Speculation: Roster Building Thread XXXVII - 5 weeks until TDL

[HatTrick Swayze]

Sometimes I think people use the term "prospect" loosely. If you included Kakko/Laffy/Miller ect as "prospects", it changes the game quite a bit. I get the sense that sometimes people are including young NHLers in that fashion.

Agreed. I would imagine NHL execs would think about it more in terms of "total youth in the organization" vs the prospect rankings we often read which follow some predetermined criteria to include/exclude players for a variety of reasons.

 

[SA16]

Just wondering, but where are you getting your numbers? Evolving Hockey has Lafreniere's most common on ice teammate as Chytil with 228 mins and 43% of his ice time. Strome (112mins and 21%) and Zibanejad (99mins and 19%)...

Kakko's most common linemate is Zibanejad with almost 100 more mins played than with Strome..

That would agree with my viewings more than what you've listed. Kakko only played like 7 or 8 games next to Strome and Panarin this year, and Lafreniere went like two months between skating with Zibanejad.

Well for some reason I looked up last years numbers, instead of this year, but the point remains the same.

Appreciate the check though. Goes to show you the other guy, who is all about hating on Caufield, doesn't even bother to take the two minutes to confirm the numbers I'm even referencing are accurate. Says all you need to know really. And this is why you should not blindly accept any numbers as fact without confirmed them. Very easy to make a simple mistake.

 

[Kocur Dill]

Hes getting nowhere close to 7mil with a flat cap. A team would have to be insane to give him that with Kadri/Hertl/Giroux/Pavelski also presumably on the market this summer. RNH & Danault are the comps. He is getting somewhere in the 5-5.75 range on 5-6 year deal with some kind of trade protection depending on the years. Its not rocket science.

I'd love to upgrade to Kadri. I've been banging that drum for a couple seasons now.

With his game in our top 6 there won't be a need to see Revo, Blais, or Hunt on the top lines again accept in game adjustments of retaliation.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

The 14-15 bottom six was worlds better than the slop we currently have there, ill give you that. But those teams wouldn't score nearly enough to beat the current Rangers. They struggled to score more than 3 goals a game in the playoffs, hence why Henrik had to be perfect. Not that any of it matters

Those teams struggled to score more than 2 goals in the playoffs. We need to stop looking back at that era as being a straight comparable. Both teams have great goalies, but this current team has far more talent than any of those teams ever had and should be able to score more.

Our offense throughout that entire contending window from 2012-2015, which is the peak of the last generation, was thoroughly putrid and the only reason we made it as far as we did is because Lundqvist was so often nearly perfect. Seriously, the amount of stress on him from knowing he had almost no marking for error is crazy.

2012 playoffs: 43 goals scored in 20 games - 2.15 goals per game scored

2013 playoffs: 26 goals scored in 12 games - 2.16 goals per game scored

2014 playoffs: 64 goals in 25 games - 2.56 goals per game scored (high water mark, though for reference LA scored 88 goals in 26 games that year for 3.38 goals per game scored)

2015 playoffs: 45 goals in 19 games - 2.36 goals scored per game


Also looking at our goals scored in games we faced elimination (or could end a series):

2012:
R1 Game 6: 3 goals scored (3-2 win)
R1 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)
R2 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R3 Game 6: 2 goals scored (3-2 OTL)

2013:
R1 Game 6: 1 goal scored (1-0 win)
R1 Game 7: 5 goals scored! (5-0 win)

R2 Game 4: 4 goals scored (4-3 win OT))
R2 Game 5: 1 goal scored (3-1 loss)

2014:
R1 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R2 Game 5: 5 goals scored!! (5-1 win)
R2 Game 6: 3 goals scored (3-1 win)
R2 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R3 Game 6: 1 goal scored (1-0 win)

R4 Game 4: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)
R4 Game 5: 2 goals scored (3-2 OTL)

