Speculation: Roster Building Thread XXXVIII:

[leetch99]

You are not getting Theodore unless you pony up something very big. And the Knights are not going to want just futures, for the same way that Gorton is not going to want just futures. From a team needs and a realistic return profile, DeAngelo for Theodore would be a realistic trade proposal.

How can that be a realistic trade for LV ? Theo is signed to a reasonable deal...Tony is not signed . Theo leads in all these categories I am reading on here and Tony only on offence stats and a lot poorer defence many claim . Tony only has a few more points than Theo. They are the same age ....so why exactly does LV make a trade like that ? We likely would have to package another player with Tony for LV to even consider this deal . Have I missed the obvious or is this a deal that has no teeth in it . I don't know...but IMO the chances of Trouba being traded are greater than a deal featuring straight swap of Theo and Tony . Heck I'm a big Tony supporter but I could get behind this deal but I have to wonder why LV does it ? What is in it for them ?

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Quite the dose of Ranger luck to be chasing a playoff spot, have the season potentially cancelled in March and walk away with nothing.

No playoff spot, and a terribly slotted pick

 

[egelband]

Quite the dose of Ranger luck to be chasing a playoff spot, have the season potentially cancelled in March and walk away with nothing.

No playoff spot, and a terribly slotted pick

I don’t think they’ll cancel the season. I just don’t see it. They may take a hiatus. Or at worst play the games without fans in the stadiums. Just my sense.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

They aren't going to cancel the season.

 

[True Blue]

Yeah, competing sooner is nearly meaningless to me. Whatever gets the better long term team is my aim.... obviously within reason.

Ok, meaningless to you. But no one says that then MUST be Cup competitive in year one. But at the same time, it would be pretty short sighted to simply burn another year or so of peak performance from the likes of Zibanejad, Panarin & Kreider.

The foundation that Gorton & JD are building is meant for long term success. But it certainly means being more competitive as soon as next year. Otherwise, why resign Kreider? Why bring in Panarin at all?

What you are proposing would be akin to Columbus trading Werenski for nothing but draft picks, Vegas trading Theodore for nothing but futures, Philly trading Prokorov for nothing but futures, Winnipeg trading Connor for nothing but futures, Vancouver trading Peterson or Boesner for nothing but futures, Arizona trading Keller for nothing but futures. Think any of that is happening?

 

[True Blue]

How can that be a realistic trade for LV ? Theo is signed to a reasonable deal...Tony is not signed . Theo leads in all these categories I am reading on here and Tony only on offence stats and a lot poorer defence many claim . Tony only has a few more points than Theo. They are the same age ....so why exactly does LV make a trade like that ? We likely would have to package another player with Tony for LV to even consider this deal . Have I missed the obvious or is this a deal that has no teeth in it . I don't know...but IMO the chances of Trouba being traded are greater than a deal featuring straight swap of Theo and Tony . Heck I'm a big Tony supporter but I could get behind this deal but I have to wonder why LV does it ? What is in it for them ?

But DeAngelo can be signed. Then it becomes a question of how much do they want one of the top offensive defensemen in the game and are they willing to pay him as much as Theodore? The trade would make sense for both teams given the teams needs.

DeAngelo has 6 more points in 3 less games. That is not tiny and the season is not over. Vegas could see a need for a better offensive defenseman. The Rangers could see a need to trade some of the depth from RD to LD.

This is all hypothetical, but what I view to be in the range of the return profile that I would be looking for IF DeAngelo was to be traded.

And no. The Rangers would not need to add anyone to the deal. DeAngelo' stats speak for themselves. Just a question of what teams want. My point that is that if it is a team like Vegas that comes knocking for DeAngelo, Theodore is the only thing that I am interested in. Not Smith, not Marchessault. So if they want DeAngelo, that is the price. If it is a different team, the name may change, but the overall return profile does not.

 

[True Blue]

I HATE RYAN STROME

70 games and 59 points. There are some things to like

 

[True Blue]

He doesn't compile many points, but actually moves the puck pretty well out of his own end.

The Rangers would not need him to be a stat compiler. They would need for him to be exactly who he is.

 

[True Blue]

How does a Zadarov Trouba pairing make you feel?

Not feeling it. Would take a Zadarov on the third pairing. But would actually prefer a Dillon there, partnered with DeAngelo.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

If the salary cap actually stays flat or goes down, I wonder how many GMs are going to be soiling themselves from being f***ed

 

[mas0764]

Ok, meaningless to you. But no one says that then MUST be Cup competitive in year one. But at the same time, it would be pretty short sighted to simply burn another year or so of peak performance from the likes of Zibanejad, Panarin & Kreider.

