Value of: Kreider or Buchnevich to SJ

[Ken Lund]

In exchange for Chris Kreider, I would offer San Jose’s 2021 1st, Dylan Gambrell, and a conditional 2nd round pick in 2022 that transfers over if SJ wins the Cup in 2020 or Kreider re-signs.

Rangers should agree to this.

 

[Gilligans Island]

Ra

Rangers should agree to this.

Delete

 

[themelkman]

Ra

Rangers should agree to this.

Sharks shouldn't. A first, an NHL ready Center and another second if anything useful happens is pretty bad value to give up for a rental second liner that needs to go.

If you turned the first into a second and added the conditions of the second to turn into a first I would take it. Basically the Kane trade who was pretty much an exact comparable at the time of his trade to current Kreider.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Sharks shouldn't. A first, an NHL ready Center and another second if anything useful happens is pretty bad value to give up for a rental second liner that needs to go.

If you turned the first into a second and added the conditions of the second to turn into a first I would take it. Basically the Kane trade who was pretty much an exact comparable at the time of his trade to current Kreider.

Kreider is a second liner and Gambrell is an NHL ready center? Those are some...Shark-friendly takes, to say the least.

 

[Gilligans Island]

Kreider is a second liner and Gambrell is an NHL ready center? Those are some...Shark-friendly takes, to say the least.

It's a fair question - why shouldn't the Kane deal be considered a comp? Not trying to wear my Sharks-tinted glasses, too.

 

[Dicdonya]

Kreider is a second liner and Gambrell is an NHL ready center? Those are some...Shark-friendly takes, to say the least.

He’s a defensively responsible 40-50ish pt winger, how is second liner not acceptable to you.

He might fit on a 1st line, but you sure as heck don’t want to fill it with players like Kreider, where you would pleased to have a 2nd line filled with players like him.

I agree about Gambrell though, he might technically be nhl ready, but that term seems a bit misleading in the context it was used.

 

[themelkman]

He’s a defensively responsible 40-50ish pt winger, how is second liner not acceptable to you.

He might fit on a 1st line, but you sure as heck don’t want to fill it with players like Kreider, where you would pleased to have a 2nd line filled with players like him.

I agree about Gambrell though, he might technically be nhl ready, but that term seems a bit misleading in the context it was used.

Thats my bad. I see him as a very similar situation to O'Reagan when we traded him for Kane. Ready for the NHL but not experienced

 

[Polar Bear]

Someone will absolutely trade a 1st for Kreider. It's just a matter of who offers one first, and if there are several, it's a matter of who adds the most alongside it.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

He’s a defensively responsible 40-50ish pt winger, how is second liner not acceptable to you.

He might fit on a 1st line, but you sure as heck don’t want to fill it with players like Kreider, where you would pleased to have a 2nd line filled with players like him.

I agree about Gambrell though, he might technically be nhl ready, but that term seems a bit misleading in the context it was used.

It's not acceptable because Kreider is literally the definition of a first line player.

Over the past 3 years, he takes on the second toughest 5-on-5 competition of any Rangers forward and plays the 3rd most minutes of any Rangers forward; there is no question that he is used as a top-liner.

And in those minutes where he plays as a top-liner, the Rangers control 54.88% of the goals and 54.59% of the expected goals; this same Rangers team controls only 45.23% of the goals and 46.05% of the expected goals when he is off the ice. His Rel xGF% is literally the best of any player in the NHL in that time frame.

I think it's a really bad idea to just look at a player's raw point totals and judge what they are based on that. But among left wingers, Kreider is literally 25th in points and 26th in points per game. If you look at just 5-on-5 numbers (which is what really matters in determining whether or not a player is a "first liner"), Kreider ranks 25th in 5-on-5 points and 21st in 5-on-5 points/60 over that time frame. So, his 5-on-5 scoring does fit the bill as a first liner, albeit a lower end one, but he is a better defensive player than every single left winger with a higher scoring rate than him.

There are individual player assessment models which attempt to account for a player's teammates, competition, usage, etc. and rate their impact. While I'm skeptical of these metrics, and don't consider them the be all end all of player evaluation, all of them say Kreider is, at worst, a good first liner. Over the past 3 years:

Corsica Hockey's WAR model ranks Kreider 60th among forwards in WAR.
Evolving Hockey's WAR model ranks Kreider 37th among forwards in WAR. (And 11th in even strength WAR)
Evolving Hockey's RAPM model says Kreider has the 18th best impact on ES goals, 12th best impact on ES expected goals, and 30th best impact on ES shot attempts among forwards.
Micah McCurdy's isolated threat says that Kreider has a +14% ES offensive impact, -10% ES defensive impact, and his shooting is 7% better than average. He doesn't release a full list of whose impacts are where, but the +24% net impact is probably top-10 in the NHL.

