Brooks Rangers Trade Nils Lundkvist to DAL for 2023 1st (Top-10 Protected), Conditional 4th

[The Dude]

Dallas is going to be around the middle to bottom of the league. Such a weird trade if you're Dallas.

 

They must be really sold on Lundkvists abilities. Is there someone in their scouting or management that was a part of the Rangers  scouting? You're giving up a potential 10th to 15th pick (or better the following year) for a kid that didn't show very much in NA. Are they banking on him being as good as Fox or something? A gamble on fast tracking their partial rebuild, by bringing in a ready to play prospect?

 

Ah well.  Thanks Dallas. 

 

 

[Phil]

3 hours ago, Slobberknocker said:

that post article points out that an injury could leave us skinny on the right hand side but given the current cap situation i guess u can't be deep up and down the lineup.

 

great haul considering.

 

didn't realize this is a continuation of the gomez deal.  hell of a trade tree if it is.

 

It would, but that's true of probably 95% of NHL teams. Very few clubs are so deep that they have NHL-caliber defenders just playing in the AHL hoping for an injury.

[josh]

3 hours ago, Slobberknocker said:

that post article points out that an injury could leave us skinny on the right hand side but given the current cap situation i guess u can't be deep up and down the lineup.

 

great haul considering.

 

didn't realize this is a continuation of the gomez deal.  hell of a trade tree if it is.

Jones and Robertson played both sides during rookie camp. Our boy Hajek played a little on the right side last season. 
and gallant would probably love to put Skinner in, too. Another big boy. 
 

 

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

I think that Drury nailed this trade: Lundqvist(late 1st rounder) for a mid-late 1st rounder(or better) + a 4th rounder.

 

Something to keep in is that Lundqvist is 22 which is the age that most defensemen either stick in the NHL or don't. Sure you get late bloomers sometimes(Dan Girardi & Ryan Graves come to mind), but this is a diminishing asset that Drury got better than cost value on. 

[Phil]

6 minutes ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

I think that Drury nailed this trade: Lundqvist(late 1st rounder) for a mid-late 1st rounder(or better) + a 4th rounder.

 

Something to keep in is that Lundqvist is 22 which is the age that most defensemen either stick in the NHL or don't. Sure you get late bloomers sometimes(Dan Girardi & Ryan Graves come to mind), but this is a diminishing asset that Drury got better than cost value on. 

 

Is this actually true? This feels awfully young to make that kind of determination on. I'd imagine most defensemen don't even make the NHL until 22?

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

7 minutes ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

I think that Drury nailed this trade: Lundqvist(late 1st rounder) for a mid-late 1st rounder(or better) + a 4th rounder.

 

Something to keep in is that Lundqvist is 22 which is the age that most defensemen either stick in the NHL or don't. Sure you get late bloomers sometimes(Dan Girardi & Ryan Graves come to mind), but this is a diminishing asset that Drury got better than cost value on. 

I'm not so sure about that. Many players, especially defenders takes longer to develop. Especially when they've spent a couple season post-draft in EU.

 

To take one random example - Anton Stralman. Drafted in '05, played in Sweden to '07, then had a couple season where he split time between NHL and AHL before being traded to Columbus and sticking in the NHL as a 24/25y old in 09/10. He wasn't a 1st rounder like Nils, but their career paths are very similar.

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Is this actually true? This feels awfully young to make that kind of determination on. I'd imagine most defensemen don't even make the NHL until 22?

Agreed, I'd love to see the data on that, and the segments across Euro -> NA, draft position, etc.

[Phil]

@Puck Head had something on this a while back, because I remember us discussing how defenders, on average, take longer than forwards. But that might have been around hitting prime, not around making the league.

[siddious]

Just now, Phil said:

@Puck Head had something on this a while back, because I remember us discussing how defenders, on average, take longer than forwards. But that might have been around hitting prime, not around making the league.

I vaguely remember him posting something but just from the eye ball test I’d venture to guess it’s both. I think most d make the league at like 22-24 on a steady basis it seems like.

 

it’s easy to be unimpressed with lunkvists performance here but the guy got 3rd paid minutes with nemeth. None of that fits with his game. He was an unfortunate casualty of the “re-tool” there just wasn’t enough room or time to grow him. 
 

I have no doubt the rangers will be drafting in the third round in 2025 if the stars give him a legit shot. 

[Phil]

I mean, on pedigree, Lundkvist will probably be a decent NHL player. To what degree, we'll have to wait and see. Either way, I think the Rangers (and Drury) made out just fine given the circumstances.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

8 minutes ago, siddious said:

I vaguely remember him posting something but just from the eye ball test I’d venture to guess it’s both. I think most d make the league at like 22-24 on a steady basis it seems like.

