Speculation: Roster Building Thread LVI: Artemi, where art thou? In NY.

[Gardner McKay]

And... we are back.

Click to read more...

 

[GAGLine]

Oh, brother!

 

[Alluckks]

Nothing like a good 90+ pages in 24 hours to find nice add-ons to the ol' ignore list

 

[NYR Viper]

Brooks says the rangers only have 2 contract slots available?

Cap Friendly has the Rangers at 39 contracts with 5 RFA's:
Lemieux
Trouba
ADA
Lettieri
Buchnevich

And then of course Kakko needs to be signed.

So wouldn't that put them at 45?

 

[McDonagh]

Brooks says the rangers only have 2 contract slots available?

Cap Friendly has the Rangers at 39 contracts with 5 RFA's:
Lemieux
Trouba
ADA
Lettieri
Buchnevich

And then of course Kakko needs to be signed.

So wouldn't that put them at 45?

Is he counting Richards, Girardi, and Spooner? I can't figure it out

 

[JC704]

I was reading a lot of the replies in the Free Agent Frenzy thread. I love how this board is so knowledgeable. I just wanted to chime in with a lengthy, but I think interesting post from an opposite perspective. I think mostly everybody here is operating on the idea that sports timelines still work in somewhat of a linear-like fashion.

Rebuild:
You tear it down —> you draft for 3/4 years —> you develop —> you sign stopgap deals in the beginning stages; add bigger pieces later —> start realistically trading toward the end of the 3-5-year process

I don’t think that’s where the Rangers are at currently. I believe they are clearly ready to compete and contend this season. I think in the end, even though a slew of draft selections were acquired in trades, this situation resembles more of a retool than an actual full-blown rebuild. They started when they were still competitive on the level with other NHL contenders, and it never got to the point where the organization started from the bottom.

So, this brings me to my next point. I know a significant portion of Rangers fans are ready to move on from Kreider because they think he’s ready for a steep decline, but what if he doesn’t actually fall off a cliff? Kreider scored 28 goals this season — same as Panarin — and did so on the worst team he’s played on in his professional career. What if having a lineup predominantly featuring guys 24-years old and younger takes some of the burden off Kreider to drive play as often as he does, and as a result he benefits from this environment? It’s very possible. That, and I kind of loosely agree with Vally/Brooks. If this team constructed as is now but without Kreider makes the playoffs, this year or next, they’re likely to be prone to some physicality deficiencies. Teams will hit them a lot. Kreider helps alleviate that issue going forward a bit.

The Rangers now have Panarin (27), Zibanejad (26), two slam dunk capable first-line players, (potentially) Buchnevich (24) in the fold, as well as players on ELCs like Kakko, Kravtsov, Chytil, Lias and Howden. The team should try and take advantage of maximizing the timespan in regard to the salary cap/first-year contracts, unlike what happened with the Winnipeg Jets. The defense is also significantly better. Trouba and Fox are difference-makers.

A Namestnikov trade should be explored before Kreider, as should a move that clears Brendan Smith’s cap hit (I really like the Ottawa/Gaborik LTIR idea; that fits the MO of what JD/Gorton would do). If the decision comes down to Kreider and Buchnevich, then obviously whichever scenario is BEST for the long term future of the organization should be explored. That said, I’m not sure Kreider’s value will ever be higher than it was at this year’s Trade Deadline and Draft.

Putting Buchnevich on the table opens up more possibilities because of the age and unknowns. Also, adding Kakko and Kravtsov into the fold, who are each natural RW, makes the idea of moving Buch when his value will never be higher to us intriguing. For this season, the Rangers have Strome who can cushion the middle six. Kakko plays in the top six immediately, Strome/Fast can play cushion middle-six minutes, allowing Kravtsov to start on the third line in a more sheltered role to balance the lineup. The logic can be switched with both Kakko and Kravtsov.