The foundation that Gorton & JD are building is meant for long term success. But it certainly means being more competitive as soon as next year. Otherwise, why resign Kreider? Why bring in Panarin at all?

What you are proposing would be akin to Columbus trading Werenski for nothing but draft picks, Vegas trading Theodore for nothing but futures, Philly trading Prokorov for nothing but futures, Winnipeg trading Connor for nothing but futures, Vancouver trading Peterson or Boesner for nothing but futures, Arizona trading Keller for nothing but futures. Think any of that is happening?

Well, I wouldn’t have re-signed Kreider, I would have traded him. But what the team is going to do and what I would do are clearly different things.

But again, what I’m proposing is not the same as trading an elite player for futures as you say above. First, do those teams all have elite prospects at the same positions in the pipeline making a logjam a necessity?

Secondly, you yourself have said you would make the trade, or at least consider the trade, for Lafreniere. Why is that not “akin to trading for futures”?

I’m not suggesting trading ADA for draft picks in future years, or even picks this year later in the first round where you have no real idea of who you are getting.

At #2OA you know exactly who it is, just like knowing you’d make the trade for Lafreniere. Well, I’m saying if it makes sense for Lafreniere it makes sense for Byfield too, or even Stutzle. They are all Kakko-level prospects and I would trade ADA for a Kakko-level prospect knowing that i have another top-4-ish RD about to break into the league, even if it takes 2 more seasons for these guys to completely develop.

If that “wastes” two years of Kreider, that’s ok by me, because I think we’re getting better than that.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

How can that be a realistic trade for LV ? Theo is signed to a reasonable deal...Tony is not signed . Theo leads in all these categories I am reading on here and Tony only on offence stats and a lot poorer defence many claim . Tony only has a few more points than Theo. They are the same age ....so why exactly does LV make a trade like that ? We likely would have to package another player with Tony for LV to even consider this deal . Have I missed the obvious or is this a deal that has no teeth in it . I don't know...but IMO the chances of Trouba being traded are greater than a deal featuring straight swap of Theo and Tony . Heck I'm a big Tony supporter but I could get behind this deal but I have to wonder why LV does it ? What is in it for them ?

Well, again, this is all only an exemplary discussion and not based on any reported rumors, but the theory would be:

1) VGK has the opposite situation to the Rangers: their only two RHS defenseman are Deryk Engelland (who is on a $700K 35+ contract) and 23-y-o Zach Whitecloud, whose NHL scoring amounts to 0-1-1 in 17 GP and who got all of 13:30 TOI in their OT win on Monday.

2) While Theodore is indeed a very good offensive player, he's still producing at 13-33-46 over 71GP vs. 15-38-53 over 68GP for DeAngelo. If you project them both out over 82 games, ADA scores 20% more. Which, on a team like VGK, who has Nate Schmidt as their second leading scorer as a defenseman (7-24-31 in 59GP) followed by Nick freakin' Holden (at 6-8-14 in 61GP), that extra oomph is even more valuable.

But again (again), this is all a hypothetical.

 

[True Blue]

But again, what I’m proposing is not the same as trading an elite player for futures as you say above. First, do those teams all have elite prospects at the same positions in the pipeline making a logjam a necessity?

DeAgelo's production is just that. Elite. Ergo he is becoming or has already become an elite offensive defenseman. So yeah, his name goes into the same exact pot as these other players.

What elite prospects do the Rangers have that are looking like they can produce like DeAngelo is producing. You cannot mean a kid who is skating in Sweden, has never stepped a toe onto NA ice and has a much better chance of being the next Tim Erixon than he does of touching the production that DeAngelo is currently doing?

Secondly, you yourself have said you would make the trade, or at least consider the trade, for Lafreniere. Why is that not “akin to trading for futures”?

Consider is not the same thing as making the deal. You have to consider every offer.

I’m not suggesting trading ADA for draft picks in future years, or even picks this year later in the first round where you have no real idea of who you are getting.

You didn't suggest trading him for a top-10 or a top-5 pick in this year's draft? I never suggested that you said to trade him for picks in future drafts or latter in the first round. But you are stating, not suggesting, that you would trade him for nothing but draft picks.

At #2OA you know exactly who it is, just like knowing you’d make the trade for Lafreniere. Well, I’m saying if it makes sense for Lafreniere it makes sense for Byfield too, or even Stutzle. They are all Kakko-level prospects and I would trade ADA for a Kakko-level prospect knowing that i have another top-4-ish RD about to break into the league, even if it takes 2 more seasons for these guys to completely develop.

What top-4 RD do the Rangers have that is about to break into the league?

You have no idea if Byfield or Stutzle or even Lafreniere will be ready to play in the league next year. Chances are against that. But even if they do, the chances that they have a similar season to what Kakko had as opposed to what McDavid had is far more likely than not. As a matter of fact, the chances of them having a second season like Barkov had is also far more likely than not. That is even if they jump straight into the NHL. Given all that, how in the world does it make sense to trade a young, elite offensive defenseman for a prospect that will probably not be read for prime time and may not be ready to contribute for another 3-4 years? Isn't this the literal example of how to get a perpetual rebuild?

You have Panarin, Kreider, & Zbad here. How can you justify burning off another year of peak performance?

If that “wastes” two years of Kreider, that’s ok by me, because I think we’re getting better than that.

And Panarin's. And ZBad's.

 

[RGY]

If the Rangers sign a veteran LD to a reasonable contract, that could also help them fulfill the expansion draft requirement. I don’t know what the market will look like for Scandella or Dillion but they and Edmonton are all possibilities.

More and more on the Dillon train. I welcome you all.

 

[leetch99]

More and more on the Dillon train. I welcome you all.

If we can afford a guy like him I can get behind that unless it means we lose Tony in some way to compensate on the outgoing salary ....that I can't get behind .

 

[RGY]

If we can afford a guy like him I can get behind that unless it means we lose Tony in some way to compensate on the outgoing salary ....that I can't get behind .

They should be able to move Smith. 1 year left on the deal. He has played well on a team that is pushing for a playoff spot. A cap floor team could certainly be interested. 1 year only so no long term commitment, especially for a rebuilding team, while providing average defense and toughness. I dont think the Rangers would have to retain.

I think only way he is here next year is if Management feels that he is a suitable depth LD. But he doesnt have to be the selection. Move him and sign Dillon to a 3-4 year deal at a similar cap hit to Smith.

 

[Tawnos]

We have a bunch of D coming. We need a defensively responsible bottom-6 forward vet more than we need a defenseman of any kind.

Janmark
M.Karlsson
Nieto
Girgensons

 

[RGY]

We have a bunch of D coming. We need a defensively responsible bottom-6 forward vet more than we need a defenseman of any kind.

Janmark
M.Karlsson
Nieto
Girgensons

If they move out Smith and make Staal the 7th D or buy him out, they have 2 slots open. They are not throwing youth out there. Hajek/Rykov/Reunanen/Miller battle for the last spot. They need a competent veteran LD. Dillon offers that. He and Trouba could be a very solid pair, especially for PKs.

But yes they also need some forward depth. There are a bunch of options there. I think they can find a good piece or two there at a reasonable price. I would add Colin Wilson and Boyle to the list of possibilities. Not both, but one of them in addition to the others you listed who offer some more speed.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

We have a bunch of D coming. We need a defensively responsible bottom-6 forward vet more than we need a defenseman of any kind.

Janmark
M.Karlsson
Nieto
Girgensons

A top four LD is 10000% a necessity and perhaps our biggest need.
Even if we have a ton of D in the pipeline, it isn't fair to expect them to step in and provide anything more than adequate to pretty good performance in a bottom pairing role for a while (which is fine, that is a need too.)

WE need to improve and diversify the bottom 6 too so yeah, its also a need.

 

[Kovalev27]

We should not be spending cap space on an LD with the investments we’ve made the last year in drafting and trades for kids to come up and fill that role. No we should not be spending money there.

 

[Tawnos]

If they move out Smith and make Staal the 7th D or buy him out, they have 2 slots open. They are not throwing youth out there. Hajek/Rykov/Reunanen/Miller battle for the last spot. They need a competent veteran LD. Dillon offers that. He and Trouba could be a very solid pair, especially for PKs.

But yes they also need some forward depth. There are a bunch of options there. I think they can find a good piece or two there at a reasonable price. I would add Colin Wilson and Boyle to the list of possibilities. Not both, but one of them in addition to the others you listed who offer some more speed.

A top four LD is 10000% a necessity and perhaps our biggest need.
Even if we have a ton of D in the pipeline, it isn't fair to expect them to step in and provide anything more than adequate to pretty good performance in a bottom pairing role for a while (which is fine, that is a need too.)

