thrilled.

It isn't really about fair value for me. It is about taking the known quantity.

 

[Off Sides]

Why on earth would the Rangers do that??

Say Dallas calls the Rangers and says, you know we would like to extend Zucc, yet not if we have to give up the 2020 1st.

Would the Rangers at that point be willing to say something like, well what if we add a bit to Zucc, then would you consider extending him and giving up the 1st?

If all it takes to make that compromise happen is what they'd likely get back for say Fast anyway, why not? Even if they have to say take back only a 4th instead of a 3rd, does it really matter in the bigger scheme of them getting Dallas 2020 1st?

 

[ETTER DE]

I'll ask again. Why didn't we see any other veterans moved when Stepan was traded, or shortly after he was traded?

Trading away 1 player isn't rebuilding. Trading away Nash, Holden, McDonagh, Grabner, and Miller is rebuilding. Avoiding long term veteran contracts so you have spots for your prospects is rebuilding.

Some of you guys don't understand the difference between retooling and rebuilding.

What are you trying to say, that Girardi was not a veteran?

 

[Lone Ranger]

I trust our staff to find the right guy at 15. I know what the odds are but just off the top of my head, McAvoy was at 14, Karlsson was at 15, Pastrnak was at 25.

There is talent to be had at that pick.

I'm fine with keeping Kreider and getting Panarin. I am not fine with getting Trouba and I am really, really not fine with us going after Karlsson.

Barzal was picked 16th.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Barzal was picked 16th.

Another good one. There are plenty of examples of those picks not panning out as well. But I do trust our scouting staff to make the right call.

 

[Off Sides]

I'm not against trading Kreider, in fact I'd probably trade him, but the potential value in the standings being part of the return is not how this works.

If your Kreider trade is Kreider for X return + value added in being a worse team, you're doing it wrong. And I suspect, in that case your emphasis on "X" return would be lower.

I agree, yet even if the Rangers without Kreider and expensive UFAs end up in later lottery position or even make the playoffs, that means the young and younger must have taken some serious steps forward at the NHL level, so isn't that a win win regardless of the x factor?

 

[duhmetreE]

Barzal was picked 16th.

Kyle Connor was taking right after him in the same draft.. Chabot right after him.... Boeser at 23... Aho at 35....

but we can only find talent at the tippity top of the draft

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

What are you trying to say, that Girardi was not a veteran?

They bought him out to get cap flexibility.

If they were truly rebuilding, then they wouldn't care about such things (See: Staal is still here)

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

It isn't like Kakko has been billed to be the next Malkin or Eichel. I feel like if he turned into an EP, we would be thrilled.

It isn't really about fair value for me. It is about taking the known quantity.

It shouldn't be about the known quality or fair value.

In order for the Rangers to trade the highest pick they've ever had, the return has to be hilariously unrealistic

 

[Edge]

It isn't like Kakko has been billed to be the next Malkin or Eichel. I feel like if he turned into an EP, we would be thrilled.

It isn't really about fair value for me. It is about taking the known quantity.

A big part of me gets that and agrees with that approach.

But there's also a part of me that watched Pettersson get beat up pretty good last year and think Kakko might be the better bet to hold up over the long-haul, likes the extra year on the contract, and thinks Kakko is more advanced at the same point as we head into the draft.

It's a calculated risk, but I don't know if I am comfortable giving Vancouver the second and 10th pick in this draft either.

I kind of feel like Mo Green in the Godfather:

Movie GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

 

[Gardner McKay]

A big part of me gets that and agrees with that approach.

But there's also a part of me that watched Pettersson get beat up pretty good last year and think Kakko might be the better bet to hold up over the long-haul, likes the extra year on the contract, and thinks Kakko is more advanced at the same point as we head into the draft.

It's a calculated risk, but I don't know if I am comfortable giving Vancouver the second and 10th pick in this draft either.

I kind of feel like Mo Green in the Godfather:

Movie GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

That I completely get. I am just always weary of the mystery box scenario. I feel like if Kakko pans out to be a point per game guy, we would all be thrilled. EP nearly was last year as a rookie.

But yeah. Durability is a legitimate concern.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

What are you trying to say, that Girardi was not a veteran?

They bought him out to get cap flexibility.

If they were truly rebuilding, then they wouldn't care about such things (See: Staal is still here)

 

[kovazub94]

That’s an absurd theory.

As absurd as a notion that prospects' development has been ruined by putting them into roles and giving responsibilities they were not ready for?

