Salary Cap: 2014 - 2015 New York Rangers :: Roster Building / Proposal Thread Part X

[aufheben]

A higher number.

-__-

The closer to 1 (or -1), the higher the correlation. "Strong" is pretty subjective, but I typically use 0.80 as a threshold. If the number is close to -1, it means that the two variables are strongly correlated, but in opposite directions (i.e., when one goes up, the other goes down).

So, a correlation coefficient of 0.45 for FO% vs CF% basically means "meh, nothing to see here".

I see, thanks.

Unsurprising results.

 

[silverfish]

Sorry. I took AP stats, but it was two years ago. I'm a little rusty.

Well, I suppose it's all subjective and depends on the data you're looking at as to what you'd deem a "suitable" correlation

What's Osh% in that chart? Shooting percentage?

 

[Kakko]

Well, I suppose it's all subjective and depends on the data you're looking at as to what you'd deem a "suitable" correlation

What's Osh% in that chart? Shooting percentage?

I think it's onIce shooting percentage

 

[Barnaby]

Based on what Legwand got last year, I'd go as high as Lindberg (Jarnkrok), Mueller (Eavers), 3rd round pick (3rd round pick).

I would make that deal as well, but last year was a strange year. There were a lot of forwards available that drove prices down. The same could happen this year - who knows - but I wouldn't count on it. I wouldn't be shocked if a team with a hole offers up a late first rounder, but I think you're most likely looking at a quality prospect + a 2nd rounder. It just comes down to whether or not you want to pay that.

 

[RGY]

If i see one more Duclair proposal I'm gona lose it.

 

[Barnaby]

You have to ask about Hall, but I don't see a realistic deal that doesn't significantly impact the team this year which we don't want to do. I'd love to add him as the younger piece, then let St Louis leave as a free agent at years end. EDM probably wants a young top 4 d-man who may potentially play top pair. A young top 6 forward. A first rounder in 2015. Someone may pay that, but it won't be us. I wouldn't be surprised to see a team like Toronto jump on it. (Nylander, Gardiner or Reilly, 2015 first maybe? - Shanny makes a splash and likely makes the playoffs in his first year at the helm.)

 

[Zuccarello Awesome*]

If i see one more Duclair proposal I'm gona lose it.

A Stanley Cup isn't worth Anthony Duclair?

This is the same franchise that traded Gartner, Weight, and Amonte to put them over the top and win The Cup.

You're probably right that my proposal including Duclair for Helm + DeKeyser/Kindl would be ill-advised.

But I don't like generalities. It's not so black and white. If a trade that sends Duclair out makes us a better team long-term or gives us a significant enough advantage short-term, then he should be traded.

I'm a huge Duclair fan. He's a great prospect, but he's not Gretzky. He shouldn't hold up any trade that significantly into goes our chances at a Cup in the remaining Lundqvist-sized window.

 

[NYRangerFan*]

A Stanley Cup isn't worth Anthony Duclair?

This is the same franchise that traded Gartner, Weight, and Amonte to put them over the top and win The Cup.

You're probably right that my proposal including Duclair for Helm + DeKeyser/Kindl would be ill-advised.

But I don't like generalities. It's not so black and white. If a trade that sends Duclair out makes us a better team long-term or gives us a significant enough advantage short-term, then he should be traded.

I'm a huge Duclair fan. He's a great prospect, but he's not Gretzky. He shouldn't hold up any trade that significantly into goes our chances at a Cup in the remaining Lundqvist-sized window.

A cup isn't guaranteed

 

[Zuccarello Awesome*]

A cup isn't guaranteed

It never is.

What's your point?

Should we never make trades to try to build a better playoff team because nothing's guaranteed?

Again, there's much more grey than black and white in all of this.

After re-thinking my proposal, I would agree with RGY that adding Helm and Kindl probably isn't worth Duclair (although if Helm and Kindl play major roles in us winning a cup, wouldn't it be?). But I disagree with the notion that Duclair shouldn't be mentioned in any trade proposals as if he's untouchable because he's dominated the OHL and looked good in the WJC. Plenty if much better prospects have been discussed and have been traded than Duclair.

