Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIX

[Tawnos]

Just for a run down of the contracts that are current and line up with Trouba signing $7m-$8m... so 8.4%-9.6%.

15. Brent Seabrook	CHI	33	D	UFA	$6,875,000	9.6%
16. Marc-Édouard Vlasic	SJS	31	D	UFA	$7,000,000	9.3%
17. Mark Giordano	CGY	34	D	UFA	$6,750,000	9.2%
18. Kevin Shattenkirk	NYR	29	D	UFA	$6,650,000	8.9%
19. Keith Yandle	FLA	31	D	UFA	$6,350,000	8.7%
20. Cam Fowler	ANA	26	D	UFA	$6,500,000	8.7%
21. Tyler Myers	WPG	28	D	UFA	$5,500,000	8.6%
22. Oliver Ekman-Larsson	ARI	26	D	UFA	$5,500,000	8.6%
23. Jay Bouwmeester	STL	34	D	UFA	$5,400,000	8.4%

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I think Trouba does fit in this group and can still grow to be the Giordano or OEL of the set.

 

[eco's bones]

But that's just it. Locking in $8m, with NTC/NMC for a player that has had trouble staying on the ice, is very risky to me.

Not disputing that at all, eco. Where the issue comes in is that he is going to get paid as a top pairing guy. Which is not what he has been.

IMO I'd rather go with paying that $8 mil to Trouba than pay $6.675 mil to Shattenkirk. We'd at least be diversifying our defense a bit on the right side--not just stuck with smallish puck movers--adding edge and a lot younger player. But also we're probably trading some salary (in the player(s) that go the other way) besides. I think Trouba as a player also would fit very well onto the kind of team that Quinn would like to have. He's made it plain anyway that he wants the Rangers to be a hard team to play against. And there's not a single guy on the Rangers right side that I feel all that comfortable about playing on our penalty kill. Pionk got a shitload of it last year and Quinn was a lot more reluctant to use Shattenkirk and DeAngelo. It's an issue if you don't want to be constantly giving up power play goals.

As for how I would categorize Trouba--I'd say he's a very good second pairing guy--maybe a top pairing guy as a 2D depending on who you're 1D is but no it's not really great if he's your 1D. That said I would rank him ahead of Brady Skjei who is right now our best defenseman and the only current Rangers D that I would call a legit top 4. So I do think he would be a very good addition to the group we have now.

 

[bobbop]

Looking at the list of impending free agent forwards and defensemen and it’s obvious that defenseman don’t get to market very often. If you want a quality defenseman, you either draft and develop or you trade for one. The Rangers are fully invested in draft and develop. Trading for a top tier player sure sounds smart.

 

[Rangerfans]

Personally, If rather miss the playoffs for one more year and try to draft as high as possible before discussing free agency.

 

[Tawnos]

You said:

Your top pair anchor D are going to get over 10% of the cap, which this year is around $8.3m

I think we are splitting hairs over $8 or $8.3

I know it seems like quibbling, but half a percent is really quite a bit in this conversation.

If you look at the list of D, there's a pretty clearly a separate tier of player when you go below 10%. Duncan Keith is at 9.8%, but he had a back-diving deal that isn't even legal anymore. John Carlson is next up at 10.1%. Meanwhile, see my post above for the players who are the next tier down.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Can he?

I’d give up Kreider in a millisecond. You may even get me to bend on a higher end player or prospect.

For help on offense? I absolutely think he or Kylington are available in the right deal. Think Valimaki is the only young D off limits there.

 

[bobbop]

At what cost to trade for or what cost to sign? Or both?

Trade.

I am much less worried about money than everyone else around here. The cap will be close to $90MM when the US broadcast rights are sold (for double the current amount) in the next year. The Rangers will have 4-7 players on ELCs for at east the next 4-5 years. We cumulatively worry too much about the cap around here.

 

[Tawnos]

Trade.

I am much less worried about money than everyone else around here. The cap will be close to $90MM when the US broadcast rights are sold (for double the current amount) in the next year. The Rangers will have 4-7 players on ELCs for at east the next 4-5 years. We cumulatively worry too much about the cap around here.

I 100% agree with this. Been that way since the cap was introduced.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Trade.

I am much less worried about money than everyone else around here. The cap will be close to $90MM when the US broadcast rights are sold (for double the current amount) in the next year. The Rangers will have 4-7 players on ELCs for at east the next 4-5 years. We cumulatively worry too much about the cap around here.

Even then there are ways around the cap. I'd hire Stan Bowman into the organization as a special advisor down the line just to manage the cap and finagle around it when the team goes over it.

