Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part XV: Trading up or down? - Mod Warning post #450

[GoAwayPanarin]

Teams probably looking for forward help:
Carolina
LA
Dallas
Edmonton
SJ
FLA (I don't think they're done)
STL
CLB
Chicago (are they moving Saad or Anisimov?)
ANA


I think the list is pretty long.

Calgary.

 

[TheTakedown]

Based on past conversations I think you will find different opinions on him. He had ~20 points in 65 games as a 20 year old. He has good size and a good shot so I would say 50-60 point winger who can play a solid 2-way game is where I'd project him to be. It's not the ppg player he was drafted to be, but that is still a very valuable player

I feel it could go either way with him.

Edmonton didn't ruin Schultz, but they ruined Yakupov. Feel like Pool Party is closer to Yakupov but I am not educated in this matter so I won't draw a conclusion

 

[mas0764]

i would easily take Lucic if we can get Draisaitl.. Chytl Anderson Howden our 2018 1st rounder our 2 d prospect are all on 3 years ELCs.. we're solid with the cap for at least that long, with us just worrying about resigning Buchenvich

For Draisaitl, hell yes. Maybe there is some concern that he's not really a 70-80 point center away from McDavid, but maybe he's helping McDavid out too. I think at worst he's a 60-70 point center which still means that Draisaitl, Zibanejad, Chytil, Andersson, Howden and Hayes form a ridiculous group of centers even if you don't have a true #1 in the Crosby or Thornton mold. And of course, there is a way more than decent chance that Draisaitl actually is going to be an 80 point #1 center in this league, the guy is gonna be 23 this season. If the biggest thing I'm giving up in this trade is having to take on Lucic, my god, I'm rushing to submit that trade paperwork to the league office before Edmonton comes to their senses.

 

[RangerBoy]

LA is also in the market for a top 6 winger. Which I see you listed.

Derp

I heard John "The Mayor" Hoven on Sirius XM. The Kings insider. He said the Kings don't want to trade their #1.

Elliott Friedman is on Hockeycentral at Noon. He said it's LA,San Jose and Boston for Kovalchuk.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I heard John "The Mayor" Hoven on Sirius XM. The Kings insider. He said the Kings don't want to trade their #1.

Elliott Friedman is on Hockeycentral at Noon. He said it's LA,San Jose and Boston for Kovalchuk.

Yeah, I heard that, too.

 

[mas0764]

I think Chytil, if he keeps progressing, is going to be a potentially dangerous player because of his skill and size.

You're looking at a skill player who is going to fill out to at least 6'2, 215, possibly in the 6'3, 220+ range.

(I know some people will point to the same thing with Kotkaniemi, but Chytil's frame and structure is significantly bigger.)

I'm still going to say the Rangers will make a very serious push for Tkachuk and be willing to pay a little premium.

I can't help but get a NYR-era Rick Nash vibe from Tkachuk.

He's going to do everything super well, everything except score 30-40 goals consistently.

At the end of the day you love a player like that when he's not scapegoated with the expectations of a massive contract and the expectations of being your #1 scorer. This fanbase will end up loving him, me included.

But on draft day and in the months ensuing, I'll be disappointed that we didn't come away with a #1 goal scorer like Zadina or a #1 center like Kotkaniemi.

 

[Edge]

I feel it could go either way with him.

Edmonton didn't ruin Schultz, but they ruined Yakupov. Feel like Pool Party is closer to Yakupov but I am not educated in this matter so I won't draw a conclusion

That's where I'm on him as well.

It's not about expecting the player he was drafted to be. I think that's highly unlikely at this point.

But I'm not entirely sure he becomes a 60 point player either, and I'm hesitant to pay either price (the original expectation, or the 60 point version).

 

[Edge]

I can't help but get a NYR-era Rick Nash vibe from Tkachuk.

He's going to do everything super well, everything except score 30-40 goals consistently.

At the end of the day you love a player like that when he's not scapegoated with the expectations of a massive contract and the expectations of being your #1 scorer. This fanbase will end up loving him, me included.

But on draft day and in the months ensuing, I'll be disappointed that we didn't come away with a #1 goal scorer like Zadina or a #1 center like Kotkaniemi.

