Brooks Rangers' Core Has Run Its Course as Tough Jacob Trouba, Chris Kreider, Mika Zibanejad Decisions Loom

[Valriera]

Lafreniere is ready and waiting to replace powerplay goals and he literally cannot do anything more to prove that to be true. I'd replace Mika with him on PP1 first, but Kreider is someone who will fetch a very strong return still and Drury should be looking to sell high here. It will not get better. 

 

 

[BrooksBurner]

2 minutes ago, Valriera said:

Lafreniere is ready and waiting to replace powerplay goals and he literally cannot do anything more to prove that to be true. I'd replace Mika with him on PP1 first, but Kreider is someone who will fetch a very strong return still and Drury should be looking to sell high here. It will not get better. 

 

 

 

If Kreider is traded, PP1 should be:

 

Trocheck (net front)

Panarin (left boards, Zib's current spot)

Zibanejad (bumper, Tro's current spot)

Lafreniere (right boards, Panarin's current spot)

Fox

[Pete]

27 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Yup. You don't have to convince me of any of that, that's for sure. You know I'm probably Kreider's biggest stan on the board other than you. A Kreider trade inevitably makes the team worse on paper temporarily. There's just no getting around that. You just can't replace 35-40 goals with $6.5 million.

 

The risk of it blowing up in your face means what though? Becoming a bubble team for a season rather than challenging for the division? The end result is likely the same: falling flat in the playoffs again. The problems just won't be fixed in a single summer. This is just how you start. It's a totally different story if Kreider were 27 with many years left to give. He's 33. The decline is coming. Get out in front of it, and deal with the consequences of what happens as a result in the immediate. It's the Brassard and Stepan trades on steroids.

Agree with a lot of this but also what nobody is really talking about is that Kreider goal scoring exploded by playing with and on the backs of all the guys people are saying need to go...Mika, Bread, some say Fox... So why keep him when there's a good chance he reverts back to 25 goal 45 point guy instead of trading him as a 45 goal scorer? 

 

It makes all the sense in the world that he would be the first to go because there are left wings coming to fill that spot. 

 

Again, I'm only interested in making trades that are going to make the team better in the short term or the long term. I'm not interested in getting guys off the roster just for the sake of getting them off the roster. So far nobody has explained to me who the centers on this team are going to be once we trade Mika for a couple of undershirts and some visors, and Goodrow, and Chytil unlikely to withstand the blast of a strong fart. 

 

 

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

I am of the school that when you get this close, you don't blow-up the team. That day is certainly coming, but right now they really need to be focused on closing the gap.

 

Like everyone else, I saw the issues that prevented them from advancing past Florida, but I think you try to address  the deficiencies that prevented us from competing with the Panthers, and then when Igor's contract expires you decide which direction to go in when some of the big contracts are more movable.

 

Right now I would see how you can move out Trouba and maybe Kaako and/or Chytil's contracts, and figure out what you need to do to backfill with players who are built for the postseason.   

[Phil]

43 minutes ago, Pete said:

I think people are so blinded by their anger that they don't realize that no matter who you trade besides Trouba, the team will be worse next year.

 

If you want to trade Mika, Panarin, etc. then you are likely to be retaining salary or taking a bad contract back and either way you are unlikely to get a player of equal caliber back (despite whatever thinks about Mika, the fact of the matter is he's a valuable player).

 

I agree. Teams who deal stars rarely, if ever, "win" the trade. They almost always lose the interim because they give up the best player in the deal by default. They sometimes win in the long-run, though. The Rangers kinda/sorta did when they traded Gaborik, for example, because the Brassard, Dorsett return ended up getting them to the Conference Final.

 

Quote

I don't care if Kreider scores goals LOL. That's exactly why you trade him. 

 

The postseason banter is like the usual shit but on steroids... I'm not interested in making this team worse in the short term and the long term. I'm fine with short-term pain for long-term gain but I'm not treating guys just to trade them and getting a bag of shit back plus having to retain salary.

 

You should care. For the same reason you care about Panarin and Zibaneajd's points (and goals). If you gut one of these players out of anger, like you said, and you fail to properly recoup the offensive loss, you jeopardize the team's ability to even make the playoffs again, let alone win in them. It's a tight rope.

 

Quote

Then you have a guy who will get you back the best possible package without trying to retain and you don't want to trade him? Then you're not really serious about changing anything. You're just serious about getting rid of certain players who you have a personal peeve with and not actually thinking logically about what can help the team the most.

 

Again, addition by subtraction is not a thing. I'm not interested in Zib or Panarin for Hurberdeau because "addition by subtraction".

 

So if anybody here is claiming that this team needs a full-on remake, but they're not interested in trading Kreider, then they can't be taken seriously as anything other than a whining fan. 

 

No one is suggesting a lateral move. If they were, all the calls would be for Panarin/Marner swap. I also don't think anyone is calling for a "full on re-make." Everything I've seen, here at least, has been about either fiddling around the margins (which is what they'll probably do), or breaking up the core, which isn't the same thing as tearing this down to the studs. Moving one of Kreider, Trouba, or Zibanejad all means the same thing — it's a massive shot across the bow to the leadership group that what's happened thus far isn't good enough. Who those players get moved for can either inspire or not, but the move itself would likely be more in the vein of Huberdeau-for-Tkachuk. Style A out for Style B in.

[Phil]

57 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Yup. You don't have to convince me of any of that, that's for sure. You know I'm probably Kreider's biggest stan on the board other than you. A Kreider trade inevitably makes the team worse on paper temporarily. There's just no getting around that. You just can't replace 35-40 goals with $6.5 million.

 

The risk of it blowing up in your face means what though? Becoming a bubble team for a season rather than challenging for the division? The end result is likely the same: falling flat in the playoffs again. The problems just won't be fixed in a single summer. This is just how you start. It's a totally different story if Kreider were 27 with many years left to give. He's 33. The decline is coming. Get out in front of it, and deal with the consequences of what happens as a result in the immediate. It's the Brassard and Stepan trades on steroids.

 

Yes. Or even missing the playoffs entirely. The Rangers aren't a good 5v5 team. They're painfully average, or below average, depending on the week. They dine out on an elite PP, which is Kreider's wheelhouse. You cut those goals out and I'm not sure what happens, but I know games instantly get much tighter and harder to win. How many of his goals translate to wins? I don't know, exactly, but I know that if you cut him out, there's a significant risk it could backfire.

 

And I haven't even gotten to the playoffs itself yet. He's the franchise leader in goals there. No one has more in series-clinching games, either. He's the best player to trade from a pure value perspective, but the worst from the perspective of who's game translates to post season success.

 

It's an incredibly risky approach.

[BrooksBurner]

21 minutes ago, Pete said:

Agree with a lot of this but also what nobody is really talking about is that Kreider goal scoring exploded by playing with and on the backs of all the guys people are saying need to go...Mika, Bread, some say Fox... So why keep him when there's a good chance he reverts back to 25 goal 45 point guy instead of trading him as a 45 goal scorer? 

 

It makes all the sense in the world that he would be the first to go because there are left wings coming to fill that spot. 

 

Again, I'm only interested in making trades that are going to make the team better in the short term or the long term. I'm not interested in getting guys off the roster just for the sake of getting them off the roster. So far nobody has explained to me who the centers on this team are going to be once we trade Mika for a couple of undershirts and some visors, and Goodrow, and Chytil unlikely to withstand the blast of a strong fart. 

 

 

 

The UFA centers suck, so it would have to be via trade. It's very much like trading Kreider. They won't get better immediately from doing it, but they might be better off for it in 2 years.

[Phil]

38 minutes ago, Pete said:

Agree with a lot of this but also what nobody is really talking about is that Kreider goal scoring exploded by playing with and on the backs of all the guys people are saying need to go...Mika, Bread, some say Fox... So why keep him when there's a good chance he reverts back to 25 goal 45 point guy instead of trading him as a 45 goal scorer? 

 

It makes all the sense in the world that he would be the first to go because there are left wings coming to fill that spot. 

 

Again, I'm only interested in making trades that are going to make the team better in the short term or the long term. I'm not interested in getting guys off the roster just for the sake of getting them off the roster. So far nobody has explained to me who the centers on this team are going to be once we trade Mika for a couple of undershirts and some visors, and Goodrow, and Chytil unlikely to withstand the blast of a strong fart.

 

Who you don't believe are ready for the NHL, let alone the role of top PP goal scorer and leading playoffs goal scorer.

