Speculation: Roster Building Thread X:

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

It’s much more nuanced than that.

there is the cap, his salary, the state of the team, the injury history, the fact that he does nothing to diversify the lineup, etc.

When they traded for Nash it made sense. They were coming off of a deep run, they had a well rounded core that needed scoring pop.

this group has nothing but scoring pop so they’re going to augment it with…. More very expensive scoring pop?

it’s just a dumb idea. Unless the plan is Eichel in and Zibanejad out (which is reshuffling at its core but at least you have one guy under contract) while ignoring all of the issues that actually plague this team.

I think they are going to diversify the lineup with or without Eichel.. They realize they need to do this, but the top six wingers are pretty set one way or another so you can't really diversify anything but the bottom six.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I think they are going to diversify the lineup with or without Eichel.. They realize they need to do this, but the top six wingers are pretty set one way or another so you can't really diversify anything but the bottom six.

with what assets and what space (assuming Eichel comes in)

Guys on the team now are not going to be making peanuts forever.

 

[Tob]

I think they are going to diversify the lineup with or without Eichel.. They realize they need to do this, but the top six wingers are pretty set one way or another so you can't really diversify anything but the bottom six.

I think by then Laf/Kakko one of Miller/Lundkvist/Kravstov, one of Schenider/Jones/Robertson will have excelled enough that the high asking price for Eichel that will be remembered well will settle most people into saying, "well, they were asking for Laf/Kakko/KAM/Nils/VK/SJR etc. etc. so we're clearing better off"

 

[huerter]

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. All the discourse among the "analysts" is that teams learned the mistakes of the Vegas expansion and are just gonna let Seattle take a player. Why give up multiple players when you only have to give up one?

Meanwhile, aren't most trades an imbalance of quantity of assets going each way? Aren't 99% of "proposals" on boards/twitter an imbalance of assets each way. And don't most "analysts" say that if you get the best player in the trade you win the trade?

So for instance, when Minnesota kept Dumba (the best player/asset at the time) by giving up Haula and Tuch how do you judge that? They gave up multiple assets. KILL THEM! But they kept the best player. PRAISE THEM!

These analysts. No common sense.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

with what assets and what space (assuming Eichel comes in)

Guys on the team now are not going to be making peanuts forever.

Well if Zibanejad goes out thats money thats not being used and he's an asset, so is Buchnevich, so is Strome etc. It just depends who Drury would rather hitch his wagon to for 5 years+. As well as the price of a trade obviously.

I'm not saying I'm for it.. I still dont know who I'd rather have going forward due to uncertainty in both (age/contract vs injury) but its gonna be one of them.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

I think by then Laf/Kakko one of Miller/Lundkvist/Kravstov, one of Schenider/Jones/Robertson will have excelled enough that the high asking price for Eichel that will be remembered well will settle most people into saying, "well, they were asking for Laf/Kakko/KAM/Nils/VK/SJR etc. etc. so we're clearing better off"

We we are assuming all of these players are going to work out as we hope too.. I would LOVE for that to happen, but whats the odds that every prospect/young kid we have hit their ceiling?

 

[Off Sides]

I’d bet still positive if he stays healthy. He has skills that not many players have and his game should translate to the playoffs. I was totally against resigning Kreider but his net presence is rare in today’s NHL. Hasn’t he led the league in deflection goals over the last few years? I’m ok playing him on the 3rd line and giving him major PP time. Higher if Laf takes awhile to improve. He gives us that depth that I’ve been talking about. If TB can continually solve their cap problems we’ll be able to deal with any in 2-3 years. I just wish Kreider was more consistent, but hopefully Gallant can get that out of him.

I feel like that may be optimistic, yet I hope something like that happens.

 

[duhmetreE]

It’s much more nuanced than that.

there is the cap, his salary, the state of the team, the injury history, the fact that he does nothing to diversify the lineup, etc.

When they traded for Nash it made sense. They were coming off of a deep run, they had a well rounded core that needed scoring pop.

this group has nothing but scoring pop so they’re going to augment it with…. More very expensive scoring pop?

it’s just a dumb idea. Unless the plan is Eichel in and Zibanejad out (which is reshuffling at its core but at least you have one guy under contract) while ignoring all of the issues that actually plague this team.

It's a near lateral move with giving up assets and cap space. Mind numbingly bad business.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

It's a near lateral move with giving up assets and cap space. Mind numbingly bad business.