Hindsight is 20-20. If we trade Duclair and win The Cup, then it was worth it. If we trade him and we don't then we made a mistake. Playing it safe will only get you so far. IMO: When your window is Lundqvist, you have to take a chance and go all-in at some point or you'll simply watch the window close.

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

A Stanley Cup isn't worth Anthony Duclair?

This is the same franchise that traded Gartner, Weight, and Amonte to put them over the top and win The Cup.

You're probably right that my proposal including Duclair for Helm + DeKeyser/Kindl would be ill-advised.

But I don't like generalities. It's not so black and white. If a trade that sends Duclair out makes us a better team long-term or gives us a significant enough advantage short-term, then he should be traded.

I'm a huge Duclair fan. He's a great prospect, but he's not Gretzky. He shouldn't hold up any trade that significantly into goes our chances at a Cup in the remaining Lundqvist-sized window.

It's a different world now--there's a cap that rewards teams that can develop cheap effective players. Plus, I haven't heard anyone chanting 1994....

 

[aufheben]

It never is.

What's your point?

Should we never make trades to try to build a better playoff team because nothing's guaranteed?

Again, there's much more grey than black and white in all of this.

After re-thinking my proposal, I would agree with RGY that adding Helm and Kindl probably isn't worth Duclair (although if Helm and Kindl play major roles in us winning a cup, wouldn't it be?). But I disagree with the notion that Duclair shouldn't be mentioned in any trade proposals as if he's untouchable because he's dominated the OHL and looked good in the WJC. Plenty if much better prospects have been discussed and have been traded than Duclair.

Hindsight is 20-20. If we trade Duclair and win The Cup, then it was worth it. If we trade him and we don't then we made a mistake. Playing it safe will only get you so far. IMO: When your window is Lundqvist, you have to take a chance and go all-in at some point or you'll simply watch the window close.

I don't really agree with this. Just a small note.

 

[RGY]

A Stanley Cup isn't worth Anthony Duclair?

This is the same franchise that traded Gartner, Weight, and Amonte to put them over the top and win The Cup.

You're probably right that my proposal including Duclair for Helm + DeKeyser/Kindl would be ill-advised.

But I don't like generalities. It's not so black and white. If a trade that sends Duclair out makes us a better team long-term or gives us a significant enough advantage short-term, then he should be traded.

I'm a huge Duclair fan. He's a great prospect, but he's not Gretzky. He shouldn't hold up any trade that significantly into goes our chances at a Cup in the remaining Lundqvist-sized window.

Who said we need to give up Duclair or even Miller for that matter to compete for a cup? Have you watched this team since we got healthy? Have you checked out the stat categories that provide the facts and that they aren't just getting lucky? This team is that good. They aren't going to be up against the wall pressed to make a trade at the deadline.

People still argue against the Weight and Amonte trades. Rangers might have still won the cup having kept them. They were tough ones to swallow. And imo those moves coupled with other bad moves hurt the rangers down the road and eventually crippled them with 7 years of not making the playoffs.

You're proposal is awful. Duclair is arguably our best forward prospect. He has a skill level that is unmatched in our system. An ability to take defenders one on one that we haven't seen in a prospect since Cherepanov. You don't trade those type of players for Darren Helm and Dekeyser/Kindl who are 3/4 defenseman in Detroit and would be a 5/6 guy here. That's just stupid management.

No prospect is Gretzky. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have a stranglehold on certain prospects in our system that are untouchables. Duclair, Buchnevich, Skjei are untouchables. Plain and simple. In this cap era you need to have cheap ELC's that can step in when you can't afford to re-sign players...which is exactly what we are facing. The '94 Rangers did not have to worry about the cap. Neil Smith and management could trade their youth and just re-sign/sign players to replace holes with no implications.

The Rangers upgrading the 6D spot would be a luxury not a necessity. Upgrading the 3rd line wing position would be a luxury. Upgrading our ability to win face-offs is the only "necessity" imo. But this team has proven they can succeed with Hayes going through the growing pains in the face-off dot. Look at the center they just matched up against; Getzlaf/Kesler, Carter/Kopitar, Thornton/Pavelski. I;m not as concerned as some are. The Rangers are not going to be adding a high profile player that will cost our big three prospects because there simply isn't one available other than Hall really....but even if you want to consider him there is the cap implications. The Rangers will add what is affordable both in terms of salary and in assets. They are not desperate by any means.

There is no shot in hell the Rangers move any of Buch, Duke, Skjei. No shot. Management (Gorton and Clarke especially) are so high on them its unreal. I'd even go as far to say Miller and Fast are a long shot to be moved. The Rangers need that cheap talent in the coming years in order to keep their more expensive ones to SUSTAIN a contending team every year.

 

[Synergy27]

Hindsight is 20-20. If we trade Duclair and win The Cup, then it was worth it. If we trade him and we don't then we made a mistake. Playing it safe will only get you so far. IMO: When your window is Lundqvist, you have to take a chance and go all-in at some point or you'll simply watch the window close.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I do think you're over-simplifying the possibilities a little bit. What if they don't trade him and don't win the Cup, but then go on to win 2 Cups in the next 5 years? I don't want to go down the "what if" rabbit hole, just want to point out that it's not quite as cut and dry as you're making it out to be.

 

[coolbean04]

Trading these top prospects is ludicrous. This team should be built with a nucleus in the mold of Detroit. Be strong contenders for the next 10 years. Don't be so short minded and trade your future for a slight increase of the cup. Remember, you are trading top prospects for a 3rd liner or a 3rd pairing stud. There are other cheaper options out there that can give us 75% of what vermette or sekera can bring us for pennies on the dollar.

 

[Barnaby]

If i see one more Duclair proposal I'm gona lose it.

Guys like Duclair, Skjei, and Buchnevich should only be mentioned if the return is massive. If you were making a Taylor Hall trade then it's understandable (not saying they will/should … cap etc.. just an example). If you are talking about a 3rd liner/faceoff specialist/6th defenseman, then hell no. It's those types of players on ELC's that allow you to retain your top talent, and possibly add to it.

 

[NYRangerFan*]

It never is.

What's your point?

Should we never make trades to try to build a better playoff team because nothing's guaranteed?

Again, there's much more grey than black and white in all of this.

After re-thinking my proposal, I would agree with RGY that adding Helm and Kindl probably isn't worth Duclair (although if Helm and Kindl play major roles in us winning a cup, wouldn't it be?). But I disagree with the notion that Duclair shouldn't be mentioned in any trade proposals as if he's untouchable because he's dominated the OHL and looked good in the WJC. Plenty if much better prospects have been discussed and have been traded than Duclair.

Hindsight is 20-20. If we trade Duclair and win The Cup, then it was worth it. If we trade him and we don't then we made a mistake. Playing it safe will only get you so far. IMO: When your window is Lundqvist, you have to take a chance and go all-in at some point or you'll simply watch the window close.

Yeah ok. So while we are at it, trade Buch, Halverson, Iverson, and Skjei along with Duke. Who cares about the cap? Its 2015 and you need young players on ELC's to contribute but no, lets trade all of them for older guys and ruin the entire organization for years to come. Duclair SHOULDN'T be mentioned because he will be a huge part of our future and i'm not messing that up because you think we need to trade guys like him to win a cup. We are close. Maybe closer than we all know, one or two MINOR trades might be all we need. Duke goes nowhere

 

[Machinehead]

It never is.

What's your point?

Should we never make trades to try to build a better playoff team because nothing's guaranteed?

Again, there's much more grey than black and white in all of this.

After re-thinking my proposal, I would agree with RGY that adding Helm and Kindl probably isn't worth Duclair (although if Helm and Kindl play major roles in us winning a cup, wouldn't it be?). But I disagree with the notion that Duclair shouldn't be mentioned in any trade proposals as if he's untouchable because he's dominated the OHL and looked good in the WJC. Plenty if much better prospects have been discussed and have been traded than Duclair.