 

[TheBloodyNine]

This whole Leafs comparison is bull**** anyway. They did what literally everyone here is encouraging the Rangers to do. They drafted 8th, 4th, 1st in 3 consecutive years. They made a move for a FA when the young kids broke out and were ready to win. They lost. It happens.

I don't think anyone here is encouraging the Rangers to neglect an extremely important part of their team (defense) in order to sign an superfluous and expensive offensive piece.

 

[emodwarf]

If your Kreider trade is Kreider for X return + value added in being a worse team, you're doing it wrong. And I suspect, in that case your emphasis on "X" return would be lower.

Your mindset seems very much like how Gorton approaches it. After getting the 2nd pick at the lottery, he was talking about doing things the right way and karma coming around to reward you. They traded away FAs for assets to restock, not to drop further down the rankings.

I doubt leadership has delusions they'll compete for a playoff spot next year, but it's clear they want to ice a team that will compete game in and game out (regardless of the scoreboard).

 

[duhmetreE]

Lets stop pretending. Gorton saw what we saw. The team was not good enough to win. The core was not good enough to win.

He dipped his toe in the pool when he traded Stepan. He then proceeded to cannon-ball the following TDL.

Arguing when the 'rebuild' began is worthless. Assets are needed to be 'rebuilt' We started accumulating assets, at an above average pace, starting with the Stepan trade. Those assets are part of the 'new core'. Time only matters in development for these players.

The core is theoretically in place already.

Zibs, Kakko, Kravtstov, Buch, Lias, Chytil, Howden, Lemiuex. Kreider? Panarin? Strome? That's the top9 filled already.

The defense will take longer, as they always do. We should get a better understanding by the start of next season... Skjei, ADA, Hajek, Rykov, Lindgren, Lundkvist and Miller is a nice pool. Adding a Trouba/Risto would help things... along with firing Ruff.. ( Dallas being a great example )

 

[SA16]

He's got 4.5 left in salary, and 3m bonus paid out on July 1st. Brooks orpik got resigned for 1m by the Caps after being traded to Colorado and bought out, i see no reason why Marleau can't do the same.

As far as "cap advantage", this applies to a cap hit being stretched out over twice the remaining years of the contract. Because he is a 35+ the entire caphit will remain as if the contract was never bought out. This is no issue for a team that has plenty of extra cap space, or is trying to reach the cap floor. I'm not sure where you were going with that.

Arizona is already over the cap floor. They have 65.6M or so already spent and that's with only 9 forwards 7 defenseman and 2 goals (Stepan/Galchenyuk/Grabner/Hinostroza/Richardson/Keller/Dvorak/Fischer/Schmaltz OEL/Goligoski/Demers/Hjalmarsson/Connauton/Chychrun/Oesterle Raanta/Kuemper. Considering they do not need his cap hit to be compliant and they are a budget team I highly doubt their ownership is interested in paying a player not to play for them.

*Just mentioning Arizona as they are often the most common team that comes up in this.

And I believe the reason Marleau can't do the same is because I don't think the NHL would permit it to happen again. It's even more blatant in this case with a player having the NMC.

I think the best thing they could hope for is to trade him to another good team he would be willing to play for (if there are any) for someone else who has a bad contract but that bad contract is lower AAV for more years. Think like an Erik Gudbrandson although apparently the Penguins like him or a Riley Nash.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Kyle Connor was taking right after him in the same draft.. Chabot right after him.... Boeser at 23... Aho at 35....

but we can only find talent at the tippity top of the draft

Nobody has said this.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I don't think anyone here is encouraging the Rangers to neglect an extremely important part of their team (defense) in order to sign an superfluous and expensive offensive piece.

True, they would have been much better off without Tavares 45 goals. Very unnecessary.

 

[duhmetreE]

Nobody has said this.

You've implied it many times.

 

[East Coast Bias]

True, they would have been much better off without Tavares 45 goals. Very unnecessary.

and Dubas is being exposed as a fraud for allowing the Marleau and Zaitsev signings in 2016/2017.

And he definitely can't deal from a position of strength (say Nylander), for defensive help.

What a disaster they're in. All that talent, no one smart enough to trade it all for futures.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

True, they would have been much better off without Tavares 45 goals. Very unnecessary.

Certainly those goals elevated the team to a higher seed and a long playoff run. Oh wait, you mean they ended the season in the exact same seeding and got bounced in the first round again WITH Tavares? Oh man, I can't believe it!

The leafs scored a whopping 16 goals more with Tavares on their squad and actually had a worse overall record in the regular season.