The value is there but.... I don’t see Lindholm getting moved, yet alone with Rakell

True. Probably get more for them in separate deals anyway.

ANA needs quality not quantity, they have plenty of that already

Not moving Lindholm. Never happening. I wouldn’t move Rakell unless we’re getting back a top RHD prospect +1st +, and “no” DeAngelo doesn’t count as a prospect. ANA and NYR aren’t good trade partners in that sense.



How is the value there for Lindholm? A host of lesser pieces and subpar prospects? We need more elite players/prospect with the potential to become them, not more middling prospects and later picks.

Lundkvist = top RHD prospect and there is what will most likely be a top 10-12 pick in there as well this year..
rangers stay far away from this deal as possible, regardless of how it makes them better now.. absolutely destroys their future.

I wouldn't say "top RHD prospect". He's a late, late 1st round pick. At best his upside is top 4D. No way he replaces Lindholm. I'm a big fan of Skjei, but he's a downgrade on Lindholm. No interest in Buch, just another downgrade on Rakell. Hájek is a throw-in. The 1st wouldn't be top 10, because NYR gets immediately better with this deal. You've added a top pairing D-man and arguable one of the best defensive D-men in the league + a top line W. Ridiculous to assume that this wouldn't make your team significantly better and likely push you into a playoff spot. You're only 6 pts out! The 2nd is next years, delaying our retool... well, this deal would put us in a full-blown rebuild actually. Just awful on multiple levels.

lol you need to research lundkvist then...
https://www.tsn.ca/russian-players-claim-four-of-the-top-five-spots-in-tsn-s-ranking-of-nhl-affiliated-prospects-1.1424256

22nd ranked nhl affiliated prospect and the first right handed defenseman (above Seider even after WJC)

Honestly I don't see a large difference between Rakell and buchnevich (both produce at a similar rate that I don't see it worth the price anaheim would want). Rakell had one very good season but hasn't even come close to repeating it, and their stats actually show that Buch is the better play driver. I'd be okay with completely removing those two from the deal.

In terms of the drop off between Skjei and Lindholm, that's a definite difference. It definitely is not Lundkvist or even a top 15 pick in this years draft difference though (considering how deep it is). Honestly, the rangers system does not help how their defense looks, I blame Ruff for ruining Skjei. Before committing the assets you are talking about I would fire Ruff and hire a new defensive coach to see how things work out. Look how Pionk is doing in WPG and Trouba is doing in NY-- just goes to show you how bad the NYR defensive scheme is.

Definitely think your getting both here

Fair enough. I take your point. He's more impressive than I thought. Actually, in hindsight and, seems like a great fit for ANA.



If that's how you feel, then probably best to just keep our respective players. I completely disagree on the bold. I was going to propose a Nils Lundkvist + 1st type deal for Rakell, but I guess there is no point if you're only looking at Rakell's recent scoring rate (when ANA sucked) and aren't even considering his 1st 30 goal season in 2016-17 as a "very good season".



Again, I disagree. The difference between Skjei and Lindholm is more than Lundkvist. Top pairing D-man of Lindholm's abilities are so rare their value is exponentially greater than that of your standard top 4 D-men like Skjei, players that are also difficult to find and harder to draft than even elite forwards. I think you're seriously under-rating Lindholm. He's not flashy and doesn't produce a tonne of points and he'll never be consider "elite" because of that (which I think is sad, but that's the modern NHL, where D-men who can't defend but post 50-70 pts win the Norris), but he's arguable the best shutdown D-man in the league. We're a bad team right now, so everyone's numbers are down.

I agree that NYR needs a change in defensive coach. Your deployment strategy is so black and white and is bound to make certain players look really good (DeAngelo) and others look really bad (Skjei). I mean, looking at the numbers, Trouba + Skjei are only getting the toughest defensive minutes (which is strange because Trouba is better offensively than defensively). Meanwhile, DeAngelo + Fox are getting most of the easiest minutes 5-on-5 + lots of offensive zone starts + lots PP time. I don't understand this strategy on multiple levels - basically inflating DeAngelo's and Fox's numbers so they demand a huge contract, whilst making the guy you just signed to a long-term 8M contract seem sub-par, which he isn't. I'd gladly add Skjei to ANA, but we're kind of set at LD and he's too expensive to have on 3rd pairing. You should keep him. Reduce and give him less gruelling minutes and I'm sure he'll flourish.

Depends on when that 2020 first is, other than that Lindholm>>>>>>>Lundkvist>Raks>everyone else (ceiling wise obv)

If ANA wants to go full rebuild mode, they should jump at this deal. That being said, I would never do this deal from the Rangers perspective. The Rangers don't need to get better immediately, and in 2 years Lundkvist could be the best player involved in this trade.