Speculation: Roster Building Thread XXXVI: The End (The Apocalypse Is Now)

[Anthony5967]

Why cause he's black?

He's not going to be Seth Jones.

Alright, relax. When he was drafted that was the comparison nearly everybody had given him, Craig Button too, I believe. Jesus.

 

[Edge]

2 yrs 2 mil is the Francour contract so yea id expect that

Hank will retire and then plenty of space

IF he does but it’s looking that way or a trade at 50 off

Not sure Lundqvist retires, but a buyout is certainly on the table.

 

[Edge]

Whether he makes the jump sooner or later, the key with Miller will be patience.

He's a guy who might need a fair amount of runway to get off the ground. That's not to say he'd be toiling in the minors for 4 years, so much as to say he's a guy who might show flashes of brilliance, coupled with moments of frustration for a few years, until one day all the pieces come together.

 

[Guyute]

Whether he makes the jump sooner or later, the key with Miller will be patience.

Whether he makes the jump sooner or later, the key'Andre with Miller will be patience.

Fixed.

 

[Rongomania]

Tkachuk would be great if we could somehow land him. Either one really.

*my dream*

 

[The New Russian Five]

I'd overpay ADA right now to get him locked up for 7-8 years though.

Especially if we can find the requisite space by getting rid of the Smith contract or, god forbid, the Lundqvist one (I still want Lundqvist to remain a career Ranger but that's emotional, admittedly).

Once that new CBA kicks in, an overpayment of DeAngelo will look like a steal.

Don't forget at some point the rangers will need to pay Fox as well and he'll likely command at least $5mill a year on his next contract if he continues his progression. Between Trouba, ADA, and Fox the rangers might have to invest 20 mill+. That is a lot of money to put entirely on the RD of the team. Rangers really need to think this through. I am still very weary about Trouba's ability to match the value of his contract. Personally if I were the rangers, I would explore trading him before his NMC kicks in. But I get the sense the organization have no interest in doing that.

 

[duhmetreE]

I'd overpay ADA right now to get him locked up for 7-8 years though.

Especially if we can find the requisite space by getting rid of the Smith contract or, god forbid, the Lundqvist one (I still want Lundqvist to remain a career Ranger but that's emotional, admittedly).

Once that new CBA kicks in, an overpayment of DeAngelo will look like a steal.

5 years is the max I can see ADA going. Works the best for both sides. We get good value and he gets to be a UFA at 29. I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a 4 year deal. 4x5 is still fair and it bring him to 28

 

[FIRE DRURY]

Karl Henriksson compares himself to Nicklas Bäckström, his favorite player.

Speaking of Karl, when do you expect him to make the jump here?

 

[dshea19]

Speaking of Karl, when do you expect him to make the jump here?

Man, I hope they leave him in Sweden until he is 21 or so. Let him keep working on all of the basics so that when he comes over the only thing he has to focus on is adjusting to NA. I can see him as a guy that will be best served with staying at home. Fast played for 3 more years in the SEL before having two seasons of AHL/NHL shuttling and then sticking in the NHL. Let him marinate. I think Nils is going to be the guy who is on the verge of the NHL next year. I honestly think that it doesn't matter as much for him to go back to the SEL if he doesn't make the Rangers. I think that when he is ready to play in the NHL, he will just be ready. I don't think the AHL will provide much benefit to him. It would benefit the Rangers to have him available for call-ups if needed.

 

[DutchShamrock]

The only thing that bugs me with the leadership topic is 99%, but probably 100%, of us are in no position to comment on the impact of any given player. We aren't in there and we don't even have casual relationships with any of them save some few rare examples. We only have hockey player quotes which could be generated by a cliche-hockey-statement app. Bob the towel guy was instrumental in our success, he showed up every day and set the tone with his work ethic. Boom, he's a leader. It's anecdotal evidence, and it's used to shut down valid points during generally well articulated debates by both sides.

Thing is, I don't recall many arguments against anyone's leadership or the value. It's simply impossible for anyone to legitimately quantify it from our perspectives.

But it's probably not a stretch to guess that leadership will be an overrated ability come buy out day when good old alternate captain Marc Staal is on deck.

I'd really just like to get on track again. Kreider is here. Maybe the debating about Chris dried up because there is no debate anymore, not because one side knows roster building more than the other.

The team is set for a few months, they have played some good hockey, and there is a guarantee that moves are coming this summer.

 

[mas0764]

5 years is the max I can see ADA going. Works the best for both sides. We get good value and he gets to be a UFA at 29. I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a 4 year deal. 4x5 is still fair and it bring him to 28

That may be what he wants to do, so he can command another payday under a new CBA at that time, age 28-29.

But that's not a great situation for the Rangers if he does remain the type of player he's showing this year. You'd like to get him locked up to 31-32 and then feel free to move on. Would be worth overpaying a bit now, because with the cap going up, it won't remain an overpayment.

 

[Edge]

I don't think the Rangers would have a problem going with something like a 5x5 deal for ADA.

It's not the only option out there, but I don't think it's one that is an automatic "no" for either side.

 

[SA16]

I don't like going 5 years on ADA. This is what we've done with everyone in the past and how we always end up getting in a tough spot by having them reach UFA at age 28-29.

 

[pld459666]

I think probably one of the hardest parts of being a GM is knowing when to bridge someone and when not to - look what happened with Skjei - should have bridged him. Look what happened with Stepan and (most likely) with Buch - exact opposite. Not an easy thing to figure out.

Stepan was Bridged

 

[Avery16]

I wouldn't mind us pursuing Mikael Granlund for second line depth if he made it to UFA.

 

[wafflepadsave]

Whether he makes the jump sooner or later, the key with Miller will be patience.

He's a guy who might need a fair amount of runway to get off the ground. That's not to say he'd be toiling in the minors for 4 years, so much as to say he's a guy who might show flashes of brilliance, coupled with moments of frustration for a few years, until one day all the pieces come together.

So Kreider?

 

[EpicDing]

I don't like going 5 years on ADA. This is what we've done with everyone in the past and how we always end up getting in a tough spot by having them reach UFA at age 28-29.

It's not just what the team wants, it's what the player wants too. I'd bet ADA wants to get to FA at that age.

 

[Leetch3]

I don't like going 5 years on ADA. This is what we've done with everyone in the past and how we always end up getting in a tough spot by having them reach UFA at age 28-29.

you say that like ada and his agent don’t know the value of being a ufa at that age and it’s just the rangers choice

 

[SA16]

you say that like ada and his agent don’t know the value of being a ufa at that age and it’s just the rangers choice

I don't think so. Look at how many seven and eight year contracts there are (106). None of those guys wanted five years to reach UFA earlier (exception: Matthews). Most players do not risk the potential loss of money if their game falls off or they get injured when they can get locked in for a big amount soon. Additionally DeAngelo's agent is Pat Brisson who is the biggest NHL agent and has signed many 7 or 8 year contracts so it is not his policy not to do so.

It is mostly the Rangers choice. They do not ever go 7+ years on guys early in their careers. It has not happened one time.

Kreider - 4 years
Skjei - 6 years
Staal - 5 years
Girardi - 6 years
Stepan - 6 years
Zibanejad - 5 years
Lundqvist - 6 years
McDonagh - 6 years
Hayes - bridge/trade

So either somehow the Rangers only manage to acquire players who want to reach FA early or they have generally had a policy where they do not max out the years as soon as possible which leads to their players becoming FA around 28-29 which makes the second contract difficult. Or it leads to bridging them early and then paying more on the next deal. If you see enough in a player to commit to him long term in his early 20s for 5-6 years then you really should be trying to sign them for 7-8 years instead considering it will work out better for the cap, you get them at a better rate during their prime, and they reach FA at an older age where you likely won't have to then give them a huge 7 year deal (like just happened with Kreider)

 

[pld459666]

Regarding the condition of the pick

I dont like it.

