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

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

Phil

By Phil
in New York Rangers

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 417
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted
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.

It can't be "period". Cost of acquisition is always part.

 

Would you trade our first this year plus Chytil plus Shesty for Nylander and then pay him 8x8? (Hypothetical, know that's not his ask)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc BSBH Legend

Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc

Posted
Posted
How about they continue with the beginning of their rebuild instead of trading for a 60 point player looking for that price tag.

 

Yeah because he will never top the production he had as a 20 y/o. No chance he?ll ever be more then a 60 points player

 

 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Giacomin BSBH Mite

Giacomin

Posted
Posted

In this case, for NY, it is all about the players we send. [Assuming Toronto agrees to the package]

 

Pete, I also assume you're OK with the Rangers paying a healthy proven 22 y/o top 6 (or better) winger fair mkt value, for 7 years. Putting aside your definition of mkt value may be different than Phils. If so, then would you be OK with something like:

 

Kreider - a key physical speedy PF replacement for Willie. Already 10 goals, imagine him with Matthews instead of Hyman? In front screening. Fast, strong, he's a unique asset for them.

 

Trading him solves the biggest upcoming dilemma for Gorton. He's a UFA after next season. We'll need to resign him for big $ or trade him during a playoff run next year or lose him for nothing. See how trading Kreids (it could even be for a Dman that the Rangers keep or toronto could use) makes paying Nylander negligible?

 

A RHD of their choosing - if I'm Dubas, it's ADA or Pionk (or Lundkvist). Yes, this is a loss that hurts, both are cost-controlled. However, I'm gambling neither becomes a #1RHD even with a true #1 partner. It also seems I may be higher on both players than you are, not saying you don't like either.

 

2 smaller assets that Dubas/Babcock may want They could choose between D prospects, say Rykov or Lindgren. Not Hajek, Miller, Lundkqvist, but anyone else. McQuaid or Claesson is theirs. They can have Staal or Shatty if they prefer, but that is not likely. They can choose a goalie, between Georgiev and Lindbom. Tampa's 2nd rounder. If they prefer Hayes or Zuc to Kreids, I do it too.

 

So my question: Would you do the deal above? Feel free to elaborate where you draw the line. ie Lindbom?

 

I agree that Willie is no Marner, think it was Future I had this debate with, when I suggested last Nov packaging McD for one of the two.. Apologies if it was someone else. Marner is special. Willie is damn good and is likely still ascending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Trading isn't a bad idea but again not at that price tag

 

I'm much more worried about the cost of acquisition than the cost of retention. Giving Nylander $7M is fine. Giving the Leafs some combination of Skjei, Buchnevich, Kravstov, etc. to get him here in the first place just sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted
There's always a chance but why pay him as such before he ever does it.

 

Because I'd rather pay for promise than pay for legacy. This is the kind of thinking that leads to giving 25- to 27-year old players six-, seven-, and eight-year deals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted

Overpaying a 22 yo RFA isn't as bad as a 30 yo UFA.

 

However, as typical with Rangers fans, we're already bitching about the Skjei contract when he's playing on a shit corp of defense...

 

What do you think happens with Nylander if he's just not that good away from Matthews?

 

Everyone else's guy is always sexy. Til they get here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted
If nothing happens by the deadline (Dec 1) does he become a UFA next summer?

 

No. He just sits the year out. Still RFA. Still TOR property.

 

Understood but who's advocating paying for legacy? He wants to be paid for more before even showing he can be more.

 

I've already established that his ask (if it's in that $7M range) is well within market value based on percentage of cap. Pastrnak, Barkov, etc. All in that 8%~ range.

 

 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted
No. He just sits the year out. Still RFA. Still TOR property.

 

 

 

I've already established that his ask (if it's in that $7M range) is well within market value based on percentage of cap. Pastrnak, Barkov, etc. All in that 8%~ range.

 

 

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

Both of whom are better players.

 

% of cap, second only to p/60 as a useless metric.

 

You think players look across the league and say "% of cap"? Do you think Matthews will say "If you give Nylander 8% of cap, I want 10%"? No. He's gonna say "If McDavid gets $10, I want $11".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Both of whom are better players.

 

% of cap, second only to p/60 as a useless metric.

 

You think players look across the league and say "% of cap"? Do you think Matthews will say "If you give Nylander 8% of cap, I want 10%"? No. He's gonna say "If McDavid gets $10, I want $11".

 

...which is based on percentage of cap. Players don't have to look at it and have an opinion. The math still breaks that way for GMs.

 

Even of both are better than him, he's not wrong to point to both as comparables, which is the entire point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted
...which is based on percentage of cap. Players don't have to look at it and have an opinion. The math still breaks that way for GMs.

 

Even of both are better than him, he's not wrong to point to both as comparables, which is the entire point.

 

Not it isn't. If the cap drops tomorrow, Matthews will still want more than McDavid. And he isn't gonna listen when Dubas says "Well, err, percentage of cap, you're both still getting 10%, but because McDavid signed before you that means he's getting 12 and you're getting 10". (Yes, I'm making up these #s to prove a point)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The cap has never dropped, which makes your scenario effectively an impossibility. At best, the cap would remain stagnant, in which case the math maintains.

 

GMs absolutely view this through the prism of percentage. They have little choice but to. It's the most sure-fire way of accounting for how things can break two, three, four years down the line. Especially given the likelihood that the cap will rise with the inflator as it's wont to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete BSBH Legend

Pete

Posted
Posted

The cap almost dropped in 2016. It doesn't matter if it didn't. It could.

 

And this % of cap is a very recent argument that people are clinging to. No one talked about it 3 years ago. Now it's a fad.

 

And to backtrack to a point a missed, if Barkov and Pasta are better than him, he's pretty stupid for trying to use them as comparables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The cap almost dropped in 2016. It doesn't matter if it didn't. It could.

 

And this % of cap is a very recent argument that people are clinging to. No one talked about it 3 years ago. Now it's a fad.

 

And to backtrack to a point a missed, if Barkov and Pasta are better than him, he's pretty stupid for trying to use them as comparables.

 

No one talked about a lot of things three years ago, or three years before that, or before that. That's how progress works. A decade ago shot metrics just meant shots. What you call a fad, I call progress.

 

As to Barkov & Co, I think he's brilliant for using them as comparables. They establish a ceiling (again, based on percentage) for him to baseline his value.

 

Why on earth, if you think you're worth $100K a year are you asking for $80 instead of $120 knowing negotiations almost always move downward, not up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...