Dreger: Kreider most likely to be traded after contract talks. 1st Rounder on the table.

[Shootertooter]

1st plus Beecher is the equivalent of two 1sts. I think Kreider will be in demand, but can't see a team giving up two 1sts.

Boston's pick will likely be 28-31 and a really good prospect is fair value.

 

[BlackFrancis]

Boston's pick will likely be 28-31 and a really good prospect is fair value.

Bruins fans wish you all the success in the world getting a equivalent return from the Lightning for this 50 pt future HOFer.

 

[Shootertooter]

Bruins fans wish you all the success in the world getting a equivalent return from the Lightning for this 50 pt future HOFer.

More likely he will go to the team that beats Boston in the finals.

 

[weinsink]

More likely he will go to the team that beats Boston in the finals.

While your yelling foreee?

 

[oilexport]

It's a huge gamble for any team to pay the price for this guy, if the ask is what most people are suggesting here.

These pending free agents never really work out when they sign the big contract, with the salary cap logistics. This guy can easily become a liability real quick. You can project a drop off once the ink dries on the new contract.

If he puts ya over the top for this years playoffs, I would go late 1st, that's it.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Bruins fans wish you all the success in the world getting a equivalent return from the Lightning for this 50 pt future HOFer.

And we wish you all the luck to try to squeeze in one more cup with your window closing quickly.

 

[BPD]

It's a huge gamble for any team to pay the price for this guy, if the ask is what most people are suggesting here.

These pending free agents never really work out when they sign the big contract, with the salary cap logistics. This guy can easily become a liability real quick. You can project a drop off once the ink dries on the new contract.

If he puts ya over the top for this years playoffs, I would go late 1st, that's it.

I think the miss in this logic is the classic HF fallacy: GMs aren't exclusively about managing the future. GMs are paid to make money, and to do it for as long as possible. You're not looking at "late 1st to go over the top", you're looking at "how much is what I'm giving up going to do for me/cost" versus "how much more revenue am I generating this year by having Kreider in the fold?"

Conservatively, let's call a playoff home game an average of $150 a seat, and 18000 attendees. It's playoffs; assume a sellout. On ticket sales alone, that's 2.7 million dollars per game in additional revenue. That doesn't count beer, food, merch, etc. Extrapolate - A Stanley Cup Finals run that features 12-16 home games is probably worth around $50 million in total revenue. Adding a round to your playoff run is like adding some 7 million, minimum, to your coffers.

Obviously, that number goes up as the rounds increase, and obviously there are revenue sharing components here, but your calculus is probably more like "Does what I'm getting increase the chances of securing an additional round? More than one?"

 

[Shootertooter]

If he puts ya over the top for this years playoffs, I would go late 1st, that's it.

That is fine but you will effectively be eliminating any chance you have to acquire said player.

 

[Calad]

@The Crypto Guy

I know you have plenty of prospects, but you aren’t getting a quality D-man in his early prime+1st+ prospect (value)for UFA.

Grzelcyk could be a quality player for you for years, not all prospects hit as you should very well know and good D-men are always in demand in trade market

It's a poor use of assets for us to acquire a D man that we could potentially have no use for, especially when he would block all of our young LHD from getting a chance to play. If we weren't in the middle of a rebuild his acquisition would make more sense, but as it stands that ice time should be going to Lindgren, Hajek, or Rykov for the next year or two, then Miller and Robertson (and others) further down the road.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

@The Crypto Guy

I know you have plenty of prospects, but you aren’t getting a quality D-man in his early prime+1st+ prospect (value)for UFA.

Grzelcyk could be a quality player for you for years, not all prospects hit as you should very well know and good D-men are always in demand in trade market

Why not?

We did when we traded you guys Nash.

-1st, 7th
-Good prospect in Lindgren who is looking like a very solid top 4 dman for us
-Decent roster player in Spooner (who at the time wasn't terrible and a player who appeared in his prime).
-Throw away player Beleskey

 

[TGWL]

You clearly have no idea of Grzelcyk.

That offer was way too much

Yes, it has nothing to do with NYR needing a forward and not a lower-pairing d-man. It must be that we have no idea of Grzelcyk.

On top of that, we'd have to pay an increase to keep Grzelcyk with his expiring RFA contract. So the situation would be to offer a short 1/2 year deal - (Probably fight with him on that and then lose him or trade him as a UFA), or offer a long term contract at a rate we're probably not comfortable with right now due to our cap.

 

[RANGERS13ADL]

I think the miss in this logic is the classic HF fallacy: GMs aren't exclusively about managing the future. GMs are paid to make money, and to do it for as long as possible. You're not looking at "late 1st to go over the top", you're looking at "how much is what I'm giving up going to do for me/cost" versus "how much more revenue am I generating this year by having Kreider in the fold?"

Conservatively, let's call a playoff home game an average of $150 a seat, and 18000 attendees. It's playoffs; assume a sellout. On ticket sales alone, that's 2.7 million dollars per game in additional revenue. That doesn't count beer, food, merch, etc. Extrapolate - A Stanley Cup Finals run that features 12-16 home games is probably worth around $50 million in total revenue. Adding a round to your playoff run is like adding some 7 million, minimum, to your coffers.

Obviously, that number goes up as the rounds increase, and obviously there are revenue sharing components here, but your calculus is probably more like "Does what I'm getting increase the chances of securing an additional round? More than one?"

Cable rights... $$$ (just adding to your statement as I agree completely)

This is a business as much as it is a sport.. Many don't realize/understand that side.. 31st overall pick doesn't have a great chance of making the NHL in any major way. But yes it is possible of course, just slim compared to the top 5 picks(who also sometimes flop).. seems like a low risk to get back a puzzle piece to a cup and millions of dollars.

 

[gravey9]

To be clear, the Rangers ask for Kreider needs to be: a prospect or young NHLer with top 6 potential + a pick. I don't think they want 3 pieces. They want a Beecher or a Kyrou/Kostin or similar player as the centerpiece. If they can't get that, they likely look to resign CK. NHL teams wanting CK need to understand they're not just bidding against each other, they're bidding against what CK potentially brings to the Rangers once their contention window opens again.

So the priority here is finding a young player who can be a contributor/line driver in 2 years. Not a 21 rookie in 3-4 years. So, again, the young player/prospect will be the centerpiece and not a late first round pick. The pick is the secondary piece. Any other components added to the deal are likely about creating cap space for the acquiring team.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Bruins fans wish you all the success in the world getting a equivalent return from the Lightning for this 50 pt future HOFer.

I wish Brisebois can use the same Yzedi mind trick that Yzerman used and lower that cost somehow.

 

[DFC]

I wish Brisebois can use the same Yzedi mind trick that Yzerman used and lower that cost somehow.

He didn't rent though. This might be why. As much as I want Kreider, I don't see us paying this kind of price.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

He didn't rent though. This might be why. As much as I want Kreider, I don't see us paying this kind of price.

Yeah that price tag is too steep for a rental. Has there been any word on Kreiders contract demands?

 

[oilexport]

I think the miss in this logic is the classic HF fallacy: GMs aren't exclusively about managing the future. GMs are paid to make money, and to do it for as long as possible. You're not looking at "late 1st to go over the top", you're looking at "how much is what I'm giving up going to do for me/cost" versus "how much more revenue am I generating this year by having Kreider in the fold?"

Conservatively, let's call a playoff home game an average of $150 a seat, and 18000 attendees. It's playoffs; assume a sellout. On ticket sales alone, that's 2.7 million dollars per game in additional revenue. That doesn't count beer, food, merch, etc. Extrapolate - A Stanley Cup Finals run that features 12-16 home games is probably worth around $50 million in total revenue. Adding a round to your playoff run is like adding some 7 million, minimum, to your coffers.

Obviously, that number goes up as the rounds increase, and obviously there are revenue sharing components here, but your calculus is probably more like "Does what I'm getting increase the chances of securing an additional round? More than one?"

My logic looks at a bigger picture then yours. I dont believe giving up so much youth assets, will make playoff money in the long run. With any team cap challenges, you cant build a winner with rentals or free agents. It's just not possible. Building a core with draft picks and RFA's gives you a better chance, they are cheaper...

So I still say, paying the huge price of picks and prospects, will lose revenue in the long run.

The math just does not add up for me unless it's a isolated case.

The oilers need a winger like this real bad, it may lift us to a higher tier and give us a change in these playoffs, and make more revenue this year, but it's like gambling in Vegas.

 

[FirstRowUpperDeck]

I think the miss in this logic is the classic HF fallacy: GMs aren't exclusively about managing the future. GMs are paid to make money, and to do it for as long as possible. You're not looking at "late 1st to go over the top", you're looking at "how much is what I'm giving up going to do for me/cost" versus "how much more revenue am I generating this year by having Kreider in the fold?"

Conservatively, let's call a playoff home game an average of $150 a seat, and 18000 attendees. It's playoffs; assume a sellout. On ticket sales alone, that's 2.7 million dollars per game in additional revenue. That doesn't count beer, food, merch, etc. Extrapolate - A Stanley Cup Finals run that features 12-16 home games is probably worth around $50 million in total revenue. Adding a round to your playoff run is like adding some 7 million, minimum, to your coffers.

Obviously, that number goes up as the rounds increase, and obviously there are revenue sharing components here, but your calculus is probably more like "Does what I'm getting increase the chances of securing an additional round? More than one?"

A decade ago, I read where average FB sales was about $16 a game per patron. Got to be $25 or more now. 18K x $25 x 30% for net is about $135,000 per game. Parking has to average $30 for those who park, but many come by public transit, so say $20 X 18,000 at about 75% profit and it's another $270,000. Who knows on merchandise.

So, a total playoff game might bring in over $3M. 2 playoff games nets you a star player in salary. I think most teams budget based on making at least one round of the PO.

Not to mention, I bet the Blues have upped both STH and gate sales by 15-20% this year. While regular season games vary and will be less, maybe $2M per night, or $82Mil in game revenues a year, adding $12-$16 Million the next year is a nice boost.

That said, if you ask any GM, its all about winning, baby! Especially on deadline trades. Seems to me the appetite for these trades, and thus, prices in general for rentals, has gone down the last few years. How many teams have acquired a bunch of big name players and won? A better approach is to acquire someone who fits your bill perfectly and not much else. And preferably well ahead of the TDL, to help build chemistry.

 

[RANGERS13ADL]

Yeah that price tag is too steep for a rental. Has there been any word on Kreiders contract demands?

Just speculation I think... 6.5-7.5m/yr I'm sure but I bet the issue will be term plus NYR making space. If the space is there I see the deal being made.

 

[BB88]

Yes, it has nothing to do with NYR needing a forward and not a lower-pairing d-man. It must be that we have no idea of Grzelcyk.

On top of that, we'd have to pay an increase to keep Grzelcyk with his expiring RFA contract. So the situation would be to offer a short 1/2 year deal - (Probably fight with him on that and then lose him or trade him as a UFA), or offer a long term contract at a rate we're probably not comfortable with right now due to our cap.

I hope you get the high price you want.

Must be nice to be a fan of a team where you don't have any kind of value for lower end 2nd pair guys in their early prime.

It's a poor use of assets for us to acquire a D man that we could potentially have no use for, especially when he would block all of our young LHD from getting a chance to play. If we weren't in the middle of a rebuild his acquisition would make more sense, but as it stands that ice time should be going to Lindgren, Hajek, or Rykov for the next year or two, then Miller and Robertson (and others) further down the road.

Your defense needs a boost and you could turn around and sell Grzelcyk for an additional credit if needed/want, and you need more veteran D-men and not just run with the kids.

& The post was Grzelcyk+1st+ prospect.

Why not?

We did when we traded you guys Nash.

-1st, 7th
-Good prospect in Lindgren who is looking like a very solid top 4 dman for us
-Decent roster player in Spooner (who at the time wasn't terrible and a player who appeared in his prime).
-Throw away player Beleskey

Gzelcyk is a whole different player than Lindgren was.

 

[Calad]

I hope you get the high price you want.

Must be nice to be a fan of a team where you don't have any kind of value for lower end 2nd pair guys in their early prime.





Your defense needs a boost and you could turn around and sell Grzelcyk for an additional credit if needed/want, and you need more veteran D-men and not just run with the kids.

& The post was Grzelcyk+1st+ prospect.



Gzelcyk is a whole different player than Lindgren was.

We have Brady skjei signed for 4 more years and Staal for another season. We are already struggling to find ice time for our prospects as they over ripen in Hartford. I'm not discounting gryezlyc or his value, I'm just explaining that it makes our logjam situation even more difficult than it already is.

 

[TGWL]

I hope you get the high price you want.

Must be nice to be a fan of a team where you don't have any kind of value for lower end 2nd pair guys in their early prime.





Your defense needs a boost and you could turn around and sell Grzelcyk for an additional credit if needed/want, and you need more veteran D-men and not just run with the kids.

& The post was Grzelcyk+1st+ prospect.



Gzelcyk is a whole different player than Lindgren was.

Did you hit your head this morning or do you often go about your day missing the point?

* NYR need a top pairing LD. If that's not being offered we don't need a LD.
* NYR desperately need a good forward prospect. One who is either ready to make the jump, or a young roster player needing a chance to play more minutes.

Nobody is saying Grzelcyk is a worthless player. He's a player that shouldn't be the main focus coming back with Kreider. The 1st is great, but the ready forward prospect is what we're looking for.

 

[cwede]

I hope you get the high price you want.
Must be nice to be a fan of a team where you don't have any kind of value for lower end 2nd pair guys in their early prime.
Your defense needs a boost and you could turn around and sell Grzelcyk for an additional credit if needed/want, and you need more veteran D-men and not just run with the kids.
& The post was Grzelcyk+1st+ prospect.
Gzelcyk is a whole different player than Lindgren was.

Grzelcyk is the wrong guy at this time for NYR. That's all.
Young promising F's are NYR critical need.

With 2 more seasons, until intention to seriously contend, more mid-roster mid-20's veterans only clog slots that could go to developing young players.
Just because Grzelcyk is part of a price you're willing to pay, doesn't make him a compelling return to the trading partner.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Another game, another goal for Kreider. Someone is going to get a red hot player.

 

[5cotland]

13G + 12A = 25 points in last 23 games.

One of the most in form players in the league.

With his current rate of form he is on pace to hit 70 points and 36 goals for a career season.