Kitchener Rangers 2023-24 Off-Season Thread (Part 1)

[Squirrel88]

Any team hoping to contend is unlikely to give up '07 players of the Reid, Lam and Romano ilk. They plan on having those players contribute to a winning team. An '08 isn't contributing in the same way (well, Reid was, but whatever). Maybe a guy like Moses works, but Griffin? Not sure the bulldogs would do that in the offseason. If they do, go for it.

I do think Kitchener needs to figure out what they are doing in goal in the off-season, though. Very difficult to trade OA goalies in season and they have 2. Presumably Malboef (he really should have had a nickname this year) should be told whether he has a place or not, so that he can line up a CIS spot for the fall, if needed.

 

[Squirrel88]

So.... since I don't have a life, and the leafs have been leafing, and I'm a bit of a nerd on this stuff, I decided to compile a list of assets moved out and in by the Rangers this year. This was done in conjunction with the consumption of a couple malted alcoholic beverages, so don't assume complete accuracy. Calculation includes the asset swap with Saginaw that resulted in the pick used on Lam and the swap of a 6th next year for a 5th his year with Flint. In other words, a little more than a year of trades. I also included the FA pickup of Big D as an asset in.

Players out - 03D, 04D (import), 04G, 05D, 05F.
Players in - 04G, 05F (import), 05D, 06F, 06D, 06D
Picks out - 2 - 2nds, 2 - 3rds, 7 - 4ths, 6 - 5ths, 1 - 6th, 1 - 7th, 1 - 8th.
Picks in - 3 - 2nds, 2 - 3rds, 2 - 4ths, 2 - 5ths.

I'm not sure how to feel about this. The players look better for the Rangers when you put names to the ages - we wouldn't trade Ellinas for all the players eligible to come back, for instance.

The picks out are more quantity than quality, but (woof) 7 4ths is a lot to make up. It also doesn't account for the opportunity cost - ie. what could have the Rangers received in a Hunter B trade, for instance. I suppose there are also culture aspects to take into consideration. What is the value of giving your young players opportunities and experiences, how important is showing faith in your players and rewarding their early-season success. There aren't clear or correct answers to these questions.

Overall - maybe not as bad as I thought? I'm pretty risk averse, so I probably still would have sold harder and bought less.

 

[EvenSteven]

Any team hoping to contend is unlikely to give up '07 players of the Reid, Lam and Romano ilk. They plan on having those players contribute to a winning team. An '08 isn't contributing in the same way (well, Reid was, but whatever). Maybe a guy like Moses works, but Griffin? Not sure the bulldogs would do that in the offseason. If they do, go for it.

I do think Kitchener needs to figure out what they are doing in goal in the off-season, though. Very difficult to trade OA goalies in season and they have 2. Presumably Malboef (he really should have had a nickname this year) should be told whether he has a place or not, so that he can line up a CIS spot for the fall, if needed.

I agree. If an “all in” team makes their 07 1st rounder available, I’d be skeptical as to the reason why. As you said, an 07 1st rounder of the quality we’d want in return for Rehkopf, you’d expect to be a big part of that team’s contention.

In net, 100% we have to go with an OA G to share the crease with Edwards. The decision of Parsons or Malboeuf has to be made fast to allow the odd guy out to prep for next year. MM should put feelers out now for trade partners for Parsons. My first choice is to move him and have Malboeuf and Edwards do a 50/50 split. Parsons might not be happy giving a rookie half the starts in a year he’ll want as many starts as possible to build a resume going forward.

Based on the return for past OHL championship OA goalies, we might not like the return for Parsons but I’m of the opinion that the extra 15 or so starts that Edwards would get if Malboeuf was his partner instead of Parsons would be worth it.

 

[EvenSteven]

No doubt trades will happen and KIT will be a seller next year, but at this point its not clear who the buyers are (other than MISS and Brantford). Probably need to wait to let the market develop before you get the top return. With Razor, don't you want to see whether you can get somebody's '08 first as part of the return?

I believe that in dealing Rehkopf, quality return is more important than quantity return.