I mean for X amount of years I agree, however after that?.. The idea behind Eichel I'm sure for the Rangers is he can be something Zibanejad can't be, a 1C for 10+ years (due to age) ON PAPER (who knows with the injury?) to grow with the younger core of Laf, Fox, etc (whoever isn't in a hypothetical trade, which we dont know the actual trade even).. I'm not sure "lateral move" is so black and white without knowing what Zibanejad is asking for (if the Rangers even asked him about it yet)

 

[NYRangers16]

It's a near lateral move with giving up assets and cap space. Mind numbingly bad business.

I’d agree with this. The better play is to save those assets and resign Zibby. We’d be able to deepen the lineup with a 1B C or 2C and would have 4-5 years to find a new #1 or #2 C. Meanwhile we can use some assets to deepen the team and still get a few elite years out of Zibby. And we continue to develop the team. We aren’t recouping what we deal for Eichel in a trade for Zibby. If you could exchange Eichel for Zibby essentially, then MAYBE it comes down to the injury issue. But it’s not that simple.

 

[Synergy27]

I mean for X amount of years I agree, however after that?.. The idea behind Eichel I'm sure for the Rangers is he can be something Zibanejad can't be, a 1C for 10+ years (due to age) ON PAPER (who knows with the injury?) to grow with the younger core of Laf, Fox, etc (whoever isn't in a hypothetical trade, which we dont know the actual trade even).. I'm not sure "lateral move" is so black and white without knowing what Zibanejad is asking for (if the Rangers even asked him about it yet)

I’m squarely in the lateral move camp. I mean, it’s possible that Eichel has another level, but these players are so insanely similar by the numbers that I simply can’t justify the assets required to “upgrade”. Both players have question marks, but Jack’s are bigger IMO.

 

[NYRangers16]

I’m squarely in the lateral move camp. I mean, it’s possible that Eichel has another level, but these players are so insanely similar by the numbers that I simply can’t justify the assets required to “upgrade”. Both players have question marks, but Jack’s are bigger IMO. View attachment 453248

Paying a premium for a brand name.

 

[huerter]

Who are Colorado's 7 forwards and unprotected forwards? Would think another trade might be coming if that 8th guy is a baller.

 

[Hockey Gamer]

I think trading for Eichel is a bad idea.

Additionally, I'll be dumbfounded if we do trade for Eichel and give up more than what we supposedly offered last off season. We all know at this point the Rangers made an offer for Eichel and it was almost acceptable but Buffalo decided it wasn't enough at the last minute and then backed out.

well..

Eichel has one less year on his contract and has a significant risk hanging over his head now. Buffalo also has a ticking time bomb in their hands and feel the pressure to move on from him.

If we actually offer more than what we originally offered in the last off season, then I have no idea what Drury is thinking. But alas, I don't think we will offer more than what we did. If anything, Eichel has lost value and Buffalo has lost leverage since our original offer from last year. So no way should we decide to give them more than we already tried.

Buffalo can keep coping and deluding themselves with fantasy.

 

[GAGLine]

I like this.

For the Rangers.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

Ryan Graves traded to NJ for Maltsev and a 2nd

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

I’m squarely in the lateral move camp. I mean, it’s possible that Eichel has another level, but these players are so insanely similar by the numbers that I simply can’t justify the assets required to “upgrade”. Both players have question marks, but Jack’s are bigger IMO. View attachment 453248

I dont disagree but lets say Zib wants 7-8 years, then even if they are "similar" it might make sense to take the guy who is 24 for 5 years (depending on the cost). Ideally Zibanejad takes 5-6 years (6th might be a buy out lol) and we go with him and then find a 2C

 

[CLW]

Paying a premium for a brand name.

This is where the "marketing" comes into play.

 

[CLW]

I like this.

For the Rangers.

Not surprised Colorado dumped Graves unceremoniously.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Lmao @ NJ.

 

[huerter]

Lmao @ NJ.

You're gonna have to explain this.

 

[Tob]

Can't decide on whether I want to make fun of New Jersey, Jeff Gorton, Duncan Siemens or Ryan Graves.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

You're gonna have to explain this.

They just gave up a 2nd round pick for a bottom pair defenseman.

 

[Tob]

They just gave up a 2nd round pick for a bottom pair defenseman.

but he shoot hard tho

 

[RGY]

They just gave up a 2nd round pick for a bottom pair defenseman.

My thoughts exactly. Graves benefited from a talented and deep Colorado team the last couple years. He won’t have that same luxury in the Swamp