Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part XIV: There ain't no gettin' off of this train we're on

[pld459666]

Even if he ends up sucking ass again, I expect that it will not be because he's out of shape

I don't doubt for a second that he was embarrassed with the demotion, deserved or not, to the AHL.

He may end up back there, but it wont be for a lack of effort again

 

[NYR Viper]

I think Smith should be given a shot to fight for a spot. Don't buy him out. It's a waste of dead cap space for a LONG time and the team doesn't need the cap space next season most likely. If he can't come back and compete and pouts then buy him out next off-season.

 

[Off Sides]

Both teams are interesting studies based on what we are going through right now. Toronto took on some bad contracts, bottomed out and got some high draft picks. Their core is a direct result of that. Boston did a major sell off, shipping out both Lucic and Hamilton, accumulated a bunch of draft picks and drafted well. None of their picks were higher than 13th overall.

Pastrnak - 25th overall
DeBrusk - 14th
Carlo - 37th
McAvoy - 14th
Donato - 56th
Heinen - 116th

We need to find a Pastrnak and McAvoy. Maybe Chytil becomes our Pastrnak and whomever we draft with our 1st becomes our McAvoy. We don't need to bottom out of we trade/draft well, though I certainly wouldn't say no to a top 3 pick in this draft or the next.

That is my guess too of the Rangers ideas, but we'll see what happens with Boston. If it turns out they end up facing a team more advanced in their rebuild who also drafted earlier than they did, and those top pick are big contributors towards them beating Boston, wouldn't that be some evidence that even if a teams rebuilds like Boston did, and things went well (they received a Pasternak, etc) and still are being eliminated from the playoffs, that it would have been more advantageous for them to rebuild like the team who eliminated them did?

If Boston ends up winning the cup that would be some evidence it's possible to build in such a way to do so, yet if they end up eliminated prior it kind of shows that while that building method can get a team into and even advance in the playoffs, it ultimately comes up short.

Which has basically been my argument throughout the last Rangers build too. Boston won a cup using such methods once, (even if they did have Seguin) the other teams who went more towards the full scorched earth rebuild have won more often. LA did so using a little of both as they picked pretty early for a span of years leading up to their runs, I'm not sure I see that trend changing.

 

[I Eat Crow]

There's no purpose in buying out Smith or Staal at this point.

AV's system was tailor-made for Smith to fail. It played to his exact weaknesses. Smith's best quality is his ability to stand up attackers in the neutral zone and at the blue line to prevent zone entries. AV's system literally goes directly against that. Smith will be fine if he comes into camp in shape.

 

[DutchShamrock]

On one hand people want to tank hard, on the other they want the players they deem bad off the team.

 

[Off Sides]

For me, there are a few key differences.

Zucc will be 31 next season and has one year left on his deal. Shattenkirk is a couple of years younger and has term left.

Shattenkirk is a defenseman, and a RHD at that. That’s inherently going to be tougher to scrape together (I won’t say replace). In that regard, the defense will still be in more of a state of flux following the trade of McD.

Coming off an injury, Shattenkirk’s comparative value is not going to be as enticing as it would be for Zucc.

Currently, the Rangers have a bit more work to do on defense than offense. I’d prefer to see how things progress first and then make those decisions.

Do you think Zucc with one year left returns more than Shattenkirk with 3 years left?

This started with me questioning if the Rangers could get a #10 pick range back for Shattenkirk, if they could, does that add more towards their rebuild versus them keeping him?

What will become of Shattenkirk's trade value next year with him playing top pair with any partner that is currently property of the Rangers?

As far as replacing him, does it really matter in the context that the Rangers replaced Stepan with DD and Girardi with Smith last year? If they are going to do that to get #7 plus ADA, and gamble on Smith, why would that be so different with them using Shattenikirk to get to a similar draft slot this year and replacing him with some cheap short term UFA D?

 

[DutchShamrock]

Do you think Zucc with one year left returns more than Shattenkirk with 3 years left?

This started with me questioning if the Rangers could get a #10 pick range back for Shattenkirk, if they could, does that add more towards their rebuild versus them keeping him?

What will become of Shattenkirk's trade value next year with him playing top pair with any partner that is currently property of the Rangers?

As far as replacing him, does it really matter in the context that the Rangers replaced Stepan with DD and Girardi with Smith last year? If they are going to do that to get #7 plus ADA, and gamble on Smith, why would that be so different with them using Shattenikirk to get to a similar draft slot this year and replacing him with some cheap short term UFA D?

Can I just pose this angle? You have Shattenkirk's value and then subtract the cost of replacing him. Then get Zuccarello's value subtracted by the cost of replacing him. Zucc for Kovalchuk plus the return for Zucc is better than the Shattenkirk scenario. I'm not even getting into Shattenkirk's value after the Washington playoffs and his injury season.

