Kitchener Rangers 2019-20 Season Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
with the draft pick situation I’m sure they would’ve welcomed him with open arms

What I was also getting at was, I was wondering if we didn’t jump the gun in acquiring Hawel with the uncertainty of Garreffa’s landing spot this season still up in the air. Hey, I love Hawel and what he brings. But at the end of the day, if Joey would’ve come back to us with an open spot, he would’ve been welcomed I would think.

And also, somebody else might’ve picked up Hawel and that’s why MM dealt for him when he did. But surely there would be other OA’s of the high-end quality available between now and the deadline. Look no further than Sarnia and what Sean Josling is doing this year. When Sarnia eventually sells, he’ll be in high demand.
 

MatthewsMoustache

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
2,819
2,274
What I was also getting at was, I was wondering if we didn’t jump the gun in acquiring Hawel with the uncertainty of Garreffa’s landing spot this season still up in the air. Hey, I love Hawel and what he brings. But at the end of the day, if Joey would’ve come back to us with an open spot, he would’ve been welcomed I would think.

And also, somebody else might’ve picked up Hawel and that’s why MM dealt for him when he did. But surely there would be other OA’s of the high-end quality available between now and the deadline. Look no further than Sarnia and what Sean Josling is doing this year. When Sarnia eventually sells, he’ll be in high demand.

it’s definitely a tough spot that Joey put him in, but like you mentioned, a lot of OAs come out of nowhere and produce
 

MatthewsMoustache

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
2,819
2,274
But would he have wanted to come back? Or was he done here.

Speaking of our draft pick situation:

Including the Garreffa trade, these are the high picks that the teams thought to contend this year have in the cupboard:

Team - 2nds - 3rds.

Flint 6-7
Kitchener 3-9
London 6-5
Oshawa 11-3
Ottawa 6-4
Peterboro 6-6
Saginaw 5-2
Sudbury 5-4

Kitchener is at a distinct disadvantage over most of the other teams in this group. They do have nine 3rds. That could make up for their lack of 2nds when you compare what they have versus that of Saginaw and maybe Sudbury.

At the end of the day, if we’re really all in, I can see us having to move at least one young quality player.

No way we deal Pinelli. Otherwise, I’m thinking MM has to listen to offers where any other young player among our 02’s, are involved.

I understand that these players have no trade clauses. However, those have been waived in the past.

For example, would MacDonnell accept a trade to Niagara? That’s close to his home and could be a landing spot in any deal for Thomas or, should he be put on the block, Tomasino.

Just throwing it out there.

McDonnell closer to home or Langdon out east I feel like would be the best 2 options
 
  • Like
Reactions: EvenSteven

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
McDonnell closer to home or Langdon out east I feel like would be the best 2 options

Don’t get me wrong. I hate moving any kids. I like those two a lot. But we’re all in now with the Ingham/Hawel trades. In light of that, it makes no sense to me to not go big this year.
 

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,604
2,541
Don’t get me wrong. I hate moving any kids. I like those two a lot. But we’re all in now with the Ingham/Hawel trades. In light of that, it makes no sense to me to not go big this year.
How in the world are we all in? Especially when you take into account that we got picks back for Gareffa to counteract the effects of the Hawel trade. We all agreed we needed an upgrade in goal so we paid a reasonable price to acquire Ingham. We are in a position where we are competitive and have options.

No offense, but I'm certainly glad you're not our GM. There's more moves than all in or folding.
 
Last edited:

MatthewsMoustache

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
2,819
2,274
How in the world are we all in? Especially when you take into account that we got picks back for Gareffa to counteract the effects of the Hawel trade. We all agreed we needed an upgrade in goal so we paid a reasonable price to acquire Ingham. We are in a position where we are competitive and have options.

No offense, but I'm certainly glad you're not our GM.

if we weren’t going for it, we wouldn’t have gotten Ingham or Hawel. Richardson would’ve been perfect if we wanted to be ‘meh’ again
 

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,604
2,541
if we weren’t going for it, we wouldn’t have gotten Ingham or Hawel. Richardson would’ve been perfect if we wanted to be ‘meh’ again
It certainly gives us the option to go for it. But if we under achieve, get too many key injuries etc we are by no means locked in. Similarly if the price is not right for a trade, it would not be made. In no way are we committed to emptying our team of draft picks and/or our young players.
 

bobber

Registered User
Jan 21, 2013
8,214
5,535
Kitchener Ontario
How in the world are we all in? Especially when you take into account that we got picks back for Gareffa to counteract the effects of the Hawel trade. We all agreed we needed an upgrade in goal so we paid a reasonable price to acquire Ingham. We are in a position where we are competitive and have options.

No offense, but I'm certainly glad you're not our GM. There's more moves than all in or folding.
This team is not "all in". If they are with the draft cupboard they have its a mistake.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
if we weren’t going for it, we wouldn’t have gotten Ingham or Hawel. Richardson would’ve been perfect if we wanted to be ‘meh’ again

I could accept being a “wait and see” team after the Ingham deal. Especially if we thought there was a chance he plays an OA season. But spending to get Hawel, and losing the coveted 2nd in ‘20 (Gue) in the deal told me MM was all in. No need to make that deal with the possibility of a Joey return out there, however slight, and other OA possibilities that may emerge over the course of the season.

That told me that MM is all in for this year. If he is in wait and see mode at this point, and we find we become sellers, is it realistic he is able to sell all of the OA’s and Damiani for fairvslue this year? It wouldn’t be easy. I’d be afraid we’d virtually stand pat and watch another group of assets graduate with nothing to show in return.

Also, the Ingham acquisition may have cost us Wu and/or Hasley from reporting this year or next. Why report here to play behind a guy who played in 57 games last year who is an OA possibility next year.
 

HockeyPops

Registered User
Aug 20, 2018
7,136
6,035
That told me that MM is all in for this year. If he is in wait and see mode at this point, and we find we become sellers, is it realistic he is able to sell all of the OA’s and Damiani for fairvslue this year? It wouldn’t be easy. I’d be afraid we’d virtually stand pat and watch another group of assets graduate with nothing to show in return.
Anyone who plays poker knows that one of the cardinal sins is throwing good money after bad. This reminds me of that.

MM knew what he knew at the beginning of the season, and based on that he acquired Hawel and Ingham. Now he has seen this team play, and knows a lot more. If he now knows he is behind (poker talk), why would he throw good money after bad?

Wait for a better spot if you think you are beat...
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeoBlue

GeoBlue

Registered User
Oct 21, 2017
1,587
1,526
Kitchener
Let's keep things in perspective here. So the Rangers have not been able to get a point in 3 out of 13 games. I think that is pretty good, no very good, considering the early injuries. The goaltending has been worth the price of admission itself whether we go for it or not.

As for the talk on here regarding the "worth" of some OA's.........One day I read that there are only 2 quality OA's out there. (Thomas and possibly Hayton) So does that mean that whomever acquires the latter 2 are the hands on favourite and everyone else should fold? Of course not. The way to counter is get the next best. So if at this point we have decided to fold, who is to say that a player like Meireles, Hawel, Yantsis or Damiani does not see his value go up? Really, I don't understand the naysayers that say we will get less and less as we move to the trade deadline. The market and situation at the time will dictate this. For example, if London acquired Thomas and Hayton, and I was a team that thought I still had a shot with a few key additions, would I not go for a Meireles and maybe a Yantsis? Who do you think would be dictating the price of these players?

On the flip side, if the Rangers keep getting at least a point in most of their games, and we get back to a healthy lineup, I think a Thomas or Hayton might be enough. But I would feel just as confident with a tier 2 elite or two, with a cheaper price tag. There are many possibilities and that is why MM is the GM. Most of his moves have not let us down. (I say "most".......sorry Lipanov!)

