[brooks] This Feels Like the End for Chris Kreider and the Rangers

With Trouba, fox, kakko and panarin this is a playoff team next season (as is) Without panarin I don’t think they are. They need scoring at this point.

 

It’s a high price to pay for one player but at least he’s still young.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

I'm still not sure they're a playoff team with Panarin with all the young guys but they are certainly better. I'm also not saying that they couldn't still win in the future without adding Panarin but having a guy like him possibly available to add to this team is a no-brainer to me.

Kev, the only problem that I'm afraid of with Panarin is the fact that after Kakko's ELC is up, we're going to have to break the bank to sign him long term. With Trouba, Panarin and possibly Kreider and whomever else tagging the books like that, it leaves little to no room for future picks/players to sign.

 

I hear the no brainer theory, but I don't think Panarin is the right type that wins us a cup. I think, (and this may just be me) that our glaring weakness for the immediate future is going to be our Center position and Defense, which has just been upgraded a bit. But there's plenty of room for improvement.

 

We're also going to have some growing pains in goal for a little while as Shesty gets acclimated to the NHL I believe.

 

I'd really just rather see Gorton/JD unload the crap that has accumulated over the years, let these old vets that have outplayed their usefulness get off the books and build it HIS way...with his own players that he's drafted/acquired. I think Panarin is a very good player as well, but hogging up 12 million in cap space for the next 7+ years is really going to hinder any moves, acquisitions, and resigning of ELC's.

 

Again that just my take, dude.

I would be surprised if the Rangers acquire anymore defensemen at this point. In my opinion the objective should be to get a #2 center unless the Devils don't take Hughes and to shed some salary.

Kev, the only problem that I'm afraid of with Panarin is the fact that after Kakko's ELC is up, we're going to have to break the bank to sign him long term. With Trouba, Panarin and possibly Kreider and whomever else tagging the books like that, it leaves little to no room for future picks/players to sign.

 

I hear the no brainer theory, but I don't think Panarin is the right type that wins us a cup. I think, (and this may just be me) that our glaring weakness for the immediate future is going to be our Center position and Defense, which has just been upgraded a bit. But there's plenty of room for improvement.

 

We're also going to have some growing pains in goal for a little while as Shesty gets acclimated to the NHL I believe.

 

I'd really just rather see Gorton/JD unload the crap that has accumulated over the years, let these old vets that have outplayed their usefulness get off the books and build it HIS way...with his own players that he's drafted/acquired. I think Panarin is a very good player as well, but hogging up 12 million in cap space for the next 7+ years is really going to hinder any moves, acquisitions, and resigning of ELC's.

 

Again that just my take, dude.

 

I hope that's the case! That means he's met all of our expectations. That's a long way down the road, however, and we'll have shed Hank's, Staal's, Smith's, and Shat's contracts by then. Plus you would assume by that point the salary cap will continue to go up which would level out Panarin's deal a bit.

 

Clearly you (and Francesa) and I are of different minds when it comes to Panarin's value. He came into the league a little more seasoned than most rookies but adjusted very well and won the rookie of the year. Got even better the next season with Chicago which I thought might have been a byproduct of playing with Kane, Toews, and company. Gets traded to Columbus, where he's not surrounded by anywhere near that talent and gets even better! This guy is consistently a PPG player. He even has done that in the playoffs! Clearly, he's not fazed with changing teams or changing roles. He just knows how to play hockey at an elite level.

 

The cost for him will be steep in terms of finances but it won't be steep in terms of value. This guy is a stud. Plain and simple.

 

And to address your points about the question marks with Shesty and some of the other young guys, isn't it better to have someone like Panarin that you know you can count on game in and game out while the youngsters are going through their growing pains?

 

I have your same concerns with the center spot though. That's why, even though I like CK a lot, I'd be okay with trading him if you can bring in a guy like Kadri to take on the 2C role.

With Trouba, fox, kakko and panarin this is a playoff team next season (as is) Without panarin I don?t think they are. They need scoring at this point.

 

It?s a high price to pay for one player but at least he?s still young.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I'm with you Nashty and Kevin. This team has needed a marquee player. Someone who's in the top 20 for goals/points and management stated something to that effect. Panarin is a perfect option, especially with all his comrades coming here. Without a Panarin the team will continue in rebuild mediocrity. And while I understand if Kreider gets traded, I don't think it's wise to do so. How many goals did the Rangers score this past season because of his screen? He got no credit, but without him there many goals don't go in. A week or two after Kreider left with his blood clot the Rangers sent their letter. I wrote on the Rangers website that their chances for a cup were really poor and with Kreider out the team looked defeated and their chances were zilch at that point. The letter soon followed. Kreider is the example of what you want in today's NHL, speed, size, goals, netfront presence, leadership on and off the ice. All those things in one player ain't easy to find. JG should find a way to sign Kreider AND Panarin. It's just about money so find a way to make it happen. Panarin is the big must and Kreider is the hope so.

