Speculation: Trade / Roster Speculation Thread XXXIII: Clever Title Pending

[Inferno]

Such as? I'm not trying to be a dick I'm curious who you're thinking of. Because from my point of view the vast majority of teams that have had windows of more than a year or two and who have consistently been near the top of their conferences acquired most of their core via the draft.

Bostons core as it stands now was almost exclusively built through low draft picks.

Same with Detroit.

Rangers still have 2nd, 3rd, etc picks. and we've picked VERY well in the later rounds.

Rangers dont have top end talent, they used their middle to late round picks to get that top end talent.

i have no problem at all with the way the Rangers are doing it. Theyre one of the better teams in the NHL. And easily one of the 3 or 4 best teams in the East.

 

[NYR Viper]

I'm watching the Anaheim game, what about DSP? Big body. LW. Likes to hit and drive the net. They have a ton of depth at forward. The Rangers need a player like him. Hard-nosed, big body, shouldn't be overly expensive. Thoughts?

 

[BroadwayHustle]

I'm watching the Anaheim game, what about DSP? Big body. LW. Likes to hit and drive the net. They have a ton of depth at forward. The Rangers need a player like him. Hard-nosed, big body, shouldn't be overly expensive. Thoughts?

I think he can be acquired in a reasonable deal considering he hasn't been as good as when they first brought him up and they have a lot of young guys getting ready to crack the lineup. The problem is what do you trade for him? Do they want a prospect or draft picks? They still need C's so who knows, maybe someone like Oscar Lindberg gets it done. Not sure if I do that

 

[NYR Viper]

I think he can be acquired in a reasonable deal considering he hasn't been as good as when they first brought him up and they have a lot of young guys getting ready to crack the lineup. The problem is what do you trade for him? Do they want a prospect or draft picks? They still need C's so who knows, maybe someone like Oscar Lindberg gets it done. Not sure if I do that

I wouldn't. I'd start with someone like St Croix

 

[BroadwayHustle]

I wouldn't. I'd start with someone like St Croix

What has happened to him? I know he is/was a boom, bust prospect but he didn't even put up impressive numbers in the ECHL

 

[NYR Viper]

What has happened to him? I know he is/was a boom, bust prospect but he didn't even put up impressive numbers in the ECHL

Point per game in the ECHL is impressive

 

[BroadwayHustle]

Point per game in the ECHL is impressive

My bad then, just a little under ppg. I know he has good hands and has always had more assists than goals looking at his stats. Is his max upside Brassard? I actually thought he was more of a goal scoring center because of how good his hands supposedly are from what I last heard about him. I clearly haven't paid much attention to him -.-

 

[NYR Viper]

My bad then, just a little under ppg. I know he has good hands and has always had more assists than goals looking at his stats. Is his max upside Brassard? I actually thought he was more of a goal scoring center because of how good his hands supposedly are from what I last heard about him. I clearly haven't paid much attention to him -.-

I think the hope has to be Brassard or Parenteau.

 

[Bluenote13]

I'm watching the Anaheim game, what about DSP? Big body. LW. Likes to hit and drive the net. They have a ton of depth at forward. The Rangers need a player like him. Hard-nosed, big body, shouldn't be overly expensive. Thoughts?

I think he was one of the better AHL forwards under 22 this year. He scored 20 of his 27 goals after the new year, 20 goals in 34 games. I think he has good value and I wouldn't be surprised if the Quacks kept him for now.

 

[NewLife]

Bostons core as it stands now was almost exclusively built through low draft picks.

Same with Detroit.

Rangers still have 2nd, 3rd, etc picks. and we've picked VERY well in the later rounds.

Rangers dont have top end talent, they used their middle to late round picks to get that top end talent.

i have no problem at all with the way the Rangers are doing it. Theyre one of the better teams in the NHL. And easily one of the 3 or 4 best teams in the East.

Exactly, they may not have find some true elite talent in the draft but been able to find a lot solid players which are the core of this team and some other been traded for top notch players.

 

[GAGLine]

Here are the list of players who played at least 60 games with the Boston Bruins:

C Gregory Campbell 82 8 13 21 1 0 1 2 47 84 9.52 11:54
C Brad Marchand 82 25 28 53 36 1 5 5 64 149 16.78 15:56
R Reilly Smith 82 20 31 51 28 6 0 3 14 146 13.70 14:42
C Patrice Bergeron 80 30 32 62 38 7 1 7 43 243 12.35 17:59
C David Krejci 80 19 50 69 39 3 0 6 28 169 11.24 19:07
L Milan Lucic 80 24 35 59 30 3 0 5 91 153 15.69 17:22
D Torey Krug 79 14 26 40 18 6 0 2 28 183 7.65 17:30
R Jarome Iginla 78 30 31 61 34 4 0 8 47 209 14.35 18:12
D Zdeno Chara 77 17 23 40 25 10 0 3 66 168 10.12 24:39
D Johnny Boychuk 75 5 18 23 31 0 0 1 45 142 3.52 21:11
C Carl Soderberg 73 16 32 48 4 5 0 3 36 129 12.40 14:15
L Daniel Paille 72 9 9 18 9 0 1 1 6 71 12.68 10:57
L Shawn Thornton 64 5 3 8 3 0 0 1 74 93 5.38 8:47
D Matt Bartkowski 64 0 18 18 22 0 0 0 30 91 0.00 19:32
D Dougie Hamilton 64 7 18 25 22 2 0 1 40 114 6.14 19:06
L Loui Eriksson 61 10 27 37 14 2 0 2 6 115 8.70 16:31

Eriksson: Drafted by Dallas
Hamilton: Boston
Bartkowski: Florida
Thornton: Toronto
Paille: Buffalo
Soderberg: St. Louis
Boychuk: Colorado
Chara: Islanders
Iginla: Dallas
Krug: Boston
Lucic: Boston
Krejci: Boston
Bergeron: Boston
Smith: Dallas
Marchand: Boston
Campbell: Florida

So out of the 16 players who played at least 60 games for the team...only 6 of them were actually drafted by the Bruins.

Not even half.

37.5%.

If you include their 2 goalies, Rask and Johnson, that becomes 6 out of 18.

33%


I would call complete and utter shenanigans that the only way to build an elite team is through the draft.

Which of those players did boston acquire by trading away high draft picks? The only 1st round pick they traded in recent years was for Kaberle and I don't think anyone would call that a smart move in hindsight, but at least they won the cup that year, so who cares.

They basically stole Rask from toronto. They signed Chara as a UFA. They traded Kessel (who they drafted 5th overall) to toronto for Seguin (2nd overall pick) and Hamilton (8th overall). They then traded Seguin for Eriksson and Smith. They signed Iginla as a UFA.

Draft picks are assets. Boston generally doesn't waste them. Trading what may end up being 2 1st round picks for a 38 year old player is a waste unless we get a cup out of it.

 

[aufheben]

Hamilton, Krug, Lucic, Krejci, Marchand, Kessel, Bergeron, Seguin...these are/were [mostly] enormous players for Boston. Using Boston as a example of elite teams not building through the draft...is probably the worst team you could choose as an example. Of course it wasn't EXCLUSIVELY through the draft...they signed Chara, supplementing their core, which were draft picks.

Picks are also assets, which can be used to acquire core players. Rask wasn't drafted by the Bruins, they traded Raycroft for him, who was drafted by Boston. Hossa was a supplemental piece to Chicago's core: Keith, Seabrook, Toews, Kane, Sharp; Patrick Sharp wasn't drafted by Chicago, but they traded a prospect (?) and a draft pick for him.

Jarmo and the Blues built through the draft. Hell, people can call it an aberration if they want, but our most successful team to date was filled (12?) with homegrown players.

 

[Trxjw]

Here are the list of players who played at least 60 games with the Boston Bruins:

C Gregory Campbell 82 8 13 21 1 0 1 2 47 84 9.52 11:54
C Brad Marchand 82 25 28 53 36 1 5 5 64 149 16.78 15:56
R Reilly Smith 82 20 31 51 28 6 0 3 14 146 13.70 14:42
C Patrice Bergeron 80 30 32 62 38 7 1 7 43 243 12.35 17:59
C David Krejci 80 19 50 69 39 3 0 6 28 169 11.24 19:07
L Milan Lucic 80 24 35 59 30 3 0 5 91 153 15.69 17:22
D Torey Krug 79 14 26 40 18 6 0 2 28 183 7.65 17:30
R Jarome Iginla 78 30 31 61 34 4 0 8 47 209 14.35 18:12
D Zdeno Chara 77 17 23 40 25 10 0 3 66 168 10.12 24:39
D Johnny Boychuk 75 5 18 23 31 0 0 1 45 142 3.52 21:11
C Carl Soderberg 73 16 32 48 4 5 0 3 36 129 12.40 14:15
L Daniel Paille 72 9 9 18 9 0 1 1 6 71 12.68 10:57
L Shawn Thornton 64 5 3 8 3 0 0 1 74 93 5.38 8:47
D Matt Bartkowski 64 0 18 18 22 0 0 0 30 91 0.00 19:32
D Dougie Hamilton 64 7 18 25 22 2 0 1 40 114 6.14 19:06
L Loui Eriksson 61 10 27 37 14 2 0 2 6 115 8.70 16:31

Eriksson: Drafted by Dallas
Hamilton: Boston
Bartkowski: Florida
Thornton: Toronto
Paille: Buffalo
Soderberg: St. Louis
Boychuk: Colorado
Chara: Islanders
Iginla: Dallas
Krug: Boston
Lucic: Boston
Krejci: Boston
Bergeron: Boston
Smith: Dallas
Marchand: Boston
Campbell: Florida

So out of the 16 players who played at least 60 games for the team...only 6 of them were actually drafted by the Bruins.

Not even half.

37.5%.

If you include their 2 goalies, Rask and Johnson, that becomes 6 out of 18.

33%


I would call complete and utter shenanigans that the only way to build an elite team is through the draft.

How did Boston manage to trade for Eriksson and Smith? By trading a recent 2nd overall draftee. How did they land Seguin? By trading a 30 goal scoring, former 5th overall pick. Soderberg? Acquired by trading a former 1st round pick Hannu Toivonen. Rask? Acquired by dealing Raycroft, a former 1st round pick.

Building through the draft isn't only about stocking your roster with drafted players.

 

[GAGLine]

Hamilton, Krug, Lucic, Krejci, Marchand, Kessel, Bergeron, Seguin...these are/were [mostly] enormous players for Boston. Using Boston as a example of elite teams not building through the draft...is probably the worst team you could choose as an example. Of course it wasn't EXCLUSIVELY through the draft...they signed Chara, supplementing their core, which were draft picks.

Picks are also assets, which can be used to acquire core players. Rask wasn't drafted by the Bruins, they traded Raycroft for him, who was drafted by Boston. Hossa was a supplemental piece to Chicago's core: Keith, Seabrook, Toews, Kane, Sharp; Patrick Sharp wasn't drafted by Chicago, but they traded a prospect (?) and a draft pick for him.

Jarmo and the Blues built through the draft.

Exactly. I'm not against trading assets. I'm against wasting them. 1st round picks are extremely valuable in today's NHL. If we reach the ECF this year, we will have traded away 3 1st round picks in 4 years, 2 of them for a player who turns 39 in a couple months.

That isn't a move made with an eye to the future. That's a win now move and if we don't win now, it can't be considered anything but a mistake.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

How did Boston manage to trade for Eriksson and Smith? By trading a recent 2nd overall draftee. How did they land Seguin? By trading a 30 goal scoring, former 5th overall pick. Soderberg? Acquired by trading a former 1st round pick Hannu Toivonen. Rask? Acquired by dealing Raycroft, a former 1st round pick.

Building through the draft isn't only about stocking your roster with drafted players.

As they say in tennis Game. Set. Match.

People need to stop looking at draft picks as question marks that might not work out, and look at them more as organizational assets.

Now, whether the Rangers organization has the knowledge and foresight to pull off solid trades like that is another story altogether, but one can dream

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Exactly. I'm not against trading assets. I'm against wasting them. 1st round picks are extremely valuable in today's NHL. If we reach the ECF this year, we will have traded away 3 1st round picks in 4 years, 2 of them for a player who turns 39 in a couple months.

That isn't a move made with an eye to the future. That's a win now move and if we don't win now, it can't be considered anything but a mistake.

Well said.

 

[Tawnos]

I think the point is that there isn't one way to do this. Boston needed to move a bunch of their 1st rounders to get where they have been. Does it really matter if it was before they made the selections or after?

I don't think Inferno is saying that he will be happy if MSL retires and the Rangers didn't win a Cup while he was here. He's saying that the Rangers strategy here is definitely a viable one (although there are some here who say there is no strategy).

It would be nice if our GM was held accountable based on the success of his strategy, legitimate or not.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I think the point is that there isn't one way to do this. Boston needed to move a bunch of their 1st rounders to get where they have been. Does it really matter if it was before they made the selections or after?

I don't think Inferno is saying that he will be happy if MSL retires and the Rangers didn't win a Cup while he was here. He's saying that the Rangers strategy here is definitely a viable one (although there are some here who say there is no strategy).

It would be nice if our GM was held accountable based on the success of his strategy, legitimate or not.

