[brooks] Trouba Expected to Sign a 7-Year Extension Worth $7.5–8 Million Per Season

[RodrigueGabriel]

For what it's worth, Corsica rates Trouba as the 25th best RHD. I don't know the guts of their processs of "stacking" different ratings well enough to defend it or attack it. I do know Trouba was frustrated at being stacked behind Byfiglien and maybe the advent of 1D PP minutes and a leadership role bring out his best. In any case, he has the leverage to demand 1D money and I doubt we're going to walk away from that.

[Dunny]

He's really McDonaughish, is he not?

 

That's how I've viewed him, anyways.

[LindG1000]

He's really McDonaughish, is he not?

 

That's how I've viewed him, anyways.

 

Better puck mover, I think. A bit less steady on the back-end; he defends by possession more than by position.

[CCCP]

hope there are no "no movement/no trade clauses"

[Puck Head]

He's really McDonaughish, is he not?

 

That's how I've viewed him, anyways.

 

Pretty much

 

 

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

[Phil]

hope there are no "no movement/no trade clauses"

 

"You can wish in one hand and crap in the other — see which gets filled first,"

 

Clauses are a currency in this CBA.

[Future]

Right. Look at RHD in the league. Where is he in that list, eighth-best? Tenth? Who cares. Pay him.

 

The alternative is significantly worse.

The other alternative is that you've invested huge money and a 1st-round pick in a guy who doesn't move the needle for your team, beyond moving from 14th to...8th, and I don't think he does. I mean, I'll ask the same question as I did about Hartman or acquiring Panarin but losing Kreider - what's the actual point? They aren't moves that make you so much better that you're a Cup contender right now.

 

It is ridiculously poor philosophy to sign a guy simply because "we don't have one." So what if you don't have a #1 RD right now? Unless they fathom themselves contenders this year, it doesn't matter.

 

At some point, with all the draft capital they've invested in the defense, you have to trust that you got it right somewhere.

[CCCP]

"You can wish in one hand and crap in the other — see which gets filled first,"

 

Clauses are a currency in this CBA.

 

love Grumpy Old Men

[Pete]

Fact is Trouba is a #1 Dman. To pay him 8m a season for the next 7 is completely fair.

 

It's not a fact, it remains to be seen, actually. He's never been a #1D, so we don't know what he is.

 

He's our #1, and I do think he's going to be overpaid, unfortunately.

[Phil]

The other alternative is that you've invested huge money and a 1st-round pick in a guy who doesn't move the needle for your team, beyond moving from 14th to...8th, and I don't think he does. I mean, I'll ask the same question as I did about Hartman or acquiring Panarin but losing Kreider - what's the actual point? They aren't moves that make you so much better that you're a Cup contender right now.

 

It is ridiculously poor philosophy to sign a guy simply because "we don't have one." So what if you don't have a #1 RD right now? Unless they fathom themselves contenders this year, it doesn't matter.

 

At some point, with all the draft capital they've invested in the defense, you have to trust that you got it right somewhere.

 

This is a false dilemma. It presumes that there isn't a third solution in which the Rangers got it right somewhere — e.g. have top-four or top-two defenders in house (Lundkvist, Miller, Rykov) — and keep Trouba.

[Future]

This is a false dilemma. It presumes that there isn't a third solution in which the Rangers got it right somewhere — e.g. have top-four or top-two defenders in house (Lundkvist, Miller, Rykov) — and keep Trouba.

No, it doesn't presume that. It means that there's a gross contradiction in the organization where they invest all this draft capital, but don't think it's good enough and have spent all of this time acquiring draft picks and young assets, but aren't going to give them time to grow without the expectation of winning right now. The logic has been flawed since the Stepan trade and though they've done a good job acquiring pieces, they have done an awful job at having any sort of a coherent plan.

 

I mean, if they don't view Kreider as a long-term piece, they sure as shit should have known that last season, and there should be no more discussion about what to do with him. They've gotten way too cute under the guise of being patient, and now they're trying to play catch-up.

[CCCP]

No, it doesn't presume that. It means that there's a gross contradiction in the organization where they invest all this draft capital, but don't think it's good enough and have spent all of this time acquiring draft picks and young assets, but aren't going to give them time to grow without the expectation of winning right now. The logic has been flawed since the Stepan trade and though they've done a good job acquiring pieces, they have done an awful job at having any sort of a coherent plan. I mean, if they don't view Kreider as a long-term piece, they sure as shit should have known that last season, and there should be no more discussion about what to do with him. They've gotten way too cute under the guise of being patient, and now they're trying to play catch-up.

 

what do you mean? their plan is to acquire as much young talent as possible. fox and trouba fit exactly that. All other prospects are just that, prospects. there's no guarantee that they will make the NHL or stick around. Having Miller, Rykov, and Lundkvist in the system should not stop you from acquiring other defensemen.

 

Kreider has another year in his contract, there was/is no reason to rush a decision on him. No reason to make a decision now when you have another year to think about it

[RodrigueGabriel]

No, it doesn't presume that. It means that there's a gross contradiction in the organization where they invest all this draft capital, but don't think it's good enough and have spent all of this time acquiring draft picks and young assets, but aren't going to give them time to grow without the expectation of winning right now. The logic has been flawed since the Stepan trade and though they've done a good job acquiring pieces, they have done an awful job at having any sort of a coherent plan.

 

I mean, if they don't view Kreider as a long-term piece, they sure as shit should have known that last season, and there should be no more discussion about what to do with him. They've gotten way too cute under the guise of being patient, and now they're trying to play catch-up.

 

Publicly, Gorton has talked about how opportunistic they have been/want to be. There is going to be a trade-off against having a fully fleshed out plan.

[ThirtyONE]

It's not a fact, it remains to be seen, actually. He's never been a #1D, so we don't know what he is.

 

He's our #1, and I do think he's going to be overpaid, unfortunately.

 

Please name 31 D in the league that are better.

[Future]

Publicly, Gorton has talked about how opportunistic they have been/want to be. There is going to be a trade-off against having a fully fleshed out plan.

Right. I think that's dumb lol

 

It's how you end up - assuming Kreider is still here this year - with 3 seasons in a row where you are selling vets at the deadline and making it clear to your team that you don't expect to be winning.

[Future]

Please name 31 D in the league that are better.

There's a big difference between being the 28th-best defensemen and being a #1 D.

 

It's like how Stepan was a #1c.

[ThirtyONE]

There's a big difference between being the 28th-best defensemen and being a #1 D.

 

It's like how Stepan was a #1c.

 

I'm not sure what this means. Please name 28 dmen then...

[Future]

I'm not sure what this means. Please name 28 dmen then...

It doesn't matter what the number is. Qualifying as a #1d is player type, not a subjective ranking.

 

There is really only like 15 #1D in the league. Not every team has one.

[josh]

I'm not sure what this means. Please name 28 dmen then...

 

I use “1D” as a label for a type of player, not the position.

[Pete]

Please name 31 D in the league that are better.

 

That's a silly way to determine what a #1 D is.

 

San Jose has 3 #1 Dmen. We may not have any.

[Pete]

I use “1D” as a label for a type of player, not the position.

 

Exactly.

[BrooksBurner]

Honestly 8 million doesn't get you a 1D anymore, so I'm not sure what the issue is if Trouba is just a very good 2D instead.

[Pete]

Honestly 8 million doesn't get you a 1D anymore, so I'm not sure what the issue is if Trouba is just a very good 2D instead.

 

Only 3 d make more than $8 and one just signed last week, who's a generational talent.

 

Last year's Norris Winner makes less than 8.

[Phil]

Honestly 8 million doesn't get you a 1D anymore, so I'm not sure what the issue is if Trouba is just a very good 2D instead.

 

Which is why, again, I point to the percentage of cap. "Real" 1D's in today's market eat 10–15% of the cap. Subban (if you still consider him a 1D), Doughty (13.8), Karlsson (14.5), Burns (11), Carlson (10), Hedman (10.7), Byfuglien (10.4), OEL (10.4), etc.

[Phil]

Only 3 d make more than $8 and one just signed last week, who's a generational talent.

 

Last year's Norris Winner makes less than 8.

 

And signed his deal three years ago, which accounted for 10.7% of the cap at the time, in a state with no income tax.