Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXVI

[DanielBrassard]

Up until his most recent injury, I was firmly in the ‘don’t trade’ group. Now, I’d like to re-sign him, but won’t be shocked to see him get dealt. I just want the situation resolved by the draft.

Basically where I am as well.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

He had 52 points this season while playing with a close to ppg center. He's a good player. He's not someone I'm overly comfortable paying from age 29-36

To be fair, I'm pretty sure you could make the argument that he had a lot to do with Zibanejad's success this season. They worked well together, why break that up if you don't have to? I don't see his game dipping dramatically in the next five years. He's in crazy shape and, at worst, you don't forget how to screen goalies on the PP. I'm not saying you sign the guy to an albatross of a contract (7x6 isn't), I'm not even saying don't trade him but moving him for a mid first round pick is terrible. You end up spending the next five years looking to replace what you traded away. Kreider for Trouba fine. I get that, a deal like that make sense. But trading everyone over twenty-whatever for prospects is a dumb way to run a franchise. Maybe Kakko makes him expendable, we'll see.

 

[Off Sides]

At some point those who want to sign free agents and those who do not will find common ground, I'd guess that to be in the 2021 and 2022 off-seasons.

Yet should they continue this course through next draft and end up in good draft position again, I don't even know if they'll need any by that point.

They could hit on their conditional picks, and/or later rounders too. Just yesterday it was pretty difficult to see them drafting at #2 in this draft.

The process is working, they received some luck too, that was always going to be a part of this. Do we have to assume they are right back to being unlucky?

 

[True Blue]

We don't need him to make an "impact" immediately (though I think he's good for 45-50 points). Why do you think he'd develop better in Finland or the dumpster fire that is Hartford than playing on Mika's RW?

I hope that he is good for 45-40 points. I have my doubts as to the likelihood of an 18 year old doing that.

And didn't we have discussions on why some vets are needed to shield kids from being in roles that they are not ready for? You are going to thrust an 18 year old on the top line, ask him to go against the opposition's top forwards and top defensemen? You sure that such a trial by fire is the right long-term answer?

Yeah, I would have no problem if he plaid another year in Finland. Or if they can get Hartford coaching straightened out, a year in AHL. Or until he shows that he is ready.

 

[haveandare]

What's the consensus on if getting 2OA should tip the scales in UFA? I'm still very skeptical of Karlsson working out long term and a lot less skeptical of Panarin. IMO the idea of signing Panarin is more palatable now. This team isn't going to suck to this same level next year with or without him in my opinion.

 

[True Blue]

The very same scouts that you were hootin' and hollering about a page back pretty much unanimously say that Kakko is ready to play in the NHL. Can't have it both ways.

It is one thing to say that someone has the potential, and another to throw someone in off the deep end.

How many times did the debates come up on here that a Howden or Chytil or Andersoon were not ready for the NHL? And now this 17 year old is? I get that he is much, much more talented. I am just hesitant and frankly in no hurry to toss him in and declare him Mika's linemate.

 

[True Blue]

What would be the case for not having Kakko in the NHL next year?

I outlined in another post, but will give you my response. This place was littered with posts how Howden, Chytil, Andersson were not ready for most of the year. I get that this kid is much more talented, but am not ready to annoit him ready for the top two lines. Don't want to see him develop on the 4th line. And other players I want to see playing on third. What is the need to rush him? I for one, am not in a hurry for next year. But I only speak for myself.

 

[NYR Viper]

There is something to be said about young players watching and learning from high end talent. Panarin is just that and he is pretty young for a UFA. Guys like Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Kravtsov, Kaako and others probably should have a couple of players to both be insulated by and learn from

 

[Matt4776]

Pittsburgh/Chicago

Malkin and Crosby were 23/24 IIRC and they were generational players. I love Kakko, but I don't know if he's going to be generational. Franchise player, sure.

Kane/Toews were 22/23. Also had a 27 year old stud #1 d-man. Who is ours? Will Kakko be as good as Kane? Doubtful.

Still both above 18-21, despite getting generational players.

 

[Fireonk]

There is something to be said about young players watching and learning from high end talent. Panarin is just that and he is pretty young for a UFA. Guys like Chytil, Andersson, Howden, Kravtsov, Kaako and others probably should have a couple of players to both be insulated by and learn from

Not fully on the Panarin train. Don't hate it, just not sure hes the best move for the long term.

However, assuming its Kakko coming aboard, this kind of makes me want to bring Zucc back for a couple years (if he doesn't re-sign with Dallas.) Think he would be a good fit with Kakko.

 

[True Blue]

Correct. Look up the past drafts. Sports Illustrated had an article last year on odds per position. Since we were drafting at #9 at the time, I remember that the odds of a #9 were 50% of being a 4th liner or worse. Even by #4 overall, the odds were something fairly high.

You are placing your bet on where someone is taken? So if Byram was taken 3OA, then you would sign off on him being a top line defenseman?

Math is not your strong suit obviously. A #1 pick has something like a 95% chance of being top-6 and pretty great odds of being a star. We can plug in a guy on the first line/pair when he has only a 10-20% chance of not getting there. It's different when a kid, based on his draft position, has greater odds of being a 4th liner than 1st liner, yet you plug him in as a first liner and start talking about retraining others into a different position.

Same comment as above.

No, just no. A 90% chance is not the same as a 20-30% chance.

Your response is solely based on where you believe Byram will go. By your logic, if a team decides that he is good enough for 3rd pick, now he is suddenly good enough in your eyes.

It's not my logic, it is the basic ability to review past draft results.

Again, seems to be that you takings raw stats and then ignoring beauty is in the eye of the beholder aspect.

No doubt you do. I'm raining on your Cup victory parade. Here's a celebration of our 6 Cups in a row because all or almost all our prospects will hit their ceiling, and then I tell you that a #9 overall pick has a 50% chance of being a 4th liner or a minor leaguer, and that the average draft has only 16-17 players who get 10 year NHL careers (750+ games), which includes a ton of 4th liners like our own Malhotra and Dominic Moore.

What is this gibberish? What Cup parade? Where do you see me touting 6 Cups?

Math, dude, math. Good scouts increase your odds, but they dont guarantee anything. A second round pick has a 20% shot of playing in the NHL even on the 4th line. Great scouts may increase that to 30-35%, but the odds are still stacked against them, and a bunch of those 35% will still be Nieves types without much trade value. Bad scouts may reduce the odds to 10%. Long term, 10% vs 30% makes a huge difference, but either way the new draftee in the second round can't be plugged in as a future NHLer.

Math is good. Math is right. Math also dictates that the draft is absolutely NO crapshoot. That is why picking higher is better than picking better. The defnition of crapshoot is something that has a completely unpredictable outcome. You cannot possibly quote percentages of how taking players higher is better than picking them lower and then state that the draft is a crapshoot. Pretty big fallacy in your argument. So having more picks in the top rounds is better. Again, that goes against the whole thing being completely unpredictable. Then you get scouting involved. Crapshoot is BS

 

[Off Sides]

What's the consensus on if getting 2OA should tip the scales in UFA? I'm still very skeptical of Karlsson working out long term and a lot less skeptical of Panarin. IMO the idea of signing Panarin is more palatable now. This team isn't going to suck to this same level next year with or without him in my opinion.

Consensus?

I think they are better off just continuing to do what they are, let the chips fall where they may. If they are decent next year that is great improvement, if they are lottery bound again, maybe they do well there.

They have some time to wait for lesser good contracts to clear one way or another, they don't know what their goalie situation turns into, and many of their prospects will either still be unsigned, just have been signed or will be entering their rookie or sophomore NHL years. They can give the KHLers should they come over a chance to acclimate too.

I am not sure I really see the hurry for them to try to change their whole dynamic. I;d like to see them go minimalist, just try to get a couple cheaper shorter term vets to back-fill, mentor, shelter.

 

[SA16]

Which team is taking on 9m of cap space while giving up top young assets for someone that isn't a top No 1 D anymore? That sounds a bit absurd to be honest.

He is a 1D.

 

[SA16]

The 28 year old guy has some injury concerns, plays a very heavy north-south game, and there is absolutely no guarantee he will be the same player at 31, never-mind 33+ when this team is a serious SCF contender (if all breaks right).

It's natural to develop an affinity for home grown guys. Kreider is my favorite Ranger. As you can see by my join date, Kreider was the first Rangers 1st rounder I witnessed as a die-hard fan. First 1st rounder I witnessed as a fan that followed the prospects of the hockey world. I own his home and away jersey.

But, we have to be realistic. If Kreider was a non-Ranger UFA, would you sign him to a 7x7 contract this offseason given the state of the team? I wouldn't. And, we have a chance to add a mid-1st round pick (not a deadline first which often ends up being in the mid-high 20s) for him.

If Kreider was not a Ranger nobody would want him at that contract. The same way if Panarin was a Ranger now nobody would went to let him go. Lots of bias.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Kreider and Jets first for Buffalo or Oilers 1st. Get it done. I’ll overpay a bit. The rebuild will have all the pieces it needs after this draft to really kick it in gear.

I’m done with Kreider’s disappearing act 5x each season and dont want the kids to take after that.

 

[Vitto79]

If they get a first and a young player in th league now they could move Kreider but argh it Would pain me lol

 

[Beacon]

You are placing your bet on where someone is taken? So if Byram was taken 3OA, then you would sign off on him being a top line defenseman?

That's obviously not exactly true, but generally speaking, a guy grabbed at #3 has much higher odds than a guy passed on until hes at #8. When you have multiple armies of scouts passing on a kid, there's usually a reason. Of course some drafts are exceptional, but 2019 isn't one of them. If Byram drops, there is a reason. It doesn't mean he wont be good. Leetch dropped to #9 because he was weak and terrible defensively on his draft day. He fixed those problems later, but there were real reasons he didnt go #1 overall in his draft.

Your response is solely based on where you believe Byram will go.

I suspect armies of professional scouts who do this full time know more than guys online who all read the same few scouting reports and maybe saw some clips.

By your logic, if a team decides that he is good enough for 3rd pick, now he is suddenly good enough in your eyes.

Sometimes teams make mistakes and reach when they shouldn't. But if 7-10 teams pass on a kid, odds are theres a reason for it.

Btw, most 3 overall draftees do NOT become first line/pair players.

 

[Matt4776]

If Kreider was not a Ranger nobody would want him at that contract. The same way if Panarin was a Ranger now nobody would went to let him go. Lots of bias.

I think more people would want to keep him than currently want to sign him, but let's not forget we did trade our #1 27-year-old stud defenseman for futures just last year. Most of this community (including myself) was on board.

 

[NYR Viper]

There are a couple of young players who I am curious to know what the team thinks of for next year. Based on what we see right now, there is quite the log jam pretty much everywhere in the line-up:

Ville Meskanen
Vinni Lettieri
Chris Bigras
Tim Gettinger
Ryan Lindgren
Yegor Rykov
Patrick Newell
Libor Hajek
Gabriel Fontaine

 

[apoptygma]

Everything that comes out of this rebuild is going to get more and more cap expensive over a short span of years.

The better the rebuild goes, the more expensive some of that will become.

If the parts becaomes expensive should mean that they also are worth a lot in an eventual trade. Leafs fan can bitch about Nylanders contract and cap hit, but at the end of the day he is a good player, and can be traded for cheaper but still good parts and picks.

 

[Ghost of jas]

What's the consensus on if getting 2OA should tip the scales in UFA? I'm still very skeptical of Karlsson working out long term and a lot less skeptical of Panarin. IMO the idea of signing Panarin is more palatable now. This team isn't going to suck to this same level next year with or without him in my opinion.

It still remains unpalatable to me. I think it changes the dynamic of the rebuild and not necessarily for the better. It becomes not wanting to waste Panarin’s prime and leads to bad long-term decisions. It’s been 13 months since the letter. This process is still so far from being complete.

 

[apoptygma]

What's the consensus on if getting 2OA should tip the scales in UFA? I'm still very skeptical of Karlsson working out long term and a lot less skeptical of Panarin. IMO the idea of signing Panarin is more palatable now. This team isn't going to suck to this same level next year with or without him in my opinion.

Agree, I think they will be even worse. No Hayes or Zuccarello at all. Maybe even not a Kreider. Staal, Smith, Shattenkirk and Lundqkvist a year older. Strome most likely will be back to his normal shooting %. Doubtfull Kakko will be one of the very few 18 year old rookies that brak 40 points.
The X factor is the young forwards, will any of them take a big leap in production. Some do at their age, but most just takes smaller leaps. When looking at all the players taking a huge leap in production this year leauge wide, most are 22-25 year old when they "figure" it out. I think we might see a 60 point season from Buch next year if this trend continue.

 

[Rangers in 7]

What's the consensus on if getting 2OA should tip the scales in UFA? I'm still very skeptical of Karlsson working out long term and a lot less skeptical of Panarin. IMO the idea of signing Panarin is more palatable now. This team isn't going to suck to this same level next year with or without him in my opinion.

with or without panarin we are a lottery team next season, my guess is they still finish bottom 6 next season, that could include breakout years for buch, ada, and a few others....it still wont matter

 

[effen]

My predictions:
- They trade Kreider at the draft
- BIG picks package to move up in the top 10. Definitely overpay. Board will debate for months.
- Staal, Smith, and Shattenkirk are all on the roster opening night
- Georgiev stays (moving him is insane, who gives a shit about Shesty right now)

Slow and steady for another year.

Rangers won't get serious about accelerating anything until they either develop, sign, or trade for a 2nd line C. That dude doesn't exist on the roster right now.

 

[Off Sides]

If the parts becaomes expensive should mean that they also are worth a lot in an eventual trade. Leafs fan can ***** about Nylanders contract and cap hit, but at the end of the day he is a good player, and can be traded for cheaper but still good parts and picks.

Sure, yet all the same had they made... did not make a couple different moves they are not quite in the same cap structure bind they are in and they would have a better chance at keeping their stockpile together.