I think the point, above all else, is that Boston traded these young assets for OTHER young assets. They've been incredible at making moves that benefit right now and into the future.

The Rangers selling off picks for a 39 year old isn't quite the same thing.

It takes real research and legwork to do what Boston did; something Glen Sather seemingly has little patience and energy for

 

[Trxjw]

I think the point, above all else, is that Boston traded these young assets for OTHER young assets. They've been incredible at making moves that benefit right now and into the future.

The Rangers selling off picks for a 39 year old isn't quite the same thing.

It takes real research and legwork to do what Boston did; something Glen Sather seemingly has little patience and energy for

Exactly. I'm not diametrically opposed to dealing away draft picks or prospects. I am, however, opposed to dealing them for depreciating assets.

This team is absolutely terrible when it comes to seeing beyond the next 12 months.

 

[pld459666]

I don't have a problem trading picks. Be those trades for younger players or elite players on the back nine of their careers.

I do have a problem of potentially trading 3 first rounders in three consecutive years.

2013 1st gone in the Nash trade.

2014 1st could be gone if we get to the ECF

2015 1st gone in the MSL trade.

I don't have a problem trading any one of those picks. Heck, I could even live with trading two of them.

But three 1st rounders in consecutive seasons? I think it's major mistake.

And while this is just my opinion, I would not look at the most recent college FA's as anything close to replacing the picks we are moving.

Could they be that 1 in a 1000 that make it? Sure. However, I think the are odds better that they amount to nothing of significance.

Not to the same extreme, but these youth for established vet trades are starting to remind me of the pre-2005 NYR approach to team building.

 

[OverTheCap]

I'd like to see more trades of the Gomez for McDonagh variety rather than Nash/MSL type trades. They need to target young cost-controlled players who have yet to enter their prime and possess the potential to have a long-term meaningful impact on the team.

 

[Ian]

Jagr is still pretty effective at 42, no?

So why is acquiring MSL a move that doesn't "see beyond the next 12 months"?

I don't agree either with how much Sather gave up, but can anyone truthfully say MSL won't be the best offensive player on this team for the next 3 seasons (barring another trade obv)? Not to mention his lower than actual value contract, which I'd imagine he'd extend at a similar cost.

 

[Ian]

I'd like to see more trades of the Gomez for McDonagh variety rather than Nash/MSL type trades. They need to target young cost-controlled players who have yet to enter their prime and possess the potential to have a long-term meaningful impact on the team.

Me, you and fans of 29 other teams agree.

The problem is any semi-intelligent GM is not going to make that move, unless there is substantial risk on one side of the equation (Tyutin for Zherdev, for example), or the GM is a flat out moron (Gomez trade).

 

[Ail]

I think the point, above all else, is that Boston traded these young assets for OTHER young assets. They've been incredible at making moves that benefit right now and into the future.

The Rangers selling off picks for a 39 year old isn't quite the same thing.

It takes real research and legwork to do what Boston did; something Glen Sather seemingly has little patience and energy for

You are giving Chiarelli too much credit and Sather not enough. Has Boston been great at getting good value for their assets? Absolutely. Among the best, but there is no formula for what makes a great prospect or budding future NHL impact player. How much of this is research and how much is luck? What do you call McDonagh? It sure looked like the Rangers did their homework on him. Drafting Stepan that collectively had most of the draft day world going, "Who and huh?" Giving Stralman a chance? Signing UDFA Girardi? Not giving up on Zuccarello?

Not to mention one of the guys who was supposedly instrumental in helping build that Boston champion has been helping build the Rangers. Glen has a habit of trading young assets for proven talent while Boston trades a lot of theirs for young potential talent. Honestly people bash the **** out ot Sather for that Nash trade but how close is that to Boston trading for Eriksson with Smith looking like a steal. People are grilling Sather over this MSL trade, look at what Boston almost (was still very willing) paid for Iginla. More than the Penguins ended up paying for him.

Boston, Boston, Boston. People just love to curse Sather for all the dumb things he did and rarely credit him for the good. Meanwhile the darling of most Ranger fans who hate Sather in Boston has made similar moves the difference being their ability to put the puzzle together rather than just dumping the right pieces all over the table and hoping it all comes together eventually. The Rangers are a good team now and not as far off as everyone likes to think as being in the same league as Boston.

 

[Ail]

Also yes I am fully aware I was saying almost the opposite about this team in the first three months before they started playing like one. I have no shame admitting I jumped the gun and didn't give them a chance.