[brooks] Behind the Rangers? Complicated Trade Deadline Dilemma

[ThirtyONE]

At some point the turnover needs to stop right? This will be year three of dumping players for non-players. Next season Panarin is 29, Zib is 27 and they'll be even more stripped down than they already are. So, I dunno. It's something to think about.

 

I made my case in the other thread. I don't think Strome and Krieder should go because you can't just keep trading away good players and expect to ever be a good team. Chytil might become a 2nd line center. But that could also be 6 years from now. At some point you have to plant your flag and say, "fuck it, let's go." You sign Strome to something reasonable and you can still trade him when the time comes.

[Phil]

At some point the turnover needs to stop right? This will be year three of dumping players for non-players. Next season Panarin is 29, Zib is 27 and they'll be even more stripped down than they already are. So, I dunno. It's something to think about.

 

I made my case in the other thread. I don't think Strome and Krieder should go because you can't just keep trading away good players and expect to ever be a good team. Chytil might become a 2nd line center. But that could also be 6 years from now. At some point you have to plant your flag and say, "fuck it, let's go." You sign Strome to something reasonable and you can still trade him when the time comes.

 

Yeah, my guess is they keep one of the two and flip the other. Kreider has tremendous value on the open market and could just return if he really wanted to be here (and the price was right).

 

I'd keep Strome, flip Kreider, and try to move Skjei at the Draft to keep DeAngelo, too.

[Pete]

The biggest issue is the cap hit of next season.

 

Basically, the Rangers have 15-17M of cap space (depending on cap increase) to fill 9 roster spots. You can fill in Shestyorkin and Kravtsov plus a further 3 AHL/ELC guys. That's about 5M. Then you have 10-12M to resign or replace deAngelo, Kreider, Strome and Fast, who all hold trade value at the deadline. Therefore at least one of those four guys must be traded - it's as simple as that.

 

You could argue for trading both Kreider and Strome, although I doubt it. The forward rental market seems extremely thin this year, so their values could be high near the deadline.

No... The biggest issue is handing out another 8 year deal to a 29 year old.

 

Next year's cap is manageable.

[RangersIn7]

No... The biggest issue is handing out another 8 year deal to a 29 year old.

 

Next year's cap is manageable.

 

Any more than 5 years would be too big of a commitment

He wants to take that, then fine. Keep him

 

If not he can be dealt and go to market

Someone will give him 7 years and 40-50

[ThirtyONE]

Yeah, my guess is they keep one of the two and flip the other. Kreider has tremendous value on the open market and could just return if he really wanted to be here (and the price was right).

 

I'd keep Strome, flip Kreider, and try to move Skjei at the Draft to keep DeAngelo, too.

 

This is the best idea I've heard all year. I am so low on Skjei. Not only is he not worth his contract, I don't think he's a top 4 d man on this team after this year.

[Phil]

This is the best idea I've heard all year. I am so low on Skjei. Not only is he not worth his contract, I don't think he's a top 4 d man on this team after this year.

 

I think Skjei is a middle-pairing D on most NHL squads. I doubt they'll have trouble finding a market for him. Especially at the Draft.

[Sod16]

If you are inclined to continue trading established players at the deadline, please repeat "a late 1st round pick has a 25% chance of becoming a decent NHL player" until you get over it.

[RangersIn7]

If you are inclined to continue trading established players at the deadline, please repeat "a late 1st round pick has a 25% chance of becoming a decent NHL player" until you get over it.

 

If you pick the right player though...

 

But your point is valid

 

What I mean though is if you like the class and you trust your scouting, those odds improve

[Phil]

If you are inclined to continue trading established players at the deadline, please repeat "a late 1st round pick has a 25% chance of becoming a decent NHL player" until you get over it.

 

Which is why the suggestion of dumping everyone is a bad one. Moving the guys you don't think you can sign, or whose contract demands you fear, isn't trading players for the sake of a lottery ticket. It's getting something for what will ultimately be nothing for you.

[Pete]

Which is why the suggestion of dumping everyone is a bad one. Moving the guys you don't think you can sign, or whose contract demands you fear, isn't trading players for the sake of a lottery ticket. It's getting something for what will ultimately be nothing for you.

But trading Skjei because you think Miller will be exponentially better might just not be correct.

[Phil]

But trading Skjei because you think Miller will be exponentially better might just not be correct.

 

It's not just Miller. Rykov is playing very well in the A right now. Matthew Robertson is also LD. There's probably enough there there to consider it, and if need be, you can probably deal him in a trade in which you get an LD back, just for less money. Jonas Brodin, for example, wouldn't save them a ton (a million and change), but has just one year left.

 

You might be able to move DeAngelo to the left, too.

[Pete]

It's not just Miller. Rykov is playing very well in the A right now. Matthew Robertson is also LD. There's probably enough there there to consider it, and if need be, you can probably deal him in a trade in which you get an LD back, just for less money. Jonas Brodin, for example, wouldn't save them a ton (a million and change), but has just one year left.

 

You might be able to move DeAngelo to the left, too.

But it's all the same boat. And you have to wait 4 more years for them to get to where Skjei is now.