I'd love to have Zadina. Easily.

It's well known I'm not sure Kotkaniemi is a #1 center, so I can't say that one would disappoint me. My views on him being a first line center aren't all that different than my views on Tkachuk being a first line center.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Yeah I'd much rather have #10 than JP.

Give us a chance to get someone that we like instead of someone who the Oilers don't.

 

[mas0764]

Don't get me wrong, I think he's got a shot to be a very good top-six forward in the NHL for 10 or more years.

But for the Rangers, which is my primary focus, I don't see him bringing anything to the table that we don't have already.

Even if you figure he's in the same relative cluster as the kids available in the 3-11 range, all things being equal or relatively close, I don't know if he brings an element that would make me seek him out over other options.

To me, that only makes sense if I see him as a first line center. Which I don't. But I don't view his upside as all or nothing --- Kopitar or Nieves.

But I think it's also telling that even some of the people touting him are a little reluctant to attach first line expectations to their pieces on him.

They cushion it with things like "best center in the draft" or "a worthy riser." But there's also a subtle element of hedging bets with him that there isn't with some of the other forwards.

Granted reporters who want to make a living off sports reporting tend to do that so that they don't burn sources and have an "out" to maintain their status as experts, but it is something to at least consider.

Even Carp and the Athletic kind of hedged on Kotkaniemi a little this morning. So if we're not sure he's better than Chytil, and we already have Andersson and Howden as guys who potentially slot in behind him, we'd have to be convinced that there is no one else on his level on the board. He'd have to be the clear, far and away best player available. And to that point, I'm just not sure he will be.

I think tie goes to the center, even if we have other centers of similar skill level, as prospects. Centers are worth too much in this league right now.

 

[NYR Viper]

I can't help but get a NYR-era Rick Nash vibe from Tkachuk.

He's going to do everything super well, everything except score 30-40 goals consistently.

At the end of the day you love a player like that when he's not scapegoated with the expectations of a massive contract and the expectations of being your #1 scorer. This fanbase will end up loving him, me included.

But on draft day and in the months ensuing, I'll be disappointed that we didn't come away with a #1 goal scorer like Zadina or a #1 center like Kotkaniemi.

Blake Wheeler has NEVER been a 30 goal scorer. He's a power-forward who leans heavily towards assists. If Tkachuk is that while also bringing a more consistent physical presence that is a VERY good player

 

[Edge]

I think tie goes to the center, even if we have other centers of similar skill level, as prospects. Centers are worth too much in this league right now.

Frankly, there are 10 prospects I like better.

 

[Edge]

Blake Wheeler has NEVER been a 30 goal scorer. He's a power-forward who leans heavily towards assists. If Tkachuk is that while also bringing a more consistent physical presence that is a VERY good player

Speaking of draft day climbers --- Blake Wheeler.

Guy is such a consistent and underrated player. His play over the last 7 seasons is painfully overlooked.

 

[True Blue]

But on draft day and in the months ensuing, I'll be disappointed that we didn't come away with a #1 goal scorer like Zadina or a #1 center like Kotkaniemi.

The former is a no-brainer. The latter, well.....No doubt that he is deserving of first round status, but I hate drafting a riser. He was out of the top 10. Almost feels like you would be taking him by buying high on the hype machine. Let's put it this way. I wold be disappointed with him at 9. Not screeching mad (insert name here....Hayton, Veleno, etc.) but disappointed.

 

[mas0764]

Hey now, I've been more active on these boards in the last 12 months than I've been in years. And I picked a heck of a good time to step up.

Tkachuk

Somehow both overrated and underrated over the course of the season.

He's not the second coming of Eric Lindros, but he's not a third line banger either.

Tkachuk is a very underrated playmaker with a high IQ and awareness. He's a smart player and I don't feel he gets enough credit because people assume he's just a big kid who steamrolls the opposition. He's not quite the power forward most fans have come to expect in the sense that he will likely lean heavier on the assists than the goals. In many ways he reminds me a lot of a young Mark Messier.

Not that I am projecting him to be anywhere near that level, but from a style standpoint there are a lot of similarities. He's more of a playmaker than goal scorer, though he's capable of scoring goals and will step up in the right moments, but it's not the foot he will lead with. But I'd say it's an underrated skill.

Tkachuk is nasty to play against. Not necessarily in a drop the gloves type of fashion, but you will pay the price as you play against him. He'll slash, he'll elbow, he'll crosscheck, but he'll also be sneaky and timely about how/when he does so.

Reports are that he's a natural leader and will be vocal in locker rooms. He's not seen as a passive kid.

The natural offense skill isn't there like it is for Svechnikov or Zadina, nor is it there from a goal scoring standpoint like it is for Wahlstrom. He's not necessarily the most intriguing offensive prospect, but I wouldn't consider it a drawback. In a world where Svechnikov could score 40, and Zadina and Wahlstrom easily project as potential 30+ goal scorers, Tkachuk might be more in the 20-25 goal range.

However, Tkachuk is not a prospect who is defined solely by his offensive production. Simply put, there is no prospect in the draft like him and very few in the NHL today. He has the ability to change the direction of a game because of the variety he brings. It might be with a timely goal, or by setting up a play, but it also occurs physically and psychologically. Tkachuk impacts games.

Now the question becomes the ceiling and where he plays. Personally, I see him as no worse than a top six forward. I think he brings enough to the table that he can play that role for a long time. But I don't think the first line is out of the question --- I'm just not quite sold on it coming as a center. Like Kotkaniemi, I don't know if all the attributes add up the way I'd prefer for a first line center. But if you put him on the left side, and you have a center who is a bit more of a goal scorer, he could be an excellent fit.

Some people have concerns about the skating, I really don't.

Like Kotkaniemi, or even Bouchard, I don't think it will be a hinderance. It's above average, it's just not outstanding. Frankly, that's one of the reasons he might indeed work better as a wing than a center.

I will also flat out say that I think he's likely to be a primary target of the Rangers. I also think that if he's within striking distance, and there's a deal to be made, I think the Rangers are more inclined to go for it.

This sounds a lot like Chris Kreider to me, though, no? But with more playmaking and passing ability.

 

[nyr__1994]

Hey now, I've been more active on these boards in the last 12 months than I've been in years. And I picked a heck of a good time to step up.

Tkachuk

Somehow both overrated and underrated over the course of the season.

He's not the second coming of Eric Lindros, but he's not a third line banger either.

Tkachuk is a very underrated playmaker with a high IQ and awareness. He's a smart player and I don't feel he gets enough credit because people assume he's just a big kid who steamrolls the opposition. He's not quite the power forward most fans have come to expect in the sense that he will likely lean heavier on the assists than the goals. In many ways he reminds me a lot of a young Mark Messier.

Not that I am projecting him to be anywhere near that level, but from a style standpoint there are a lot of similarities. He's more of a playmaker than goal scorer, though he's capable of scoring goals and will step up in the right moments, but it's not the foot he will lead with. But I'd say it's an underrated skill.

Tkachuk is nasty to play against. Not necessarily in a drop the gloves type of fashion, but you will pay the price as you play against him. He'll slash, he'll elbow, he'll crosscheck, but he'll also be sneaky and timely about how/when he does so.

Reports are that he's a natural leader and will be vocal in locker rooms. He's not seen as a passive kid.

The natural offense skill isn't there like it is for Svechnikov or Zadina, nor is it there from a goal scoring standpoint like it is for Wahlstrom. He's not necessarily the most intriguing offensive prospect, but I wouldn't consider it a drawback. In a world where Svechnikov could score 40, and Zadina and Wahlstrom easily project as potential 30+ goal scorers, Tkachuk might be more in the 20-25 goal range.

However, Tkachuk is not a prospect who is defined solely by his offensive production. Simply put, there is no prospect in the draft like him and very few in the NHL today. He has the ability to change the direction of a game because of the variety he brings. It might be with a timely goal, or by setting up a play, but it also occurs physically and psychologically. Tkachuk impacts games.

Now the question becomes the ceiling and where he plays. Personally, I see him as no worse than a top six forward. I think he brings enough to the table that he can play that role for a long time. But I don't think the first line is out of the question --- I'm just not quite sold on it coming as a center. Like Kotkaniemi, I don't know if all the attributes add up the way I'd prefer for a first line center. But if you put him on the left side, and you have a center who is a bit more of a goal scorer, he could be an excellent fit.

Some people have concerns about the skating, I really don't.

Like Kotkaniemi, or even Bouchard, I don't think it will be a hinderance. It's above average, it's just not outstanding. Frankly, that's one of the reasons he might indeed work better as a wing than a center.

I will also flat out say that I think he's likely to be a primary target of the Rangers. I also think that if he's within striking distance, and there's a deal to be made, I think the Rangers are more inclined to go for it.

So almost similar to Lias, where the sum of the package is greater than any individual part, where while it may not be flashy, at the end of the day, when you add everythigng up, you have a really good player who is a positive contributor on a successful team.

 

[Edge]

This sounds a lot like Chris Kreider to me, though, no? But with more playmaking and passing ability.

Hmm, when you switch the emphasis to playmaking and passing, and eliminate the speed, that results in a significantly different player.

They both can use their physical tools to intimidate, but no, I don't think they're really similar.

Same with Andersson.

Tkachuk is pretty unique.

 

[mas0764]

Frankly, there are 10 prospects I like better.

Fair enough.

FWIW I think if I cared -- or really knew enough -- to make a top 20, or top 50 board, or whatever, Kotkaniemi would probably be 6-7-8-9, somewhere around there. But I'd have him there because I'd be giving bonus points for being a center over guys like Bouchard or Dobson.

 

[Edge]

The former is a no-brainer. The latter, well.....No doubt that he is deserving of first round status, but I hate drafting a riser. He was out of the top 10. Almost feels like you would be taking him by buying high on the hype machine. Let's put it this way. I wold be disappointed with him at 9. Not screeching mad (insert name here....Hayton, Veleno, etc.) but disappointed.

I'd be okay at 9, but probably a little disappointed as well.

Not because he isn't a good prospect, but because there are guys I like more who are a guaranteed to be there.

 

[Edge]

Fair enough.

FWIW I think if I cared -- or really knew enough -- to make a top 20, or top 50 board, or whatever, Kotkaniemi would probably be 6-7-8-9, somewhere around there. But I'd have him there because I'd be giving bonus points for being a center over guys like Bouchard or Dobson.

I have him at 11, so he's not too far down for me.

Picking him at 9 wouldn't be out of line.

But I am also kind of hoping he's off the board so it doesn't even become a scenario.

 

[mas0764]

Well, like I said, I would warm up to Tkachuk, probably relatively quickly. I'd talk myself into the fact that he's seen by some publications and scouts as right there at 4 or even 3, right after Dahlin and Svetchnikov, and perhaps Zadina.

But I definitely want top line scorers or top line centers for the Rangers' next core. I like the pieces we have in Chytil and Andersson but Andersson may be a plus second liner, and it never hurts to have more top line talent.

I also kinda feel liker we have a ton of good defensive prospects, so I'm definitely in on a forward.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I can't for the life of me find it.

What time does the draft start? 7 or 8?

Trying to figure out if I need to tip out of work early.

My tickets say 6:30. Assuming that's local time, it would be 8:30 EST

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

My tickets say 6:30. Assuming that's local time, it would be 8:30 EST

7:30. 1 hour time difference between Dallas and NYC.

 

[Inferno]

Hmm, when you switch the emphasis to playmaking and passing, and eliminate the speed, that results in a significantly different player.

They both can use their physical tools to intimidate, but no, I don't think they're really similar.

Same with Andersson.

Tkachuk is pretty unique.

I'm gonna get killed for this...but I think of prime Corey Perry but leaving more to being a playmaker than a goal socrer.

 

[Edge]

I'm gonna get killed for this...but I think of prime Corey Perry but leaving more to being a playmaker than a goal socrer.

Now Corey Perry is a prime example of a kid who exploded after being drafted.

We talk about going for skill and high ceilings and big swings, and that's all well and good.

But even in 2018, Corey Perry would be a pick in the 20s.

There is no formula and a guy being a homerun type swing isn't as much about highlight reel skills as we probably want to believe.

If it was, it'd be a hell of a lot easier to find those gems in the late first.