Either way, I’m excited about next season. I think what the Rangers have accomplished looks very much like what the Yankees were able to. The Yankees sold off at the 2016 Trade Deadline, despite being one of baseball’s best teams from May on, and started contending in 2017 until now. I think the Rangers, as of now, resemble the Yankees heading into that 2017 season. Different sports and apples/oranges, but the Yankees’ young players were unknowns, much like how we speak about our players here. I think this organization has acquired so much young talent, a significant percentage will make an impact in the NHL next season. It’s exciting.

 

[Ola]

I as reading a lot of the replies in the Free Agent Frenzy thread. I love how this board is so knowledgeable. I just wanted to chime in with a lengthy, but I think interesting post from an opposite perspective. I think mostly everybody here is operating on the idea that sports timelines still work in somewhat of a linear-like fashion.

Rebuild:
You tear it down —> you draft for 3/4 years —> you develop —> you sign stopgap deals in the beginning stages; add bigger pieces later —> start realistically trading toward the end of the 3-5-year process

I don’t think that’s where the Rangers are at currently. I believe they are clearly ready to compete and contend this season. I think in the end, even though a slew of draft selections were acquired in trades, this situation resembles more of a retool than an actual full-blown rebuild. They started when they were still competitive on the level with other NHL contenders, and it never got to the point where the organization started from the bottom.

So, this brings me to my next point. I know a significant portion of Rangers fans are ready to move on from Kreider because they think he’s ready for a steep decline, but what if he doesn’t actually fall off a cliff? Kreider scored 28 goals this season — same as Panarin — and did so on the worst team he’s played on in his professional career. What if having a lineup predominantly featuring guys 24-years old and younger takes some of the burden off Kreider to drive play as often as he does, and as a result he benefits from this environment? It’s very possible. That, and I kind of loosely agree with Vally/Brooks. If this team constructed as is now but without Kreider makes the playoffs, this year or next, they’re likely to be prone to some physicality deficiencies. Teams will hit them a lot. Kreider helps alleviate that issue going forward a bit.

The Rangers now have Panarin (27), Zibanejad (26), two slam dunk capable first-line players, (potentially) Buchnevich (24) in the fold, as well as players on ELCs like Kakko, Kravtsov, Chytil, Lias and Howden. The team should try and take advantage of maximizing the timespan in regard to the salary cap/first-year contracts, unlike what happened with the Winnipeg Jets. The defense is also significantly better. Trouba and Fox are difference-makers.

A Namestnikov trade should be explored before Kreider, as should a move that clears Brendan Smith’s cap hit (I really like the Ottawa/Gaborik LTIR idea; that fits the MO of what JD/Gorton would do). If the decision comes down to Kreider and Buchnevich, then obviously whichever scenario is BEST for the long term future of the organization should be explored. That said, I’m not sure Kreider’s value will ever be higher than it was at this year’s Trade Deadline and Draft.

Putting Buchnevich on the table opens up more possibilities because of the age and unknowns. Also, adding Kakko and Kravtsov into the fold, who are each natural RW, makes the idea of moving Buch when his value will never be higher to us intriguing. For this season, the Rangers have Strome who can cushion the middle six. Kakko plays in the top six immediately, Strome/Fast can play cushion middle-six minutes, allowing Kravtsov to start on the third line in a more sheltered role to balance the lineup. The logic can be switched with both Kakko and Kravtsov.

Either way, I’m excited about next season. I think what the Rangers have accomplished looks very much like what the Yankees were able to. The Yankees sold off at the 2016 Trade Deadline, despite being one of baseball’s best teams from May on, and started contending in 2017 until now. I think the Rangers, as of now, resemble the Yankees heading into that 2017 season. Different sports and apples/oranges, but the Yankees’ young players were unknowns, much like how we speak about our players here. I think this organization has acquired so much young talent, a significant percentage will make an impact in the NHL next season. It’s exciting.

For next season, I don’t think we are that much better now than we where two months ago.

To win games we need to be solid across the board and have all lines and special teams come together. A lot can go wrong, it won’t take much for us to lose games. We don’t have a ‘team’ in place.

 

[Thirty One]

Brooks says the rangers only have 2 contract slots available?

Cap Friendly has the Rangers at 39 contracts with 5 RFA's:
Lemieux
Trouba
ADA
Lettieri
Buchnevich

And then of course Kakko needs to be signed.

So wouldn't that put them at 45?

I've got 46 after Kakko, I'm not sure if CapFriendly is counting O'Regan.

 

[Jackpot]

For next season, I don’t think we are that much better now than we where two months ago.

To win games we need to be solid across the board and have all lines and special teams come together. A lot can go wrong, it won’t take much for us to lose games. We don’t have a ‘team’ in place.

Huh?

 

[Alluckks]

Who thinks it would be a bad idea for the Devils to re-sign Hall to a 6 year extension worth 66 million?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Who thinks it would be a bad idea for the Devils to re-sign Hall to a 6 year extension worth 66 million?

For them? Yeah it'd probably be pretty bad.

I hope they do it.

 

[nyr2k2]

I've got 46 after Kakko, I'm not sure if CapFriendly is counting O'Regan.

It's definitely 46 with Kakko. No idea what Brooks is smoking today.

 

[Jackpot]

For next season, I don’t think we are that much better now than we where two months ago.

To win games we need to be solid across the board and have all lines and special teams come together. A lot can go wrong, it won’t take much for us to lose games. We don’t have a ‘team’ in place.

The additions of Panarin, Trouba, Kakko, Fox and bringing in Shesty, and Kravtsov and not even a little better? I regress, you did say "that much", but seriously? Not trying to be an asshat, but I'd like to think those additions makes us quite a bit better IMO... Maybe I got it wrong..

 

[Kupo]

It's definitely 46 with Kakko. No idea what Brooks is smoking today.

Brooks thinks Pyatt and his pretty blue eyes is still on the team.

 

[Ola]

The additions of Panarin, Trouba, Kakko, Fox and bringing in Shesty, and Kravtsov and not even a little better? I regress, you did say "that much", but seriously? Not trying to be an asshat, but I'd like to think those additions makes us quite a bit better IMO... Maybe I got it wrong..

I was thinking about Kreider going, but my point still stands, it’s not like a line is ready to perform at the peak of its potential after a camp. Or a defensive pairing. Or a PP. Or a PK.

Goaltending could be an issue.

I don’t — at all — think it’s a given that we will be a PO team next season. To bank on that is just ridiculous.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I as reading a lot of the replies in the Free Agent Frenzy thread. I love how this board is so knowledgeable. I just wanted to chime in with a lengthy, but I think interesting post from an opposite perspective. I think mostly everybody here is operating on the idea that sports timelines still work in somewhat of a linear-like fashion.

Rebuild:
You tear it down —> you draft for 3/4 years —> you develop —> you sign stopgap deals in the beginning stages; add bigger pieces later —> start realistically trading toward the end of the 3-5-year process

I don’t think that’s where the Rangers are at currently. I believe they are clearly ready to compete and contend this season. I think in the end, even though a slew of draft selections were acquired in trades, this situation resembles more of a retool than an actual full-blown rebuild. They started when they were still competitive on the level with other NHL contenders, and it never got to the point where the organization started from the bottom.

So, this brings me to my next point. I know a significant portion of Rangers fans are ready to move on from Kreider because they think he’s ready for a steep decline, but what if he doesn’t actually fall off a cliff? Kreider scored 28 goals this season — same as Panarin — and did so on the worst team he’s played on in his professional career. What if having a lineup predominantly featuring guys 24-years old and younger takes some of the burden off Kreider to drive play as often as he does, and as a result he benefits from this environment? It’s very possible. That, and I kind of loosely agree with Vally/Brooks. If this team constructed as is now but without Kreider makes the playoffs, this year or next, they’re likely to be prone to some physicality deficiencies. Teams will hit them a lot. Kreider helps alleviate that issue going forward a bit.

