Rangers Re-Sign Kaapo Kakko to 2-Year/$4.2M Extension; $2.1M AAV

[jsm7302]

https://hockeyroyalty.com/2023/03/21/la-kings-a-star-is-emerging-in-quinton-byfield/

 

I know Kakko was the defined #2 OA but teams go off the board sometimes and this was our opportunity to grab a center at #3 OA. I know Byfield hasn't lit the world on fire but by the looks of progression, I'll go out on a limb and say by next year, the gap will widen a bit between production of Byfield v Kakko. Just some conjecture and conversation. If I could do it again, I'd def take the center over the winger at #2OA during a rebuild. 

 

Byfield- 21pts- 42 games

Kakko- 34pts- 71 games

[Cash or Czech]

When Kakko was picked, we had Zibanejad-Strome-Chytil-Andersson-Howden as our center depth.

 

Plus, Byfield sucks. We'd be bitching more about him than we do now about Kakko. It sucks that Kakko has yet to turn into a 50-60 point player, but he's certainly better than Byfield. 

[LindG1000]

6 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

https://hockeyroyalty.com/2023/03/21/la-kings-a-star-is-emerging-in-quinton-byfield/

 

I know Kakko was the defined #2 OA but teams go off the board sometimes and this was our opportunity to grab a center at #3 OA. I know Byfield hasn't lit the world on fire but by the looks of progression, I'll go out on a limb and say by next year, the gap will widen a bit between production of Byfield v Kakko. Just some conjecture and conversation. If I could do it again, I'd def take the center over the winger at #2OA during a rebuild. 

 

Byfield- 21pts- 42 games

Kakko- 34pts- 71 games

 

Byfield wasn't available in 2019. He was the 2nd overall in 2020.

[Cash or Czech]

9 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Byfield wasn't available in 2019. He was the 2nd overall in 2020.

 

Also this LOL

 

You can't even really bitch about not getting Hughes because he wasn't an option. We can certainly compare him to Dach, Seider, Cozens, Zegras, Boldy, Caufield. 

 

But of his draft class, Kakko is 5th in points. 

[Tomas Sandstrom]

Take a deep breath and practice Patience...

 

Kakko certainly hasn't lit the world on fire, but he's still young.  He's getting experience, and (as slow as it may seem), he IS getting better and growing more confident.  

 

I, for one, am not panicking or wishing we had a different player with the pick.

 

Rooting hard for Kakko to continue to grow and produce more as time goes on in his, still very young, career.

 

Besides, what's his actual role on this team?  Do they need him to be a top scorer?   Maybe in a year or 2, the Rangers will need to move him up and count on him to produce more on the scoreboard.  Maybe he'll also get the PP time and more minutes to do so.  

[Drew a Penalty]

Kakko and Byfield were separate drafts, Byfield needed 2.5 years of AHL time to get to where he is now, and where he is now is a random blog gassing him up while he gets 15 minutes per night. 

 

What's the conversation? Kakko needed AHL time? Yeah. We've been through this.

[jsm7302]

24 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Byfield wasn't available in 2019. He was the 2nd overall in 2020.

FACT CHECK!!!!!

 

I stand corrected....cool. I actually don't feel so bad about it now. Thanks!

 

Free therapy.

 

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

46 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

https://hockeyroyalty.com/2023/03/21/la-kings-a-star-is-emerging-in-quinton-byfield/

 

I know Kakko was the defined #2 OA but teams go off the board sometimes and this was our opportunity to grab a center at #3 OA. I know Byfield hasn't lit the world on fire but by the looks of progression, I'll go out on a limb and say by next year, the gap will widen a bit between production of Byfield v Kakko. Just some conjecture and conversation. If I could do it again, I'd def take the center over the winger at #2OA during a rebuild. 

 

Byfield- 21pts- 42 games

Kakko- 34pts- 71 games

With hindsight I would take Seider, but Byfield would also be a good pick.

 

At the end of the day they were never going to give up on such a consensus pick. The scouts had Kakko closer to Hughes than "the rest" was to Kakko.

 

The list of "Players I'd take before Kakko" is getting too long. He probably wouldn't even go top 10 in a re-draft.

 

It is what it is at this point. We got lucky with the lotteries and it ultimately didn't help us at all. I guess you can say that's fair lol.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

48 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Byfield wasn't available in 2019. He was the 2nd overall in 2020.

LOL ofcourse. I thought Byfield was a 2OA aswell so I was so confused as to how him and Kakko was in the same draft.

 

Either way, both of our top picks "sucks" and probably wouldn't go top 5 in a re-draft. It sucks, but it is what it is.

[Gravesy]

If the Rangers hadn't taken Kakko and Lafreniere with those two picks there would've been legitimate calls for everyone involved to be institutionalized. Slam dunk picks, the fact they have yet to break out properly is down to a load of factors that have been covered ad nauseum. 

Revisiting those two decisions is completely pointless.

 

[Scott]

17 minutes ago, Gravesy said:

If the Rangers hadn't taken Kakko and Lafreniere with those two picks there would've been legitimate calls for everyone involved to be institutionalized. Slam dunk picks, the fact they have yet to break out properly is down to a load of factors that have been covered ad nauseum. 

Revisiting those two decisions is completely pointless.

 

 initially for sure, not now if they (our 1 and 2 OA)put up the same somewhere else and we brought in a couple of these other guys who did what they've done elsewhere here or shown the ability to do it here. Forcing their way up the lineup maximizing the opportunities given to them etc, showing that they have "it". Showing their ceilings aren't as low as what we ended up with. Cheap third liners,

Edited March 22, 2023 by jsrangers

[Phil]

I hate to be that guy, but they're not "slam dunk picks." They were "consensus picks."

 

I do agree that the revisionist history stuff is of no practical use, but Kakko is worlds away from what was expected of him. This is fine insofar as it keeps his price tag low, but there's a very real ceiling on what you should want to pay a player like this if this keeps up. I'm not wasting my time investing multi-millions in a reliable two-way third-line winger just because he's "young." Youth isn't a skill, it's a feature who's value is relative to contractual status. Once we reach arbitration and/or unrestricted free agency with this player, I'd walk.

[Albatrosss]

Laf was definitely a slam dunk pick.  i mean we were talking 60-70 points in his rookie year. 

[LindG1000]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

I hate to be that guy, but they're not "slam dunk picks." They were "consensus picks."

 

I do agree that the revisionist history stuff is of no practical use, but Kakko is worlds away from what was expected of him. This is fine insofar as it keeps his price tag low, but there's a very real ceiling on what you should want to pay a player like this if this keeps up. I'm not wasting my time investing multi-millions in a reliable two-way third-line winger just because he's "young." Youth isn't a skill, it's a feature who's value is relative to contractual status. Once we reach arbitration and/or unrestricted free agency with this player, I'd walk.

 

Honestly...that's shockingly true for a lot of his draft class. Most of that top 10 is worlds away from what was expected of them (Hughes, unfortunately, in the other direction). 

 

 

[Phil]

2 hours ago, CCCP said:

Laf was definitely a slam dunk pick.  i mean we were talking 60-70 points in his rookie year. 

 

I'm being semantic, but to me, "slam dunk" is something you apply to a pick after the player pans out. Hughes is a "slam dunk pick." Kakko was "consensus."

[Scott]

3 hours ago, CCCP said:

Laf was definitely a slam dunk pick.  i mean we were talking 60-70 points in his rookie year. 

 

We missed, terribly.

Edited March 22, 2023 by jsrangers

[The Dude]

Kakko has that body language again. The unsure of himself,  questioning his own existence and fear of fucking up look on his face. 

 

I'll always say the Rangers ruined him.

[siddious]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

Kakko has that body language again. The unsure of himself,  questioning his own existence and fear of fucking up look on his face. 

 

I'll always say the Rangers ruined him.

