Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XXXV

[haohmaru]

Skill wins in hockey and grit does not.

In the playoffs? Simply untrue as evidenced by many, many Stanley Cup winners. Hell, even our '94 Cup champs brought in "grit" and jettisoned skill to win a Cup. A deep roster, center depth, veteran(s) on defense also don't hurt either.

And I'm not talking Reaves grit. I'm talking Goodrow, Hunt, Blais, Trouba, etc... Grit with skill is ideal.

 

[New York RKY]

In the playoffs? Simply untrue as evidenced by many, many Stanley Cup winners. Hell, even our '94 Cup champs brought in "grit" and jettisoned skill to win a Cup. A deep roster, center depth, veteran(s) on defense also don't hurt either.

And I'm not talking Reaves grit. I'm talking Goodrow, Hunt, Blais, Trouba, etc... Grit with skill is ideal.

One of these is not like the other.

 

[mas0764]

In the playoffs? Simply untrue as evidenced by many, many Stanley Cup winners. Hell, even our '94 Cup champs brought in "grit" and jettisoned skill to win a Cup. A deep roster, center depth, veteran(s) on defense also don't hurt either.

And I'm not talking Reaves grit. I'm talking Goodrow, Hunt, Blais, Trouba, etc... Grit with skill is ideal.

But we're not talking about Goodrow and Trouba. Or Schneider. Players who have size and grit and skill.

Hunt is on par with Reaves. And Blais can't show anything. He's a career high 15 point player. He falls into the "nothing," category also. Where this board gets the idea that he's something more than an average fourth liner is shocking. Career high 15 points and he's a 26 year old RFA next season. Oh, it's cause he's always injured? THEN WHY DID WE TRADE BUCH FOR HIM?

We went out of our way to acquire not 1, not 2, but 3 players who are big zeros other than their grit.

It was wrongheaded. Drury did the wrong thing this offseason with regard to that, and the Buch trade.

Goodrow was a good acquisition. Gallant was a good hire. No one has ever said otherwise on those things. Yet somehow I'm supposed to "take the L."

Uh... no.

Pure skill combined with gritty skill (think Tom Wilson) wins in the playoffs.

Grit by itself doesn't win anything, anytime.

 

[McSauer]

One of these is not like the other.

Prob two--Blais and Hunt are synonymous IMHO. Bottom line grit, nothing more really.

 

[MrAlmost]

It's still a team game and every player on your roster will not be Tom Wilson. (A unicorn)

You need skill players, gritty players and ones in between to win. That's what the team has now. It is a well constructed team.

 

[mas0764]

It's still a team game and every player on your roster will not be Tom Wilson. (A unicorn)

No, but you have your skill guys like Zibanejad, Panarin, and Fox.

Then you have your guys who are in the Wilson mold or will be some day - guys with skill and can be tough to play against like Kreider, Lafreniere, Kakko, and Chytil who all have size.

Then you have your Rooneys and Goodrows who are basically defense and grit only.

You don't need three more grit only guys. You need more skill guys.

We saw this year when we had a couple key injuries that we were icing a team of AHLers who can't play. That's what happens when you have too many AHL grit guys like Reaves and Hunt.

You need skill players, gritty players and ones in between to win. That's what the team has now. It is a well constructed team.

It wasn't, for the vast majority of the year, until they added three guys with either skill or speed at the trade deadline.

Copp is a nice example of a guy who has both. Vatrano is mostly skill. Motte is mostly speed.

Obviously these guys were available for cheaper than they would have been in the prior offseason due to expiring contracts, but a properly constructed roster would have been focusing on adding these skilled players all along.

I can buy that we didn't have the resources to add big name skill players to long term contracts because of the pending cap situation, but then why was Buch dealt for more grit over skill?

It's a simple answer. The team, led by Drury, overreacted to the grit mandate which was possibly implemented by an owner who doesn't know much of anything about modern hockey.

The pendulum has to swing back this offseason. We need two young skilled centers. It's ok if they are Lundell types who are ALSO hard to play against, but they have to have a top-6 caliber offensive skillset too.

The team DIDN'T have a good offseason. It had a mediocre to poor one. It was horrific most of the year at 5v5 and had little chance against contenders, was carried all season by the out-of-their-mind play by stars such as Shesterkin, Kreider, Panarin and Fox, and then was rescued by a trade deadline in which players with some skill and scoring ability were finally added.

 

[Ned Braden]

But we're not talking about Goodrow and Trouba. Or Schneider. Players who have size and grit and skill.

Hunt is on par with Reaves. And Blais can't show anything. He's a career high 15 point player. He falls into the "nothing," category also. Where this board gets the idea that he's something more than an average fourth liner is shocking. Career high 15 points and he's a 26 year old RFA next season. Oh, it's cause he's always injured? THEN WHY DID WE TRADE BUCH FOR HIM?

We went out of our way to acquire not 1, not 2, but 3 players who are big zeros other than their grit.

It was wrongheaded. Drury did the wrong thing this offseason with regard to that, and the Buch trade.

Goodrow was a good acquisition. Gallant was a good hire. No one has ever said otherwise on those things. Yet somehow I'm supposed to "take the L."

Uh... no.

Pure skill combined with gritty skill (think Tom Wilson) wins in the playoffs.

Grit by itself doesn't win anything, anytime.

No, we are talking about Goodrow, along with Blais, Reaves, and Hunt. It was all of these moves in totality that sent a message to the team that Drury had something else in mind for roster construction relative to grit. And Blais did add something to this season in that he led that charge with grit and some skill early in the season...and that hitting attitude stayed for the season, leading to players like trouba and even Gautier being more physical this year. And yes Reaves and Hunt obviously helped with that, even they are now better positioned as fourth line players (where Drury envisioned them all along).

Look I get your philosophy. You value skill over grit always. I think they are both needed and obviously so does Drury. The problem for you is...you were wrong. This team is now balanced and clearly 100% better for it. You should just admit that.

 

[mas0764]

No, we are talking about Goodrow

I'm not. I said earlier Goodrow was a shrewd addition.

Next.

along with Blais, Reaves, and Hunt. It was all of these moves in totality that sent a message to the team that Drury had something else in mind for roster construction relative to grit.

That message was misguided and those three players are contributing little to nothing right now. Is your argument that it was the right move to get these players so we could be sucking at 5v5 and have to replace them all at the trade deadline with skill like Vatrano? Interesting.

And Blais did add something to this season in that he led that charge with grit and some skill early in the season...and that hitting attitude stayed for the season

This is a fantasy narrative.

A player who played 14 games, and has a career high of 15 points, did not set any tone for the season from the fourth line. The canonization of this guy because we traded a 26 year old first line RW for him is hilarious. The lengths homers will go to, to avoid calling that trade a loss, it's something else. That trade was a loss.

The coach largely set the tone, and not much else did.

And yes Reaves and Hunt obviously helped with that, even they are now better positioned as fourth line players (where Drury envisioned them all along).

Reaves adds nothing on the ice. He may be fine as a locker room presence, in which case we could have done away with the Hunt, McKegg and Blais additions and had Reaves as our 13th forward.

Look I get your philosophy. You value skill over grit always. I think they are both needed and obviously so does Drury. The problem for you is...you were wrong. This team is now balanced and clearly 100% better for it. You should just admit that.

The team is now balanced that it has added skilled players in Copp and Vatrano. Which, going back to it, I gave Drury a B for the deadline when he added those guys for non-exorbitant costs.

But the team sucked at 5v5 when it was icing all that grit that had not enough skill.

The team over-focused on grit in the offseason at talent's expense and it showed. The problem was.... Drury was wrong (and so were you). The two things he was the wrongest about was the Buch trade for nothing and his handling of the Kravtsov situation, both of which resulted in a precipitous and damaging loss of current and long term skill for the franchise. Hopefully he can rectify the Kravtsov situation this offseason, in which case his grade in my book will improve, and hopefully he can win some trades this offseason, at which point I'll chalk up the Buch deal to "can't win 'em all." But right now he has a track record that skews more negative than positive.

Take notes because we need two young centers with skill this offseason. It's ok if they have grit too, but it's not ok to add more grit with no skill. The team needs more skill at this point and it needs to shed some of it's non-skilled grit. That's my philosophy.... not to employ too many "grit" guys who don't make any difference.

 

[Ned Braden]

I'm not. I said earlier Goodrow was a shrewd addition.

Next.



That message was misguided and those three players are contributing little to nothing right now. Is your argument that it was the right move to get these players so we could be sucking at 5v5 and have to replace them all at the trade deadline with skill like Vatrano? Interesting.



This is a fantasy narrative.

A player who played 14 games, and has a career high of 15 points, did not set any tone for the season from the fourth line. The canonization of this guy because we traded a 26 year old first line RW for him is hilarious. The lengths homers will go to, to avoid calling that trade a loss, it's something else. That trade was a loss.

The coach largely set the tone, and not much else did.



Reaves adds nothing on the ice. He may be fine as a locker room presence, in which case we could have done away with the Hunt, McKegg and Blais additions and had Reaves as our 13th forward.



The team is now balanced that it has added skilled players in Copp and Vatrano. Which, going back to it, I gave Drury a B for the deadline when he added those guys for non-exorbitant costs.

But the team sucked at 5v5 when it was icing all that grit that had not enough skill.

The team over-focused on grit in the offseason at talent's expense and it showed. Drury was wrong. The two things he was the wrongest about was the Buch trade for nothing and his handling of the Kravtsov situation, both of which resulted in a precipitous and damaging loss of current and long term skill for the franchise. Hopefully he can rectify the Kravtsov situation this offseason, in which case his grade in my book will improve, and hopefully he can win some trades this offseason, at which point I'll chalk up the Buch deal to "can't win 'em all." But right now he has a track record that skews more negative than positive.

Take notes because we need two young centers with skill this offseason. It's ok if they have grit too, but it's not ok to add more grit with no skill. The team needs more skill at this point and it needs to shed some of it's non-skilled grit. That's my philosophy.... not to employ too many "grit" guys who don't make any difference.

That's a lot of words. You gave Drury an F grade for the off-season and a B for the deadline. Pretty amazing that combined C-/D+ grade has resulted in the 5th best record in hockey. Perhaps all those words are grounded in some sort of emotion around Buch and Kravstov, and not really reality?

 

[mas0764]

That's a lot of words.

It's a complex topic that simple minded cliches can't encapsulate.

You gave Drury an F grade for the off-season and a B for the deadline. Pretty amazing that combined C-/D+ grade has resulted in the 5th best record in hockey.

You would be wise not to think of it as a "combined" grade.

The point is that Drury was wrong with his approach this offseason. Unacceptably wrong. Some grit is ok. Good, even, but mostly when it's in the form of grit that can also play with skill like Tom Wilson, Anton Lundell, etc. Drury went overboard with too many grit players who are big fat nothings (again, possibly at the prompting of a know-nothing owner, granted).

The Buch trade was exhibit A. The Kravtsov fiasco was exhibit B. They placed too much of an emphasis on grit and not enough on skill.

(Not to rehash all this, but I will reiterate that the reason Kravtsov didn't earn a spot in camp is because they didn't make one for him. They said "You didn't win a spot in the top 6 skill spots, so either win a grit spot or go to the AHL. Oh, you can't out-check Sammy Blais? That's too bad, enjoy Hartford, we'll call you up when there's a spot." Kravtsov was a better option as a skill player; they just said they wanted someone who was a better option as a grit player and that wasn't Kravtsov. If their approach had been to emphasize skill over grit, and to create a third scoring line, Kravtsov makes the team out of camp).

The team has the 5th best record in hockey not because of Reaves, Hunt, McKegg, or Blais. And largely not because of Goodrow.

It's mostly here because of all the skill it has. You know, Fox, Shesterkin, Panarin, Zibanejad, and Kreider going off for 50 goals. If you think we are where we are today because of Sammy Blais, Ryan Reaves, and Dryden Hunt, then you aren't understanding what you are watching three nights a week.

Perhaps all those words are grounded in some sort of emotion around Buch and Kravstov, and not really reality?

I mean, I was fighting with other homer posters a year or two earlier about how we should trade Buch. So I don't think that's it.

I want to win. It's just that I have an opinion that my way is right (as well as statistical evidence that supports it).

 

[MrAlmost]

No, but you have your skill guys like Zibanejad, Panarin, and Fox.

Then you have your guys who are in the Wilson mold or will be some day - guys with skill and can be tough to play against like Kreider, Lafreniere, Kakko, and Chytil who all have size.

Then you have your Rooneys and Goodrows who are basically defense and grit only.

You don't need three more grit only guys. You need more skill guys.

We saw this year when we had a couple key injuries that we were icing a team of AHLers who can't play. That's what happens when you have too many AHL grit guys like Reaves and Hunt.



It wasn't, for the vast majority of the year, until they added three guys with either skill or speed at the trade deadline.

Copp is a nice example of a guy who has both. Vatrano is mostly skill. Motte is mostly speed.

Obviously these guys were available for cheaper than they would have been in the prior offseason due to expiring contracts, but a properly constructed roster would have been focusing on adding these skilled players all along.

I can buy that we didn't have the resources to add big name skill players to long term contracts because of the pending cap situation, but then why was Buch dealt for more grit over skill?

It's a simple answer. The team, led by Drury, overreacted to the grit mandate which was possibly implemented by an owner who doesn't know much of anything about modern hockey.

The pendulum has to swing back this offseason. We need two young skilled centers. It's ok if they are Lundell types who are ALSO hard to play against, but they have to have a top-6 caliber offensive skillset too.

The team DIDN'T have a good offseason. It had a mediocre to poor one. It was horrific most of the year at 5v5 and had little chance against contenders, was carried all season by the out-of-their-mind play by stars such as Shesterkin, Kreider, Panarin and Fox, and then was rescued by a trade deadline in which players with some skill and scoring ability were finally added.

I understand what you are trying to say. However, I don't think you are assessing the characteristics of players fairly based on preconceived conclusions about the necessity and/or long-term impact of the acquisitions. The team has improved as it has gotten tougher and older.

Kakko and Chytil, despite their size, are not gritty. I don't think Chytil has a hit all year and has lost almost every down low battle he has accidentally found himself in. Laf isn't either at the moment since he doesn't have enough of an effect on the game one way or another, but he has potential. Z, on the other hand, is a skilled and gritty player. Motte is not just speed, he is a gritty player. Vatrano is also a gritty player, plays in tight and has a great shot. "Tough" players aren't just fighters like Reaves. They are players willing to go to the hard areas of the ice; Half wall, corners, net front; and play the game there, engage, and win. We had little of that all year cause even with the addition of tougher players in the offseason, we still didn't have enough of them at the NHL level and we were still simply too young.

Our team had injuries and their lack of depth brought in AHL players to fill those holes. That doesn't mean the team brought in a bunch of gritty players. AHLer does not automatically equal gritty player. They simply were not NHL level players.

Copp is a player that can do both, and if this team really needed more skill then grit, why is it a unanimous decision among all Ranger fans that Copp, the gritty player, should be kept over Strome, the non-gritty player? Strome has out produced Copp every year. And not just as a Ranger, literally every year they have both been in the league. Surely he is the keeper right? Well, of course, we know that isn't the case, cause we don't need skill only, we need grit.

Looking back at the Cup winners since 2010, there is no team that won with more skill players and less grit. The majority of the lineups are tough, capable NHLers. That is what we added. There are even 3 to 4 teams you can argue that didn't have a skill-only player in the lineup that would be akin to like a Panarin. Now this ins't irrefutable evidence, but look at Calgary and Minnesota. They are the 2 teams that flat out beat us the worst all season and they are a mixture of skill and toughness that fairs well in the playoffs when scoring goes down, the game is played tighter and more often in the corners and net front.

Everyone wants a young, talented, cost controlled, center, but the reality is that that player is not available without issues or question marks, usually. Right now, there are none that look to be shaking loose. That will likely not change until next season since all the young, under-performing teams look to be comfortable with their young centers. Currently, no drama around the league so to speak. Lundell is not available.

 

[Ola]

I understand what you are trying to say. However, I don't think you are assessing the characteristics of players fairly based on preconceived conclusions about the necessity and/or long-term impact of the acquisitions. The team has improved as it has gotten tougher and older.

Kakko and Chytil, despite their size, are not gritty. I don't think Chytil has a hit all year and has lost almost every down low battle he has accidentally found himself in. Laf isn't either at the moment since he doesn't have enough of an effect on the game one way or another, but he has potential. Z, on the other hand, is a skilled and gritty player. Motte is not just speed, he is a gritty player. Vatrano is also a gritty player, plays in tight and has a great shot. "Tough" players aren't just fighters like Reaves. They are players willing to go to the hard areas of the ice; Half wall, corners, net front; and play the game there, engage, and win. We had little of that all year cause even with the addition of tougher players in the offseason, we still didn't have enough of them at the NHL level and we were still simply too young.

Our team had injuries and their lack of depth brought in AHL players to fill those holes. That doesn't mean the team brought in a bunch of gritty players. AHLer does not automatically equal gritty player. They simply were not NHL level players.

Copp is a player that can do both, and if this team really needed more skill then grit, why is it a unanimous decision among all Ranger fans that Copp, the gritty player, should be kept over Strome, the non-gritty player? Strome has out produced Copp every year. And not just as a Ranger, literally every year they have both been in the league. Surely he is the keeper right? Well, of course, we know that isn't the case, cause we don't need skill only, we need grit.

Looking back at the Cup winners since 2010, there is no team that won with more skill players and less grit. The majority of the lineups are tough, capable NHLers. That is what we added. There are even 3 to 4 teams you can argue that didn't have a skill-only player in the lineup that would be akin to like a Panarin. Now this ins't irrefutable evidence, but look at Calgary and Minnesota. They are the 2 teams that flat out beat us the worst all season and they are a mixture of skill and toughness that fairs well in the playoffs when scoring goes down, the game is played tighter and more often in the corners and net front.

Everyone wants a young, talented, cost controlled, center, but the reality is that that player is not available without issues or question marks, usually. Right now, there are none that look to be shaking loose. That will likely not change until next season since all the young, under-performing teams look to be comfortable with their young centers. Currently, no drama around the league so to speak. Lundell is not available.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but one thing — and I am not even sure it’s that relevant for how our team is built — but you bring up Minny and their toughness, and how it works in the POs. Most of their toughness comes from the Greenway-JEE-Foligno line, right? That line has 2 goals in the last 11 PO games they played and has basically achieved absolutely nothing for Minny in the POs besides being a huuuuuge net minus for their team.

And it’s really the same with the Islanders Martin-Czaikas-Clutterback line. They haven’t been effective in the POs either.

Somewhere I think it’s easy to project how these type of lines will do in the POs incorrectly. I 100% think that balance is super important and I think you need grit and depth. But speed is more than anything — without any doubt — what has worked in the POs in the last couple of years.

 

[duhmetreE]

I understand what you are trying to say. However, I don't think you are assessing the characteristics of players fairly based on preconceived conclusions about the necessity and/or long-term impact of the acquisitions. The team has improved as it has gotten tougher and older.

Kakko and Chytil, despite their size, are not gritty. I don't think Chytil has a hit all year and has lost almost every down low battle he has accidentally found himself in. Laf isn't either at the moment since he doesn't have enough of an effect on the game one way or another, but he has potential. Z, on the other hand, is a skilled and gritty player. Motte is not just speed, he is a gritty player. Vatrano is also a gritty player, plays in tight and has a great shot. "Tough" players aren't just fighters like Reaves. They are players willing to go to the hard areas of the ice; Half wall, corners, net front; and play the game there, engage, and win. We had little of that all year cause even with the addition of tougher players in the offseason, we still didn't have enough of them at the NHL level and we were still simply too young.

Our team had injuries and their lack of depth brought in AHL players to fill those holes. That doesn't mean the team brought in a bunch of gritty players. AHLer does not automatically equal gritty player. They simply were not NHL level players.

Copp is a player that can do both, and if this team really needed more skill then grit, why is it a unanimous decision among all Ranger fans that Copp, the gritty player, should be kept over Strome, the non-gritty player? Strome has out produced Copp every year. And not just as a Ranger, literally every year they have both been in the league. Surely he is the keeper right? Well, of course, we know that isn't the case, cause we don't need skill only, we need grit.

Looking back at the Cup winners since 2010, there is no team that won with more skill players and less grit. The majority of the lineups are tough, capable NHLers. That is what we added. There are even 3 to 4 teams you can argue that didn't have a skill-only player in the lineup that would be akin to like a Panarin. Now this ins't irrefutable evidence, but look at Calgary and Minnesota. They are the 2 teams that flat out beat us the worst all season and they are a mixture of skill and toughness that fairs well in the playoffs when scoring goes down, the game is played tighter and more often in the corners and net front.

Everyone wants a young, talented, cost controlled, center, but the reality is that that player is not available without issues or question marks, usually. Right now, there are none that look to be shaking loose. That will likely not change until next season since all the young, under-performing teams look to be comfortable with their young centers. Currently, no drama around the league so to speak. Lundell is not available.

I agree with everything but Panarin. He has a gritty aspect to his game and excels greatly in it.... when he chooses to.

Since Strome went out and Copp was acquired, we've seen that player.

 

[duhmetreE]

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but one thing — and I am not even sure it’s that relevant for how our team is built — but you bring up Minny and their toughness, and how it works in the POs. Most of their toughness comes from the Greenway-JEE-Foligno line, right? That line has 2 goals in the last 11 PO games they played and has basically achieved absolutely nothing for Minny in the POs besides being a huuuuuge net minus for their team.

And it’s really the same with the Islanders Martin-Czaikas-Clutterback line. They haven’t been effective in the POs either.

Somewhere I think it’s easy to project how these type of lines will do in the POs incorrectly. I 100% think that balance is super important and I think you need grit and depth. But speed is more than anything — without any doubt — what has worked in the POs in the last couple of years.

How did you come to that conclusion? Their GF% and xG% is great.

That line obliterated our Zibs line to the point Gallant putting Reaves on it. I repeat... Gallant took Laffy off that line and inserted Ryan Reaves. There's more to the game than just scoring goals. Both games against them, that line turned the tide and led their team to victory.

IMO that's a phenomenal 3rd line. Arguably the best in hockey.

 

[Savant]

He doesn’t really fit well with anyone on the team. But I guess he also has a revolving door of wingers so hard to tell.

Chytil I could weirdly trust with Kreider and Zibanejad.

If there is one player that doesn’t fit well with anyone on the team, unfortunately it’s Kakko. To a lesser extent Lafreniere.

 

[Lays]

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

The salary cap is a myth. Just have players get "injured" in a rotation and you can be $10MM over the cap all season.

