[Rumour] Rangers shopping Nils Lundkvist

[MeanSeanBean]

9 hours ago, JamesB said:

Not sure why there is so much negativity about Lundqvist. Last year he was a 21-year-old playing in the NHL, and playing decently. If he were a 21-year old Canuck prospect there would be a lot more positivity. He did not score a lot last year in the NHL but how many 21-year D-men do? He was a (low) first round pick, he has played well in the World Juniors, and in the SHL, and was able to put up points in the AHL in part of a season there. He had a positive plus/minus with the Rangers last year and, more importantly, his underlying analytics are quite good. Guys with his track record usually (but not always) go on to have pretty good NHL careers. 

 

There is no guarantee, but the odds are at least decent that he becomes a legitimate top 4 good NHL D. He is already a legitimate 3rd pairing NHL D.  The problem for the Rangers is that he is going to have a hard time getting much ice-time given the quality of the Ranger D with Fox, Trouba, and Schneider ahead of him on the right side. And he is too good to be relegated to the AHL. So it stands to reason that the Rangers would trade him if they can get a decent return, just as the Canucks were reportedly looking to move Hoglander for the right return. 

 

I assume that the idea of getting Lundkvist for  DePietro was posted as a joke, but some people are taking it seriously. 

 

At straight up trade of Hoglander for Lundqvist would not be crazy although I would not do it without a sweetener.  

I think the problem comes from optics. Most of us haven't watched him play regularly in the NHL, and sure as sand didn't watch his AHL games. You here about him being brought up, but then not playing great and it's easy to write him off. That's why I mentioned his partner. Nemeth didn't help Schneider look good either.

 

From what I gathered, he was fine in the bigs. Not good by any means, but was fine for a 21 year old playing his first big minutes. In the AHL he started poorly, but really picked it up after he got used to the game (this is his first year on North America ice)

 

He has just been passed by other players in the Rangers origination and there isn't really a spot for him on their team. They can see that, which is why they were rumored to be trying to trade him last year. Obviously he can see that as well, which is why there is rumblings he wants out. The Rangers window is open now, Nils is better off being traded for something that can bolster the roster now.

 

I like Lundkvist and started paying closer attention to him last year when he was in the JT rumours. I definitely think there is a player there. I don't think that's us stepping up to trade for him since he doesn't fit our needs. But I do think he could have a successful NHL career as a 2nd or 3rd pair D with powerplay minutes.

[aGENT]

32 minutes ago, Shayster007 said:

I think the problem comes from optics. Most of us haven't watched him play regularly in the NHL, and sure as sand didn't watch his AHL games. You here about him being brought up, but then not playing great and it's easy to write him off. That's why I mentioned his partner. Nemeth didn't help Schneider look good either.

 

From what I gathered, he was fine in the bigs. Not good by any means, but was fine for a 21 year old playing his first big minutes. In the AHL he started poorly, but really picked it up after he got used to the game (this is his first year on North America ice)

 

He has just been passed by other players in the Rangers origination and there isn't really a spot for him on their team. They can see that, which is why they were rumored to be trying to trade him last year. Obviously he can see that as well, which is why there is rumblings he wants out. The Rangers window is open now, Nils is better off being traded for something that can bolster the roster now.

 

I like Lundkvist and started paying closer attention to him last year when he was in the JT rumours. I definitely think there is a player there. I don't think that's us stepping up to trade for him since he doesn't fit our needs. But I do think he could have a successful NHL career as a 2nd or 3rd pair D with powerplay minutes.

Yeah, he's probably got something like a Justin Schultz-esque ceiling. While that's not exactly what we need...it's certainly nothing to sneeze at, and a legit NHL player.

[Honky Cat]

I guess Allvin could kick the tires on this players long as JTM is not in the conversation.

 

[aGENT]

16 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

I guess Allvin could kick the tires on this players long as JTM is not in the conversation.

 

I'd consider a package with Lundkvist for Miller. As I stated above, he's got a Justin Schultz-esque ceiling. Nothing wrong with that as PART a potential Miller return. Even if he's not exactly what we need there. But there'd need to be another good piece in that package.

 

Or a separate deal works too.

Edited September 2, 2022 by aGENT

[Honky Cat]

7 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'd consider a package with Lundkvist for Miller. As I stated above, he's got a Justin Schultz-esque ceiling. Nothing wrong with that as PART a potential Miller return. Even if he's not exactly what we need there. But there'd need to be another good piece in that package.

 

Or a separate deal works too.

It would have to be an exceptional piece.(not a late 1st,and/or a middling roster player).

Quality is infinitely more important than quantity when it comes to a JTM trade.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Honky Cat

[Guest]

21 hours ago, Kuzy said:

Poolman has tons of negative value, Hoglander will probably have even less trade value by the end of this year since there's barely a spot for him on the team. I say kill 2 birds with one stone (find young RHD, get rid of Poolman's contract)

Try being positive for once 

 

[Locke Lamora]

12 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'd consider a package with Lundkvist for Miller. As I stated above, he's got a Justin Schultz-esque ceiling. Nothing wrong with that as PART a potential Miller return. Even if he's not exactly what we need there. But there'd need to be another good piece in that package.

 

Or a separate deal works too.

Yup, Lundkvist is not really what we need in a D man coming this way so no way is he the centrepiece of a deal I’d be happy with. 
 

I get this weird feeling that Hoglander might be a sweetener we might have to throw in to get a deal done. That would suck as I like The Hog a lot.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

It would have to be an exceptional piece.(not a late 1st,and/or a middling roster player).

Quality is infinitely more important than quantity when it comes to a JTM trade.

 

Ideally, sure. Have to see if something like that becomes available though.

 

That said...something like Lundqvist, Othmann, Robertson and a 1st...while none of those pieces is necessarily "exceptional" would be solid value and all of those guys have good upside/could also be flipped for other pieces.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'd consider a package with Lundkvist for Miller. As I stated above, he's got a Justin Schultz-esque ceiling. Nothing wrong with that as PART a potential Miller return. Even if he's not exactly what we need there. But there'd need to be another good piece in that package.

 

Or a separate deal works too.

My issue is with Lundkvist's physical ceiling, being 5'11 and 180 lbs. 

 

Schultz is 6'2 and was listed at 193 lbs. 

 

I don't have any interest in adding more small dmen until we figure out what we have in Rathbone and the rest of defense takes shape. 

 

Travis Dermott is barely 6 feet tall but is a stocky 205 lbs.  If we're even thinking of moving on from Myers in the next year, we will have one of the smallest defense cores in the league, and that's with Luke Schenn who should gracefully transition to a 6th/7th dman in the next couple of years (I'd like to keep him on the team for multiple reasons). 

 

We really need a dman in the mould of Braden Schneider or K'Andre Miller. I know Rangers will never give those two up, but there has to be a way to acquire slightly older versions. 

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

My issue is with Lundkvist's physical ceiling, being 5'11 and 180 lbs. 

 

Schultz is 6'2 and was listed at 193 lbs. 

 

I don't have any interest in adding more small dmen until we figure out what we have in Rathbone and the rest of defense takes shape. 

 

Travis Dermott is barely 6 feet tall but is a stocky 205 lbs.  If we're even thinking of moving on from Myers in the next year, we will have one of the smallest defense cores in the league, and that's with Luke Schenn who should gracefully transition to a 6th/7th dman in the next couple of years (I'd like to keep him on the team for multiple reasons). 

 

We really need a dman in the mould of Braden Schneider or K'Andre Miller. I know Rangers will never give those two up, but there has to be a way to acquire slightly older versions. 

Nils is also only 22. He'll likely be within 5lbs +/- of Shultz's weight in his prime.

 

That guy might have to come via UFA, or a separate trade. And again, there's no reason we couldn't flip any of Lundqvist, Rathbone etc for other players at some point.

[wildcam]

27 minutes ago, Locke Lamora said:

Yup, Lundkvist is not really what we need in a D man coming this way so no way is he the centrepiece of a deal I’d be happy with. 
 

I get this weird feeling that Hoglander might be a sweetener we might have to throw in to get a deal done. That would suck as I like The Hog a lot.

Might be a Woo 6'0, RD- 21 yrs old. --- Lundkvist 5'11 RD - 23,  both player have promise need a change??

[Gawdzukes]

Miller and a first.

 

Get er done JB, JR, JAR JAR, whatever your name is. 

[wildcam]

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2022/09/nils-lundkvist-not-expected-at-training-camp-rangers-working-on-trade.html

 

NYR will work out a decent trade for Lunkvist RD--23 has some skill just Rangers have so much depth on right side..

[Kuzy]

1 hour ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Try being positive for once 

 

Take your own advice more often pal.

[King Heffy]

11 hours ago, JamesB said:

Not sure why there is so much negativity about Lundqvist. Last year he was a 21-year-old playing in the NHL, and playing decently. If he were a 21-year old Canuck prospect there would be a lot more positivity. He did not score a lot last year in the NHL but how many 21-year D-men do? He was a (low) first round pick, he has played well in the World Juniors, and in the SHL, and was able to put up points in the AHL in part of a season there. He had a positive plus/minus with the Rangers last year and, more importantly, his underlying analytics are quite good. Guys with his track record usually (but not always) go on to have pretty good NHL careers. 

 

There is no guarantee, but the odds are at least decent that he becomes a legitimate top 4 good NHL D. He is already a legitimate 3rd pairing NHL D.  The problem for the Rangers is that he is going to have a hard time getting much ice-time given the quality of the Ranger D with Fox, Trouba, and Schneider ahead of him on the right side. And he is too good to be relegated to the AHL. So it stands to reason that the Rangers would trade him if they can get a decent return, just as the Canucks were reportedly looking to move Hoglander for the right return. 

 

I assume that the idea of getting Lundkvist for  DePietro was posted as a joke, but some people are taking it seriously. 

 

At straight up trade of Hoglander for Lundqvist would not be crazy although I would not do it without a sweetener.  

The problem is his play in his own zone.  Analytics are absolutely useless for evaluating defensive ability.  After watching him play, it's very clear it's extremely unlikely that his play in his own zone will ever approach an acceptable standard for an NHL blueliner.  Trading something of value for a defenceman who can't play defence is not something that should be considered.

 

[Goal:thecup]

11 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The problem is his play in his own zone.  Analytics are absolutely useless for evaluating defensive ability.  After watching him play, it's very clear it's extremely unlikely that his play in his own zone will ever approach an acceptable standard for an NHL blueliner.  Trading something of value for a defenceman who can't play defence is not something that should be considered.

 

Ok, I relent, Lundkvist for Dickenson, take it or leave it; doesn't look like they're getting a lot of interest (and they're definitely not getting Hogz that's for sure).

 

[King Heffy]

Just now, Goal:thecup said:

Ok, I relent, Lundkvist for Dickenson, take it or leave it; doesn't look like they're getting a lot of interest (and they're definitely not getting Hogz that's for sure).

 

I'd still prefer to waive Dickinson.

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

I'd still prefer to waive Dickinson.

careful where you waive your Dickie.

 

Its maybe a good option, but also kind of awkward if he isn't claimed, then what do we do with him? I guess it could potentially make him a bit more tradable since 1/2 his salary is buried but if we could trade him for some d depth I'd be fine with it. 

[King Heffy]

6 minutes ago, JM_ said:

careful where you waive your Dickie.

 

Its maybe a good option, but also kind of awkward if he isn't claimed, then what do we do with him? I guess it could potentially make him a bit more tradable since 1/2 his salary is buried but if we could trade him for some d depth I'd be fine with it. 

AHL would be fine.  I'm not opposed to trading him, just not for another Hunt/Pouliot/Larsen.   Any defenceman who can't play defence is simply not welcome here.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Kuzy said:

Take your own advice more often pal.

 

I'm not your pal, buddy!