The Rangers now have Panarin (27), Zibanejad (26), two slam dunk capable first-line players, (potentially) Buchnevich (24) in the fold, as well as players on ELCs like Kakko, Kravtsov, Chytil, Lias and Howden. The team should try and take advantage of maximizing the timespan in regard to the salary cap/first-year contracts, unlike what happened with the Winnipeg Jets. The defense is also significantly better. Trouba and Fox are difference-makers.

A Namestnikov trade should be explored before Kreider, as should a move that clears Brendan Smith’s cap hit (I really like the Ottawa/Gaborik LTIR idea; that fits the MO of what JD/Gorton would do). If the decision comes down to Kreider and Buchnevich, then obviously whichever scenario is BEST for the long term future of the organization should be explored. That said, I’m not sure Kreider’s value will ever be higher than it was at this year’s Trade Deadline and Draft.

Putting Buchnevich on the table opens up more possibilities because of the age and unknowns. Also, adding Kakko and Kravtsov into the fold, who are each natural RW, makes the idea of moving Buch when his value will never be higher to us intriguing. For this season, the Rangers have Strome who can cushion the middle six. Kakko plays in the top six immediately, Strome/Fast can play cushion middle-six minutes, allowing Kravtsov to start on the third line in a more sheltered role to balance the lineup. The logic can be switched with both Kakko and Kravtsov.

Either way, I’m excited about next season. I think what the Rangers have accomplished looks very much like what the Yankees were able to. The Yankees sold off at the 2016 Trade Deadline, despite being one of baseball’s best teams from May on, and started contending in 2017 until now. I think the Rangers, as of now, resemble the Yankees heading into that 2017 season. Different sports and apples/oranges, but the Yankees’ young players were unknowns, much like how we speak about our players here. I think this organization has acquired so much young talent, a significant percentage will make an impact in the NHL next season. It’s exciting.

The issue isn't with Kreider for this year, its the years after if you're committed to keeping him.

If you aren't, holding onto him is a massive risk. What if he gets hurt? He could just as easily pull a Zuccarello and suck for most of the season as he is to pull a Hayes, who for sure boosted his value by staying for a few extra months.

The 2017 Yankees had unknowns/unprovens, but they had unknowns who ended up turning into stars right away, including a rookie who broke records and was robbed of an MVP. We can't expect that to happen here.

It's still going to take time. Committing 11.6 to Panarin is already a massive risk in itself regardless of where they're at in the process (its a ton of money) but even more so when you consider the rest of the roster. Committing 7+ or there about for Kreider would pretty much be a poison pill contract. Unless hes willing to take a hit on term AND dollars, he shouldn't see opening night.

 

[mas0764]

Brought it up in the FA thread.

Would love to see Gorton continue to be aggressive and shop some of the wing assets we have, to get a very young future #1 center.

Maybe a combination of Buch, Kreider, and one of our excess defensive prospects (Lindgren, for example)?

 

[chosen]

For next season, I don’t think we are that much better now than we where two months ago.

To win games we need to be solid across the board and have all lines and special teams come together. A lot can go wrong, it won’t take much for us to lose games. We don’t have a ‘team’ in place.

That's the recipe to win the Cup, not to win games.

 

[Tob]

Trouba should be signed any minute now.... any minute now.

 

[Avery16]

It's definitely 46 with Kakko. No idea what Brooks is smoking today.

They don’t teach math in J school

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

Kadri, Galchenyuk and Kerfoot are off the market now, who else in that bracket might be available?

 

[Ola]

That's the recipe to win the Cup, not to win games.

I mean, sure we have more potential, but like look at STL. 31st in the league halfway into the season. There are so small marginals between success and failure. Especially if you have pressure on you. Teams that had a lot of turnover of personnel can — never — be safe.

 

[Thirty One]

Trouba should be signed any minute now.... any minute now.

You're not vetted.

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

What’s the deadline before Trouba files for arbitration?

 

[Ghost of jas]

Trouba should be signed any minute now.... any minute now.

Book it!