Zibanejad will need a huge raise as well then too

I hope that's the case! That means he's met all of our expectations. That's a long way down the road, however, and we'll have shed Hank's, Staal's, Smith's, and Shat's contracts by then. Plus you would assume by that point the salary cap will continue to go up which would level out Panarin's deal a bit.

 

Clearly you (and Francesa) and I are of different minds when it comes to Panarin's value. He came into the league a little more seasoned than most rookies but adjusted very well and won the rookie of the year. Got even better the next season with Chicago which I thought might have been a byproduct of playing with Kane, Toews, and company. Gets traded to Columbus, where he's not surrounded by anywhere near that talent and gets even better! This guy is consistently a PPG player. He even has done that in the playoffs! Clearly, he's not fazed with changing teams or changing roles. He just knows how to play hockey at an elite level.

 

The cost for him will be steep in terms of finances but it won't be steep in terms of value. This guy is a stud. Plain and simple.

 

And to address your points about the question marks with Shesty and some of the other young guys, isn't it better to have someone like Panarin that you know you can count on game in and game out while the youngsters are going through their growing pains?

 

I have your same concerns with the center spot though. That's why, even though I like CK a lot, I'd be okay with trading him if you can bring in a guy like Kadri to take on the 2C role.

 

Oh believe me, I see your points and you've been spot on in your assessments of Panarin. The guy is a stud, and I wouldn't have an issue with him being here at all. But the question you ask above is probably better suited for Gorton/JD. That's the GM question that drives them to make these deals, and to tell you quite honestly Kev...I WISH I knew the answer to that one!! :rofl:

 

I suppose we'll find out the answer very soon though. It's actually fortunate to be in a position to be able to confront that type of free agency issue these days!

Zibanejad will need a huge raise as well then too

 

No, he'll be in his late 20s. We'll have to trade him.

No, he'll be in his late 20s. We'll have to trade him.

 

Because we might need cap space in 3 years if all our youngsters pan out. ;)

No, he'll be in his late 20s. We'll have to trade him.

 

why wait? trade him now and sign Panarin

Yet I’m one of the few who would rather sign kreider

WE KNOW!!!

No, he'll be in his late 20s. We'll have to trade him.

 

why wait? trade him now and sign Panarin

 

You guys are on a roll!! :rofl:

I'd love to retain Kreider myself, I think he fills a nice role. Can you imagine rolling lines with Kakko*, Krav*, Panarin, and Kreider? That's some serious size and power charging down the ice.

 

 

* assuming they live up to potential

No, he'll be in his late 20s. We'll have to trade him.

We're still at a minimum 2 years away from a sniff at contention. The window may be 5 years after that. So a 28 year old now is 32-33 hitting the middle of that window. it's not that people don't want players in their late 20s. The problem is that they just won't stay that way long enough.

 

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

at the same time you need veterans to win the cup. not easy to win with all 25 year olds

I didn't realize the Rangers are building to win the IIHF World U20 Championships instead of the Stanley Cup.

We're still at a minimum 2 years away from a sniff at contention. The window may be 5 years after that. So a 28 year old now is 32-33 hitting the middle of that window. it's not that people don't want players in their late 20s. The problem is that they just won't stay that way long enough.

 

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

 

Slight disagreement. Between the VGK and Blues runs not sure you need to a juggernaut regular season team to get into the playoffs nor the the Finals. Not saying NYR are a lock for anything, but no reason they should not be in play for one of 8 Eastern Conference playoff slots this coming season.And then, who knows. Because really the tournament is it's own thing, a different animal. Think the idea you need to build over 3 or 4 seasons is simply not how things work any more.

at the same time you need veterans to win the cup. not easy to win with all 25 year olds

 

This question is inherently fascinating and one that could result in a month's worth of research to no monetary gain whatsoever as to what is the optimal age mix for a Cup winner. I just quickly looked up the two role models I have for a dynasty, the Islanders of the early 80's and the Oilers of the late 80's. Next I would look at the Hawks of recent lineage. These are the models for what I want Gorton to do in terms of putting together a winner. On the Islanders 4th Cup team in 1982-83, the two oldest players were Billy Smith (33) and Butch Goring (34). Goring was added in 1980 as "the final piece of the puzzle" with playoff experience and veteran mojo. But the nucleus was Potvin (30), Gillies (29), Trottier (27), and Bossy (26). Remember, that was for the last of FOUR Cups. So change those numbers to 26, 25, 23, and 22 for the first time they won. The next year, they lost to the Oilers and were regarded as - and were - on the decline.

 

While some see the 1994 Rangers as the last Edmonton Cup, we'll tell those people to fuck off for now and look at the 1989-90 team, which had lost Gretzky and Coffey by that time. The oldest guy on the team was a big D named Randy Gregg (34), followed by Craig McTavish (32), Randy Huddy (31), and Kevin Lowe (31). While the nucleus of that team was slightly older, Kurri (30) Messier (29), Anderson (29), and Tikkanen (25), (recognize any of those names?) you have to jack those back 5 years to the first championship (4 Cups in 5 years). So it's McT (27), Lowe (26), Messier (24), Kurri, (25), and add Gretzky and Coffey (both 24).

