Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XVIII

[GeorgeKaplan]

Some of these ideas in here are starting to make this rebuild feel like the Rangers are a kid that was saving up his allowance for a video game, is close but still doesn’t quite have enough, but is out somewhere and something catches their eye, so they think “we’ve been good, and it was so easy to save what I’ve already have” so they buy it. Now they’re at a threshold where they go into another store and something catches their eye and they can ignore it and remind themselves they’re saving for something they want more or they can just keep buying things they want in the short term until they’re back to where they were before they started saving

 

[Edge]

What is the Jost obsession on here?

Not so much an obession, as it is a topic that gets bantered around because it would seem the Rangers have had interest in him in the past, still have some degree of interest in him now, and because Colorado is apparently not against the concept of moving him.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I would take Bennett tbh.

With out having the optics of being a “failed” high pick for us, I think he would be a nice middle 6 addition.

 

[Avery16]

https://nypost.com/2019/12/17/rangers-are-helpless-in-this-cheap-shot-epidemic/

Chris Kreider, who intermittently played that role in the past, doesn’t often play that game.

 

[charliemurphy]

Anybody know what the situation is with Detroit sending Zadina down? They looking to move him?

 

[RGY]

https://nypost.com/2019/12/17/rangers-are-helpless-in-this-cheap-shot-epidemic/

So, just reading this one tidbit alone, Brooks wants Kreider to go around elbowing players in retaliation? Slew footing? Blindside hits?

i mean what was he supposed to do? He has played the same physical game with the occasional big hit once in awhile.

Brooks is an asshat.

 

[Edge]

https://nypost.com/2019/12/17/rangers-are-helpless-in-this-cheap-shot-epidemic/

And there's the talk about a North-South style player --- setting up the story for the spring/summer when the Rangers pursue that direction, and when Uncle Larry writes his annual, "You can't trade this guy, what are we going to do!!!" article.

Either way, he's set up his follow-up story.

 

[Avery16]

So, just reading this one tidbit alone, Brooks wants Kreider to go around elbowing players in retaliation? Slew footing? Blindside hits?

i mean what was he supposed to do? He has played the same physical game with the occasional big hit once in awhile.

Brooks is an asshat.

Not disagreeing with most of this, but I'd read the whole thing. He advocates for no cheap shots. Wants a Tom Wilson, and laments that Lemieux is overpenalized, a la Avery.

 

[Edge]

Anybody know what the situation is with Detroit sending Zadina down? They looking to move him?

None that I am aware of. He's a typical 20 year old kid who is trying to translate his game consistently in the NHL. He's had good moments and not so good moments.

In other words, the Rangers don't have the market cornered on kids who don't storm the NHL before they're old enough to drink or post monster numbers as rookies.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Anybody know what the situation is with Detroit sending Zadina down? They looking to move him?

Typical Detroit slow-cooking prospects stuff

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Not disagreeing with most of this, but I'd read the whole thing. He advocates for no cheap shots. Wants a Tom Wilson, and laments that Lemieux is overpenalized, a la Avery.

 

[Edge]

Not disagreeing with most of this, but I'd read the whole thing. He advocates for no cheap shots. Wants a Tom Wilson, and laments that Lemieux is overpenalized, a la Avery.

I always laugh when I read things like, "The Rangers need a Tom Wilson."

Of course they do. And just about every one wants one, including the team who already has one.

But they don't sell them in bulk at Costco.

One of the reasons why Lemieux generated immediate calls to the Rangers upon his acquisition? Because he has a chance to become that player. He held his own against Wilson a few weeks back. Granted, Lemieux is a work in progress, but he's arguably that type of player.

And if the concern is that Lemieux has the refs attention, I'm sure Uncle Larry is aware that a "Tom Wilson Type" would quickly generate the same level of attention from the zebras.

I give the Larry credit, he's skillful at playing emotions and getting reader reactions. That's what keeps him employed in a shrinking industry landscape. But, to some degree, you have to go into his story knowing that's his approach. Because otherwise, it can sometimes be an eye-roll inducing experience.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

As if getting one Tom wilson player isn’t hard enough, he suggests getting two

Apparently these guys just grow on trees

 

[Trxjw]

Another thing to keep in mind with Wilson: He's only recently graduated from "4th line goon" to "top-six power-forward." The Caps waited a long time for him to translate his scoring ability from Junior to the NHL level. Lemieux could definitely be on a similar track himself.

 

[Edge]

As if getting one Tom wilson player isn’t hard enough, he suggests getting two

Apparently these guys just grow on trees

You get a Tom Wilson! And you get a Tom Wilson!! Tom Wilsons for everyone!!!

 

[Fitzy]

The best solution to cheap shots is better refereeing.

I believe in self-defense, and own guns to protect my home, but the first and best option is always the police.

