article: Could the Rangers Trade for Ryan Reaves?

[Lord Al]

On the New Ice City podcast, David Schoen of the Las Vegas Review-Journal speculates that the Rangers might ask the Golden Knights about trading for Ryan Reaves (49:00).

 

Schoen cites the fact that Reaves was a healthy scratch for the last two playoff games for Vegas and the fact that new Rangers’ coach Gerard Gallant was a big proponent of Reaves’ play when he was a coach of the Golden Knights.

 

The Rangers have been open about their desire to add a different element to their lineup, which Ryan Reaves definitely would bring, though he has lost a step from his Vegas days.

 

Reaves is signed for one more season at a cap hit of $1.75 million. https://nhltraderumors.co/2021/07/01/could-the-rangers-trade-for-ryan-reaves/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=could-the-rangers-trade-for-ryan-reaves

 

 

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

[The Dude]

Hes 578 years old. No.

[Phil]

I'm hoping they do. He won't be an everyday player but he'll give them the option they need for the heaviest games against the Capitals, Islanders, and whoever else beefs up in the division.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Winter]

$1.75m to pay for someone we can get for .750m no thanks.

[Pete]

Only if Vegas retains salary... And Reaves.

 

Just say "No" to Brasher/Asham/Scott 2.0.

[Phil]

$1.75m to pay for someone we can get for .750m no thanks.

 

Who?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

That is just brutal production even for a 4th liner/13th forward type.

 

Would much rather see what Will Cullyle can do or even Mason Geersten playing F if you just want a face smasher.

 

11 points across 82 games(and downwardly diminishing), is production that just about any NHL player can give you.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/ryan-reaves

[Ozzy]

I'm hoping they do. He won't be an everyday player but he'll give them the option they need for the heaviest games against the Capitals, Islanders, and whoever else beefs up in the division.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Exactly! He's not going to be here for production, he's here for PROTECTION....We have enough producing scorers in my opinion....and to keep him for a year while Cuylle and Barron get their feet under them?? Sounds like a pretty good insurance policy to me.

[Phil]

That is just brutal production even for a 4th liner/13th forward type.

 

Would much rather see what Will Cullyle can do or even Mason Geersten playing F if you just want a face smasher.

 

11 points across 82 games(and downwardly diminishing), is production that just about any NHL player can give you.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/ryan-reaves

 

Because you're not bringing him in for production. You're bringing him in for his leadership and his fists. So, no, not anyone can give you that. Reaves isn't just a "face-puncher" he's an effective one. Signing the next Voros to get his ass handed to him every time he "fights" isn't effectively filling any quota. It's checking a box to check a box, knowing you're doing the worst possible job of it.

[ThirtyONE]

For one year? Yeah sure. Not like he’s gonna cost much in terms of a trade.

 

Personally I still prefer Lucic at 50% retained.

[josh]

It’s an option.

 

A guy we wanted a few years ago. Might be a bit old to play the strict enforcer role, but certainly an option.

 

I’m stuck on the Ritchie boys this offseason. Or Goodrow, who kills penalties

[RichieNextel305]

I’m torn. We need muscle. But do we need to get someone this useless otherwise?

 

Part of me is for it, the other part just wants guys who are effective but are also bangers.

 

I feel bad for Drury. This is a very, very tough first offseason for a rookie GM.

[Phil]

It’s an option.

 

A guy we wanted a few years ago. Might be a bit old to play the strict enforcer role, but certainly an option.

 

I’m stuck on the Ritchie boys this offseason. Or Goodrow, who kills penalties

 

Right, which is why I want him as part of a rotation fourth-line so he isn't the only guy being asked to step up.

 

Martinook, Bellemare, Reaves, Barron

 

Martinook, Goodrow, Reaves, Barron

 

Something in this mold. Maybe more toward the Goodrow side if you definitely want another guy who can fight well.

[Pete]

For one year? Yeah sure. Not like he’s gonna cost much in terms of a trade.

 

Personally I still prefer Lucic at 50% retained.

Didn't realize Looch had a decent season, and even at around $2.5AAV that's... Not bad?

 

I'd consider this before Reaves, who is now borderline useless.

 

Reaves is a typical Rangers (Sather+Dolan) move that would be a red flag for me, signaling that anyone worried about Sather pulling strings with JD gone had every right to be concerned.

[Phil]

Agreed — we kicked around the idea of Lucic a bit ago. I'd 100% try to get a 50% retention trade there first and foremost.

 

Reaves is a great person, the problem is you can already see the decline. He feels like Brashear, who they brought in at 37 to replace a 27-year old Orr. And they felt it every time he was on the ice. He just couldn't do it anymore. Maybe Reaves still can. I don't know, but I'm not so blind as to not see the parallel and have at least some reservations due to his age.

[LindG1000]

Didn't realize Looch had a decent season, and even at around $2.5AAV that's... Not bad?

 

I'd consider this before Reaves, who is now borderline useless.

 

Reaves is a typical Rangers (Sather+Dolan) move that would be a red flag for me, signaling that anyone worried about Sather pulling strings with JD gone had every right to be concerned.

 

Lucic would be interesting. He can play up and down the lineup, not that you'd want him on the first line. He plays the sort of hockey we're looking for. He's not useless outside of the role we're looking for. He'd be a mentor and a half for Cuylle and a few others. Calgary probably would dump him on the cheap.

 

Feels like he should be at least considered.

[Phil]

Would Calgary dump him? They feel like Vancouver lite in that we don't really understand what they are. Are they actually rebuilding, or are they trying to go for it with a core that's clearly not succeeding?

 

The other problem is, he's a LW, and they're utterly jammed up there. That's a major hangup IMO. You're not getting the most out of Lucic stuck on your fourth line, and if he's not there, someone else extremely important (Panarin, Lafreniere, or Kreider) is.

[Pete]

Would Calgary dump him? They feel like Vancouver lite in that we don't really understand what they are. Are they actually rebuilding, or are they trying to go for it with a core that's clearly not succeeding?

 

The other problem is, he's a LW, and they're utterly jammed up there. That's a major hangup IMO. You're not getting the most out of Lucic stuck on your fourth line, and if he's not there, someone else extremely important (Panarin, Lafreniere, or Kreider) is.

He played 13 a night and Gallant's 4th lines historically have gotten around 11. It's really the difference of a 2-3 shifts.

 

He was productive last year, but coming here we would not be paying him to produce, we would just be paying him to not be completely useless and maybe give somebody a beating every now and then.

[Phil]

Right, I'm just saying, he's technically gonna be relegated to the "fourth-line" regardless, so it would probably mean an Isles-like approach where ice time is much more evenly distributed due to a heavier reliance/willingness to play checking lines. Barzal lead all Isles forwards in average TOI/G this year at 18:43, for example. Because guys like Cizikas (13:50), Clutterbuck (13:26), Komarov (12:50), and Martin (11:04) actually play.

 

You can build a real identity fourth line with Lucic on it, though. Imagine something like Lucic - Goodrow/Cizikas - Barron?

[RichieNextel305]

My issue is this: the Islanders seem to be the flavor of the week. I’ll admit I’m on the bandwagon with that too, in that we need to have a 4th line like that. I’m sure all of us. But the fact is that every year, teams find different ways to win. Sometimes, it’s the top tier talent that take over and then everyone is hungry for big time players. Then it’s goaltending and everyone is after that. Then it’s depth and everyone is after that.

 

When the Rangers are ready to roll and win, it will be because of their top guys. We’re built very differently from an Islander team that relies solely on their depth. We need to improve ours, there is no doubt. But these are 2 very different hockey teams. I don’t want an identity line because I saw how successful theirs was. Whatever we throw together this off-season, our fourth line won’t replicate that level of success. I just want guys who can chip in when needed and who deter opponents from taking Panarin and throwing his head against the ice surface.

 

There are so many different ways to win in this league, and whenever it is our turn, we’re gonna do it in a way that is more closely resembling the Penguins in the past who have relied on their top guys turning it on then the Islanders who relied on their 4th line. You need all the pieces working in unison.

[Phil]

The Lightning are gonna win another Cup. They fit the bill, too. Even in the playoffs, Point leads all forwards in TOI/G at 18:51. Their third line of Goodrow (17:06), Gourde (17:14), Coleman (16:08) plays. Even their fourth-liners still see the ice. Maroon-Colton-Joseph all average just under 10 minutes a game.

 

This isn't a "copy the Isles" approach. It's a "copy the good teams" one.

[Ozzy]

Right, which is why I want him as part of a rotation fourth-line so he isn't the only guy being asked to step up.

 

Martinook, Bellemare, Reaves, Barron

 

Martinook, Goodrow, Reaves, Barron

 

Something in this mold. Maybe more toward the Goodrow side if you definitely want another guy who can fight well.

 

Didn't realize Looch had a decent season, and even at around $2.5AAV that's... Not bad?

 

I'd consider this before Reaves, who is now borderline useless.

 

Reaves is a typical Rangers (Sather+Dolan) move that would be a red flag for me, signaling that anyone worried about Sather pulling strings with JD gone had every right to be concerned.

 

Lucic would be interesting. He can play up and down the lineup, not that you'd want him on the first line. He plays the sort of hockey we're looking for. He's not useless outside of the role we're looking for. He'd be a mentor and a half for Cuylle and a few others. Calgary probably would dump him on the cheap.

 

Feels like he should be at least considered.

 

Why not Both???

 

Lucic and Reaves. We should be able to afford both now with a ton of dead cap off the books from last season, no?

[LindG1000]

Would Calgary dump him? They feel like Vancouver lite in that we don't really understand what they are. Are they actually rebuilding, or are they trying to go for it with a core that's clearly not succeeding?

 

The other problem is, he's a LW, and they're utterly jammed up there. That's a major hangup IMO. You're not getting the most out of Lucic stuck on your fourth line, and if he's not there, someone else extremely important (Panarin, Lafreniere, or Kreider) is.

 

I think Calgary has the Vancouver problem for an entirely different set of reasons though. Whereas Vancouver is dealing with the fallout from atrocious cap mismanagement and poor deals, Calgary seems to be dealing with some level of imposter syndrome (they're not who we thought they were!) and that half their stars want to run like hell from Darryl Sutter.

 

We've heard Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Hanifin, Giordano, and Backlund in some level of "Calgary wants them out" or "they want out of Calgary" in the last three months. That's just weird - that's a team primed to do something stupid.

[LindG1000]

Why not Both???

 

Lucic and Reaves. We should be able to afford both now with a ton of dead cap off the books from last season, no?

 

That's a tough fourth line to muck it up against, but an easy fourth line to hammer in matchups. We'd need to be very careful how they're deployed in away games - some teams will feast on the lack of speed.

[Ozzy]

That's a tough fourth line to muck it up against, but an easy fourth line to hammer in matchups. We'd need to be very careful how they're deployed in away games - some teams will feast on the lack of speed.

 

I think we can sacrifice a little speed for toughness...kinda like the scales of justice, G! LOL

 

...tough to have both...but if we pair in our quick defenseman to make up that speed factor, that unit of 5 would be a killer!!! :thumbs: