Br4d Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 7 minutes ago, LindG1000 said: Great hands, great size, exceptional puck protection, and a proclivity for getting to the net. What has held him back is twofold - he was a decent skater in Finland and a bad one here, and with less space, it's hard for him to get to the net (likely because of his skating). He's not a lost cause here by any means. He's not a lost cause but the expense of developing him outweighs the probable return. The ice isn't going to get any bigger and he does not play the grinding game that NA ice surfaces promote, particularly in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 4 minutes ago, Br4d said: He's not a lost cause but the expense of developing him outweighs the probable return. The ice isn't going to get any bigger and he does not play the grinding game that NA ice surfaces promote, particularly in the playoffs. I'm willing to bet that if he can work out his skating, he's a far more useful player. Right now, he's a wet blanket for all players on the ice. That's a double-edged sword, but it's a far better problem to solve than if he was being absolutely railroaded on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 There's no "expense" to developing him. This isn't hard. You sign him to his QO. That doesn't stop you from doing anything over the summer, especially with the cap cushion. Go get your 1RW, Kakko competes with whoever else might be in line for 3RW duties in camp. He either wins the job or he doesn't. If he doesn't, trade or waive. It's literally the easiest decision of the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 11 minutes ago, LindG1000 said: I'm willing to bet that if he can work out his skating, he's a far more useful player. Right now, he's a wet blanket for all players on the ice. That's a double-edged sword, but it's a far better problem to solve than if he was being absolutely railroaded on the ice. As long as the Rangers are not looking at him to fill 1RW/2RW he has some value to us in the bottom 6. If we're looking at him as a potential solution in the top 6 then he's going to be the same drag on the team he has been for most of his career. The only time Kakko has been worth much was on a light checking 3rd line with the other two kids. Light because Chytil doesn't hit people and Kakko not only doesn't have a mean streak he appears generally adverse to hitting somebody hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 bottom line is that if you trade Kakko now you get nothing back. Maybe a 4th round pick. He's not cockblocking anyone on this team. I'm not giving up on him yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 1 hour ago, Br4d said: This is never going to happen unless he changes his play style. The book on him at this point has to be: "just stay with him while he has the puck. He'll figure out how to make a play that gives it away." He's little bit more physical now than before, so he's trying to adapt. He's too talented to just fade away IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 He's 23....I always try to keep that in mind with him 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 16 minutes ago, Albatrosss said: bottom line is that if you trade Kakko now you get nothing back. Maybe a 4th round pick. He's not cockblocking anyone on this team. I'm not giving up on him yet That's a fair point. I feel like a fresh start for him would be best in like a Columbus or now Utah market. Let him go somewhere quieter to get his footing and restart his career trajectory. The lights are bright here and I don't think he is right for Broadway. Whoever said his shoulders were above his ears, I feel like it has been that way for long stretches over the past couple years. Belaboring the issues in the relationship are not going to fix things. Fresh start for him would be nice. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJWantsTheCup Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 If they can keep him for under 2.5M it’s worth the risk of giving him 1 more season. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 (edited) 9 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said: If they can keep him for under 2.5M it’s worth the risk of giving him 1 more season. I'm fine with this as long as there's no plan in place to try him at 1RW/2RW in camp. Been there and done that and it is now time for Kakko to produce and earn a shift up the lineup instead of failing and falling down the lineup. Edited June 7 by Br4d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 In all of this we should remember that whomever we each want to move on from the odds are excellent we want to do that because it is easy to do so. That's not what real contenders do. They figure out what they need to do and they go full bore until they succeed or it becomes clear they can't. We're all going to hate 34 year old Mika Zibanejad to a degree that we don't fully understand yet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 2 hours ago, Albatrosss said: Kakko will be valuable to the Rangers when he starts producing offensively Sure. But I think he’d be more valuable if he and the Rangers accepted what he is at this point. It’s fairly safe to say he has limited offensive upside. He can, however, be an effective mid 6, defensively responsible, puck possession type of guy. Let’s treat him and pay him as such. If we do, he can still have a good career; just not the one we hoped it would be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 34 minutes ago, jsm7302 said: That's a fair point. I feel like a fresh start for him would be best in like a Columbus or now Utah market. Let him go somewhere quieter to get his footing and restart his career trajectory. The lights are bright here and I don't think he is right for Broadway. Whoever said his shoulders were above his ears, I feel like it has been that way for long stretches over the past couple years. Belaboring the issues in the relationship are not going to fix things. Fresh start for him would be nice. People keep thinking they know what's best for him with the fresh start narrative, but he's not asking for that. He's saying he wants to stay. At this point he probably knows what's best for him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 9 minutes ago, Br4d said: In all of this we should remember that whomever we each want to move on from the odds are excellent we want to do that because it is easy to do so. That's not what real contenders do. They figure out what they need to do and they go full bore until they succeed or it becomes clear they can't. We're all going to hate 34 year old Mika Zibanejad to a degree that