Toggle sidebar

News Article: SEA officially open for biz as of yesterday

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
27,673
3,709
Da Big Apple
NYRFANMANI said:
Why Lindgren Bern?! Why!?
Click to expand...

Good Intentions said:
Lindgren? Enjoy your video game sess.
Click to expand...

general principle being the best option
I appreciate all Lindy does for us.

If we have an excess, either we trade the vet who has established value and keep the elc cheap emerging prospect, or vice versa.
Prob there is the prospect is undervalued due to lack of proven NHL viewing, thus, we take a loss if that is the play.

IF we knew we could flip say, Jones + Niils L + Barron + 1st for Zegras, that would be an alternative.

But not only is ANA still likely to keep Z anyway, we don't want to move our guys unless we have signif high expectations they eventually hit.

So, by process of elimination, our best strategy long term is to develop kids, then plug and play.

Unless we relocate Robertson to LW, or offer LW to Lindgren, we can't creatively shuffle the assets. Only way that allows us to keep Robertson + Lindgren is to deal/give new position to KAM ]no!] or deal Jones. Do we want to sell Jones, potentially another Fox, for cheap? no

So we sell high on Lindy exiting elc and bank assets and cap space.
That is least damaging of options --- if we believe Robertson + Jones join KAM as the real deal.
 
Good Intentions

Good Intentions

Registered User
Mar 30, 2018
2,070
1,793
bernmeister said:
general principle being the best option
I appreciate all Lindy does for us.

If we have an excess, either we trade the vet who has established value and keep the elc cheap emerging prospect, or vice versa.
Prob there is the prospect is undervalued due to lack of proven NHL viewing, thus, we take a loss if that is the play.

IF we knew we could flip say, Jones + Niils L + Barron + 1st for Zegras, that would be an alternative.

But not only is ANA still likely to keep Z anyway, we don't want to move our guys unless we have signif high expectations they eventually hit.

So, by process of elimination, our best strategy long term is to develop kids, then plug and play.

Unless we relocate Robertson to LW, or offer LW to Lindgren, we can't creatively shuffle the assets. Only way that allows us to keep Robertson + Lindgren is to deal/give new position to KAM ]no!] or deal Jones. Do we want to sell Jones, potentially another Fox, for cheap? no

So we sell high on Lindy exiting elc and bank assets and cap space.
That is least damaging of options --- if we believe Robertson + Jones join KAM as the real deal.
Click to expand...

Respect the heck out of you and your knowledge, but Lindgren isn’t going anywhere whatsoever. Not even worth bringing up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FoxysExpensiveNYDigs and bernmeister
bbny

bbny

Unregistered User
Apr 12, 2019
2,166
3,540
bernmeister said:
general principle being the best option
I appreciate all Lindy does for us.

If we have an excess, either we trade the vet who has established value and keep the elc cheap emerging prospect, or vice versa.
Prob there is the prospect is undervalued due to lack of proven NHL viewing, thus, we take a loss if that is the play.

IF we knew we could flip say, Jones + Niils L + Barron + 1st for Zegras, that would be an alternative.

But not only is ANA still likely to keep Z anyway, we don't want to move our guys unless we have signif high expectations they eventually hit.

So, by process of elimination, our best strategy long term is to develop kids, then plug and play.

Unless we relocate Robertson to LW, or offer LW to Lindgren, we can't creatively shuffle the assets. Only way that allows us to keep Robertson + Lindgren is to deal/give new position to KAM ]no!] or deal Jones. Do we want to sell Jones, potentially another Fox, for cheap? no

So we sell high on Lindy exiting elc and bank assets and cap space.
That is least damaging of options --- if we believe Robertson + Jones join KAM as the real deal.
Click to expand...

The Rangers need more guys like Lindgren, not fewer. Lindgren, Miller, Jones down the left side sounds good for the next 5-6 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FoxysExpensiveNYDigs, bl02 and Ratelleitlikeitis

Kaapo Hollweg

Registered User
Jun 21, 2019
429
664
bernmeister said:
general principle being the best option
I appreciate all Lindy does for us.

If we have an excess, either we trade the vet who has established value and keep the elc cheap emerging prospect, or vice versa.
Prob there is the prospect is undervalued due to lack of proven NHL viewing, thus, we take a loss if that is the play.

IF we knew we could flip say, Jones + Niils L + Barron + 1st for Zegras, that would be an alternative.

But not only is ANA still likely to keep Z anyway, we don't want to move our guys unless we have signif high expectations they eventually hit.

So, by process of elimination, our best strategy long term is to develop kids, then plug and play.

Unless we relocate Robertson to LW, or offer LW to Lindgren, we can't creatively shuffle the assets. Only way that allows us to keep Robertson + Lindgren is to deal/give new position to KAM ]no!] or deal Jones. Do we want to sell Jones, potentially another Fox, for cheap? no

So we sell high on Lindy exiting elc and bank assets and cap space.
That is least damaging of options --- if we believe Robertson + Jones join KAM as the real deal.
Click to expand...
Lindgren on the left wing ahead of Lafreniere in the line up would be such a Quinn thing to do, though. :sarcasm:
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
27,673
3,709
Da Big Apple
bbny said:
The Rangers need more guys like Lindgren, not fewer. Lindgren, Miller, Jones down the left side sounds good for the next 5-6 years.
Click to expand...

so, you are prepared to lose Robertson and likely not for good value to keep Lindy?

I'm not saying we HAVE TO move him right away, we could hold an extra LD for a yr.
but if we are keeping KAM, one of Lindy/Jones/Robertson has to go.
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
27,673
3,709
Da Big Apple
Kaapo Hollweg said:
Lindgren on the left wing ahead of Lafreniere in the line up would be such a Quinn thing to do, though. :sarcasm:
Click to expand...

who the hell said ahead of LaF!!!!

IF IF IF IF
KAM/Jones/Robertson
and you want Lindy in the lineup and not rotating as 4th reserve LD alternating evenly w/those 3, then the only other place for him in the lineup is 4LW.
 

jay from jersey

Registered User
Jan 30, 2008
5,909
4,111
bernmeister said:
general principle being the best option
I appreciate all Lindy does for us.

If we have an excess, either we trade the vet who has established value and keep the elc cheap emerging prospect, or vice versa.
Prob there is the prospect is undervalued due to lack of proven NHL viewing, thus, we take a loss if that is the play.

IF we knew we could flip say, Jones + Niils L + Barron + 1st for Zegras, that would be an alternative.

But not only is ANA still likely to keep Z anyway, we don't want to move our guys unless we have signif high expectations they eventually hit.

So, by process of elimination, our best strategy long term is to develop kids, then plug and play.

Unless we relocate Robertson to LW, or offer LW to Lindgren, we can't creatively shuffle the assets. Only way that allows us to keep Robertson + Lindgren is to deal/give new position to KAM ]no!] or deal Jones. Do we want to sell Jones, potentially another Fox, for cheap? no

So we sell high on Lindy exiting elc and bank assets and cap space.
That is least damaging of options --- if we believe Robertson + Jones join KAM as the real deal.
Click to expand...
What if dealing lindgren pisses fox off so bad, he doesn’t want to resign long term?
 
eco's bones

eco's bones

Registered User
Jul 21, 2005
26,074
12,409
Elmira NY
Dream trade with Seattle would be sending Kreider there. Right now he’s our worst contract but he could be for them possibly what Neal was for Vegas.

Maybe Barron could replace Chris in the lineup.
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
27,673
3,709
Da Big Apple
jay from jersey said:
What if dealing lindgren pisses fox off so bad, he doesn’t want to resign long term?
Click to expand...

While mathematically possible, that is so unlikely it warrants dismissal.
While I'm sure Fox has bonds w/his teammates, some more than others, and likely his regular partner may be at the top of the list, we all know how much, including from his earliest youth when supposedly he wore Rangers pjs to bed, he loves this team.

I doubt he does not put the team first here, especially since there is reality of hard cap and roster size limit as determining factors. He would be more likely, logic suggests, if a favorite teammate was getting a raw deal and not paid in line w/typical projections.

If he puts the team first, he will certainly recognize there is need for mo toughness. So he will want Robertson, whether that is as an add to Lindgren or as his replacement.

But again, that leaves the ?, what happens to Jones if we keep Lindgren?

We need to play Jones for upwards of a season at min no matter what to establish his NHL value.

And no, I will not follow you and other win now guys gambling on an injury risk, expensive Eichel as return for Jones as a core piece.

Get a 1st for Lindy.
Add 1st for Strome
1st + fore Buch
Bank future picks.
If/when opportunity emerges, you are ready.

Use totality of assets, i.e, youth that can emerge.
Add toughness and better lineup as I've described.

some variation of Buch to CAR for 1st + Drury
Strome for 1st min
if you don't get a better offer

package deal:
Strome to SEA now for 2023 1st [top 10 protected]
Lindy to SEA now for 2024 1st [top 10 protected]
Geo + Hajek + Reunanen + Howden
for
2021 2nd + 2022 3rd + 2023 3rd

... helps SEA now to get going ASAP

helps NY in long run, esp if Kraken are not as successful as LVGK asap


------
finally, I could flip the script and ask what if he likes Jones + Robertson better?
 

jay from jersey

Registered User
Jan 30, 2008
5,909
4,111
Hunter Gathers said:
Oh God.

The idea of trading Lindgren (a guy playing at a near first pairing level) is about as stupid as it gets.
Click to expand...
It’s nice on paper. But the real world implications differ slightly. Everyone marvels about how good Fox is and how amazing it is that he’s doing all of this at 23yrs old. Rightfully so. Fox is amazing. But what they don’t see is how comfortable Fox is with Lindgren and the history they have together since being on team USA. Fox is able to make certain reads and certain plays on the ice because he trusts his partner to cover him when needed, make A slick pass or a hit when needed, basically cover his ass when needed. You don’t throw that kind of chemistry away cause there may be a better choice. I can see if Age was an Issue, Or if it was financially impossible to keep lindgren. But neither are the case
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: eco's bones and Hunter Gathers
Nickmo82

Nickmo82

Registered User
Mar 31, 2012
6,023
4,264
Japan
tumblr_o16n2kBlpX1ta3qyvo1_1280.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: RosensRug and dapowl
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom