SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

SuprDave45

Member Since
Jul. 6, 2017
Forum Posts
523
Posts per Day
0.2
Forum: Armchair-GMAug. 23, 2020 at 12:29 p.m.
Thread: Tarasenko
Tarasenko is a phenomenal player...

Now that that's out of the way, this really doesn't make a lot of sense for the Rangers.

As the team stands now, there is a log jam at RW. Buchnevich, Kakko, Kravtsov, Gauthier and a host of other players up and down the roster that can easily play RW.

Throw into this, that they also have a log jam at LW now, assuming they pick LaFreniere, Panarin, Kreider, Lemieux and again a host of other players like Chytil, Howden, Barron..on and on.

You're adding to a position of strength that doesn't need any help, nor has the space to accommodate that help. I am actually looking for the Rangers to move someone like Buchnevich in order to move Kreider to RW, simply because it would be counterproductive to have LaFreniere playing 3/4th line minutes.

On top of this, the Rangers give up lots of draft capital, a LD prospect and goalie for the pleasure? I realize to get a player like Tarasenko you have to give up a lot, but wouldn't those assets be better used on a center?

Sprinkle on top of this the cap nightmare this deal puts you into...

Beyond the fantasy value... it just makes ZERO sense!
Forum: Armchair-GMAug. 23, 2020 at 12:15 p.m.
Thread: Looking good
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BorisBagel66</b></div><div>Habs decline</div></div>

Really? lol

Where are you getting a 24 year old 60+ point (had 53 in 68 this season) RHD who is under RFA control for the next three years?

For #16 in the draft? You're that confident your pick turns out as good or better than that? You could only pray that whatever is picked at 16 turns into a player with that type of production. In that regard, the trade has very little downside for Montreal vs all the upside of a proven commodity. Oh, and you get a plug in kid LD who instantly upgrades your lineup, a strong prospect in Gettinger and a 4th to boot.

The value of offensive RHD is off the charts, probably more than Centers these days. DeAngelo should be able to get the Rangers a 1st on his own. Brady Skjei did, and he's never come close to sniffing 60 point production.

The Rangers on the other end, take on all the risk of making that pick turn out to be something special. Even worse when you look at it combined! What are the chances that the player picked at 16 ends up having more value than DeAngelo, Hajek, Gettinger and a 4th? It would have to be the pick of a lifetime!

I think you mean the Rangers decline.
Forum: Armchair-GMOct. 1, 2019 at 11:31 a.m.
Thread: price to calgary
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>SuprDave45</b></div><div>I am not sure I understand your question. I didn't say Price being the superstar of his team and being a goalie was bad, I said that the winning team blueprint is not having your goalie be the highest paid player on the team. I used Binnington, Holtby and Murray as examples because their teams won the championship without the goalie being the highest paid player. These are just the facts of the matter..I don't have anything against the guy lol.

Look, the Rangers' highest paid player for years has been Henrik Lundqvist..for all his greatness through his prime, even he couldn't win the cup on his own (though he almost did in 2014).

I didn't make the case for trading him, the original poster did. I would agree with you honestly (although for slightly different reasons).</div></div>

I'll take this idea even further. I can make the case that you have to go back 16 years to find a Stanley Cup winning team where the goalie was the clear cut superstar/highest paid player on the team:

2003 New Jersey Devils, Martin Brodeur made $4,745,026 (Elias made $4,722,249). Honorable mention to Jonathan Quick.
Forum: Armchair-GMOct. 1, 2019 at 11:19 a.m.
Thread: price to calgary
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mnet</b></div><div>I don't see MTL trade Price because why would they want to do that? Your starting goalie is most likely your player with the most TOI in the year... Price had 3880 Min. last year... Binnington had 1876min... Carey Price is without a doubt the Superstar of the Montreal Canadiens so why is this bad BECAUSE he's a goalie?</div></div>

I am not sure I understand your question. I didn't say Price being the superstar of his team and being a goalie was bad, I said that the winning team blueprint is not having your goalie be the highest paid player on the team. I used Binnington, Holtby and Murray as examples because their teams won the championship without the goalie being the highest paid player. These are just the facts of the matter..I don't have anything against the guy lol.

Look, the Rangers' highest paid player for years has been Henrik Lundqvist..for all his greatness through his prime, even he couldn't win the cup on his own (though he almost did in 2014).