Totally different than the kakko we saw in the beginning of the season for sure 

[Phil]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

Kakko has that body language again. The unsure of himself,  questioning his own existence and fear of fucking up look on his face. 

 

I'll always say the Rangers ruined him.

 

This is a nonsense, unfalsifiable argument that permanently paints the player as a victim and absolves them of any potential wrongdoing or responsibility in their own development.

 

Did the Rangers "ruin" Lias Andersson and Vitali Kravtsov, too? Must be why they're not doing shit for other orgs. They were "ruined" here.

[Pete]

4 hours ago, Phil said:

 

I'm being semantic, but to me, "slam dunk" is something you apply to a pick after the player pans out. Hughes is a "slam dunk pick." Kakko was "consensus."

You're definitely being semantic.

 

Label whatever you want, the were touted as 2 prospects a who couldn't miss as NHLers. 

 

They are surely NHLers but have not lived up to draft status. I believe Kakko could be an elite middle 6 player. Maybe the best 3rd line RW as he matures. But not what you want from a #2.

 

Lafreniere is just filler. I'd have no problem moving him or letting him walk even. 

[Phil]

No disagreement. As long as Kakko's price point is third line-level, I'm also A-OK with keeping him around as a quality, reliable player and penalty-killer, even if he never pans out. I just don't se any reason to bend over backwards to keep any of these players if these paces continue, because in reality, none of them move the needle.

[Albatrosss]

5 hours ago, Phil said:

 

I'm being semantic, but to me, "slam dunk" is something you apply to a pick after the player pans out. Hughes is a "slam dunk pick." Kakko was "consensus."

You mean in hindsight?  That’s too easy

[Albatrosss]

47 minutes ago, Pete said:

You're definitely being semantic.

 

Label whatever you want, the were touted as 2 prospects a who couldn't miss as NHLers. 

 

They are surely NHLers but have not lived up to draft status. I believe Kakko could be an elite middle 6 player. Maybe the best 3rd line RW as he matures. But not what you want from a #2.

 

Lafreniere is just filler. I'd have no problem moving him or letting him walk even. 

I believe you will be wrong. I believe Laf will come around and dominate. He’s the whole package. He’s everything you’d want in a player—can pass, can score, physical, take no shit kind of player. It will just take him a little longer than we all would hope. He’s the future captain!!

[NEKRanger]

I think the point is that Kakko and Laf were the players that anyone would have picked in the Rangers' position.  Hard to question the Rangers drafting them (did the Rangers optimize their development is another question).

 

The Kraktsov and Anderson picks are much more aggravating because they were 'reaches' at the time of the draft and they turned out to be busts (at least in NY).

[Gravesy]

14 hours ago, Phil said:

I hate to be that guy, but they're not "slam dunk picks." They were "consensus picks."

 

I do agree that the revisionist history stuff is of no practical use, but Kakko is worlds away from what was expected of him. This is fine insofar as it keeps his price tag low, but there's a very real ceiling on what you should want to pay a player like this if this keeps up. I'm not wasting my time investing multi-millions in a reliable two-way third-line winger just because he's "young." Youth isn't a skill, it's a feature who's value is relative to contractual status. Once we reach arbitration and/or unrestricted free agency with this player, I'd walk.

I'm not sure your definition of slam dunk vs consensus is the dictionary version of not, but I would've thought my point was pretty clear. 

There's no point going down the road of "The Rangers should've taken player X instead of Kakko" or "player Y instead of Lafreniere" with the benefit of hindsight. Because, when the Rangers were on the clock, taking anyone other than the players they took would've been insanity and would've gone done as something like top 10 reaches of all time. The fact neither of them has panned out so far is a combination of bad luck, situation and the Rangers as a developmental organization. And possibly also the hockey community as a whole under rating the importance of skating and foot speed for prospects in the modern game.

But like I said, literally every GM past and present would've taken those two when it was time to turn the card in.

Whether or how you pay them is a separate discussion, and one where I think we're aligned.

Edited March 23, 2023 by Gravesy