Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XXXVI

[DialUp]

Fox getting $9m, Zibanejad getting $8m, Panarin getting $11.5

Why aren't we trading them too?

 

[Fitzy]

It should not be some sort of sacrilege to discuss moving on a year early rather than a year late.

It shouldn't be sacrilege, but it is worth a conversation about whether it's a good idea. You're talking about two guys who, while may be eventually replaceable are the de facto co captains of the team.

And that's before we get into the muddy waters of the years where their NMCs turn to NTC's.

I think we can make it work until 2024 when that happens. Kreider and Trouba get 3 seasons to try to bring home the Stanley Cup.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

It’s economics - CK will be moved before the 23/24 season and Trouba before the 24/25 season. Like ‘em both, great guys in the room, important pieces. The only way this doesn’t happen is if we find cheap replacements for a slew of middle income players like Lindgren, Chytil, Goodrow, even Blais. Not to mention Nemeth who is good as gone this off-season.

 

[QJL]

Schneider is not close to replacing what Trouba brings. Trouba is Schneider’s distant ceiling.

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

Schneider is not close to replacing what Trouba brings. Trouba is Schneider’s distant ceiling.

And that is not a bash on Schneider at all. He's playing great. Trouba is just a unicorn that many of us underappreciate.

 

[mas0764]

I think you're overlooking a part of the equation - once you ask the player to waive, the dynamic between the organization and the player dramatically changes - for the worse. There's significant risk in doing so if you expect the player to decline the ask.

But doesn't the decline in relationship increase the odds that the player will want out? I think that's kinda the point, once a player hears that he is not wanted, or at least not wanted in the same role, he will want to go somewhere that he is wanted.

I'm not suggesting the Rangers call up Trouba the minute the season ends and say "Hey bub, you aren't worth your salary, we want you to get the F out, whaddaya say?" But at some point it will become apparent to them that is the case and that conversation will have to be had tactfully with Trouba. That he is worth more to some other team than he is to the Rangers. The day is coming... maybe not this offseason, but as each season passes becomes more and more likely.

And the real discrepancy seems to be that a certain faction wants to iron-clad that date as 2023-2024 when the NMC expires to a limited NTC, where others seem to be saying "What real difference does a year make? Why not after 2022-2023? If a trade could make it worth our while, it makes sense to move on a year early."

Ie, we are talking basically about a difference in timing and when that timing makes sense.

As far as Schneider stepping into Trouba's role - I don't see it. Can you point to what stats you're looking at that bear this out? I mean, I understand that the intangibles don't mean a whole lot to you but I'd like to hear what you're basing that opinion on.

What Trouba brings over Schneider right now is offense and not defense. I mean, these are advanced stat-driven so of course we can nitpick what these things really mean but the fact is Schneider is plain excellent at defense. There's really no debate whatsoever that Schneider is soon going to be able to handle Trouba's defensive responsibilities in a more than adequate fashion. The debate would be whether it's worth keeping Trouba WITH Schneider, but the argument I keep hearing is "we can't move Trouba because we have no one to replace him," which is not true. A better argument would be "we can't move Trouba because we can't replace Schneider on the third pair when Schneider moves up." Certainly you have less proven options for that third pair role but if you are going to drag your feet for clearing up $8m in salary because you can't trust second year players in Nils and Jones or a first year player in Robertson on that third pair, well, that's not really reasonable either. A playoff contender isn't risking everything by playing highly regarded rookies on the third pair, because, uh, look at us doing exactly that with Schneider this very year.

And yes I tend to be skeptical of intangibles because they cannot be measured and are almost basically a personal preference in how much they count. I of course acknowledge that the experience, the body checking impact, and the leadership that Trouba brings is valuable. But because they cannot be measured it's hard to quantify how valuable they are in relation to his actual on-ice defensive play definitely not being worth $8m.

Proponents of those intangibles know this and disingenuously base their arguments almost entirely around these non-quantifiable things as trump cards. "Sure, Schneider is just as good as Trouba, but EXPERIENCE! CASE CLOSED!" Come on. Of course experience is worth something but guess who else is getting some this year? Fox. Lindgren. Miller. There is value to that but it has to be contextualized and that's something that is never acknowledged.... that those values are not priceless and they are not irreplaceable and they are not mandatory when you have other leaders on the team as well (like Panarin, Kreider, Zibanejad, Copp, etc).

