Speculation: Roster Building Thread LXXX: Going 8-0 to close out might not be enough!

[RGY]

I would rather have 4 effective lines.

Vegas seems to do just fine...

 

[Graves94]

Disgraceful that nobody challenged that idiot in the third period, after he came back on the ice.
We all know what he did to Buchnevich/Panarin, but no one talks about what he did to Fox earlier in the period (trying to take his head off). These are your teams star players he's targeting and you're playing a meaningless regular season game...to not do anything is disgusting. Were was Rooney? Smith?

 

[NYSPORTS]

I would rather have 4 effective lines.

Our goon line negotiating

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

so how come the less skilled Isles are successful and historically the finesse Penguins win Cups after adding grit? Tampa added grit after being swept by Columbus. Boston regularly beats the highly skilled Leafs.

There is a point of diminishing returns in this league.

You're missing my point. Those teams didn't add guys like Deveaux, Glass, Newbury or Brashear.

Tampa added Blake Coleman who had 20 goals that season and was 0.5 P/GP in the post-season.

 

[True Blue]

I gave you a template that I notice you conveniently omitted any reference to in your reply, the Mark Stone trade.

You were already told how disingenuous that deal was considering what would have been had there been any term whatsoever left on it. Do you need several people to repeat the same thing for your understanding?

And yet again that was not a one for one trade. So now are you changing your mind and are grading Buchnevich for a package that will include a Lundell? That is a far different story.

I literally just named one.

And again, this caveat you are putting in place is arbitrary.

If Brassard can be traded for Zibanejad then Buch can be traded for Lundell. It's the same level of projection required.

You have yet to name they type of trade you are describing.

And apparently you need more education so that we can do away with the revisionist history. The Rangers did not trade Brassard for some random prospect who had not shown yet. At the time of the deal, just finishes his second consecutive 20 goal season and already notched a 40+ point year and a 50+ point year. So hardly Anton friggin' Lundell.

It's not moving the goalposts, it's the crux of the entire argument. A Buch-for-Lundell trade would make sense for both teams, and is eminently possible.

If you are going to insist on worthless throw-ins to make sure it's not "1-to-1" that can also be accomplished with ease, but the framework remains the same.

A Buchnevich for Lundell trade does not have the mathematical probability of zero. So you got that going for you. But since you are tying yourself in knots to come up with a market comp of a trade and are unable to do so, going with my original axion that these types of deals really do not happen. Unles of course it is in your basement, while patting yourself on the back for being GM of the year while having the franchise mode on EA sports.

Just calling a spade a spade.

That's not what it is. And for as long as you post, and I feel like responding, I shall freely do so.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Completely agree outright deterrence is a myth. Vally, I seem to remember lots of goonery going on when Orr was here. I'll give him a pass on an emotional night but I don't think pure deterrence holds water. When Wilson goes into a blind rage like he did last night, he clearly isn't in control of his actions and isn't behaving rationally...he isn't thinking about who the NYR have on the bench in the moment.

That said to @Ola's point I do think 1 or 2 more players who can play and are willing to drop the gloves CAN affect the mentality of the team in a positive way. It makes sense to me that players would be more inclined to flirt with the line or go for a big hit knowing that they have another guy or two on the bench ready to step up to help with any blowback. Lindgren is a great example of someone who could be affected by this, he's a great hitter but not necessarily a fighter. Something like the Islanders 4th line is the ideal scenario.

 

[True Blue]

I gave you the Stone trade as an example.

Again, you were told that if he had any term left whatsoever, that deal does not happen. If the team was any team but Ottaway that HAD to trade him or loose him for nothing, that deal does not happen. The Rangers are not in the position like Ottawa, that they NEED to trade Buchnevich.

But even if we ignore why your example is completely disingenuous, the fact that you can only come up with one or two such reasons, hardly makes it a precedent of how deals are struck. Teams with playoff aspirations do not really trade young top liners in the prime of their career for prospects that have never played a single second of NHL time.

 

[True Blue]

Agree. A large part of our hopes also rest on Chytil, Laf, Kakko, Kravstov and Miller being physical players. Those are all big guys.

Being big guys and playing a physical game are two different things. They can impose their size, but that is still not necessarily playing a physical game.

Would you trade Buch for two physical third line players (lets say 30-40 pt potential)? I make that trade without thinking any day.

I think that is the type of trade that you are likely to see. Unless there is a deal that nets them a ready-made top-6 center or a player that has already shown that he is ready right now to be a second line center, then I think that Buchnevich will be moved to diversify the everyday roster.

 

[Gospel of Prospal]

I could see us overpaying for Ryan Reaves in free agency, but what about buying low on Max Domi?