 

it’s easy to be unimpressed with lunkvists performance here but the guy got 3rd paid minutes with nemeth. None of that fits with his game. He was an unfortunate casualty of the “re-tool” there just wasn’t enough room or time to grow him. 
 

I have no doubt the rangers will be drafting in the third round in 2025 if the stars give him a legit shot. 

I don't even think he was unimpressive. As you said, he was played in a role that didn't suit him at all, but he wasn't brutal or anything. He struggled a bit with the pace and physicality in the beginning, but I think he adapted well to that as well. His underlying numbers was not bad (especially when you consider his partner). even 1g, 4p in 25 games is not that bad for a rookie playing only 3rd pair minute (and a few seconds of PP2 time). 0 penalty minutes and +4 rating is actually pretty impressive when you consider his ice-time and D-partner.

 

If they give him the right D partner and PP time I think Dallas will be very happy with this trade in the end. That doesn't mean we won't be happy as well. This is a win-win.

[BrooksBurner]

24 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Is this actually true? This feels awfully young to make that kind of determination on. I'd imagine most defensemen don't even make the NHL until 22?

I would guess the age to “throw in the towel” is much older for defensemen than it is for forwards, and I don’t think it’s at 22.

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, rmc51 said:

I would guess the age to “throw in the towel” is much older for defensemen than it is for forwards, and I don’t think it’s at 22.

 

I'm just guestimating, but 25, maybe 26, feels right as a general rule of thumb. Most probably come in at 22, so by 25, you'd have a three-year body of work to make a call on ahead of potential free agency.

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

17 hours ago, Phil said:

 

I'm just guestimating, but 25, maybe 26, feels right as a general rule of thumb. Most probably come in at 22, so by 25, you'd have a three-year body of work to make a call on ahead of potential free agency.

I think that you guys are over-stating what I said, and apologies if I was not clear.

 

All that I was stating was that Lundqvist is a diminishing asset. I did not imply anywhere that he was washed up at 22, just that he really needs to stick a role this season; it's just short of make or break especially after forcing a trade out of another organization. 

 

If he hits his projected ceiling as a 2nd pair NHL defenseman with PP QB capabilities, then Dallas got a good(not great) deal on him. If he is still bouncing back and forth between the AHL in March, then I don't think you can say the same thing.

 

Look at Libor Hajek at 24 who has put together an inconsistent and unimpressive 3 year body of work. Does anyone think it's unlikely that he will be playing in Slovakia or the KHL next season?

 

Edited September 22, 2022 by MuddyInTheMiddle

[Pete]

IMO the barometer of this being a good deal for Dallas really has little to do with what Nils does and more to do with full team performance.

 

He could put up 60 points this season, but if Dallas is still terrible then they're going to be sellers at the deadline and likely will be much worse next season. If you are the Stars you probably want that top 10 pick, in that scenario.

 

Even the players you're selling at the deadline are going to be going to play off teams most likely, so those pics are not going to be as good as the one they would have wound up with if they didn't trade it to us for a defenseman that really didn't help the entire team get much better. 

 

Sure, they got a great player, right in the middle of a potential rebuild. I guess it helps that he's only 22, I really think they're going to be no losers in this trade. Everybody's getting something they wanted for something they might not need. 

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

IMO the barometer of this being a good deal for Dallas really has little to do with what Nils does and more to do with full team performance.

 

He could put up 60 points this season, but if Dallas is still terrible then they're going to be sellers at the deadline and likely will be much worse next season. If you are the Stars you probably want that top 10 pick, in that scenario.

 

Even the players you're selling at the deadline are going to be going to play off teams most likely, so those pics are not going to be as good as the one they would have wound up with if they didn't trade it to us for a defenseman that really didn't help the entire team get much better. 

 

Sure, they got a great player, right in the middle of a potential rebuild. I guess it helps that he's only 22, I really think they're going to be no losers in this trade. Everybody's getting something they wanted for something they might not need. 

 

Yeah, this is exactly how I see it, because I also don't see Dallas in a full-scale rebuild. They have so many young guys who are clearly ready to take the reigns. I think they're going to have a pretty seamless transition from the Benn-Seguin-Pavelski-Burns-Bishop era to the Robertson-Hintz-Marchment-Heiskanen-Oettinger one.

 

Whatever Lundkvist turns into, he turns into, but he's stepping into a good situation where even if they're bad off the hop, he'll get decent minutes to find his feet on the fly with much less pressure to perform immediately.

[Pete]

4 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yeah, this is exactly how I see it, because I also don't see Dallas in a full-scale rebuild. They have so many young guys who are clearly ready to take the reigns. I think they're going to have a pretty seamless transition from the Benn-Seguin-Pavelski-Burns-Bishop era to the Robertson-Hintz-Marchment-Heiskanen-Oettinger one.