Anywhere, here's the stat cards. For good measure I'm throwing in Miller's so you can see his jump from last year to this year as it's reasonable to conclude Schneider also continues to develop along a similar arch (ie, a GSVA of 0.5 - 1.0 is probably reasonable for Schneider next year with an even more positive defensive rating; and again, the deficiency between Schneider and Trouba's overall GSVAs will probably be offensive driving entirely). For comparison last year Miller was -0.2 and this year Schneider is 0.0 pace but 0.2 projection (meaning the model thinks he will still slightly improve).

​

​

​

​

​

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

That was the genesis of this debate. "Why would these players waive?" When they get passed by the kids and the writing is on the wall that they are no longer the in the top 6 of most important players, there's reason there that they MIGHT consider waiving. I'm not saying it's definitely happening tomorrow, but I absolutely could see it happening while they still have NMCs.

You're obsessed with how old these guys are, why? For me it's simple, I want as many good hockey players on the team I root for as possible, regardless of how old they are. I'll let the bean counters figure out the rest. And I will send $100 dollars to the charity of your choice if either of Kreider or Trouba agree to a trade before their NMCs expire.

 

[mas0764]

Schneider is not close to replacing what Trouba brings. Trouba is Schneider’s distant ceiling.

Defensively that's not true.

 

[mas0764]

You're obsessed with how old these guys are, why? For me it's simple, I want as many good hockey players on the team I root for as possible, regardless of how old they are.

Because running a hockey franchise doesn't exist in a single year vacuum. Contracts and future roster construction and trying to win a Cup next year or giving yourself the best odds to win once or more than once in a five year period are all real considerations, real things. Especially in context of how hard it is to win in any single season.

Trouba and Kreider are both soon to decline and their salaries if they are declining actively hurts the NY Rangers franchise ability to win.

These things have to be considered. Trade offs where you lose slightly now but gain way more later are still good, smart moves.

Look at it this way: If you spent 3 seasons making trades where you lose 10% in those years but gain 20% the following three years, you would end up way, way ahead of everyone else in years 3-6. That's the goal, to be way ahead of everyone else.

I like both the players but the models of their impending declines doesn't lie. It's coming. Any one player may defy those odds for a season or two but the models are MOSTLY right because they are based on statistics and generalities. Abiding by them generally is wise.

You'll notice I very rarely cite that we should move on from Panarin despite being a similar age to Kreider. It's because Panarin models to be an elite or first line wing till he's like 35. There's no rush to get out from his contract.

 

[mas0764]

Why aren't we trading them too?

Well for one thing, all three of those players are way better than Kreider and Trouba.

 

[mas0764]

It’s economics - CK will be moved before the 23/24 season and Trouba before the 24/25 season. Like ‘em both, great guys in the room, important pieces. The only way this doesn’t happen is if we find cheap replacements for a slew of middle income players like Lindgren, Chytil, Goodrow, even Blais. Not to mention Nemeth who is good as gone this off-season.

And I'm merely suggesting moving the time frames up a year or so if we find adequate replacements early.

 

[MrAlmost]

If I am reading those charts right, and I couple that with D-zone starts and quality of competition, Trouba is about as far away from Schneider as Schneider is from me.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Clinging to these guys because they are the "leaders," of this team is missing the forest for the trees. These guys are trending down in the near-ish future and they are super expensive. And we have long term options in spades at their positions (LW, defense). Those are our two deepest organizational areas.

Lol, OMG. These guys are playing some of the best hockey of their careers. You think they're gonna just show up to camp next September and forget how to play the game? Kreider is a freak, if Laff worked as hard as he did in the offseason, we'd be golden. Him and Trouba have years of top level hockey in them.

 

[Crease]

Franchise record is 53 wins and 113 points (2014-15). They are currently at 50 and 106, with 5 games remaining.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

I like both the players but the models of their impending declines doesn't lie. It's coming. Any one player may defy those odds for a season or two but the models are MOSTLY right because they are based on statistics and generalities. Abiding by them generally is wise.

You'll notice I very rarely cite that we should move on from Panarin despite being a similar age to Kreider. It's because Panarin models to be an elite or first line wing till he's like 35. There's no rush to get out from his contract.