 

[LokiDog]

At this point, it very much may be a reality that one of Kakko/Laf needs to go to compliment the window that is going to exist for the next 2-3 years with this core. You can say there’s “two windows” but that assumption is contingent upon a second window existing when Laf and KK are in their primes. That window may never come. The window that exists right now with Zib, Panarin, Kreider, Fox, Trouba, Miller, Shesty, etc. is real. It’s here. None of Laf, Chytil or Kakko are contributing to it. Assuming there will be a second window led by Laf, Kakko, Chytil, Fox, Miller, Schneider, Shesty is a MASSIVE leap of faith right now. Schneider filling Trouba’s shoes seems likely, but those three kids filling the shoes of Kreider, Mika and Panarin is extremely unlikely.

Meanwhile, they have value now. If we can add quality players who are under contract you have to listen to offers. As you see with Vatrano, you can find a winger to compliment your top six. Can we get a young center or stud LD out of KK or Laf? Those are harder to find. Our prized young assets happen to play the least valuable positions. If Laf could land us a youngish cost controlled center and we had 3-4 deep playoff runs over the next 4 years… especially if we won a Cup… I don’t really know if I’d care whether Laf became a 70+ point winger for someone else one day. And I’m comfortable enough with the gamble that he won’t.

 

[Circus86]

The salary cap is a myth. Just have players get "injured" in a rotation and you can be $10MM over the cap all season.

We should just do the same next season. Re-sign Coop, Vatrano, Motte and some other depth guys like Blais. Add another 2C. Just rotate them in and out of LTIR next season. No one seems to care about it anyway.

 

[EdJovanovski]

I could’ve sworn I saw that exact quote not long after it happened lol

 

[TheBloodyNine]

He wasn't wrong!

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

I remember Tony and Smith being absolutely brutal that game, to the point that everything was ending up in an odd man rush against them and Quinn had to shorten the bench.

That season was haunted. The roster had/has a lot of smart-seeming guys on it, ten years from now I'm sure I'd be happy to buy a copy of 2021: What the f*** Even Was That by Chris Kreider or Ryan Strome

 

[NYR Viper]

At this point, it very much may be a reality that one of Kakko/Laf needs to go to compliment the window that is going to exist for the next 2-3 years with this core. You can say there’s “two windows” but that assumption is contingent upon a second window existing when Laf and KK are in their primes. That window may never come. The window that exists right now with Zib, Panarin, Kreider, Fox, Trouba, Miller, Shesty, etc. is real. It’s here. None of Laf, Chytil or Kakko are contributing to it. Assuming there will be a second window led by Laf, Kakko, Chytil, Fox, Miller, Schneider, Shesty is a MASSIVE leap of faith right now. Schneider filling Trouba’s shoes seems likely, but those three kids filling the shoes of Kreider, Mika and Panarin is extremely unlikely.

Meanwhile, they have value now. If we can add quality players who are under contract you have to listen to offers. As you see with Vatrano, you can find a winger to compliment your top six. Can we get a young center or stud LD out of KK or Laf? Those are harder to find. Our prized young assets happen to play the least valuable positions. If Laf could land us a youngish cost controlled center and we had 3-4 deep playoff runs over the next 4 years… especially if we won a Cup… I don’t really know if I’d care whether Laf became a 70+ point winger for someone else one day. And I’m comfortable enough with the gamble that he won’t.

The simple answer is trade Chytil who doesn’t appear to be a center and often appears to have a fairly low hockey IQ. Play Kaako and Laf with a veteran or two and get them some real PP time.

 

[Go Rangers]

Cut the homer nonsense out. People aren't homers for enjoying good season, and a rebuild that by every objective measure has been successful regardless of the fantasy asset management league you play in your head.

Drury did a good job. You were wrong. Take the L like the man said and move on.

I would say that Drury surpassed my expectations. So far it’s been real good.

 

[RangerBoy]

Strome has 48 points in 66 games playing with Panarin. Strome plays on the first unit PP. 48 points. That's it. Strome was better the two previous seasons.