 

Whatever Lundkvist turns into, he turns into, but he's stepping into a good situation where even if they're bad off the hop, he'll get decent minutes to find his feet on the fly with much less pressure to perform immediately.

Who's Burns? 

[Phil]

11 minutes ago, Pete said:

Who's Burns? 

 

No idea why I included him. I was thinking Klingberg but for some stupid reason included Brent Burns.

[LindG1000]

10 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yeah, this is exactly how I see it, because I also don't see Dallas in a full-scale rebuild. They have so many young guys who are clearly ready to take the reigns. I think they're going to have a pretty seamless transition from the Benn-Seguin-Pavelski-Burns-Bishop era to the Robertson-Hintz-Marchment-Heiskanen-Oettinger one.

 

Whatever Lundkvist turns into, he turns into, but he's stepping into a good situation where even if they're bad off the hop, he'll get decent minutes to find his feet on the fly with much less pressure to perform immediately.

 

This is a trade where there will be no losers, but there's a decent chance of us being the "bigger winner". 

 

I like the Stars youth. I really do not like the Stars age or depth, or their defense beyond Heiskanen. Lindell is decent, but Suter is ancient and the rest is a total wildcard. It isn't hard to envision a scenario where Dallas picks in the high teens and this trade just feels equal or the pick is flipped. It's also not too hard to see a world where Dallas - clearly not a top 3 team in the Central, possibly not even a top 4 team depending on how you rate the Predators - are very much on the outside looking in. Throw in a resurgent Vegas, a reportedly better Vancouver, a far more talented Seattle team, an Anaheim team that when healthy, was leading the Pacific for a good chunk of last season....it's really not hard to see the Stars finishing 12th in the conference with little hope of a quick turnaround.

 

Combine that with a penny-pinching owner and you can see the dominos laid out for the Rangers to pick high in 2024. 

 

 

 

[Phil]

1 minute ago, LindG1000 said:

This is a trade where there will be no losers, but there's a decent chance of us being the "bigger winner". 

 

I like the Stars youth. I really do not like the Stars age or depth, or their defense beyond Heiskanen. Lindell is decent, but Suter is ancient and the rest is a total wildcard. It isn't hard to envision a scenario where Dallas picks in the high teens and this trade just feels equal or the pick is flipped. It's also not too hard to see a world where Dallas - clearly not a top 3 team in the Central, possibly not even a top 4 team depending on how you rate the Predators - are very much on the outside looking in. Throw in a resurgent Vegas, a reportedly better Vancouver, a far more talented Seattle team, an Anaheim team that when healthy, was leading the Pacific for a good chunk of last season....it's really not hard to see the Stars finishing 12th in the conference with little hope of a quick turnaround.

 

Combine that with a penny-pinching owner and you can see the dominos laid out for the Rangers to pick high in 2024.

 

I'm with you, excluding Seattle. They're still a bag of shit.

[LindG1000]

Just now, Phil said:

 

I'm with you, excluding Seattle. They're still a bag of shit.

 

I'll say two things about Seattle and then just agree to disagree.

 

1 - They should be far, far more creative and dangerous offensively with Beniers, Wright, Bjorkstrand, Burakovsky, and a healthy Jaden Schwartz. They literally brought in five top 9 players here that should be marked improvements. 

2 - There is no fucking way they have goaltending as poor as they got last year. Grubauer simply isn't as bad as he showed last year. 

 

Wait and see, but I just don't think Seattle is a 60-70 point team anymore. They'll be in that Vancouver/Dallas/Anaheim area.

[Phil]

K. Agree to disagree. They're trash.

[BrooksBurner]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

No idea why I included him. I was thinking Klingberg but for some stupid reason included Brent Burns.

[Keirik]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

 

No idea why I included him. I was thinking Klingberg but for some stupid reason included Brent Burns.

I mean they look so similar lol 

[Keirik]

2 hours ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I'll say two things about Seattle and then just agree to disagree.

 

1 - They should be far, far more creative and dangerous offensively with Beniers, Wright, Bjorkstrand, Burakovsky, and a healthy Jaden Schwartz. They literally brought in five top 9 players here that should be marked improvements. 

2 - There is no fucking way they have goaltending as poor as they got last year. Grubauer simply isn't as bad as he showed last year. 

 

Wait and see, but I just don't think Seattle is a 60-70 point team anymore. They'll be in that Vancouver/Dallas/Anaheim area.

Matty Beniers is legit too in my mind. Guy is going to have a real nice rookie year. Good late fantasy draft pick for anyone in a league.