Hindsight is 20-20. If we trade Duclair and win The Cup, then it was worth it. If we trade him and we don't then we made a mistake. Playing it safe will only get you so far. IMO: When your window is Lundqvist, you have to take a chance and go all-in at some point or you'll simply watch the window close.

I'd rather contend consistently and have a few decent shots at the Cup than trade youth for one shot at it and maybe not get it anyway.

We're good enough as we are to win the Cup if we're hot. And being hot in May is really all it comes down to.

I've yet to see a single proposal that isn't a trade for the sake of a trade.

 

[Vidic15*]

A cup isn't guaranteed

Neither is Duclair.

 

[Zuccarello Awesome*]

Sacrificing the future (Duclair) for a couple of key role players who know how to win in the playoffs now

is not a trade for the sake of making a trade.

Don't lump me in with bern and that madness.

I already said (3x now) that I conceded the proposal and that RGY was right that we shouldn't give up Duclair for Helm+Kindl.

But all teams make trades that sacrifice the future when they're on the cusp. We're certainly a contender, but are we all that different from 3-5 other teams in the East alone?

Are we head and shoulders above BOS, PITT, WAS, MON?

Are we even a better team than Tampa Bay?

Over a 7 game series, having Helm and Kindl in the lineup gives us a much better chance than relying on John Moore / Matt Hunwick taking regular playoff shifts and relying on a rookie in Hayes to anchor a third line, win faceoffs, and most importantly continue to play at a high level after 82+ games when he's never played more than 45 in one season.

My proposal suggested J.Moore, Duclair, Miller, Kristo/Haggerty, and a 2nd rounder.

So Miller and JMoore come out.

Helm and Kindl take their spots.

Duclair has no relevance on this team's roster since he's playing in juniors for the rest of the season regardless.

So upgrading JMoore and Miller to Helm and Kindl at the expense of Duclair and a 2nd...

Maybe you think it's too high of a price to pay.

Maybe you think Duclair is untouchable because "management is so high on them!" (as if they'd be low on a recent draft pick regardless of their performance)

Maybe you think it's just the wrong move.


I'm fine with all of those.

But don't tell me it's a trade for trade's sake.

It's a trade that addresses our two needs (while they are minor and you may consider upgrading these spots LUXURIES rather than necessities, other teams that we're in contention with are going to be buying at the deadline and trying to improve their rosters.

So unless you think we're head and shoulders above every team in the East and West, then upgrading Miller/JMoore to Helm/Kindl gives us a better chance to win the Stanley Cup.

Btw, that is still the goal: winning The Stanley Cup.

Not building a perennial contender that is strong every year but never wins (see: San Jose)

We could hold onto Duclair at all costs, and it seems like to some of you, you'd be happier with 5 trips to the SCF and not winning one over 2 SCF trips and winning one.

If we win the Cup this year, nothing else really matters. It won't matter if Duclair becomes the next Gretzky on Detroit, because we will have traded him to improve our chances THIS YEAR; NOW, and succeeded.

It's a gamble, yes, but watch what the other top teams do at the deadline.

Acting like the Rangers are a perfect team because they've been playing great hockey on a long streak is naive. Chicago, LA, Tampa, Anaheim, Pittsburgh, etc are all going to be looking to improve their rosters even further by the trade deadline. Are the Rangers so above all those teams that upgrading is simply a "luxury" and we should hold on to our favorite prospects at all costs? Come on now.

What do you think those teams are going to be dealing to try to upgrade?

Prospects and picks. (Forever overvalued on HF; especially on the NYR board because of our over-sensitivity to trading youth due to "the Dark Ages.") Time to get over that. Even the almighty Kings and Hawks upgraded their rosters last deadline. I guess adding Gaborik was just a case of Luxurious Lombardi

 

[Zuccarello Awesome*]

Tl;dr version:

Duclair isn't untouchable.

For the right upgrade, he's absolutely in play, just as Miller, JMoore, draft picks, and other prospects are.


NYR needs:

A) insurance for the third line, whether it's a C or a W who can take faceoffs
B) a more reliable partner for Klein


Be happy. At least we aren't seeking a top-6 C or a PPQB or a top-line winger.

