Rangers Targeting Alex Wennberg; Kraken Keeping Him Out of Lineup Due to 'Trade Related Reasons'

[RichieNextel305]

 

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, siddious said:

Hot guys thread?

 

We have an entire section for this already, bro.

 

https://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/forum/74-new-york-rangers/

[siddious]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

 

We have an entire section for this already, bro.

 

https://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/forum/74-new-york-rangers/

I never got past the Hank thread sorry 

[Ozzy]

16 minutes ago, Pete said:

He's got Pyatt eyes.

 

Is that better than Betty Davis??

[jsm7302]

25 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

 

I'm not thrilled about it. I'm moreso disappointed that this is going to be the priority over the black hole to MZ's right.

[Br4d]

This would be a very uninspiring add.

 

It suggests that the Rangers are really worried about Mika at this point and they need line 3 to be more consistent offensively.  However the guy they'd be picking up is no guarantee to jumpstart Cuylle and the RW on that line.

 

 

Edited March 4 by Br4d

[Phil]

15 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

I'm not thrilled about it. I'm moreso disappointed that this is going to be the priority over the black hole to MZ's right.

 

We don't really know this until we see what goes for him. If they get him with upward of 50% retention (or more if they broker a third team), it would leave plenty of room to meaningfully address a RW.

[BrooksBurner]

I don't mind acquiring him, but it's going to come down to cost, cap retention, and what that means for any other moves.

[Pete]

17 minutes ago, Br4d said:

This would be a very uninspiring add.

 

It suggests that the Rangers are really worried about Mika at this point and they need line 3 to be more consistent offensively.  However the guy they'd be picking up is no guarantee to jumpstart Cuylle and the RW on that line.

 

 

Where do you get this stuff from?

[Phil]

41 minutes ago, Br4d said:

This would be a very uninspiring add.

 

It suggests that the Rangers are really worried about Mika at this point and they need line 3 to be more consistent offensively.  However the guy they'd be picking up is no guarantee to jumpstart Cuylle and the RW on that line.

 

 

 

No, it doesn't. It suggests the Rangers are, rightfully, adding center depth to insulate their forward group as a whole given Brodzinski is an NHL playoffs rookie and Laviolette hasn't leaned on Goodrow to move up.

[RichieNextel305]

Yeah, any add for a 3C I don’t think has anything to do with Zibanejad and more to do with wanting more stability there than what is already there.

[torontonyr]

If we got him, would we have room for a RW?

[Pete]

10 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

No, it doesn't. It suggests the Rangers are, rightfully, adding center depth to insulate their forward group as a whole given Brodzinski is an NHL playoffs rookie and Laviolette hasn't leaned on Goodrow to move up.

 

Just now, RichieNextel305 said:

Yeah, any add for a 3C I don’t think has anything to do with Zibanejad and more to do with wanting more stability there than what is already there.

Exactly. The narrative here around Zib is filled with next level fabrication.

 

If anything, the urgency with which they're moving to get a 3C (They even moved Goodrow up between Vesey and Cuylle today) shows that they are prioritizing this over a right wing for MZ/CK.

 

To me that says they believe the answer lies within, or they don't see it as big of a problem as some here do. 

[BrooksBurner]

20 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

No, it doesn't. It suggests the Rangers are, rightfully, adding center depth to insulate their forward group as a whole given Brodzinski is an NHL playoffs rookie and Laviolette hasn't leaned on Goodrow to move up.

And that’s fine. What I’m concerned about is that Wennberg’s cap hit takes up almost their entire space, so if they take the full hit that would mean they don’t care to leave enough space for an impactful RW for Zib. That’s not good.

[Scott]

1 hour ago, BrooksBurner said:

I don't mind acquiring him, but it's going to come down to cost, cap retention, and what that means for any other moves.

Yep, hard to judge anything until after the bell on TDL day.  Not entirely sold on Wennberg being much of a difference maker and the unknown of what the cost is if they do get him. Although I'm pretty sure he checks the box of being better than Brodzinski.  I think the next shoe to drop on getting a RW is the bigger question and larger need of the two.

Edited March 4 by Scott

[RichieNextel305]

 

[Br4d]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

No, it doesn't. It suggests the Rangers are, rightfully, adding center depth to insulate their forward group as a whole given Brodzinski is an NHL playoffs rookie and Laviolette hasn't leaned on Goodrow to move up.

 

If we looked at the chart of 5v5 goals this season by line we'd see one line with dots all over the place and every other line basically looking interchangeable.

 

There's no way we go into the playoffs with that reality and do anything.

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

If we looked at the chart of 5v5 goals this season by line we'd see one line with dots all over the place and every other line basically looking interchangeable.

 

There's no way we go into the playoffs with that reality and do anything.

The Panthers have a guy with 8 points playing on their second line alongside a 45ish point center.

 

Please stop with the doom and gloom.

[Phil]

1 hour ago, torontonyr said:

If we got him, would we have room for a RW?

 

Yes, but how much depends on if they go for retention on this deal. The right play, IMO, is to pay extra to get SEA to eat 50% and then give up like a 6th round pick to a third party team to get another 25% eaten. Brings Wennberg down to $1.125M (prorated).

 

  

1 hour ago, BrooksBurner said:

And that’s fine. What I’m concerned about is that Wennberg’s cap hit takes up almost their entire space, so if they take the full hit that would mean they don’t care to leave enough space for an impactful RW for Zib. That’s not good.

 

See above.

[jsm7302]

43 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

 

I'd look at Wennberg and Vatrano as a win. 

[BrooksBurner]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

Yes, but how much depends on if they go for retention on this deal. The right play, IMO, is to pay extra to get SEA to eat 50% and then give up like a 6th round pick to a third party team to get another 25% eaten. Brings Wennberg down to $1.125M (prorated).

 

  

 

See above.

 

Depends who they target. If they get Vatrano at 50% then they don't need more than like 25% on Wennberg.

[Phil]

27 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Depends who they target. If they get Vatrano at 50% then they don't need more than like 25% on Wennberg.

 

Sure, I'm just saying that no one they get is likely coming at full freight. Not if they want to address multiple positions, like we've been told they do.

[The Dude]

The price for this guy with retention is not something I think the Rangers should do. That isn't going to be cheap on assets.  If you're going to give a lot for retention,  I'd pool the assets for the RW.  Not so much fir Wennberg. 

 

I'd rather Henrique. I think the cost would be equal. 

 

[Sharpshooter]

All Wennberg does is just move Brodz to fourth line center, which is fine. He and Vatrano would be a solid deadline.

[BrooksBurner]

Quote

The Post has learned that the Blueshirts are engaging in negotiations with Seattle over rental center Alex Wennberg, identified two weeks ago in this space as a target. Wennberg, 29, is a two-way, responsible center who can also play up on the wing if that is preferred or required. The Blueshirts are believed to be offering a second-rounder plus a mid-level prospect for the Swede.

 

https://nypost.com/2024/03/05/sports/matt-rempe-may-be-out-of-lineup-at-deadline-with-rangers-in-alex-wennberg-talks/

 

Gross. Dude is an OK 3C. No way he's worth that.

 

Zero faith in Drury to get this right.