How Not to Rebuild: NYR Edition

[leetchy2]

I think at this point we should call up Othmann and give him a taste for nine games. Can he be any worse than Krav? Who knows, but he could be a spark.

[siddious]

Just now, leetchy2 said:

I think at this point we should call up Othmann and give him a taste for nine games. Can he be any worse than Krav? Who knows, but he could be a spark.

I dunno they’re already ruining 3 forward prospects. That’s probably enough for now, save some for the next few seasons. 

[Scott]

44 minutes ago, Winter said:

If we got Hughes we'd be playing him on the 3rd-4th line, hell we'd of probably traded him for a 5th round pick by now, this is not a player issue, its an organizational one. People want to call offensive prospects busts who have never gotten steady offensive roles on the team lmao yikes. Bedard probably praying we dont start tanking so he isn't subject to the risk of being drafted by this prospect killing organization, considering he already has a risk of Arizona. 

And I would bet on that 3rd and or 4th line he would be killing himself trying to stick out, make shit happen, elevating his game and those around him and god forbid showing emotion trying to fire-up any turds around him make them better. Not waiting on others to put him on their back or for them to hold his hand.   Our 2 haven't ever regularly played on the 4th line that I can recall. They've both had shots at the two tops lines at various times. A week or 10 days ago Laf had the same amount of 5v5 time as Mika, I believe it was 5th on the team. 

 

 but the Kids Line! Put them together and leave them alone. 

 

Some of the same people now saying we need to change things with them again, and this org has no patience for kids. So are we leaving the kid line alone or not? Personally again outside of two multi-goal games by Chytil our other two went on a 4 goal in 39  game heater in the playoffs.  They were awake in the playoffs, sure.  They might thrive in careers that weren't based on actual results.  Again they're not alone by far but damn they sure are a part of the problem.

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Winter said:

If we got Hughes we'd be playing him on the 3rd-4th line, hell we'd of probably traded him for a 5th round pick by now, this is not a player issue, its an organizational one. People want to call offensive prospects busts who have never gotten steady offensive roles on the team lmao yikes. Bedard probably praying we dont start tanking so he isn't subject to the risk of being drafted by this prospect killing organization, considering he already has a risk of Arizona. 

 

If they drafted Hughes, and things worked out as they did, he'd be the teams first line center. Zibanejad would have walked, or they sure as shit wouldn't have signed Trocheck.

[fletch]

 

16 hours ago, siddious said:

Bad at winning. Even worse at rebuilding. 
 

feels like we’re on the heels of 1998 again with a shitty team and a front office that doesn’t get it. 

 

16 hours ago, goondman said:

Until Dolan is out the equation, its just wheel spinning

 

Rangers Stanley Cup championships:

1928

1933

1940

1994

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_Six#:~:text=Montreal won ten of the 25 Stanley Cups,while Boston and New York won no Cups.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stanley_Cup_champions

Stanley Cups Final Era, since 1915.  Only original six shown here.

Apps	Team	Wins	Losses	Win %
35	Montreal Canadiens	24	10	0.706
24	Detroit Red Wings	11	13	0.458
21	Toronto Maple Leafs	13	8	0.619
20	Boston Bruins	6	14	0.3
13	Chicago Blackhawks	6	7	0.462
11	New York Rangers	4	7	0.364

 

Leafs haven't made a SCF appearance since 1967; since the league started expanding, they've arguably been the most futile Original Six franchise of the era.

 

My speculation, garnered from listening to others over the years:  it's the New York media market.  Other cities have successfully gone through a true rebuild.  Dolan isn't interested, because it requires the patience to let young talent develop, and not grab shiny toys off the free agent and trade markets.  When you get a free agent or trade acquisition, price is at a premium, which effects roster construction, as you have less money to spend on other players, in the salary cap era.   You need some young talent developed within the organization (lower price) to have your 5 year window to win titles.  Once you have your core, you can add the pricy last piece or two to win.

 

If the gold standard is to build a team to win 2 titles in a 5 year window, since 1962, we have:

Lightning 2020, 2021

Penguins 2016, 2017

Blackhawks 2010, 2013, 2015

Kings 2012, 2014

Devils 1995, 2000, 2003

Red Wings 1997, 1998, 2002

Avalanche 1996, 2001

Penguins 1991, 1992

Oilers 1984, 1985, 1987, 1988

Islanders 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983

Canadiens 1953, 1956-1960, 1965-1966, 1968-1969, 1971, 1973, 1976-1979

Flyers 1974-1975

Bruins 1970, 1972

Leafs 1962-1964, 1967

 

Salary cap was instituted for 2005-2006, so that sharpens the focus:

Lightning 2020, 2021

Penguins 2016, 2017

Blackhawks 2010, 2013, 2015

Kings 2012, 2014

 

If you are the Rangers, these are your four model franchises.  Do a deep dive, and analyze what these model franchises did to build a team to win the first title, and roster additions/subtractions during the run to add that second title (or third!).

 

I'm not ready to write off the 2021-2022 Rangers, in the midst of a bad slump, as a team without hope.  I mean, think about how hard it's been to be a fan of this incarnation of the Ottawa Senators.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ottawa_Senators_seasons

 

But I don't think we are on track to become a model franchise, with 2 titles in 5 years.

[Gravesy]

I've been thinking a lot about what Kakko and Lafreniere would've looked like by now if they were drafted by actual rebuilding franchises. I think @ThirtyONEis spot on with his analysis tbh. 

One thing is opportunity, the other aspect of this is the effect of walking into an organization where you're immediately one of the guys. Your getting 1st line minutes, you're on PP1. When the team needs a play, you're out there. It's an absolutely incredible difference between that and joining a team where you're a bit part player, a team that can afford "burying" you on the 3rd line and where the GM and coach has a mandate of winning rather than developing. I think it's absolutely true that the Rangers got a bit unlucky and that Laf and Kakko were probably never complete franchise altering talents. And there's probably some learning involved in taking two guys with mediocre skating ability and a lack of dynamism that high.

But I'm absolutely convinced that a guy like Lafreniere would look dramatically different if he'd joined a team where he would be expected to take on a leadership role from day 1. I mean, look at how he played during last years run. He should shoulder a fair bit of criticism for not being able to find that player in himself with regularity, but man. He isn't McDavid or McKinnon, but I feel like the Rangers are in the process of wasting a really good hockey player. 

 

[Sod16]

You mention Toronto, which has been abjectly futile since 1967, but there are many others.

 

Philly has a fan base and budget the equivalent of an original 6, but has not won in 48 years and has had some long seriously bad periods.

 

Buffalo and Vancouver.  Great hockey markets.  52 years and counting.

 

Montreal is just another franchise now, and has been for almost 30 years.

 

Wild and Jackets.  22 years and a grand total of one conference final appearance between them.

 

FLA.  30 years of lameness.

 

SJ.  30 years no cups.

 

Some teams luck out and happen to have No.1 or No.2 picks the years in which generational talents are no brainer picks.  Pittsburgh.  Mario, Sid and Malkin.  

 

 

[fletch]

22 minutes ago, Sod16 said:

You mention Toronto, which has been abjectly futile since 1967, but there are many others.

 

Philly has a fan base and budget the equivalent of an original 6, but has not won in 48 years and has had some long seriously bad periods.

 

Buffalo and Vancouver.  Great hockey markets.  52 years and counting.

 

Montreal is just another franchise now, and has been for almost 30 years.

 

Wild and Jackets.  22 years and a grand total of one conference final appearance between them.

 

FLA.  30 years of lameness.

 

SJ.  30 years no cups.

 

Some teams luck out and happen to have No.1 or No.2 picks the years in which generational talents are no brainer picks.  Pittsburgh.  Mario, Sid and Malkin.  

 

 

 

Great points, to widen the discussion outside the original six.  If you look at the model franchises and compare to Flyers, Sharks, Canucks, etc.  I agree that generational talent is important but not necessary (see Kings 2012, 2014).   But Gretzky had Messier.  Lemieux had Malkin (as you mention).  Kucherov had Stamkos. Kane had Toews.  By having at least 2 stars avoids having the opponent just focus on stopping one player.

 

Looking at recent Avalanche, Lightning rosters - these were deep teams, not just with generational talent.   It remains to be seen whether the Avalanche can get a second title within 5 years, especially given their roster turnover. Given the salary cap, did the Avalanche focus too much on the first title, at the sacrifice of an additional title?  Model franchises were able to plan and achieve at least 2 titles.

 

For Flyers, Wild, Sharks, great hockey markets, the knee-jerk is to blame owners and management.  I think that probably oversimplifies, and we'd have to go case-by-case.

 

Senators/Sabres you have to convince players to live in Ottawa and Buffalo, or at least have a crash pad for the season.  There are advantages to living in places like Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal, Miami, Phoenix, New York, Boston, Las Vegas, Dallas, Los Angeles, San Francisco depending on your lifestyle.  It impacts where free agents choose to go, and how much money a player resigns for to stay with clubs.

