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

2021-22 NHL Trade Deadline: All in, Bay Bay!

Cash or Czech

By Cash or Czech
in New York Rangers

 Share
Phil
Message added by Phil,

Breaking this out from another thread. Let's use this as our general trade deadline thread and for live discussion on deadline day.

 

Chatter can be about anything deadline related.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

LindG1000
LindG1000

I think something we need to consider here is the current state of the market and how that impacts pricing. I hear a lot of us saying things like "we don't want to use all our chips this year" and thi

Keirik
Keirik

Clearly offensive D is exactly what this team needs to fix their two holes in the top 9.    

BrooksBurner
BrooksBurner

If typos on here were recorded as plus/minus, he'd be down there with Leddy.

Posted Images

Cash or Czech BSBH Legend

Cash or Czech

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

If they're accepting Georgiev and a pick for Nylander, you pull the trigger and worry about next year's cap later

 

All but guarantees one of Trouba and Kreider won't be here past next season. Or that we let Strome walk and try to figure out a stopgap at center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrooksBurner BSBH Legend

BrooksBurner

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, G1000 said:

 

Probably, but I truly think our 2c next season is probably a struggling young-ish RFA - maybe on a capped-out or roster-blocked team that we've not really put thought into just yet. Jack Roslovic, Alex Turcotte, Barret Hayton, maybe Dylan Strome. I can see a deal with Calgary, but I'm not really sure you want any of their reasonably available centers without retention. 

 

Either that, or we're going to go after Vincent Trocheck in FA.


Can you imagine Dylan Strome coming in to replace Ryan Strome? Lol.

 

As for 2C, I would not put it past Drury to trade Kaapo Kakko in a deal to cement that position long term (though not for the guys you have listed). Someone proven. There are so many different reasons to do that, and I actually quite like Kakko. But let’s face it, the guy is losing value (trade and team value) because he doesn’t produce. The Rangers also won’t be able to keep all of their young players. I personally think Kakko has been passed up by Lafreniere and K. Miller in terms of who is getting the $ bag first. I think Schneider may also be on his way to doing so. If I’m Drury, I’m not wanting to play a cheap bridge game with all of these guys. I’m going to want to start locking a couple of them up long term. I mentioned this in the Kakko offer sheet thread I started a while ago, but I still think there is some serious potential for offer sheet shenanigans with Kakko, and I think the Rangers can do better with a trade for Kakko than offer sheet compensation.

 

So, I would pose the question of which centers are available if Kakko is available?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, rmc51 said:


I don’t know about that. Rakell costing a 1st as a rental is driven more by a couple of seasons he had 5 years ago rather than what he is worth today. It’s paying for the name. If you are correct, I would pass. If I’m correct and Rakell/Lindholm could be had together around a 1st/Robertson/another prospect or pick, I would do it.

 

It feels like we do this every year, and every year I have to type some variation of the same response. I'm not trying to drag you here, specifically, but I feel like fans in general dramatically overrate the value of a "first-round pick," by conveniently forgetting that they're not actually of equal value. The first, second, third, overall picks are, statistically speaking, significantly more likely to produce an NHL player than the 24th, 25th, or 26th pick. Moreover, if you're moving the 24th, 25th, or 26th overall pick for a 50-point player, you're effectively just advancing the hope that that lottery ticket represents in the first place.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd rather pay a first for Artturi Lehkonen (or Rakell, or pretty much any legitimate middle-six forward) than get mad that the Habs (or whoever) won't accept less because the fact of the matter is, all of those players can give you more, sooner, than that pick might give you, ever. For every David Pastrnak, there are a dozen Nikita Scherbaks or Nikolay Goldobins.

  • Applause 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LindG1000 BSBH Legend

LindG1000

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

It feels like we do this every year, and every year I have to type some variation of the same response. I'm not trying to drag you here, specifically, but I feel like fans in general dramatically overrate the value of a "first-round pick," by conveniently forgetting that they're not actually of equal value. The first, second, third, overall picks are, statistically speaking, significantly more likely to produce an NHL player than the 24th, 25th, or 26th pick. Moreover, if you're moving the 24th, 25th, or 26th overall pick for a 50-point player, you're effectively just advancing the hope that that lottery ticket represents in the first place.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd rather pay a first for Artturi Lehkonen (or Rakell, or pretty much any legitimate middle-six forward) than get mad that the Habs (or whoever) won't accept less because the fact of the matter is, all of those players can give you more, sooner, than that pick might give you, ever. For every David Pastrnak, there are a dozen Nikita Scherbaks or Nikolay Goldobins.