 

[True Blue]

The examples are probably endless of established top 6 players being traded for prospects, yet someone is insisting it never happens.

Was Gomez a 26 year old top liner in the prime of his career?

 

[Gospel of Prospal]

Julien Gauthier is the same size as Tom Wilson, but 30 pounds heavier. His f'n father and grandfather were professional wrestlers. Theoretically, he'd be the perfect guy to stand up to Wilson and be that Matt Martin/Josh Anderson-type of player that we need. He's also extremely fast on the ice.


Ugh, he's such a frustrating player.

 

[NYSPORTS]

You're missing my point. Those teams didn't add guys like Deveaux, Glass, Newbury or Brashear.

Tampa added Blake Coleman who had 20 goals that season and was 0.5 P/GP in the post-season.

so what are you adding to this roster so they can compete? You keep preaching they can’t sacrifice skill while mentioning Kreider, Trouba and Lindgren as if the trio is apples to apples with other teams with grit.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

so what are you adding to this roster so they can compete? You keep preaching they can’t sacrifice skill while mentioning Kreider, Trouba and Lindgren as if the trio is apples to apples with other teams with grit.

Add someone who brings that physical element AND helps you win games. Not a goon like Mason Geertsen who will be exposed every time he's on the ice.

It's not rocket science.

 

[NYSPORTS]

I could see us paying Ryan Reaves overpaying for Ryan Reaves in free agency, but what about buying low on Max Domi?

I don’t think either of those players have a spot here.

 

[True Blue]

While hardly common place, we managed to trade Gomez for a McDonagh who hadn’t played in the NHL yet. Also, more often than prospects, but you see guys dealt for picks, which are just as unproven. And as someone pointed out, the situation is a bit closer to unprecedented territory as it’s very rare for a team to have a 26 year old top line performing winger and not have room for him in their plans. Since that type of situation doesn’t come along too often, the type of trade that may result may also be on the rarer side.

If you think of Buch as Laine-ish (better player, way less hype, a few years older) than maybe that’s the type of package we should be looking for in return. I’d love Lindholm for Buch.

Come on. That is also a tad disingenuous. First of all, the deal was not Gomez for a McDonagh. It was Gomez for McDonagh and Higgins. Higgins was a young player with two 20 goal seasons under his belt and a 50+ point season and two 38 point seasons. Second of all, Gomez was not a 26 year old top liner when that deal went down.

So to make this an apples to apples conversation, you remove Buchnevich and install Strome and have Florida add a Bennet. So the deal becomes Strome for Lundell and Bennet. Think that happens? Of course not.

Otherwise, again to make it apples to apples, Florida has to significantly up the ante. So Buchnevich goes for Lundell, Bennet and a 2022 first.

I am not suggesting that this happens, I am suggesting that if we want to somehow make a young top line player being traded for a prospect that has not registered a second in the NHL be put into context of the Gomez deal, the landscape needs to change.

 

[RangersFan1994]

Add someone who brings that physical element AND helps you win games. Not a goon like Mason Geertsen who will be exposed every time he's on the ice.

It's not rocket science.

Wayne Simmonds would have been perfect.

 

[NYSPORTS]

Add someone who brings that physical element AND helps you win games. Not a goon like Mason Geertsen who will be exposed every time he's on the ice.

It's not rocket science.

it is when you keep preaching skill. Besides a few mentioned Reaves nobody is saying goon but you. Ready to move a Nils for grit?

 

[True Blue]

I know he produces, but I see buch much more as a 2nd liner. His eye test production in many (NOT ALL) seem to come from great plays by others more often than not, but he has the skill to capitalize on those plays and his addition of solid defense is terrific. I guess what I am getting at is there are 1st line players that drive and make the 1st line, and then there are the complimentary players that can play with 1st line players. I think pitt is a great example of what I mean where they have a long list of those kind of players that have played with sid over the years. I LOVE buch, I love him more for his attitude and push back than anything. He may know he is going to get manhandled by someone but he doesnt back down and we need more of that. That is the part I am more worried about in losing him than I am his production bc I think we have internal options that will offer the same production soon, although they will lack the rest of his game.

His production for the two years, are now in fact of a legit top liner. So while I understand that your view is that he is not, what he has been showing is much better than that. And now that he has added the two way game and the penalty killing aspect of the game, a two-way playing top liner is who he is.

 

[NYSPORTS]

Wayne Simmonds would have been perfect.

eh, i think he’s lost some steps/strides.

 

[leetch99]

.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

it is when you keep preaching skill. Besides a few mentioned Reaves nobody is saying goon but you. Ready to move a Nils for grit?

I was responding in part to Machinehead

Like, am I the only one who remembers anything?

I remember having Orr, Boogaard, Brashear, and Deveaux. I was there. With the exception of Jody Shelley actually putting up a few points late in 09-10 these guys never f***ing did anything.

NHL enforcers spent 99% of their careers fighting guys they fished with.

I'm not against adding a gritty, physical player as long as that player also adds something else. We tried it with Brendan Lemieux and Cody McLeod recently, and you're not winning with those players. Even Dan Carcillo added something on top of his physicality. Get a guy like that.

Your inability to understand what I'm saying makes this a fruitless debate. I'll leave it at that.

 

[mas0764]

You were already told how disingenuous that deal was considering what would have been had there been any term whatsoever left on it. Do you need several people to repeat the same thing for your understanding?

It's not disingenuous for all the reasons I explained. Do you need several people to repeat to you why it's not?

Sorry it obliterates your silly position.

And yet again that was not a one for one trade.

And as I've said repeatedly it doesn't need to be a one to one trade. The fill ins for the Stone trade were minor and could easily be replicated.

You have yet to name they type of trade you are describing.

I did name one, the Stone trade, it's a template for what I'm advocating. It didn't even take me ten seconds of searching.

A team with motive to move a first player for a prospect due to that team's circumstances: Ottawa's circumstances being that it was entering a rebuild and didn't have Stone locked up to a long term deal that would fit it's cap structure moving forward into a rebuild. Our similar circumstances would be we are still searching for a young center and we don't have Buch locked up to a long term deal at an affordable cap hit for our structure and his role moving forward.

I actually agree with you that if Buch was locked up at $3.5m for the next 4 seasons we aren't having this discussion.

The problem here, as it was with Ottawa, is that Buch isn't locked up at a price that matches his role moving forward. It's his lack of term, just like it was with Stone in Ottawa.

So these situations are about as similar as can reasonably be expected.

 

[Quinnisinoverhishead]

Vally is completely right. Still need enforcers. The enforcers need to be effective skaters, otherwise they will get exposed in todays NHL. I think if Mason Geertsen works on his skating this offseason, we give him a shot on the fourth line LW. Next season we roll with Panarin getting 19mins/game, Laffy getting 18 mins/game & Kreider getting 17mins/game. That leaves 6 mins/game for a 4th line LW. Slot Geertsen in there or someone that I hope Geertsen turns into.

Seeing Wilson skate around in the third period bothered me. And how Washington came back from 3-2... infuriated me. That one tough guy on a team makes everyone else a little tougher.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Wayne Simmonds would have been perfect.

Wayne Simmonds 8 years ago, yes.

We need a Carcillo or Dorsett type. Very gritty, will finish every check, will drop the gloves when needed and will also be able to chip in offensively and be an effective 4th line grinder.

 

[mas0764]

Again, you were told that if he had any term left whatsoever, that deal does not happen.

And you were told that doesn't matter. Buch has extendable rights that make him valuable to Florida and give them motive to acquire, and yet his future role gives the Rangers motive to trade him away. There is never going to be an exact duplicate of this trade because never before has a “playoff contender,” ever had three elite rising wingers under the age of 21 plus an all world 29 year old on a massive contract plus another 29 year old on a very large contract PLUS said first line 26 year old. The abundance of riches at wing for us makes this not a repeatable scenario in NHL history.

But for a team with established motive to move said 26 year old first line player, as Ottawa had, a package mainly centered around a top prospect IS, in fact, historical precedent.

Not 1-to-1? Fine. The Lindberg and a second round throw ins can easily be matched; they are nearly worthless. I’ll take whatever other garbage Florida has lying around if it would make you feel better, or, I’ll just waive it since we have no need of it.

But even if we ignore why your example is completely disingenuous, the fact that you can only come up with one or two such reasons, hardly makes it a precedent of how deals are struck. Teams with playoff aspirations do not really trade young top liners in the prime of their career for prospects that have never played a single second of NHL time.

Yeah, just as wrong every time you repeat it.

First you say "It doesn't happen."

Now who is moving the goal posts?

Here comes the amendment: Well, I guess it does happen, but only when a team has motive to trade the player because they are entering a rebuild.

Well, here's the next amendment that I'm adding: The Rangers have no role for Buch moving forward. As Edge confirmed they realize. The reason it has never happened "exactly" as this before is because no team has ever been in exactly our situation before.

But what you said is that teams don't trade top liners for prospects and that has now been proven laughably false.

I suppose next it will be "Teams don't trade 26 year old players from Russia whose last names begin with B to southern state teams for prospects drafted in 2019! FIND ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE THAT HAS HAPPENED!!!! YOU CAN'T!!!"

Pathetic argument.