Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLIII

[Kakko Schmakko]

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/sharks/nhl-rumors-sharks-erik-karlsson-expected-be-pursued-rangers

 

[wafflepadsave]

look at most teams that play hard in the playoffs a lot of their players are visibly missing some front teeth, our players not so much. We need more players that are willing to get their faces ugly to play hard and help their team win games.

Have to buy if you won’t draft those types.

 

[Leetch3]

regardless of which side you fall on, i can't think of a more pointless debate than when the rebuild officially started. there could not be a more meaningless piece of information. it has absolutely zero relevance on when the rebuild will be complete...

the only thing that matters is the current state of the team which I see as most of the key players have played 1 season or have yet to play in the NHL and WHEN they determine that the team is ready to move forward to the next phase and be aggressive...

a rebuild isn't a set timeline where you do this in year 1, that in year 2, etc and by calling it year 4 instead of year 3 it magically speeds the process forward. its a fluid process that needs to be evaluated constantly and various points. what happens in year 2 is dependent on what happened in year 1. the results in a given year could leap the process ahead, or it could slow it down if things don't go well but there is no set time frame.

and on the flip side there is no way to know for sure when the team is ready to move forward, there is no qualifications or check boxes to know. alot of it will be gut feel...but that's why gorton, drury, JD and company get paid the big fishnagels...

but when that time comes and they make the decision to add pieces to the current team to be aggressive, that will be when it happens. what you consider as the start of the rebuild simply determines how long in retrospective that it took. so if it makes you feel better saying we are 1 1/2 years in or 3 years in or 10 years in go for it. but that doesn't change where the team stands today and when that next phase will happen

 

[DanielBrassard]

If it is indeed the Rangers plan to to eschew UFA and really take another year to acquire another high-end draft pick, Kakko should be left in Liiga so his contract slides another season. That way when the team is truly ready to compete, hopefully by 2022-2023 we can have Kakko on his ELC still.

 

[Greg02]

If it is indeed the Rangers plan to to eschew UFA and really take another year to acquire another high-end draft pick, Kakko should be left in Liiga so his contract slides another season. That way when the team is truly ready to compete, hopefully by 2022-2023 we can have Kakko on his ELC still.

That's never going to happen. Rangers are going to make decisions based on what is best for his development and cultivating a positive long term relationship with a potential home-grown superstar, not service time manipulation.

 

[Leetch3]

If it is indeed the Rangers plan to to eschew UFA and really take another year to acquire another high-end draft pick, Kakko should be left in Liiga so his contract slides another season. That way when the team is truly ready to compete, hopefully by 2022-2023 we can have Kakko on his ELC still.

the problem with that is how good kakko is will be a HUGE factor in when the team is ready to move forward. so if he's not in the NHL you are just delaying that decision potentially

 

[eco's bones]

So Gorton states that in june 2017 they were rebuilding on the fly, and you say the rebuild started in 2018. And the reason you say this is because it suits you and other pro rebuilders better. A long rebuild, wasting a lot of years is hard for people to swallow. So let us make it look that the rebuild started later then it did. Even if it contradicts what the GM has said. This is not an honest way of arguing.

IMO it started with the Stepan deal but it doesn't even matter as far as I'm concerned. Someone wants to say Feb. 2018--fine and dandy--I don't care. How much time this will or is supposed to take is neither here or there. Whether or not Panarin becomes a Ranger--still there are going to be even more older players on the way out the next couple years and the team is likely going to be the youngest team in the league next year and probably the year or two afterwards. Most people would call that rebuilding but at least some here think it would be some kind of betrayal signaling the end of all their dreams which IMO is ridiculous. Whether or not Panarin becomes a Ranger doesn't mean we'll have to trade a single one of our kids or draft picks--doesn't mean we can't try to acquire more younger players and draft picks or even just hold on to the ones we have. Signing Panarin doesn't mean we close down our kids development. Signing Panarin doesn't mean squat except that we've got a damn good hockey player that will probably help some of those kids get better quicker. It doesn't mean we'll have to trade Andersson--it doesn't even mean we'll have to give up on Crawley or can't re-sign Halverson--though I probably wouldn't do that anyway.

 

[eco's bones]

If it is indeed the Rangers plan to to eschew UFA and really take another year to acquire another high-end draft pick, Kakko should be left in Liiga so his contract slides another season. That way when the team is truly ready to compete, hopefully by 2022-2023 we can have Kakko on his ELC still.

I agree if the plan is just to throw him out there in the shittiest situation possible. I'd leave him in Finland and I'd be leaving Kravtsov in Russia in that case too.

 

[Avery16]

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/sharks/nhl-rumors-sharks-erik-karlsson-expected-be-pursued-rangers

so we didn't learn anything from Boyle and Shattenkirk. Ok then.

 

[DanielBrassard]

the problem with that is how good kakko is will be a HUGE factor in when the team is ready to move forward. so if he's not in the NHL you are just delaying that decision potentially

I think the benefits of having him on an ELC when the team is ready to compete outweighs waiting another year. Let him destroy Liiga for another season, bring him in as a 19-year old like Pettersson and have him still cost controlled when it will really count.

 

[eco's bones]

I have to say that I looked at last year positively and that even before we won the lottery. The record was shit but the compete was there and like it hasn't been in a long time. I expect the team will be better next year. You have a coaching staff that knows what it wants and will constantly push the players to perform better and I expect our younger players to be better and take on more responsibilities. I don't look at guys like Howden, Chytil and Andersson as babies anymore. They've had a year and know what the league is about now and what's it going to take to be better. They have a summer to prepare and get stronger for the new season acting on that experience. Do I think the Rangers will make the playoffs? Probably not but I don't see them as a bottom 5 either and f*** Zucc and Hayes being gone--this is an opportunity for players to seize and if you want something--how bad do you want it? IMO Kakko should be good enough to replace one of them anyway. So people being down on this team is WTF to me. I think we should push it as hard as we can and go for it and let the chips fall where they will.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I think the benefits of having him on an ELC when the team is ready to compete outweighs waiting another year. Let him destroy Liiga for another season, bring him in as a 19-year old like Pettersson and have him still cost controlled when it will really count.

Pettersson only stayed over for another year because he weighed 3 pounds, nor was he even close to as accomplished as Kakko is heading into the draft.

Leaving him over seas would be dumb. Let him come over and get acclimated now. If he's as good as advertised, we'll have no problem building a team around him, ELCs or not.

 

[Leetch3]

I think the benefits of having him on an ELC when the team is ready to compete outweighs waiting another year. Let him destroy Liiga for another season, bring him in as a 19-year old like Pettersson and have him still cost controlled when it will really count.

first off people need to stop talking about ELC like we are building for a 3 year window and when those ELC contracts end we can't win anymore. chicago and pittsburgh won multiple cups after giving their guys huge raises. kakko and kravtsov are being brought in so we can be good for 10-15 years, not for the 3 year window that they are on their ELC. and there is still more kids to come. so you might not have kakko on his ELC but you might have miller, lundqvist and the 2020 1st still on one. it doesn't matter...

but I think you missed my point about waiting another year...one of the most important things that will determine the decision of when to move forward is when guys like kakko and kravtsov show that they are ready to be top players and odds are they won't be as rookies just cause rarely are players that good in their first year. so if you push back their rookie year a year, then you are pushing back that decision a year. all you are doing is making them a year older. that 1st year will still be played before it happens imo

 

[Leetch3]

there is also a potential downside to delaying that 2nd contract...

mikko rantanen played in the nhl in his D+1 year, but only played 9 games with the Avs (0 points), then played in the AHL and the WJC which made his contract slide...D+2 year he played 75 games and had 38 points...then he busted out in year D+3 with 84 points in 81 games and then 87 points in 74 games in year D+4 which was the final year of his ELC...

so he's now a RFA...how much more $$ will the avs have to pay him coming off back to back 80 point seasons then if he only had 1 good year? sure last year they had him on a great deal but they didn't win. so did it really benefit them long term if now the 2nd deal is alot more $$??

maybe it won't impact his deal...but just saying there are risks both ways, same with bridge deals vs long term deals on the 2nd contracts

 

[bobbop]

Riddle me this...If the Rangers are adverse to giving Panarin seven years because of his age, it really doesn’t make any sense to sign Kreider (who is six months older) to a seven (or even six) year contract that wouldn’t kick in until a year from now. Does it?

Yet who provides veteran presence and leadership in the top six? Mika can’t do it all by himself.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Riddle me this...If the Rangers are adverse to giving Panarin seven years because of his age, it really doesn’t make any sense to sign Kreider (who is six months older) to a seven (or even six) year contract that wouldn’t kick in until a year from now. Does it?

