Seattle Expansion: The Rangers Should Trade for a D to Protect

[BrooksBurner]

Much of the focus with the expansion draft has generally revolved around who we might lose between Blackwell, Howden, or Gauthier, which is probably what will happen, but it seems like it's been glossed over that we are presumably utilizing a defenseman protection slot on Libor Hajek. That seems like something we could use to our advantage, as there should be no qualms about exposing him. The Rangers should be looking to utilize this extra protection spot and checking in with any teams who might be in a bit of a pinch where they have an extra defenseman they cannot protect. A veteran LD for the upcoming season would be a nice get.

 

Some potential options:

Calgary - Mark Giordano (it's either him or Tanev...if they expose Giordano, either or are probably the selection by Seattle) - checks the leadership box, eats minutes on PK

Colorado - Ryan Graves - big body, plays a more physical game, now has playoff experience from time with the Avs

St. Louis - Vince Dunn - might still be a bit of "more of the same", but he may also make some sense paired with Trouba on a 2nd pairing

Washington - Brenden Dillon - see Graves, except even more physical

 

All of these guys are a substantially better use of a protection slot on defense and better at hockey than Hajek. A glance at the UFA list says they are probably better than anything you'd realistically be able to get in free agency.

 

Anybody else? And what's the cost here? The teams who would lose these players would need to view the trade as player X for whatever the Rangers give + whoever would then be poached off their team in place of the guy they just traded. So the Rangers would still have to make it worth their while, but the cost should be much less than what it might normally be. It might be at a point where a 3rd round pick gets you any one of these players.

[Phil]

Ekholm is the "clear" answer here, even though he's not really super physical or imposing in any way. Just a solid player.

 

I'd say McNabb given the Gallant connection. Tons of playoff experience. Big, mean, hits like a truck. One year left at $2.5 million. But Vegas doesn't have to deal with the draft, so he's a slightly different get. Rangers can still acquire him to protect him, but it would be more of a hockey trade for a player they just like. Might give the Knights enough breathing room to work out a deal to keep Martinez, too.

[LindG1000]

Can throw Jake McCabe into that mix too. He's a 27 y/o UFA coming off injury so he could be had on the super cheap, but he plays a similar game to what we like. He's not really a big dude though.

 

Caleb Jones might fit the bill real well too. As might Calvin De Haan.

[Sod16]

Very good point. We should make a trade to get a good deal on a D man who another team can't protect and another trade to get a forward to protect rather than "waste" protection on Howden or Gauthier.

 

If we don't make such trades, Drury will have failed to take advantage of the unusually advantageous position that the Rangers are in with respect to the expansion draft and it will not reflect well on him.

 

Good early test for Drury.

[The Dude]

I think I like the plan of adding a forward in this exact manner. Like Greenway.

 

Some of these names are interesting and are really good players. The Rangers just have sooooo many prospects that are on the doorstep.

Jones

Lundkvist

Robertson

Schneider

Reunanen

Skinner

Hajek

 

I'd think 3 or 4 of these names will see NHL ice this season. It's kinda set up nicely for them, as they can plug one of these guys in on the bottom 2 pairings and not be scared shirtless of failure.

 

Obviously one or 2 of these names may have to go in whatever big trade the Rangers might do. Although it seems more and more likely that they are staying with the same top 9 and creating a better 4th line that will get more minutes. Sooo, you have all these D men.

[BrooksBurner]

Very good point. We should make a trade to get a good deal on a D man who another team can't protect and another trade to get a forward to protect rather than "waste" protection on Howden or Gauthier.

 

If we don't make such trades, Drury will have failed to take advantage of the unusually advantageous position that the Rangers are in with respect to the expansion draft and it will not reflect well on him.

 

Good early test for Drury.

 

Good thought on forward too. When I was browsing around I didn't notice a team who was up against the expansion and losing a valuable forward though. They could still upgrade that last forward spot, but I guess my train of thought was how to get an upgrade cheaply because of the predicament another team finds themselves in.

[LindG1000]

I think there are few if any teams in true dilemmas at forward w/the expansion draft. The Canes may have been, but they've already announced their intentions. Defense is where you get the opportunity. Doubly so because while I can understand some system related reasons (new coach, complete lack of center depth, probably a good deal of 3c upside that can be tapped) for protecting Howden, there is quite literally no argument for protecting Hajek.

[BrooksBurner]

Ekholm is the "clear" answer here, even though he's not really super physical or imposing in any way. Just a solid player.

 

I'd say McNabb given the Gallant connection. Tons of playoff experience. Big, mean, hits like a truck. One year left at $2.5 million. But Vegas doesn't have to deal with the draft, so he's a slightly different get. Rangers can still acquire him to protect him, but it would be more of a hockey trade for a player they just like. Might give the Knights enough breathing room to work out a deal to keep Martinez, too.

 

I would love Ekholm, though Nashville isn't in an expansion pinch to move him.

 

Obviously Vegas is exempt from tue expansion, so they don't have to move McNabb/anyone either.

 

I think both those guys would cost full freight, especially Ekholm. I'd be ok with that on Ekholm's side, for sure. I made a post on trading for him recently.

[Pete]

I like Brendan Dillon, but admittedly haven't looked at his stats.

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

Good thought on forward too. When I was browsing around I didn't notice a team who was up against the expansion and losing a valuable forward though. They could still upgrade that last forward spot, but I guess my train of thought was how to get an upgrade cheaply because of the predicament another team finds themselves in.

 

Minnesota is in a pinch both at forward and D. They handed out too many NMC's

 

they have 3 NMC's on D so Dumba has to be exposed

 

with Zuc and and Parise also with NMC's, they have to pick 5 (assuming upcoming UFAs are left unprotected and also unclaimed) out of Rask, Fiala, Foligno, Greenway, Bjugstadt, Hartmann, and Eriksson-ek

 

Eriksson-Ek I cant see getting left exposed after his deal (unless their thought process is, leave him exposed, dare Seattle to take on an 8 year contract right out of the gate) so that's 4 out of those 6 you have to choose from. All reasonably important players for them

[BrooksBurner]

Minnesota is in a pinch both at forward and D. They handed out too many NMC's

 

they have 3 NMC's on D so Dumba has to be exposed

 

with Zuc and and Parise also with NMC's, they have to pick 5 (assuming upcoming UFAs are left unprotected and also unclaimed) out of Rask, Fiala, Foligno, Greenway, Bjugstadt, Hartmann, and Eriksson-ek

 

Eriksson-Ek I cant see getting left exposed after his deal (unless their thought process is, leave him exposed, dare Seattle to take on an 8 year contract right out of the gate) so that's 4 out of those 6 you have to choose from. All reasonably important players for them

 

Yeah, I looked at Minny (and Dumba), but we have no need for RHD. No interest in the defensemen they are forced to protect either.

 

Greenway has been a popular name on this board

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

if they do want to protect Dumba though, we can maybe make a move for Brodin (LHD, long term deal but very affordable)

 

Not 100% advocating for trading for another D. I like what we have and what else is coming. But if they do want to add another more experienced defenseman and are willing to sacrifice a prospect or two to make it happen, its an option.

 

Greenway is popular here, but I'm sure that means he's popular in Minnesota as well. I think they try to keep him. Someone like Bjugstad can jump up and down the line up as a center for us maybe? would definitely be available for super cheap

[LindG1000]

Yeah, I looked at Minny (and Dumba), but we have no need for RHD. No interest in the defensemen they are forced to protect either.

 

Greenway has been a popular name on this board

 

We probably all agree that they need to protect Fiala, Greenway, and Eriksson Ek. They have no choice but to protect Parise, Zuccarello, Spurgeon, Suter, Brodin. That's a problem - Fenton fucked them over with all these NMCs.

 

This is a ticking clock. Minnesota is going to lose Dumba for nothing to Seattle - he's undeniably the best exposed player and he's worth the 6m.

 

They way I see it, they have four options:

 

1 - Accept their fate and lose Dumba for nothing.

2 - Get Suter to waive his NMC and get rid of/don't protect him. I don't think Brodin or Spurgeon get approached here. Getting Parise or Zuccarello to waive does nothing here - their most likely protection structure is 7/3/1. Swapping a protected Parise for a protected Rask or Hartman probably isn't all that useful.

3 - Trade Dumba and get SOMETHING for him.

4 - Bribe Seattle not to take him.

 

Option 3 makes the most sense from a likely to happen standpoint. The problem is that your list of teams is limited twice over - once by who has an open spot in the expansion draft (which, by my estimates, is us, Detroit, maybe Edmonton, LA, NJ, Ottawa) and again by Dumba's limited NTC. And let's face it - how many of those teams are probably already on Dumba's no-trade?

 

Guerin's got a shit sandwich here. His best move is to retain salary (that is one thing Minnesota has in spades) and deal him for something of decent value. The question for the Rangers becomes something more like "how ready is Nils, how tradeable is Dumba at 1/4 salary if it all goes to hell"?, because this is a move we don't need to make but is probably exceptional asset management over protecting Libor Hajek.

[ThirtyONE]

I’ve seen this idea tossed around and now I think it would be a big missed opportunity if they didn’t take advantage. All the names listed are interesting. My one fear with Drury is that he seems to be a slow decision maker - per some of the beat writers. I hope that doesn’t hinder his ability to make shit happen in a tight window like this.

[BrooksBurner]

We probably all agree that they need to protect Fiala, Greenway, and Eriksson Ek. They have no choice but to protect Parise, Zuccarello, Spurgeon, Suter, Brodin. That's a problem - Fenton fucked them over with all these NMCs.

 

This is a ticking clock. Minnesota is going to lose Dumba for nothing to Seattle - he's undeniably the best exposed player and he's worth the 6m.

 

They way I see it, they have four options:

 

1 - Accept their fate and lose Dumba for nothing.

2 - Get Suter to waive his NMC and get rid of/don't protect him. I don't think Brodin or Spurgeon get approached here. Getting Parise or Zuccarello to waive does nothing here - their most likely protection structure is 7/3/1. Swapping a protected Parise for a protected Rask or Hartman probably isn't all that useful.

3 - Trade Dumba and get SOMETHING for him.

4 - Bribe Seattle not to take him.

 

Option 3 makes the most sense from a likely to happen standpoint. The problem is that your list of teams is limited twice over - once by who has an open spot in the expansion draft (which, by my estimates, is us, Detroit, maybe Edmonton, LA, NJ, Ottawa) and again by Dumba's limited NTC. And let's face it - how many of those teams are probably already on Dumba's no-trade?

 

Guerin's got a shit sandwich here. His best move is to retain salary (that is one thing Minnesota has in spades) and deal him for something of decent value. The question for the Rangers becomes something more like "how ready is Nils, how tradeable is Dumba at 1/4 salary if it all goes to hell"?, because this is a move we don't need to make but is probably exceptional asset management over protecting Libor Hajek.

 

I feel like there's no way Seattle would take Suter's contract. If Suter was okay assuming the very small risk that he'd have to pack up and move to Seattle, he might waive.

[LindG1000]

I feel like there's no way Seattle would take Suter's contract. If Suter was okay assuming the very small risk that he'd have to pack up and move to Seattle, he might waive.

 

Yup. I think Suter is a nonstarter on both the Seattle front and the Suter front, but the way the protection is structured, it's him, Brodin, or Spurgeon. Brodin just signed a new deal. Spurgeon just signed a new deal and is also their Captain. It's Suter or bust, and that's probably not happening.

[Sod16]

If MN does not ask Parise and Suter to waive, they deserve what they get, and if Parise and Suter do not consent they are first class jerks, because they will never get picked with their contracts, especially with the other choices that inevitably will be available off MN's roster.

[LindG1000]

If MN does not ask Parise and Suter to waive, they deserve what they get, and if Parise and Suter do not consent they are first class jerks, because they will never get picked with their contracts, especially with the other choices that inevitably will be available off MN's roster.

 

Or both of them could refuse as is their right with NMCs and wait til next offseason where their contracts start putting out cap hits close to 4x their actual payouts, Arizona comes a-calling, and they've just got these nagging chronic injuries that prevent them from playing.

[BrooksBurner]

Vince Mercogliano is the new Larry reading the boards:

 

https://www.lohud.com/story/sports/nhl/rangers/2021/07/09/7-teams-ny-rangers-should-call-trades-prior-expansion-draft/7892353002/

 

Teams are allowed to protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goalie, but the Blueshirts only have six eligible forwards and two eligible defensemen who fall into the "must-protect" category. Rather than give those open slots to fringe players such as Brett Howden and Libor H?jek, they can use them to pursue trades with teams who have overflow at either position.

 

Introduce yourself Vinny...what's your handle?

[BrooksBurner]

 

 

One of the targets gone. The Rangers don't have a 2nd rounder, but if they did, I don't think I'd have gone that high for Graves.

[The Dude]

 

 

One of the targets gone. The Rangers don't have a 2nd rounder, but if they did, I don't think I'd have gone that high for Graves.

 

Agreed. He's probably worth that in a normal hockey trade. I was expecting a discount.