I didn't make the case for trading him, the original poster did. I would agree with you honestly (although for slightly different reasons).
Forum: Armchair-GMOct. 1, 2019 at 10:50 a.m.
Thread: price to calgary
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>bohorvat</b></div><div>hell no price can get you more</div></div>

Based on?

Because in this trade offer I don't see anything about retained salary, which will continue to be the single biggest obstacle in the way of trading him. 10.5m for a goaltender in today's cap environment is just way too much. The cap hit of the last three Stanley Cup winning goaltenders <strong>COMBINED</strong> was...ironically...$10,500,000! Teams don't build around goalies anymore, they build around superstars and supporting role/depth players. In the goaltending department, they compromise performance with affordability..think bang for the buck.

You also need to consider, that the theoretical team trading for Price would be a contender who needs a goalie...where is a contending team getting 10.5m in free cap space for the next 7 seasons? Calgary sure doesn't have it!

The reality is that if a trade is to be made including Price, Montreal will need to eat money as well as take a perceived "loss" when we talk about Price's value as a player..simply because of his contract. So we can forget this idea of "you can get more" or "he's the best goalie", because that value isn't going to show up in any real life trade for him. They should certainly get some quality in return, but not the same quality as they would if Price's quality as a player were the only variable.

And all of this is with the given assumption that he doesn't get hurt yet again. Oh...and that he waives his full no movement clause to go to Calgary...

I enjoy watching him as a fan of the game, and he is truly a phenomenal goalie, but that's where it ends. I don't see Montreal ever moving this guy.
Forum: Armchair-GMOct. 1, 2019 at 10:22 a.m.
Thread: Last trade NYR
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mvp13</b></div><div>Carey Price says no

... extremely doubtful from both sides, though</div></div>

This was worth a reply just to thumbs up this ^ lol

As for the trade, your asking for a 2nd rounder, and 3 players the Rangers place a lot of value on and are looked at as part of the teams future core for Jonathan Drouin, a 1st rounder and some bleh...what is it that makes the Rangers take this?

The "bleh"...or quantity over quality approach does absolutely nothing for the Rangers...they have tons of bodies, many of them high quality. You'd have to swap out the "bleh" for 1 player who could beat out players currently on the Rangers' roster for a spot on the team in order to make the deal more interesting.

If you wanted to look at it from a Krieder for Drouin standpointl (which is much more realistic), The Rangers like Drouin's contract control and age..but he doesn't have the skill set that Krieder has, which is much more valuable to their team specifically. The Rangers have lots of finess/creativity players just like Drouin...arguably too many, not enough North/South..freight train types like Krieder is.

And...your starting goaltender wouldn't attend practice anymore..so no deal.
Forum: Armchair-GMOct. 1, 2019 at 10:00 a.m.
Thread: TIME TO OVERREACT
Not sure that's necessarily true, but just my opinion...and I'll explain why I feel this way...

An enforcer who leads the league in fights sounds like an oxymoron, because a good enforcer uses his simple presence to deter other teams from getting out of line. It's the fear factor that the enforcer concept is based on. But if actually you're fighting, then something has already happened leading to the fight. This kind of defeats the purpose of the Rangers having Haley around since your original comment was "no one touches Panarin or Kakko all season".

The fact that he led the league in fights two seasons ago doesn't really say anything about him being good at his role, and more likely says that other players aren't really afraid of fighting him. The league might know that he is willing to fight, but they evidently don't care, hence..no fear factor. I'd be much more interested in knowing how he fared in those 22 fights, and who he fought against.

I again point to the last pre-season game with the Islanders. You could clearly tell the Islanders knew they had a big upper hand in the physical department, which has been an issue with the Rangers for years now. It showed in the third period when the Islanders decided they had enough with being out-skated for two periods and started running everyone in sight. Interestingly enough, the game turned in the Islanders favor because the Rangers could not respond in kind, and they eventually lost the game. They tried their guts out as a team, and I give them a lot of credit for that since this is truly the eventual solution to the problem. But Hayley was not nearly the imperfect answer to the problem that you would like, highlighted by him losing his fight handily to the Islanders' 3rd string tough guy. It only emboldened the Islanders and tilted the momentum of the game further in their favor. In the end he actually sparked the opposition, and didn't come close to serving as a deterrent.

Again, I am not knocking the guy himself, he has my respect for sure...but this is a <strong>no-frills brand</strong> band-aid approach by the Rangers at best.

Team toughness is what makes teams respect each other. Two fighters can have a fight...it's the other players who are left on the ice after the misconducts are given out...the guys who don't fight.. that get hesitant when things get rough. The prospect of pissing a tough team off..and then shift after shift getting physically pounded by that team's players top to bottom, isn't very appealing to the "fines" guy...that type of fear is the real deterrent.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 30, 2019 at 12:41 p.m.
Thread: TIME TO OVERREACT
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Barbs</b></div><div>I think he plays at least 70 games. No one touches Panarin or Kakko all season</div></div>

Team toughness is a much better deterrent. And even more to the point, Haley shouldn't be thought of as an enforcer, hes a grit player who is willing to fight... at best. he isn't scaring anyone into not taking a run at Panarin or Kakko.

Take the last pre-season game for example..
The entire third period, the Islanders took run after run at Ranger players... on one shift, their fourth line took turns with cheap shots on Lemieux. Their reward for taking liberties? Their 3rd best fighter got the pleasure of kicking Haley's @$$.

The guy has heart, but if your going to employ the flawed enforcer theory...at least make it a legit enforcer. Glass was better than this!

For their part, the Rangers showed some spark and and didn't back down, but the reality is their a bunch of shrimps who aren't very good at taking the body and are even worse at fighting when necessary. I would anticipate the organization moving fast to bring on a better fighter if and when one becomes available..or overpaying for one if their young blue chippers start getting bounced around.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 24, 2019 at 4:14 p.m.
Thread: No Panarin TOR OTT EDM
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>His underlying numbers suggest he MIGHT be able to bump his production marginally on a better line than what he's played with, but I have issues with this:

1. Every season he's played, even when the Rangers were still "good" in 16/17, has seen Vesey get absolutely lit up in terms of SF/SA. He's bordering on a career average of 2 shots against for every shot he takes. Is he lazy in terms of a 2-way game, or have the lines he's been stuck on been THAT bad his whole career?
2. This assumes Edmonton is paying for what you <em>think</em> he'll become. If he's been playing his career as a 3rd or 4th liner thus far, he should cost as much as a typical 3rd or 4th liner does. Teams, especially the Oilers, cannot afford to pay a "maybe" tax on their acquisitions. I'd be more comfortable with a 3rd or a 4th with a B-prospect.
3. If the Rangers haven't been good for two years or so, and are committed to a rebuild, what about Vesey's game has kept him buried in the bottom-6 when roster vacancies have opened up via trade? With skilled players being shipped out for picks and prospects, why hasn't he been able to establish himself as a 2nd line forward on a bad team obviously starving for scoring?

Also considering how bad Chiarelli was robbed in the Strome/Spooner trade, I'm incredibly hesitant to bet high on Vesey in addition to what I've brought up above. The Rags have conned the Oilers (read: asshat GM of the century) in the past. It's not a major basis for preventing this trade, but it has to be taken with a grain of salt.</div></div>

Almost entirely in agreement on most of it.

He's had opportunities to slot up on the top two lines when injuries hit, and he did produce marginally well. But you are right, he is what he is...a big bodied, quality bottom 6 winger that could be a mismatch on the right line once he settles into his prime and he's utilized correctly. This is in no way meant to be a knock, the fact is every NHL team needs these players. So there is value with him, but I am not sure it's a high 2nd. I think he'd be better used in a package deal, the Rangers would squeeze more value out of him that way.

But the idea that he would play with McDavid...and this would augment his production...is just terrible lol. If he's playing with McDavid or Drai...the Oilers are having another bad season.

The Toronto deal, are they rebuilding? Why would they want lesser players and some 1st rounders? Cap problems aren't going to cause them to give away "now" players while their trying to make their cup runs.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 24, 2019 at 3:59 p.m.
Thread: No Panarin
Strome is a keeper for several reasons:

Who's playing 2C? I don't like Strome as the 2C, but after trading Hayes the Rangers don't have a better option. Chytil just isn't an NHL center, what did you see last year that makes you think he can play big minutes as the 2C? I had my doubts before the season started, nothing I saw changed my mind. Digging deeper, he played just 2.5% of his even strength minutes at center last year...and that was on the 4th line. The Rangers would ruin him by putting him at 2C out of the box.

As a 3C (which is where you'd eventually like him to slot in), Strome is a bargain at the price and would be a mismatch skill wise. The Rangers are in control of his rights after his contract runs out, if he doesn't repeat last years production, then you decide what you want to do with him. If he does repeat, he's worth significantly more than you're getting back in that trade. At the clip he produced with the Rangers, he'd be in the mid 40 point range over the course of a season, while being defensively reliable and a solid penalty killer. Throw in his wingers improving around him (which is bound to happen this season), and those totals should tick upwards.

At worst, he's a stop gap that buys Chytil, Andersson and Howden time to develop. At best, he's your teams 3C for the foreseeable future.


A 2nd is too much for Fox, Rangers hold all the cards in this situation. I'd love to get him on the roster this season, but not by overpaying. A 3rd, or they can wait until the following season. Or I'd give them Pionk for him straight up.

Vesey is worth more than a low end 3rd rounder. I am no huge fan, but he is a big bodied 30-40 point forward still entering his prime. It would be a waste to take an end of the round 3rd...that pick probably turns into an AHL player. What would be the point?

Kakko is a RW.

You'd rather trade Strome and have Nieves play 4C? If this team is built correctly, Nieves is in the stands, in Hartford or on another team's roster.

Howden, Lemiuex and Fast as a 4th line would be real interesting to see.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 24, 2019 at 1:26 p.m.
Thread: It Be Legends
Agreed...Gardiner definitely doesn't take 4, lots of teams would offer him more. The Rangers also have a ton of kids on the left side waiting for their shot, wasn't that the rebuild idea? I don't see adding Gardiner as part of the plan. There would be a better argument for it if he were RHD, but there's better options on that front anyway.

Disagree on cap space...if you look at the future outlook, their fine in cap. Krieder's FA year will be the biggest hurdle, and even then there's money to sign him for a modest raise with the cap going up and a chunk of Girardi's money going away. Karlsson changes that, but really the Rangers shouldn't go anywhere near him. There's money to sign say a 2C and Panarin. a 10m and 6m range player...and still retain Krieder. After that, when some of the kids start hitting RFA, Hank and Shatt come off the books. That's good for 15m...they'll have ample money to long term or bridge however they see fit.



That's a massive over payment for Fox, and really doesn't make a lot of sense when the Rangers are completely in the driver's seat on a deal. If you're looking to relieve cap, send the players away for their proper value somewhere else. Lots of teams would be interested in Vesey for much more than a player who essentially refuses to play for their team. Pionk alone for Fox is more in the ballpark, Carolina would receive a young RHD who can play now and doesn't cost much vs a guy who is largely unproven and is likely going to walk away for nothing in return. I would think they should take this and run.

While I get that your sending Shatt to San Jose to replace EK, there's a couple of problems here:
First, Shatt's value couldn't be lower right now (outside of being injured). I don't see how San Jose is going to send you picks and any sort of prospect for him.
Second, that trade would require Shatt to waive...why would he do that? The guy took a discount and less years to play in NY for his favorite team, you're sending him to the West Coast?
Finally, I really don't think the Rangers should want any part of EK. He's been an amazing player, almost revolutionary, but we all know the writing is on the wall. He played in only 53 games this season...not 73...53. A solid 30 games missed, more than 1/3 of the season! What are the odds that it get's better in the coming years? You want to throw 7 years at 10.5m a year at that? Sorry..but you're insane! Let some other team set their cap on fire for him. If he suddenly becomes Cal Ripken and never misses another game, God bless em for winning the gamble. I'd rather use my cap somewhere less risky. 10.5m should buy me one hell of a consolation prize!

There's more sensible approaches to fixing the Rangers D:

Give DeAngelo some leash, he's earned it. Trade for Fox this off season, get him on board for the coming season so he can get the growing pains out of the way. Let's see what he is now!
Throw your hat in the ring for Trouba. Lots of people will be competing, but take your shot anyway, he's worth it.
Develop Miller and Lundkvist properly, don't just throw them to the wolves like you did Skjei.
If you miss on Trouba (which is likely), maybe you throw the Jets' pick at the best RHD on the board at this years draft.
If half of this goes as you would hope, their fine on the right side.

