Thread: Bright Future
View Single Post
Old
06-11-2008, 11:06 PM
  #72
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Son of Steinbrenner;14379564]
Quote:
The Rangers have drafted cheap DEPTH talent and they have decent young defenseman. If they had a young talented RW on the roster today they would still have to pay him at whatever the market rate is. If the Rangers had Perry right now and he was about to become a restricted free agent they would have to pay him. In the old days when free agency was at 31 years old and very few teams signed Restricted Free agents the draft was much more important..The only real way a team can get into salary cap trouble is by giving no movement clauses or signing guys over 35 to multi year contracts.
Would the Rangers have to pay that player? You bet. But they also know that when they resign him that he's there's for the next decade and that they have a shot at avoiding a bidding war.

It also means that if they have to move him, he's young enough to get a good return. There aren't going to be many teams signing up to trade for a guy you just signed or trade for him when he's older.

Secondly, we come right back to a point I made earlier. Until you have to sign Perry, you can focus on other contracts. You can time your moves so that one big contract comes to an end when Perry's might be coming up. So let's say for arguments sake that Perry was a Ranger.

This summer Perry would be do for a big contract, however you'd have some balance because a guy like Jagr's contract (or Shanahan's) would be ending.

Quote:
The Rangers have a good young team to build around. They also have a system that helps out an awful lot. I don't see a high end goalscorer but I don't have a problem with those players being brought in through trades, Restricted Free Agency, and Unrestricted Free Agents. If you can spread out when contracts are going to end AND with the salary cap climbing yearly the Rangers can be players for need players every year. if they are smart about it...
Trades are going to cost you resources. Which is the whole point of building through the draft to begin with. The idea of developing your own players means you don't have to trade for those pieces as often.

Second problem is that your needs depend on who is available. If it's a down year, you're basically screwed for the upcoming season unless you trade assets. Which brings us right back to my first point about the point of developing your own players in the first place.

Quote:
I think Korpikoski is going to be a fantastic two way second line player. I've thought his ceiling was higher then most from the moment i saw him. He adapts to any league and any line he plays on. I thought this before the goal against Pittsburgh... (which is no sample size in my book)
And maybe that is, but even if I buy into that he still maxies out as a 25 goal scorer and I'll be honest with you SOS, I just don't see that. The problem with this plan is that it keeps coming back to players overachieving over what most experts and even the team seems to project.

If we go with that approach and over-project a lot of our guys, of course the picture is going to be nicer.

I can't say it's not going to happen, but I don't think I'd be thrilled about the odds either.


Quote:
I think this topic is has been beaten to death for 5 years now. The Rangers screwed up the pick but 5 years later and if the Rangers make the right moves this offseason they could easily be Stanley Cup contenders. Would Getzlaf help right now, no doubt...but they would also be paying him a market contract...something they are going to have to pay a free agent or players aquired in trades anyway.
It's all a matter of timing though. Would we have to pay Getzlaf? Sure, but that probably means we wouldn't have had to overpay for another center. It means you could've spent that money on a high end winger for the future and Getzlaf's contract would've been absorbed by the money you save when Shanny or Jagr's contract runs out.

Winning the cup can come down to having just enough money to get the right player at the right time. Sometimes it comes down to that small window that exists right before a young player is due for a new contract and an old player is finishing out a contract.

Those are the small windows a team has to be able to jump at.


Quote:
I'm looking for a top line scorer on all the teams not just what's in the system. I do think/hope Cherapanov is a 30 to 40 goal guy but if he doesn't work out the Rangers can replace his lost value with somebody from the outside....
Which means once again we have to hope that to either trade or sign someone.

The former will once again require moving more depth to get a player we don't have in the first place. The latter requires a player to

A. Actually be available
B. Willing to sign
C. Us bidding against other teams.

But if the future is so bright, why do we have to keep signing so many guys to fill crucial positions we didn't fill? If that's the case, than maybe the future isn't so bright as we'd like to believe.

Under the sign a free agent approach we will now have constructed at least 1/2 of our top lines from guys we bought.

Quote:
Edge, if the Cherepanov and Anisimov don't work out do you think the Rangers are totally screwed? I just don't see that being the case...We don't even know if Cherapanov is going to be here after next season. Then is the battle cry going to be who the Rangers should've taken insted of Cherapanov?
Totally screwed? No. But I also don't think they're good enough to win it all.

So if this team exists as a number 4 or 5 seed for the next six years, is that considered a good thing?

