if we trade our 2021 first, it's gotta be top 3 protected and I think it would be

not entire lottery protected, top 3 though
- jimbro83

Ok so let's say we trade the pick and end up where we should have been this year at 11 overall. Would you be comfortable giving up Chytil and 11th overall next year, in addition to letting Strome walk since we wouldn't be able to afford him, to get Cirelli? This assumes Tampa would even accept that, but lets say they do. We go into next year with our centers being Zib - Cirelli - Howden - Blackwell. Is that so much better than Zib - Strome - Chytil - Howden that it's worth giving up a 1st + for?

If so then we can agree to disagree but I don't think so

Purely hypothetical, because I'm curious what some of you would do:

If Tampa offered you Cirelli for Kakko straight up...do you do it?
- eichiefs9

Not directed at me, but I would absolutely not. Curious to see the other answers though.

Purely hypothetical, because I'm curious what some of you would do:

If Tampa offered you Cirelli for Kakko straight up...do you do it?
- eichiefs9

Considering we have no idea what Kakko is fully capable of since he only played 1 year as an 18 year old with Chytil as his center for most of the season, Id say this year with Kakko playing consistently with either Zib or Strome he will have a much improved year.

That's exactly what Ottawa did with Zib. They traded Zib and a 2nd to upgrade their 2C position by bringing in Brassard. Nobody is giving us a proven young 2C for Chytil unless we throw in significant assets which I think is foolish before we see what Chytil is. Cirelli keeps getting brought up. I like Cirelli and agree at this point that he is better than Chytil, but he is 2 years older and will cost significantly more in dollar terms. Let's also keep in mind that he had 1 more even strength goal than Chytil this year, and only 2 more total, in 8 more games. Most of his points came from assists, where he had 19 more than Chytil.

Chytil's most common linemates last year were Howden, who is almost universally disliked by Ranger fans, and Kakko, who everyone admits had a tough season as an 18 year old. Cirelli's most common linemates were Killorn and Stamkos. Obviously he was going to have more points.

Cirelli also had Selke votes which is important and impressive, but you could make an argument that on a team with as much fire power as Tampa, he could afford to focus more on the defensive side of the game.

All else equal, yes I prefer Cirelli, but when you look at the cost to get him, I don't think its worth giving up an unprotected 1st after the lottery luck we've had in the past 2 years, along with the fact that this season may not even happen, which would put us directly back into the lottery next season.
- SkjeiStadium

I think I'm going to have you ghost write my posts

Purely hypothetical, because I'm curious what some of you would do:

If Tampa offered you Cirelli for Kakko straight up...do you do it?
- eichiefs9

Nope

It depends on the return. Which Ive always suggested has to be a top 6 C.
- aecliptic

Who's this amazing 2c that everyone keeps saying we should go get? It's like there's a guy name Tradferme Toosee who is 55% on draws, gritty, a Selke candidate, 55-65 point player making less than $5 million just sitting out there that we can get for Chytil, some picks and middling prospects. Oh, and Buch. We can trade Buch too.

Purely hypothetical, because I'm curious what some of you would do:

If Tampa offered you Cirelli for Kakko straight up...do you do it?
- eichiefs9

I think you'd get 100% no on this question around here

Not directed at me, but I would absolutely not. Curious to see the other answers though.
- SkjeiStadium

It was pretty much an open question to anyone, I was just curious.

I have no attachment to either of them, but you could make the argument that:

- Kakko has a bit more risk and didn't have an outstanding first season (no, I'm not suggesting that means he stinks)

- Cirelli fills an area of need for the Rangers and figures to be an extremely valuable player in the league sooner than later and brings a defensive element that is also highly beneficial

- The Rangers would be dealing from an area of extreme strength (the wing) to fill one where they're relatively weak (center)

No argument that trading Kakko after 1 season could backfire big time, but I happen to be real high on Cirelli. If he wasn't on a team with the kind of star power that Tampa has I think he'd be receiving quite a bit more praise.

If I'm being objective though, you could also have a reasonable argument that Cirelli may get easier matchups playing down a deep lineup a bit...but I don't think that's the case, personally.

I think you'd get 100% no on this question around here
- jimbro83

More or less what I figured, and it's probably the right answer, but I don't think it's entirely crazy either.

More or less what I figured, and it's probably the right answer, but I don't think it's entirely crazy either.
- eichiefs9

Tampa would have to add more, it definitely would be the kind of thing Tampa should be pursuing though

like Cirelli, Taylor Raddysh and 2021 Tampa first (top 3 protected)

that would be interesting deal

but no way should Kakko's difficult first season should be interpreted as something that would enable a team to come in and steal him from Rangers

It was pretty much an open question to anyone, I was just curious.

I have no attachment to either of them, but you could make the argument that:

- Kakko has a bit more risk and didn't have an outstanding first season (no, I'm not suggesting that means he stinks)

- Cirelli fills an area of need for the Rangers and figures to be an extremely valuable player in the league sooner than later and brings a defensive element that is also highly beneficial

- The Rangers would be dealing from an area of extreme strength (the wing) to fill one where they're relatively weak (center)

No argument that trading Kakko after 1 season could backfire big time, but I happen to be real high on Cirelli. If he wasn't on a team with the kind of star power that Tampa has I think he'd be receiving quite a bit more praise.

If I'm being objective though, you could also have a reasonable argument that Cirelli may get easier matchups playing down a deep lineup a bit...but I don't think that's the case, personally.
- eichiefs9

I do think that Cirelli benefits from playing in Tampa's lineup, but I don't in any way think that he isn't very good or deserving of praise. I think the Rangers have a situation where they can have two very good wingers in Kakko and Laf that grow together within the organization which is very important. Cirelli has proven to be very good, but has had literally no pressure on him to produce in that lineup. That would not be the case here as he would be expected to drive the second line. He may be up to it and he may not, which to me is almost an equal risk as Kakko panning out into a productive winger. As for a position of strength, RW isn't as strong as many people think unless we move someone from the left side which comes with its own risks. We let Fast go, we don't know what we have in Kravtsov or Gauthier yet, and Buch is what he is, a middle 6 winger with good chemistry with Zib.

Either way I can see the argument but I wouldn't do it. Maybe that's my rose colored glasses with regards to Kakko because until we landed Laf he was our "savior"

This all goes back to something Ive been very vocal about since the beginning of last year...

Is Quinn the right coach for this team? Is he the coach to teach these kids how to play hockey at an NHL level? Does he come with the right mindset to get these kids to the next level?

This all goes back to something Ive been very vocal about since the beginning of last year...

Is Quinn the right coach for this team? Is he the coach to teach these kids how to play hockey at an NHL level? Does he come with the right mindset to get these kids to the next level?
- aecliptic

I was a Quinn guy until the Hank bubble decision

I definitely think he's on the hot seat

Lafreniere needs to not struggle at all and Kakko needs to improve greatly

Considering we have no idea what Kakko is fully capable of since he only played 1 year as an 18 year old with Chytil as his center for most of the season, Id say this year with Kakko playing consistently with either Zib or Strome he will have a much improved year.
- aecliptic

Using your argument against you.

Chytil has only played 2 years at the age of 20 (hasn't played as a 21yo yet). So why does Kakko get the pass and Chytil has hit his ceiling? Is there really a one year grace period and then a one year window to reach your potential? Seems harsh to me...

Using your argument against you.

Chytil has only played 2 years at the age of 20 (hasn't played as a 21yo yet). So why does Kakko get the pass and Chytil has hit his ceiling? Is there really a one year grace period and then a one year window to reach your potential? Seems harsh to me...
- Bean_Dip

what's happening with Chytil now is that he doesn't have that "well at least he's better than Lias" safety card

he absolutely needs to be a 20 goal-20 assist guy this season (depending on number of games the season has of course)

what's happening with Chytil now is that he doesn't have that "well at least he's better than Lias" safety card

he absolutely needs to be a 20 goal-20 assist guy this season (depending on number of games the season has of course)
- jimbro83

Do we really think that's that far out of the realm of possibility? The argument to trade Fil seems to be around the fact that he has reached the ceiling on his potential, which I do not agree with at all.

Do we really think that's that far out of the realm of possibility? The argument to trade Fil seems to be around the fact that he has reached the ceiling on his potential, which I do not agree with at all.
- Bean_Dip

I don't think it's remotely fair that Chytil has reached his ceiling, he's BARELY scratched the surface IMO

but, I am all for using him as a trade chip in the right deal, not untouchable by any means

Do we really think that's that far out of the realm of possibility? The argument to trade Fil seems to be around the fact that he has reached the ceiling on his potential, which I do not agree with at all.
- Bean_Dip

It's not unfathomable at all. I think it's likely. He will play with better wingers and have another year of experience under his belt. Continuing to use Zib as a corollary, he broke the 20 goal, 40 point mark his 21 year old season. If Chytil struggles this year, there can be some cause for concern, but he certainly hasn't reached his ceiling.

