Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

McKenzie: "Rangers want to get better in a hurry,"


Phil

Recommended Posts

Well you can look at future free agents on Capfriendly. There are only a handful over the next 4 or 5 years (Hall? Gaudreau? Forsberg? Mackinnon?), and the chances of any of them hitting the market are slim to none. All would be almost 30 as well by the time they are even up. I think Panarin at 31-32 will still be better than what you will find available on the open UFA market, even considering potential regression. Karlsson I am less sure about.

 

But we are in the beginning of a rebuild. The rangers are adding asset after asset. The farm is starting to really be stocked. Why do they have to sign any big time ufa? When the time is right they will have the assets to trade from positional strength to solidify what they need. Look at the best teams, they all have become good through the draft with very little in terms of massive ufas. Toronto is the only one and they are going to lose one of their young guns because of Tavares but they are in year six or seven since their tear down. Even with Tavares though they have ignored their defense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 479
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

But we are in the beginning of a rebuild. The rangers are adding asset after asset. The farm is starting to really be stocked. Why do they have to sign any big time ufa? When the time is right they will have the assets to trade from positional strength to solidify what they need. Look at the best teams, they all have become good through the draft with very little in terms of massive ufas. Toronto is the only one and they are going to lose one of their young guns because of Tavares but they are in year six or seven since their tear down. Even with Tavares though they have ignored their defense
One more time for the people in the back...

 

A.

Bird.

In.

The.

Hand.

 

Wait and trade for someone... How do you know who will be available? And then you have to gut your team and system to get them.

 

Wait and sign a different UFA... Again how do we know who'll be available? Will they be 27? Will they want to come?

 

We're not at the beginning of a rebuild. We're about half way through after this draft with the amount of picks we've made last year and this year, even with the massive whiff on Lias.

 

Also regarding the Blackhawks, not sure where you're getting only Kane isn't a drain. Toews is a p/g player and Keith is $5.5 against the cap. Seabrook's deal is trash and they haven't drafted well, and they had no goaltending this year or they'd be in the playoffs.

 

And if next year's draft is as good as 2003 (link to that prediction?), you can grab a great player in the top 10, middle 10 or bottom 10. Suter went 7, Seabrook 14 and Burns 20. And that's just the D. I'd take Corey Perry at 28 all day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will take longer than 3 years to be contenders, I guess that's where we disagree.
Well if we're taking 5 years from now that's a problem as we'll have to replace Zib, Krieder and Skjei since they will be over 30 and we know that's not allowed...

 

With the amount of picks we've already made and the player we're getting at 2 (I think you guys are severely underrating that player... Hughes or Kakko) we are most likely a playoff team at minimum and Panarin + another year of experience for young pkayers likely makes us one next season.

 

You can't perpetually rebuild. Last year and this year, with the # of picks we have, that process of selling pieces like we did with Hayes and should with Kreider is likely over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one said it's not allowed to have players over 30 but I think it's fair for people to be hesitant to sign a UFA who's inching closer to 30 y/o to 9-10 million for extended period of time. And I'm not underrating those players, infact I'm hoping either of those players become our own Panarin or even better than him. And when time comes, I want to be sure there's enough money to pay him, Kravtsov and company rather than be hindered by aging Panarin and Karlsson deals.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one said it's not allowed to have players over 30 but I think it's fair for people to be hesitant to sign a UFA who's inching closer to 30 y/o to 9-10 million for extended period of time. And I'm not underrating those players, infact I'm hoping either of those players become our own Panarin or even better than him. And when time comes, I want to be sure there's enough money to pay him, Kravtsov and company rather than be hindered by aging Panarin and Karlsson deals.
Every UFA is approaching 30. This logic means you never sign a player approaching UFA, even your own.

 

You can't win with a team full of 22-27 year olds. Or maybe you can? Seems unlikely though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every UFA is approaching 30. This logic means you never sign a player approaching UFA, even your own.

 

You can't win with a team full of 22-27 year olds. Or maybe you can? Seems unlikely though.

 

Approaching or at 30 isn’t the problem. It’s guys that age wanting 7 or 8 seasons at huge dollars carrying them until they are in their mid to late 30’s that’s the issue.

 

If they could get Karlsson for example on a 5 year deal, even if they have to duke him more money, they should pursue that heavily. Even if he declined you can live with 1 or even 2 years wherein he’s a diminished player with a huge cap hit and salary. But anymore than that, it’s a major problem.

But I can’t see him taking anything less than a max term deal.

 

Even in a capped sport, the money doesn’t kill the big market teams. The term is what hurts them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say this draft and FA period closes out year 2 of the rebuild. While it might not have been the full on plan in everyone’s mind, the rebuild started when Step got traded at the 2017 draft. Gorton new he’d be going with a youth movement at some point at that time, he saw Stepan’s NTC was approaching, he didn’t want to be saddled with that, so he moved him. And didn’t really replace him with someone who could conceivably replace his ice time. Then 7-8 months later, out came the letter and the sell off.

 

I think even with some adds in FA this summer and obviously a huge piece at the draft coming, while they probably take a nice step forward , they’re still outside looking in as far as the playoffs go. That could be different depending on who they sign, how impactful rookies are, and how much some younger guys progress this year. But they’d still need to make about a 20 point improvement. That’s a huge jump and a lot to ask.

 

If it is Karlsson and Panarin, then a huge improvement won’t surprise me. If they only grab one, it would.

But either way, you’re still looking at a lot of ice time being consumed by rookies and kids. Karlsson and Panarin can’t carry every play or play every shift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more time for the people in the back...