Obviously if they make the playoffs they aren't awful, but they aren't great either. So what exactly constitutes a "bright" future. Being good but not great? Or would bright be a team that can win some championships?

I'm shooting for the second of those options. But I don't see it happened without this developing an impact player or two. In this case, those two would be Cherapanov and Anisimov.


Quote:
Then why do you think success is coming post Jagr and Shanny? Do you think the Rangers as is with the guys under contract and in the system right now are a team to build around? What sort of players would you bring in? Edge, you know i think the world of your opinion so i'm curious what your plan would be with what the Rangers ahve right now...Forget what they could've had but if you were in Sathers shoes for the next 2 months what's the plan?
I think the Rangers will be a better team without Jagr and Shanahan. Whether or not they will be a GREAT team depends on the development of two impact players.

I think there is a pretty wide margin of where this team could end up. If Cherapanov and Anisimov develop to their potential, I think this team could be dangerous. But I'm still concerned that they're going to have too many centers and not enough icetime.

If those two don't develop, I think the team will be above average but a notch below the great teams. I think they'll be better than they are now, but I don't see them overcoming the top teams.

As for the second part of your question about Sather, to be honest with you, I don't know if I have a cure-all. Once certain decisions have been made, un-doing them gets tricky. The plan to cover our holes now will come down to waiting to see if other team's sign a player, who becomes a free agent and who is available. In essence we have to wait before we can act. That's yet another reason I'm not crazy about going with the trading/signing approach.

I think Sather has to take a look at Hossa and Campbell. How signable they are is another question. The problem is, Sather's not going to be alone in looking at those guys. So one scenario is Sather find's a way to trade into the 10-12 spot and adds a top end prospect at either forward or defense. He then finds a way to sign Hossa and Campbell and brings in a veteran forward on the cheap.

Is that enough? I don't know and I lean towards probably not. But it's difficult to give an answer that solves everything when so much as already been put into motion.


Quote:
I think the Rangers have developed a collection of guys that make a up a team to build around. Going forward it would be great to draft an impact player every year but that's not realistic. It never happens....The Rangers have a team to build around now it's bringing back and bringing in the right parts.
I like the collection of kids we have, but to be a winner you have to develop more than one impact forward over a 5-8 year span and right now we haven't. I think we have a lot of guys who would compliment the guy to build around. In a sense it's almost like we've built a really nice car but now can't find an engine and transmission.

We could try and get by and it'll look nice enough to fool some people, but in the end we won't get anywhere without good parts in those key areas.

I'm not looking for a system full of impact players, I'm looking for more than what we've seen. That's what seperates us from the good teams. And unless that changes, it is what will continue to seperate us from them.

The problem is that we're not talking about bringing in one or two parts. We're talking about having to sign two centers and at least one wingers. That's not building a team, that's buying one and those parts gets very expensive.

Find the right pieces implies finding a final piece, maybe two. Well last summer we spent final piece money on two guys who apparently aren't the final pieces. In fact I don't even think we're talking about final pieces right now, we're actually talking about having to re-find centerpieces. And that is something completely different.


Quote:
Edge, the league is so year to year now it's impossible to agree with that statement.


I think the Rangers can build that championship team but i don't think it has to be JUST through the draft...
I don't disagree with that. But the last three champions each had at least two impact players at forward who they drafted. Furthermore they were able to add the final pieces because they had the young players to begin with and were able to take advantage of their windows.

Right now we've already spent final piece/ impact player money on two centers who would block two guys we need to develop (Anisimov, Dubinsky) for us to even be a contender in the first place.

Secondly, unlike the teams who win we don't even currently have an impact player who is young and not yet to their first big contract which means we have to spend even more money to sign a wing who score goals.

We've now moved out of the final piece mode when we do that because we've now signed 1/2 of our core players rather than develop them.

That goes beyond signing guys to put us over the top, now we're talking about signing guys to get to the starting gate.

Detroit bringing in a final piece is them adding depth with a guy like Cleary. They can't do that if they had to sign free agents to play the roles manned by their developed impact players.

That's why they are the champions and we are team that hasn't even figured out who exactly we're going to build around. All the support pieces in the world, now matter how great, isn't going to change that fundamental flaw.

Case in point, this team NEEDS Cherapanov and Anisimov to be one of the elite. If the goal is too simply be good, than we'll be okay with what we have.

If the key is to lift the cup, our current team makeup and approach isn't going to do it.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote