Teams that want to take a serious run in the playoffs usually have a full compliment of picks and more at the deadline. Rangers need to start filling in the missing picks and add more over the next couple of years. To be in on the top players available a GM has to have something serious to offer.
I’m not a big fan of loading up with picks so that we can buy players at the deadline. I’d like to trade for picks, use them to pick and develop players. Makes more sense.
Last season, much like the 17-18 season, we attempted to trade our way into contention. I get the Costantini and Moore acquisitions. 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 8th for a couple high end OA’s? Great additions at a good price.
Zhilkin and Arcuri however? For the pair, 4x2nds, 6x3rds, 4th, 5th? I’m not saying they weren’t worth that or that they weren’t acquired at market value. I’m saying if we’d have drafted properly, and had extra high picks to have more successful drafts, we don’t make those trades. Or at least not both of them.
Our ‘04 draft was bad. Yes there were a couple good players there. But we did not have a 2nd round pick that year. Having 3x3nds and 2x4ths was good, but none of those picks were a factor in last year’s post season. If not for the Hunter Brzustewicz acquisition and the two imports, the contribution from the ‘04 contingent would have been next to nil. A strong ‘04 group means we likely don’t have to trade for one of if not both of Zhilkin / Arcuri.
Our ‘05 draft was better, but again, no 2nd rounder. You should get very good players in the 2nd round. Not having at least one 2nd rounder at the draft sets us back.
What our game plan should be going forward:
MM has already started things just fine. We have what looks to be a very good to high end ‘07 group. And he seems to be adding ‘06 pieces that could have some upside.
We should be looking to improve the 07 group, add a piece or two to the 06 group, and bring in the picks that would give us strong 08 and 09 groups. To achieve this, attempt to trade as many of our graduating players as we can this year, and I believe we need to move Rehkopf this year as well but only if the price is right.
Our goal needs to be, since we’re rebuilding over the next two years, to be really good in 25-26 and possibly host and be the favorite in 26-27, and have a 27-28 returning group good enough to be pretty good again, or, as Hamilton did last year, have multiple, quality returning pieces to start the process over again.
Being really good in 25-26 means that the ‘06 group needs to be good. I’m not expecting spectacular, but good enough to be a complement to the ‘07 group who’ll be a force in their 3rd year here. Since the ‘06 group likely won’t be top shelf, they should provide good OA options for the 26-27 season. And if we can get three of those ‘06’s to be very good OA’s, we won’t need to burn assets to improve that 26-27 OA group.
And 26-27 goes without saying. All in big time. But, we cannot be trading our way into contention that year. We need to be elite already, then maybe make a couple deals to augment an already elite group. To do this, we won’t need a very deep draft pick cupboard, going into the 26-27 season, if we acquire the picks / players this year by dealing our graduating players and hopefully Rehkopf.
What we need in return is 06 and 07 player(s) and mutilple 2nd and 3rd round picks in the next two drafts.
Christian Kyrou went last year for Alex Daviault (17 year old 3rd rounder), 2x2nds, 3rd, 4th, 5th. That’s my Hunter Brzustewicz trade comparable and I try to get that return for him: a decent ‘06 plus the picks.
The Owen Beck return was a 1st rounder, an 18 year old 2nd rounder, 2x2nds, 3rd, 4th. That’s my Rehkopf trade comparable. To move him, we need close to this return.
If we accomplish the above, we look like this post trade deadline:
06’s x 4.
Bottineau, DiFelice, Ellinas plus the ‘06 that would come in the Hunter B deal. If everything pans out right, perhaps we have a decent to pretty good ‘06 group.
07’s x 6.
Romano, Lam, Reid, Stark, and whoever comes in the Rehkopf deal. That’s five solid 07’s. Once you factor in MacNiel, Edwards and Arquette (I think he’s signed?), we could have the best concentration of 07’s on one team league wide.
To make sure we have the best shot of having really good ‘08’s and ‘09’s, we should aim to have, say, five picks in the first three rounds of the next two drafts. Three 2nds and a 3rd or two and two. This shouldn’t be a problem with the picks coming back in the Brzustewicz / Rehkopf trades, along with what we may be able to bring in if we move any other graduating players.
The players we draft in the ‘24 and ‘25 drafts will be the supporting cast when we contend in 25-26 and 26-27. If these 17 and 18 year olds are valuable contributors, it lessens the need to fill holes by burning assets to bring in expensive players like Zhilkin and Arcuri.
If we get the contribution expected from the 16, 17, and 18 year old groups in those two years, we’d only need to make inexpensive, minor deals for supporting players.
Again, we have to put the brakes on trading multiple 2nds and 3rds at deadlines for graduating vets. The best way to build a winning roster is to take those 2nds and 3rds, use them to draft and develop players to be high end contributors in their 3rd and 4th years. Do that, and there’s no need to trade for multiple high end vets at the deadline when we’re in an all in year.
In ‘03, we really only made one major deal (Campbell) and some secondary deals (Clarkson, Halkidis, O’Nabigon). We didn’t break the bank on those deals and none were done at the deadline. Why? Because along with our high end graduating players, we had high end 18 and 17 year old players who were major factors. Even the 16 year old 1st rounder Evan McGrath played important minutes. There was no need to spend huge at the deadline.
In ‘08, the Mason deal was the big splash at the deadline but that was it for expensive acquisitions. Shutron and Tregunna were a tier below but we didn’t break the bank dealing for those two, and only Tregunna was brought in at the deadline. We were already a top end team with little need for multiple major additions.
Going into the possible hosting year, our 1st rounder taken in the ‘26 draft may be in play but only if it’s for the right return. Based on what we should have already existing, we shouldn’t have to trade our way into being a top contender. The pieces should already be there. Then, maybe, you tweak things. That being the case, our ‘26 1st may not need to be on the table.
Apologies. This post went longer than I expected.