I don't think it's remotely fair that Chytil has reached his ceiling, he's BARELY scratched the surface IMO

but, I am all for using him as a trade chip in the right deal, not untouchable by any means
- jimbro83

Exactly. He's not an untouchable, but I'm not trading him in a package for a similar player. It would have to be true upgrade.

Using your argument against you.

Chytil has only played 2 years at the age of 20 (hasn't played as a 21yo yet). So why does Kakko get the pass and Chytil has hit his ceiling? Is there really a one year grace period and then a one year window to reach your potential? Seems harsh to me...
- Bean_Dip

I never said he reached his ceiling, Im just saying, with what Ive seen after 2 years that I dont think hes a good fit at CENTER. FFS, Im talking about him as a CENTER. I think there are deeper components to his game that are a bit worrisome. Mainly his size and the lack of desire to use it. The fact that in 2 years his FO% is practically identical. The fact that he doesnt seem too keen on back checking and getting dirty. Hes a professional hockey player at the highest level, and these are things that arent taught, these are things you choose to do or not do. Thats my problem.

I never said he reached his ceiling, Im just saying, with what Ive seen after 2 years that I dont think hes a good fit at CENTER. FFS, Im talking about him as a CENTER. I think there are deeper components to his game that are a bit worrisome. Mainly his size and the lack of desire to use it. The fact that in 2 years his FO% is practically identical. The fact that he doesnt seem too keen on back checking and getting dirty. Hes a professional hockey player at the highest level, and these are things that arent taught, these are things you choose to do or not do. Thats my problem.
- aecliptic

I see what you're saying and don't wholly disagree with you about his game thus far. I do disagree that these things aren't taught however. This league is made up of guys who were superstars their entire lives, and are now middling players on their teams. Guys like Chytil never had to use their size very much, or had to play great defense because their talent carried them throughout their lives. The league is also made up of guys who have then altered their game to fit the role that they need to play. Kevin Hayes is a perfect example. The guy came here and was big, strong, and frankly lost out there. By the time he left he was a very good 2C that signed a 7 x 7 contract strictly because he learned the nuances of the game. I, and I believe others here, just do not believe he has had adequate time to learn the game at this level yet which is why we have a longer leash for him than you do. You're entitled to your opinion as to whether he should have learned that by now or whether he's learning fast enough, but I think that is the disconnect here.

I see what you're saying and don't wholly disagree with you about his game thus far. I do disagree that these things aren't taught however. This league is made up of guys who were superstars their entire lives, and are now middling players on their teams. Guys like Chytil never had to use their size very much, or had to play great defense because their talent carried them throughout their lives. The league is also made up of guys who have then altered their game to fit the role that they need to play. Kevin Hayes is a perfect example. The guy came here and was big, strong, and frankly lost out there. By the time he left he was a very good 2C that signed a 7 x 7 contract strictly because he learned the nuances of the game. I, and I believe others here, just do not believe he has had adequate time to learn the game at this level yet which is why we have a longer leash for him than you do. You're entitled to your opinion as to whether he should have learned that by now or whether he's learning fast enough, but I think that is the disconnect here.
- SkjeiStadium

This third year will be telling of his progress, especially since he will have proper wingers to play with.

I never said he reached his ceiling, Im just saying, with what Ive seen after 2 years that I dont think hes a good fit at CENTER. FFS, Im talking about him as a CENTER. I think there are deeper components to his game that are a bit worrisome. Mainly his size and the lack of desire to use it. The fact that in 2 years his FO% is practically identical. The fact that he doesnt seem too keen on back checking and getting dirty. Hes a professional hockey player at the highest level, and these are things that arent taught, these are things you choose to do or not do. Thats my problem.
- aecliptic

So not using his size and his FO% is the reason to move on? Just trying to follow the logic.

Again, a two year window for a player to improve on peripheral skills like these seems pretty harsh.

I get it, we all want Chytil to be a bona fide stud in every aspect of the game, but history has shown it takes time and patience.

Got to give Chytill some time to fill out his frame. He is still a tall lanky dude. Once he puts on some muscle will be better in the trenches

Got to give Chytill some time to fill out his frame. He is still a tall lanky dude. Once he puts on some muscle will be better in the trenches
- TPC

I was watching his goals of 19-20 and he has undeniable skill. Lots of potential there.