 

So I would argue that a team that can win and stand the test of time is built around guys that are (or are going to be) 23-28 during the prime window. You can find a Cup team like the '94 Rangers that are considerably older, but that crew epitomizes one and done. They had near miss years where they couldn't pull it over the line and barely squeaked out a 7 game final against a Vancouver team everyone expected them to destroy.

 

If I am Gorton and I am building a team for a contention window that begins in 2 years and I have an opportunity to trade a guy who will be 30-35 in the prime window for a similarly skilled guy who will be 20-25 - much less to get back into the top 10 for one of those primo centers - I do it. Today. Literally, today. Pick up a vet along the way for experience. But build your young, skilled nucleus first and foremost.*

 

* I would regard Panarin as borderline, but the more elite a player is (Messier, anyone?), the more you can/should bend the rule. Alas, I don't think Kreider falls in that category. And I guess I finally figured out where I stand on the issue.

Slight disagreement. Between the VGK and Blues runs not sure you need to a juggernaut regular season team to get into the playoffs nor the the Finals. Not saying NYR are a lock for anything, but no reason they should not be in play for one of 8 Eastern Conference playoff slots this coming season.And then, who knows. Because really the tournament is it's own thing, a different animal. Think the idea you need to build over 3 or 4 seasons is simply not how things work any more.

 

I'm just not betting man, but if I were I would bet an awful lot that we don't see the ECF until at least 21-22. The colts we have are still a ways from being the horses necessary to go up against Boston, et al.

In the salary cap age I don’t think looking at teams from the 80s adds much value. Also you don’t always have to be older to be a good leader, especially when players are in the league at 18. Just add talent talent talent with a long term eye on the cap. The leadership will take care of itself.

WTH does " Mel " Brooks get his info? And, who believes any of what he publishes??

Yet I?m one of the few who would rather sign kreider

I am would.also like.to.sign him

In the salary cap age I don’t think looking at teams from the 80s adds much value. Also you don’t always have to be older to be a good leader, especially when players are in the league at 18. Just add talent talent talent with a long term eye on the cap. The leadership will take care of itself.

 

OK. Chicago Blackhawks. The most successful team of the salary cap era.

 

2015 was their last Cup and they had a few geezers for sure: most notably Marion Hossa and Michael Rozsival (both 36), Patrick Sharp (33), Johnny Oduva (32), and Duncan Keith (32).

The nucleus of the team in their 3rd Cup year was Hossa and Rozsival (who, at 36, I would list as talented exceptions), Sharp (32), Keith (31), Corey Crawford (29), Jonathan Toews (26), Patrick Kane (25), Brandon Saad (22). That skews older than the teams I cited, and I think we’d all agree that older guys with deep and successful playoff experience are more valuable than those without.

 

So, go back to their first Cup in 2009. The oldest guys on the team were the goalies, Khabibulen (36), and Huet (33). There were two other guys in their 30’s, little known Brent Sopel (32, 2p) and Samuel Pahlsson (31). The nucleus of the team was Martin Havlat (27), Sharp (27), Keith (25), Brent Seabrook (23), Kris Versteeg (22), Kane (20), Toews (20), and Dustin Byfuglien, then playing RW at age 23. Man, Kane and Toews were babies.

 

You still put a team together the same way you did in the 1980’s, through the draft, trades, and signings. These examples are about age mixes that were able to sustain championship level success for a longer time. The salary cap exerts its pressure as players get older. On its face, the cap exaggerates rather than diminishes the value of young cost-controlled talent.

 

My point is that If you want to build a team for longer-term success, your pillars better be young to start with. I have increasing sympathy for Josh’s ongoing campaign to eschew pretty good talent for elite talent, especially now that we have lots of chips. Kreider has been our pretty good talent and we love him. But if we can flip him either alone or in combination with other pretty good assets for something with a strong chance of being a young pillar, we should.

Penguins were about as successful as Black Hawks. They had a few very high paid pillars and filled the rest of the roster with role players or guys looking for a cup at a discount. I read an article today about WAR for players drafted between 2014 and 2017. We are at the absolute bottom of the league. Nobody even close. We got to draft better, impossible to be worse. Then we get to make choices and have options. Given the bleak recent history I don’t think we afford to jettison our core players still a few years from even hitting 30. Like I said in another post I am all for dealing Kreider for a 1 and assets if we think we got a good shot at Panarin. I don’t think it is reasonable to think we have any combination of players on the roster that could bring back a young pillar.

 

I am looking forward to watching some young developing talent and more winning. Would be great to have an extended playoff run near term. Fantastic to win a Cup. Can’t even think about multiple Cups since there has only been 1 in my life.