Again, I don't consider these metrics to be perfect for player evaluation, and I think they definitely have their outliers. But every single one of them says that Kreider is a top-line forward. You put that together with the fact that he plays top-line minutes and posts fantastic results, I don't understand how you can call him anything other than a top-line forward.

 

[Dicdonya]

It's not acceptable because Kreider is literally the definition of a first line player.

Over the past 3 years, he takes on the second toughest 5-on-5 competition of any Rangers forward and plays the 3rd most minutes of any Rangers forward; there is no question that he is used as a top-liner.

And in those minutes where he plays as a top-liner, the Rangers control 54.88% of the goals and 54.59% of the expected goals; this same Rangers team controls only 45.23% of the goals and 46.05% of the expected goals when he is off the ice. His Rel xGF% is literally the best of any player in the NHL in that time frame.

I think it's a really bad idea to just look at a player's raw point totals and judge what they are based on that. But among left wingers, Kreider is literally 25th in points and 26th in points per game. If you look at just 5-on-5 numbers (which is what really matters in determining whether or not a player is a "first liner"), Kreider ranks 25th in 5-on-5 points and 21st in 5-on-5 points/60 over that time frame. So, his 5-on-5 scoring does fit the bill as a first liner, albeit a lower end one, but he is a better defensive player than every single left winger with a higher scoring rate than him.

There are individual player assessment models which attempt to account for a player's teammates, competition, usage, etc. and rate their impact. While I'm skeptical of these metrics, and don't consider them the be all end all of player evaluation, all of them say Kreider is, at worst, a good first liner. Over the past 3 years:

Corsica Hockey's WAR model ranks Kreider 60th among forwards in WAR.
Evolving Hockey's WAR model ranks Kreider 37th among forwards in WAR. (And 11th in even strength WAR)
Evolving Hockey's RAPM model says Kreider has the 18th best impact on ES goals, 12th best impact on ES expected goals, and 30th best impact on ES shot attempts among forwards.
Micah McCurdy's isolated threat says that Kreider has a +14% ES offensive impact, -10% ES defensive impact, and his shooting is 7% better than average. He doesn't release a full list of whose impacts are where, but the +24% net impact is probably top-10 in the NHL.

Again, I don't consider these metrics to be perfect for player evaluation, and I think they definitely have their outliers. But every single one of them says that Kreider is a top-line forward. You put that together with the fact that he plays top-line minutes and posts fantastic results, I don't understand how you can call him anything other than a top-line forward.

Wow over the last three years when he has been one of the best players on a rebuilding franchise he’s been used as a first line forward and the teams stats are better with him on the ice instead of when worse and/or less seasoned players are on the ice. Color me surprised.

Kreider has never lead his team in points, or even pts/60 on a team who’s best offensive player in his career has been someone like Nash, Zuccerello or recently Zibanejad.

Sorry, he may fill in as first liner on a rebuilding team, but I stand by my stance that if you’re teams first line is filled with Kreiders, you’re screwed. Whereas if you’re second line is filled with Kreiders, you’re a happy camper, because he’s a darn good second line winger.

So use all the advanced stats you like, im not taking a winger who struggles to score 50pts 6 years into his career on my top line unless I’m forced to.

You may be willing to risk a first round pick and a decent prospect to see if he can be more then that, but I’m definitely not.

 

[PattyLafontaine]

Zero Value...?

Wrong, to the 10th power.



Facts.

Brian Boyle, a 4th line center with no term was traded for a 2nd last season. Hayes, another pending UFA was traded for a 1st plus Lemieux. The previous year Nash was traded for a 1st. Grabner, another pending UFA was traded for a 2nd and a decent prospect.

Hell, Jimmy ****ing Vesey was traded for a third, yet Kreider has zero value.

@PattyLafontaine you clearly don't know much about players value. Kind of an embarrassing take, actually.

Yikes you missed the point. Players on their last year of their contract continue lose trade value once the trade deadline passes like an option.

Hell the business of contracts from a GM is similar to dealing with options with margin calls.

July 1, 2020 his trade value is zero because NYR does have the rights. It’s not currently zero hence use of the derivative description.

 

[supsens]

It's not acceptable because Kreider is literally the definition of a first line player.