 

Any Kreider trade, by it's nature, requires a suitable NHL-caliber replacement coming back in the deal. This has to be player-for-player, not for cap relief or futures. I know you say you are comfortable short-term or long-term, but you really should be heavily focused on short-term. The window for this team to win is now. They have two years. Then the whole dynamic changes/shifts. Maybe there's a second window led by Laf/Fox/Miller/Shesterkin? but it comes at a significant new cost. They're all gonna be on big ticket deals.

 

We're not explaining who replaces Zib, but you're not explaining who replaces Kreider. Othmann? Who you think still needs AHL time? Berard? Who you think is disadvantaged by his size? Perreault, who is still a college player?

 

There's exactly one core player who it's "natural" to replace, and that's Trouba. Because Schneider's proven it. Everyone else requires an NHL-certified replacement.

[BrooksBurner]

10 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yes. Or even missing the playoffs entirely. The Rangers aren't a good 5v5 team. They're painfully average, or below average, depending on the week. They dine out on an elite PP, which is Kreider's wheelhouse. You cut those goals out and I'm not sure what happens, but I know games instantly get much tighter and harder to win. How many of his goals translate to wins? I don't know, exactly, but I know that if you cut him out, there's a significant risk it could backfire.

 

And I haven't even gotten to the playoffs itself yet. He's the franchise leader in goals there. No one has more in series-clinching games, either. He's the best player to trade from a pure value perspective, but the worst from the perspective of who's game translates to post season success.

 

It's an incredibly risky approach.

 

I get and agree with all of that. He's still 33. All of these concerns are about to be forced by age anyway. I don't mean to insinuate that he'll magically be useless, but that 35-40 goals starts to become 25 goals.

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

I get and agree with all of that. He's still 33. All of these concerns are about to be forced by age anyway. I don't mean to insinuate that he'll magically be useless, but that 35-40 goals starts to become 25 goals.

 

For a player who scores the overwhelming majority of his goals by being stationary? I beg to differ. And even at 25 goals, he's worth it. Andreychuk scored 21 goals in his final NHL season at the age of 40.

 

Kreider has always been healthy. That's the key. Not his age. He'll age gracefully IMO provided he remains healthy unlike another peer like Ryan Smyth.

[Pete]

25 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Who you don't believe are ready for the NHL, let alone the role of top PP goal scorer and leading playoffs goal scorer.

 

Any Kreider trade, by it's nature, requires a suitable NHL-caliber replacement coming back in the deal. This has to be player-for-player, not for cap relief or futures. I know you say you are comfortable short-term or long-term, but you really should be heavily focused on short-term. The window for this team to win is now. They have two years. Then the whole dynamic changes/shifts. Maybe there's a second window led by Laf/Fox/Miller/Shesterkin? but it comes at a significant new cost. They're all gonna be on big ticket deals.

 

We're not explaining who replaces Zib, but you're not explaining who replaces Kreider. Othmann? Who you think still needs AHL time? Berard? Who you think is disadvantaged by his size? Perreault, who is still a college player?

 

There's exactly one core player who it's "natural" to replace, and that's Trouba. Because Schneider's proven it. Everyone else requires an NHL-certified replacement.

This is my point. He is the only player who is going to come close to getting you that with no retention. You're not getting an NHL caliber 1C2/C back for Mika without retention. Same for Panarin.

 

That's why it just makes sense to trade him. He's their most valuable asset.

[Pete]

42 minutes ago, Phil said:

You should care. For the same reason you care about Panarin and Zibaneajd's points (and goals). If you gut one of these players out of anger, like you said, and you fail to properly recoup the offensive loss, you jeopardize the team's ability to even make the playoffs again, let alone win in them. It's a tight rope.

I don't care how many goals CK scores because if you trade him it's because you have decided not to add on the margins. He's the most valuable chip.

 

Trading Mika and Panarin means retention and you're getting much, much worse in the near term. Trading Kreider, you can probably get back a nice young piece + futures, and between that player + Laf getting better, you're can try to get close to what Krieder gave you.

 

[Phil]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

I don't care how many goals CK scores because if you trade him it's because you have decided not to add on the margins. He's the most valuable chip.

 

Trading Mika and Panarin means retention and you're getting much, much worse in the near term. Trading Kreider, you can probably get back a nice young piece + futures, and between that player + Laf getting better, you're can try to get close to what Krieder gave you.