@bobbop, do you think the next CBA negotiations will profoundly affect the salary caps as Lockout Part 1 and Lockout Part Deux had?

 

[offdacrossbar]

trouba added to this lineup at 8 per. sign me up right now.

would i go to war with skjei/ trouba as my 1st pair. is water wet ? compared to what weve had the last 2 years ? yep.

would i love to/must we dump shattenkirk and/or smith ? yep. and yep.

would i trade kreider plus for trouba. yep yep yep.

skjei/trouba
hajek/ADA
staal/pionk
rykov

im down with that.

 

[Tawnos]

Even then there are ways around the cap. I'd hire Stan Bowman into the organization as a special advisor down the line just to manage the cap and finagle around it when the team goes over it.

@bobbop, do you think the next CBA negotiations will profoundly affect the salary caps as Lockout Part 1 and Lockout Part Deux had?

I know you didn't ask me, but the only way I could really see there being a major impact is if they move to an asymmetrical salary range. By that, I mean the cap is less over the midpoint than the floor is under it. This is one of the ways they can mitigate the impact of escrow because it'll put real dollars spent closer to that midpoint. From what I've seen, the league isn't looking at trying to decrease the player's share but there are some things they can do for the cap calculation itself.

The league might push to lower the max term of contracts, but there's only so far they can really go with that to begin with.

I'm skeptical that we're even going to get a compliance buyout.

 

[I Eat Crow]

I know you didn't ask me, but the only way I could really see there being a major impact is if they move to an asymmetrical salary range. By that, I mean the cap is less over the midpoint than the floor is under it. This is one of the ways they can mitigate the impact of escrow because it'll put real dollars spent closer to that midpoint. From what I've seen, the league isn't looking at trying to decrease the player's share but there are some things they can do for the cap calculation itself.

The league might push to lower the max term of contracts, but there's only so far they can really go with that to begin with.

I'm skeptical that we're even going to get a compliance buyout.

No worries, I appreciate any input!

I don't think that the league will look to take more of the players' share because of the aforementioned pending TV deal. The league will make it's money. This will have a trickle down effect in the form of an increasing salary cap. It's why I don't think that a new CBA would have as profound an impact on the cap as the first two did. The league added another team with a 32nd on the way since the last lockout. The league is healthy.

Don't think we're seeing any cap compliance buyouts with the cap increasing either. I don't see contract terms being lowered either. 7 years is perfect, IMO.

 

[bobbop]

Even then there are ways around the cap. I'd hire Stan Bowman into the organization as a special advisor down the line just to manage the cap and finagle around it when the team goes over it.

@bobbop, do you think the next CBA negotiations will profoundly affect the salary caps as Lockout Part 1 and Lockout Part Deux had?

The owners are for the most part happy with the current CBA. They would like to make some costemtic changes (e.g shorter contracts) but the core of the agreement is working for them. There’s really only one franchise left on shaky financial ground (ladies and gentlemen, your Arizona Coyotes)

The players will want changes to escrow. There are a number of ways this can be addressed. They also want to go to the Olympics and some other working condition improvements.

My guess is that this negotiation will not result in a work stoppage.

 

[Beacon]

Jacob Trouba is only 25 and it will save Rangers some time with this rebuild - so it will be interesting to see if Jeff Gorton will upgrade their defense this summer.

The rebuild timeline is the decade when Kakko's 22-32 years old. Not just because of Kakko, but also because our other guys with the highest ceiling (Chytil, Kravtsov, K'Andre) are just barely older than Kakko.

 

[Rangers in 7]

my problem with trading for trouba is trouba, hes not a number 1 defensemen in my opinion....i just dont see a stud guy

 

[Beacon]

Again the timing seems off to me on Trouba. Yes he’s a good RHD and they don’t grow on trees but similar to Panarin he’d be here for two years while we find out what we are missing / in need of to become a playoff team. Not a true contender.

In two years ur free of Staal and Kirk and Hanks cap.

By then u will know as well what ADA is or isn’t and the prospects will be more well defined.

But what about immediate gratification? It's almost as if finishing 20th best next year instead of 28th best is less important to you than winning the Cup in 5 years.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

trouba added to this lineup at 8 per. sign me up right now.

would i go to war with skjei/ trouba as my 1st pair. is water wet ? compared to what weve had the last 2 years ? yep.

would i love to/must we dump shattenkirk and/or smith ? yep. and yep.

would i trade kreider plus for trouba. yep yep yep.

skjei/trouba
hajek/ADA
staal/pionk
rykov

im down with that.

Uhhh, who are you trading for Trouba in this scenario?

 

[DanielBrassard]

Is he a top pairing defenseman right now?