Give Hajek and Rykov their time this upcoming season. Neither are served playing in the AHL. Once you see what they've got, you have a better handle on keeping or replacing.
Pray to God that Skjei finds his game again, help make this happen with a competent partner.
Lindgren is your backup/dark horse.
This should cover the left side, but if it doesn't LHD are a little easier to come by.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 23, 2019 at 8:44 a.m.
Thread: Dead Weight
Hank's already been offered the opportunity to be traded, he declined. Being essentially the biggest face of the franchise since Brian Leetch, the team isn't going to take on the optic of pushing him out. He isn't going anywhere.

That all being said, why do you consider him dead weight?

If we are talking about playing time...if he is outplayed by the other goalies, he will sit. Georgie took the majority of the starts towards the end of the season, so Quinn has a full handle on this aspect.

If we are talking about money, I just armchaired a team that signed Panarin, signed Trouba and still had cap space. Your major concern money wise is the season Krieder is free, at which time the cap goes up, and a large chunk of Girardi's money falls away, so the money is there. After that season, both Hank and Shatt come off the board, freeing up like 16m. That's just in time to retain the first wave of kids (Andersson, Chytil &amp; Howden).

If your looking at money, the bigger choice is what to do with Staal. Do you buy him out? Do you sit on him another year for a bigger savings on the buyout the following year?

Not much else to worry about here.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 22, 2019 at 1:52 p.m.
Thread: One More Year of Meh
Any theoretical team moving forward should have Panarin on it. Not because he's guaranteed to sign, but because if he indeed does want on the Rangers you'd be crazy not to add that type of young talent for just money.

What's the idea in not trading for Fox? If the Rangers can negotiate the opportunity to talk to him about his intentions, and the rumors on him are true, a 3rd is most certainly worth it. Especially in a season where you have picks to burn.

I mean really, what exactly is a 3rd round pick worth? It's a gamble really...you may get something out of it...like Fox! Or you may get nothing...but honestly which is more likely? Adding Fox via trade puts him on the team THIS season, and the Rangers sorely need RHD help. This would mean moving on from Pionk which for me is much more preferable. It would also bring the D unit more into focus for the following season, when you'll most certainly be looking to add Miller and Lundkvist to the right side.

Other than this lol...I do agree with the moral of the post. The Rangers are under no pressure to go nuts this offseason, things are progressing nicely. Kakko, Kravtsov and Igor being added to the mix will be more than enough to sate fans' hunger for moves and fresh meat.

I don't know about offering Buch 5 mil for term. He finished strong this season, but it's 15 games. Give him a show me bridge 1 year around 4, if he repeats then he can get his money (ala Krieder deal). If he doesn't, then your in the drivers seat to offer what you want. And if he's too expensive at that point, there's a boat load of wingers on the way to take his place, someone around the league will give you value for him.

I'm not sure a 3rd is a smart use of Vesey's value. I think some form of package with he, Names and Pionk would net something worthwhile for the Rangers, and the three clear out cap space. This seems like a better way to go imo.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 22, 2019 at 1:36 p.m.
Thread: Sabres make realistic trades with Jet Vegas and Tampa
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BigDog91</b></div><div>You are cap strapped team, HE had 40 points on one of the best teams ever created. He is making over 5 million. He is over payed and you need to trade some one to stay under cap. he was also your 4th line center in playoffs. SO obviously team does not value him so highly.</div></div>

Every competitive team in the NHL is a cap strapped team, they find ways around it like everyone else. It's not to say that Miller isn't expendable for them, but his point total and their cap situation are not a direct reflection of his value, and their not going to just toss out the baby with the bath water to relieve some cap. Miller gets lost in the wash with a team with so many talented forwards. He is an obvious choice for a trade, but the scraps you're offering in return wouldn't get it done. They could get better across the NHL (except from the Rangers, we wouldn't give up a bag of pucks for him lol).

The Trouba trade is equally unattractive from Winnipeg's view. Offering up a defenseman because you're getting a defenseman doesn't automatically even out the value..not to mention the interest from the other team. The Jets would probably be more interested in investing their cap money in an impact forward rather than another defenseman, particularly if they can't retain Hayes. If their lineup is healthy, you could argue that D is where they can afford to lose as Trouba and Buff play the same position/role for them. You'd make a much stronger case offering them Mittelstadt in some form of deal for him.

I'm not in a rush to say Trouba wouldn't sign with Buffalo, their close to home and he'd pair nicely with Dahlin for their primes.

