Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XXXV

[Boris Zubov]

Those aren’t fantasies.

 

[McRanger92]

In 2019-2020, the team was 4-0 against Carolina. Dominated them. Out-scored them 17-9 in those four games. Had people running around claiming that the Canes were trying to change the rules of the play-in because they were "scared" of facing the Rangers. We got curb-stomped and swept in that play-in.

The Canes won a couple rounds, and have been in the playoffs for three years running, and only NOW are they seen as a true contender.

Experience matters. The Rangers don't have it, and need to get it in the next couple post-seasons. Going all in NOW is just shooting their shot two or three years before they have any real chance at the target. As fans, we have dealt with the most painful part of the rebuild process (losing beloved vets, acquiring young talent, and building it back into a playoff team). It would be pointless to do all of that only to f*** it up by trying to skip one final step between this team and contender status (ie: building up post-season experience). Make some smart additions? Yes. Make additions that will still be here 3 years from now? Yes. Self-rent Strome, even though he's almost certainly not in the financial picture next year? Yes. Emptying the cupboard or using our best trade chips for players who will only help for one or two years? Stupid.

You're arguing against the wrong person. Im not saying to go all in or trade all of our assets, but in the right deal any of Lundkvist/Kravtsov/Chytil/Jones or any of our picks are available and should be. And even if the Ranger dont win the Cup this year it doesnt make it "all for nothing" as some posters have said. Playoff experience and showing the locker room that the front office is committed to competing for Cups is very important for a young team. Rebuilding and stockpiling assets isn't priority 1 anymore

 

[smoneil]

I agree with this. There are plenty of useful rentals out there, but if they get a chance to add a guy with 2-3 years left they should overpay to have the other team retain and squeeze everyone under the cap for a few years.

Hockey Stat Miner (great follow on twitter) pointed out that this has been common among contenders historically. Justin Williams for the Canes in 06, Mark Recchi for the Bruins in 08 and McD for Tampa in 2018 were specific examples of guys who were deadline adds the year before their teams won the Cup.

Mark Recchi was 40 years old, and was traded with a 2nd round pick (from a non-playoff TBL team) for two "reclamation" level guys (Lashoff hadn't stuck with Boston for three years running, and his AHL numbers had been trending down as well. Karsums was D+4 and looked like a AAAA player--he only played 24 NHL games).

McD is a different situation. TBL, in 2018, had the cap space to re-sign him to a 7 year extension. He was a "now AND future" piece. We don't have the cap space to keep any big ticket players beyond this year (or next, if they come with retention).

Williams wasn't a 2006 rental. He was traded to the Canes in January of 2004 in return for Danny Markov. The Canes didn't make the playoffs that year (and the Flyers lost in the Conference finals). After the lockout, they signed Williams to a 1-year "show me" RFA contract for less than $1.5m (this was the season the Canes won the Cup). The following season, they signed him to a long-term deal. At the time he was traded by Philly, Williams was seen as a disappointment and an injury risk (bad knee). He looked more like Chytil than Hertl at that point.

The only one of your three examples to cost anything significant is McDonagh, and again, TBL had the cap space to sign him long term. Williams and Recchi? If you want to trade ~Hajek and Gauthier for a cheap grisly veteran (with an expiring contract) and a 2nd round pick (the equivalent of the Recchi deal), I'm on board with it. The closest equivalent would probably be Phil Kessel. You want to send a veteran D on a bad-ish contract for another team's struggling young player (ie: the Justin Williams trade)? Hey, I'm on board with that.

But the "All in" folks want to throw out first round picks, top prospects, and young roster players in exchange for players who won't be here for more than 1 or 2 years because of the cap crunch. And this team isn't ready for that (nor is it what Carolina or Boston did in your examples).

 

[smoneil]

You're arguing against the wrong person. Im not saying to go all in or trade all of our assets, but in the right deal any of Lundkvist/Kravtsov/Chytil/Jones or any of our picks are available and should be. And even if the Ranger dont win the Cup this year it doesnt make it "all for nothing" as some posters have said. Playoff experience and showing the locker room that the front office is committed to competing for Cups is very important for a young team. Rebuilding and stockpiling assets isn't priority 1 anymore

You just named three of our top 5 prospects (#s 1, 3, and 5), our draft picks, and a young vet who--until this year--was developing well. How is that NOT "using out best trade chips for players who will only help for one or two years"? There is a middle ground between stockpiling assets and throwing them into the pot with a middling hand.

 

[Boris Zubov]

Mark Recchi was 40 years old, and was traded with a 2nd round pick (from a non-playoff TBL team) for two "reclamation" level guys (Lashoff hadn't stuck with Boston for three years running, and his AHL numbers had been trending down as well. Karsums was D+4 and looked like a AAAA player--he only played 24 NHL games).

McD is a different situation. TBL, in 2018, had the cap space to re-sign him to a 7 year extension. He was a "now AND future" piece. We don't have the cap space to keep any big ticket players beyond this year (or next, if they come with retention).

Williams wasn't a 2006 rental. He was traded to the Canes in January of 2004 in return for Danny Markov. The Canes didn't make the playoffs that year (and the Flyers lost in the Conference finals). After the lockout, they signed Williams to a 1-year "show me" RFA contract for less than $1.5m (this was the season the Canes won the Cup). The following season, they signed him to a long-term deal. At the time he was traded by Philly, Williams was seen as a disappointment and an injury risk (bad knee). He looked more like Chytil than Hertl at that point.

The only one of your three examples to cost anything significant is McDonagh, and again, TBL had the cap space to sign him long term. Williams and Recchi? If you want to trade ~Hajek and Gauthier for a cheap grisly veteran (with an expiring contract) and a 2nd round pick (the equivalent of the Recchi deal), I'm on board with it. The closest equivalent would probably be Phil Kessel. You want to send a veteran D on a bad-ish contract for another team's struggling young player (ie: the Justin Williams trade)? Hey, I'm on board with that.

But the "All in" folks want to throw out first round picks, top prospects, and young roster players in exchange for players who won't be here for more than 1 or 2 years because of the cap crunch. And this team isn't ready for that (nor is it what Carolina or Boston did in your examples).

There is absolutely no reason to sit on our hands when we unlimited cap space at the deadline & an overabundance of prospects; many who will never play for the team simply because we don't have spots for them. It would be criminal not to try to make a run with this group, but I'm not advocating selling the farm. I've only seen a few posters suggest we go "All-in".

Most of us are against trading prime assets for pure rentals. But if you can add someone like a Reilly Smith for a 2nd & a 3rd, you do it. If Pavelski becomes available & the cost is our first this year, sure it stings a little but its a no brainer. That pick will wind up in the mid-late 20s anyway & it sends a message to the locker room that the organization believes in them. Trades like that are not mortgaging the future.

 

[McRanger92]

You just named three of our top 5 prospects (#s 1, 3, and 5), our draft picks, and a young vet who--until this year--was developing well. How is that NOT "using out best trade chips for players who will only help for one or two years"? There is a middle ground between stockpiling assets and throwing them into the pot with a middling hand.

Youre going to be disappointed if you think all these guys are eventually moved for other long-term pieces. Realistically, the majority of the long term core is in place due to contract status or their standing among the young players.

Panarin, Fox, Kreider, Mika, Trouba, Igor, Goodrow and to a lesser extent Lindgren will be key cogs to this window, with Strome or a suitable replacement. We can reasonably assume the org feels Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller & Schneider are part of the solution as well. The rest, especially the ones who are blocked in the NHL lineup (Lundkvist/Jones), actively regressing (Chytil) or flat out left the team (Kravtsov) should be used as chips over this and coming years for more immediate help.

 

[smoneil]

There is absolutely no reason to sit on our hands when we unlimited cap space at the deadline & an overabundance of prospects; many who will never play for the team simply because we don't have spots for them. It would be criminal not to try to make a run with this group, but I'm not advocating selling the farm. I've only seen a few posters suggest we go "All-in".

Most of us are against trading prime assets for pure rentals. But if you can add someone like a Reilly Smith for a 2nd & a 3rd, you do it. If Pavelski becomes available & the cost is our first this year, sure it stings a little but its a no brainer. That pick will wind up in the mid-late 20s anyway & it sends a message to the locker room that the organization believes in them. Trades like that are not mortgaging the future.

We aren't disagreeing. I would make your Smith trade in a NY minute. I'm a bit more hesitant to give up the 1st on a pure rental, but could be persuaded (I'd rather offer both 2nds or a 2nd and a Hajek-level player--maybe add some potential movement on the draft pick based on how far the team goes). I just think that the team's best chips (the high end prospects who are likely victims of the numbers game) should only be on the table for pieces of similar value that will be here for an extended period of time. The person I quoted named our draft picks and three of our top prospects. I don't want the team to spend that on rentals who will be gone by the time we would best be able to utilize them (ie: in another couple years, after this group gets a couple of playoff runs under their belts).

 

[mottosays]

Are you arguing that we shouldn't care if they dislike each other, or that they do in fact like each other? It's pretty obvious they don't like each other

Who the f*** cares?

The ratio of trivial shit on here is too much.

 

[smoneil]

Youre going to be disappointed if you think all these guys are eventually moved for other long-term pieces. Realistically, the majority of the long term core is in place due to contract status or their standing among the young players.

Panarin, Fox, Kreider, Mika, Trouba, Igor, Goodrow and to a lesser extent Lindgren will be key cogs to this window, with Strome or a suitable replacement. We can reasonably assume the org feels Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller & Schneider are part of the solution as well. The rest, especially the ones who are blocked in the NHL lineup (Lundkvist/Jones), actively regressing (Chytil) or flat out left the team (Kravtsov) should be used as chips over this and coming years for more immediate help.

We aren't disagreeing about which pieces are potential trade chips (though I still maintain that Chytil is in a slump rather than "actively regressing"--he was great last year and I will never understand why so many posters here despise the kid). We are disagreeing about where and when and how to spend them. Your suggestions have been about spending all/most of them RIGHT NOW to add pieces in the name of winning the Cup RIGHT NOW. History tells us that a team's first taste of playoff hockey--regardless of how much they've added--doesn't go well. Even if we add all the pieces you clamor for, this team is more likely to get swept in round 1 than it is to go the distance. I'm not saying sell. I'm not saying don't spend. But the team needs to spend smart, and that means holding your chips for the right deal. In my opinion, the "right deal" is one that helps the team long-term. Even the examples you gave in your earlier post--none of the buying teams won the Cup that year. None of the selling teams did either. None of them came close. And I bet if you asked Philadelphia, they would tell you that they wished they'd held on to Justin Williams (and the 1,101 NHL games and 707 NHL points he had after leaving Philly as a "disappointment" as a 22 year old) instead of giving up on him in favor of 34 games (5 points, and no trip even to the SCF) of Danny Markov.

Use the chips to bring in long term players. Use them to move up the draft to get a higher-impact prospect. And if you can't get that, then let them keep developing. It was a philosophy that turned 90s/00s Detroit into a dynasty.

 

[Lgrsean]

In 2019-2020, the team was 4-0 against Carolina. Dominated them. Out-scored them 17-9 in those four games. Had people running around claiming that the Canes were trying to change the rules of the play-in because they were "scared" of facing the Rangers. We got curb-stomped and swept in that play-in.

The Canes won a couple rounds, and have been in the playoffs for three years running, and only NOW are they seen as a true contender.

Experience matters. The Rangers don't have it, and need to get it in the next couple post-seasons. Going all in NOW is just shooting their shot two or three years before they have any real chance at the target. As fans, we have dealt with the most painful part of the rebuild process (losing beloved vets, acquiring young talent, and building it back into a playoff team). It would be pointless to do all of that only to f*** it up by trying to skip one final step between this team and contender status (ie: building up post-season experience). Make some smart additions? Yes. Make additions that will still be here 3 years from now? Yes. Self-rent Strome, even though he's almost certainly not in the financial picture next year? Yes. Emptying the cupboard or using our best trade chips for players who will only help for one or two years? Stupid.

How many of Igor's cheap vezina contending years should the Rangers set their sights on playoff experience instead of winning the cup? Who/what are you OK with trading away and who are the guys you are OK with bringing in? What year do you expect the rangers to compete for the cup and who will we be relying on at that point? Who are the guys on the Rangers right now are on the team you are imagining competing for the cup?

I'd rather try to win a cup while Igor is cheap than wait until he's the highest paid goaltender in the league and lose the guys who gained that playoff experience to cap problems.

 

[McRanger92]

We aren't disagreeing about which pieces are potential trade chips (though I still maintain that Chytil is in a slump rather than "actively regressing"--he was great last year and I will never understand why so many posters here despise the kid). We are disagreeing about where and when and how to spend them. Your suggestions have been about spending all/most of them RIGHT NOW to add pieces in the name of winning the Cup RIGHT NOW. History tells us that a team's first taste of playoff hockey--regardless of how much they've added--doesn't go well. Even if we add all the pieces you clamor for, this team is more likely to get swept in round 1 than it is to go the distance. I'm not saying sell. I'm not saying don't spend. But the team needs to spend smart, and that means holding your chips for the right deal. In my opinion, the "right deal" is one that helps the team long-term. Even the examples you gave in your earlier post--none of the buying teams won the Cup that year. None of the selling teams did either. None of them came close. And I bet if you asked Philadelphia, they would tell you that they wished they'd held on to Justin Williams (and the 1,101 NHL games and 707 NHL points he had after leaving Philly as a "disappointment" as a 22 year old) instead of giving up on him in favor of 34 games (5 points, and no trip even to the SCF) of Danny Markov.

Use the chips to bring in long term players. Use them to move up the draft to get a higher-impact prospect. And if you can't get that, then let them keep developing. It was a philosophy that turned 90s/00s Detroit into a dynasty.

I’m not an all in guy, I don’t want to trade every piece this season. Definitely some if it’s the right move. I do think we’re arguing past each other a little because we do agree on the overall point.

As for the examples I have of trades in the past, that was more of an idea of what they could do, not nitpicking specific moves

Gotta draw the line at the “multiple Cups” and “dynasty” talk I see about the Rangers though. I can’t even fathom winning 1, let alone 2 or 3. Worrying about the next one before you’ve won the 1st is nuts

 

[McRanger92]

How many of Igor's cheap vezina contending years should the Rangers set their sights on playoff experience instead of winning the cup? Who/what are you OK with trading away and who are the guys you are OK with bringing in? What year do you expect the rangers to compete for the cup and who will we be relying on at that point? Who are the guys on the Rangers right now are on the team you are imagining competing for the cup?

I'd rather try to win a cup while Igor is cheap than wait until he's the highest paid goaltender in the league and lose the guys who gained that playoff experience to cap problems.

Id also add that while I’m not an “All-in” guy this year, there’s something to be said for if not now, when?

The Rangers will never have this much trade deadline cap space, or as many assets, ever again. With a goalie having a potential Hart Trophy season, it would be a totally defensible move if they chose to go that way.

 

[Clark Kellogg]

How many of Igor's cheap vezina contending years should the Rangers set their sights on playoff experience instead of winning the cup? Who/what are you OK with trading away and who are the guys you are OK with bringing in? What year do you expect the rangers to compete for the cup and who will we be relying on at that point? Who are the guys on the Rangers right now are on the team you are imagining competing for the cup?

I'd rather try to win a cup while Igor is cheap than wait until he's the highest paid goaltender in the league and lose the guys who gained that playoff experience to cap problems.

“Do or do not. There is no try.“
I would rather wait to mortgage future’s and picks for when the team can do win the cup. Not when they can try and win the cup.
There are currently 6 NHL playoff ready players on this team (one of those is injured).
To get through 4 of the following 7 teams, Boston, Carolina, Florida, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Toronto and Washington in a seven game series just for the right to play one of Colorado, Minnesota and Vegas seems like an impossible try, even if the Rangers go out and trade for a bunch of rentals. Please stop and remember that many of those afore mentioned teams also have an elite goalie.
Time is on our side. We are one of the youngest teams in the league and many of those cup contenders now are only going to get old and tired in a year or two.
Just look at the Long Island team; it’s like they fell off a cliff this year and they won’t be competing again for many years to come.

 

[Ola]

Lmao what.

Kuznetzov is 6'2.

Malkin is 6'3" and hes won thrice.

Schenn, ROR and Bozak are all 6'1".

PLD is 6'3". This is nonsense.

Oki, so you are saying that its possible to win a Cup with a bunch of centers 6'2 or bigger??

 

[SA16]

Oki, so you are saying that its possible to win a Cup with a bunch of centers 6'2 or bigger??

As long as they skate hunched over it’s fine

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Lol, so we traded Grabner for nothing.

