What Remains to Improve to Be a Legit Cup Contender This Year?

[Phil]

Just now, siddious said:

Then it takes time to learn how to play in the playoffs. 

Takes time to learn how to *win in the playoffs. Every team that's won in recent years with cores the Rangers are trying to emulate failed before they won. Tampa. Chicago. Hell, go all the way back to Pittsburgh. All of them. That's part of the learning process.

[siddious]

5 minutes ago, Phil said:

Takes time to learn how to *win in the playoffs. Every team that's won in recent years with cores the Rangers are trying to emulate failed before they won. Tampa. Chicago. Hell, go all the way back to Pittsburgh. All of them. That's part of the learning process.

I mean you are nitpicking but yes thats basically what I am saying. I think its far too early to start selling the farm (exaggeration, I know). Let them get a taste, let this team continue to grow and add pieces when they are serious contenders.

[Phil]

I guess, yeah. I just see a difference between learning how to play and learning how to win. Learning how to play is something you figure out after your first experience. Learning how to win is applying it. But not looking to split hairs. I think we agree on the principle.

That said, I'm not at all against the idea of adding even as early as this year. I think the addition of someone like Giordano, for example, who they were apparently after during expansion, would be a huge, huge boon.

[siddious]

7 minutes ago, Phil said:

I guess, yeah. I just see a difference between learning how to play and learning how to win. Learning how to play is something you figure out after your first experience. Learning how to win is applying it. But not looking to split hairs. I think we agree on the principle.

That said, I'm not at all against the idea of adding even as early as this year. I think the addition of someone like Giordano, for example, who they were apparently after during expansion, would be a huge, huge boon.

Im all for adding giordano if Nemeth is going back the other way (I think hes a UFA after this year? too lazy to look it up). But I dont see that being the deal. 

[Phil]

1 minute ago, siddious said:

Im all for adding giordano if Nemeth is going back the other way (I think hes a UFA after this year? too lazy to look it up). But I dont see that being the deal. 

That's kind of the idea, but what I am saying is I have no problem dealing from surplus to reinforce this team, as early as this year if what we see holds up through the season. If getting a really good rental or two means sacrificing, say, Matthew Robertson or Zac Jones, I'm OK with that. Most of these defensive prospects are never going to play here, regardless.

[jsm7302]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

That's kind of the idea, but what I am saying is I have no problem dealing from surplus to reinforce this team, as early as this year if what we see holds up through the season. If getting a really good rental or two means sacrificing, say, Matthew Robertson or Zac Jones, I'm OK with that. Most of these defensive prospects are never going to play here, regardless.

Sucks, doesn't it? I mean who was drafting so poorly that they stacked up positions like that? Or did it just turn out this way by chance?

[Phil]

They didn't draft poorly at all. They drafted exceptionally well as evidenced by the surplus. This is what good teams do. That includes selling off from said surplus to address organizational weaknesses.

[Go Blue]

I think Gallant is a huge asset

he will drive the players

[Albatrosss]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

They didn't draft poorly at all. They drafted exceptionally well as evidenced by the surplus. This is what good teams do. That includes selling off from said surplus to address organizational weaknesses.

long-term organizational weaknesses, not short-term

[Albatrosss]

1 minute ago, Go Blue said:

I think Gallant is a huge asset

he will drive the players

to the airport?

[Phil]

Just now, CCCP said:

long-term organizational weaknesses, not short-term

Both. Either. It all depends on the framing. If the team feels it's in position to win now, short-term is justified. Just like it was with, say, Marty St. Louis.

[siddious]

5 minutes ago, Phil said:

That's kind of the idea, but what I am saying is I have no problem dealing from surplus to reinforce this team, as early as this year if what we see holds up through the season. If getting a really good rental or two means sacrificing, say, Matthew Robertson or Zac Jones, I'm OK with that. Most of these defensive prospects are never going to play here, regardless.

I would personally rather see those guys turned into future picks which can be moved when the time to add pieces is actually here or long term pieces that actually continue to shape the roster to what it needs to be going forward. If you think Giordano fits that I guess fine but I think hes a bit too old to be important when it matters.

Like I said it all comes down to price and fit. I just dont want to see them go too hard right now because these is still reason to think this team needs seasoning. None of the current vets on this team looked like they had any idea how to play in a playoffs setting during the covid shortened playoff. 

1 minute ago, Phil said:

They didn't draft poorly at all. They drafted exceptionally well as evidenced by the surplus. This is what good teams do. That includes selling off from said surplus to address organizational weaknesses.

Exactly- always go best player available. Most draft picks take 2-5 years to develop into roster players, you cant possibly predict what your tea needs will be at that point. 

[LindG1000]

I have almost no issue with sacrificing a piece or two of the future to give it a real shot this year. Windows are smaller than we think they are, and while it takes time to learn to win in the playoffs, there's also a distinct advantage of feeling like you're playing with house money. Making the playoffs and adding the two deadline pieces we're talking about (figure Giordano and Fleury, just for the sake of argument) is playing with house money, imo.

[Phil]

7 minutes ago, G1000 said:

I have almost no issue with sacrificing a piece or two of the future to give it a real shot this year. Windows are smaller than we think they are, and while it takes time to learn to win in the playoffs, there's also a distinct advantage of feeling like you're playing with house money. Making the playoffs and adding the two deadline pieces we're talking about (figure Giordano and Fleury, just for the sake of argument) is playing with house money, imo.

This.

[fletch]

Playoff experience needed.

It sure helps to have a superstar help drive you to the Cup.   It could be during one year a player delivers at that level (thinking of O'Reilly for Blues).  Stone could be that player for Vegas, Panarin is our best option at this point.  

Need Kakko and Lafreniere to develop into more consistent performers, or construct 2 consistent scoring lines.  Solidify the defensive zone so that we limit 2 on 1 and 3 on 2 chances, improve marking to limit high scoring opportunities.  Get four rounds of consistent goaltending from Shesterkin.

 

 

 

[Phil]

Just now, fletch said:

Playoff experience needed.

It sure helps to have a superstar help drive you to the Cup.   It could be during one year a player delivers at that level (thinking of O'Reilly for Blues).  Stone could be that player for Vegas, Panarin is our best option at this point.  

Need Kakko and Lafreniere to develop into more consistent performers, or construct 2 consistent scoring lines.  Solidify the defensive zone so that we limit 2 on 1 and 3 on 2 chances, improve marking to limit high scoring opportunities.  Get four rounds of consistent goaltending from Shesterkin.

Right — this is exactly why I'm saying, if your team is performing, reward them. Get them that experience they can lean on in the playoffs when the games tighten and younger players might struggle.

Getting, let's say, Fleury + Giordano and someone like Marcus Johansson could go a long way.

[LindG1000]

That, and you never really know what happens. Think back to those Pitt, Chi, LA teams - the first run in the playoffs was them limping in and getting a juggernaut in rd1 (Pitt got the Alf-Heat-Spezza Senators, LA got the Thornton/Marleau/Campbell/Nabokov Sharks, Chicago actually ran to the WCF before hitting the Wings). 

If the calculus here is "look, we can spend a prospect and 2 picks and have a decent chance of making it out of round 1" - I take that. Those 10 games will mean more to our core than the picks ever would have.

[Phil]

6 minutes ago, G1000 said:

That, and you never really know what happens. Think back to those Pitt, Chi, LA teams - the first run in the playoffs was them limping in and getting a juggernaut in rd1 (Pitt got the Alf-Heat-Spezza Senators, LA got the Thornton/Marleau/Campbell/Nabokov Sharks, Chicago actually ran to the WCF before hitting the Wings). 

If the calculus here is "look, we can spend a prospect and 2 picks and have a decent chance of making it out of round 1" - I take that. Those 10 games will mean more to our core than the picks ever would have.

Right, and it's cumulative. The more you win, the more you believe.

[siddious]

All fair points. I think it comes down the move they make. Smart asset management is key here. Losing Kravtsov for a rental and losing in the first round is a disaster. 

[Cr00zng]

17 minutes ago, siddious said:

All fair points. I think it comes down the move they make. Smart asset management is key here. Losing Kravtsov for a rental and losing in the first round is a disaster. 

Is Kravstov still a thing for the Rangers? If he is, trading him away for a rental seems to be smart asset management... Regardless of the outcome of the first round...

 

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by Cr00zng
Clarification...

[Phil]

I mean, Kravtsov is already a lost cause, so trading him for a player who actually plays for the Rangers, regardless of the outcome, is more positive than negative. I doubt teams are lining up to offer their top prospects for him.

[-ERIK-]

#47 is ready For Miller

[Tonybologna]

2 hours ago, G1000 said:

I have almost no issue with sacrificing a piece or two of the future to give it a real shot this year. Windows are smaller than we think they are, and while it takes time to learn to win in the playoffs, there's also a distinct advantage of feeling like you're playing with house money. Making the playoffs and adding the two deadline pieces we're talking about (figure Giordano and Fleury, just for the sake of argument) is playing with house money, imo.

Definitely. And you go for it this year because, dare I say it....who knows? We COULD win it all! And because if it's playoff experience you want, what's better for your guys a 1st round exit or a deep playoff run? Obviously the deep run. We have the cap and we have pieces I think we can part with that get us what we need. It's not like we need a star, we've got those already

[josh]

43 minutes ago, br-avery said:

#47 is ready For Miller

 

Barron wears #47

 

 

[fletch]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

Right — this is exactly why I'm saying, if your team is performing, reward them. Get them that experience they can lean on in the playoffs when the games tighten and younger players might struggle.

Getting, let's say, Fleury + Giordano and someone like Marcus Johansson could go a long way.

I think we are more than 1-2 years away from being a Cup contender, so I'd like to see how all of the new pieces gel before mixing the pot further.  

If you think that we are past the rebuild and developing a stronger playoff contender, I think you still have higher priorities than backup goalie (I see the two birds with one stone argument, but think of how much the roster has turned over in the past year, we don't want to be a revolving door).  If you are looking for that final piece I still think the top 6 and the defensemen are higher priorities than a backup goalie.

Fleury still wants to be a starter and is finally free of the Lehner platoon.  I think Halak and Holtby have shown the willingness to be the backup, even though I'm sure they'd love to be the no. 1.  Ultimately we need to see whether Shesterkin can elevate in the playoffs, and I don't think we can do that with Fleury on the roster.