 

[RGY]

Not interested in trading Shattenkirk.

 

[RangerBoy]

On one hand people want to tank hard, on the other they want the players they deem bad off the team.

The good players bring back the most value. I am skeptical of the Rangers becoming a better team over one off season. People say the Rangers can compete for a playoff spot next season because the division is mediocre. The division did produce 5 playoff teams. Columbus and Jersey had 97 points which 20 more the Rangers had. Florida had 96 points. Gorton was asked in one of his two radio interviews last week if he had second thoughts about making the trades. He said no second thoughts because Lundqvist masked our weaknesses.

 

[Edge]

Do you think Zucc with one year left returns more than Shattenkirk with 3 years left?

This started with me questioning if the Rangers could get a #10 pick range back for Shattenkirk, if they could, does that add more towards their rebuild versus them keeping him?

What will become of Shattenkirk's trade value next year with him playing top pair with any partner that is currently property of the Rangers?

As far as replacing him, does it really matter in the context that the Rangers replaced Stepan with DD and Girardi with Smith last year? If they are going to do that to get #7 plus ADA, and gamble on Smith, why would that be so different with them using Shattenikirk to get to a similar draft slot this year and replacing him with some cheap short term UFA D?

I don’t think Shattenkirk brings back a top 10 pick.

I’d say the overall return for both guys isn’t too far off, so much as I just think the timing for a Zucc move makes more sense. I don’t see a huge value difference right now in terms of incoming assets, but I do see the potential for more disarray on the blue line. There’s going to be enough of that even without trading Shattenkirk.

And if RHD defenseman weren’t at a premium in the NHL right now, I think it would be a more viable option. But that’s not the case and so I think it’s more prudent to wait a little while. The clock is ticking on Zucc if they’re going to move him. If they plan to move Shattenkirk, they have a bigger window.

 

[Fvital92]

The good players bring back the most value. I am skeptical of the Rangers becoming a better team over one off season. People say the Rangers can compete for a playoff spot next season because the division is mediocre. The division did produce 5 playoff teams. Columbus and Jersey had 97 points which 20 more the Rangers had. Florida had 96 points. Gorton was asked in one of his two radio interviews last week if he had second thoughts about making the trades. He said no second thoughts because Lundqvist masked our weaknesses.

And we still have Lundqvist, if goes beast mode again I don't see why we can't make the playoffs, I think next year's team will be better than this year, at least more watchable.

 

[Good Intentions]

And we still have Lundqvist, if goes beast mode again I don't see why we can't make the playoffs, I think next year's team will be better than this year, at least more watchable.

I think we're going to have a very strong offseason, with a formidable lineup come October. Very competitive 18-19.

 

[GAGLine]

That is my guess too of the Rangers ideas, but we'll see what happens with Boston. If it turns out they end up facing a team more advanced in their rebuild who also drafted earlier than they did, and those top pick are big contributors towards them beating Boston, wouldn't that be some evidence that even if a teams rebuilds like Boston did, and things went well (they received a Pasternak, etc) and still are being eliminated from the playoffs, that it would have been more advantageous for them to rebuild like the team who eliminated them did?

If Boston ends up winning the cup that would be some evidence it's possible to build in such a way to do so, yet if they end up eliminated prior it kind of shows that while that building method can get a team into and even advance in the playoffs, it ultimately comes up short.

Which has basically been my argument throughout the last Rangers build too. Boston won a cup using such methods once, (even if they did have Seguin) the other teams who went more towards the full scorched earth rebuild have won more often. LA did so using a little of both as they picked pretty early for a span of years leading up to their runs, I'm not sure I see that trend changing.

I don't think what Boston does at this point will be proof anything other than doing it the way they did can work or can fail (for now), but we knew that already. Any method of building a team CAN work. Look at Vegas. I just think that, given the salary cap and player values relative to their cap hits, it makes sense to lean more heavily on drafting than signing UFAs. High priced free agents are rarely worth their cap hit. People like to say that free agents are free, nothing but money, but that isn't really true under a salary cap. Since the cap has been implemented, we have had more success shopping in the bargain bin than we have by buying brand name. Too often we as fans, and Rangers management, has looked to free agency to find our best players. I think we can see pretty clearly now that that doesn't work. Sure, you might get a Chara or a Hossa, but that's one quality piece added to an already strong foundation, not the keystone player upon which the team is built around.

Which is exactly why we shouldn't be looking at Tavares or Karlsson. We need to build the foundation first, then we can look to supplement via free agency.

 

[bobbop]

What the Rangers really need right now is an off season like the Bruins had in 2006. Draft Kessel, Lucic and Marchand. Trade for Rask. Sign Chara and Savard.