I'm all for adding "Mean" players, but I mean guys who can play the game like Dorsett, Lemieux, and Prust. Not Glass or Haley.

 

[Ghost of jas]

The Rangers need a Ryan Ellis-type who doesn’t get disciplined when he cheapshots someone.

 

[Off Sides]

The thinking on players over picks is that you have a better understanding over who a prospect is a year or two after they were drafted. For example, there was much more confidence that Lindgren and Hajek would really be NHLers in March of 2018 than there was in June of 2016. Because of that, their value was greater than the 37 or 49 picks in the 2018 draft.

Also, you can accelerate things by getting young players who are almost ready to play in the NHL, instead of picks that you have to wait 3-4 years on.

But you have a point about being able to leverage picks into players later as well.

I'm not totally convinced the Rangers would not have been better off with picks concerning player like Howden, Hajek, Lindgren, etc. Not that I dislike them, just seems like they are going to turn into secondary players, maybe.

Therefor I'm not sure that is all that different than taking picks instead then using those picks for a higher potential player who happens to become available, Fox for example.

Rangers are a preferred destination for players, if other teams have to move someone because they just do not want to be there anymore, the Rangers have a pretty good chance at being on their list of want to go there. If so it may come down to if the Rangers have the picks as currency at that point or not.

To use Jost as an example, I'd rather have the picks and hope that some higher potential player shakes loose, whether that player be an on the cusp of the NHL prospect (Fox), a RFA who is doing the I'm not signing long term thing (Trouba), or even a good vet who is just looking to get out from where he is at.

I see it as remaining more flexible instead of just taking the best of whats available at the deadline, which when it comes to high potential near or already in the NHL players, it is pretty rare that they move.

 

[Savant]

Not so much an obession, as it is a topic that gets bantered around because it would seem the Rangers have had interest in him in the past, still have some degree of interest in him now, and because Colorado is apparently not against the concept of moving him.

Sure, but not to sound harsh, but I think there are obvious reasons that the Avalanche are willing to move Jost. The idea of getting a young NHL ready player is fine, but I don’t think the Rangers have any use for a center/winger tweener who is a top six/middle six tweener. The Ranger roster is filling up. If they are going to be getting guys under contract, they need to be able to fulfill a specific role. Jost - I don’t know what he does but I know he doesn’t get more than 30 points a season. So he isn’t really a top six score, and he isn’t going to give a ton of jam. What is he? I bet the Avalanche are asking that themselves too based on their recent acquisitions. It’s a suckers bet.

Getting another 1st would not be the worst thing in the world. In fact I don’t know what’s stopping the Rangers from spending their futures on a more established player if they want to go that route. There isn’t enough room for everyone on defense, and you can always draft more. I’ve been pretty vocal about wanting to go for Lindholm from Anaheim. That’s the kind of move the Rangers should be making. I don’t know what Jost has going for him besides that he was a former 1st rounder. I don’t see how his game has translated to the NHL level. But maybe that’s just me.

 

[Edge]

Sure, but not to sound harsh, but I think there are obvious reasons that the Avalanche are willing to move Jost. The idea of getting a young NHL ready player is fine, but I don’t think the Rangers have any use for a center/winger tweener who is a top six/middle six tweener. The Ranger roster is filling up. If they are going to be getting guys under contract, they need to be able to fulfill a specific role. Jost - I don’t know what he does but I know he doesn’t get more than 30 points a season. So he isn’t really a top six score, and he isn’t going to give a ton of jam. What is he? I bet the Avalanche are asking that themselves too based on their recent acquisitions. It’s a suckers bet.

Getting another 1st would not be the worst thing in the world. In fact I don’t know what’s stopping the Rangers from spending their futures on a more established player if they want to go that route. There isn’t enough room for everyone on defense, and you can always draft more. I’ve been pretty vocal about wanting to go for Lindholm from Anaheim. That’s the kind of move the Rangers should be making. I don’t know what Jost has going for him besides that he was a former 1st rounder. I don’t see how his game has translated to the NHL level. But maybe that’s just me.

So to delve into this a little deeper --- you're not wrong, Jost has his concerns and that is why there is a willingness to move him.

But circling back to the Rangers end, I've heard for a while that there's interest in him as a wing, where he can focus more on just going to the net, utilizing his speed and getting in close. In the Rangers case, they view him as having the potential to be a second line wing. I don't know if there's a concern with the roster filling up right now, especially at wing. There are going to be quite a few pieces that are moved over the next few years, and some that simply aren't going to pan out. So Jost isn't necessarily blocking a wing, especially if the Rangers end up moving out one or two wings over the next six months.

If the Rangers went with this approach, it wouldn't be because they view Jost as a 15 goal/30 point center. It would be with the belief that he can be a 20 goal, 40-50 point wing.