 

A.

Bird.

In.

The.

Hand.

 

Wait and trade for someone... How do you know who will be available? And then you have to gut your team and system to get them.

 

Wait and sign a different UFA... Again how do we know who'll be available? Will they be 27? Will they want to come?

 

We're not at the beginning of a rebuild. We're about half way through after this draft with the amount of picks we've made last year and this year, even with the massive whiff on Lias.

 

Also regarding the Blackhawks, not sure where you're getting only Kane isn't a drain. Toews is a p/g player and Keith is $5.5 against the cap. Seabrook's deal is trash and they haven't drafted well, and they had no goaltending this year or they'd be in the playoffs.

 

And if next year's draft is as good as 2003 (link to that prediction?), you can grab a great player in the top 10, middle 10 or bottom 10. Suter went 7, Seabrook 14 and Burns 20. And that's just the D. I'd take Corey Perry at 28 all day.

 

A bird in the hand? The rangers are not ready to take that risk. While the quantities are known as far as this years ufas. Nobody knows what they are three years from now so while they are known today they aren’t when this team is ready to compete. What also isn’t known is what the rangers have. Right now it’s potential. By definition what they need to spend their money on depends on which prospects work out and which ones don’t. I’m not fearful of missing out. The reason is because this team isn’t ready to fish in those waters.

 

As far as a future trade. You don’t have to hit your team. In fact it’s your choice. Spending like others suggest actually could take that choice out of your hands because of the cap. Bottom line the opposing argument is a tired one for this franchise. The rangers have tried your way over and over and over again. I’m all for going for it but there is a time and a place and that time is not now.

 

The rangers are half way through a rebuild? By what metric? I’m not disagreeing. But the league is littered with teams that have been rebuilding forever. Kakko changes everything? Maybe. Do you think Edmonton maybe thought Mcdavid would change things. How about buffalo with Eichel and dahlin? The problems in both cities are vast but depth is certainly at the forefront. Not sure we willfully want to spend so much on two guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to assess how far through the rebuild they actually are. No one knows the timeframe that those actually in the organization placed on it or when they feel it started.

 

IMO, it started in June of 17 when they traded Step and bought out Girardi. That puts us 2 years in this upcoming Draft. Initially I felt it would be about 3 seasons worth of trades, stockpiling picks, prospects, and younger players, poor on ice results and picking high. I felt at that time 2 years ago they would start to see good results at the latter stages of 19-20 season, with an eye on being a bonafide playoff team again in 20-21 and improving from there.

 

That is still my viewpoint at this time.

 

Making the aforementioned adds of both Panarin and Karlsson should accelerate that timeframe. But that hasn’t happened yet, so I’ll stick to my original timeframe of 3 seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the quantities are known as far as this years ufas. Nobody knows what they are three years from now

 

I don't know why you push this as support for not signing Panarin. It is actually quite the opposite because players of his quality hitting the market is incredibly rare. Being the lucky team to sign a player of his caliber is even rarer. Other than Tavares last year, who obviously just wanted to go back home, how many players of that caliber have hit the market in the last decade? What we know based on the past is precisely how we attempt to predict the future/unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bird in the hand? The rangers are not ready to take that risk. While the quantities are known as far as this years ufas. Nobody knows what they are three years from now so while they are known today they aren?t when this team is ready to compete. What also isn?t known is what the rangers have. Right now it?s potential. By definition what they need to spend their money on depends on which prospects work out and which ones don?t. I?m not fearful of missing out. The reason is because this team isn?t ready to fish in those waters.

 

As far as a future trade. You don?t have to hit your team. In fact it?s your choice. Spending like others suggest actually could take that choice out of your hands because of the cap. Bottom line the opposing argument is a tired one for this franchise. The rangers have tried your way over and over and over again. I?m all for going for it but there is a time and a place and that time is not now.

 

The rangers are half way through a rebuild? By what metric? I?m not disagreeing. But the league is littered with teams that have been rebuilding forever. Kakko changes everything? Maybe. Do you think Edmonton maybe thought Mcdavid would change things. How about buffalo with Eichel and dahlin? The problems in both cities are vast but depth is certainly at the forefront. Not sure we willfully want to spend so much on two guys.

Becoming Edmonton or Buffalo is what you're proposing. Keep sucking and keep drafting. Dont sign Panarin or Karlsson while we have the chance. Wait until Kakko is making 12 mil a year and then sign Lucic, Skinner, or Okposo.

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bird in the hand? The rangers are not ready to take that risk. While the quantities are known as far as this years ufas. Nobody knows what they are three years from now....

 

This will always be true of any player, so there is zero sum logic here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What’s worse is that you can’t even concede that there is any chance of it not working. The reason is because to admit that you must try and rationalize the effects a contract like that would have in those circumstances. It’s a waste a time to discuss this any further. I totally disagree with you. Take solace in that you will get your man. I look forward to the next guy they have to have. Something like St. Louis, yandle, Staal. Kind of like how we got here in the first place. Difference is those didn’t last a decade.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on you definition of working. I can see them playing well here for a couple of years. To me this all hinges on years 4-7 though. Those are the years in which it’s realistic to expect contending. I will 100% honest I have no idea what panarin or ek will look like then. It’s possible they are better than today. It’s possible. I’m just not comfortable with making that gamble to me for no reason.

 

I’m not against signing ufas ever. I’m against long term deals at this point where this team stands today. Depending on how the team progresses that can change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...