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

Pavel Buchnevich, Jacob Trouba File for Arbitration


Phil

Recommended Posts

To be fair, you're not going to get Buch for 4 years at that number, Dzingel only got two, but that's a pretty typical bridge.

 

I like giving Buch 4 years now though so that, when you have guys coming off their ELC, Buch will be an expiring contract who has played some top-6 minutes over the past couple years and will be easy to move. That becomes a lot more difficult if you have to give him 5x$5m in 2021.

 

I meant the 4x4. I wouldn't expect him to sell any UFA years at less than 4M AAV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't think anybody is saying to pay Kreider and Buch like top line players.

 

Teams with scoring depth all have Kreider comparable contracts on the second and third line line, and a lot of them produce a lot less. Alex Steen ($5.75m) signed at 7.6% of cap . TJ Oshie was at the same number but got a full 8 years. Kreider at $7m, assuming an $83m cap next year, would be at 8.4%. That's not the type of contract that hurts you. Should WPG just let Laine and one of Ehlers/Connor walk because they are on the second line?

Maybe not next year, but down the line when guys like Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox and Chytil come off their ELC’s having a 30 something Kreider on 7m is exactly the type of deal that hurts you. I’m extremely sceptical even though I like Kreider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It ain't Buch money, either. You're willing to pay for him showing up half a season and playing well, when the other half he was scratched LOL.

 

Who didn't get scratched by Quinn last year? I also think that motivated Buch to be a player we hadn't yet seen, so your attempt to denigrate actually gets put in the plus column for me.

 

The Rangers need to hit on some value contracts moving forward and I see an opportunity for a value contract here. I will admit I am higher on Buchnevich's ceiling than most. Given his progression has trended up, I look at it as a logical gamble. Last summer with Skjei was not because he had been trending downward since his rookie year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe not next year, but down the line when guys like Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox and Chytil come off their ELC’s having a 30 something Kreider on 7m is exactly the type of deal that hurts you. I’m extremely sceptical even though I like Kreider.

Kreider could still be scoring 25-30 goals at that point so, no, it doesn't hurt you, because that's easily tradeable. If you think his production is going to dip, then it doesn't matter what his cap # is because they shouldn't keep him anyway.

 

Most of the money for those guys is going to come from the expiring contracts. Hank, Staal, Smith, and Shatty alone is around $32m. It's not like they're the Leafs and you're going to have to give 4 guys $10m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It ain't Buch money, either. You're willing to pay for him showing up half a season and playing well, when the other half he was scratched LOL.

 

Exactly

This is why a bridge deal suits him well.

 

I like him a lot and I think he has much more potential to tap into. The 20-goal season and his improved play later in the season are big positives and really encouraging to see.

 

But he still has a lot to prove and improve upon before anyone should dump $20+ million over 4+ years of guaranteed paydays in his lap when he hasn?t fully earned it yet.

 

That said, he?s certainly earned something and a 2 year deal and $6 million or so ain?t nothing to sneeze at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly

This is why a bridge deal suits him well.

 

I like him a lot and I think he has much more potential to tap into. The 20-goal season and his improved play later in the season are big positives and really encouraging to see.

 

But he still has a lot to prove and improve upon before anyone should dump $20+ million over 4+ years of guaranteed paydays in his lap when he hasn?t fully earned it yet.

 

That said, he?s certainly earned something and a 2 year deal and $6 million or so ain?t nothing to sneeze at.

Exactly. Agreed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe not next year, but down the line when guys like Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox and Chytil come off their ELC?s having a 30 something Kreider on 7m is exactly the type of deal that hurts you. I?m extremely sceptical even though I like Kreider.
For a guy who's never scored 30, to boot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed to an extent on the first part, but my thought is that Buchnevich has already shown that he is a 15-20 goal scorer and capable of well more than that. He is 24 years old and a solid candidate to get even better. We all saw the progression he made last year (15g, 12A in last 42 games), which is a 30 goal/50+ point pace over a majority of the season. His production sky-rocketed when he received 2nd line-ish minutes. He's the exact kind of talent you try and lock up on the cheaper side while you have the leverage.

 

He really hasn't though. His underlying metrics suggests that he's probably a 2nd line wing, maybe even more, but until he does it for more than 20 games, you can't pay him like he has.

 

He's on the right track, and I'm right there with you hoping he's a 30/30 guy, but he's in more of a "prove it" spot than he is a "I've done it, pay me" spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He really hasn't though. His underlying metrics suggests that he's probably a 2nd line wing, maybe even more, but until he does it for more than 20 games, you can't pay him like he has.

 

He's on the right track, and I'm right there with you hoping he's a 30/30 guy, but he's in more of a "prove it" spot than he is a "I've done it, pay me" spot.

 

He really has though. And it's hard to call 4M 2nd line money to be honest. If it is, it's bottom of the barrel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. They didn't. Not sure why that matters here.

 

You would know why it matters if you've read anything being written. It requires just a touch of critical thinking though.

 

Skjei is an example of a player you bridge because, while he is/was young, he had been trending downward.

 

Buchnevich is an example of a player you consider buying UFA years because he's young and has started to trend upward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skjei was.

 

Any inconsistent player, really.

 

Buch, Deangelo this season. Unless they want to sign a deal like Fast

 

 

And we are not hating on Buchnevich. Just need to be cognizant of his play and the cap moving forward. Can’t hand out term contracts for question marks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would know why it matters if you've read anything being written. It requires just a touch of critical thinking though.

 

Skjei is an example of a player you bridge because, while he is/was young, he had been trending downward.

 

Buchnevich is an example of a player you consider buying UFA years because he's young and has started to trend upward.

Sure, a 16 game trend. Like Brendan Smith when he came to NY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would know why it matters if you've read anything being written. It requires just a touch of critical thinking though.