I have been impressed with the younger players we have. Even if we lost our OA's this year and got nothing for them, I feel we have a pretty good team for the near future. We would trade Vuk and Damiani next year and would probably have a pretty solid team in 2021-22 and even 2022-23. But I feel we will definitely know better come the trade deadline, and there is no need deal hastily until then.
 

GeoBlue

Registered User
Oct 21, 2017
1,587
1,526
Kitchener
Also, the Ingham acquisition may have cost us Wu and/or Hasley from reporting this year or next. Why report here to play behind a guy who played in 57 games last year who is an OA possibility next year.

What has me baffled is why Pfiel is still here? The logical thing to me would be to bring in Wu or Hasley as a backup with them knowing they would get a fair share of games behind Ingham with the possibility of grabbing the #1 job should Ingham move on next season.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
Let's keep things in perspective here. So the Rangers have not been able to get a point in 3 out of 13 games. I think that is pretty good, no very good, considering the early injuries. The goaltending has been worth the price of admission itself whether we go for it or not.

As for the talk on here regarding the "worth" of some OA's.........One day I read that there are only 2 quality OA's out there. (Thomas and possibly Hayton) So does that mean that whomever acquires the latter 2 are the hands on favourite and everyone else should fold? Of course not. The way to counter is get the next best. So if at this point we have decided to fold, who is to say that a player like Meireles, Hawel, Yantsis or Damiani does not see his value go up? Really, I don't understand the naysayers that say we will get less and less as we move to the trade deadline. The market and situation at the time will dictate this. For example, if London acquired Thomas and Hayton, and I was a team that thought I still had a shot with a few key additions, would I not go for a Meireles and maybe a Yantsis? Who do you think would be dictating the price of these players?

On the flip side, if the Rangers keep getting at least a point in most of their games, and we get back to a healthy lineup, I think a Thomas or Hayton might be enough. But I would feel just as confident with a tier 2 elite or two, with a cheaper price tag. There are many possibilities and that is why MM is the GM. Most of his moves have not let us down. (I say "most".......sorry Lipanov!)

I have been impressed with the younger players we have. Even if we lost our OA's this year and got nothing for them, I feel we have a pretty good team for the near future. We would trade Vuk and Damiani next year and would probably have a pretty solid team in 2021-22 and even 2022-23. But I feel we will definitely know better come the trade deadline, and there is no need deal hastily until then.

Thomas and Hayton aren’t OA’s.

Damiani likely won’t play an OA season next year. If we allow our current OA’s to graduate and get nothing for them, and Damiani likely doesn’t return, all we’ll have is the sale of Vukojovic next year to build the draft cupboard.

Our 02’s and 03’s are who we should really build towards. The 21-22 and 22-23 seasons. Only having Vukojovic to sell off next year doesn’t give us a wealth of assets to go towards those years.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
What has me baffled is why Pfiel is still here? The logical thing to me would be to bring in Wu or Hasley as a backup with them knowing they would get a fair share of games behind Ingham with the possibility of grabbing the #1 job should Ingham move on next season.

Wu and Hasley obviously don’t see the prospect of playing behind a workhorse like Ingham (57 games played last year and 11 of 13 this year) desirable enough to deep six their NCAA eligibility. Especially if he returns for an OA season.

Who could blame them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim Wallach

bobber

Registered User
Jan 21, 2013
8,214
5,535
Kitchener Ontario
Then what are we? All in? Selling? Or standing pat?
IMO MM wants the Rangers to be competitive. If he cleans out the cupboard and loses the first or second round fans will call for his head. I just don't see where he gets the assets to go all in and build a team that can win the league. Maybe someone can explain how he can go "all in".
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
IMO MM wants the Rangers to be competitive. If he cleans out the cupboard and loses the first or second round fans will call for his head. I just don't see where he gets the assets to go all in and build a team that can win the league. Maybe someone can explain how he can go "all in".

The only way I think he can go “all in” is move most of our high picks and a young player or two - one of quality.

But for me, I think it’s ill advised to do so with a thin 00 and 01 group.

But he’s already been spending on vets.

If he just wanted to be competitive, Ingham would have been enough. No need to burn assets on Hawel. If that’s all he does of significance going forward, I doubt we’d be any further ahead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobber
Mar 12, 2009
7,359
7,428
I know it’s early, and I know his opposition in the three games he’s played is a collective 17 wins in 41 games (including the Rangers who have only won six times in 13 games), but Joey is averaging over two points a game.

That’s better than any of our OA’s. That’s actually better than anybody on our team. I know he may or may not keep that pace up, but he’s doing quite well with his new team. We could use that offence here in Kitchener - especially on the PP.

Just sayin.

One curious question I have is that had we not traded for Hawel as quick as we did, and Joey found himself in the position he was in sitting at home last week, would he have come back to Kitchener with the Rangers only having two OA’s on the roster? Would the team have him back?

I’m not sure if this question was asked of him in the interview with Farwell last weekend, but I’d be interested to know.
...then after a couple losses in a row, or games when he's had a bunch of giveaways, or when we've been getting pushed around at all we'd be hearing the complaints about the weak side of his game and how we need size just like was done when he was a full time Ranger putting up points here. No matter what happens, it always seems like the takeaway is "the grass is greener over there".
 

MatthewsMoustache

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
2,819
2,274
we are yet to see what this teams fully capable of. the penalties, the shaky start on the back end, and the injuries.

the thing is, we might not see a full lineup until december or later. Pinelli is gone for U17’s. Hawel and Sebrango are week to week. day to days have been popping up left and right. and there’s still games to be played that can’t be accounted for yet.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
we are yet to see what this teams fully capable of. the penalties, the shaky start on the back end, and the injuries.

the thing is, we might not see a full lineup until december or later. Pinelli is gone for U17’s. Hawel and Sebrango are week to week. day to days have been popping up left and right. and there’s still games to be played that can’t be accounted for yet.

Well MM better get a good idea soon. DeBoer ususally knew “who we were” somewhere between Halloween and American thanksgiving and acted accordingly.

Not only does MM have to get a handle on it soon, he has to also look at what is going on around the conference. Saginaw brought in more high picks with the Porco trade. London just solidified their crease today on the cheap by striking a deal with Sarnia for the OA from the WHL. He had great numbers last year. That’s two big adds to the Knights on the cheap (Merkley) since the start of the season. They still have a fully stocked cupboard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gondrex

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
No offense, but I'm certainly glad you're not our GM. There's more moves than all in or folding.

No offence taken.

But since you brought it up:

I was never a fan of standing pat at the last trade deadline. I was a proponent of selling our graduating assets. This years OA group, should have brought us more in trade at the last trade deadline than they would have in the off-season or up to this trade deadline. I understand that MM may have tried to sell off one or more of the OA’s. There were rumours out there that team(s) were interested and negotiations took place but that a player or two said they wouldn’t report to certain teams. Of course, MM said none of that was true. Whether it was or not, that is what we expect him to say anyway being the professional GM that he is. In any event, we traded McHugh for an ok return.

Then we go into this season with some high-end OA players in Meireles, Yantsis, and Garreffa. Based on our thin group of quality 00’s and 01’s, I expected MM to not contend this year but instead, try to sell off the three OA’s and Damiani as the season played out. Then use those assets along with what we already had (six 2nds, nine 3rds at the time) to go all in on the next two+ seasons.

Garreffa yanked the rug out from under MM’s feet by saying he wasn’t interested in playing his overage season. That’s on him, not MM. before that, we traded for Ingham in the off-season. As a veteran goaltender who is NHL drafted, he’s not guaranteed back for an overage season. I accept the fact that this team drastically needed decent goaltending. Since it was a 19-year-old goaltender we were bringing in, for me it was a signal that MM was expecting to contend this year. Otherwise, it would’ve made more sense to go after a goaltender a year younger. Before we brought in Ingham, I suggested one of the Owen Sound goaltenders. McLean or Guzda. Both are 01’s and would be here this year and next. Either would’ve been an upgrade over what we already had in Richardson and Pfiel.