WE need to improve and diversify the bottom 6 too so yeah, its also a need.

One of Staal or Smith is absolutely still going to be here next year.

 

[mulli25]

We should not be spending cap space on an LD with the investments we’ve made the last year in drafting and trades for kids to come up and fill that role. No we should not be spending money there.

We can speculate about a long term solution already within the organization, but they 100% do not have anything that resembles a 1-3 year solution for the gaping hole at LD.

The writing is on the wall that the organization absolutely believes those are cup-competing years.

Via free agency or a trade, they are going to actively try to get a top 4LD so start preparing yourself.

 

[Ola]

If the salary cap actually stays flat or goes down, I wonder how many GMs are going to be soiling themselves from being f***ed

The cap isn't going down. Nobody benefits from that. Its up to the PA, and I just can't see how they would allow that.

 

[NYR Viper]

A solid bottom-6 vet or two would be ideal for this team. A guy in the mold of a Cizikis or Acciara

 

[mas0764]

DeAgelo's production is just that. Elite. Ergo he is becoming or has already become an elite offensive defenseman. So yeah, his name goes into the same exact pot as these other players.

Didn't disagree with that.

What elite prospects do the Rangers have that are looking like they can produce like DeAngelo is producing. You cannot mean a kid who is skating in Sweden, has never stepped a toe onto NA ice and has a much better chance of being the next Tim Erixon than he does of touching the production that DeAngelo is currently doing?

Well, Adam Fox, for one, but even setting him aside, I'm not saying Lundkvist looks like they can replicate what DeAngelo is doing.

I'm saying Lundkvist + Byfield might be better than DeAngelo + (whatever you get by trading Lundkvist).

You didn't suggest trading him for a top-10 or a top-5 pick in this year's draft? I never suggested that you said to trade him for picks in future drafts or latter in the first round. But you are stating, not suggesting, that you would trade him for nothing but draft picks.

The hypothetical that kicked this all off was, what if Anaheim comes to you after winning the second overall pick and says, we'll give you #2OA for ADA?

I'm tempted by that offer.

That is not "trading for futures." That's basically a trade for Byfield, or, if you like Stutzle better than Byfield.

You have no idea if Byfield or Stutzle or even Lafreniere will be ready to play in the league next year.

I don't care about next year (and the Rangers shouldn't either).

Not that this would ever happen, but if someone offered us Lafreniere for ADA, we'd be crazy to say no.

My hypothetical was never about, for example, the 7th overall pick. It was about if you can get a Kakk0-level prospect, and what's more, a center... a position that we pretty desperately need a future stud at, if we have plans on competing long term. Mika will not keep up his production for a decade..... we need that insulation from an 18-22 year old type prospect.

Chances are against that. But even if they do, the chances that they have a similar season to what Kakko had as opposed to what McDavid had is far more likely than not. As a matter of fact, the chances of them having a second season like Barkov had is also far more likely than not. That is even if they jump straight into the NHL. Given all that, how in the world does it make sense to trade a young, elite offensive defenseman for a prospect that will probably not be read for prime time and may not be ready to contribute for another 3-4 years? Isn't this the literal example of how to get a perpetual rebuild?

Isn't adding an Alexis Lafreniere or Quentin Byfield an example of a perpetual rebuild? No, it is not, it is an example of putting the final pieces rebuilt core of forwards to match our exemplary depth of defensive prospects.

It would be rebuild over at that point. Not "rebuild continue indefinitely."

We'd have every piece we need with the possible exception of top pair LD.

You have Panarin, Kreider, & Zbad here. How can you justify burning off another year of peak performance?

Because we aren't winning any Stanley Cups in the next 2 years anyway. This team lacks the necessary forward components in terms of depth and quality to truly compete for a Cup with teams like the Bruins. Two forwards are basically carrying us right now and that's not good enough for a long playoff run.

Their years are getting burned one way or the other. What do I care if it's missing the playoffs next year, versus getting bounced in the first or second round?

And again, I'm not talking about stockpiling late-selected Filip Chytils who are good prospects but take a half decade to arrive. I'm talking about a known Kakko-level prospect who arrives in the NHL next season or the year after, and is contributing quality middle-6 minutes or better the year or so after that. Like we expect with Kakko.

That's how you make a contender for 2022 while Panarin and Mika are still playing well, and you have quality and quantity in the forward pipeline.

I'm basically implying, if I could clone Kakko and trade ADA for that clone, would I do it? I think there's a good argument to be made for 'yes.'