Yet who provides veteran presence and leadership in the top six? Mika can’t do it all by himself.

Ryan Callahan

 

[bobbop]

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/sharks/nhl-rumors-sharks-erik-karlsson-expected-be-pursued-rangers

Wyshynski is a great comedian but not a great hockey analyst. Karlsson was on ice for almost every goal the sharks gave up in the playoffs. Everyone always points at the Rangers. That’s one move that would really shock me.

 

[bobbop]

Ryan Callahan

You missed the top six part.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Riddle me this...If the Rangers are adverse to giving Panarin seven years because of his age, it really doesn’t make any sense to sign Kreider (who is six months older) to a seven (or even six) year contract that wouldn’t kick in until a year from now. Does it?

Yet who provides veteran presence and leadership in the top six? Mika can’t do it all by himself.

Brian Boyle

 

[DanielBrassard]

You missed the top six part.

I was being sarcastic. But it's a fair point and will be really interesting to see who fills that role without Kreider and Panarin if he signs elsewhere

 

[Edge]

There are a lot of unknowns. I think of it this way. A lot of people say 5-7 years for a good rebuild and by the year after next, we are starting to get into the range where we have a good contingent of prospects that are 5 years removed from their draft year. If all goes right, we'll be entering the next phase of on-ice quality sooner than some people expect... because Gorton was smart and gave us a little bit of a headstart by trading for all of these 2016 draftees. In other words, we're not close, but we're closer than some realize.

I will say that I personally feel the 2020 draft is the close of that chapter for this organization. And the path between now and then is still very important for this team.

I think even most people who are cautious and don’t think the time is right, tend to feel that’s there’s one more year of this. So while I can’t speak for others, I don’t view this current phase of being cautious as everlasting. It has more days behind it than ahead of it. But that’s also why I don’t want to go off that path, because we are so close to wrapping up this particular phase.

 

[bobbop]

The Athletic's Winnipeg beat writer wrote about Trouba and 7 likely interested teams.





Carp likes throwing stuff out there. He wrote about the offer sheet last week. He responded in the Q&A section. He brings up the offer sheet as a possibility but then adds he will believe it when he sees it. He adds Point is a better player than anyone the Rangers could get at the top of the draft. Using that strategy, every team should use the offer sheet option because the player acquiring via offer sheet is better than the draft picks.

Point will require the Rangers to give 4 first round picks. TB is matching anything below that threshold. JD is preaching process and patience. Giving up 4 first rounders.



Trust The Process

The Trouba cost will be prohibitive. The Rangers level of interest shouldn't be linked to what they don't do with another player.

After reading the Athletic’s article on Trouba, my thoughts are that only three of the seven teams on the list — Rangers, Philadelphia and Detroit — are really in a position to trade for Trouba. I’m sure there are a couple of others not mentioned. That will affect the return he can bring back.

The best alternative for the Jets is probably keep him as a one year rental.

I’d hate like hell to see him end up in Philadelphia.

 

[RGY]

After reading the Athletic’s article on Trouba, my thoughts are that only three of the seven teams on the list — Rangers, Philadelphia and Detroit — are really in a position to trade for Trouba. I’m sure there are a couple of others not mentioned. That will affect the return he can bring back.

The best alternative for the Jets is probably keep him as a one year rental.

I’d hate like hell to see him end up in Philadelphia.

I definitely would rather investigate the cost for Trouba over the cost for EK.

Heck, I would rather look into a hockey trade for other defenseman out there. I would even consider PK Subban if NSH was willing to retain salary. I do think PK can still play and produce, but it would have to be the right price.

But Colin Miller would be a better choice on the low end. Someone also mentioned Cernak the other day.

Don’t trade for Malkin. See what it would take to have Panarin come here and go from there.

I would like for them to move Vesey and Nams salaries. Then sign Hagelin for the bottom lines. Re-sign Kreider.

Defense will be the trickiest part of the offseason.

 

[NYR Viper]

I’m all aboard the Colin Miller train. Only issue being that he doesn’t exactly offer something different than Shattenkirk or DeAngelo right now. If they can move Pionk and Shattenkirk he’s a guy I’d be very interested in.

 

[GlasgowNewYorkRanger]

league has never stopped teams from circumventing the cap this way before....luongo just needs to take a job with the league as the head of player safety or claim that his pads are suddenly itchy and they are in the clear

Hang on a minute...