I never believed that we could go all in this year mainly because our 00 and 01 groups are thin of high-end players. Teams that go all in had better have decent OA’s, and an above average group of 18 and 19-year-olds.

Going into this year, we had high end OA’s, but only one high end 00 in Damiani and one high end 01 in Vukojovic. That isn’t enough to go all in. But if you have a wealth of high draft picks, you can go all in as you can trade your way into being a contender.

We are already pretty good this year but don’t have the high draft picks needed to bring in the help we need to put us over the top in this conference. Especially when you consider what the other contenders have in their draft cupboards. But if we sold off this year, we would have the assets to go all in next year despite the lack of high end 01’s. And we wouldn’t have moved any of our young players.

The reason that I am saying that MM will have to sell off a young player or two along with our remaining high picks to turn this team into a good bet to be the conference champion is because I believe through his actions, he is already all in. He’s already on that road.

My biggest fear is that he stands pat. He didn’t sell our graduating assets going into this year. In fact he traded for a couple more graduating assets. That tells me he has no intention of selling. We don’t really have a wealth of assets with which to go all in to the point where we will be the favourite among the rest of the contenders in the conference unless we sell off a young player or two.

In my opinion, if I were a betting man today, I would bet that we don’t do much more to improve this team this year. I also don’t believe we sell. Therefore, I see us being a pretty good team this year. Then we’ll be a pretty good team next year. And be a pretty good team the year after. If he does stand pat and not improve on this team drastically this year, or the unexpected happened and sell off as many graduating assets as he can, I won’t have any other choice than to be of the believe that he just wants to be a pretty good team year in and year out without ever doing a major selloff one year in order to build up a wealth of assets to be able to buy large in a contending year.

Is there still a chance he sells this year? Maybe. But if he decides he has to, he’ll have to make a deal or two to get us to where we were in the off season regarding the number of graduating players we’d have that should be moved. Owen Sound did a late sell off last year and didn’t really get true value for their assets. Do we want to put ourselves in that position?
 

rangersblues

Registered User
Mar 21, 2010
2,604
2,541
No offence taken.

But since you brought it up:

I was never a fan of standing pat at the last trade deadline. I was a proponent of selling our graduating assets. This years OA group, should have brought us more in trade at the last trade deadline than they would have in the off-season or up to this trade deadline. I understand that MM may have tried to sell off one or more of the OA’s. There were rumours out there that team(s) were interested and negotiations took place but that a player or two said they wouldn’t report to certain teams. Of course, MM said none of that was true. Whether it was or not, that is what we expect him to say anyway being the professional GM that he is. In any event, we traded McHugh for an ok return.

Then we go into this season with some high-end OA players in Meireles, Yantsis, and Garreffa. Based on our thin group of quality 00’s and 01’s, I expected MM to not contend this year but instead, try to sell off the three OA’s and Damiani as the season played out. Then use those assets along with what we already had (six 2nds, nine 3rds at the time) to go all in on the next two+ seasons.

Garreffa yanked the rug out from under MM’s feet by saying he wasn’t interested in playing his overage season. That’s on him, not MM. before that, we traded for Ingham in the off-season. As a veteran goaltender who is NHL drafted, he’s not guaranteed back for an overage season. I accept the fact that this team drastically needed decent goaltending. Since it was a 19-year-old goaltender we were bringing in, for me it was a signal that MM was expecting to contend this year. Otherwise, it would’ve made more sense to go after a goaltender a year younger. Before we brought in Ingham, I suggested one of the Owen Sound goaltenders. McLean or Guzda. Both are 01’s and would be here this year and next. Either would’ve been an upgrade over what we already had in Richardson and Pfiel.

I never believed that we could go all in this year mainly because our 00 and 01 groups are thin of high-end players. Teams that go all in had better have decent OA’s, and an above average group of 18 and 19-year-olds.