2015:
R1 Game 5: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R2 Game 5: 2 goals scored (2-1 win OT)
R2 Game 6: 4 goals scored (4-3 win)
R2 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win OT)

R3 Game 6: 7 goals scored wow! (7-3 win)
R3 Game 7: 0 goals scored (2-0 loss)


14 of 21 games when facing elimination the Rangers scored 2 or less goals. That is absurd. The only game 7 to score more than 2 goals was the 2013 vs Washington and Lundqvist had a shutout that night anyway. That goose egg in game 7 vs Tampa was basically the cherry on top of giving the Rangers what they deserved after those 4 playoff seasons of not scoring enough.

17-4 in elimination games from 2012-2015 while scoring 2 or fewer goals 14 times. That's nuts.

 

[bhamill]

Nils/Krav/1st for Miller 50% is an easy yes. Take that and run.

I still say no. Even If you think they will be able to keep Strome that way (I don't), it doesn't get us close to a cup for Miller's two years and then he walks (or worse signs a big contract that takes him to 36-8 years old) and you have zero to show for that 1st, Krav and Nils (and Strome).

 

[McSauer]

Those teams struggled to score more than 2 goals in the playoffs. We need to stop looking back at that era as being a straight comparable. Both teams have great goalies, but this current team has far more talent than any of those teams ever had and should be able to score more.

Our offense throughout that entire contending window from 2012-2015, which is the peak of the last generation, was thoroughly putrid and the only reason we made it as far as we did is because Lundqvist was so often nearly perfect. Seriously, the amount of stress on him from knowing he had almost no marking for error is crazy.

2012 playoffs: 43 goals scored in 20 games - 2.15 goals per game scored

2013 playoffs: 26 goals scored in 12 games - 2.16 goals per game scored

2014 playoffs: 64 goals in 25 games - 2.56 goals per game scored (high water mark, though for reference LA scored 88 goals in 26 games that year for 3.38 goals per game scored)

2015 playoffs: 45 goals in 19 games - 2.36 goals scored per game


Also looking at our goals scored in games we faced elimination (or could end a series):

2012:
R1 Game 6: 3 goals scored (3-2 win)
R1 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)
R2 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R3 Game 6: 2 goals scored (3-2 OTL)

2013:
R1 Game 6: 1 goal scored (1-0 win)
R1 Game 7: 5 goals scored! (5-0 win)

R2 Game 4: 4 goals scored (4-3 win OT))
R2 Game 5: 1 goal scored (3-1 loss)

2014:
R1 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R2 Game 5: 5 goals scored!! (5-1 win)
R2 Game 6: 3 goals scored (3-1 win)
R2 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R3 Game 6: 1 goal scored (1-0 win)

R4 Game 4: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)
R4 Game 5: 2 goals scored (3-2 OTL)

2015:
R1 Game 5: 2 goals scored (2-1 win)

R2 Game 5: 2 goals scored (2-1 win OT)
R2 Game 6: 4 goals scored (4-3 win)
R2 Game 7: 2 goals scored (2-1 win OT)

R3 Game 6: 7 goals scored wow! (7-3 win)
R3 Game 7: 0 goals scored (2-0 loss)


14 of 21 games when facing elimination the Rangers scored 2 or less goals. That is absurd. The only game 7 to score more than 2 goals was the 2013 vs Washington and Lundqvist had a shutout that night anyway. That goose egg in game 7 vs Tampa was basically the cherry on top of giving the Rangers what they deserved after those 4 playoff seasons of not scoring enough.

17-4 in elimination games from 2012-2015 while scoring 2 or fewer goals 14 times. That's nuts.

All beautifully said. Especially the bold.

This current team--while lacking the depth of our cup run team--would demolish that previous team with PP alone. Regardless of 5v5, the firepower this team has upfront is world's better than anything the '12-'15 teams had.

And don't get me started on coaching--even Torts couldn't get this team up for games from mid 11-12 (when that hardworking team peaked in Feb, and was just .500 from then on, including the playoffs) on to his firing in 13, to AV getting out-coached in literally every playoff series.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Corey Pronman wrote the annual who says no? feature for The Athletic this year. He ran the trade ideas submitted by the subscribers by a few NHL execs

A few Rangers mentions

1. Islanders trade Anthony Beauvillier, Aatu Raty, a first-round pick this year that’s top-10 protected, and a third-round pick to the Coyotes for Jakob Chychrun — Liam K.
Exec No. 1: That is the asking price roughly for Chychrun and nobody has done it yet. It’s close, but I would guess Islanders say no. Beauvillier is pretty good, an established solid NHL player. Raty some people like, some people don’t, and a first-round pick that could get pushed to 2023. It is close but just a tad too much for the Islanders.
Exec No. 2: Islanders say no.

Rangers could fart out a better offer than this without blinking an eye.

 

[McRanger92]

I'd love to upgrade to Kadri. I've been banging that drum for a couple seasons now.

With his game in our top 6 there won't be a need to see Revo, Blais, or Hunt on the top lines again accept in game adjustments of retaliation.

Kadri is 31 and going into UFA status off a potential 100 point season. I dont think NYR touch that one with a 10 foot pole.

 

[Avery16]

Rangers could fart out a better offer than this without blinking an eye.

Maybe, but I’d rather have Beauvillier, Raty, a 1st and a 3rd than Chychrun. Flip Beauvillier.

 

[mas0764]

I still say no. Even If you think they will be able to keep Strome that way (I don't), it doesn't get us close to a cup for Miller's two years and then he walks (or worse signs a big contract that takes him to 36-8 years old) and you have zero to show for that 1st, Krav and Nils (and Strome).

Me too.

 

[Thirty One]

I don't buy that, you can move other pieces to make room for him if he's that good, and its not like Vancouver is going into a rebuild, they are in the middle of it and they aren't in cap hell next year, and if they were they could move less important players. I honestly think there has to be more to this, unless he just wants out.

Right now they are a decidedly mediocre team. Do you think signing all the same players they are mediocre with now, only for more money and over the ages that players normally decline, is a good strategy to turn things around? Some people thought that's what the Rangers should do with Hayes and Zuccarello, and it's how lots of teams would approach it, so maybe. Not how I would go about it though. They need the next wave of younger players to go along with their core. There's also the question of if Miller, an American, wants to sign in Canada.

 

[McRanger92]

I still say no. Even If you think they will be able to keep Strome that way (I don't), it doesn't get us close to a cup for Miller's two years and then he walks (or worse signs a big contract that takes him to 36-8 years old) and you have zero to show for that 1st, Krav and Nils (and Strome).

I think theres value in not being locked into anything long-term with a 2C after 2023. KAM & Laf need new deals then and you can assess what the teams needs are stylistically after 2 full playoff runs. Maybe theres a vet who will sign for a short term deal with a contender.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Rangers could fart out a better offer than this without blinking an eye.

And LMAO at it being the Islanders saying no. If Arizona would take that offer the Islanders should take it and run.

A good middle 6 winger, a B level prospect (at best) and 1st rounder that is top 10 protected?

That's a low ball offer IMO, how are the Islanders the ones saying no?

 

[Synergy27]

I think they had more of an opportunity in the past to fill this void and they passed on it. We don't need to re-hash those debates, my point is that it's getting harder, which leads to my follow up point, it's only going to get harder and harder from here on out, so we can't wait anymore, we can't trade our best prospects for a rental and then think we'll deal with it in 2023, it will be impossible.

I unfortunately think you’ve hit the nail on the head here. I won’t rehash my lamentations about winning the lottery when we did. But that notwithstanding, this team has shown a lack of interest in investing in the C position at the draft and it’s going to be problematic moving forward.

