2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part II

[mas0764]

Who has to be off the board already to make Drysdale the Rangers pick? I’m not interested in a d that high but in the 8_10 range I think you either take him or move the pick. I also think something strange has happened if he is still there at 8_10 like Ottawa getting Lafreniere and Askarov or something.

Probably all the forwards up to Rossi and/or Lundell.

 

[mas0764]

Let's for a moment say that the Rangers pick 8th and 7 forwards come off the board first.

Gorton is on the clock and both Drysdale and Lundell are on the board. I have to tell you, that would be interesting to watch.

Drysdale would be very hard to pass up in that spot, even though our RHD depth would be stupid good at that point. Having said that, it would trigger a follow-up, post-draft move and that's where things can get exciting.

But I think Drysdale comes off prior and it's a non-issue. Just fun to speculate about.

I think you have to consider taking Drysdale and then trying to package ADA for Nylander or equivalent.

 

[Edge]

I think of Lundell as a first liner like I think of Kreider as a first liner.

Capable, but not a team-carrier or line-carrier.

I would say I am closer to thinking of Lundell's first line capabilities as reminding me of a guy like Stepan, or maybe even Brassard --- especially the former.

 

[mas0764]

I would say I am closer to thinking of Lundell's first line capabilities as reminding me of a guy like Stepan, or maybe even Brassard --- especially the former.

Yeah... similar comp, right? Stepan being a 50 point, defensively competent center. Anchored a first line when higher scoring players like Nash and MSL were around.

But I also don't particularly want to go back to the days of my first line players topping out at 50-something points.

I'd take Lundell if I'm stuck there, but I'd also be throwing in a LOT of assets to get up just a couple selections higher. I think guys like Holtz and Raymond are 70+ point players versus Lundell as a 50-ish.

That's a huge difference.

Lundell is ok and checks a box for me long term, I'd have him slotted as a second line center of the future (what Andersson was supposed to be, frankly).

But I'm still seeking one more long term top liner if that's my pick this year. Possibly trading away assets to free up cap room for another free agent. Say you could move Skjei and Buch and Kreider all off the books and go sign .... and I'm just making this up as an example, not suggesting it..... Taylor Hall.

 

[Edge]

Yeah... similar comp, right? Stepan being a 50 point, defensively competent center. Anchored a first line when higher scoring players like Nash and MSL were around.

But I also don't particularly want to go back to the days of my first line players topping out at 50-something points.

I'd take Lundell if I'm stuck there, but I'd also be throwing in a LOT of assets to get up just a couple selections higher. I think guys like Holtz and Raymond are 70+ point players versus Lundell as a 50-ish.

That's a huge difference.

Lundell is ok and checks a box for me long term, I'd have him slotted as a second line center of the future (what Andersson was supposed to be, frankly).

But I'm still seeking one more long term top liner if that's my pick this year. Possibly trading away assets to free up cap room for another free agent. Say you could move Skjei and Buch and Kreider all off the books and go sign .... and I'm just making this up as an example, not suggesting it..... Taylor Hall.

And moving up might depend on from where.

At 13, jumping 6 spots is rough.

At 8 or 9, it might be easier to leapfrog a team or two.

 

[mas0764]

And moving up might depend on from where.

At 13, jumping 6 spots is rough.

At 8 or 9, it might be easier to leapfrog a team or two.

Which is why a deadline sell off a pieces that will not be long term here (Strome, Buch, Fast, Skjei, even Kreider) (some of these, not all) remains an appealing option. Clear salary, future assets coming back, and increase your odds of winning the lottery AND being in a better position to trade up.

And then as we've mentioned, hey, feel free to then go sign Kreider back in the offseason.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Lundell is loved by NHL types. Gunler not so much, and I wish I could post some nasty quotes from my DMs but I’m not trying to destroy a kid or lose sources to prove a point. Late first? Absolutely no issues. One thing I noticed that I wish I could quantify is how often Lulea players don’t pass to him when he’s open. Really can’t explain it. It just seems to be pretty frequent compared to Holtz and Raymond.

Rangers can’t afford to take multiple risks anymore with these high picks. Take the risks later on.

Lundell is a top-10 pick. The stats are pretty meaningless because look at Puljujarvi among many others in a less-physical league like the SM-Liiga. Also I went over a ton of film — Lundell rarely creates high-danger scoring chances for his linemates, as in drawing attention and passing it on the tape through traffic into a scoring area. Its mostly cycle cycle cycle —pass to point — cycle cycle cycle — dump down low — cycle cycle cycle. Other than that his game is close to flawless. With that shot he can score 30 in this league no problem.

HIFK is a massive possession team up and down the lineup. Very deep.

On size and smarts alone, Lundell would give the Rangers a strong center prospect. Plus help Kaako out if needed.

 

[mas0764]

Well that is a good analysis and I hope it's true because I think there's a decent chance that he is the player the Rangers may be left looking at drafting, or he may be the player the Rangers can afford to move up for.

But I still would much rather Holtz, Raymond or Stutzle. That's who I'd be trying to trade for if I'm the Rangers.

 

[Edge]

I'd have zero problem with Lundell as the pick, just would prefer 7 other forwards over him. But if they're gone, and we're picking 9th or 10th, no hesitation there.

 

[mas0764]

Actually what I'd really like is to revisit the "Buch for 8th overall" scenario, or something close to it, and then exit the draft with one of Stutzle/Holtz/Raymond and then ALSO Lundell.

