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 Will Remember This Chris Kreider Disappearing Act


Phil

Recommended Posts

1. Despite playing for a coach in Alain Vigneault who was not terribly invested by that point and putting out a lineup that included defensemen Ryan Sproul, Rob O?Gara and John Gilmour and forwards David Desharnais and Paul Carey ? a quintet that has not played a second of NHL hockey this season since Carey was sent to the AHL by Ottawa after five games ? the Rangers went 7-9-3 after tearing the team asunder a year ago.

 

This year, with David Quinn coaching as if it were the first half of November with his team occupying a playoff position, the Blueshirts have gone 1-2-4 since both Kevin Hayes and Mats Zuccarello were sent away.

 

So Chris Kreider?s rather extended walkabout in which he was bounced off the first line, shuttled to the fourth unit for a time and has settled well, who knows where, either complicates the issue or confirms it for management.

 

Because no one can tell me this stretch in which the winger has no goals and two assists in the last seven at exactly the wrong time is not going to factor considerably in the decision whether to sign Kreider to a pricey, long-term contract extension or trade the 28-year-old (as of April 30) at the draft before he gets into his walk year.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/03/12/rangers-will-remember-this-chris-kreider-disappearing-act/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last 6 games, Kreider has 2 assists and Zibanejad has 2 points, both in the same game.

 

Let's see what changed... oh oh, I know!

 

And don't bring up Zucc, because those guys were putting up points with Buchnevich and Namestnikov, until they were split up. Not to mention how fucking awful Coach Quinn's powerplay has been, throughout the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last 6 games, Kreider has 2 assists and Zibanejad has 2 points, both in the same game.

 

Let's see what changed... oh oh, I know!

 

And don't bring up Zucc, because those guys were putting up points with Buchnevich and Namestnikov, until they were split up. Not to mention how fucking awful Coach Quinn's powerplay has been, throughout the season.

 

Zucc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't trade him if you sign Panarin and/or Karlsson. At the same time, this really depends on the term.

 

6x6 is palatable. 7x7.5 is not.

 

Kreider's tenure with the team is completely out of his control, point-wise, or cap-wise. It completely depends on how this team does in the offseason, and maybe how they perform the first few months of next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kreider does this every year. Not a surprise.

 

I think many thought that this year was different for him. An elevation to a new level. This is probably the best thing that could happen to keep his long term cost low. If he had more consistency and had finished with 40g and 70 points for example, he would cost a lot more and the Rangers would not entertain trading him with that level of production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't trade him if you sign Panarin and/or Karlsson. At the same time, this really depends on the term.

 

6x6 is palatable. 7x7.5 is not.

 

Is the old logic of 50 points = ~$5 mil no longer relevant with the cap increases? I'm not sure Kreider has earned a $6 mill a year contract, long-term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the old logic of 50 points = ~$5 mil no longer relevant with the cap increases? I'm not sure Kreider has earned a $6 mill a year contract, long-term.

 

Kind of. It's a lot easier to just use percentage of cap rather than hard-and-fast AAVs based on points.

 

$5M under a $70M salary cap, for example, isn't of the same relative value as $5M under an $80M cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the old logic of 50 points = ~$5 mil no longer relevant with the cap increases? I'm not sure Kreider has earned a $6 mill a year contract, long-term.

 

Well, he'll be pushing 60 points this year most likely. James van Riemsdyk is a good comparable. He got 5yr/35m this past summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quinn's accountability policy is in general a good thing, but he takes it too far when he splits up his two best players and sticks one on the 4th line after a few ineffective games. You have to let some players, especially your best ones, play through dry spells. The buzz kill of being out of the playoff race and losing their buddies had a predictable impact on 93 and 20. I thought they actually thought they looked good in the first period tonight after being reunited on the first line with 17. It's too bad 20 got kicked out. Let's give that trio another try in Calgary. 20 needs to be signed unless his demand is flat out ridiculous. We've had enough burning down. But if he's not signed, you probably have to trade him to avoid a third year in a row dominated by the specter of looming trades of major roster players at the deadline. Also, if you don't like the price of Kreider, you won't like the price of what they get for him, if it's anything close to a proven NHL player(s).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can take it or leave it with Kreider. He's a good, not great, player who could be a good piece moving forward but also someone who could bring a nice haul in the summer.

I just hope Gorton learns from the Hayes and, to a lesser extent, Zucc situations.

You sit down with Kreider this summer and figure out what he wants to extend. If you like what you hear you sign him. If you don't, you trade him at the draft or at least before camp comes around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So has Zibanejad, but they were doing well together, producing well beyond their norm. Not sure why you split them up.
Not really. Z goes through point droughts but contributes is other ways and is visible.

 

Krieder just disappears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kreider is a secondary player and this is why. He’s never been consistent. If he was, he’d be making double the money and would be a star in the league.

 

He’s frustrated 3 coaches so far in his NHL career. He is what he is: a fine player. Good but not great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Z goes through point droughts but contributes is other ways and is visible.

 

Krieder just disappears.

 

Kreider does as well. Still pressures d with his speed, plays physical and fast, and is an annoying net-front presence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't trade him if you sign Panarin and/or Karlsson. At the same time, this really depends on the term.

 

6x6 is palatable. 7x7.5 is not.

 

Please, no more 6 and 7 year contracts. Players have no incentive to go the extra mile on these long-term deals and the risk of having to buy them out half-way through the contract increases greatly. Hope management would have learned their lessons on this by now (Redden, Girardi, Richards, Drury, etc..). Keep Kreider to a 2-3 year deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, no more 6 and 7 year contracts. Players have no incentive to go the extra mile on these long-term deals and the risk of having to buy them out half-way through the contract increases greatly. Hope management would have learned their lessons on this by now (Redden, Girardi, Richards, Drury, etc..). Keep Kreider to a 2-3 year deal.

 

I like your logic but other teams out there will definitely be offering longer contracts if that means they can swoop in and grab a player they want when that player is a UFA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The years thing is simple mathematics. Players are looking at a total number, so the years to get to it are probably not of major concern. For example, I doubt Panarin particualrly cares about 6, 7, or 8 years. What he cares about is the $80 million he stands to make by signing whatever deal he signs in free agency. Teams have to give extra years to bring the AAV to a more managable number.

 

$80 million over five years, for example, is $16 million per season. Versus $11.5 (rounded) over seven. That, to me, is the reason these guys all sign these deals.

 

That's not to say there isn't value in Panarin signing, say, a three-year deal for $45 million ($15 million AAV) and then coming back to free agency again at 31 when he can probably do it again (bringing his grand total to $90 million or more), but there's more risk in that than signing the 7-year contract he's bound to be offered this summer that guarnatees him $80 million no matter what.

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...