Brooks Lundkvist 'Blue Chip Most Likely to Be Played' at Deadline?

[Albatrosss]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

 

No one is suggesting they gut the farm. What's being backed here is strategically dealing from organizational depth.

That plan is going to “gut the farm”. What will it take to trade for 2 pieces?  At least 2 picks, couple of prospects and a roster player. Thats 5 assets for a 2 month rentals. And we don’t even know which prospects and roster players are going the other way. 

[Phil]

  

1 minute ago, CCCP said:

That plan is going to “gut the farm”. What will it take to trade for 2 pieces?  At least 2 picks, couple of prospects and a roster player. Thats 5 assets for a 2 month rentals. And we don’t even know which prospects and roster players are going the other way. 

 

You just listed four prospects you label as highly-talented. We're suggesting trading one, and you're telling me that's "gutting?" What would trading two of them be, the end of the world?

[Albatrosss]

5 minutes ago, Phil said:

  

 

You just listed four prospects you label as highly-talented. We're suggesting trading one, and you're telling me that's "gutting?" What would trading two of them be, the end of the world?

1 prospect will not get you 2 rentals in return. Lets be realistic. At minimum it will take 1 prospect and a pick for a rental. I dont want to lose Othmann or Cuyle yet, and i dont want to trade Jones and Lundkvist for a rental.  

[Phil]

Not all prospects are "highly-talented." You're conflating quantity and quality.

[LindG1000]

6 minutes ago, CCCP said:

That plan is going to “gut the farm”. What will it take to trade for 2 pieces?  At least 2 picks, couple of prospects and a roster player. Thats 5 assets for a 2 month rentals. And we don’t even know which prospects and roster players are going the other way. 

 

Not necessarily rentals. In the case of a guy like Lehkonen, for example, he's an RFA and likely not due a significant deal. Or a guy like Chychrun, who would be under contract for a while - just examples. 

 

Also, not necessarily "gut the farm". Gut the farm, to me, means to move two or more critical future assets - of which we probably have exactly one (Othmann). As of right now, there are three assets in the entire system who MIGHT be critical that aren't on the Rangers already - Othmann, Jones, Berard. if you consider Jones part of the puzzle already, add Cuylle simply because he's a unique skillset. The "farm" is either already with the Rangers or has drastically changed from the math we were doing around guys like Kravtsov and Lundkvist, so we circle back to the original point - nothing here is gutting the farm.

[LindG1000]

4 minutes ago, CCCP said:

1 prospect will not get you 2 rentals in return. Lets be realistic. At minimum it will take 1 prospect and a pick for a rental. I dont want to lose Othmann or Cuyle yet, and i dont want to trade Jones and Lundkvist for a rental.  

I don't think Lundkvist or Jones is on the table for a rental, and I don't think Othmann is on the table at all. I think that's your Kravtsov/Robertson and a pick deal.

[Ozzy]

23 minutes ago, G1000 said:

Man, it's fair. If you asked us in October what the goal was, it's "make playoffs, take step". We're one of the top 5 teams in the NHL so far. We have a few statement wins and a few games that exposed us. We have the most advantageous cap situation we're ever going to have. Half the value in a rebuild is to have this exact conversation at some point - who fits, who doesn't, who do we need to trade to get the pieces for this team to win a Cup? 

 

Go for it. The worst that happens is, what? We lose a guy like Kravtsov who would never play for us anyway? Or a Lundkvist, who is clearly blocked from being impactful on our roster? Or Robertson, same? Or even if it costs us a Chytil - are we really that mad?

 

15 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

No one is suggesting they gut the farm. What's being backed here is strategically dealing from organizational depth.

 

I'll buy that, fellas.   And what's more is I think you guys are right.  @Pete made a good point too, stating that you can't horde all these guys either.  They can't play in the AHL while the main team could be filling holes and making a run at a Cup.

 

I guess it's sufficient to say that the window is now open for us, and it will be for a while.  The defense is set for a long time right now, and I think dealing from our dtrength to take a shot at it now couldn't hurt...even give these kids some experience of their own!!  Valuable shit!!!

 

The upside certainly seems to outweigh the downside by a huge margin when you look at it like G man said.

 

 

 

[Ozzy]

1 minute ago, G1000 said:

I don't think Lundkvist or Jones is on the table for a rental, and I don't think Othmann is on the table at all. I think that's your Kravtsov/Robertson and a pick deal.

 

We also have two #2's in our pocket, heading into this year's draft!

[Sharpshooter]

The Rangers just need to bolster the bottom six and they're pretty much set for the most part. Their top six isn't going anywhere, and they're set on defense and goaltending. It took three years or so to get this point, they have the pieces, make it happen.

[LindG1000]

2 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

 

We also have two #2's in our pocket, heading into this year's draft!

For now. I think both of those are prime assets to move, but I have to imagine that Drury will hold at least one top-64 pick.

[Phil]

17 minutes ago, G1000 said:

For now. I think both of those are prime assets to move, but I have to imagine that Drury will hold at least one top-64 pick.

 

Agreed. I think their first and one of the two seconds is on the table. Not both.

[Phil]

 Brooks, from his usual spot on Duguay's Up in the Blue Seats podcast:

 

Quote

"Braden Schneider has won the job. How many games has he played, seven, eight? He looks like he's played for five years. He's polished. He's poised. He can play in the offensive zone. He's stiff in the defensive zone. I just don't see [him] coming out. He is their third pair right defenseman."

 

This was in direct succession to his suggestion that Lundkvist is the blue chip trade piece the team is likely to move.

[Long live the King]

1 hour ago, G1000 said:

Define rental, too. 

 

I know I've shat on this idea in the past, however I can't help but wonder. If you pick up a guy like Pavelski, or Giroux, or really any of these OGWACs we're thinking are strong mid-six fits who have made something like $65-75M in their careers and the last thing they need is the cup - is there a better place to sign going into next season than us? Vezina caliber goalie, Norris winning defender, two of the top goalscorers in the NHL, three of the top 15 point-getters in the NHL - the pieces are there for a really convincing argument that you come to NY for a great chance at a cup. 

 

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

1 hour ago, G1000 said:

And honestly what the fuck is it really going to cost us to bring in, say, Lehkonen, Pavelski or Gingeroux, and lets say for fun, 3 months of Hampus Lindholm? 

 

1st, 3rd, Lundkvist, Kravtsov, Robertson? Maybe one more piece?

 

1 hour ago, G1000 said:

Go for it. The worst that happens is, what? We lose a guy like Kravtsov who would never play for us anyway? Or a Lundkvist, who is clearly blocked from being impactful on our roster? Or Robertson, same? Or even if it costs us a Chytil - are we really that mad?

The worst (and most likely) to happen is we're sitting in july at draft day and we're now short a 1st and a 2nd and we have 1 pick in the top 60. We've also lost 3 of our best prospects that's outside of the NHL right now, just to lose in 7 games instead of 5 in the 1st round.

 

We're basically using all our chips on this one run (in this scenario you laid out). We've only got Othman, Cuylle and Jones left of players that could help this team on an ELC contract and we've also got rid of our best trade assets for when this team is in the best possible situation to win (which is a year or two down the road, with more experience).

 

I'm all for "going for it", but why the overkill? A 1st and Kravtsov for a good rental (RW or C) and a 3rd rounder for a depth D should be enough.

[Ozzy]

49 minutes ago, Phil said:

 Brooks, from his usual spot on Duguay's Up in the Blue Seats podcast:

 

 

This was in direct succession to his suggestion that Lundkvist is the blue chip trade piece the team is likely to move.

 

I love Schneider!!  I feel very comfortable & confident when he's on the ice!!!

[Scott]

40 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

 

The worst (and most likely) to happen is we're sitting in july at draft day and we're now short a 1st and a 2nd and we have 1 pick in the top 60. We've also lost 3 of our best prospects that's outside of the NHL right now, just to lose in 7 games instead of 5 in the 1st round.

 

We're basically using all our chips on this one run (in this scenario you laid out). We've only got Othman, Cuylle and Jones left of players that could help this team on an ELC contract and we've also got rid of our best trade assets for when this team is in the best possible situation to win (which is a year or two down the road, with more experience).

 

I'm all for "going for it", but why the overkill? A 1st and Kravtsov for a good rental (RW or C) and a 3rd rounder for a depth D should be enough.

fair points.

 

I don't see anybody (say guys like Giroux/Pavelski) taking pennies on the dollar next year to sign here so I wouldn't overpay there thinking there's a realistic shot they might.  Maybe a 75 year old Thornton type but not the others, hell Giroux may not even want out of Philly.

 

Will be interesting to see what Drury does for sure.

[LindG1000]

58 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

 

The worst (and most likely) to happen is we're sitting in july at draft day and we're now short a 1st and a 2nd and we have 1 pick in the top 60. We've also lost 3 of our best prospects that's outside of the NHL right now, just to lose in 7 games instead of 5 in the 1st round.