 

[True Blue]

I think you have to consider taking Drysdale and then trying to package ADA for Nylander or equivalent.

Drysdale becoming DeAngelo's replacement is not realistic (If this is who DeAngelo is becoming). At this point, I would not include him in a package for a Nylander.

The Rangers are better off is Drysdale is taken by someone else.

 

[mas0764]

Drysdale becoming DeAngelo's replacement is not realistic (If this is who DeAngelo is becoming). At this point, I would not include him in a package for a Nylander.

The Rangers are better off is Drysdale is taken by someone else.

Totally agree that the Rangers are better off if Drysdale goes before they pick.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Totally agree that the Rangers are better off if Drysdale goes before they pick.

Or after.

 

[mas0764]

Or after.

Touche.

 

[Joey Bones]

Who has to be off the board already to make Drysdale the Rangers pick? I’m not interested in a d that high but in the 8_10 range I think you either take him or move the pick. I also think something strange has happened if he is still there at 8_10 like Ottawa getting Lafreniere and Askarov or something.

I highly doubt, at this point, that Drysdale will be available at No. 8-10

 

[Joey Bones]

Let's for a moment say that the Rangers pick 8th and 7 forwards come off the board first.

Gorton is on the clock and both Drysdale and Lundell are on the board. I have to tell you, that would be interesting to watch.

Drysdale would be very hard to pass up in that spot, even though our RHD depth would be stupid good at that point. Having said that, it would trigger a follow-up, post-draft move and that's where things can get exciting.

But I think Drysdale comes off prior and it's a non-issue. Just fun to speculate about.

Agreed. Think Drysdale would be off the board way before that. This draft, outside Lafreniere & Byfield, is gonna be a confusing jumble of crazy!!

 

[Joey Bones]

I think you have to consider taking Drysdale and then trying to package ADA for Nylander or equivalent.

Not until Drysdale becomes something worthy of moving DeAngelo or any pro on the roster for that matter....

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Not until Drysdale becomes something worthy of moving DeAngelo or any pro on the roster for that matter....

Drysdale is a 5'11", 170lb RHD.

Lundkvist has the exact same profile. Given Nils's progress this year, Drysdale's got a ways to go before he's as valuable as the guy we drafted in '18.

 

[Joey Bones]

Lundell is loved by NHL types. Gunler not so much, and I wish I could post some nasty quotes from my DMs but I’m not trying to destroy a kid or lose sources to prove a point. Late first? Absolutely no issues. One thing I noticed that I wish I could quantify is how often Lulea players don’t pass to him when he’s open. Really can’t explain it. It just seems to be pretty frequent compared to Holtz and Raymond.

Rangers can’t afford to take multiple risks anymore with these high picks. Take the risks later on.

Lundell is a top-10 pick. The stats are pretty meaningless because look at Puljujarvi among many others in a less-physical league like the SM-Liiga. Also I went over a ton of film — Lundell rarely creates high-danger scoring chances for his linemates, as in drawing attention and passing it on the tape through traffic into a scoring area. Its mostly cycle cycle cycle —pass to point — cycle cycle cycle — dump down low — cycle cycle cycle. Other than that his game is close to flawless. With that shot he can score 30 in this league no problem.

HIFK is a massive possession team up and down the lineup. Very deep.

On size and smarts alone, Lundell would give the Rangers a strong center prospect. Plus help Kaako out if needed.

Isn’t cycling a team based strategy though? I agree with you on most of what you said other than the cycling part. I feel like if he was in a different system that kind of emphasized his shot more, he’d use it to his advantage. Cycling just makes me think that he’s doing what the coaches want from him and that’s a very good quality to have.... a coach’s trust.

 

[Joey Bones]

Actually what I'd really like is to revisit the "Buch for 8th overall" scenario, or something close to it, and then exit the draft with one of Stutzle/Holtz/Raymond and then ALSO Lundell.

Let’s chill a little there. None of these prospects are NHLers yet and Buch is. If the Rangers move him for 8th or whatever, they need to make sure they have someone on the wings now or in a year who could soften the blow of losing Buch.

 

[Joey Bones]

Drysdale is a 5'11", 170lb RHD

Lundkvist has the exact same profile. Given Nils's progress this year, Drysdale's got a ways to go before he's as valuable as the guy we drafted in '18.

Adding to my point that moving DeAngelo for Drysdale is silly....

 

[Thirty One]

Not until Drysdale becomes something worthy of moving DeAngelo or any pro on the roster for that matter....

Why would that need to be a guarantee if we're getting a top line winger back in the deal?

 

[mas0764]

Let’s chill a little there. None of these prospects are NHLers yet and Buch is. If the Rangers move him for 8th or whatever, they need to make sure they have someone on the wings now or in a year who could soften the blow of losing Buch.

With what Buch brings I’m not going to worry. If the pick busts, he busts. But the Rangers have a solid draft history so I’m not worried. I’m gambling on upside. Playing it safe gets you disappointing endings.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

Do not I repeat do not take Drysdale. We have enough dmen in the system. This draft needs to be about getting a center unless of course we land number 1 overall. I'm just not as sold on Lundell as others though.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Do not I repeat do not take Drysdale. We have enough dmen in the system. This draft needs to be about getting a center unless of course we land number 1 overall. I'm just not as sold on Lundell as others though.

If we get 2nd overall, go with Stützle or Byfield. At 4, Holtz over Raymond.