Speculation: Roster Building Thread XLVI: Dog Days Pending

[Matz03]

I would hope that management passes on all of the "big" free agents and goes into the bargain bin of unsigned guys. Hopefully fill the bottom 9 with 1-2 of these guys with the intention of flipping them come the trade deadline. I'd look to resign Stalberg with again a plan to flip him at the trade deadline. If any of those guys pans out there's upside of 2nd round picks or decent prospect coming back. They must look at ways to add picks in 2016-2017-2018 and rebuild the farm a bit.

 

[Raspewtin]

Absolutely no desire for Brouwer in any fashion.

 

[NickyFotiu]

I hope we go in to the bargain bin AFTER we sign Stamkos. I have no desire to be the Coyotes or their equivalent. Having guys that are cheap (aka not in demand) is great for the 3rd & 4th lines but not for our first two lines. This is why I hate the cap. It turns fans in to bean counters more concerned with salary than actual play.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Hey me Riley Nash for the 4th line. Can play center and the wing. PKs as well. The less amount of time our top 6 players are PKing the better.

 

[silverfish]

First line is this season. Called the 8 5v5 goals he had.

This guy has never been much of a scorer. Is paid for his "intangibles" only.

If the Rangers weren't going to pay Hagelin $4m to be a third-liner, they shouldn't pay Brouwer that either.

 

[Matz03]

I hope we go in to the bargain bin AFTER we sign Stamkos. I have no desire to be the Coyotes or their equivalent. Having guys that are cheap (aka not in demand) is great for the 3rd & 4th lines but not for our first two lines. This is why I hate the cap. It turns fans in to bean counters more concerned with salary than actual play.

This team as currently constructed is nothing more than a bubble team, maybe not even that. How does Stamkos help this team in anyway this year or even in the next 2-3 years? The hard thing is to realize you need to rebuild, for a NY team, and it's so obvious that's exactly what needs to happen.

Bargain bin signings (1 yr variety) allow you to create competition for roster spots, and to recoup some assets via trade.

At the least the Cap forces management to think, instead of just doing the easy and obvious thing and throwing money at the problem (Stamkos). The cap forces teams to plan and analyze every step and move they make.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

First line is this season. Called the 8 5v5 goals he had.

This guy has never been much of a scorer. Is paid for his "intangibles" only.

If the Rangers weren't going to pay Hagelin $4m to be a third-liner, they shouldn't pay Brouwer that either.

You would hope the Rangers learned for their mistakes by signing Drury to that contract for his "intangibles".

 

[cd211]

You would hope the Rangers learned for their mistakes by signing Drury to that contract for his "intangibles".

Haha negative.. Drury was a top 6, 2 way 50pt+ center.. Brouwer is a grinder with a scoring touch.. Dude will get PAID as we all know but NYR will not be his landing spot..

 

[silverfish]

You would hope the Rangers learned for their mistakes by signing Drury to that contract for his "intangibles".

Haha negative.. Drury was a top 6, 2 way 50pt+ center.. Brouwer is a grinder with a scoring touch.. Dude will get PAID as we all know but NYR will not be his landing spot..

I agree with dethomas. Drury had way more offensive skill than Brouwer does. That should tell anyone everything they need to know about potentially brining Brouwer here for the contract he may get as a UFA.

Total pass from me.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

I agree with dethomas. Drury had way more offensive skill than Brouwer does. That should tell anyone everything they need to know about potentially brining Brouwer here for the contract he may get as a UFA.

Total pass from me.

Wasn't comparing their play but the people that defended Drury's contract due to his intangibles. Agree with everyone not to sign a player just for that reason.

 

[NickyFotiu]

This team as currently constructed is nothing more than a bubble team, maybe not even that. How does Stamkos help this team in anyway this year or even in the next 2-3 years? The hard thing is to realize you need to rebuild, for a NY team, and it's so obvious that's exactly what needs to happen.

Bargain bin signings (1 yr variety) allow you to create competition for roster spots, and to recoup some assets via trade.

At the least the Cap forces management to think, instead of just doing the easy and obvious thing and throwing money at the problem (Stamkos). The cap forces teams to plan and analyze every step and move they make.

I'm all for getting younger as long as younger also means better. Stamkos is 26.

I'll take my chances with McD, Stamkos, Kreider, JT Miller, Buchenevich, Stepan, Brass, Hayes, Zooks, Brady, and Dylan. They are age 21-28. We can move our guys over 30 (Nash, Staal, and Girardi) for youth instead of just throwing away the investment we have made developing those guys. There is no reason to throw away all our younger players in the hopes that we can replace them with better draft choices sometime in the next 5-10 seasons.

Would you have dumped all of the SJ Sharks veterans after their last 3 seasons? I'm glad our goal here is not to become the next Arizona, Winnipeg, Carolina, Ottawa, etc.

 

[Matz03]

I'm all for getting younger as long as younger also means better. Stamkos is 26.

I'll take my chances with McD, Stamkos, Kreider, JT Miller, Buchenevich, Stepan, Brass, Hayes, Zooks, Brady, and Dylan. They are age 21-28. We can move our guys over 30 (Nash, Staal, and Girardi) for youth instead of just throwing away the investment we have made developing those guys. There is no reason to throw away all our younger players in the hopes that we can replace them with better draft choices sometime in the next 5-10 seasons.

Would you have dumped all of the SJ Sharks veterans after their last 3 seasons? I'm glad our goal here is not to become the next Arizona, Winnipeg, Carolina, Ottawa, etc.

That all sounds great, I'd be more than happy for a core like that. But actually moving all three of Nash, Staal, Girardi, then signing replacements on D, and putting together a decent 4th line is way easier said than done. Especially all in a single offseason.

Lastly, it wouldn't surprise me if 3 of the 4 teams you mention (Arizona, Winnipeg, and Carolina) are all better next year than NYR.

 

[Riche16]

I'm all for getting younger as long as younger also means better. Stamkos is 26.

I'll take my chances with McD, Stamkos, Kreider, JT Miller, Buchenevich, Stepan, Brass, Hayes, Zooks, Brady, and Dylan. They are age 21-28. We can move our guys over 30 (Nash, Staal, and Girardi) for youth instead of just throwing away the investment we have made developing those guys. There is no reason to throw away all our younger players in the hopes that we can replace them with better draft choices sometime in the next 5-10 seasons.

Would you have dumped all of the SJ Sharks veterans after their last 3 seasons? I'm glad our goal here is not to become the next Arizona, Winnipeg, Carolina, Ottawa, etc.

I for one would almost trade places with those teams.

Very few in this league are worse off than we are ATM

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

I'm all for getting younger as long as younger also means better. Stamkos is 26.

I'll take my chances with McD, Stamkos, Kreider, JT Miller, Buchenevich, Stepan, Brass, Hayes, Zooks, Brady, and Dylan. They are age 21-28. We can move our guys over 30 (Nash, Staal, and Girardi) for youth instead of just throwing away the investment we have made developing those guys. There is no reason to throw away all our younger players in the hopes that we can replace them with better draft choices sometime in the next 5-10 seasons.

Would you have dumped all of the SJ Sharks veterans after their last 3 seasons? I'm glad our goal here is not to become the next Arizona, Winnipeg, Carolina, Ottawa, etc.

I'd be for it but how are they affording Stamkos when in any trade involving Nash, Staal and Girardi they are going to have to retain salary more then likely.

I find the chances of trading Girardi, even when retaining salary, slim to none.

Also how are they addressing the PMD issue? They aren't getting a Vatanen/Ellis/Barrie/Dumba type for Nash or Staal.

More of the same issues that they currently have. They need to add speed and bottom 6 depth that can skate and PK while not being totally inept in the offensive zone.

They need to restock the farm.

 

[NickyFotiu]

That all sounds great, I'd be more than happy for a core like that. But actually moving all three of Nash, Staal, Girardi, then signing replacements on D, and putting together a decent 4th line is way easier said than done. Especially all in a single offseason.

Lastly, it wouldn't surprise me if 3 of the 4 teams you mention (Arizona, Winnipeg, and Carolina) are all better next year than NYR.

Why would we have to trade all 3 in one offseason. If you are dumping our whole team wont it take you longer than one offseason to get us back to 101 points?

 

[NickyFotiu]

I'd be for it but how are they affording Stamkos when in any trade involving Nash, Staal and Girardi they are going to have to retain salary more then likely.

I find the chances of trading Girardi, even when retaining salary, slim to none.

Also how are they addressing the PMD issue? They aren't getting a Vatanen/Ellis/Barrie/Dumba type for Nash or Staal.

More of the same issues that they currently have. They need to add speed and bottom 6 depth that can skate and PK while not being totally inept in the offensive zone.

They need to restock the farm.

We would prioritize. Stamkos would be our best player so his 9-10 mill comes first. We can go around 7 mill over the cap in the offseason. That could help give us some flexibility to clear some cap room. We could move Nash for some of the cap room needed for Stamkos. We might move Staal as well.

We have depth and even if we did not have depth guys that are not in demand are always around cheap. 26 year old 40-50 goal scorers are much harder to obtain.

We address our issues like professional GMs. We do what we can to improve our team when we are able. We don't throw a tantrum and throw out the baby with the bath water. We look at our assets and liabilities. We try to keep as many assets as possible while moving our liabilities when able. Nobody will admit how they thought SJ needed a complete tear down this time last year. We do need changes. We should look to get younger but we should not sell our own young assets short. When a car blows out 2 old tires they don't dump the engine and the transmission. They get 2 new tires.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

We would prioritize. Stamkos would be our best player so his 9-10 mill comes first. We can go around 7 mill over the cap in the offseason. That could help give us some flexibility to clear some cap room. We could move Nash for some of the cap room needed for Stamkos. We might move Staal as well.

We have depth and even if we did not have depth guys that are not in demand are always around cheap. 26 year old 40-50 goal scorers are much harder to obtain.

We address our issues like professional GMs. We do what we can to improve our team when we are able. We don't throw a tantrum and throw out the baby with the bath water. We look at our assets and liabilities. We try to keep as many assets as possible while moving our liabilities when able. Nobody will admit how they thought SJ needed a complete tear down this time last year. We do need changes. We should look to get younger but we should not sell our own young assets short. When a car blows out 2 old tires they don't dump the engine and the transmission. They get 2 new tires.

While i don't think the trade everyone mentality is correct they are going to have to make a hockey trade involving one or two of the "core pieces" to jump start things.

If the Rangers retain everyone from the core less Nash and Staal the Rangers will not be able to add Stamkos' $10 million cap hit with the cap may be going up a million or two.

If they are able to sign Stamkos, why keep both of Stepan/Brassard? Move one to create some more cap space and address additional holes in the roster/prospect pool.

Have to pay Kreider, Miller and Hayes. McI is an RFA but shouldn't cost that much.

 

[NickyFotiu]

While i don't think the trade everyone mentality is correct they are going to have to make a hockey trade involving one or two of the "core pieces" to jump start things.

If the Rangers retain everyone from the core less Nash and Staal the Rangers will not be able to add Stamkos' $10 million cap hit with the cap may be going up a million or two.

If they are able to sign Stamkos, why keep both of Stepan/Brassard? Move one to create some more cap space and address additional holes in the roster/prospect pool.

Have to pay Kreider, Miller and Hayes. McI is an RFA but shouldn't cost that much.

Nash-8 mill
Staal-5.7 mill
Boyle-4.5 mill

That is a nice start. Would we keep Brass, Step and Stamkos? Maybe or maybe not. One might be moved for a RH Dman.

 

[NickyFotiu]

JT-Stamkos-Brass (90 goals)
Kreider-Step-Zooks (65 goals)
Oscar-Hayes-Buchnevich

McD-TBD
Brady-Klein
TBD-Dylan

 

[BringBackLibertys]

Nash-8 mill
Staal-5.7 mill
Boyle-4.5 mill

That is a nice start. Would we keep Brass, Step and Stamkos? Maybe or maybe not. One might be moved for a RH Dman.

What you didn't mention:

Trade Nash - we will most likely have to hold back 25%
Trade Staal - we will probably have to hold back a full 50%

so really, we are looking at 2m + 2.85m in dead space, which kinda kills grabbing a 10mil a year contract, and signing all our RFAs, AND getting D to cover who is gone, AND signing a 4th line.

 

[NickyFotiu]

What you didn't mention:

Trade Nash - we will most likely have to hold back 25%
Trade Staal - we will probably have to hold back a full 50%

so really, we are looking at 2m + 2.85m in dead space, which kinda kills grabbing a 10mil a year contract, and signing all our RFAs, AND getting D to cover who is gone, AND signing a 4th line.

We should do what we can when we can starting with Stamkos. Staal is worth more than 2.85 mill a season so I will say we retain 35% of his deal. We can always find 4th line players. Finding a guy like Stamkos is much harder. I can live with a swap of Stamkos for Staal, Nash, and Glass. The quickest way to mediocrity would be to have no all star caliber players in our top 6. If we want to play with the big dogs we have to have a big dog of our own.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Nash-8 mill
Staal-5.7 mill
Boyle-4.5 mill

That is a nice start. Would we keep Brass, Step and Stamkos? Maybe or maybe not. One might be moved for a RH Dman.

Rangers will have to retain at least $2.8 on Nash and $1.7 on Staal in order to not have to take back a crappy contract and get a decent return. That's $4.5 in dead space for the next two years.

Then you have:

Stepan ($6.5), Brassard ($5.0), Zucc ($4.5), Glass ($1.45), Fast ($950k), Buch ($950k), Lindberg ($650k), McD ($4.7), Girardi ($5.5), Klein ($2.9), Skjei ($925k), Lundqvist ($8.5) and Raanta ($1.0) for a combined $43.5 million (13 players)

Then to resign the RFAs we are probably looking at Kreider ($4.0 x 4 years), Miller ($4.0 x 4 years), Hayes ($2.0 for 2 years) and McI ($900k for 2 years) for a total of (i rounded up) $11 million.

