Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIX

[Tawnos]

The only thing about burying him is that they don't need the cap space next year and buying him out only extends the pain

But burying him does nothing for the organization, where getting him off the roster does.

 

[Mac n Gs]

You guys did at least watch the Jets series?

That is a microcosm of what Trouba is, he's really good in his own zone, he is good at getting to the puck to guys who attempt and shoot a lot. His offense is not really what his production line indicates.

Trouba sending passes to his most common teammate forwards Scheifele, Wheeler, Connor, Ehlers, Laine both 5on5 and on the PP are a little different than who he'd be passing to on the Rangers.

Damn just having a dman who’s really good in his own zone that’s also good at getting the puck to his F sounds great after what we’ve watched since 2015-16

 

[NYR Viper]

Eh, within reason.

Missing an entire season over a 5 year span to a varied assortment of issues raises some red flags for me.

Normally, I might be somewhat okay if the talent level is incredibly high. But in this case, I'm not sold on how the durability plays into a guy for whom we'd be handing an increased role.

Typically, if a guy is talented, and you're trying to preserve him, you slide him into more of a support role. You usually don't heap more focus and responsibility on him.

That's what we'd be looking to do, and that's a little scary.

Wouldn't this be a reason why he wouldn't get paid AS much as he probably would if he had back-to-back-to-back 82 game seasons played though?

 

[Tawnos]

You guys did at least watch the Jets series?

That is a microcosm of what Trouba is, he's really good in his own zone, he is good at getting to the puck to guys who attempt and shoot a lot. His offense is not really what his production line indicates.

Trouba sending passes to his most common teammate forwards Scheifele, Wheeler, Connor, Ehlers, Laine both 5on5 and on the PP are a little different than who he'd be passing to on the Rangers.

Personally, my interest in Trouba isn't about his offense. He's a good skating, big, really good defensive right defenseman. The points are a bonus.

 

[NYR Viper]

But burying him does nothing for the organization, where getting him off the roster does.

For next year, I agree. But 2 years from now when they still have dead cap space and may begin trying to improve their roster it would be a hindrance.

 

[Edge]

Eh... Trouba played the 2nd most ES minutes per game this year among D on the Jets, only trailing Byfuglien who missed half the season. He played the 2nd most short-handed minutes after Morrissey, who he was usually paired with anyway. He played the 2nd most PP minutes after Byfuglien. And he played the 2nd most overall, again after Byfuglien.

He played 250 more total minutes than any other D on the team and for half the year, he was the 1RD. I'm not really sure how much of an increased role we'd really be giving him.

Yes, for half a season he was that guy. He's a very talented player. I don't question his talent.

On the one hand, a 40 game sample size does support his ability of handling being the focus on defense. On the other hand, him being injured for 83 games of the previous over the previous five years can't just be overlooked as just a random thing that happens to him.

And then that leads to the question, how much are you willing to move to see if that is sustainable, and then how much are you willing to invest in that durability going forward?

Personally, I don't know if I am willing to move assets and make that kind of investment.

 

[EpicDing]

You guys did at least watch the Jets series?

That is a microcosm of what Trouba is, he's really good in his own zone, he is good at getting to the puck to guys who attempt and shoot a lot. His offense is not really what his production line indicates.

Trouba sending passes to his most common teammate forwards Scheifele, Wheeler, Connor, Ehlers, Laine both 5on5 and on the PP are a little different than who he'd be passing to on the Rangers.

A righty who is really good in his own zone and can make a pass is pretty much exactly what I'm looking for.

The players he'd be passing to on the Rangers will get better, that's not my concern.

 

[offdacrossbar]

McDonagh is hailed around here as the best defender weve had in well..... forever.

over the last 7 seasons, hes played an average of 70 reg season games per yr. 70

trouba 6 seasons averaged 68 reg season games. 68

so why are we afraid of jake trouba ?

 

[Off Sides]

Personally, my interest in Trouba isn't about his offense. He's a good skating, big, really good defensive right defenseman. The points are a bonus.

That I'll agree on,

I'm in disagreement about that being enough to first trade for then pay for in his next likely contract.

