Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIX

[Mac n Gs]

By the way, the whole point of getting Trouba should be to play him with Skjei, not trade Skjei for him.

 

[Off Sides]

Let's talk about the cap hit percentages of Shattenkirk, Smith, Staal.

 

[Tawnos]

Let's talk about the cap hit percentages of Shattenkirk, Smith, Staal.

Shattenkirk: 8.87%
Smith: 5.8%
Staal: 7.8%

Shattenkirk got low 1st pairing money.
Smith got low 2nd pairing money.
Staal got high 2nd pairing money.

 

[Off Sides]

Shattenkirk: 8.87%
Smith: 5.8%
Staal: 7.8%

Shattenkirk got low 1st pairing money.
Smith got low 2nd pairing money.
Staal got high 2nd pairing money.

On a good team are all 3rd pair defenders, even on the Rangers one of them is a 4th line wing.

I think that is why using cap percentage is misleading, you can give out percentages which the market dictates, and still end up overpaying for what you actually get.

 

[ETTER DE]

That these names are coming up kind of tells me the Rangers aren't looking to be a bottom feeder team next season. That they are going to go out and try to fix an area or two on the team while also hoping that the kids this year (along with Kakko or Hughes) improve next year.

The trade for McQuaid last season suggested that they did not want to expose the youngsters to much. Still Pionk ended up playing over his head. Maybe Gorton realizes that he has to go for something better this year, and Trouba is also young enough to be part of the new core. To wait until next year when he is UFA might not be seen as a wise move if you want to implement him to that core.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

By the way, the whole point of getting Trouba should be to play him with Skjei, not trade Skjei for him.

Disagree.

With Miller, Hajek, and Rykov they already have plenty of LHD with size who are likely NHL players. Day is less likely, but if he makes it, will be another with excellent size. Then, there are Crawley and Lindgren, who are both a bit shorter, but solidly built. Followed by Reunanen, Själin, Ragnarsson – all of whom have a solid shot of making it (listed in decreasing likelihood IMO) and, while only average sized, are all as big or bigger than our biggest RHD in the system.

Meanwhile, Keane is our only RHD in the entire organization who isn't undersized (and he's only 6'0, 185 lbs).

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

By the way, the whole point of getting Trouba should be to play him with Skjei, not trade Skjei for him.

Is Thomas Vanek a terrible player yet? I wouldn't hate trading Buchnevich for Trouba and signing Vanek to fill the gap next year.

Skjei-Trouba-Shatty-Smith-Staal-DeAngelo is an insane amount of money to spend on what could be a league average defense, but would probably be worse. Need to find someone to dump one of those three guys on, especially if we want Trouba.

 

[DutchShamrock]

Based on Winnipeg's needs, and not just our take it or leave it offer, I would imagine they want their 1st round pick back and something like Hajek. They are contenders, so they won't completely reset the team. They also value having cost controlled players in the pipeline and spent their last two 1st rounders.

Skjei doesn't help them re-sign Laine and Connor, or Meyers (or their 2nd pair replacement). It doesn't get them a #2 center. Kreider isn't a need. Chevy is notoriously stingy and patient. He isn't going to buckle while still having another year of control.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

No one said this. Not one person.

Those that are wary of him are because the combo of assets it would take to acquire him and the fact that he’s not durable NOW. Meaning he likely will not age well.

I think drafting our Trouba is the way to go. Hoping K’Andre is that and more. Yes he’s not a righty but that doesn’t mean we can’t draft someone on the right.

I’ve said before and will day again the best (maybe only) way we **** up this rebuild is by trying to accelerate it and stepping in ****

Oh sorry, did I really have to add a sarcasm tag to that post?

I don't even want the Rangers to get Trouba for the exact reasons you state.

 

[Trxjw]

I like Trouba. I think he's definitely a bit overhyped on this board but he's a very good player. That being said, it comes down to what he will cost us and how much he will need for a new contract. Anything more than $7m per is a bit iffy for me, and adding much more than Skjei to a deal starts to get a bit expensive rather quickly.

I'm also a bit worried about acquiring a guy at what might be his peak value. I think the Rangers can afford to be a little particular and try to find someone who isn't at peak value yet.

 

[Edge]

I don’t really want to wade into a get him/don’t get him argument, but I don’t think Trouba would be a first unit powerplay guy here and that’ll skew him points/minutes/worth

I think the expectations might be my biggest concern.

I keep getting caught on how my mind interprets the sales pitch: We're potentially talking about moving valuable assets, some of whom we don't yet fully understand, for a player who's had a hell of a time staying in the lineup during his peak physical years, and asking him to assume a role he's never played before, on a team that isn't nearly as fully developed or talented as they one he's leaving.

So then I try going Mad Libs style and changing some of the nouns/keywords to see if it sounds better:

We're potentially talking about using our tax return, which hasn't been deposited yet, to buy a used pickup truck that's had some durability concerns in recent years, and we're going to use this pickup truck in new manner, which is more challenging than the manner it was used before.

And then I say to myself, "Wait, why are we so gung-ho about this approach again?"

 

[Riche16]

Oh sorry, did I really have to add a sarcasm tag to that post?

I don't even want the Rangers to get Trouba for the exact reasons you state.

LOL sorry was at gym when I read it. My bad

 

[pld459666]

You mean give up significant assets for a player, sign him to a very expensive contract and ask him to be something that he has not been before? Where have we seen this before?

Bobby Holik comes to mind immediately

 

[Tawnos]

On a good team are all 3rd pair defenders, even on the Rangers one of them is a 4th line wing.

I think that is why using cap percentage is misleading, you can give out percentages which the market dictates, and still end up overpaying for what you actually get.

That's exactly the same thing that's true about cap dollars. In fact, cap hit dollars are more misleading, because the sticker shock of $8m for Trouba (or in Panarin's case, $11m) makes it seem like we're overpaying because our brains remember big ticket free agents that cost less.

It's the same thing as with gas prices. In 2012, people thought gas was waaay higher than it had ever been at an average price of $3.55 per gallon. It was high, but adjusted for inflation, gas prices had been nearly as high at other points in history. For example, 1981 when the price adjusted for inflation was $3.51. Even though we think of gas prices as having been lower in the past, they weren't really. With the exception of the 1990s, most of the time, they've been about the same as they are today. It's the sticker shock that causes us to think high prices are unusual.

 

[GAGLine]

I like Trouba. I think he's definitely a bit overhyped on this board but he's a very good player. That being said, it comes down to what he will cost us and how much he will need for a new contract. Anything more than $7m per is a bit iffy for me, and adding much more than Skjei to a deal starts to get a bit expensive rather quickly.

I'm also a bit worried about acquiring a guy at what might be his peak value. I think the Rangers can afford to be a little particular and try to find someone who isn't at peak value yet.

Anyone that you have in mind?

 

[Riche16]

Based on Winnipeg's needs, and not just our take it or leave it offer, I would imagine they want their 1st round pick back and something like Hajek. They are contenders, so they won't completely reset the team. They also value having cost controlled players in the pipeline and spent their last two 1st rounders.

Skjei doesn't help them re-sign Laine and Connor, or Meyers (or their 2nd pair replacement). It doesn't get them a #2 center. Kreider isn't a need. Chevy is notoriously stingy and patient. He isn't going to buckle while still having another year of control.

If this is what it takes to land him then the answer should be a resounding HELL NO

 

[Off Sides]

That's exactly the same thing that's true about cap dollars. In fact, cap hit dollars are more misleading, because the sticker shock of $8m for Trouba (or in Panarin's case, $11m) makes it seem like we're overpaying because our brains remember big ticket free agents that cost less.

It's the same thing as with gas prices. In 2012, people thought gas was waaay higher than it had ever been at an average price of $3.55 per gallon. It was high, but adjusted for inflation, gas prices had been nearly as high at other points in history. For example, 1981 when the price adjusted for inflation was $3.51. Even though we think of gas prices as having been lower in the past, they weren't really. With the exception of the 1990s, most of the time, they've been about the same as they are today. It's the sticker shock that causes us to think high prices are unusual.

Sure there is some perception in that.

Yet a 8M cap hit defender this year is not going to move all that much from wherever his ranking in cap hit is over the duration of his contract.

Sure there will be some new contracts which go above, pushing his down, yet there will also be cap hits which retire, or end and that player goes down.

It's not like the wild swings in cap hit rankings which using cap hit percentages indicate.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

LOL sorry was at gym when I read it. My bad

No worries!

 

[Ola]

You mean give up significant assets for a player, sign him to a very expensive contract and ask him to be something that he has not been before? Where have we seen this before?

Yeah for sure. and also he is only [whatever] age.

I wouldn't rule out Trouba, but if Winnipeg can get someone to pay "fair" value for him as he wasn't a pending UFA -- he shouldn't even be an option. But that is certainly not guaranteed. Boston only got a 1st and two 2nds in a very similar trade when Hamilton was sent to Calgary.

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

Based on Winnipeg's needs, and not just our take it or leave it offer, I would imagine they want their 1st round pick back and something like Hajek. They are contenders, so they won't completely reset the team. They also value having cost controlled players in the pipeline and spent their last two 1st rounders.

Skjei doesn't help them re-sign Laine and Connor, or Meyers (or their 2nd pair replacement). It doesn't get them a #2 center. Kreider isn't a need. Chevy is notoriously stingy and patient. He isn't going to buckle while still having another year of control.

Moritz Seider will change that

 

[eco's bones]

The trade for McQuaid last season suggested that they did not want to expose the youngsters to much. Still Pionk ended up playing over his head. Maybe Gorton realizes that he has to go for something better this year, and Trouba is also young enough to be part of the new core. To wait until next year when he is UFA might not be seen as a wise move if you want to implement him to that core.

The Rangers ended up being exposed anyway on our right side defense which was clearly not up to handling all kinds of situations. Shattenkirk, Pionk and DeAngelo are all smallish puck moving D and they all have defensive issues and all of them can be physically overmatched when matched against bigger, stronger and skilled forwards. McQuaid could handle some of that but everyone knew that he was going to get moved along eventually.

In that respect adding Trouba certainly wouldn't hurt us. He would give us an anchor on the right side and play 25 minutes a game. The biggest issue to me is Shattenkirk--whose offensive game is not nearly what it was and whose defensive game is pretty leaky as well. We pay him a lot of money and he's nowhere near being a first pairing defenseman.

So we're pretty much in agreement.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

The Rangers ended up being exposed anyway on our right side defense which was clearly not up to handling all kinds of situations. Shattenkirk, Pionk and DeAngelo are all smallish puck moving D and they all have defensive issues and all of them can be physically overmatched when matched against bigger, stronger and skilled forwards. McQuaid could handle some of that but everyone knew that he was going to get moved along eventually.

In that respect adding Trouba certainly wouldn't hurt us. He would give us an anchor on the right side and play 25 minutes a game. The biggest issue to me is Shattenkirk--whose offensive game is not nearly what it was and whose defensive game is pretty leaky as well. We pay him a lot of money and he's nowhere near being a first pairing defenseman.

So we're pretty much in agreement.

Which is why it's a good thing none of these proposed moves are being made with a view of chasing a cup next year...

 

[True Blue]

If Trouba isn't the guy, maybe we look at someone like Ristolainen. Or if not him, then maybe there's a deal to be made for a prospect who is NHL ready.

Ristolainen is intriguing. I would be very interested in what Quinn could get out of him. His game seems to fit in with what Gorton and Quinn are looking for.

 

[True Blue]

What I just don't understand is why folks are making pronouncements on a player absent the cost to acquire that player. I totally get the reservations about acquiring Trouba... if we're giving up a top prospect and/or 1st round pick(s) to get him. Total non-starter from me. But if you can essentially swap Skjei (with a small add) for him? That, conversely, is a no-brainer from my POV. Start with those two poles and then you've got a spectrum in the middle.

The issue with Trouba is that what he is going to demand to get paid and that contract will have NTC/NMC. If the Rangers are paying him to be a top pairing, anchor of a defense type of player, is that what they are getting? My gut says not. Couple that with his in ability to stay on the ice and said NTC/NMC and this could become a very bad situation right about the time that this team is truly ready to compete.

 

[Tawnos]

Sure there is some perception in that.

Yet a 8M cap hit defender this year is not going to move all that much from wherever his ranking in cap hit is over the duration of his contract.

Sure there will be some new contracts which go above, pushing his down, yet there will also be cap hits which retire, or end and that player goes down.

It's not like the wild swings in cap hit rankings which using cap hit percentages indicate.

This is really just not true. Or do you not understand that cap hit % only refers to the percentage of the cap of the first year of the deal?

In 2010-11, Duncan Keith's 9.8% cap hit was 13th in the league among D. In 2018-19, 9.8% is 14th. Not really different.

In 2010-11, his $5.5m cap hit was 14th among D. In 2018-19, it's 27th among D. That's a pretty big change of the course of what, today, would be a max term contract.