You might be able to get multiple 2nds and 3rds for Rehkopf in the off season, but I think I’d rather wait til January and get an 08 1st ++.

Looking at two different types of returns for high end players at the last deadline:

Brantford got 2x2nds, 4x3rds, 2x4ths for Jorian Donovan. None of those picks were for the ‘24 draft.
Peterboro got 07 1st rounder Caden Taylor plus a pick for Donovan McCoy. Sure that was a landslide of picks for the Bulldogs, but in Taylor, Petes got the 9th overall pick in 2023. He had huge numbers in his OHL draft year and after the trade to the Petes, he scored at around a 40 point pace. That’s pretty good as a 16 year old. That’s where I may take that quality over the quantity of picks.

After that type of deal for Rehkopf, we’d have two 07 1sts and two 08 1sts on the roster. That bodes well going forward.

By the time the trade deadline rolls around, Rehkopf likely has played in his second WJC and should be at the very worst on a 40-45 goal pace. That player brings big return the deadline. No, he’s not the 200 foot player that Owen Beck is. But Beck isn’t scoring goals at near the pace that Rehkopf is. A team looking for scoring who already has high end 200 ft players on the roster, would be a great landing spot for a Rehkopf.

Hard to deny that with his resume, he’ll be worth as much as Beck.

If we’re worried about the empty draft cupboard not being filled out via a Rehkopf deal, trading Andonovski, Sale, and maybe Swick should go a long way in tending to that issue.

 

[rangersblues]

I believe that in dealing Rehkopf, quality return is more important than quantity return.

You might be able to get multiple 2nds and 3rds for Rehkopf in the off season, but I think I’d rather wait til January and get an 08 1st ++.

Looking at two different types of returns for high end players at the last deadline:

Brantford got 2x2nds, 4x3rds, 2x4ths for Jorian Donovan. None of those picks were for the ‘24 draft.
Peterboro got 07 1st rounder Caden Taylor plus a pick for Donovan McCoy. Sure that was a landslide of picks for the Bulldogs, but in Taylor, Petes got the 9th overall pick in 2023. He had huge numbers in his OHL draft year and after the trade to the Petes, he scored at around a 40 point pace. That’s pretty good as a 16 year old. That’s where I may take that quality over the quantity of picks.

After that type of deal for Rehkopf, we’d have two 07 1sts and two 08 1sts on the roster. That bodes well going forward.

By the time the trade deadline rolls around, Rehkopf likely has played in his second WJC and should be at the very worst on a 40-45 goal pace. That player brings big return the deadline. No, he’s not the 200 foot player that Owen Beck is. But Beck isn’t scoring goals at near the pace that Rehkopf is. A team looking for scoring who already has high end 200 ft players on the roster, would be a great landing spot for a Rehkopf.

Hard to deny that with his resume, he’ll be worth as much as Beck.

If we’re worried about the empty draft cupboard not being filled out via a Rehkopf deal, trading Andonovski, Sale, and maybe Swick should go a long way in tending to that issue.

Question - Which of our recent first round picks would you have theoretically traded for

1. Owen Beck

2. Carson Rehkopf

I know Lalonde will be one of them. Would you be satisfied with him (or a player of his value) plus picks for a return for Rehkopf now

 

[EvenSteven]

Question - Which of our recent first round picks would you have theoretically traded for

1. Owen Beck

2. Carson Rehkopf

I know Lalonde will be one of them. Would you be satisfied with him (or a player of his value) plus picks for a return for Rehkopf now

It would depend on the needs of the team. If we’re trading away a 1st, that means we’re all in and already have players of the highest end. Having already had Rehkopf on the roster this year, it would make more sense to trade for a Beck type player.

But if we already have, say, a Beck or Colby Barlow type player on the roster and needed more scoring, Rehkopf may be the direction to go in.

Last year for instance, we didn’t need Arcuri at the deadline. We already had multiples of that type of player. That’s a situation where you go after a Beck or Barlow type.

 

[bobber]

Wonder what direction MM takes the team in next season. Jussi mentioned that they would like a team that can contend every year or something along that line in Brown's article. Gives one pause for thought on what the future may hold. Some franchises make just enough trades to gain assets like Hamilton or the Knights. Fans will be left guessing here in KW. We are like the proverbial box of chocolates.

 

[bobber]

This past draft it was mentioned several players were going a different direction than the OHL. If this turns out to be a fact and several first round picks are considered defective what effect will this have on the next draft? Will half of the franchises get two picks in the first round?
Not clear how this works. Happens more every year and it is a detriment to other teams. Rangers benefitted with a defect when Hage went to Chicago. It does effect teams with one pick from adding value. If the league wants parity is this a great way to go about creating it? Top franchises benefit from defects more than teams hanging around the perifity.(If that's a word)

 

[EvenSteven]

Rangers benefitted with a defect when Hage went to Chicago.

That’s debatable. Sure we have Romano who’s a year younger, But, had Hage reported, he’d have brought more to this year’s post season than Romano. Would have made our top six much better.

Age difference aside, the Hage / Romano thing can be considered a wash. We got nothing except the comp 1st (and a 4th) for Hage’s rights when defected players more often bring much more in trade. Another reason this can be considered a wash is that if we are targeting 2027, Hage wouldn’t be here but he’d bring a ton in trade at the ‘26 deadline.

All theoretical of course.

I think the problem with the Rangers ever drafting a player who would become defected is that player, if he wants to play in the OHL, will report to Kitchener. The defected players that are picking their spots will likely have Kitchener on their list.

I contend we’ll never draft a player we can’t sign but will sign with another OHL team meaning multiple 2nds and 3rds coming our way in trade along with the comp pick. Won’t happen.

 

[bobber]

That’s debatable. Sure we have Romano who’s a year younger, But, had Hage reported, he’d have brought more to this year’s post season than Romano. Would have made our top six much better.

Age difference aside, the Hage / Romano thing can be considered a wash. We got nothing except the comp 1st (and a 4th) for Hage’s rights when defected players more often bring much more in trade. Another reason this can be considered a wash is that if we are targeting 2027, Hage wouldn’t be here but he’d bring a ton in trade at the ‘26 deadline.

All theoretical of course.

I think the problem with the Rangers ever drafting a player who would become defected is that player, if he wants to play in the OHL, will report to Kitchener. The defected players that are picking their spots will likely have Kitchener on their list.

I contend we’ll never draft a player we can’t sign but will sign with another OHL team meaning multiple 2nds and 3rds coming our way in trade along with the comp pick. Won’t happen.

Good points. Just wondering about this past draft where half the first and even some 2nd rounders said they weren't committing to the OHL. Seems more were looking at another direction unless more are faking it to get where they want to go.

 

[Buttsy]

Not to harp on this point BUT I think Kitchener is at a spot in time where they really need to look at the roster vs the coaching style of Jussi. Jussi has a year of OHL hockey under his belt and should know what style of team he now needs to compete. I don’t think Jussi bringing over the Finland style game exclusivly will work but he is a sharp guy that probably realizes that now. Standing pat for the most part of Year 1 of Jussi was a great move. I say MM needs in a room with his coach and player by player say “Ya” or “Nay” as to whether the player fits on a Team Jussi. And this could involve some big names ….
As an FYI I know it’s hard to believe but if the Knights can’t win Kitchener is my go to team. I know I’m a little untraditional when thinking this way but then my third pick is Windsor …. LOL, guess I just like geography and my closest teams! My buddy and I had Memorial Cup tickets for Kitchener when Mario Lemieux and his team represented the Quebec League.

 

[rangersblues]

That’s debatable. Sure we have Romano who’s a year younger, But, had Hage reported, he’d have brought more to this year’s post season than Romano. Would have made our top six much better.

Age difference aside, the Hage / Romano thing can be considered a wash. We got nothing except the comp 1st (and a 4th) for Hage’s rights when defected players more often bring much more in trade. Another reason this can be considered a wash is that if we are targeting 2027, Hage wouldn’t be here but he’d bring a ton in trade at the ‘26 deadline.

