rumor/report: Rangers Sending Two Scouts to Leafs/Pens Game; Nylander?

[Phil]

To Pionks credit, he leads the team in ice time (ATOI) and blocked shots (39). Both of which are indicative of a good defenseman and seeing as this will be his first full NHL season.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

How? Both are indicative of the coach playing him a lot.

[Pete]

But that strongly suggests that he's merely a product of Matthews, which is a bit of an unfalsifiable position.

 

I can understand having reservations over whether or not to pay him like Matthews. But I can't really buy the methods we're using here to do so — calling him a "support" player, like he's Carl Hagelin in disguise.

 

I didn't call him a support player but you're smart enough to realize that playing with Matthews isn't the same as playing with Zib, or Chytil or LyinAss.

[Phil]

I didn't call him a support player but you're smart enough to realize that playing with Matthews isn't the same as playing with Zib, or Chytil or LyinAss.

 

Of course, but there's a fuck ton of doubt being built into him as a player. I think, at best, you're probably still looking at a 60~ point player where he'd probably be an 80-point player with TOR over the next few seasons playing alongside Matthews and Marner.

[Pete]

Of course, but there's a fuck ton of doubt being built into him as a player. I think, at best, you're probably still looking at a 60~ point player where he'd probably be an 80-point player with TOR over the next few seasons playing alongside Matthews and Marner.

 

Right, so why are we paying him $7+ mil to be that?

[Phil]

Right, so why are we paying him $7+ mil to be that?

 

Because that's what 60-point players get paid? I also think that as the Rangers add more quality, the return on that investment can only (or should only) go up, no? I mean, they're fucking up the tank right now, but let's say for the sake of argumen they end up with another top-10 pick, or multiple firsts again this season. Let's say they grab another high-impact player. Is he really on an island going into next season, the season after, etc?

 

What if you add Panarin to that?

 

I mean, you have to start somewhere, so why not start with clearly talented players and build on it? I feel like it would be similar to the Zibanejad approach.

[The Dude]

I'd do that if it were remotely true.

 

Lindgren is essentially a non-prospect. Pionk, I wouldn't think has much trade value and Zucc is an expiring deal. I don't think that package even gets you Hymen.

 

Did I miss something on Lindgren? How is he now a non prospect?

 

I think Toronto would like a place holding top nine winger who can do a bit of everything along with an inexpensive young D man, who can possibly be a decent two way, point producer if put in a top four role, to take a run this year. Add in a prospect and I guess more (pick and or McQuaid?), I don't think they are far off.

 

They (Toronto) have cap issues coming up. I'd think a mish most of current help and cheap future help is more up their alley. If they stack their deck this season, they could be an even more serious contender.

[Albatrosss]

Because that's what 60-point players get paid? I also think that as the Rangers add more quality, the return on that investment can only (or should only) go up, no? I mean, they're fucking up the tank right now, but let's say for the sake of argumen they end up with another top-10 pick, or multiple firsts again this season. Let's say they grab another high-impact player. Is he really on an island going into next season, the season after, etc?

 

What if you add Panarin to that?

 

I mean, you have to start somewhere, so why not start with clearly talented players and build on it? I feel like it would be similar to the Zibanejad approach.

 

im with you. rebuild starts now, not 3 years from now when your picks are ready for NHL. then add another 3 years for them to mature and become fringe 3rd liners.

[Phil]

im with you. rebuild starts now, not 3 years from now when your picks are ready for NHL. then add another 3 years for them to mature and become fringe 3rd liners.

 

Right. I mean, it's a very rough projection, but Zibanejad, Kravstov, Chytil, Panarin, Nylander, and X is a very good top-six to build on for 2019, 2020, 2021.

 

Panarin / Zibanejad / Nylander-Chytil

X / Chytil-Nylander / Kravstov

 

Solve for X and figure out if you want Chytil or Nylander to be a center and, damn, can that team go.

[josh]

Right. I mean, it's a very rough projection, but Zibanejad, Kravstov, Chytil, Panarin, Nylander, and X is a very good top-six to build on for 2019, 2020, 2021.

 

Panarin / Zibanejad / Nylander-Chytil

X / Chytil-Nylander / Kravstov

 

Solve for X and figure out if you want Chytil or Nylander to be a center and, damn, can that team go.

 

That team would get pushed around by mites

[Phil]

Can't push what you can't catch.

 

 

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

[josh]

When most teams employ a defense of 4 guys standing on the blue line, yeah, they’ll get caught

[Phil]

Keep Kreider, then. His speed and size can be used as compliment.

 

 

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

[Pete]

Because that's what 60-point players get paid? I also think that as the Rangers add more quality, the return on that investment can only (or should only) go up, no? I mean, they're fucking up the tank right now, but let's say for the sake of argumen they end up with another top-10 pick, or multiple firsts again this season. Let's say they grab another high-impact player. Is he really on an island going into next season, the season after, etc?

 

What if you add Panarin to that?

 

I mean, you have to start somewhere, so why not start with clearly talented players and build on it? I feel like it would be similar to the Zibanejad approach.

 

Um, that's what he's asking for.

 

I'm not trading multiple pieces and then overpaying Nylander.

[Phil]

Um, that's what he's asking for.

 

I'm not trading multiple pieces and then overpaying Nylander.

 

OK, and I have no problem with that ask. I don't think it's overpayment at all. I also don't think 60 points is his ceiling at all. I think it's more of a baseline.

[Pete]

OK, and I have no problem with that ask. I don't think it's overpayment at all. I also don't think 60 points is his ceiling at all. I think it's more of a baseline.

First you question if that's a player of his caliber price tag, then you say you have no problem with it?

 

 

And not PLUS assets.

[Phil]

Pete, I said that I think he's a 60~ point player and an 80-point player if he sticks with TOR (and Matthews). You then asked "why are we paying him $7M to be that?"

 

I'm not questioning his value. You are.

 

I'd happily pay him $7M to put up 60+ points as this team continues to add offensive pieces. To me, the return on investment will pay off as the club injects it's high-end talent, and as that talent makes their mark. In short, as Chytil finds his footing, and when Kravtsov makes his way to North America.

 

Adding Panarin to this mix would also help.

 

Despite all of this, I do agree that the team really isn't in position to pull off the trade. I'm just saying that, in a vacuum at least, were they to, I'd have no problem giving that man his money.

[josh]

Rather pay a bit more for Karlsson for the same 60+ points & defense

 

Only thing intriguing about a nylander deal is dumping a contract or two.

[Phil]

Free agency is almost certainly where they need to find value right now. Trades can work, but it's gotta be on their terms, not Toronto's (or anyone else).

[Pete]

Pete, I said that I think he's a 60~ point player and an 80-point player if he sticks with TOR (and Matthews). You then asked "why are we paying him $7M to be that?"

 

I'm not questioning his value. You are.

 

I'd happily pay him $7M to put up 60+ points as this team continues to add offensive pieces. To me, the return on investment will pay off as the club injects it's high-end talent, and as that talent makes their mark. In short, as Chytil finds his footing, and when Kravtsov makes his way to North America.

 

Adding Panarin to this mix would also help.

 

Despite all of this, I do agree that the team really isn't in position to pull off the trade. I'm just saying that, in a vacuum at least, were they to, I'd have no problem giving that man his money.

 

Oh I guess I misread "Because that's what 60 point players get paid?" They actually don't. Barkov and Pastrnak are far superior players who are not making what Nylander is asking, and they do more to drive offense, they are the best players on their lines. They make guys around them better. Matthews is doing fine without Nylander.

 

I know he's you MCM but he's not worth assets + cap space cost of acquisition.

[Phil]

Oh I guess I misread "Because that's what 60 point players get paid?" They actually don't. Barkov and Pastrnak are far superior players who are not making what Nylander is asking, and they do more to drive offense, they are the best players on their lines. They make guys around them better. Matthews is doing fine without Nylander.

 

I know he's you MCM but he's not worth assets + cap space cost of acquisition.

 

Based on percentage of cap, they do. Pastrnak was 8.89% of the cap when signed. Barkov was 8.08%. Nylander (assuming he signs for $7M) would be 8.81% of the current $79.5M cap ceiling.

 

Also, Matthews is my MCM, not Nylander. I loved his father way more than Willie.

[ThirtyONE]

It just seems silly to talk about a player who's 22 as if they've plateaued. If this was two or three years ago, Nylander would be the best Ranger prospect since Lundqvist. If it was one year ago, he'd be the teams highest scorer. When you look at what we have on the team, there's a lot of dead weight and there's a lot of players who just aren't going to make the cut once we're back in contention. We don't know what Anderson will be. We don't know what Chytil will be. Or Kratsov or Miller, etc. We know what Nylander is and at 22 he's the perfect age for what we're trying to do here.

 

Is he a STAR? No. Is he very good? Yes. And we have a severe lack of very good players. Nit picking a player to death isn't worth the time. Get me talented players. Period.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

Rather pay a bit more for Karlsson for the same 60+ points & defense

 

Only thing intriguing about a nylander deal is dumping a contract or two.

 

Karlsson has 0 goals and is -9 on a good Sharks team in 20 games so far this season. He's 5 years older than Nylander and didnt he have a big injury or something recently? Nor does he really play any good defense.

[NYRangers723]

Oh I guess I misread "Because that's what 60 point players get paid?" They actually don't. Barkov and Pastrnak are far superior players who are not making what Nylander is asking, and they do more to drive offense, they are the best players on their lines. They make guys around them better. Matthews is doing fine without Nylander.

 

I know he's you MCM but he's not worth assets + cap space cost of acquisition.

 

Agreed Pete

[josh]

Karlsson has 0 goals and is -9 on a good Sharks team in 20 games so far this season. He's 5 years older than Nylander and didnt he have a big injury or something recently? Nor does he really play any good defense.

 

Should get and re-sign him now!

[Pete]

Based on percentage of cap, they do. Pastrnak was 8.89% of the cap when signed. Barkov was 8.08%. Nylander (assuming he signs for $7M) would be 8.81% of the current $79.5M cap ceiling.

 

Also, Matthews is my MCM, not Nylander. I loved his father way more than Willie.

The percentage of cap is a weak argument.