But it's also important to distinguish between suggestions for the roster vs. reporting back rumblings that I hear. With Jost it's the latter more than me or the board pining for him. It's kind of like the Nylander rumblings --- it's really more about reporting back on names and teams they've engaged with and probably will continue to engage with. I just say that as a point of clarification.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Sure, but not to sound harsh, but I think there are obvious reasons that the Avalanche are willing to move Jost. The idea of getting a young NHL ready player is fine, but I don’t think the Rangers have any use for a center/winger tweener who is a top six/middle six tweener. The Ranger roster is filling up. If they are going to be getting guys under contract, they need to be able to fulfill a specific role. Jost - I don’t know what he does but I know he doesn’t get more than 30 points a season. So he isn’t really a top six score, and he isn’t going to give a ton of jam. What is he? I bet the Avalanche are asking that themselves too based on their recent acquisitions. It’s a suckers bet.

Getting another 1st would not be the worst thing in the world. In fact I don’t know what’s stopping the Rangers from spending their futures on a more established player if they want to go that route. There isn’t enough room for everyone on defense, and you can always draft more. I’ve been pretty vocal about wanting to go for Lindholm from Anaheim. That’s the kind of move the Rangers should be making. I don’t know what Jost has going for him besides that he was a former 1st rounder. I don’t see how his game has translated to the NHL level. But maybe that’s just me.

Preach.

 

[Edge]

I'm not totally convinced the Rangers would not have been better off with picks concerning player like Howden, Hajek, Lindgren, etc. Not that I dislike them, just seems like they are going to turn into secondary players, maybe.

Eh, I'm iffy on that one. I think as a board we've become fixated on stars. We need stars and everyone wants stars. But even getting secondary players is essential and considered a success. There's only so many stars out there, and when you start getting into late first round picks and second rounders (which is what we would've received instead of Howden, Hajek, Lindgren), your odds aren't great.

If anything, a "very good" outcome with those picks would be coming with the names we're discussing, because the odds of landing a star is pretty slim.

That also doesn't take into account the challenge that instead of being 21/22, those kids are 19/20 and that much further from reaching their potential, assuming you managed to land someone who develops in the first place.

The problem with draft picks is that they're like young political candidates without years of voting records to be held against them. We can mold them into whatever we want in our own minds, and the outcome will always look better than what we have.

 

[RGY]

Not disagreeing with most of this, but I'd read the whole thing. He advocates for no cheap shots. Wants a Tom Wilson, and laments that Lemieux is overpenalized, a la Avery.

I think Lemieux is getting the short end of the stick with some penalties. He also draws penalties.

There are not many like Tom Wilson. Very few. Closest is Josh Anderson imo. But I don’t think you’re getting him.

 

[Edge]

Preach.

It's also not one or the other.

Nylander, Jost, picks, north-south players, etc. don't have to exist in an either/or world.

It's not that it's Jost OR an established player. Likewise it's not Nylander OR a left defenseman.

I think there's many moving parts in what the Rangers are going to be doing and it's not as linear, or as much of a fork in the road as we might think.

 

[Savant]

So to delve into this a little deeper --- you're not wrong, Jost has his concerns and that is why there is a willingness to move him.

But circling back to the Rangers end, I've heard for a while that there's interest in him as a wing, where he can focus more on just going to the net, utilizing his speed and getting in close. In the Rangers case, they view him as having the potential to be a second line wing. I don't know if there's a concern with the roster filling up right now, especially at wing. There are going to be quite a few pieces that are moved over the next few years, and some that simply aren't going to pan out. So Jost isn't necessarily blocking a wing, especially if the Rangers end up moving out one or two wings over the next six months.

If the Rangers went with this approach, it wouldn't be because they view Jost as a 15 goal/30 point center. It would be with the belief that he can be a 20 goal, 40-50 point wing.

But it's also important to distinguish between suggestions for the roster vs. reporting back rumblings that I hear. With Jost it's the latter more than me or the board pining for him. It's kind of like the Nylander rumblings --- it's really more about reporting back on names and teams they've engaged with and probably will continue to engage with. I just say that as a point of clarification.

And that is all fine and good. I just don’t think there is any evidence whatsoever Jost can be a top six wing. If it hasn’t happened in Colorado, don’t know who is unlocking that here. I don’t know if you throw the money that you threw at Bukarovsky and Donskoi is you think Jost can do that role. That being said is rather pay more and get Nylander than try to extract something out of Jost. The Rangers uplevel at this stage by getting top line players, and top pair defensemen. They have the middle areas covered. If they want to get back to contending they need better talent. I am perfectly fine going after Nylander. Maybe the Rangers don’t have to choose, and that is great as long as one move isn’t prohibitive to another.