Maybe we could get the GM who pulled that off.

Oh wait, it was Gorton!

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

There isn't a Chara or a Savard to be had in this year's UFA market.

I know JT is there, but he's a cap killer waiting to happen.

 

[I Eat Crow]

What the Rangers really need right now is an off season like the Bruins had in 2006. Draft Kessel, Lucic and Marchand. Trade for Rask. Sign Chara and Savard.

Maybe we could get the GM who pulled that off.

Oh wait, it was Gorton!

It would be great if the Rangers could get Wahlstrom, Bokk, and Sandin and be like Kessel, Marchand, and Krug, respectively. Wise in the 2nd round could be a Krejci.

Sign Karlsson to be our Chara next summer and hopefully that leads to good things. Before you all attack me about this, if you have a chance to acquire a top 10 player in the game, you do it and worry about the rest later. If the Rangers win the lottery and get a top 3 pick, I actually see the Rangers making a serious offer for Karlsson this summer, but that's another discussion.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Anyone who is against Karlsson as a UFA is out to lunch IMO.

As is anyone who wants to trade for him this summer. Unless you get him for something surrounding ADA, 2nd and Vesey (which you won't), stay away.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

The lottery is over, right? We're #8?

 

[Irishguy42]

The lottery is over, right? We're #8?

Lottery is April 28th. Right now, we have the best chance at ending up in the #8 position.

 

[NYR Viper]

It would be great if the Rangers could get Wahlstrom, Bokk, and Sandin and be like Kessel, Marchand, and Krug, respectively. Wise in the 2nd round could be a Krejci.

Sign Karlsson to be our Chara next summer and hopefully that leads to good things. Before you all attack me about this, if you have a chance to acquire a top 10 player in the game, you do it and worry about the rest later. If the Rangers win the lottery and get a top 3 pick, I actually see the Rangers making a serious offer for Karlsson this summer, but that's another discussion.

I think Gorton has his eyes set on next off-season already where he could get his Chara and possibly his Savard

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I think Gorton has his eyes set on next off-season already where he could get his Chara and possibly his Savard

Karlsson+Seguin lmao.

Depending on how this season goes, I may be completely behind that.

 

[eco's bones]

This is probably going to piss a lot of people off again but on Brendan Smith:

If he ends up playing in Hartford again next year the Rangers are going to take a $3.325mil cap hit from his overall $4.35mil salary. If they bought him out--the buyout cost for next year would be $1.092. The Rangers would have an extra $2mil + cap to work with and the following season as well. Two years of that. In the third season of his buyout we'd break even. The three seasons after that we would take a $1.267mil cap hit each year--which ain't a lot.

I'm not sure where the Rangers are with Smith but if he's done something irredeemable in their eyes or if they don't think he's going to be able to get back to where he was he should be bought out. If they think he can at least play a regular role (and I don't mean the 7th D) next year on their D he'll probably get another shot unless the Rangers have some big plans for free agency and think they could use that extra $2+ mil cap.

He's kind of put himself where he is but if the Rangers do decide to buy him out there is sense to be had from it--cap savings the next two years (18-19, 19-20) to be used on someone else--a break even year (20-21)---minimal cap penalty the last three years (21-22, 22-23, 23-24). One other thing---if he ends up Hartford again next year the Rangers should absolutely buy him out after that--no ifs, ands or buts.

 

[RangerBoy]

 

[RangerBoy]

What the Rangers really need right now is an off season like the Bruins had in 2006. Draft Kessel, Lucic and Marchand. Trade for Rask. Sign Chara and Savard.

Maybe we could get the GM who pulled that off.

Oh wait, it was Gorton!

It helps when the player is a fitness freak who doesn’t eat garbage food,rides his bike everyday and runs triathlons.

Only problem is Boston missed the playoffs right after signing Chara and Savard. 06-07. They were a last place team. Chiarelli fired Gorton and Sather hired him on Sinden’s recommendation.

 

[NYR Viper]

It helps when the player is a fitness freak who doesn’t eat garbage food,rides his bike everyday and runs triathlons.

Only problem is Boston missed the playoffs right after signing Chara and Savard. 06-07. They were a last place team. Chiarelli fired Gorton and Sather hired him on Sinden’s recommendation.

That could theoretically be next year for this team. Bottom out next year. Continue building through the draft and off-load couple more vets if possible (MZA, Smith if he can get his game back, Staal, Spooner/Namestnikov/Hayes/Vesey).

I think that by the end of next season and once they get through the 2019 draft the team will be building again, not dismantling. That's when Gorton should dip his toe in the UFA waters again.

Use this upcoming season to sign cheap vets on short term contracts and off-load again at the deadline