Targets to Break the Rangers' Homogeneity?

I'd argue Kakko does actually help with the homogeneity. He's the best player we have in the corners. He's hard to get off the puck. He doesn't play the same skill game we see with Buch, Laf, Panarin, Krav, Chytil, Mika, etc. I can see him becoming a 30/30 player who plays good d -- similar to what Rick Nash was when he was here.

 

I think what Pete said is true. I don't know how Buch fits long term and perhaps Kakko can even slid into Buch's role on the PK.

 

Buch has really had one hell of a year. He's a big part of this team. But I think he's likely priced himself off the roster with his great play. We also have Kravstov playing on the 4th line which isn't sustainable. Krav and Kakko will both need to come up into the top 6. Unlike Buch, I don't foresee us having to wait 6 years until either of these guys contribute at Buch's level. I think it's possible either one can do it in the next two.

I'd argue Kakko does actually help with the homogeneity. He's the best player we have in the corners. He's hard to get off the puck. He doesn't play the same skill game we see with Buch, Laf, Panarin, Krav, Chytil, Mika, etc. I can see him becoming a 30/30 player who plays good d -- similar to what Rick Nash was when he was here.

 

I think what Pete said is true. I don't know how Buch fits long term and perhaps Kakko can even slid into Buch's role on the PK.

 

Buch has really had one hell of a year. He's a big part of this team. But I think he's likely priced himself off the roster with his great play. We also have Kravstov playing on the 4th line which isn't sustainable. Krav and Kakko will both need to come up into the top 6. Unlike Buch, I don't foresee us having to wait 6 years until either of these guys contribute at Buch's level. I think it's possible either one can do it in the next two.

 

Agree with this, as well. Was thinking the same. He's not a real "off the rush" type player, he does his work on the cycle.

The Rangers (1) have a poor record in close games; (2) habitually allow tying and go ahead goals late; and (3) have an absurdly anomalous disparity between goal differential and and overall record. These are the hallmarks of a team that is lesser than the sum of it's parts. While "homogeneity" may contribute to that, I think it's more on the coach. If the coach assimilated the young entering players over a three year period to a disciplined system, wouldn't we be closer to the sum of our part already, even if still an incomplete work?

 

I've seen efforts to "add grit, sandpaper" before: Zubov and Nedved for Samuelson and Robitaille; Nordstrom and Ferraro for McSorley and aging Kuri; twin free agent signings of Keene and Skrudland. I have no need to see a repeat of all of that.

If you looked at the defensive metrics you'd see that Strome and Buch are practically identical, with Strome's position carrying greater defensive responsibility.

 

What would your solution be here? Are you of the mindset that the bottom 6 is all that needs to change? If so, that's where we will disagree I guess.

I'd argue Kakko does actually help with the homogeneity. He's the best player we have in the corners. He's hard to get off the puck. He doesn't play the same skill game we see with Buch, Laf, Panarin, Krav, Chytil, Mika, etc. I can see him becoming a 30/30 player who plays good d -- similar to what Rick Nash was when he was here.

 

I think what Pete said is true. I don't know how Buch fits long term and perhaps Kakko can even slid into Buch's role on the PK.

 

Buch has really had one hell of a year. He's a big part of this team. But I think he's likely priced himself off the roster with his great play. We also have Kravstov playing on the 4th line which isn't sustainable. Krav and Kakko will both need to come up into the top 6. Unlike Buch, I don't foresee us having to wait 6 years until either of these guys contribute at Buch's level. I think it's possible either one can do it in the next two.

 

They aren't guaranteed to reach where Buchnevich is today. Ironically, the vision you just painted for Kakko is what Buchnevich has been this season.

What would your solution be here? Are you of the mindset that the bottom 6 is all that needs to change? If so, that's where we will disagree I guess.

I think we ca say first and foremost that Larry is only saying this because we're saying it. So it's a bit of the tail wagging the dog here.