All theoretical of course.

I think the problem with the Rangers ever drafting a player who would become defected is that player, if he wants to play in the OHL, will report to Kitchener. The defected players that are picking their spots will likely have Kitchener on their list.

I contend we’ll never draft a player we can’t sign but will sign with another OHL team meaning multiple 2nds and 3rds coming our way in trade along with the comp pick. Won’t happen.

I don't think any 17 year old player short of Connor McDavid would have made a difference to the outcome of this year's playoffs. Even that's debatable.

 

[EvenSteven]

I don't think any 17 year old player short of Connor McDavid would have made a difference to the outcome of this year's playoffs. Even that's debatable.

Three of four games vs London, empty net goals notwithstanding, were one goal games.

There are a ton of “ifs”, “ands” and “buts”, but it could be argued, that having Hage instead of Romano means an extra top six forward in the lineup. As a 1st round ranked NHL player, he’d likely be right there behind Rehkopf, Mesar and Sop. His performance this year indicates that would likely be the case.

With that in mind, instead of bringing in Sale, you bring in another veteran D to shore up the back end. Our over taxed D made things difficult at times for Parsons. Who knows? A steadier D corps makes life easier for Parsons and a couple of those one goal games go the other way making the series a lot tighter.

Debatable.

 

[rangersblues]

Three of four games vs London, empty net goals notwithstanding, were one goal games.

There are a ton of “ifs”, “ands” and “buts”, but it could be argued, that having Hage instead of Romano means an extra top six forward in the lineup. As a 1st round ranked NHL player, he’d likely be right there behind Rehkopf, Mesar and Sop. His performance this year indicates that would likely be the case.

With that in mind, instead of bringing in Sale, you bring in another veteran D to shore up the back end. Our over taxed D made things difficult at times for Parsons. Who knows? A steadier D corps makes life easier for Parsons and a couple of those one goal games go the other way making the series a lot tighter.

Debatable.

Definitely would have made it tighter but wouldn't have changed the outcome

 

[EvenSteven]

Definitely would have made it tighter but wouldn't have changed the outcome

Perhaps not. But it might’ve been enough to get us into the second or third seed and not see London till the third round.

 

[EvenSteven]

So.... since I don't have a life, and the leafs have been leafing, and I'm a bit of a nerd on this stuff, I decided to compile a list of assets moved out and in by the Rangers this year. This was done in conjunction with the consumption of a couple malted alcoholic beverages, so don't assume complete accuracy. Calculation includes the asset swap with Saginaw that resulted in the pick used on Lam and the swap of a 6th next year for a 5th his year with Flint. In other words, a little more than a year of trades. I also included the FA pickup of Big D as an asset in.

Players out - 03D, 04D (import), 04G, 05D, 05F.
Players in - 04G, 05F (import), 05D, 06F, 06D, 06D
Picks out - 2 - 2nds, 2 - 3rds, 7 - 4ths, 6 - 5ths, 1 - 6th, 1 - 7th, 1 - 8th.
Picks in - 3 - 2nds, 2 - 3rds, 2 - 4ths, 2 - 5ths.

I'm not sure how to feel about this. The players look better for the Rangers when you put names to the ages - we wouldn't trade Ellinas for all the players eligible to come back, for instance.

The picks out are more quantity than quality, but (woof) 7 4ths is a lot to make up. It also doesn't account for the opportunity cost - ie. what could have the Rangers received in a Hunter B trade, for instance. I suppose there are also culture aspects to take into consideration. What is the value of giving your young players opportunities and experiences, how important is showing faith in your players and rewarding their early-season success. There aren't clear or correct answers to these questions.

Overall - maybe not as bad as I thought? I'm pretty risk averse, so I probably still would have sold harder and bought less.

No life? Lol! Me either!!

Look at the transactions for the 2017-18 season:

Players / picks in:
Logan Stanley
Kole Sherwood
Givani Smith
Logan Brown
Austin McEneny
Mario Culina
1 x 2nd
4 x 3rds
1 x 4th
1 x 6th

Picks / players out:
Elijah Roberts
Doug Blaisdell
Grayson Ladd
Cedric Shiemenz
Jake Henderson
Cole Carter
9 x 2nds.
3 x 3rds.
1 x 4ths
2 x 5ths.
2 x 8ths.
1 x 10th.
1 x 15th

Of note with those transactions:
We got quite a bit bigger and more physical with those trades. We traded out smaller less physical guys like Roberts and Carter and every skater but McEneny we brought in was over 6 feet and most were gritty, physical players.

It’s obvious MM could see we already had a ton of skill in guys like Mascherin, Garreffa and Hugg and looked to complement that skill with size and physicality.

Also of note:
Look at that D post trade deadline.

Stanley. McEneny.
Hall. Vallati.
Gentles. Garreffa.
Vukojevic. York.

That’s big, tough, deep and experienced. Only one rookie in the bunch (Vukojevic).

With the success we had that year, it’s odd that MM veered away from those thought processes the last couple of years.

Time to revisit the 2017-18 season methinks.

 

[Ward Cornell]

My buddy and I had Memorial Cup tickets for Kitchener when Mario Lemieux and his team represented the Quebec League.

I missed it, my wife to be never wanted to postpone our wedding and honeymoon. What can a guy do???
We're now away for our 40th.

 

[bobber]

I missed it, my wife to be never wanted to postpone our wedding and honeymoon. What can a guy do???
We're now away for our 40th.

Quite the sacrifice but I'm sure you made the right decision Ward. Congrats on 40th.

 

[rangersblues]

I missed it, my wife to be never wanted to postpone our wedding and honeymoon. What can a guy do???
We're now away for our 40th.

Congratulations Ward. Hard to believe that was 40 years ago. That was quite a season that we had to get to host the Memorial Cup

 

[bobber]

Mario Lemieux and his team mate sat behind us at the Mem Cup. Didn't do much in that tourney if my old memory is correct but what player he was in the NHL.

 

[GeoBlue]

Mario Lemieux and his team mate sat behind us at the Mem Cup. Didn't do much in that tourney if my old memory is correct but what player he was in the NHL.

I remember it like it was yesterday. Mario was upset because he didn't want to go to Pittsburgh in the draft. LOL! Some people thought he was holding back so that he wouldn't get drafted by them. I remember going to the game when his team played the Rangers. He looked quite average until one point in the game where he was playing keep away with the puck from 3 Rangers. He got a standing O for those few seconds.

 

[Gondrex]

................. He looked quite average until one point in the game where he was playing keep away with the puck from 3 Rangers. He got a standing O for those few seconds.

This very sentence would have been my exact words. That "keep-away" incident happened just below where I was sitting....and yes he was very average otherwise.

My seat was high up on one of the "yellow benches". A guy from Kamloops tried to squeeze himself onto our 3-person bench. I'm guessing he had a standing room ticket. The benches were uncomfortable enough let alone having to deal with the over capacity issue. My two buddies and I had enough of it and got him booted. If he was a Ranger fan I may have re-considered .

 

[Rangers True Blue]

I would think (and have to believe) that Jussi had input on the draft this year. After his inaugural year in the OHL, he witnessed the grit side of the OHL and should realize the need and value of those type of players on the Rangers. I'm sure Kyrazakos and Glynn are in his ear as well.

With that said, I hope they have a good look at Labrash and "encourage" Xu to show up at camp. Looking forward to rookie camp....

 

[Ward Cornell]

Quite the sacrifice but I'm sure you made the right decision Ward. Congrats on 40th.

Hmmm....I've noticed you left out for some reason that my wife made the right decision.

 

[bobber]

Hmmm....I've noticed you left out for some reason that my wife made the right decision.

Thought about it but changed my mind. Don't make the same mistake I did. Stole one of those bells you ring for service. Tried it at home. Didn't work! First time I tried it she came with a cast iron frying pan. Best laid plans of mice and men