Going into this year, we had high end OA’s, but only one high end 00 in Damiani and one high end 01 in Vukojovic. That isn’t enough to go all in. But if you have a wealth of high draft picks, you can go all in as you can trade your way into being a contender.

We are already pretty good this year but don’t have the high draft picks needed to bring in the help we need to put us over the top in this conference. Especially when you consider what the other contenders have in their draft cupboards. But if we sold off this year, we would have the assets to go all in next year despite the lack of high end 01’s. And we wouldn’t have moved any of our young players.

The reason that I am saying that MM will have to sell off a young player or two along with our remaining high picks to turn this team into a good bet to be the conference champion is because I believe through his actions, he is already all in. He’s already on that road.

My biggest fear is that he stands pat. He didn’t sell our graduating assets going into this year. In fact he traded for a couple more graduating assets. That tells me he has no intention of selling. We don’t really have a wealth of assets with which to go all in to the point where we will be the favourite among the rest of the contenders in the conference unless we sell off a young player or two.

In my opinion, if I were a betting man today, I would bet that we don’t do much more to improve this team this year. I also don’t believe we sell. Therefore, I see us being a pretty good team this year. Then we’ll be a pretty good team next year. And be a pretty good team the year after. If he does stand pat and not improve on this team drastically this year, or the unexpected happened and sell off as many graduating assets as he can, I won’t have any other choice than to be of the believe that he just wants to be a pretty good team year in and year out without ever doing a major selloff one year in order to build up a wealth of assets to be able to buy large in a contending year.

Is there still a chance he sells this year? Maybe. But if he decides he has to, he’ll have to make a deal or two to get us to where we were in the off season regarding the number of graduating players we’d have that should be moved. Owen Sound did a late sell off last year and didn’t really get true value for their assets. Do we want to put ourselves in that position?
Some valid points. In most cases I dislike standing pat. In the case this season though, I think there is a case to be made that there are a lot of mediocre teams, most being with average goaltending at best. I think MM has put the team in position to make some value trades that could put the team in contention. I don't see any team strengthening themselves measurably as there aren't many high impact players out there.

Bottom line is we'll have to wait and see for the time being. I don't think any big moves are imminent.
 

Rangers True Blue

Registered User
Aug 2, 2017
1,675
1,402
On the positive side.....Pinelli is a gem and is one of our top scorers.........McDonnel is a beast........Ottaveinen gets better and better every game and his shot is a laser guided missile.......Motew is special and will evolve with experience and age....Serpa and Fishman while young are still buzzing around and causing havoc.........Petizian has stepped up his game.......and yes, we do have some solid OAs...just have to get them back although it's been said Meireles may show up this Friday. And Ingham is such a difference in net...a difference that has allowed the team to spread its wings and play hockey rather than be so concerned about their D zone. Do they need to improve as a team....no doubt....but I do believe they will get there. Now will they win their division?.......going to be tough..........win the league......doubtful IMO. But the future is bright as long as MM can continue to add to the strong young core we already have.
 

EvenSteven

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
7,321
6,077
On the positive side.....Pinelli is a gem and is one of our top scorers.........McDonnel is a beast........Ottaveinen gets better and better every game and his shot is a laser guided missile.......Motew is special and will evolve with experience and age....Serpa and Fishman while young are still buzzing around and causing havoc.........Petizian has stepped up his game.......and yes, we do have some solid OAs...just have to get them back although it's been said Meireles may show up this Friday. And Ingham is such a difference in net...a difference that has allowed the team to spread its wings and play hockey rather than be so concerned about their D zone. Do they need to improve as a team....no doubt....but I do believe they will get there. Now will they win their division?.......going to be tough..........win the league......doubtful IMO. But the future is bright as long as MM can continue to add to the strong young core we already have.


All those kids you mentioned are evidence of a very strong 02/03 group of young players. All the more reason to focus on that group as the nucleus of a contender. Starting next year IMO. They’ll be in their third and second year respectively and getting better and better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->