 

We're basically using all our chips on this one run (in this scenario you laid out). We've only got Othman, Cuylle and Jones left of players that could help this team on an ELC contract and we've also got rid of our best trade assets for when this team is in the best possible situation to win (which is a year or two down the road, with more experience).

 

I'm all for "going for it", but why the overkill? A 1st and Kravtsov for a good rental (RW or C) and a 3rd rounder for a depth D should be enough.

 

Time changes these things too. Values fluctuate, players come in and out - college signings, undrafteds/overseas additions, draft picks, free agency, etc. Doubly so when we're talking about a guy like Kravtsov or Lundkvist, who still have that 1st round pick sheen on them in spite of the reality of their situations in NY.

 

It's not overkill to talk about dealing two prospects who have clearly been passed up on the depth chart and a pair of picks to take a legit shot at it. It'll feel shitty if those players aren't enough to overcome Pittsburgh - but that's an issue you deal with later on.

[RJWantsTheCup]

I keep thinking Lundkvist, Chytil and Kravtsov could all be packaged in some trade with Montreal since Gorton drafted them all.  

[RichieNextel305]

This was always going to be the case with one of our defensive prospects. We simply had too many, which is fine. But at some point, one was going to be used as bait to fill holes on the roster.

[LindG1000]

25 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

I keep thinking Lundkvist, Chytil and Kravtsov could all be packaged in some trade with Montreal since Gorton drafted them all.  

 

Sure, but name two or three players off Montreal you want right now that they'll actually trade. 

[RichieNextel305]

There are a lot of avenues Drury can investigate here too. There is no shortage of names that are/can be available over the next little bit. You can go big and swing for the fences (Giroux? Hell, it was talked about sparringly for a minute a few months back, but Patrick Kane? That would take some work) or you can look for modest ways to shore up the Top-9 and blue line. 

[Phil]

37 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

There are a lot of avenues Drury can investigate here too. There is no shortage of names that are/can be available over the next little bit. You can go big and swing for the fences (Giroux? Hell, it was talked about sparringly for a minute a few months back, but Patrick Kane? That would take some work) or you can look for modest ways to shore up the Top-9 and blue line. 

 

It's all price-dependent, I'd think. First shot should surely be to swing for the fences given all the cap room and the small trove of defensive prospects they can deal. But if the asking price for all the big guys is backbreaking, and/or they don't end up available for whatever the reason, I'm not opposed to just adding depth everywhere.

 

Adding, say, Lehkonen, Chris Tierney, and a good, veteran depth defender would at least allow them to build an identity third line. It would put a ton of pressure on Lafreniere and Kakko to produce in the top-six, but it gives you a reliable third line with Lehkonen, Tierney, and Goodrow (in whatever formation).

[LindG1000]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

It's all price-dependent, I'd think. First shot should surely be to swing for the fences given all the cap room and the small trove of defensive prospects they can deal. But if the asking price for all the big guys is backbreaking, and/or they don't end up available for whatever the reason, I'm not opposed to just adding depth everywhere.

 

Adding, say, Lehkonen, Chris Tierney, and a good, veteran depth defender would at least allow them to build an identity third line. It would put a ton of pressure on Lafreniere and Kakko to produce in the top-six, but it gives you a reliable third line with Lehkonen, Tierney, and Goodrow (in whatever formation).

That third line would be absolutely terrifying to play against. 

[Albatrosss]

3 hours ago, G1000 said:

 

Not necessarily rentals. In the case of a guy like Lehkonen, for example, he's an RFA and likely not due a significant deal. Or a guy like Chychrun, who would be under contract for a while - just examples. 

 

Also, not necessarily "gut the farm". Gut the farm, to me, means to move two or more critical future assets - of which we probably have exactly one (Othmann). As of right now, there are three assets in the entire system who MIGHT be critical that aren't on the Rangers already - Othmann, Jones, Berard. if you consider Jones part of the puzzle already, add Cuylle simply because he's a unique skillset. The "farm" is either already with the Rangers or has drastically changed from the math we were doing around guys like Kravtsov and Lundkvist, so we circle back to the original point - nothing here is gutting the farm.

which is fine.  like i said (if anyone was reading what im saying) is that i want them traded for someone who's going to stick around and not walk in July.  Othmann, Jones, Lundkvist, Cuyle are blue chip prospects, it would be incredibly short-sighted to lose them for rentals this year

[Albatrosss]

3 hours ago, G1000 said:

I don't think Lundkvist or Jones is on the table for a rental, and I don't think Othmann is on the table at all. I think that's your Kravtsov/Robertson and a pick deal.

hopefully so but there's talk of adding more than one player