 

To be fair, RMC's point is well taken that we have had a good hit rate in the 20s given the likelihood of outcomes in that part of the draft. But that doesn't change the fact that the difference between a mid-late 1st and a mid-round 2nd is relatively trivial in outcome odds. Smarter teams will play the quantity over quality range, so that when they've identified that K'Andre Miller profile, they can package 2 2nds and move up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrooksBurner BSBH Legend

BrooksBurner

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

It feels like we do this every year, and every year I have to type some variation of the same response. I'm not trying to drag you here, specifically, but I feel like fans in general dramatically overrate the value of a "first-round pick," by conveniently forgetting that they're not actually of equal value. The first, second, third, overall picks are, statistically speaking, significantly more likely to produce an NHL player than the 24th, 25th, or 26th pick. Moreover, if you're moving the 24th, 25th, or 26th overall pick for a 50-point player, you're effectively just advancing the hope that that lottery ticket represents in the first place.

 

Call me crazy, but I'd rather pay a first for Artturi Lehkonen (or Rakell, or pretty much any legitimate middle-six forward) than get mad that the Habs (or whoever) won't accept less because the fact of the matter is, all of those players can give you more, sooner, than that pick might give you, ever. For every David Pastrnak, there are a dozen Nikita Scherbaks or Nikolay Goldobins.


I’m not against trading the 1st at all, but make it worth it. I guess my line for “worth it” is higher than yours. Rakell for 2 months and Lehkonen don’t move the needle for me enough to do it - though they are nice players. If the market pays them a 1st, I guess let other teams do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
Posted
Just now, jsrangers said:

100% agree there's a huge difference in the odds of a top round 1st vs a mid-bottom round pick turning into a real good NHL player.

 

But if there's no chance you can retain whoever you're trading the pick for past this season I think that also factors into it. Meaning a lower round first might grow to help you.  Guess it comes down to thinking or believing you have a real shot by essentially removing one of the many turds for that lower round first for a rental.  I can definitely see both sides.

 

Not much. You play the games that are directly in front of you. Not the ones that are in front of you three years from now.

 

This also assumes you have no other reinforcements to lean on, which we both know isn't true. The Rangers have made like nine first-round picks in the last five years. They still have Othmann, Cuylle, and others on the rise to potentially fill the same role we're talking about filling with a placeholder.

 

Let's use Rakell here again as the example since he's a UFA. Would I trade the first to get him even if I can't keep him? Yes. Because he helps you now. If he walks, he walks, and you worry about filling his role with someone internally, or in free agency who doesn't cost you as much, but that doesn't negate the value he can give you today.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil BSBH Legend

Phil

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, rmc51 said:


I’m not against trading the 1st at all, but make it worth it. I guess my line for “worth it” is higher than yours. Rakell for 2 months and Lehkonen don’t move the needle for me enough to do it - though they are nice players. If the market pays them a 1st, I guess let other teams do it.

 

I mean, I agree that there's a breaking point. Not any player is worth a first-rounder, even a late one, but the middle-six options we've been talking about are. At least to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrooksBurner BSBH Legend

BrooksBurner

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, G1000 said:

 

To be fair, RMC's point is well taken that we have had a good hit rate in the 20s given the likelihood of outcomes in that part of the draft. But that doesn't change the fact that the difference between a mid-late 1st and a mid-round 2nd is relatively trivial in outcome odds. Smarter teams will play the quantity over quality range, so that when they've identified that K'Andre Miller profile, they can package 2 2nds and move up.


I would contend that not all teams have the same ability to scout. With the way the Rangers have been evaluating players to draft in the back half of the first round, a back half 1st should be more valuable to them than it might otherwise be according to league average hit rates. If we are batting like Jeter, I don’t need to pretend we are a .275 hitter.

 

As you’ve also pointed out, having a late 1st puts them in position to potentially move up 5-10 spots to get that Miller or Schneider type they have identified as a blue chip prospect.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...