BrooksBurner

The coach I wanted last summer. Love Torts.

Ultimately we’re left with debating about what unsustainable means. I always interpreted the “unsustainable” part to mean they weren’t as good as their record and would fall on their faces in the playoffs in fairly short order because of it. That didn’t happen. Winning a Cup seems like poor criteria to determine whether something is sustainable or not, given how extremely hard it is to win a Cup. A lot of good 5v5 teams don’t win the Cup, so it’s a lot more nuanced than that. Carolina is a terrific 5v5 team. They lost…to the Rangers. Was their approach not sustainable because they lost? About the injuries, it’s a two way street. The Rangers were without Goodrow and Lindgren for a lot of round 1. That helped Pittsburgh a lot in building a lead to begin with.

I mean you're both right and wrong at the same time. They lost for the reasons that many highlighted during the season. It was ultimately their Achilles' heel in a series against potentially one of the top 4 or 5 greatest dynasties to play the game (pending if TB completes 3X in a row). However, the team absolutely destroyed the notion that how they were winning was not sustainable throughout the year. That diatribe never gave enough credit to the incredibly elite portions of the team (Igor + PP), which were basically the sole reasons for winning both playoff series. We don't really know if that's a problem yet or not when it comes to multi-year sustainability, but hopefully they just improve 5v5 so we don't have to find out.

Is 4.49 ok

It's a bit more complicated than this, but it allows them to max out the cap limit on the team without Weber's cap hit included. Whereas previously they would have had the cap limit minus Dadonov's cap hit to spend on the rest of the team. So: Montreal saves a significant amount of real money by not paying a player who isn't going to play, while getting a decent player back. Vegas pays a significant amount more real money in exchange for freeing up cap space, which they knew they were going to have to do eventually the moment they traded for Eichel. I'm not sure how the real money part works (how much insurance covers versus the team, but I assume the team is on the hook for a healthy amount). Examples on CapFriendly here: https://www.capfriendly.com/ltir-faq#basic-example

On the money. I thought the play by play guys are OK, not good but not terrible. They get a lot of names wrong during play though. Ray Ferraro is terrible. Steve Levy between periods is terrible. Chelios is a bore. Emily Kaplan wasn’t good, but I give her a pass because she’s new/young/will improve with experience. There’s probably better options for her role though. Example: remember the Rangers’ Amanda Borges?

Half retention plus they take Nemeth. Then we can talk about the rest of the pieces involved. Toews is a good stop-gap option at the right price for sure.

"We need a center who can win faceoffs" by Game 4 of next season. If you thought Chytil and Strome were bad at them, I implore you to look at Dach's numbers. With that said, I still do Lundkvist for Dach and it's not a tough decision at all.

Here's something Gallant deserves credit for, even if he was forced into it a bit at first. PP from Beginning of Season -> 12/14 (28 games): 23.5% (8th in league) PP from 12/15 -> End of Season (54 games): 26.3% (4th in league) That might seem like a somewhat small increase, but it turned a good PP into a visibly lethal PP. Panarin used to be on the left boards with Strome on the right boards and Zibanejad in the middle as a bumper/one timer option. Panarin got hurt for a game and a half. Zibanejad got slotted into the one timer position on the left boards, but looked very dangerous just in that short time as he has in the past. Instead of Gallant switching it back to what it was two games later, which I'm pretty confident Quinn would have done as the original PP configuration that was not maxing out everyone's strengths was his idea (I harped on him about this for a long time), Gallant kept it. He moved Panarin over to the other side and Strome to the bumper position. Zibanejad was not playing very well before the switch (5 goals, 16 assists, 21 points in 28 games). I remember reading shit from people who were already trashing the contract extension during that time period.

Nope. Don’t see Strome signing for $4.5 either. It’s all a pipe dream.

Depends short vs long term, how much $, etc. Vatrano and/or Kakko are moveable contracts if it comes down to that.

And this can't be overstated enough. When you consistently find gems in rounds 3+, when the time is right you can sell your 1sts and 2nds for quality players.

Just sayin':

1.6 was his QO. Noice.

He had a 5.9 shooting % this year in 67 games which is pretty much unsustainably bad. The previous two seasons were 10.5 and 12.7. He has a nice shot. No clue what happened this season, but he couldn’t buy a goal. Shooting volume isn’t a problem for him though, so theoretically if his % goes back up to where it’s been he should be looking at 15-20 goals next season if he plays 82.

Forgotten! I do think it's fine to look at the tape to evaluate certain things like his shot/skating/stride/etc., but for sure the dipsy doodle shit that he used to burn shitty KHL defensemen in some of his highlights isn't going to fly in the NHL. That's for the kiddos to fawn over. I was really referring to the little I saw in that stint he had with the team a couple of years ago at the end of season. The ice time and production wasn't there, but I remember my lasting impression was 1) he knows where to go in the OZ without the puck - looks to camp around in the slot area and find open space, and 2) he carried the puck on his stick with confidence. It could be I was just too used to watching the shaky and unassertive versions of Kakko and Lafreniere that year, but I hope we get to find out more about him in the NHL first instead of trading him.

If Strome came in at $4.5, the Rangers wouldn’t even need to pay someone to take Nemeth yet. He could be 7D or get buried in Hartford. They would have the space to absorb it.

Nothing weird about it. I just think the equation changes if you’re at a $4.5M number on Strome is all. Just a few days ago I was passing on both, because I was assuming $5.5M+ on both. Under $5M for Strome was floated by Staple which got everyone talking about it. I’m not sure we can conclusively say Strome and Copp are incapable of being the answers though. There’s a chance they aren’t, which is why you can only go so high on $, but I’m not sure the Rangers’ problem is personnel anymore. All of the talent is alreadys here. Now I think it just comes down to buy in from the team as a whole to skate harder every shift. Challenge for pucks harder. Backcheck harder. Commit more to team defense. Anyone can do these things, but it’s something that needs to be learned and adopted team wide. As guys bond with each other, they fight harder for each other and the desire to win together grows. Once this mentality kicks in, it’s contagious and spreads like wildfire especially once it starts to result in winning. Eventually you bring in random guys for depth and they bust their ass sideways for you because that’s the mentality set by the team.

Goodrow - Chytil - Kakko is a good 3rd line too. It's a good top 9. Blais on the 4th line with the ability to flex up all over the lineup will be great too.

Me too. He has a really good shot. I think he would instantly have one of the best shots on the team.

From the little I've seen of Kravtsov, he loves to go to the slot area. I think he would be a tremendous fit on Panarin's line.

I don't blame Copp at all for that either. I mentioned this before but he's totaled half as much money as Strome in his career. He also doesn't have roots in NY. The only connection he really has is being friends with Trouba. Strome has lived in NY for 8 of the last 9 years of his life, and is close with a bunch of guys on the team.

Yes. Agreed 100%. And listen, Strome is in a good position to take less. Zibanejad took less than he could have gotten on open market (probably $10M+). Kreider took less (probably $7.5M+). I will never blame a guy for maximizing earnings during their career if that’s what they want to do, but guys have already started taking less on this team. Strome has also had $25M worth of contracts so far. How much does life change financially for him if he gets another $27M (4.5M x 6) on his next contract to stay or $30M (6M x 5) to leave? Negligible. Especially when you add it to his career total earnings already. Now…how much does non-financial life change for him and his family if he leaves? And what about quality of hockey career and chance to win a Cup?

Lol you know my history on Strome. I wasn’t sold and I admit it. I’m not 100% sold now like maybe you are, but I’m way more confident in a bit of risk as the $ goes down. My perception started to change towards the end of year last year. This year I thought he was good and found it really strange how the sentiment traveled significantly in the other direction. Felt like I was being gaslit all year. He’s a 20 goal 60 point guy, and I think he might have even more to offer with “not Hunt” on the other wing. I didn’t take away from the playoffs what everyone else seemed to. The negatives were highlighted. The positives were buried. One unfortunate play made on one leg doesn’t take away that he raised his physical game significantly and was unafraid to get involved. He proved he was willing to skate through a tough injury on a contract year for the team. I thought for two years he was a pussy. He has shown me he is not. He’s solidly productive and he’s a vocal leader. Don’t get me wrong. I’m realistic. I like the guy, but I wouldn’t want him signed for $6M. Or even $5.5. Same goes for Copp. But at something like $4.5? That’s a game changer IMO. Also, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Continuity is pretty important when you look to build on previous successes.