Grabner, in part, got us K'Andre Miller.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

How many of Igor's cheap vezina contending years should the Rangers set their sights on playoff experience instead of winning the cup? Who/what are you OK with trading away and who are the guys you are OK with bringing in? What year do you expect the rangers to compete for the cup and who will we be relying on at that point? Who are the guys on the Rangers right now are on the team you are imagining competing for the cup?

I'd rather try to win a cup while Igor is cheap than wait until he's the highest paid goaltender in the league and lose the guys who gained that playoff experience to cap problems.

Trying to win a cup when you’re not ready is worse. This team is not ready yet. No team coming out of a rebuild has won in their first year back. This is not the year.

 

[Vitto79]

A young center was offered. And a first.

who was this magical young C ?
what team and why wouldn’t they take it? Lol

 

[pld459666]

I happen to love PLD, so I'd be in on him hard core if he was available. His play in round performance vs the Leafs told me all I need to know.

Kinda weird, no?

 

[wafflepadsave]

Mark Recchi was 40 years old, and was traded with a 2nd round pick (from a non-playoff TBL team) for two "reclamation" level guys (Lashoff hadn't stuck with Boston for three years running, and his AHL numbers had been trending down as well. Karsums was D+4 and looked like a AAAA player--he only played 24 NHL games).

McD is a different situation. TBL, in 2018, had the cap space to re-sign him to a 7 year extension. He was a "now AND future" piece. We don't have the cap space to keep any big ticket players beyond this year (or next, if they come with retention).

Williams wasn't a 2006 rental. He was traded to the Canes in January of 2004 in return for Danny Markov. The Canes didn't make the playoffs that year (and the Flyers lost in the Conference finals). After the lockout, they signed Williams to a 1-year "show me" RFA contract for less than $1.5m (this was the season the Canes won the Cup). The following season, they signed him to a long-term deal. At the time he was traded by Philly, Williams was seen as a disappointment and an injury risk (bad knee). He looked more like Chytil than Hertl at that point.

The only one of your three examples to cost anything significant is McDonagh, and again, TBL had the cap space to sign him long term. Williams and Recchi? If you want to trade ~Hajek and Gauthier for a cheap grisly veteran (with an expiring contract) and a 2nd round pick (the equivalent of the Recchi deal), I'm on board with it. The closest equivalent would probably be Phil Kessel. You want to send a veteran D on a bad-ish contract for another team's struggling young player (ie: the Justin Williams trade)? Hey, I'm on board with that.

But the "All in" folks want to throw out first round picks, top prospects, and young roster players in exchange for players who won't be here for more than 1 or 2 years because of the cap crunch. And this team isn't ready for that (nor is it what Carolina or Boston did in your examples).

They’re really just two out for the season injuries from being sellers.

 

[pld459666]

Yeah but neurons don't replace themselves and JT Miller didn't have many to begin with.

And yet, hes just shy of a point per game player three years running.

The dumb narrative is old and tired

 

[pld459666]

haha do you remember how hard it was to win that thing? I doubt it honestly I’ll take one every 30 years gladly. Give me one more now another around 70 and I’ll die happy LOL


You absolutely can if you get Miller at 50%

Regarding bold, I have contended for the last 25+ years that the Rangers made the road to the Stanley Cup in 94 harder on themselves at that deadline.

No one in the league could match the teams speed and scoring ability. We swept the Devils 6-0 in the Regular Season before the trades and barely got by in the ECF.

I'd say we probably beat the Devils AND Vancouver handily 4-1 each series with the team we had before the trades.

 

[KOVALEV022473]

Trying to win a cup when you’re not ready is worse. This team is not ready yet. No team coming out of a rebuild has won in their first year back. This is not the year.

I know. I was reminded earlier in the thread. I had forgotten we received a 2nd round pick with Rykov.

 

[Vitto79]

And yet, hes just shy of a point per game player three years running.

The dumb narrative is old and tired

i can see them getting a guy w an extra year left but I think your right play is just to trade 2nd round picks and down for Rentals

keep your kids we done know who’s for real yet

 

[mas0764]

who was this magical young C ?
what team and why wouldn’t they take it? Lol

Per the respected insider Edge, the offer was Kupari and a first from LA for Buch. He's stated on many occasions that there were, in his mind, better offers than the one we accepted for Buch.