Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXV

[egelband]

If we move one of Shatty/Smith/Staal, I wouldn't be opposed to McQuaid on a 1 year deal.



Okay. Marner is getting into super overrated category. He isn't even the best player on his own team or in his division.

I prefer him to Matthews and Kane, and to Eichel by a mile. In fact, Pasternak is probably the other one I'd want. This is a subjective thing.

 

[SA16]

I prefer him to Matthews and Kane, and to Eichel by a mile. In fact, Pasternak is probably the other one I'd want. This is a subjective thing.

There is a guy on Tampa who wears number 86.

 

[egelband]

Not sure if I would but any interest in bringing McQuaid back on a cheap deal and unloading him at the deadline again?

We're there an opening, for sure. But I sense the Rangera have way too many options now. McQuaid probably wouldn't want to sign to be the seventh-eighth guy. Though I agree, he brings a great dimension to the lineup.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

If we move one of Shatty/Smith/Staal, I wouldn't be opposed to McQuaid on a 1 year deal.



Okay. Marner is getting into super overrated category. He isn't even the best player on his own team or in his division.

I wouldn’t give up four firsts for Marner but I wouldn’t hesitate to say that he is the #1 offensive catalyst on the Leafs and an elite, elite offensive threat. There’s a reason JT is having a career year goal scoring wise.

Now, “generational”...no. That’s Crosby/Ovechkin/McDavid and that’s about it. Maybe Dahlin but it’s obviously verrrry early there.

 

[Gardner McKay]

I prefer him to Matthews and Kane, and to Eichel by a mile. In fact, Pasternak is probably the other one I'd want. This is a subjective thing.

I disagree. I'd take Matthews and Pastrnak over Marner without thinking. I would also easily take MacKinnon, Kucherov and Barkov over Marner. I don't know if Marner is even a top 5 player in his conference, let alone be the 2nd best player in the NHL or is a generational player. Now to be fair, the East is just absolutely loaded with talent.

Would I take him on the Rangers? Unlike Nylander, I absolutely would.

 

[egelband]

There is a guy on Tampa who wears number 86.

Fair enough. Wasnt even thinking about Tampa.

 

[Good Intentions]

Rather than play spin the bottle with superstar names...

Forward thinking. What connects does JD have in his rolodex that could make sense as a potential fit for a June trade?

 

[Gardner McKay]

I wouldn’t give up four firsts for Marner but I wouldn’t hesitate to say that he is the #1 offensive catalyst on the Leafs and an elite, elite offensive threat. There’s a reason JT is having a career year goal scoring wise.

Now, “generational”...no. That’s Crosby/Ovechkin/McDavid and that’s about it. Maybe Dahlin but it’s obviously verrrry early there.

I think that is a fair point and there is definitely a good argument to be had. But yeah, he isn't generational. That is a word that gets thrown around way too much these days. I mean, look at who you said - Crosby/Ovechkin/McDavid. No Malkin and Marner isn't Malkin. Could you make the argument for Malkin? Sure. But he isn't a clear cut generational player and if Marner isn't even on a Malkin's level, he isn't close to generational. Elite? Yeah, for sure.

 

[egelband]

I disagree. I'd take Matthews and Pastrnak over Marner without thinking. I would also easily take MacKinnon, Kucherov and Barkov over Marner. I don't know if Marner is even a top 5 player in his conference, let alone be the 2nd best player in the NHL or is a generational player. Now to be fair, the East is just absolutely loaded with talent.

Would I take him on the Rangers? Unlike Nylander, I absolutely would.

The point I was making is that I'd definitely give up multiple firsts for Marner.

 

[donpaulo]

yeah for me Barkov is the guy to build around, not Marner.
Not saying Marner is bad, only that Aleksander is better and a more complete hockey player.
191 cm, amazing skater & 94 points this season

 

[RGY]

There is no way we end up with Marner or Barkov. Their respectice teams will move other bodies to keep them and then find cheap filler players for the bottom lines.

 

[Gardner McKay]

The point I was making is that I'd definitely give up multiple firsts for Marner.

I wouldn't. You build around an elite 1C. Not a winger.

 

[donpaulo]

There is no way we end up with Marner or Barkov. Their respectice teams will move other bodies to keep them and then find cheap filler players for the bottom lines.

Not suggesting NY can get Barkov. Only that he is the guy I would build around over for example Marner.

 

[Mac n Gs]

I'd consider it for Marner. Dude is Generational. In my book, at least. At the moment, it's McDavid, then Marner.

It just become cost prohibitive at that point when you factor in the compensation and the scaled-up AAV to pull it off. That’s why I brought up the mid-tier guys since they’re much easier to acquire and it would be easier to work out a deal for them.

 

[SA16]

There are very few players in the league that would be worth giving up four potentially early first round picks for. The list almost begins and ends with McDavid. It is very hard to give up four firsts - one of which will almost surely be a good lottery pick - for the rights to get an elite player and immediately pay him 11M+. Trading four firsts would be very different as I think you would really want to lottery protect the 2020 pick which you can't do to a RFA.

 

[egelband]

It just become cost prohibitive at that point when you factor in the compensation and the scaled-up AAV to pull it off. That’s why I brought up the mid-tier guys since they’re much easier to acquire and it would be easier to work out a deal for them.

For sure. Always depends on the cost. For example, Panarin at 8.5x5 or even 8x6, I do it. But if he's expecting 9 or 10, I let someone else pay it. Managing the cap is so crucial these days.

 

[egelband]

There are very few players in the league that would be worth giving up four potentially early first round picks for. The list almost begins and ends with McDavid. It is very hard to give up four firsts - one of which will almost surely be a good lottery pick - for the rights to get an elite player and immediately pay him 11M+. Trading four firsts would be very different as I think you would really want to lottery protect the 2020 pick which you can't do to a RFA.

I agree in principle but I think the list is a bit bigger than McDavid. Yeah, four firsts is a huge price. But if you look at our last for firsts, you trade them for Marner or Kucherov or Matthews. Just my opinion.

 

[donpaulo]

Its interesting to consider a NYR team with Kreider & Panarin both locked up for the long term.
What that does to the building plan and the long term cap consequences.

While I'm not a proponent of such a move, its still intriguing.

 

[donpaulo]

I agree in principle but I think the list is a bit bigger than McDavid. Yeah, four firsts is a huge price. But if you look at our last for firsts, you trade them for Marner or Kucherov or Matthews. Just my opinion.

I think if the option is to pay 4 firsts for a franchise guy, then make it a center

 

[RangerBoy]

The Rangers have no incentive to bid against themselves. Fox is a nice player but there’s no guarantee he will become a legit top 4 D.

The Rangers would probably give up a 2nd for Fox.

 

[egelband]

I think if the option is to pay 4 firsts for a franchise guy, then make it a center

Sure I get it. A center has more value than a winger and if you're gonna take one shot a center would beer better. But these days I'd be less concerned. Centers aren't taking all the faceoffs. Offense is being generated from all over the ice. And while the center's defensive roles is more important, these days everyone has to be defensively responsible. You're right, a center is preferable but I'd still give the four firsts for Marner or Kucherov or Pasternak too.

 

[LORDE]

I agree in principle but I think the list is a bit bigger than McDavid. Yeah, four firsts is a huge price. But if you look at our last for firsts, you trade them for Marner or Kucherov or Matthews. Just my opinion.

Our last 4 1st aren't anything close to our next 4 though really. Obviously time will tell with Chytil and Kravtsov, but then you have lottery balls tues, and our finish next season.

Tough to compare that with Lias, Chytil et all

 

[SA16]

I agree in principle but I think the list is a bit bigger than McDavid. Yeah, four firsts is a huge price. But if you look at our last for firsts, you trade them for Marner or Kucherov or Matthews. Just my opinion.

It's a move that can be considered next year but I don't think it's a good idea if expectations are that this is going to be a bottom five team again to give up a reasonable shot at LaFreniere and whoever else is available that early.

 

[egelband]

It's a move that can be considered next year but I don't think it's a good idea if expectations are that this is going to be a bottom five team again to give up a reasonable shot at LaFreniere and whoever else is available that early.

This is another important point. Can the rangers tank another year. We've seen how tough it is to tank. A proper tanking is probably tougher than making they playoffs. But yeah. Getting a legit star let that is a great and worthy prize.

 

[egelband]

Our last 4 1st aren't anything close to our next 4 though really. Obviously time will tell with Chytil and Kravtsov, but then you have lottery balls tues, and our finish next season.

Tough to compare that with Lias, Chytil et all

Surely. But with a Marner - for arguments sake- the team probably is in the playoffs. At least after that first year. The picks probably aren't that high. It's all debatable, of course.