I don’t think the trades you are mentioning are available. We frankly got absurdly lucky with the Zibanejad trade. I can’t see that happening again.

This team is going to have to figure out another way to win.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

And LMAO at it being the Islanders saying no. If Arizona would take that offer the Islanders should take it and run.

A good middle 6 winger, a B level prospect (at best) and 1st rounder that is top 10 protected?

That's a low ball offer IMO, how are the Islanders the ones saying no?

I thought the same thing. Lou would wet his jeans if he could get Chychrun for that.

 

[Chalfdiggity3]

Well for some reason I looked up last years numbers, instead of this year, but the point remains the same.

Appreciate the check though. Goes to show you the other guy, who is all about hating on Caufield, doesn't even bother to take the two minutes to confirm the numbers I'm even referencing are accurate. Says all you need to know really. And this is why you should not blindly accept any numbers as fact without confirmed them. Very easy to make a simple mistake.

Your the dumb dumb that put up the wrong stats. I told you that i dont care about the toi comparisons. This is about caufield not being a good payer and wanting to trade our best chip for him. Your the bum in this situation since you STILL cant/wont answer the question as to WHY are we trading our best trade chip for a player who plays wing and wont get playing time over kakko or laf?

Says all i need to know bout you.

 

[mas0764]

I unfortunately think you’ve hit the nail on the head here. I won’t rehash my lamentations about winning the lottery when we did. But that notwithstanding, this team has shown a lack of interest in investing in the C position at the draft and it’s going to be problematic moving forward.

I don’t think the trades you are mentioning are available. We frankly got absurdly lucky with the Zibanejad trade. I can’t see that happening again.

This team is going to have to figure out another way to win.

It can't just roll with Zibanejad though.

It's gonna have to find at least a 60 point Stepan level young player at center.

 

[Synergy27]

It can't just roll with Zibanejad though.

It's gonna have to find at least a 60 point Stepan level young player at center.

Anyone can score 60 playing with Panarin. That hopefully becomes true for Laf and Kakko too. This team just needs hard working, good skating, two way centers down the middle behind Z. It doesn’t matter how old they are. They just need to be affordable.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I love how people are still on the Rangers have a deep farm system bit. Our farm was ranked 18th this offseason.

If we deal three prime pieces from it, it's like last.

Our farm system ranking went down because we graduated a large chunk of players onto the roster. Plus it's just a subjective opinion from the Athletic writer who compiled that list, it's not hard facts.

Part of what needs to be factored in is players' timelines and roster space. You can't keep everyone.

Othmann, Cuylle, Berard, Kravtsov are all strong wing prospects that along with Kakko and Lafreniere give us 6 solid wingers who are on the same timeline and should all be NHLers. You have Panarin and Kreider locked up so even if one of these kids busts or is traded it's not going to hurt you much in terms of org depth.

Lundkvist, Schneider, Jones, Robertson are all strong D prospects who should be NHLers. You already have 23 year old Lindgren and Fox and 22 year old K'Andre with gray beard 27 year old Trouba all basically locked into their spots barring any hockey trades.

We have tons of talented kids who are ready to start stepping into NHL roles but not enough spots for them on the roster. You need to do what you can to get the maximum value out of the assets acquired in the rebuild, whether that is the player stepping into the lineup or being traded to acquire another player.

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

I am pretty adamant against bringing in JT Miller, but at 50% retained, my mind changes on that subject.

 

[TheDirtyH]

Well for some reason I looked up last years numbers, instead of this year, but the point remains the same.

Appreciate the check though. Goes to show you the other guy, who is all about hating on Caufield, doesn't even bother to take the two minutes to confirm the numbers I'm even referencing are accurate. Says all you need to know really. And this is why you should not blindly accept any numbers as fact without confirmed them. Very easy to make a simple mistake.

Yeah I wasn't disagreeing with your points at all, just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.

 

[smoneil]

Are dealing Nils & Kravtsov really "selling the farm" though? They dont have long term spots here, either by choice or because other players are blocking them.

Also, lack of playoff experience is so overblown considering the Rangers best players have all played in plenty of playoff games. And are we really worried about Fox & Igor in the playoffs? These guys are all-world talents, I feel confident saying they will be just fine.

You wrote this just a handful of posts after my post showing that no, lack of playoff experience is not overblown, but actually a nearly universal component in a Cup winning team. So the Rangers "best players" all have playoff experience, except for the two most important ones...where that doesn't seem to matter because you don't want it to? You're also talking about a grand total of what? 7 players? Out of a roster of 22? And lets be real, Zib and Strome haven't had to carry a team in the playoffs before. Their "experience" is in a far different role, and it was years ago.

You may be "confidant" that they will be "just fine," but the actual facts show that no team in more than 30 years has won a Stanley Cup after missing the playoffs four years running. The only team in that span to win the Cup after missing the playoffs more than one season before their Cup run was the Hurricanes, who benefitted from the lockout and a weird season that allowed smaller skill guys to dominate because of the new rules. And even though they had missed the playoffs two years running before winning the Cup, ~half of that roster had played in a Cup final the year before that. So you are confident that the team will do something no team has done in more than three decades of hockey. I'd prefer to see them make choices based on what's likely rather than assuming they will pull off another Miracle on Ice style defiance of the odds.

 

[bhamill]

I think theres value in not being locked into anything long-term with a 2C after 2023. KAM & Laf need new deals then and you can assess what the teams needs are stylistically after 2 full playoff runs. Maybe theres a vet who will sign for a short term deal with a contender.

That's reasonable. But the KAMs and Lafs needing new deals is also why you need guys on ELCs and 2nd contracts.
I'm not trying to say that in a vacuum JT isn't worth Vancouver's supposed asking price, I think under the circumstances it isn't a good deal/fit for NYR. It costs them way too much for what they will actually gain as far as team success/Cup odds.
Of course that's my opinion. If you see JT getting us CLOSE to that Cup for those two years, I totally understand your position, I just don't agree with it.

 

[McRanger92]

You wrote this just a handful of posts after my post showing that no, lack of playoff experience is not overblown, but actually a nearly universal component in a Cup winning team. So the Rangers "best players" all have playoff experience, except for the two most important ones...where that doesn't seem to matter because you don't want it to? You're also talking about a grand total of what? 7 players? Out of a roster of 22? And lets be real, Zib and Strome haven't had to carry a team in the playoffs before. Their "experience" is in a far different role, and it was years ago.

You may be "confidant" that they will be "just fine," but the actual facts show that no team in more than 30 years has won a Stanley Cup after missing the playoffs four years running. The only team in that span to win the Cup after missing the playoffs more than one season before their Cup run was the Hurricanes, who benefitted from the lockout and a weird season that allowed smaller skill guys to dominate because of the new rules. And even though they had missed the playoffs two years running before winning the Cup, ~half of that roster had played in a Cup final the year before that. So you are confident that the team will do something no team has done in more than three decades of hockey. I'd prefer to see them make choices based on what's likely rather than assuming they will pull off another Miracle on Ice style defiance of the odds.

I don't think anything you said is factually incorrect, I just don't think the Rangers should be approaching the deadline with their lack of playoff experience as a deciding factor in what they do. Most teams have to fail in the playoffs before they can win. But if the Rangers trade some assets for win-now players and lose in the second round I'm not going to be crying about it.

Give your team a shot and let the chips fall where they may. The deeper you go now the more beneficial it will be going forward.

 

[Boris Zubov]

A lot of people who just look at stats and haven’t been watching Miller play in their city for the past 3 seasons are going to be extremely disappointed.

I think you mean pleasantly surprised, if not shocked at the changes to his game.

Your inherent bias is preventing you from being impartial. Same with Kravtsov, same with Buch.