 

Also think about luck when thinking about playoff series.  Shots hitting posts and going in or out, Hasek-type saves, missed penalty/bad penalty calls, fluky goals, defensemen blowing a tire - they all change the trajectory of a game, and potentially a series.   You can't luck your way through four rounds of the playoffs.  But if your goaltender steals a game, or you get a lucky break, you can end up in the next round of the playoffs instead of being eliminated.  And sudden-death overtime really crystallizes the luck versus skill element.  Highly skilled players attempting to set up the winning goal, covering for defensive breakdowns that will end the game - but the 'best' team for the first 60 regulation minutes doesn't always win, to be fortunate to get the OT winning goal.   And franchise histories are written based on cups, SCF appearances, and how far you got in the playoffs.  

[RangersIn7]

A lot of it is just circumstances as mentioned.

When they wrote the letter and pushed the reset button in 2018, they were aging and in decline, but they weren’t awful. Nor did they get dreadfully bad the following season. And then Zib emerged as a 40-goal guy. And they spent big on Panarin and Trouba. And Igor showed up. And Fox. And boom, you’ve got a competitive roster and you have to think about winning.

So those kids you drafted high, that on a team that normally would be found in the cellar and be able to just run those guys out there 16-20 minutes a night, they find themselves getting 12-14 a night. And there’s the PP being what it’s been over the last several years, blocking those guys there too. 
 

I think the talent is in the room. It just isn’t being utilized and deployed the right way. And the lack of defensive system, structure, and quite honestly, EMPHASIS on that area of play is the problem. They simply don’t defend well. And there isn’t much reason for it. 
 

What they should “Rebuild” is their system and structure from back to front. Not to take anything away from others on the roster, but Igor is their best player. If they’re building around him, it stands to reason you should play as though you are. 

[Bugg]

2 hours ago, fletch said:

 

Great points, to widen the discussion outside the original six.  If you look at the model franchises and compare to Flyers, Sharks, Canucks, etc.  I agree that generational talent is important but not necessary (see Kings 2012, 2014).   But Gretzky had Messier.  Lemieux had Malkin (as you mention).  Kucherov had Stamkos. Kane had Toews.  By having at least 2 stars avoids having the opponent just focus on stopping one player.

 

Looking at recent Avalanche, Lightning rosters - these were deep teams, not just with generational talent.   It remains to be seen whether the Avalanche can get a second title within 5 years, especially given their roster turnover. Given the salary cap, did the Avalanche focus too much on the first title, at the sacrifice of an additional title?  Model franchises were able to plan and achieve at least 2 titles.

 

For Flyers, Wild, Sharks, great hockey markets, the knee-jerk is to blame owners and management.  I think that probably oversimplifies, and we'd have to go case-by-case.

 

Senators/Sabres you have to convince players to live in Ottawa and Buffalo, or at least have a crash pad for the season.  There are advantages to living in places like Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal, Miami, Phoenix, New York, Boston, Las Vegas, Dallas, Los Angeles, San Francisco depending on your lifestyle.  It impacts where free agents choose to go, and how much money a player resigns for to stay with clubs.

 

Also think about luck when thinking about playoff series.  Shots hitting posts and going in or out, Hasek-type saves, missed penalty/bad penalty calls, fluky goals, defensemen blowing a tire - they all change the trajectory of a game, and potentially a series.   You can't luck your way through four rounds of the playoffs.  But if your goaltender steals a game, or you get a lucky break, you can end up in the next round of the playoffs instead of being eliminated.  And sudden-death overtime really crystallizes the luck versus skill element.  Highly skilled players attempting to set up the winning goal, covering for defensive breakdowns that will end the game - but the 'best' team for the first 60 regulation minutes doesn't always win, to be fortunate to get the OT winning goal.   And franchise histories are written based on cups, SCF appearances, and how far you got in the playoffs.  

Go back to game 3 vs. TBL; had a 2-0 lead, and a chance to go up 3-0 on the champions. Not sure they ever recovered from that in their heads. Now that doesn't mean they were a lock to beat the Avs, in fact far from it. But who knows with an all world goalie?

 

That's the hangover. You get thisclose, and then how do you get back? It isn't resting on the fact that you got there, it's understanding the committment required every game to make getting back a possibility. Keep in mind, injuries and bad luck can derail things, but that's less likely if there's structure. 

 

Now good franchises know how to build on that. But the way M$G operates is any success is grounds for a parade rather than  step on a long road. Mika bobblehead night for 5 goal game in a garbage season is one example that stands out. It's nice, but it didn't get you closer to the ultimate goal. What Drury has to  address is a mindset that doesn't appreciate the big picture. There's an institutional softness around this franchise. Every postgame comment spare Trouba Saturday sounds like total drivel. You gotta play better; no fuckin' kidding. Are we gonna hear the same shit later tonight again? 

 

And about structure; offensively the constant overpassing and perimeter shit has to stop. It hasn't been addressed since Quinn. Nobody goes to the net. You cannot have your best players being the greatest offenders either. Defensively, there has to be more structure. They keep blowing leads because nobody knows what the hell to do with the puck other than make a panicky pass to nobody. 

Edited December 5, 2022 by Bugg

[Pete]

While they should really be getting PP time, it just can't be the excuse for them not producing. 

 

Yes other early picks weren't blocked the way Laf and Kakko are, but those kids were also going up against the league's top players and still producing. These kids don't have to play against the guys Zib and Panarin do, and they still look wildly overmatched. 

[RJWantsTheCup]

11 hours ago, leetchy2 said:

I think at this point we should call up Othmann and give him a taste for nine games. Can he be any worse than Krav? Who knows, but he could be a spark.

They can't call up Othmann.  They had to keep him out of camp or not have him for the season.  Still think it was a mistake.

[Pete]

1 minute ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

They can't call up Othmann.  They had to keep him out of camp or not have him for the season.  Still think it was a mistake.

Othmann needed to go back. Keep him far from this mess. 

 

He's got some growing up to do as well, he's learning some lessons this season.

 

I'm happy they're being patient. His future is too bright. 

[Bugg]

18 minutes ago, Pete said:

While they should really be getting PP time, it just can't be the excuse for them not producing. 

 

Yes other early picks weren't blocked the way Laf and Kakko are, but those kids were also going up against the league's top players and still producing. These kids don't have to play against the guys Zib and Panarin do, and they still look wildly overmatched. 

Again, TBL has a structure, NYR do not. Young players get worked into the lineup and know what they're supposed to do. So these kids get the worst of both worlds; no real defined role but a franchise that expects production comensurate with their draft status. May be Laffy and Kakko aren't that good to begin with and the consensus was wrong(and neither appears to be a great skater). But they aren't helped by this dog's breakfast. 

Edited December 5, 2022 by Bugg

[Pete]

Just now, Bugg said:

Again, TBL has a structure, NYR do not. Young players get worked into the lineup and knw what they're suppsoed to do. So these kids get the worst of both worlds; no real defined role but a franchise that expects production comensurate with their draft status. May be Laffy and Kakko aren't that good to begin with and the consensus was wrong(and neither appears to be a great skater). But they aren't helped by this dog's breakfast. 

Bingo. They need more support than GG can give. GGs assistants should have been axed already. 

[LindG1000]

2 hours ago, RangersIn7 said:

A lot of it is just circumstances as mentioned.

When they wrote the letter and pushed the reset button in 2018, they were aging and in decline, but they weren’t awful. Nor did they get dreadfully bad the following season. And then Zib emerged as a 40-goal guy. And they spent big on Panarin and Trouba. And Igor showed up. And Fox. And boom, you’ve got a competitive roster and you have to think about winning.

So those kids you drafted high, that on a team that normally would be found in the cellar and be able to just run those guys out there 16-20 minutes a night, they find themselves getting 12-14 a night. And there’s the PP being what it’s been over the last several years, blocking those guys there too. 
 

I think the talent is in the room. It just isn’t being utilized and deployed the right way. And the lack of defensive system, structure, and quite honestly, EMPHASIS on that area of play is the problem. They simply don’t defend well. And there isn’t much reason for it. 
 

What they should “Rebuild” is their system and structure from back to front. Not to take anything away from others on the roster, but Igor is their best player. If they’re building around him, it stands to reason you should play as though you are. 

 

I think this is bringing up some good points. So much of this is circumstantial. Kreider decides to turn into Dave Andreychuk, Panarin hits the market against all odds, a fringe playoff team wins the draft lottery, a fourth-round goalie takes the crown from the King, Zibanejad starts hitting his 6th overall potential, a stud young defender forces his way to NY, etc, etc. 

 

This shit doesn't happen in a rebuild. But it happened to us. And to be clear - these aren't bad things! Rebuilding teams would kill for that kind of luck. 

 

It's bad luck in the sense that we were strong on wing and won lotteries for wings. If Lafreniere was a center or a D, we're not having this discussion. If Kakko was a center or a D, we're not having this discussion either.  

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I think this is bringing up some good points. So much of this is circumstantial. Kreider decides to turn into Dave Andreychuk, Panarin hits the market against all odds, a fringe playoff team wins the draft lottery, a fourth-round goalie takes the crown from the King, Zibanejad starts hitting his 6th overall potential, a stud young defender forces his way to NY, etc, etc. 

 

This shit doesn't happen in a rebuild. But it happened to us. And to be clear - these aren't bad things! Rebuilding teams would kill for that kind of luck. 

 

It's bad luck in the sense that we were strong on wing and won lotteries for wings. If Lafreniere was a center or a D, we're not having this discussion. If Kakko was a center or a D, we're not having this discussion either.  

I don't disagree with most of this, but the bolded... Chytil says that isn't true LOL. 

[LindG1000]

Just now, Pete said:

I don't disagree with most of this, but the bolded... Chytil says that isn't true LOL. 

 

Maybe? A 1st/2nd overall has a vastly different potential than a 21st overall. It's all alternate history imagination.

[BrooksBurner]

10 minutes ago, Pete said:

I don't disagree with most of this, but the bolded... Chytil says that isn't true LOL. 

[RJWantsTheCup]

If only they got the 1st instead of the 2nd and the 2nd instead of the 1st they would have Hughes & Byfield.

[RangersIn7]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

While they should really be getting PP time, it just can't be the excuse for them not producing. 

 

Yes other early picks weren't blocked the way Laf and Kakko are, but those kids were also going up against the league's top players and still producing. These kids don't have to play against the guys Zib and Panarin do, and they still look wildly overmatched. 

Yeah. It’s a slippery slope in a term. You’ve got a point. I won’t deny it.

 

Though I’ll say this. Most often, production at the NHL level is based on volume vs opportunity. Yet every player is different. It’s hard to navigate and even harder to predict. But it’s real. 
 

You give a guy 15 minutes with limited PP time and he produces very little to nothing and looks somewhat non-present. But give that same player 18 minutes and more PP time, and he scores a goal, or makes a brilliant play to set up a goal, or he really gets after it in a crucial spot and heavily contributes to a good play that results in a goal. Or things of that nature. 
 

It’s a bit of a challenge 

 

Edited December 5, 2022 by RangersIn7

[Sharpshooter]

Kakko and Lafreniere were in different situations on a rebuilding team than New Jersey as some have said. I really don't think that has anything to do with. I just don't think they're that good. Kakko has gotten stronger, but it hasn't translated at all to the score sheet. He's hie own worst enemy at times. Lafreniere has actually regressed and looks the worst he's ever been in his young career.

 

Overall, all of this makes me sad.

[Bugg]

16 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

Kakko and Lafreniere were in different situations on a rebuilding team than New Jersey as some have said. I really don't think that has anything to do with. I just don't think they're that good. Kakko has gotten stronger, but it hasn't translated at all to the score sheet. He's hie own worst enemy at times. Lafreniere has actually regressed and looks the worst he's ever been in his young career.

 

Overall, all of this makes me sad.

Strange thing; neither is a center, nor a pure prolific goal scorer. To go in those slots as forwards, very odd without one or both of those qualities. 

[Sod16]

Hmm, how much faster would LaF and Kakko be skating if they had been placed with bottom teams building around them?  Neither has wanted for extended top 6 opportunities here.  In fact, they both might have been overwhelmed if placed on a team building around them.  It's hard to think of Kakko, in his first year when he was statistically the worst forward in the league, playing big minutes in the key situations.

[RangersIn7]

1 hour ago, LindG1000 said:

 

I think this is bringing up some good points. So much of this is circumstantial. Kreider decides to turn into Dave Andreychuk, Panarin hits the market against all odds, a fringe playoff team wins the draft lottery, a fourth-round goalie takes the crown from the King, Zibanejad starts hitting his 6th overall potential, a stud young defender forces his way to NY, etc, etc. 

 

This shit doesn't happen in a rebuild. But it happened to us. And to be clear - these aren't bad things! Rebuilding teams would kill for that kind of luck. 

 

It's bad luck in the sense that we were strong on wing and won lotteries for wings. If Lafreniere was a center or a D, we're not having this discussion. If Kakko was a center or a D, we're not having this discussion either.  

Yup

 

But the coaching staff and front office need to manage, utilize, augment/supplement, and get the most out of that talent… and they aren’t right now.