 

It's possible, yeah. Would definitely mean Lafreniere to PP1.

[RJWantsTheCup]

Kreider, Kakko & Chytil for Brady Tkackuk.

[BrooksBurner]

40 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

For a player who scores the overwhelming majority of his goals by being stationary? I beg to differ. And even at 25 goals, he's worth it. Andreychuk scored 21 goals in his final NHL season at the age of 40.

 

Kreider has always been healthy. That's the key. Not his age. He'll age gracefully IMO provided he remains healthy unlike another peer like Ryan Smyth.

 

That's fair. I think he'll age like another net front great ala Pavelski, in terms of amount of goals and type of goals (high 20s).

 

I think we'd just have to know some names that could be had in a return for him to make the best decision. I wouldn't want them to do it for picks or prospects.

[Phil]

9 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

That's fair. I think he'll age like another net front great ala Pavelski, in terms of amount of goals and type of goals (high 20s).

 

I think we'd just have to know some names that could be had in a return for him to make the best decision. I wouldn't want them to do it for picks or prospects.

 

Totally agreed, and Pavelski has only just now fallen off. He's 39. He's been a 25+ goal guarantee for the last five years. I think that's absolutely a perfect comparison.

 

And I agree completely re: your final point. If they trade Kreider for picks and prospects, it's a waste of valuable time and you may as well just tear this down again (or partial tear down). There's no point in making themselves significantly worse without at least temporary, NHL-quality stop-gaps in place.

[phillyb]

1 hour ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

Kreider, Kakko & Chytil for Brady Tkackuk.

 

Almost posted this in the other thread, except I thought it might be Kakko or Chytil instead of both and then you add. I'd do that in a fucking heartbeat, but I'm not sure that's what Ottawa wants and I'd be asking for more if I were them. 

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

6 minutes ago, phillyb said:

 

Almost posted this in the other thread, except I thought it might be Kakko or Chytil instead of both and then you add. I'd do that in a fucking heartbeat, but I'm not sure that's what Ottawa wants and I'd be asking for more if I were them. 

 

Why would Ottawa ever want to make that deal.

 

You are talking about trading a player with concussion issues who is one hit away from a career ending injury, someone who is looking like they are going to be a career third liner and an aging forward who only has 2 years left on his contract for a borderline franchise player. Also Ottawa would be taking back 5-6 million in salary.

 

Makes no sense. 

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

Totally agreed, and Pavelski has only just now fallen off. He's 39. He's been a 25+ goal guarantee for the last five years. I think that's absolutely a perfect comparison.

 

And I agree completely re: your final point. If they trade Kreider for picks and prospects, it's a waste of valuable time and you may as well just tear this down again (or partial tear down). There's no point in making themselves significantly worse without at least temporary, NHL-quality stop-gaps in place.

It depends on the picks and prospects. What would Chicago give up to have him on Bedard's wing?

 

If you're trading Kreider you've decided not to add around the margins and go for it again. You're riding out Panarin and trying to see what Mika is without CK and/or pump his trade value up for someone to take him.

 

In that case, a guys who's 1,2,3 years away is not a problem.

[Br4d]

4 hours ago, Duguay10 said:

I think they are stuck with making another run at it with this core. Move on from Trouba, that makes sense. Maybe Kakko goes. Keeping Kreider, Zibby and Bread pretty much assures you a play off spot next year. But you will need to step up at the trade deadline and find some physical top 6 player to help were we fell short this year. 

 

It's hard to keep the core together at this point.  We need to break up the endless cycle which is of no value at all in the playoffs.

[Br4d]

2 hours ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

Kreider, Kakko & Chytil for Brady Tkackuk.

 

I think the hierarchy of assets that you could make an offer for Tkachuk around looks sort of like this:

 

1.  Fox or Laf or (maybe) Igor.

2. Miller or Schneider or Othmann.

3. Kakko.

 

One from each tier.  Probably have to add another tier if the hook in the deal is Igor.

[Br4d]

3 hours ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

I am of the school that when you get this close, you don't blow-up the team. That day is certainly coming, but right now they really need to be focused on closing the gap.