 

Skjei is an example of a player you bridge because, while he is/was young, he had been trending downward.

 

Buchnevich is an example of a player you consider buying UFA years because he's young and has started to trend upward.

Skjei is in the past and therefore and irrelevant example.

 

I wouldn't call 20 games after the deadline an upward trend for Buch. I'd call it 20 good games and probably closer to 40 bad games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any inconsistent player, really.

 

Buch, Deangelo this season. Unless they want to sign a deal like Fast

 

 

And we are not hating on Buchnevich. Just need to be cognizant of his play and the cap moving forward. Can’t hand out term contracts for question marks.

 

1st half Buchnevich was inconsistent. 2nd half Buchnevich post-benching was very good. I'm just willing to bet on the 2nd half. The problem with Skjei is you couldn't point to any progression for really any stretch of time in the season before they extended him. That's why it was a head scratcher, and he didn't progress last year either.

 

I know nobody is dumping on Buchnevich, just like I'm not going to hate on a bridge deal either. There's such a thing as a good bet versus a bad bet. I just view this as more of a good bet than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would know why it matters if you've read anything being written. It requires just a touch of critical thinking though.

 

Skjei is an example of a player you bridge because, while he is/was young, he had been trending downward.

 

Buchnevich is an example of a player you consider buying UFA years because he's young and has started to trend upward.

 

As a player you have to earn those years being bought. Buch hasn’t yet. Not with 1 20-goal season and a huge need to improve his play without the puck and outside of the offensive zone.

 

Again, talent is there and he’s starting to deliver. But there’s a lot to grow on still. This season is big for him

Give the kid a couple years, a nice raise and let’s see what happens next couple seasons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have a problem with Buch being too good and needing a big contract than sucking and taking up too much cap space. If he outgrows a bridge deal we'll have options, rather than being forced to buy him out or give away assets to move him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Buch a lot, but I'm not sure he's a long-term piece at all. I actually think the Rangers are best bridging him and letting him walk in free agency when guys like Krav and Kakko are both going to be angling for full-time top-six roles. By that point, paying your third-best RW like your first would just be poor spending IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Book is still out on Buch. They’ll have a clearer picture of what he truly is offensively in a year, and it’s likely another 2 full seasons until he’s able to not only establish that, but also round out and establish what the rest of his game will look like.

 

If we are talking about a guy who will play on the 3rd line and score, while that’s great, it’s hard to have a guy in that spot who is unable to play at least some level of a defensive and checking role and be effective without the puck in his own end or in the neutral zone. Even if the game is going away from that to an extent. Hard to pay a guy who has his value almost exclusively offensively when he’s playing basically 3rd line minutes and some power play time, but isn’t bringing much else,and has other guys who are better than him in front of him on the depth chart. In a year or so they may be better suited with a different type of player in that spot.

 

Bridge all the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kreider could still be scoring 25-30 goals at that point so, no, it doesn't hurt you, because that's easily tradeable. If you think his production is going to dip, then it doesn't matter what his cap # is because they shouldn't keep him anyway.

 

Most of the money for those guys is going to come from the expiring contracts. Hank, Staal, Smith, and Shatty alone is around $32m. It's not like they're the Leafs and you're going to have to give 4 guys $10m.

Well, yeah. Considering Kreider has never scored 30 goals and topped 25 twice in his career I?m questioning the degree of realism in him being a 25-30 goal scorer at 33. As a result, I?m highly doubtful he?d be tradeable with 3 years left on a 7m deal.

I agree that we shouldn?t project too much with the young players. But if Kakko is the franchise player we believe he is it?s far to assume he eats around 1/3 of that cap space. You?ll also need a new deal for Zib. And of course the other players mentioned. I just don?t think it?s a good fit and I think if you trust the process the right move at this point is to trade him.

My position is that this is a high risk contract and a luxury the Rangers cannot afford. But it?s a complicated question and the opposing view is valid as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, yeah. Considering Kreider has never scored 30 goals and topped 25 twice in his career I’m questioning the degree of realism in him being a 25-30 goal scorer at 33. As a result, I’m highly doubtful he’d be tradeable with 3 years left on a 7m deal.

I agree that we shouldn’t project too much with the young players. But if Kakko is the franchise player we believe he is it’s far to assume he eats around 1/3 of that cap space. You’ll also need a new deal for Zib. And of course the other players mentioned. I just don’t think it’s a good fit and I think if you trust the process the right move at this point is to trade him.

My position is that this is a high risk contract and a luxury the Rangers cannot afford. But it’s a complicated question and the opposing view is valid as well.

Well I didn't say age 33, because that's not what he's going to be in 3 years. You don't sign Panarin, trade for Trouba, and think, "trust the process." Making those moves and not thinking you'll be good for another 3 years is contradictory. They're trying to win right now, and Kreider gives you the best shot at that.

 

To that end, why are we assuming that Kreider's play is going to drop off a cliff, but Panarin's won't? The whole "Panarin's game translates better" is...nonsense, relative to Kreider, who is phenomenally conditioned and who's only real injury was a fluke. Part of the critique of Kreider is that he's not physical enough, drifts, etc. etc., which is fair, but it lends itself to longevity. If he played like Ryan Callahan, I'd agree, but he doesn't. In the NHL today, 30 is only a cutoff for guys who can only make the roster if they go 100 mph. Guys who play with any skill are good far beyond that. There's no reason Kreider can't have the same career arc as Pavelski - who plays basically the same game - or Marleau, who both surpassed their career-high goal totals in their age 29 season and were productive well into their 30s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO if you bridge Buch and he does anything like he showed last year (becomes a 50 point player), Kreider is getting moved to make room for his salary and some other player's raises.

 

Gotta keep that salary manageable and don't offer trade protection.

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...