But imo your idea of "realistic" needs some adjustment =)
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 22, 2019 at 11:38 a.m.
Thread: If trouba wants to sign long term with leafs
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>palhal</b></div><div>We do have different definitions of the magical # 1 RHD. Winnipeg Buff, Trouba and Myers costing 18m and where has it got them? Trouba has declined long term deals before to become a UFA, not to sign with the Leafs. Still doesn't sign the Leafs cap issue</div></div>

This is pretty much right on point...

Sure, everyone wants that top pair Victor Hedman kinda guy, and RHD are harder to come by. But in Toronto's situation, their fully invested in the forwards and are looking for serviceable/competent on the back end, as this is what they can afford. The hope would be that the forwards can keep the pressure on the other team for more of the game than the other way around. It's not ideal, but it's what you've got.
I'm not even sure it's the worst idea, I can't look at Pittsburgh and say their D was stellar and stacked with all-stars during their cup runs. Nashville has had one of the most stacked D's in the NHL the last couple of years, it hasn't gotten them a cup either.

All of that aside, there is still the reality of it...you just can't afford him. Trouba is going to cost upwards of 7m+...I can't see how the Leafs retain their important players AND fit him in. It's not to say it's impossible, but it's going to require some cherry picking that just doesn't translate into a real world solution.

I also agree on Trouba's status, the writing on the wall has pointed to him wanting to dictate where he goes for the last several seasons. The Jets would have to overpay for him at this point in order to keep him...as in offer him way more than he's worth. Is that something they want to do? They have some kids coming up for paydays as well! They took their gamble at keeping him for a cup run this year, and it didn't work out. I don't blame them for trying, but it's closing in on Tavares time, they would be wise to spread the rumors early, whip everyone up into a frenzy, and then make him available at the draft. The offers will be abundant, take the best one and move on from the mess!
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 22, 2019 at 10:41 a.m.
Thread: Big DE
I am not sure it's about paying him anymore. He's a year away from having control over where he plays, and while the Jets have a great team, I really don't think he wants to play in Winnipeg. That's the vibe I've always gotten from the outset of the whole drama, but I can't speak like I am a Jet fan, perhaps they would be able to explain better.

I like the Jets pick at this point also, there could be real nice value there if one of the top 10 guys goes through one of those slides you see happen from time to time.

That being said, Trouba would check A LOT of boxes for the Rangers, as there is a serious need for a real top pair RHD on this team. Plenty of teams would say the same though, and if he's made available (I assume it would be at the draft), there will be no shortage of offers. It's going to come down to what are you willing to offer in return I guess. I don't mind a first, just not any of this or next year's 1st's.

I had a similar team drawn up that I was messing with, you may have inspired me to post lol.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 22, 2019 at 8:32 a.m.
Thread: Is this enough
Taking a shot at the answer...

For me, I always ask myself a couple of things when making offers..

First, does anything you are offering the other team have a shot of equaling or becoming what you're getting. More specifically in this case, does any of what you're giving have a tangible shot at becoming William Karlsson or at least equaling his value..

Second, what is the teams motivation to accept your proposal.

The answer in my opinion to the first question is no...Lias Andersson "could" become something..but he's a long way from having proven that. The other random picks are all crap shoots, you can't read anything out of them.

Digging into to the second question, why would Vegas want to trade Karlsson? He's 26 on a team that is in the middle of their contention run. They have no motivation to reset and wait around for picks and a prospect to grow.

I think the answer is no...this isn't enough.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 19, 2019 at 9:33 a.m.
Thread: WISCONSIN
Not really sure I see the sense in this...I'll explain.

Outside of the top say..5 picks (Hughes, Kakko, Pod, Cozens &amp; Dach..maybe toss Byram in here), none of the other players are slam dunk guarantees. You could even argue that Hughes and Kakko are the only real guaranteed hits.

By draft's end, the Rangers will be loaded with "maybe's/could be's/what if's/talented" etc...why are they trading two players who had their best seasons to date and are entering their primes? For a 7 and 13?

The hope I am assuming is that they turn into impact players, and that would make a lot of sense if this was two years ago. Krieder and Buch already are impact players, and the Rangers are close to turning the corner into becoming competitive (not to be confused with contender, that's the next step). The Rangers already have a lot of picks, what they need now are known quantities, Panarin...Trouba..etc, to compliment the "could be's".

I would love to find a way to grab Dach to eventually become the 2C one day, but I'd pass here if I were the Rangers.

PS: If Krieder were made available at the deadline, he would have fetched a 1st by himself..that's not enough.