 

Like everyone else, I saw the issues that prevented them from advancing past Florida, but I think you try to address  the deficiencies that prevented us from competing with the Panthers, and then when Igor's contract expires you decide which direction to go in when some of the big contracts are more movable.

 

Right now I would see how you can move out Trouba and maybe Kaako and/or Chytil's contracts, and figure out what you need to do to backfill with players who are built for the postseason.   

 

What does this do for us when we wind up in the playoffs against Florida or TB again?

 

I hate the idea of a regular season next year that doesn't mean anything because we all know several key players are going to vanish when they start getting hit in the playoffs.

[Pete]

24 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

It's hard to keep the core together at this point.  We need to break up the endless cycle which is of no value at all in the playoffs.

Some people are going to have to accept that breaking that cycle might come by adding to the roster, not removing players from it. Another thing people will need to accept...The Rangers lost the games by a goal. If Jake Guentzal was on this roster they might still be playing.

 

Reality is they need a RW and possibly a 3C and 3RW if Kakko goes, and a bottom pairing. If you can get playoff performers in those roles, that's all you really need.

 

People want to talk about our stars disappearing but Barkov (2G last 10 games) wasn't great and neither was Tkachuk (1G last 10). Tarasenko was dropped to the third line. Florida got down lineup contributions from guys like Tarasenko and Lundell, and they had a 3rd pair playing the best hockey of their career.

 

I'm open to whatever happens this summer. Trade everyone for all I care. But if they run it back I'm not gonna cry about it and when the playoffs start you roll the dice that the puck will bounce your way more than it did this season.

 

Because the reality is that's about all they can do based on what the contract and trade protections are.

Edited June 3 by Pete

[siddious]

8 minutes ago, Pete said:

Some people are going to have to accept that breaking that cycle might come by adding to the roster, not removing players from it. Another thing people will need to accept...The Rangers lost the games by a goal. If Jake Guentzal was on this roster they might still be playing.

 

Reality is they need a RW and possibly a 3C and 3RW if Kakko goes, and a bottom pairing. If you can get playoff performers in those roles, that's all you really need.

 

People want to talk about our stars disappearing but Barkov (2G last 10 games) wasn't great and neither was Tkachuk (1G last 10). Tarasenko was dropped to the third line. Florida got down lineup contributions from guys like Tarasenko and Lundell, and they had a 3rd pair playing the best hockey of their career.

 

I'm open to whatever happens this summer. Trade everyone for all I care. But if they run it back I'm not gonna cry about it and when the playoffs start you roll the dice that the puck will bounce your way more than it did this season.

 

Because the reality is that's about all they can do based on what the contract and trade protections are.

None of this is wrong.

 

the depth wasn’t nearly as good as we all

Imagined it was. 
 

goodrow was really the only depth guy who

did much of anything.

People are frustrated. I doubt all of kreider Zib panarin And trouba are gone even if that’s what drury wants to do which is unlikely simply because none of those contracts are easy to move so you’re either buying them out or giving away assets.
 

1RW should be a priority. I like chytil but they gotta get center figured out too and im not sure he’s the answer. 

 

any moves require cap considerations to be taken into account. Drury almost assuredly has to get rid of one of the big contracts without taking on salary somehow. 
 

my vote is trouba. 
 

and that’s just for this coming season. We all

know the storm that’s coming after that.

[Ozzy]

13 minutes ago, Pete said:

Some people are going to have to accept that breaking that cycle might come by adding to the roster, not removing players from it. Another thing people will need to accept...The Rangers lost the games by a goal. If Jake Guentzal was on this roster they might still be playing.

 

Reality is they need a RW and possibly a 3C and 3RW if Kakko goes, and a bottom pairing. If you can get playoff performers in those roles, that's all you really need.

 

People want to talk about our stars disappearing but Barkov (2G last 10 games) wasn't great and neither was Tkachuk (1G last 10). Tarasenko was dropped to the third line. Florida got down lineup contributions from guys like Tarasenko and Lundell, and they had a 3rd pair playing the best hockey of their career.

 

I'm open to whatever happens this summer. Trade everyone for all I care. But if they run it back I'm not gonna cry about it and when the playoffs start you roll the dice that the puck will bounce your way more than it did this season.

 

Because the reality is that's about all they can do based on what the contract and trade protections are.

 

I'm ok with this too, Pete.  It might be our option considering we get one more swipe at it with Igor.