 

I guess my point is we're at the point in the rebuild where you can't move guys unless you know you're getting the same thing out of the next man up.

[Phil]

Sure you can. It's a risk, but the Rangers clearly didn't know they were getting the same thing out of Chytil and Andersson but still moved Hayes because they were rebuilding. They're technically still rebuilding.

[Pete]

Sure you can. It's a risk, but the Rangers clearly didn't know they were getting the same thing out of Chytil and Andersson but still moved Hayes because they were rebuilding. They're technically still rebuilding.

That was the last year. This is this year. This is Trouba and Panarin time. It's not the same.

[Phil]

That was the last year. This is this year. This is Trouba and Panarin time. It's not the same.

 

Of course not. They've advanced some, but if they miss the playoffs again, they're clearly still rebuilding, even if they're closer than they were then. You can still do something like this under the protective umbrella of "rebuild" for probably one more off season.

[Keirik]

I say you at least approach Kreider sooner rather than later and see if he’s willing to give a discount to stay for 3-4 years for around 6m per. Try and trade Skjei at some point which is very doable considering his age and relatively reasonable cap.

[LindG1000]

Of course not. They've advanced some, but if they miss the playoffs again, they're clearly still rebuilding, even if they're closer than they were then. You can still do something like this under the protective umbrella of "rebuild" for probably one more off season.

 

I think you're looking more at the "hockey trade" than the "picks and prospects" deal with our expiring guys. I'd rather see Kreider bring us Alex Newhook or Martin Kaut than the Avs 1st and some prospect. Sure, we can do what we did with Trouba and parlay the pick for a player, too.

 

Quantities that are further along in their development are like to be the talk of the TDL if we go full seller.

[Phil]

Sure, I agree completely. It's why I suggested you could even take back an NHL player in a Skjei deal if you're moving him to get out from the deal and to free up cash. Brodin, for example.

[RangersIn7]

Sure, I agree completely. It's why I suggested you could even take back an NHL player in a Skjei deal if you're moving him to get out from the deal and to free up cash. Brodin, for example.

 

Even if we’re only in year 3 of a 4-5 year rebuild, which we probably are, it’s late enough in the game to do a hockey trade.

[Phil]

I'm not suggesting dumping him for a bunch of picks.

[Keirik]

I'm not suggesting dumping him for a bunch of picks.

 

If you mean for Skjei I’d dump him for anything that doesn’t involve a contract back. I figure either Staal and or Smith are in their last year as well with buyout or bury if possible and we are pretty deep defensively. I’d rather retain a guy like Kreider if for fairly reasonable and 5 years or less if possible. Keep some of these pieces we have with Strome, Lemieux, and ADA. At some point we do have to decide if we currently have pieces for the rebuild mostly in place and let experience and talent take over hoping that 20/21 is the year we really show to be a cup contender. Hanks last year, still have Panarin mostly in his prime, Ziby as well, Fox flourishing, et al. At some point we have to have some foundation with some previously experienced players still remaining.

 

The one thing I keep hesitating on getting rid of Kreider is his playoff experience and ability to turn up for big games here and there. I think he would be pretty vital to another cup run.

[josh]

So...29 year old, 1 dimensional LW who offers nothing when not scoring and doesn't score enough to warrant the disappearance...who you are probably paying close to $7 until around 35

 

vs

 

27 year old forward who can play all 3 positions on any line in your lineup in any situation...who you are probably paying ~$5 until around 32

 

One you lose to UFA this year and one you have control as an RFA...Both are like 50 point players in a vacuum...

 

This is a no brainer in favor Strome, in my eyes.

 

I mean, to compare the careers of Kreider vs Strome, yeah, I?d pay the extra 1m for a known commodity, if i had to pick one. There?s really no comparison between the two. At all.

[josh]

So what's your salary guess here? Strome 5.5-6M vs Kreider 6.5-7M? I don't think Strome has that much leverage as an RFA. If he stuck to that much, I have a feeling the Rangers would just take him to arbitration, probably get him for 4-4.5M, and make him have another good season next year.

 

Arbitration might be a decent option with Strome. Again, I don?t see him taking any huge discount after his only productive season. Why should he?

 

Does anyone really see him taking a worse deal than what Namestnikov or Spooner got? Guys like this are getting $5.5x6... and it ends up fucking them all.

 

5mx2y, or trade him

[Pete]

I mean, to compare the careers of Kreider vs Strome, yeah, I?d pay the extra 1m for a known commodity, if i had to pick one. There?s really no comparison between the two. At all.

Agree. Kreider is an easy dump. Strome needs more thinking through and handling.

[BrooksBurner]

Arbitration might be a decent option with Strome. Again, I don?t see him taking any huge discount after his only productive season. Why should he?

 

Does anyone really see him taking a worse deal than what Namestnikov or Spooner got? Guys like this are getting $5.5x6... and it ends up fucking them all.

 

5mx2y, or trade him

 

I'm good with a 2 yr deal honestly. Not sure Strome sells a year of UFA to do that though. It would be excellent for the Rangers because they would know a lot more about their young players after another 2 seasons. They would also know a lot more about Strome. Certainly don't want to pay 5+M long term for a 35-40 point player if he regresses back to his previous career averages.