Over the past 3 years, he takes on the second toughest 5-on-5 competition of any Rangers forward and plays the 3rd most minutes of any Rangers forward; there is no question that he is used as a top-liner.

And in those minutes where he plays as a top-liner, the Rangers control 54.88% of the goals and 54.59% of the expected goals; this same Rangers team controls only 45.23% of the goals and 46.05% of the expected goals when he is off the ice. His Rel xGF% is literally the best of any player in the NHL in that time frame.

I think it's a really bad idea to just look at a player's raw point totals and judge what they are based on that. But among left wingers, Kreider is literally 25th in points and 26th in points per game. If you look at just 5-on-5 numbers (which is what really matters in determining whether or not a player is a "first liner"), Kreider ranks 25th in 5-on-5 points and 21st in 5-on-5 points/60 over that time frame. So, his 5-on-5 scoring does fit the bill as a first liner, albeit a lower end one, but he is a better defensive player than every single left winger with a higher scoring rate than him.

There are individual player assessment models which attempt to account for a player's teammates, competition, usage, etc. and rate their impact. While I'm skeptical of these metrics, and don't consider them the be all end all of player evaluation, all of them say Kreider is, at worst, a good first liner. Over the past 3 years:

Corsica Hockey's WAR model ranks Kreider 60th among forwards in WAR.
Evolving Hockey's WAR model ranks Kreider 37th among forwards in WAR. (And 11th in even strength WAR)
Evolving Hockey's RAPM model says Kreider has the 18th best impact on ES goals, 12th best impact on ES expected goals, and 30th best impact on ES shot attempts among forwards.
Micah McCurdy's isolated threat says that Kreider has a +14% ES offensive impact, -10% ES defensive impact, and his shooting is 7% better than average. He doesn't release a full list of whose impacts are where, but the +24% net impact is probably top-10 in the NHL.

Again, I don't consider these metrics to be perfect for player evaluation, and I think they definitely have their outliers. But every single one of them says that Kreider is a top-line forward. You put that together with the fact that he plays top-line minutes and posts fantastic results, I don't understand how you can call him anything other than a top-line forward.

Many of the advanced stats seem to be used for fan interaction and marketing, I don't think they hold the same value to gm's and coaches as they do to random stat watchers.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Wow over the last three years when he has been one of the best players on a rebuilding franchise he’s been used as a first line forward and the teams stats are better with him on the ice instead of when worse and/or less seasoned players are on the ice. Color me surprised.

Kreider has never lead his team in points, or even pts/60 on a team who’s best offensive player in his career has been someone like Nash, Zuccerello or recently Zibanejad.

Sorry, he may fill in as first liner on a rebuilding team, but I stand by my stance that if you’re teams first line is filled with Kreiders, you’re screwed. Whereas if you’re second line is filled with Kreiders, you’re a happy camper, because he’s a darn good second line winger.

So use all the advanced stats you like, im not taking a winger who struggles to score 50pts 6 years into his career on my top line unless I’m forced to.

You may be willing to risk a first round pick and a decent prospect to see if he can be more then that, but I’m definitely not.

It's pretty hilarious that you say "color me surprised", as if this is some normal occurrence, when literally not one other player in the league does what Kreider does! Literally not one other player has a high rel xGF% than him; his rel xGF% is 9.01%, 2nd place is Mark Stone at 8.73%, and nobody else even cracks 7.5%. It's not some sort of normal occurrence for a player to post these kinds of numbers.

I really think you should try using more than just point totals to evaluate a player. They are just one metric that only account for offense that doesn't even account for the entirety of a player's impact.

 

[Vitto79]

Sharks have cap space ? Thought they would just sign Marleau and Thornton for cheap

 

[Dicdonya]

It's pretty hilarious that you say "color me surprised", as if this is some normal occurrence, when literally not one other player in the league does what Kreider does! Literally not one other player has a high rel xGF% than him; his rel xGF% is 9.01%, 2nd place is Mark Stone at 8.73%, and nobody else even cracks 7.5%. It's not some sort of normal occurrence for a player to post these kinds of numbers.

I really think you should try using more than just point totals to evaluate a player. They are just one metric that only account for offense that doesn't even account for the entirety of a player's impact.

And you really think that Kreider is just so special that he alone can sit at the pinnacle of xgf% of all the players in the entire league, and is not instead an exception or outlier to that model?

Even if he truely is that amazing at xgf%, it’s all rather pointless if it’s always “expected” and never realized goals.

I use advanced stats, but I certainly don’t put as much stock in them as you do, because 3 gf/60 is ALWAYS better than 2 gf/60 even if the latter has 3.5xgf/60. Because guess what, the expected does not always happen in hockey, and whether it was expected or not, you don’t win scoring 2 goals while the other team scores 3, no matter how fancy the stats are you’re using.

If we were talking about some young kid, on a bad team, or buried in the lineup of a great team, that might just need a change of scenery or linemates to fully realize his potential, I would be more open to this line of reasoning. However Kreider is 28 yo, been on good and bad teams, with varying levels of linemates and ice time, and never once broke out into anything but a 2nd line production player, while through the years several of his teammates and linemates have left him in the dust production wise. Not to mention, his playoff scoring is equally as mundane as his regular season scoring, so I can’t even find a silver lining there.

So for the last time, I do not accept Kreider as a legit 1w, because for my own standards, I do not accept 40-50pts as good enough for a first liner unless there is no better option, obviously. Maybe Kreider could score more on the sharks, but I’m not spending a first and a decent prospect on that risk at this point.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

And you really think that Kreider is just so special that he alone can sit at the pinnacle of xgf% of all the players in the entire league, and is not instead an exception or outlier to that model?

Even if he truely is that amazing at xgf%, it’s all rather pointless if it’s always “expected” and never realized goals.

I use advanced stats, but I certainly don’t put as much stock in them as you do, because 3 gf/60 is ALWAYS better than 2 gf/60 even if the latter has 3.5xgf/60. Because guess what, the expected does not always happen in hockey, and whether it was expected or not, you don’t win scoring 2 goals while the other team scores 3, no matter how fancy the stats are you’re using.

If we were talking about some young kid, on a bad team, or buried in the lineup of a great team, that might just need a change of scenery or linemates to fully realize his potential, I would be more open to this line of reasoning. However Kreider is 28 yo, been on good and bad teams, with varying levels of linemates and ice time, and never once broke out into anything but a 2nd line production player, while through the years several of his teammates and linemates have left him in the dust production wise. Not to mention, his playoff scoring is equally as mundane as his regular season scoring, so I can’t even find a silver lining there.

So for the last time, I do not accept Kreider as a legit 1w, because for my own standards, I do not accept 40-50pts as good enough for a first liner unless there is no better option, obviously. Maybe Kreider could score more on the sharks, but I’m not spending a first and a decent prospect on that risk at this point.

Kreider's team controls 54.88% of the GOALS with him on the ice and 45.23% of the GOALS without him on the ice. There is nothing expected, nor fancy about that.

 

[Dicdonya]

Kreider's team controls 54.88% of the GOALS with him on the ice and 45.23% of the GOALS without him on the ice. There is nothing expected, nor fancy about that.

Lol yikes.

I already said that impresses me very little considering the team he’s been on the last 3 years.

Just because he is the shiniest nickel in a sack of nickels and pennies, doesn’t mean he’s a quarter. Sorry.

Kreider played with Zucc, Hayes, and Zibanejad. I’m supposed to be impressed that when Kreider and the other top forwards aren’t on the ice the team sucks comparatively? Yeah ok shocking.

Shout all you like, my opinion will not change. Kreider is a good second line forward, that won’t kill a first line, and I’d rather see if our prospects can do more or less than him given an opportunity, instead of spend assets we have few of, and eat up all our cap space before the year even starts leaving us handcuffed if we need to make more pressing acquisitions during the year.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Lol yikes.

I already said that impresses me very little considering the team he’s been on the last 3 years.

Just because he is the shiniest nickel in a sack of nickels and pennies, doesn’t mean he’s a quarter. Sorry.

Kreider played with Zucc, Hayes, and Zibanejad. I’m supposed to be impressed that when Kreider and the other top forwards aren’t on the ice the team sucks comparatively? Yeah ok shocking.

Shout all you like, my opinion will not change. Kreider is a good second line forward, that won’t kill a first line, and I’d rather see if our prospects can do more or less than him given an opportunity, instead of spend assets we have few of, and eat up all our cap space before the year even starts leaving us handcuffed if we need to make more pressing acquisitions during the year.

His goals for percentage is higher than any Sharks player with 100 games over that time frame

 

[Dicdonya]

His goals for percentage is higher than any Sharks player with 100 games over that time frame

So? Are you attempting to now convince me he’s somehow better than all the Sharks forwards, or was this just a fun nugget of info to share?

Not sure why you’re so adamant about this guy, you really do love him though.

However I won’t be persuaded, until I see actual results, because if he is truely as amazing as you make him out to be, than I’m honestly horrified at how bad his hands and vision must be to struggle to score points like he does, and of the pedestrian assists he does accumulate, the majority are secondary. Based on what you’re making him out to be he should be a god, yet he’s not, something isn’t adding up.

 

[JeremyTB]

That would be a slap in the face to Labanc if he gets traded after taking that discount. Not going to happen. Also doesn't make sense for the Sharks doing that after getting that value deal. Plus Labanc is going to be cheaper than Kreider, even after his next deal and is much younger. Also has a bigger upside.

 

[bernmeister]

Kreider for picks + prospects is a possibility. Don't see the Rangers wanting to move Buch for anything sort of an overpayment.

All hfb tries to be opportunistic and there is nothing wrong with that.
IMO
there best scenario is Kreider maintained on a good deal, esp since FINALLY he had a good linemate in Zib, demonstrating they play well together. Now hopefully, they will listen to me and recognize Nieves, with his size, speed, passing and solid defensive play, is an ideal complementary mix and that is your second line [Kakko-Kravtsv-Panarin your top unit[.
Great for us for Kreider is 4 yrs, 6.25 per. I don't think he goes there.
I think he does 6.2 x 5.
If he doesn't THEN the auction starts, not before.

Rangers have multiple options.
With Trouba officially in the fold, and good RD prospects not far away, they can sell high on Deangelo.
They can also sell market price on Skjei and Strome
and cheap on Namest at half.

So Buch it depends what the market will pay for him, but the above should make keeping both possible short term, with Buch moved at some point this year, but not less than a competitive bid market.

Lol yikes.

I already said that impresses me very little considering the team he’s been on the last 3 years.

Just because he is the shiniest nickel in a sack of nickels and pennies, doesn’t mean he’s a quarter. Sorry.

Kreider played with Zucc, Hayes, and Zibanejad. I’m supposed to be impressed that when Kreider and the other top forwards aren’t on the ice the team sucks comparatively? Yeah ok shocking.

Shout all you like, my opinion will not change. Kreider is a good second line forward, that won’t kill a first line, and I’d rather see if our prospects can do more or less than him given an opportunity, instead of spend assets we have few of, and eat up all our cap space before the year even starts leaving us handcuffed if we need to make more pressing acquisitions during the year.

ugh.
Yet another person who wants Kreider, but won't pay for him, or acknowledge there are multiple teams interested.

 

[Dicdonya]

All hfb tries to be opportunistic and there is nothing wrong with that.
IMO
there best scenario is Kreider maintained on a good deal, esp since FINALLY he had a good linemate in Zib, demonstrating they play well together. Now hopefully, they will listen to me and recognize Nieves, with his size, speed, passing and solid defensive play, is an ideal complementary mix and that is your second line [Kakko-Kravtsv-Panarin your top unit[.
Great for us for Kreider is 4 yrs, 6.25 per. I don't think he goes there.
I think he does 6.2 x 5.
If he doesn't THEN the auction starts, not before.

Rangers have multiple options.
With Trouba officially in the fold, and good RD prospects not far away, they can sell high on Deangelo.
They can also sell market price on Skjei and Strome
and cheap on Namest at half.

So Buch it depends what the market will pay for him, but the above should make keeping both possible short term, with Buch moved at some point this year, but not less than a competitive bid market.





ugh.
Yet another person who wants Kreider, but won't pay for him, or acknowledge there are multiple teams interested.

Uhm you haven’t been reading my replies then, because I do not want him. Thought that was fairly obvious.

 

[bernmeister]

Uhm you haven’t been reading my replies then, because I do not want him. Thought that was fairly obvious.

That you did not want him was not only point being made.
Kreider is not a 2nd line value, so he commands 1st line return, wherever he goes, if he goes.

I am anticipating they eventually settle on a 1st line of
Kakko-Kravtsov-Panarin

pushes Kreider and Zib w/correct pivot [Nieves] to 2nd line

Kreider still commands first line value returned if moved.

 

[themelkman]

Sharks have cap space ? Thought they would just sign Marleau and Thornton for cheap

Sharks have four mil in cap space even with Jumbo and Marleau for cheap. Also we have at least 4 mil in contracts that could easily get moved if needed

 

[themelkman]

That you did not want him was not only point being made.
Kreider is not a 2nd line value, so he commands 1st line return, wherever he goes, if he goes.

I am anticipating they eventually settle on a 1st line of
Kakko-Kravtsov-Panarin

pushes Kreider and Zib w/correct pivot [Nieves] to 2nd line

Kreider still commands first line value returned if moved.

If Kreider gets first line value then he is the worst guy we could pick up for that cost. I would prefer just about any other first liner in the league