Who's declining?? What kind of bizarro world are you living in? The mother f***er just scored 50 goals this year.

 

[duhmetreE]

Potential ≠ Reality

 

[mas0764]

It shouldn't be sacrilege, but it is worth a conversation about whether it's a good idea. You're talking about two guys who, while may be eventually replaceable are the de facto co captains of the team.

And that's before we get into the muddy waters of the years where their NMCs turn to NTC's.

I think we can make it work until 2024 when that happens. Kreider and Trouba get 3 seasons to try to bring home the Stanley Cup.

If we can make it work, that's fine. Some of this debate is spilling over from another one.

To clarify, what kicked off this round was the question "Why would a player waive?" - and the answer to that is, if the team approaches him about a reduced role, that is one reason why a player might waive.

That has seemed to spill back into my suggestion the other day that we should consider trading Trouba if the return was great enough, which I characterized would be: a future 1C/2C prospect, and the salary relief to bring back Vatrano and Motte, and the salary relief to be able to lock up Miller and Lafreniere to team-friendly long term deals.

That people so adamantly refuse to consider or even discuss moving on from a player just a year or two early, when that player is definitely just statistically a second pair defender on a contending team, when they'd be getting back a 1C,/2C prospect which is the hardest thing in hockey to acquire, when they have a player who could take his role and be worse but not trainwreck worse and who will only get better in time, and when it allows you to lock up way more important long term pieces like Miller and Laf, that tells me there is an emotional component to their decision vis a vis their personal attachment to the player.

 

[mas0764]

Potential ≠ Reality

It actually often does, it's just not a guarantee.

 

[Circus86]

I think one problem here is that we pay a lot of players a bit too much money, not much but a bit. And those numbers add up. On the other hand Shesty is the only real bargain contract. You could argue Kreider as well, but only based on this season.

Trouba has had and excellent season and maybe justified his payroll, but he should have been signed at 6,5ish or not at all. Look at the aav Toews has in Colorado. Panarin was UFA so we overpaid. 11,6 is too much. And I love Panarin, best player of our team. He could hit 100 points this season. But then you look at all those other teams stars. Kaprizov, Hubi, Draisaitl, Kucherov. Barkov is a monster and signed long term with 10 aav. All of them with better contracts. If Panarin had 10mil aav it would be a lot better. What about Goodrow. Should be 2,7-3mil. And suddenly there is 4mil extra cap space. Because 3 players are signed to slightly more reasonable contracts. Maybe should run a tighter ship regarding cap, even if it sometimes means missing out on a player.

Some teams I think are doing really good in that regard: Boston, Tampa, Florida, Colorado, Minnesota. Many other teams not so much.

 

[mas0764]

Who's declining?? What kind of bizarro world are you living in? The mother f***er just scored 50 goals this year.

Kreider is 31 in ten days dude.

It's a question of when and not if. He and Trouba can't both see the end of their deals here given their expense and the flat cap, and there's a greater chance than not that NEITHER of them see the end of their deals here.

It's awesome that he scored 50 goals this year. It both makes us a better team right now AND increases his stock should we need to move him.

The fact is, though, that he's on a team with Panarin and Lafreniere who are going to be here long after he has departed.

Finding the most advantageous time to move on is what this constant headbutting is about. I will continue to go to bat for the idea not that we should be pushing him out the door but if there is a deal that makes sense and we have an adequate replacement in the pipeline (and we do), taking a short term hit for a long term gain remains wise if the long term gain is valuable enough.

 

[mas0764]

I think one problem here is that we pay a lot of players a bit too much money, not much but a bit. And those numbers add up. On the other hand Shesty is the only real bargain contract. You could argue Kreider as well, but only based on this season.

Trouba has had and excellent season and maybe justified his payroll, but he should have been signed at 6,5ish or not at all. Look at the aav Toews has in Colorado. Panarin was UFA so we overpaid. 11,6 is too much. And I love Panarin, best player of our team. He could hit 100 points this season. But then you look at all those other teams stars. Kaprizov, Hubi, Draisaitl, Kucherov. Barkov is a monster and signed long term with 10 aav. All of them with better contracts. If Panarin had 10mil aav it would be a lot better. What about Goodrow. Should be 2,7-3mil. And suddenly there is 4mil extra cap space. Because 3 players are signed to slightly more reasonable contracts. Maybe should run a tighter ship regarding cap, even if it sometimes means missing out on a player.