So that's $54.5 million for 17 players then add in the $4.5 million in dead space from dealing Nash and Staal which brings us to $59 million. Need 5 more players plus operating money.

Lets say the cap goes up to $73 being optimistic. $14 million in cap space. Sign Stamkos for $10 x 7 years. $4 million for 4 more players and need operating cap space of about a million so really $3 million.

Going to be hard to do that. They could probably find a taker in Glass since he has one year left to free up another $1.5 million. Sign Riley Nash with that extra $1.5. Back to $3 million for 3 players. May be Hrivik for the 4th line? He's an RFA as well. He might take less to get a one way contract.

Can it be done without moving Stepan or Brassard? Possibly but it's going to be close.

Kreider - Stamkos - Stepan
Miller - Brassard - Zucc
XXXX - Hayes - Buch
Hrivik - Riley Nash - Fast
Lindberg (starts season on IR)

McD - Klein
Skjei - McI
XXXX - Girardi
XXXX

Lundqvist
Raanta

Problem is that third line player is going to cost a little bit. Also that defensive depth is hurting big time if Skjei and McI can't step up their games. Or sign a second pairing LD which again will cost you.

It so depends on what Nash and Staal being back in their trades.

EDIT: May be the Rangers move Nash With the $2.8 retained to the Preds for Wilson and the #17.

Staal with the $1.7 retained for a couple of seconds. May be to the Avs for 2016 second and 2017 second. Recoup those lost picks from the Eric Staal trade.

Then Stepan to the Wild for Dumba (resigned 5 years $4 million per), Tuch and the #15.

Stepan being traded frees up $6.5 million and under my,above scenario there was $3 million left in cap space. Wilson makes a hair under $4 million. Tuch gets a ELC of $950k. Dumba at $4 million. Total of $9 million.

Kreider - Stamkos - Buch
Miller - Brassard - Zucc
Wilson - Hayes - Tuch
Hrivik - Riley Nash - Fast
Lindberg (IR)

McD - Dumba
Skjei - Klein
XXXX - McI
Girardi

Lundqvist
Raanta

Only $500k (not counting the $1 million cushion i left earlier for operating cash) left for that third pairing LD or or may be McI can switch to the left?

 

[Matz03]

Why would we have to trade all 3 in one offseason. If you are dumping our whole team wont it take you longer than one offseason to get us back to 101 points?

The way your original scenario reads, you're dumping Nash, Staal, and Giradri and getting Stamkos and signing all of the Rfa's. Im saying that would be difficult to achieve this offseason alone. Then you're not addressing the need for D. I'm not sure where I'm dumping the whole team and why 101 points is relevant.

We should do what we can when we can starting with Stamkos. Staal is worth more than 2.85 mill a season so I will say we retain 35% of his deal. We can always find 4th line players. Finding a guy like Stamkos is much harder. I can live with a swap of Stamkos for Staal, Nash, and Glass. The quickest way to mediocrity would be to have no all star caliber players in our top 6. If we want to play with the big dogs we have to have a big dog of our own.

Who becomes the top righty D and who fills the last left D? And more importantly where is the $ for them coming from even with a 4th line filled in later.

 

[NickyFotiu]

The way your original scenario reads, you're dumping Nash, Staal, and Giradri and getting Stamkos and signing all of the Rfa's. Im saying that would be difficult to achieve this offseason alone. Then you're not addressing the need for D. I'm not sure where I'm dumping the whole team and why 101 points is relevant.


Who becomes the top righty D and who fills the last left D? And more importantly where is the $ for them coming from even with a 4th line filled in later.

If you are dumping all the assets ( not just the over 30 guys) that we have invested in that have paid off with 2 conference finals, a cup final, and a 101 point team I would like to know your timetable to get us back to the 101 point mark we were at this season. How many years will it take you?

I worry about my top line before my 4th line. I do what I can but put a priority on the near impossible players to obtain. I can find mediocre players on the cheap every season. Can you find a 26 year old Stamkos as a UFA every season?

 

[Avery16]

Before this spins out into the atmosphere, let me suggest a little something more down to earth (not to say it isn't still ambitious)

Lets try to move Girardi, Staal, Nash, Glass

Lets try to keep our RFAs and Yandle

Lets try to add the RHS PPQB

Lets redevelop our bottom 6 from within

Something like:

Kreider/Stepan/Buchnevich
Miller/Brassard/Zuccarello
Klingberg/Lindberg/Hayes
Fast/Hrivik/Jensen

McDonagh/ RHS PPQB (Shattenkirk/Vatanen/Barrie/etc)
Yandle/Klein
Skjei/McIlrath

Lundqvist
Raanta

IF we can move Nash/Staal/Girardi/Glass (BIG IF) this is very doable.