Player Discussion Nils Lundkvist

[serp]

Stars needed a young-ish RHD with offensive skill right now and thats what Lundkvist brings. Any defenseman they draft with the 2023 pick will take at least 3 years until he's ready.

So far he looks like what the team wanted Honka to be but never became.

 

[Zapp]

The most interesting part of that whole debacle is it seemed Rangers fans were the most level headed about the trade. They were happy to get a 1st rounder, but they were getting on everybody's ass on the main board's about it not being a fleece deal. They knew Nils was a quality player.

 

[LT]

The most interesting part of that whole debacle is it seemed Rangers fans were the most level headed about the trade. They were happy to get a 1st rounder, but they were getting on everybody's ass on the main board's about it not being a fleece deal. They knew Nils was a quality player.

Yea this was a lot of why I really liked it. I don’t care what random people who don’t know anything about the player thinks. Especially on a board that skews heavily toward preferring picks and extreme youth.

 

[brakeyawself]

And even with a first round pick having a lot of value because of the mystery box potential, the reality of 16-20 overall pick where this one is likely to land is very much like Nill paying Tuesday for a hamburger today.

We knew Lundkvist was terrific, but that Fox is Fox and Schneider is more of the type of player we needed in our 2nd RD spot. Really if one of those players were not there, I don't think there's any chance we move Nils. Having Jones in the club helps as he's a possibility to run our PP2 in the future, which would have likely gone to Nils otherwise. But SOME of us wanted a legit center prospect in return. Not just a 1st round pick and whatever. And I think if we had traded him early last season, we could have gotten something more along those lines. Or at least more than we got in this deal from Dallas; And really, I thought it was apparent even then that there wasn't likely going to be a place for Nils long term. Schneider hadn't yet rose the ranks but it was clear he was headed in that trajectory. And I was really pushing to package Nils with like Krav or someone for a legit young center. But Drury and Krav made things uncomfortable and Nils kind of just floundered. Almost now wish we let him play a few months this season and run the PP@ just to get his value up. The way he played, all be it in one game, suggests in 3 or 4 months time he might be worth double what Dallas paid.

I would also feel better about the pick if I trusted Drury and Co. a bit more regarding how they'll spend it. If for instance, this was Dallas' front office making the pick, I'd be quite confident and thus value the pick more. But with the Rangers, there seems to be this habit of going for need more than best player available, or grit over high end talent. And then when need and talent seem to merge in availability, that's when they seem to get hit with the grit bug. Like I love how Othmann turned out, but I'm pretty sure they picked him because he had PF tendencies, also talent and a good shot, but at that point he hadn't yet broke out. And there was Wyatt freakin Johnston sitting there... the center we desperately needed..... and like 8 other centers who exploded the D+1 year, Stank, Raty, Svechkov, Pinelli, Bolduc, L'Heureux, Bourgault, Helenius.... and we got exactly none of them. Meanwhile we just drafted wingers with like 3 out of our last 4 or 5 1st round picks and we are stacked at LW, theoretically. It still boggles my mind and hurts my head.

But if I had faith that Drury would, with either pick next year, just take the best center on the board... I'd feel much better. We have an issue with taking centers it seems. Especially when they are talented. I swear if they use the pick on a D, unless it's like some Korchinski/Mintyukov level prospect that for some reason falls, I'll lose my head.

But yea, I feel like the pick is more valuable in some hands than others. Detroit and LA are other great examples, not teams that just get lucky here and there, but that consistently draft well, at least in their current regimes.

 

[Troy McClure]

We knew Lundkvist was terrific, but that Fox is Fox and Schneider is more of the type of player we needed in our 2nd RD spot. Really if one of those players were not there, I don't think there's any chance we move Nils. Having Jones in the club helps as he's a possibility to run our PP2 in the future, which would have likely gone to Nils otherwise. But SOME of us wanted a legit center prospect in return. Not just a 1st round pick and whatever. And I think if we had traded him early last season, we could have gotten something more along those lines. Or at least more than we got in this deal from Dallas; And really, I thought it was apparent even then that there wasn't likely going to be a place for Nils long term. Schneider hadn't yet rose the ranks but it was clear he was headed in that trajectory. And I was really pushing to package Nils with like Krav or someone for a legit young center. But Drury and Krav made things uncomfortable and Nils kind of just floundered. Almost now wish we let him play a few months this season and run the PP@ just to get his value up. The way he played, all be it in one game, suggests in 3 or 4 months time he might be worth double what Dallas paid.

I would also feel better about the pick if I trusted Drury and Co. a bit more regarding how they'll spend it. If for instance, this was Dallas' front office making the pick, I'd be quite confident and thus value the pick more. But with the Rangers, there seems to be this habit of going for need more than best player available, or grit over high end talent. And then when need and talent seem to merge in availability, that's when they seem to get hit with the grit bug. Like I love how Othmann turned out, but I'm pretty sure they picked him because he had PF tendencies, also talent and a good shot, but at that point he hadn't yet broke out. And there was Wyatt freakin Johnston sitting there... the center we desperately needed..... and like 8 other centers who exploded the D+1 year, Stank, Raty, Svechkov, Pinelli, Bolduc, L'Heureux, Bourgault, Helenius.... and we got exactly none of them. Meanwhile we just drafted wingers with like 3 out of our last 4 or 5 1st round picks and we are stacked at LW, theoretically. It still boggles my mind and hurts my head.

But if I had faith that Drury would, with either pick next year, just take the best center on the board... I'd feel much better. We have an issue with taking centers it seems. Especially when they are talented. I swear if they use the pick on a D, unless it's like some Korchinski/Mintyukov level prospect that for some reason falls, I'll lose my head.

But yea, I feel like the pick is more valuable in some hands than others. Detroit and LA are other great examples, not teams that just get lucky here and there, but that consistently draft well, at least in their current regimes.

My guess is the pick has more value to the Rangers as a trade asset than as a draft pick to use. You guys should be pushing to win now while Panarin is still awesome, and having an extra pick gives you more flexibility at the deadline to add someone.

 

[brakeyawself]

My guess is the pick has more value to the Rangers as a trade asset than as a draft pick to use. You guys should be pushing to win now while Panarin is still awesome, and having an extra pick gives you more flexibility at the deadline to add someone.

It's possible, but our cap situation is so murky it would require some real nuance and fine tuning to make work. And honestly, I would almost rather just keep the picks at this point. It depends how they would spend it of course, on what variety of player. I definitely don't want to see it shipped out for like a 3rd line energy guy or something like that. Like if we get Kane for a few years? Sure, that's a different story. I just have no clue how that would work financially.

It almost seems more prudent to me to find as many good young players on low contracts as possible rather than adding another expensive vet. because as it stands right now,, I don't see how we would resign Panarin in a couple years when his contract is up anyway. Assuming Laf continues to improve to be worth a more significant contract. As it stands, I am not sure Kakko, Chytil or Kravtsov will reach that point, which does change things a bit as those future contracts were being factored into our future expenditures. I don't see Panarin staying, in part because I don't think we will be able to afford him. Not with the other contracts we have now. So if players like Kakko, Chytil., Krav etc... aren't really working out, I'd find it a better idea to bring in new youth and trade them for future assets, rather than pay Kakko and Chytil mid level salaries to do what younger, new prospects might be able to accomplish equally. And I think whatever we could get moving that 1st round pick, we could probably get something similar moving pieces like Chytil and Kakko instead. Maybe not 1 for 1 value, but close enough. Id rather almost get a guy like Wheeler or something for cheaper than a guy like Kane who would theoretically cost more also. Relative to finances of course.

Anyway, I guess we will see. But with the way the team and finances are structured, right now I def lean more towards trying to draft our future 2c/3c than trying to trade for him. Or even our future top 6 RW or whatever. We got lucky on Othmann, whom while not going to replace Panarin 1 for 1, will at least give us another theoretically quality LW if he does move on. Guess will see. At least we are sured up with Zib and Troch, even though I didn't love the length of the Trochek contract, but whatever.

 

[eartotheground]

It's possible, but our cap situation is so murky it would require some real nuance and fine tuning to make work. And honestly, I would almost rather just keep the picks at this point. It depends how they would spend it of course, on what variety of player. I definitely don't want to see it shipped out for like a 3rd line energy guy or something like that. Like if we get Kane for a few years? Sure, that's a different story. I just have no clue how that would work financially.

It almost seems more prudent to me to find as many good young players on low contracts as possible rather than adding another expensive vet. because as it stands right now,, I don't see how we would resign Panarin in a couple years when his contract is up anyway. Assuming Laf continues to improve to be worth a more significant contract. As it stands, I am not sure Kakko, Chytil or Kravtsov will reach that point, which does change things a bit as those future contracts were being factored into our future expenditures. I don't see Panarin staying, in part because I don't think we will be able to afford him. Not with the other contracts we have now. So if players like Kakko, Chytil., Krav etc... aren't really working out, I'd find it a better idea to bring in new youth and trade them for future assets, rather than pay Kakko and Chytil mid level salaries to do what younger, new prospects might be able to accomplish equally. And I think whatever we could get moving that 1st round pick, we could probably get something similar moving pieces like Chytil and Kakko instead. Maybe not 1 for 1 value, but close enough. Id rather almost get a guy like Wheeler or something for cheaper than a guy like Kane who would theoretically cost more also. Relative to finances of course.

Anyway, I guess we will see. But with the way the team and finances are structured, right now I def lean more towards trying to draft our future 2c/3c than trying to trade for him. Or even our future top 6 RW or whatever. We got lucky on Othmann, whom while not going to replace Panarin 1 for 1, will at least give us another theoretically quality LW if he does move on. Guess will see. At least we are sured up with Zib and Troch, even though I didn't love the length of the Trochek contract, but whatever.

a reasoned, non hot/dogmatic taek? do you even hfboard, bro?

 

[David Castillo]

I mean, Nils wasn't really a known quantity either. But still, trading magic beans for a magic sapling seem like a win.

It was only a year ago that Lundkvist won the award for Sweden's best defenseman as the U21 record holder in goals scored by a defender. It's not like this was some kid who got his coffee and didn't perform. He got some coffee, showed some chops, but the coach preferred the other 1st round pick instead. Lundkvist's situation is closer to Theodore and Durzi (prospects doing everything they already could to show they belonged only to be deemed expendable for artificial reasons) than players like Dermott or Honka, who had time to make an impression but struggled due to performance.

 

[LT]

Nils was a top 20 prospect on HF in 2019 and 2020 both. I think Nill had a pretty good idea about what he was getting.

 

[FirstRowUpperDeck]

Nils was a top 20 prospect on HF in 2019 and 2020 both. I think Nill had a pretty good idea about what he was getting.

I read where he was on the Stars draft list, and last week at the STH luncheon, Nill said their Euro scouts were very high on him for a long time. I think it seemed like a no brainer to Nill as a Klingberg replacement, not an exact copy, but with enough offensive skills to help the team.

 

[starsfan86]

I read where he was on the Stars draft list, and last week at the STH luncheon, Nill said their Euro scouts were very high on him for a long time. I think it seemed like a no brainer to Nill as a Klingberg replacement, not an exact copy, but with enough offensive skills to help the team

He seems to be more defensively sound than Klingberg, so maybe it evens out.

 

[hairylikebear]

He seems to be more defensively sound than Klingberg, so maybe it evens out.

You'd have to compare him to young Klingberg, who I think handled his rookie assignments at least as competently. Lundkvist probably has similar struggles for similar reasons as he faces tougher competition more often. Although, he has a top prospect's skating mechanics - unlike Klingberg who had to make it work with some awkward mechanics that sometimes caused him to trip over himself a bit.

 

[serp]

You'd have to compare him to young Klingberg, who I think handled his rookie assignments at least as competently. Lundkvist probably has similar struggles for similar reasons as he faces tougher competition more often. Although, he has a top prospect's skating mechanics - unlike Klingberg who had to make it work with some awkward mechanics that sometimes caused him to trip over himself a bit.

Exactly . Klingberg was much more of a raw prospect compared to Lundkvist which makes sense because IRC Klingberg switched to become a defenseman just at 16 . Klingberg was the kind of late round pick you make and don't expect to turn out often in the 5th round unlike Lundkvist who was a first rounder

 

[jerseyjinx94]

As a Rangers fan, I came to check out what you guys think of Nils so far. This is part of drafting and developing so many quality players. Not enough space for all of them. Happy that he seems to have found a home with an adequate opportunity, hope he turns into a good one.