When his future deal will probably be $7-$8m with NTC/NMC, will he be a top pairing anchor of a defense then?

He's been a top-pairing D for a few years now.

 

[offdacrossbar]

Uhhh, who are you trading for Trouba in this scenario?

#20 plus a prospect/pick

 

[Fitzy]

I know I've been pitching Trouba but we have a lot of other things to take care of before that becomes a possibility.

I'd like to know what management's plan with the unholy "S" trinity on defense is in the next 2 years. Do we ride out the contracts, or do we try to move some of them?

Buyouts for Staal and Smith really only make sense in summer of 2020, and since they hurt us for a 2nd year in exchange for some relief in year 1, we'd have to be really pushing the cap at that point to make it worth it.

Smith, Shattenkirk, Staal, and Hank are all up in 2 years. I can't imagine they'll all last to the end of their contracts here.

 

[Beacon]

I’m not gonna dive into the whole Trouba debate, although I like him a lot as a player.

However, if we’re saying a 25 year old player doesn’t fit our timeline, what in the actual **** are we doing here then?

In the actual f'k, we are waiting for our top ceiling guys - Kakko, Chytil, Kravtsov, K'Andre, our top pick in 2020, all of them still teenagers - to at least come close to their prime so we know what we got before we start giving up assets and paying UFA salaries. Please, no more Gretzky, Fleury, Lindros, Bure, etc.

I wouldn't take any UFA (and Trouba will get a near-UFA salary since he's only cost-controlled for one more season) for any money and for any trade because all it does to this team is drop us from the first half a dozen picks in the 2020 draft to somewhere near the bottom of the lottery. That's the worst possible scenario. At least if you suck and get Kakko, you know you took a step forward. You suck a little less and get Dellandrea, how exactly did you move closer to the Cup?

 

[bobbop]

I have been saying for months and will repeat again; there is no rationale for not buying Smith out this summer unless someone is willing to take on half (good luck with that) of his contract. None. He will not be playing top six defense on this team again and in the future it makes little sense to keep him around as a fourth line winger. Saves over $3MM on the cap this year which can be put to use elsewhere. Bigger hit next year but still less than his contract if he stayed. Thanks for playing Brendan, drive home safely.

I think they try to rehabilitate Shattenkirk one more time before giving up on him. And I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't talked to Staal about accepting a trade in the offseason. At 50%, I do believe there would be a market for Staal.

 

[Beacon]

At some point, you actually need players in their prime.

That point is not 2 months before you draft your top asset. It has to be at least a couple years after.

It can't just be all youngsters and hoarding draft picks.

Yes, that's exactly what it is early in the rebuilding process: acquisition of young, cost-controlled assets who are all about the same age and will all be hitting their prime around the same time.

Also, the word "hoarding" implies we have so much youth, we don't know what to do with it. That's false. We have question marks all over including 1RD, 1LD, 1C, 1LW, 1RW, 1G, you name it. Some of those question marks may be resolved as our kids emerge, but certainly not every hole will get plugged from within. We need that top pick in the strong 2020 draft. We need more late first round picks who can be high risk, high return lottery tickets. What we don't need are UFA contracts this summer.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

I get it, but the price to sign (between $7-8m) is not a second pairing guy. That is a top pair anchor.

I never said I see him as a #1. I said I see him as a #2 (out of 6).

That's still top-pairing, however. The complement to a true 1D LHD – whom hopefully we have (whether in Miller or someone yet to be acquired) on an ELC for most of Trouba's next contract.

 

[NYR Viper]

I think if we are assuming any player being brought in is going to totally revamp the defense on their own we are going to be disappointed. A guy like Trouba would be paid, for sure. But he most likely is not going to be getting absurd money like the Doughty's or Subban's of the world. At even $7m, that's barely average for a top-pairing defenseman RIGHT NOW, let alone if the cap keeps increasing.

The questions become, as always:
What is the price to acquire him?
Do the Rangers view him as someone who can help transition this defense into something that resembles a solid NHL group?

I think people get too caught up in #1 or #2, or #3 designations on defense. Trouba is a guy who can log a lot of minutes in all situations. The Rangers have a hole on the right side for the foreseeable future in terms of a guy who plays like him and yet they have a ton of depth on the left side.

Re-allocating Skjei's cap hit to Trouba would suit this team very well moving forward considering where the depth of the organization currently sits.

This team has had A LOT of dead cap space on defense for more tan a few years (Girardi, Staal, Shattenkirk, Smith). I'm more concerned with jettisoning those guys than I am paying Trouba market value through his prime years starting at 25 years old.