 

[Tawnos]

For next year, I agree. But 2 years from now when they still have dead cap space and may begin trying to improve their roster it would be a hindrance.

2 years from now the buyout costs the team less than keeping the player, or about the same as burying him. 3 and 4 years from now it's $1.1m, which doesn't concern me much.

 

[Edge]

I don't understand the "more responsibility" talking point. For example, he was #1 on the Jets in TOI and in Defensive Zone starts as well as 2nd in QoC metrics right after his partner Josh Morrissey. The idea that he can't be a #1 defenseman when he showed this season he can is strange.

I don't question whether he can be a number one defenseman. I question whether he can do that year-in and year-out.

There's a big difference between doing that for 40 games, and doing that for four or five seasons.

It's more minutes, it's tougher assignments, it's additional wear and tear.

And more than a few guys tend to do better when they can slide back into that second pairing assignment. Sure, they're capable of playing the first line minutes and can do a good job there. But over time, it's a grind.

When I see Trouba, I see a potentially similar situation to McD in a few years. Just fine if you have a Hedman or a Byfuglien ahead of him. Perfectly capable of stepping up and playing that top role at times. But not necessarily a guy I want to count on as over the longer-haul for that role.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Zibanejad is signed to a good contract.He also is not a question mark as far as what will happen once he comes here. If you can get a 26-year-old .9 ppg player for $5/year who is signed until he'll be only 29 years old, go for it. There's no realistic universe where we can do that. We are talking about $7-9 and a term that takes him well into his 30s.

How is it a good thing that a contract like Zibanejad's expires in the next 3 years exactly? Right before we have to end up paying all of our younger players their 2nd contracts? That's possibly the worst thing that could happen. That's why I don't understand the reluctance to add someone like Trouba who would be locked in at a good rate for the next 7 or 8 years, but having to pay Zibanejad a 9-10M contracct at age 29 is totally OK. Trouba is almost a year younger than Zibanejad so if you believe Zibanejad can be a part of the next Rangers contender why can't Trouba?

 

[DutchShamrock]

Staal's problem is his contract, not his performance. He's better than most around here concede and he could be a valuable third pair defender if his minutes were properly managed. If he was making $2MM, we would love him. There's a place for him somewhere in this league. The off season is the time to move him.

Finally the truth! Thank you, it's not worth bickering over the topic but it makes my day to see an objective observer give that guy some credit.

 

[NYR Viper]

2 years from now the buyout costs the team less than keeping the player, or about the same as burying him. 3 and 4 years from now it's $1.1m, which doesn't concern me much.

But if the team isn't competing next year and doesn't need the cap space why even have that $1.1m in dead space 2 and 3 years from now?

 

[Tawnos]

But if the team isn't competing next year and doesn't need the cap space why even have that $1.1m in dead space 2 and 3 years from now?

Because getting him off the team and out of the system right now has its own inherent value.

The dead space would be 3 and 4 years from now. Next year the buyout is $1.1m. 2 years from now it's 3.1m. 3 and 4 it's back to $1.1m. But still, 3 and 4 years from now, we're not going to be hard up for that cap space either.

 

[Edge]

You guys did at least watch the Jets series?

That is a microcosm of what Trouba is, he's really good in his own zone, he is good at getting to the puck to guys who attempt and shoot a lot. His offense is not really what his production line indicates.

Trouba sending passes to his most common teammate forwards Scheifele, Wheeler, Connor, Ehlers, Laine both 5on5 and on the PP are a little different than who he'd be passing to on the Rangers.

Which speaks to the other side of this equation.

The Jets are in a very different zone than the Rangers at this point.

So, let's go ahead and say the injuries are all a fluke, the 40 games as a number one is proof enough, and the cost of acquiring and signing is no cause for concern.

That leads me back to the initial concern I expressed --- I think there'd be a significant drop coming and the dream of Trouba wouldn't quite match the reality of him being here, with this lineup.

And when the latter happens, I can see a lot of Rick Nash type discussions on here.

 

[NYR Viper]

Because getting him off the team and out of the system right now has its own inherent value.

But they don't need the contract slot or the cap space and he doesn't seem to be a bad teammate

 

[Beacon]

So what we are waiting for is our prospects to break out and get huge second contracts thereby making it very hard for us to fill a team around them with quality players as opposed to going for it early where they will be very cheap and potentially provide huge surplus value?

While they are cheap, they are teenagers who need to be sheltered to produce even a fraction of what they will do later. Their second contracts won't be huge unless they massively exceed expectations. They are cost-controlled into the second half of the next decade. There's a big difference between a UFA contract and a bridge contract, or even a UFA contracts vs a long term contract that spans both the bridge and the UFA years. That's how you get McDonagh for $4.5 or Zibanejad for $5. When you sign straight up UFAs, they no longer worry about how their career or injuries will go before they get cash in, so they get crazy money. Everyone expects UFAs to sign for RFA money, then looks shocked on July 2. Every year, same thing. Let me repeat this again: to sign a high-level UFA that every team would want, you have to offer him a contract that the other 30 GMs look at and think, "I wouldn't want that guy for free with that kind of a contract." Because so long as there's even 1 other GM who thinks your offer is not insane, he will keep on bidding to sign this player.

P.S. Is it fun for you to change every time you quote me from beacon to bacon? I'm just curious about the entertainment value in that. Unless you're 12 years old?

 

[Off Sides]

A righty who is really good in his own zone and can make a pass is pretty much exactly what I'm looking for.

The players he'd be passing to on the Rangers will get better, that's not my concern.

I agree there is some value there, I disagree on how valuable that is. Trouba on his entry level, on his RFA contracts, certainly in my mind worth it, his next contract, I see that as much more in the questionable zone where the Rangers and us fans end up questioning why they gave him that contract. If they trade assets on top to just get him in the first place, I'm probably putting that in the Rangers and us fans are unsatisfied about how it plays out.

 

[True Blue]

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.

No, I get that. My point is that I believe he is going to look to get paid as a top pairing guy.

 

[Edge]

Personally, my interest in Trouba isn't about his offense. He's a good skating, big, really good defensive right defenseman. The points are a bonus.

Unfortunately we will pay for that bonus both in what it costs to acquire him, and then sign him.

Make no mistake about that. His next contract will not reflect him being a 35 point defenseman with the attributes you listed. We will be paying for all of those nice little "bonuses."

 

[JohnC]

A team will take 2 years of Marc Staal @ a 2.85M cap hit but 2 years of Brendan Smith @ a 2.175M hit is immovable?

Color me completely skeptical.

 

[True Blue]

i dont think smith plays another game for us. hes bought out.

That is very easy to state. But when you begin to factor in the dead cap space that it causes, and couple that with Girardi's already occupying such space, the hit is not insignificant.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I don't question whether he can be a number one defenseman. I question whether he can do that year-in and year-out.

There's a big difference between doing that for 40 games, and doing that for four or five seasons.

It's more minutes, it's tougher assignments, it's additional wear and tear.

And more than a few guys tend to do better when they can slide back into that second pairing assignment. Sure, they're capable of playing the first line minutes and can do a good job there. But over time, it's a grind.

When I see Trouba, I see a potentially similar situation to McD in a few years. Just fine if you have a Hedman or a Byfuglien ahead of him. Perfectly capable of stepping up and playing that top role at times. But not necessarily a guy I want to count on as over the longer-haul for that role.

I think stating it was 40 games is a vast minimizing of the role he has had for the last few seasons. Since 16-17 he is 2nd in TOI even though he has Byfuglien and Myers on the right side with him, he's 1st on the Jets in toi%QoC and in CF%QoC and gets the most defensive zone starts. It seems to me he is the #1 defenseman on the team, not Byfuglien or anyone else.

 

[EpicDing]

I agree there is some value there, I disagree on how valuable that is. Trouba on his entry level, on his RFA contracts, certainly in my mind worth it, his next contract, I see that as much more in the questionable zone where the Rangers and us fans end up questioning why they gave him that contract. If they trade assets on top to just get him in the first place, I'm probably putting that in the Rangers and us fans are unsatisfied about how it plays out.

Yeah I definitely get that. As long as it's cheap trade-wise I'm into it though.