The way it reads on CapFriendly is that it's the later/lower pick of the two.

So if one of Toronto or Carolina misses the POs, we get the pick of the team that DOES make the POs

That sucks

 

[Edge]

So Kreider?

There's a lot of similarities there.

I think Kreider had the advantage of not being a defenseman, not learning a new position, and not necessarily having everyone pencil him into a core role immediately --- so my hope is that some of the latter could rub off on how people view Miller.

If indeed he went back for his junior year of college, I don't think it would be a bad decision by any stretch.

All the tools are there with Miller, it's a matter of how/when/if they come together. It could happen sooner, or it might take a while --- it's somewhat difficult to say. But I've always leaned more conservatively on all our of 2018 first round picks and preferred giving them the time and space they need to come along. I've always viewed them through more of a long-term prism.

 

[Off Sides]

Ok so this is what we are looking at going into the off season (Note: * Means RFA / Lines aren't set and players and move up and down):

Kreider - Zbad - Buch
Panarin - Strome* - Kakko
Lemieux* - Chytil - Gauthier
XXXX - Howden - XXXX
XXXX

Lindgren - Fox
Smith - ADA*
Staal - Trouba
XXXX

Shesh
Georgiev*
Lundqvist

Total cap hit less RFA projections: $67MM ($7.5MM of which is dead cap space)

My projected cap ceiling: $84MM ($17MM I cap space)

RFAs:

• ADA: 5 years $6.5MM AAV
• Strome: 2 years $4.5MM AAV
• Lemieux: 2 years $1.5MM AAV
• Georgiev: 2 years $2MM AAV

Remaining cap space after RFA: $2.5MM (19 man roster with 3 goalies)

Realistic prospects that could make the team (cheap ELCs):

• Kravstov
• Lundkvist
• Rykov
• Hajek
• DiGuissepe*

Let's say for the remaining 4 spots they are filled with ELC or cheap vets, average of $1MM/player. Remaining cap space to operate the season is -$1.5MM.

The Rangers would still need to buyout or somehow trade one of Staal, Lundqvist or Smith. Possibly more, otherwise your basically going into next season with the same roster, which isn't the worst thing when the team is so young and the less experienced players should continue to progress (and wouldnt be able to retain Fast).

The other thing is that the Rangers moves at the TDL werent debilitating.

Good post, I agree overall that is about the situation even if I have minor different guesses in what the RFAs will get. It also means they just let Fast go.

So any adding of a LD (really any player(s) who have even somewhat significant cap hits) comes at the expense of one of those listed going out, at about equal cap hit incoming and outgoing, unless they do something with Staal, Lundqvist or Smith.

 

[EpicDing]

Regarding the condition of the pick

I dont like it.

The way it reads on CapFriendly is that it's the later/lower pick of the two.

So if one of Toronto or Carolina misses the POs, we get the pick of the team that DOES make the POs

That sucks

The pick also isn't lottery protected. If they both miss, Toronto ends up in the top 10, and Carolina wins the lottery, we could end up with a top 3 pick (theoretically).

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Regarding the condition of the pick

I dont like it.

The way it reads on CapFriendly is that it's the later/lower pick of the two.

So if one of Toronto or Carolina misses the POs, we get the pick of the team that DOES make the POs

That sucks

The only way we benefit is if they both miss because Toronto's pick is lottery protected and they would give carolina their pick next year, then Carolina would have to give us theirs regardless.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Regarding the condition of the pick

I dont like it.

The way it reads on CapFriendly is that it's the later/lower pick of the two.

So if one of Toronto or Carolina misses the POs, we get the pick of the team that DOES make the POs

That sucks

Yes but if both of them miss, Toronto picks in the top 10 and Carolina wins the lottery, we get that pick.