Some teams I think are doing really good in that regard: Boston, Tampa, Florida, Colorado, Minnesota. Many other teams not so much.

Well said. It adds up.

Give us $4m more in cap room and some of this discussion is not happening.

It also means, again, while I'm not pushing anyone out the door tomorrow, maybe we should consider what expensive player we can live without. It's not Kakko, we need him.

~cough, cough Goodrow is making $3.6m and is a fourth liner cough, cough ~

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

Kreider is 31 in ten days dude.

It's a question of when and not if. He and Trouba can't both see the end of their deals here given their expense and the flat cap, and there's a greater chance than not that NEITHER of them see the end of their deals here.

It's awesome that he scored 50 goals this year. It both makes us a better team right now AND increases his stock should we need to move him.

The fact is, though, that he's on a team with Panarin and Lafreniere who are going to be here long after he has departed.

Finding the most advantageous time to move on is what this constant headbutting is about. I will continue to go to bat for the idea not that we should be pushing him out the door but if there is a deal that makes sense and we have an adequate replacement in the pipeline (and we do), taking a short term hit for a long term gain remains wise if the long term gain is valuable enough.

To make a deal, you have to ask them to waive. It's. Not. Happening.

And there are no more short term hits, they're trying to win Cups, not take a step back or short term hit to move someone who shouldn't be moved to accommodate someone who isn't ready to do what they do.

 

[B17 Apricots]

It got a ton of backlash but I think last year into early in the off-season there was a legitimate argument to be made for asking if one of them would waive. The organization was all over the place. The team sucked, the locker room was a mess. Tons of controversy, all year it was one thing after the other. The coaching staff sucked, they get fired, nearly the entire front office is gone. So it's not like this was some wonderful contender where it'd be completely out of line.. its really more like, hey we're kind of a disaster right now if you'd like to go somewhere else we can make something happen.

Fast forward a bit, they hire a competent coaching staff, Kreiders a 50 goal scorer, the deadline additions make them a legitimate contender... If ever there was a time to ask a player if they'd like to waive it would've been when the team was down and out. Present day, I don't see any scenario where they get moved until their deals become NTCs in 24-25.

And as it sits that's fine. As long as Drury is smart about the deals he gives out here. I wouldn't go too long on term in case you need to free up some money. Kakkos bridge should get you to that 24-25 sweetspot. K'Andre, Chytil and Laf will come up a year short. 3.5 mil comes off the dead cap. Goodrow should be movable. We should be fine

 

[mas0764]

To make a deal, you have to ask them to waive. It's. Not. Happening.

So again, we are crossing debates a little here.

This started a bit yesterday when the question was asked, "Why would a player waive?"

In the complete hypothetical, not naming Kreider or Trouba or the Rangers specifically, a player might waive if their role were being reduced.

I agree that it's probably not likely that Kreider or Trouba waives this coming offseason, without getting into the separate debate of whether the Rangers should actually try to get them to (as that would depend on offered returns in trade. If for some reason, for example, the Canadiens run by Jeff Gorton had a man-crush on Trouba called and offered the first overall pick for Trouba, uh, come on, I'm asking him to waive).

And there are no more short term hits, they're trying to win Cups, not take a step back or short term hit to move someone who shouldn't be moved to accommodate someone who isn't ready to do what they do.

You should always be considering a short term hit if the hit is small enough/survivable enough and the long term hit is great enough. Always. The difference between winning a Cup and not is very rarely one Jacob Trouba caliber player anyway (which is why renting is generally such a bad idea, especially the cost to rent is first round picks or high end prospects).

If you consistently make decisions where you win the transactions talent-wise or asset-wise, you will literally always be a Cup contender even if you continue to make short term sacrifices, as you will always be flush with extra assets.

 

[QJL]

Defensively that's not true.

Yes it is. Trouba is better defensively than Schneider by a solid margin in every major defensive metric, with more almost 7% defensive zone starts. There is nothing in the metrics or the eye test that says Schneider is on the cusp of excelling in top pairing shutdown defenseman responsibilities. Trouba is having an exceptional defensive season, among the best in the league. Schneider is solid bottom pairing guy right now with a lot to learn.