We're in great shape. But we're not perfect. Just as the other top teams in the league will continue to try to improve and upgrade their rosters, we too should be actively looking to address those two minor needs. At worst, we add depth in case of injury. At best, we add a piece or two that puts us over the top and makes us a more complete team; thus: even harder to play against over a 7 game series.

Acting like our roster is perfect because of a 20-game streak of strong play is as naive and silly as the Islanders fans thinking their team is a top contender with the best chance at coming out of the East and winning The Cup because of a strong regular season streak!

 

[Machinehead]

There's improvements to be made and I'm open to moves, but the price has to be favorable. Duclair is not untouchable but I want more than a 3rd liner and/or 6D coming back for him.

One thing I've learned over the years is that the best team in the league rarely wins the Stanley Cup. The hottest team in the league in the Spring wins the Stanley Cup.

The way I look at it, we're in the mix, the rest comes down to luck. A 3rd liner or 6D could improve those odds, but I don't see them as enough of a difference maker to lose the trade long-term. Look at the LA Kings. We have a better team than them. We had a better team than them last year. It meant nothing because they had everything working at the right time and had the experience to win close games.

If we're this hot in the Spring, we win it. Sekera or Helm isn't gonna make that happen.

 

[Zuccarello Awesome*]

There's improvements to be made and I'm open to moves, but the price has to be favorable. Duclair is not untouchable but I want more than a 3rd liner and/or 6D coming back for him.

One thing I've learned over the years is that the best team in the league rarely wins the Stanley Cup. The hottest team in the league in the Spring wins the Stanley Cup.

The way I look at it, we're in the mix, the rest comes down to luck. A 3rd liner or 6D could improve those odds, but I don't see them as enough of a difference maker to lose the trade long-term. Look at the LA Kings. We have a better team than them. We had a better team than them last year. It meant nothing because they had everything working at the right time and had the experience to win close games.

If we're this hot in the Spring, we win it. Sekera or Helm isn't gonna make that happen.

100% agree.

Spot-on.

I don't want you to hate me or think I'm stupid RGY ;P I've been reading here for years and I very much respect your insights on the Rangers.

We can agree to disagree on whether our prospects are untouchable. My take is that while of course you need cheap ELC players to not only perform, but to fill important roles throughout your lineup, I don't hold up a potential deal to improve the roster simply because Prospect X is a shiny new toy and we have all the hopes that he'll reach his full potential and be a game-breaking superstar.

Of course we need to keep injecting prospects LIKE Duclair into the lineup in a cap-world, but we also just drafted him in the 3rd round. A free asset. If you can turn that asset into a player that can help your chances at a Cup in the short-term, it has to be considered. And like I said Duclair was just taken in the 3rd round, as was Buchnevich. We have two 2nds and a 3rd in the upcoming draft which is supposedly extremely deep. We could draft a player like Duclair again if he was traded. There are ways to recover and refill the prospect pool. A recently drafted 3rd round pick shouldn't hold up a deal to help us improve.

 

[Raspewtin]

Did SeventySeven make a new account?

Dear god.

 

[Zuccarello Awesome*]

Did SeventySeven make a new account?

Dear god.

Is that directed at me?

Am I doing something wrong?

Like I said, I've been a reader here for quite a while and the vast majority of your posts contribute nothing to this forum.

How about adding something productive to the discussion instead of sarcastic remarks directed at the poster, rather than the topic (against the rules that I read)? IMO, It's a sign of immaturity when your only response to an opinion that doesn't match your own is arrogant sarcasm and dismissal.

I don't mean to jump all over you, but if you search "Raspewtin," you'll see what I mean. Please consider a change in behavior / attitude. We're all hockey fans, and here we're even all NYR fans. If you disagree, state your case. (ie: RGY and myself disagreeing on prosecute being untouchable or not). There's really no need to dismiss any opinion that rivals your own. A little humility goes a long way.

 

[BBKers]

Not letting this go to 1.000. New thread is up here