[Proposal] pettersson to the rangers

[spook007]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

 

I think that only becomes an issue if the next couple years retooling doesn't bring any success.

 

Moving a Miller and/or Boeser doesn't signal a rebuild, there's no "tearing down" happening here. The younger core is largely in place. It just needs tweaking, supplementing and complimenting.

 

And assuming we get something resembling "regular" Petey back next year, plus whatever pieces we get back in trade, plus whatever other moves management makes (sign a Paul/Tierney/Sturm?), this team should still be a bubble playoff team, just as it is now (if we hadn't had an early season bed crapping).

 

Now, if those moves still = bed crapping and bottom 10'ish finishes, all bets are off in 2-3 years.

Yes to a better 3C... nothing against Dickinson, but man 'stone hands' definitely does better on the wing.

 

My concern is Petey stating he wants to win.

Its all the talk about picks, as picks takes time to take off..

When folks talk about picks and drafting, it, at times, sounds as if they expect the team to be challenging within 3 years.

I don't think picks mature this quickly to become game breakers and especially not defenders...

Miller or Boeser is probably ok, but more than 1 for picks, and hmmm...

 

On the other hand... decisions has to be made one way or another... I think we have a bubble team, but don't think we are strong enough to go far, and when Millers contract comes to an end, he needs paid...

If Boeser and Petey could find their mojo, Garland for a defensive upgrade, could maybe makes us competitive, while having enough cash to keep Miller, but not sure that would work out long term... 

PS. I am quite sure Boeser is in play and Garland as well. They want to bet bigger and want to be a fast team. Money needs to be found to pay them.

Edited January 17, 2022 by spook007

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, spook007 said:

While we make all these rebuilding decisions, there is also the players themselves to think about?

if we trade Miller, Horvat and Brock, is Petey really going to hang around, hoping the next batch will be good enough?

and if he's gone too are Quinn and Demko wanting to hang around long term. 
While we see and compare the teams that have a successful rebuild by tearing it down, there seems to be as many if not more, that keeps going around in rebuild circles... until they eventually get lucky.... or moved. 
I definitely don't have the answers, but I do know, that this fan base don't have the patience to start a new rebuild. It won't be good for another 5 years at least if they tear it down, and thats a big maybe...

Do agree that Miller probably brings in the most and Bo will too....

 

I am just wondering in anyone would have interest in Garland. Good deal, long term for a point producer? JR want to get bigger, so...?

I know, that its not a deadline move, but his 5M could go a long way?

Or if its at deadline maybe Brock with $ retained until his contract expires...? I like Brock, but we've got to decide, which kind of team we want to be.

Garland is an awesome trade chip too.   I'm hoping we make the playoffs.   If we do the team will have rallied under their new coach, and really what an incredible time to be a fan.   Can't rule anything out yet.   We did play to win against TB and Florida ... and just beat WSH (and it was an exciting game to boot!).    For sure we are in the toughest part of the schedule so far - 3 games in 4 nights and two afternoon games back to back!  A win next game will salvage the road trip.   And hopefully be the start of some more W's.   We can always hope - seen some strange seasons, 94 being the ultimate one yet.    Really want to see how we do come playoff time.   Motte is awesome right now - arguably our best forward during this road trip for the minutes he played.   EP got the monkey off his back.    Pearson's been great too.  What would make me happier then anything is making the playoffs, and this team committing to each other to take pay cuts to stick around.   I don't think the team will be too upset if one of them doesn't come back but i have no clue what goes on behind closed doors. If either is a glue guy then yes maybe consider someone else.   On Garland, he's been our best forward 5 x 5 all season so far.   And that's a value contract.   If he was on the first unit he'd be our leading scorer right now.   At less then 5.   Guess we will find out this off-season or before that, what these guys really think.   BB agent was a total d!ck his last contract, wanted way more then BB had earned yet on a long term deal - and stuck it to us with QO.   Not sure how Rutherford will deal with that.   

 

Toews and Kane moaned about a rebuild and losing their players - all the while enjoying their legacy deals.   EPs salary means we lose somewhere else.   Reality is a teams window is during second contracts and quality veterans on palatable legacy deals, still in their prime.   It's mind bending seeing this team better with less depth.   The core would really need to take a big step.   Maybe that's what we are seeing right now.   Demko needs to keep being our MVP.... Spook the marco view is tough, but there really isn't any reason to say we aren't going through the steps now to get to a contender.   Will need a good trade or two, and some more depth coming up behind us ...

[Gawdzukes]

New York hangs up the phone.

[spook007]

15 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Garland is an awesome trade chip too.   I'm hoping we make the playoffs.   If we do the team will have rallied under their new coach, and really what an incredible time to be a fan.   Can't rule anything out yet.   We did play to win against TB and Florida ... and just beat WSH (and it was an exciting game to boot!).    For sure we are in the toughest part of the schedule so far - 3 games in 4 nights and two afternoon games back to back!  A win next game will salvage the road trip.   And hopefully be the start of some more W's.   We can always hope - seen some strange seasons, 94 being the ultimate one yet.    Really want to see how we do come playoff time.   Motte is awesome right now - arguably our best forward during this road trip for the minutes he played.   EP got the monkey off his back.    Pearson's been great too.  What would make me happier then anything is making the playoffs, and this team committing to each other to take pay cuts to stick around.   I don't think the team will be too upset if one of them doesn't come back but i have no clue what goes on behind closed doors. If either is a glue guy then yes maybe consider someone else.   On Garland, he's been our best forward 5 x 5 all season so far.   And that's a value contract.   If he was on the first unit he'd be our leading scorer right now.   At less then 5.   Guess we will find out this off-season or before that, what these guys really think.   BB agent was a total d!ck his last contract, wanted way more then BB had earned yet on a long term deal - and stuck it to us with QO.   Not sure how Rutherford will deal with that.   

 

Toews and Kane moaned about a rebuild and losing their players - all the while enjoying their legacy deals.   EPs salary means we lose somewhere else.   Reality is a teams window is during second contracts and quality veterans on palatable legacy deals, still in their prime.   It's mind bending seeing this team better with less depth.   The core would really need to take a big step.   Maybe that's what we are seeing right now.   Demko needs to keep being our MVP.... Spook the marco view is tough, but there really isn't any reason to say we aren't going through the steps now to get to a contender.   Will need a good trade or two, and some more depth coming up behind us ...

(Damn... just made a long post and the it vanished...

 

Here we go again...

Yes the team has been good despite resent results under Bruce... Competed well in Florida and only crapped the bed in Carolina.

If Petey and Brock could find their mojo again, who knows what they can do, but feel they are still short of some heavies at the back. I have nevertheless been impressed with how they have been standing up for one another, something I doubted we'd see with this core...

 

Now the hard part... Who to keep and who to leave.

I love Garland, but think he could be in play if the team want to get bigger. Boeser may have priced himself out of an extension, as there is only so much money around, and he has hardly burnt the house down.

Bo, provided he isn't asking for the moon, I feel will be offered a long contract, and that leave Miller... That is a tough one... he makes us tick, and lift the team, but timeframe wise + how much he wants, may kill it off. He plays exactly the way they want the team to... 

Fun fact.... for all the unhappiness about Benning and his use of draft picks, Miller has been a massive home run. Regardless of him staying or leaving. He may bring back a kings ransom, and it may be too much to refuse, in which case, it will be a no brainer.

 

Kane and Toews got Blachawks a cup, and then cleaned the table with their contracts...good for them, but think a few of their team mates have been left less than impressed, as there is only so much to go round... 

 

In the end, I just hope we don't have to go through another 5-6 years to get back into the play offs again... Summers are too freaking long without post season hockey.

 

 

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, spook007 said:

Yes to a better 3C... nothing against Dickinson, but man 'stone hands' definitely does better on the wing.

He's far better on W. And if we're losing Miller, we'll need the added C depth.

 

3 hours ago, spook007 said:

My concern is Petey stating he wants to win.

Petey needs to play better than he has to be making any comments about winning.

 

3 hours ago, spook007 said:

Its all the talk about picks, as picks takes time to take off..

When folks talk about picks and drafting, it, at times, sounds as if they expect the team to be challenging within 3 years.

I don't think picks mature this quickly to become game breakers and especially not defenders...

Miller or Boeser is probably ok, but more than 1 for picks, and hmmm...

I don't think picks will be the main return management will be looking for.  We'll be looking for C and D prospects/younger players primarily IMO, with picks to make up additional value. Like for example, Chytil, Schneider and a 1st (+ likely another pick or prospect) for Miller. The pick(s) aren't remotely the key pieces of that. And picks can also be packaged up for other players, or the players we draft with them can be packaged, etc, etc... And if we're getting a couple players like Chytil/Schneider back, we might need those picks in three years to come in on ELC's and help keep the team cap compliant and competitive. But that doesn't mean we can't be competitive during their 2-3 year development either.
 

Basically, don't get too hung up on 'getting picks back'. It's not a harbinger of doom as a well executed part of a larger plan  that includes younger players.

 

3 hours ago, spook007 said:

On the other hand... decisions has to be made one way or another... I think we have a bubble team, but don't think we are strong enough to go far, and when Millers contract comes to an end, he needs paid...

This is what it really come down to for me. Do we want to be better now, with Miller, prior to our core entering their prime, or better in 2-7 years (+/-), without Miller, with the core in their prime? Unless he's willing to sign a sweetheart, ~$7m and 4-5 year deal (highly unlikely IMO), we need to maximize his trade value and continue to build for 2-7 years from now IMO. 

 

3 hours ago, spook007 said:

If Boeser and Petey could find their mojo, Garland for a defensive upgrade, could maybe makes us competitive, while having enough cash to keep Miller, but not sure that would work out long term... 

PS. I am quite sure Boeser is in play and Garland as well. They want to bet bigger and want to be a fast team. Money needs to be found to pay them.

Garland is young enough (3 years younger than Miller) and cheap enough to fit in to the beginning of the core's prime. He's also exactly the type of player Rutherford sounds like he wants. Doubt he's going anywhere. Not yet anyway. But he certainly would have trade value.

 

Boeser depends on what he's willing to re-up for and what the trade market values him at. Silly trade offer for him and/or wants too much money.... bye. That said, I expect he'll re-up at something like $6.5x6 personally.

[spook007]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

He's far better on W. And if we're losing Miller, we'll need the added C depth.

 

Petey needs to play better than he has to be making any comments about winning.

Without Petey playing better, it all becomes irrelevant regardless, so absolutely yes...

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

 

I don't think picks will be the main return management will be looking for.  We'll be looking for C and D prospects/younger players primarily IMO, with picks to make up additional value. Like for example, Chytil, Schneider and a 1st (+ likely another pick or prospect) for Miller. The pick(s) aren't remotely the key pieces of that. And picks can also be packaged up for other players, or the players we draft with them can be packaged, etc, etc... And if we're getting a couple players like Chytil/Schneider back, we might need those picks in three years to come in on ELC's and help keep the team cap compliant and competitive. But that doesn't mean we can't be competitive during their 2-3 year development either.

I've stated that before as well.. I believe, if trades are made, we will be looking more towards good prospects, just about to break through or even just breaking through, more than picks... Have to accept that picks normally takes around 3-4 years, D-men in particular if not more (unless top picks) before they can support the team properly...

 

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Basically, don't get too hung up on 'getting picks back'. It's not a harbinger of doom as a well executed part of a larger plan  that includes younger players.

 

This is what it really come down to for me. Do we want to be better now, with Miller, prior to our core entering their prime, or better in 2-7 years (+/-), without Miller, with the core in their prime? Unless he's willing to sign a sweetheart, ~$7m and 4-5 year deal (highly unlikely IMO), we need to maximize his trade value and continue to build for 2-7 years from now IMO. 

Yes again exactly... the choice is do we go with what we have (can we afford Miller) or do we slaughter the golden goose, before it get old and dry, and get premium return on it. No doubt Miller will be very attractive, and should be able to fetch a handsome return.

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Garland is young enough (3 years younger than Miller) and cheap enough to fit in to the beginning of the core's prime. He's also exactly the type of player Rutherford sounds like he wants. Doubt he's going anywhere. Not yet anyway. But he certainly would have trade value.

 

Boeser depends on what he's willing to re-up for and what the trade market values him at. Silly trade offer for him and/or wants too much money.... bye. That said, I expect he'll re-up at something like $6.5x6 personally.

Garland is where I think they may consider it, if they want to hold on to Miller... Exactly because of the good deal he is on. We all like his tenacity, but we have to find cap somewhere, if we want to keep Miller.

Boeser for me is in the same boat, but more because I'm not sure he follows the plan of a young, fast, strong and big.

And he is going to cost... both he and Petey needs to score goals... and neither has been too impressive so far... 

 

Lots of things to ponder... Hope they get it right.

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by spook007