we don't fully understand yet. I'm with you on Zibanejad. He's the #1 problem by a significant margin because of the contract length, but he's too comfy here. It's really hard to see him waiving. On the other hand, your theory about trading his best bud away might be enough to tilt him in that direction by next summer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: I'm with you on Zibanejad. He's the #1 problem by a significant margin because of the contract length, but he's too comfy here. It's really hard to see him waiving. On the other hand, your theory about trading his best bud away might be enough to tilt him in that direction by next summer. The Kreider trade needs to be to a place he wants to go (outside the division) and he needs to feel good about the opportunity. That's the best way to get him to sell Zibanejad on a change of scenery. My choice would be Chicago or Dallas at this point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 17 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: On the other hand, your theory about trading his best bud away might be enough to tilt him in that direction by next summer. Why would that be the case unless you're trading them both to the same team? And if the prevailing wisdom is that their partnership is a problem, why would another team be interested in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 3 minutes ago, Pete said: Why would that be the case unless you're trading them both to the same team? And if the prevailing wisdom is that their partnership is a problem, why would another team be interested in that? You trade Kreider first and see if the dynamics favor sending Zibanejad to the same team. We have all summer after the trade to watch that and see what happens. The prevailing wisdom is that Kreider and Zibanejad have gotten too comfortable with the status quo in NY. Whoever acquires both of them is likely to get a more motivated performance out of them than we can. The thing that totally sucks is that Kreider is the guy who is easier to trade. We'd be much better off trading Zib and then having him work on Kreider and deciding if the deal makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 4 minutes ago, Pete said: Why would that be the case unless you're trading them both to the same team? And if the prevailing wisdom is that their partnership is a problem, why would another team be interested in that? I'm not sure about it needing to be the same team part. I get the train of thought that he'd be able to re-unite with Kreider, but just changing the environment in NY might be enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 7 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: I'm not sure about it needing to be the same team part. I get the train of thought that he'd be able to re-unite with Kreider, but just changing the environment in NY might be enough. I was more questioning the idea that Zib would be more Kreider weren't here... What's the difference between not playing with Kreider in New York and not playing with Kreider in, say, San Jose? I also don't really know if pro athletes make decisions that way. Lundqvist was devastated when Zucc left, but he still said he wanted to stay during the rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 3 minutes ago, Pete said: I was more questioning the idea that Zib would be more Kreider weren't here... What's the difference between not playing with Kreider in New York and not playing with Kreider in, say, San Jose? I also don't really know if pro athletes make decisions that way. Lundqvist was devastated when Zucc left, but he still said he wanted to stay during the rebuild. Nothing, but that's the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 15 minutes ago, Br4d said: You trade Kreider first and see if the dynamics favor sending Zibanejad to the same team. We have all summer after the trade to watch that and see what happens. The prevailing wisdom is that Kreider and Zibanejad have gotten too comfortable with the status quo in NY. Whoever acquires both of them is likely to get a more motivated performance out of them than we can. The thing that totally sucks is that Kreider is the guy who is easier to trade. We'd be much better off trading Zib and then having him work on Kreider and deciding if the deal makes sense. Yeah, I don't agree with that comfortable nonsense. You have some people saying he's comfortable with losing and then you have other people saying that he gets too sad when they lose. You can't have it both ways, which one is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 1 minute ago, BrooksBurner said: Nothing, but that's the point. I don't get it, but like I said I don't think professional NHL athletes make decisions that way. I've never heard of an NHL athlete who asks for a trade because the team traded their friend. Sounds like some NBA shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 4 minutes ago, Pete said: I don't get it, but like I said I don't think professional NHL athletes make decisions that way. I've never heard of an NHL athlete who asks for a trade because the team traded their friend. Sounds like some NBA shit. He'll want to stay and play with Kreider if Kreider is here. If Kreider isn't here, he might not care as much one way or another. That's not insinuating he'd ask for a trade, just that he might become open to one when asked. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 (edited) 1 minute ago, BrooksBurner said: He'll want to stay and play with Kreider if Kreider is here. If Kreider isn't here, he might not care as much one way or another. That's not insinuating he'd ask for a trade, just that he might become open to one when asked. Yes I get that, but what I'm saying is if he's not going to be playing with CK anyways, why uproot his family? Players don't sign 8-year deals with full NMCs unless they really like where they are. These guys are all professionals, I don't think friendship plays as much of a role. It's not even like they're neighbors. Edited June 7 by Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 7 Share Posted June 7 1 minute ago, Pete said: Yes I get that, but what I'm saying is if he's not going to be playing with CK anyways, why uproot his family? Players don't sign 8-year deals with full NMCs unless they really like where they are. Right. There's more to it than just who your coworkers are, but you go from no shot to "well, i dunno, maybe". Maybe there's no shot either way In any event, it's a somewhat boring convo because there's so little chance he's moved any time soon. I'd rather talk about getting Panarin to waive, wouldn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now