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

Does Pavel Buchnevich Need to be Dealt?


skjeitheday

Recommended Posts

Strome is 26!!! He's not old and should be considered as part of the future. I really don't see any coach splitting up a duo pacing what they are. Strome at age 26 is going at a PPG. Why not make that guy a core player?

 

It’s just the money and term. If they can find an agreement that works for both, that could happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Strome is 26!!! He's not old and should be considered as part of the future. I really don't see any coach splitting up a duo pacing what they are. Strome at age 26 is going at a PPG. Why not make that guy a core player?

 

It's also a cap and negotiation game. If he comes out this summer and says he wants 5 years or he's just going to go to arbitration and become a UFA Summer 2021, what are you going to do? Give him the 5 years? No. That's how you get into cap trouble by overpaying complementary players for too long. Now you're in a position where he may walk after a year and you lose him for nothing. We can't assume he's going to just settle for a 2-3 year contract, which would be ideal, so you cover your bases. You see if he's replaceable from within to give yourself the ability to more easily pivot if need be. If a guy like Chytil shows he's ready and gives you confidence that Strome's production with Panarin can be replaced, you have better footing when negotiating with Strome. If he hardlines it on wanting a lengthy term versus a 1 year arbitration deal, you won't feel pressured to cave to the demand because you're confident you have a guy who can replace him. Then you can pull the plug and choose to deal him if he doesn't meet somewhere in the middle.

 

For the record, I think it would be ideal to get Strome on a 2-3 year contract. I'm just not sure he's going to be willing to settle with that, so I'd start preparing for the alternatives just in case. Leaving as many options and doors open as possible is critical when constructing your team in a capped sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also a cap and negotiation game. If he comes out this summer and says he wants 5 years or he's just going to go to arbitration and become a UFA Summer 2021, what are you going to do? Give him the 5 years? No. That's how you get into cap trouble by overpaying complementary players for too long. Now you're in a position where he may walk after a year and you lose him for nothing. We can't assume he's going to just settle for a 2-3 year contract, which would be ideal, so you cover your bases. You see if he's replaceable from within to give yourself the ability to more easily pivot if need be. If a guy like Chytil shows he's ready and gives you confidence that Strome's production with Panarin can be replaced, you have better footing when negotiating with Strome. If he hardlines it on wanting a lengthy term versus a 1 year arbitration deal, you won't feel pressured to cave to the demand because you're confident you have a guy who can replace him. Then you can pull the plug and choose to deal him if he doesn't meet somewhere in the middle.

 

For the record, I think it would be ideal to get Strome on a 2-3 year contract. I'm just not sure he's going to be willing to settle with that, so I'd start preparing for the alternatives just in case. Leaving as many options and doors open as possible is critical when constructing your team in a capped sport.

 

Would you go to 4 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always asking the tough questions aren't you? Heh. No, I wouldn't. 2 years would be my ideal. 3 years would be my limit. If you ask me what I think the Rangers might do, I think they might be willing to go to 4.

 

See I think they might HAVE to go 4 if they want him beyond next year.

4 isn’t terrible. You’d get his age 27,28,29, and 30 seasons. At a reasonable number, that’s fine. Has some versatility, playing C or W. If he’s playing 3rd line in a couple years, that’s fine too, as Chytil surpassing him is the likely reason.

 

They’re probably not going to keep him though. I think he gets the 1 year deal and moves on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See I think they might HAVE to go 4 if they want him beyond next year.

4 isn?t terrible. You?d get his age 27,28,29, and 30 seasons. At a reasonable number, that?s fine. Has some versatility, playing C or W. If he?s playing 3rd line in a couple years, that?s fine too, as Chytil surpassing him is the likely reason.

 

They?re probably not going to keep him though. I think he gets the 1 year deal and moves on.

No more than 4 years and no more than $5.5 is the right idea.

 

Even if you remove Panarin and he reverts to an ~45 point player, that's not a bad deal. He's also durable and doesn't play a wear-you-down style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No more than 4 years and no more than $5.5 is the right idea.

 

Even if you remove Panarin and he reverts to an ~45 point player, that's not a bad deal. He's also durable and doesn't play a wear-you-down style.

 

Agreed. Even if his production reverted towards the norm, it’s totally doable.

Only real concern is does keeping him effect keeping Zib in a couple of years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Even if his production reverted towards the norm, it’s totally doable.

Only real concern is does keeping him effect keeping Zib in a couple of years?

 

Totally depends on the sum of DeAngelo, Chytil, Fox, Kakko, possibly Kravtsov, and what their next contracts look like. If Chytil goes nuts next year, it's probably going to be a long term deal. If Kakko goes nuts before his ELC is up, it's probably a long term deal. Same with the others, and DeAngelo may already be in line for a long term deal now. All of it digs into money available for others. I think they need to set aside 10-11 million for Zibanejad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s just the money and term. If they can find an agreement that works for both, that could happen

 

Bingo!!! :thumbs:

 

Would you go to 4 years?
I would, but like you said above, and also what Pete says below: I don't go over 4yrs x $5.5 mil

 

No more than 4 years and no more than $5.5 is the right idea.

 

Even if you remove Panarin and he reverts to an ~45 point player, that's not a bad deal. He's also durable and doesn't play a wear-you-down style.

 

I just wish he could win more faceoffs; he'd be the perfect 3rd line center for this squad behind Zibby and Chytil.

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...