 

That being said, I don't really even completely agree with what he's saying. Firstly he's saying if you successfully defend the top two players on the team, you're likely to beat the team. That's true of probably 20+ other teams in the NHL. He's pointing at the lack of depth scoring, and if you look at the 3rd/4th line lack of production, I get that.

 

The second thing about "they beat you with talent or not at all" (kind of a dumb thing to say) doesn't really do a good job of identifying the real issue which is a bias towards the extra pass and being too fancy. In a tight checking game, it's not that they're unable to create the scoring chance, it's that they pass it up (pun intended) looking for a prettier play. That's what fucks them up. They don't know how to simplify their game.

 

So what I would look for is not the "Tom Wilson" type, but rather the "Alex Ovechkin" type...A guy who will shoot the puck whenever he has the opportunity and not look for that extra pass. Over the last 2 years, Zib is 8th in the NHL goals but 17th in shots. Panarin is 13th/33rd respectively.

 

So ultimately, it's not the skill game or "east/west" that kills us, it's the unwillingness to simplify and put pucks at the net. So I'm not looking at just forwards here because Fox and even Miller are also guilty of deferring and passing when they should shoot. Only Trouba has the willingness to let it rip...His issue is that it's usually right into the goalie's chest. I will say they miss ADA from that perspective. He would fling it on net if he didn't have a play.

 

So now that we've set that up, I think upgrading the 3C position to someone who has that willingness to shoot, and some more coaching/development from Lafreniere, Fox, Miller, Kakko and Kravtsov probably gets you closer. Then re-asses.

 

I don't think you start trading away top scorers in order to borrow from Peter to pay Paul. I will say that Z's been shooting less this year than in the past and it might be a confidence problem. In Kreider, Kakko and Lafreniere you've got players who typically have played in traffic as well.

 

The answer could come from within, but Chytil to me seems like a player with no role who we could maybe use to get a guy who puts pucks on net. Dylan Larkin comes to mind.

They aren't guaranteed to reach where Buchnevich is today. Ironically, the vision you just painted for Kakko is what Buchnevich has been this season.

 

Well yes and no. Buch and Kakko do not play the same style game. Kakko plays a much harder game than Buch. Where Buch is opportunistic in the offensive zone, Kakko is doing the dirty work. This is a thread about sameness and how to break away from that. I'm arguing that trading Buch is likely the best way to get a good return on a player that we don't already have, while Kakko can probably learn to fill Buch's shoes.

The answer could come from within, but Chytil to me seems like a player with no role who we could maybe use to get a guy who puts pucks on net. Dylan Larkin comes to mind.

 

I agree too that Chytil could and possibly should be looked at as another trade chip. As the year has gone on, he's actually lost more minutes and responsibility. He's clearly not better than Strome so that 2nd line center role won't be an option. He can't win a face-off so he's not getting PP time. Top 6 wing and 3rd line center are two perfect spots to break the current mold, so to speak.

I agree too that Chytil could and possibly should be looked at as another trade chip. As the year has gone on, he's actually lost more minutes and responsibility. He's clearly not better than Strome so that 2nd line center role won't be an option. He can't win a face-off so he's not getting PP time. Top 6 wing and 3rd line center are two perfect spots to break the current mold, so to speak.

 

It's hard to say Chytil is clearly not better then Strome if you look at the opportunity given to Strome over Chytil. Strome has played 880 TOI this year compared to Chytils 440 TOI. And the playing with One of the greatest players on the planet is still a huge boost. Strome FO% 43 to Chytil 39%. If Strome did not play on the PP he would have 28 points to Chytil 19 points in 14 fewer games. I'd love to see what Chytil would do playing with Bread for these last games but it won't happen.

It's hard to say Chytil is clearly not better then Strome if you look at the opportunity given to Strome over Chytil. Strome has played 880 TOI this year compared to Chytils 440 TOI. And the playing with One of the greatest players on the planet is still a huge boost. Strome FO% 43 to Chytil 39%. If Strome did not play on the PP he would have 28 points to Chytil 19 points in 14 fewer games. I'd love to see what Chytil would do playing with Bread for these last games but it won't happen.

 

Except Strome has earned not "been given" this opportunity. You also left out Chytil missing games when comparing total TOI. Strome also put up points with Kreider who is not one of the greatest players on the planet.

 

Not sure what's to be gained playing Chytil with Panarin other than proving what we already know, Panarin makes players around him better.

 

Point being, it's not at all hard to say that Strome is both better and more durable than Chytil.

I think we ca say first and foremost that Larry is only saying this because we're saying it. So it's a bit of the tail wagging the dog here.

 

That being said, I don't really even completely agree with what he's saying. Firstly he's saying if you successfully defend the top two players on the team, you're likely to beat the team. That's true of probably 20+ other teams in the NHL. He's pointing at the lack of depth scoring, and if you look at the 3rd/4th line lack of production, I get that.

 

The second thing about "they beat you with talent or not at all" (kind of a dumb thing to say) doesn't really do a good job of identifying the real issue which is a bias towards the extra pass and being too fancy. In a tight checking game, it's not that they're unable to create the scoring chance, it's that they pass it up (pun intended) looking for a prettier play. That's what fucks them up. They don't know how to simplify their game.

 

So what I would look for is not the "Tom Wilson" type, but rather the "Alex Ovechkin" type...A guy who will shoot the puck whenever he has the opportunity and not look for that extra pass. Over the last 2 years, Zib is 8th in the NHL goals but 17th in shots. Panarin is 13th/33rd respectively.

 

So ultimately, it's not the skill game or "east/west" that kills us, it's the unwillingness to simplify and put pucks at the net. So I'm not looking at just forwards here because Fox and even Miller are also guilty of deferring and passing when they should shoot. Only Trouba has the willingness to let it rip...His issue is that it's usually right into the goalie's chest. I will say they miss ADA from that perspective. He would fling it on net if he didn't have a play.

 

Agree with pretty much all of this.

 

So now that we've set that up, I think upgrading the 3C position to someone who has that willingness to shoot, and some more coaching/development from Lafreniere, Fox, Miller, Kakko and Kravtsov probably gets you closer. Then re-asses.

 

Good with this approach too. I'd prefer to do more than just one position on the team, but incremental changes makes sense too.

 

I don't think you start trading away top scorers in order to borrow from Peter to pay Paul. I will say that Z's been shooting less this year than in the past and it might be a confidence problem. In Kreider, Kakko and Lafreniere you've got players who typically have played in traffic as well.

 

The answer could come from within, but Chytil to me seems like a player with no role who we could maybe use to get a guy who puts pucks on net. Dylan Larkin comes to mind.

 

Agreed. That's why I disagree with the Buchnevich trade talk. I think it's safe to say they would not trade him for another winger, when the reason he's "expendable" is because of the supposed winger depth. That means they would trade him for a center, but if you keep Zibanejad and Strome, that means you're trading a top line winger for a bottom 6 center. That's not good value. So what's left? Futures? More maybes? I just don't like this avenue. I'd entertain a Buchnevich trade if it's for a bonafide top 6 center.

 

I love the Larkin pick. I almost brought him up myself, but have trouble seeing the Wings trading him months after they named him Captain. They seem committed. But if you get Larkin, he's a top 6 C. You don't trade for him and keep Zibanejad and Strome.

It's hard to say Chytil is clearly not better then Strome if you look at the opportunity given to Strome over Chytil. Strome has played 880 TOI this year compared to Chytils 440 TOI. And the playing with One of the greatest players on the planet is still a huge boost. Strome FO% 43 to Chytil 39%. If Strome did not play on the PP he would have 28 points to Chytil 19 points in 14 fewer games. I'd love to see what Chytil would do playing with Bread for these last games but it won't happen.

 

I'd make the argument that Strome -> Chytil is less of a drop off than Buchnevich -> Kakko. Chytil gets ridden around here but he's on a 45 point pace with zero PP time and 13 minutes a game.

Agree with pretty much all of this.

 

 

 

Good with this approach too. I'd prefer to do more than just one position on the team, but incremental changes makes sense too.

 

 

 

Agreed. That's why I disagree with the Buchnevich trade talk. I think it's safe to say they would not trade him for another winger, when the reason he's "expendable" is because of the supposed winger depth. That means they would trade him for a center, but if you keep Zibanejad and Strome, that means you're trading a top line winger for a bottom 6 center. That's not good value. So what's left? Futures? More maybes? I just don't like this avenue. I'd entertain a Buchnevich trade if it's for a bonafide top 6 center.

 

I love the Larkin pick. I almost brought him up myself, but have trouble seeing the Wings trading him months after they named him Captain. They seem committed. But if you get Larkin, he's a top 6 C. You don't trade for him and keep Zibanejad and Strome.

Larkin is also a total Michigander homeboy. Stevie would get some blowback. But it's worth a call and we've got the players, picks, and prospects with which to overpay with a smile.

 

Sent from my SM-G970U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I'd make the argument that Strome -> Chytil is less of a drop off than Buchnevich -> Kakko. Chytil gets ridden around here but he's on a 45 point pace with zero PP time and 13 minutes a game.

 

Again, we're conflating points with the question of the thread. Points don't necessarily equal value on a team that's built like this one.

Again, we're conflating points with the question of the thread. Points don't necessarily equal value on a team that's built like this one.

 

No. I'm just saying point production isn't Chytil's problem. Strome and Chytil are both fairly one dimensional. The difference is Strome gets to play an offensive role with PP time and Chytil is asked to play a 3rd line role without PP time. We really haven't seen what Chytil's true potential is because he's playing a role he shouldn't be.

 

So back to my original point, Kakko has had a lot of opportunity in an offensive top 6 role. The gap still remains larger between Buchnevich and Kakko than Strome and Chytil. So why would we trade Buchnevich before Strome, especially when Buchnevich brings more to the team than Strome?

No. I'm just saying point production isn't Chytil's problem. Strome and Chytil are both fairly one dimensional. The difference is Strome gets to play an offensive role with PP time and Chytil is asked to play a 3rd line role without PP time. We really haven't seen what Chytil's true potential is because he's playing a role he shouldn't be.

 

So back to my original point, Kakko has had a lot of opportunity in an offensive top 6 role. The gap still remains larger between Buchnevich and Kakko than Strome and Chytil. So why would we trade Buchnevich before Strome, especially when Buchnevich brings more to the team than Strome?

But Buch doesn't bring more than Strome and we're stacked at wing. Not so much at center.

 

Chytil isn't a true center anyway.

But Buch doesn't bring more than Strome and we're stacked at wing. Not so much at center.

 

Chytil isn't a true center anyway.

 

Buchnevich has been a top flight PKer. That alone means he brings more.

 

"Stacked at wing" is true if LWs and RWs are interchangeable. We are stacked at LW, where we have two proven top 6 LWs in Panarin and Kreider. We only have one proven top 6 RW and everyone wants to trade him, and for what? Prospects? A 3rd liner?

 

The right move here would be to switch out Strome and hunt for a 2C who can fill the needs we have.

"Stacked at wing" is true if LWs and RWs are interchangeable. We are stacked at LW, where we have two proven top 6 LWs in Panarin and Kreider. We only have one proven top 6 RW and everyone wants to trade him for what? Prospects? A 3rd liner?

The best package you can get?

 

We have 3 wingers for 2 top 6 spots, none equipped for the 3rd line. It would be a shame to have the 2nd overall last year top out at a third liner if you're going Buch, Krav, Kakko.

 

Buch is the most likely to go due to cap.

 

I also have no issue trading Kravtsov.

Maybe this off season isn't the time to deal out of our surplus of wings or young defenseman. Why not put a contract in front of Buch and Strome say $5M times 4 years each? Let them choose to sign or become trade fodder. Let it be known if you want to stay you have to give a discount. There is just to many guys and let the players choose who really wants to be here. I'm not saying that's the end all be all of deciding but it matters. If Strome or Buch want to sign a contract like that then I'm not moving them hastily.

The best package you can get?

 

We have 3 wingers for 2 top 6 spots, none equipped for the 3rd line. It would be a shame to have the 2nd overall last year top out at a third liner if you're going Buch, Krav, Kakko.

 

Buch is the most likely to go due to cap.

 

I also have no issue trading Kravtsov.

 

Long term I might agree at RW. If you care about the team becoming a playoff team starting next year though, I don't think you do it with Kakko and Kravtsov as your top 2 RW. That's a lot of unrealistic pressure to place on those guys.

 

If push comes to shove, I'd rather trade Strome and keep my depth at RW for now because 2/3 of it is young, unproven depth. Can't commit to Strome long term, so find a 2C that helps address our issues. If you can't find that, or the cost to attain is unreasonable, I would argue that Chytil is more prepared to fill 2C than either Kakko and Kravtsov are to fill 1RW and 2RW. Therefore, I'd elevate Chytil to 2C and sign one of the 3C options I mentioned earlier. This would not be ideal, but I'd be more comfortable long term going that route.

Long term I might agree at RW. If you care about the team becoming a playoff team starting next year though, I don't think you do it with Kakko and Kravtsov as your top 2 RW. That's a lot of unrealistic pressure to place on those guys.

 

If push comes to shove, I'd rather trade Strome and keep my depth at RW for now because 2/3 of it is young, unproven depth. Can't commit to Strome long term, so find a 2C that helps address our issues. If you can't find that, or the cost to attain is unreasonable, I would argue that Chytil is more prepared to fill 2C than either Kakko and Kravtsov are to fill 1RW and 2RW. Therefore, I'd elevate Chytil to 2C and sign one of the 3C options I mentioned earlier. This would not be ideal, but I'd be more comfortable long term going that route.

Yea we don't see eye to eye on Chytil. He's not even a center, IMO. He's got no vision, doesn't create opportunity for linemates, isn't a real distributor. He's also god awful defensively and in the dot.

 

I'd actually wonder if he'd be better than either Krav or Kakko as 1RW.

Yea we don't see eye to eye on Chytil. He's not even a center, IMO. He's got no vision, doesn't create opportunity for linemates, isn't a real distributor. He's also god awful defensively and in the dot.

 

I'd actually wonder if he'd be better than either Krav or Kakko as 1RW.

 

That wasn't as much a vouch for Chytil as much as it was to illustrate how much I am against rolling Kakko and Kravtsov 1/2 RW next year.

 

My ideal scenario a few posts ago was Strome and Chytil both out. Neither are very good at actually being centers. Revamp down the middle. Keep your high ceiling wings. Only let one go if it's a Larkin coming back.

That wasn't as much a vouch for Chytil as much as it was to illustrate how much I am against rolling Kakko and Kravtsov 1/2 RW next year.

 

My ideal scenario a few posts ago was Strome and Chytil both out. Neither are very good at actually being centers. Revamp down the middle. Keep your high ceiling wings. Only let one go if it's a Larkin coming back.

We don't see eye to eye on Strome either lol.

 

I was around when the Nylander was a point per game player, and everybody wanted to upgrade on him too. Then we wind up with Gomez and Drury... I'm perfectly happy with our top two centers. I'm happy with Buch. We just can't pay everybody. There's no one in house to step into 2C. We have options for 1RW.

I suppose the Rangers could try to take a gamble and see if SJ is interested in a Strome for Hertl swap. Both have one year left on a contract, Same age, Strome saves them a bit in cap, Hertl is much better from the dot and actually is pretty good playoff wise. I figure if you are initiating the trade as the Rangers you might have to add a small amount although the trade is pretty even if the rest of the league buys in to Strome being for real.

I think Strome's trade value is still probably shadowed by the "but he's been playing with Panarin" factor, although anyone watching him closely should see that he simply is a good player (when not taking foolish stick fouls).

 

Good point: on what tablet, brought down from what mount, does it say that Chytil must play center?