OK, so you’re the Rangers, kind of standing in place until John Davidson assumes the presidency, not that another handful of days or another week or so of waiting will affect the offseason. The meetings have ended and the talent evaluators, including general manager Jeff Gorton, are in Slovakia scouting the World Championships
My sense is that this hiring process is being done on the timetable of Garden CEO Jim Dolan, who may have had the Knicks on his mind this week. My belief is that if Davidson were not coming, he’d have informed the Rangers by now and there would be a scramble to interview alternate candidates. According to all best information available, that is not the case.
Matters have not changed since Apr. 9, the night the Blueshirts secured the second-overall pick in the 2019 NHL draft who is almost certainly going to become Kaapo Kakko. There was the trade for Adam Fox, but all the major decisions lay ahead.
Click Here: bape jacket cheap
There is the macro decision about whether the Blueshirts are in position to attempt to accelerate this rebuild by mixing a high-profile veteran or two into a room populated increasingly by Gen Y’s or whether nabbing that No. 2 selection has provided more incentive to let it all grow organically and see where it falls through the season. Folded into that determination — one the president will have the authority to make — are the micro-decisions concerning potential buyouts, the fate of Chris Kreider and the wisdom of going all-in (whatever that exactly would entail) on Artemi Panarin in free agency that have been topics for months.
They’re all hypotheticals at this point. Davidson surely has insight into Panarin that no one currently listed in the New York hierarchy owns, so that input would be invaluable. But as long as we’re talking hypotheticals, here’s one for you:
What if the Rangers could get Evgeni Malkin from the Penguins without sending a young blue chipper back in return? Would you rather have Malkin, 33 on July 31, for the final three years of his contract at a cap hit of $9.5 million per, or would you rather have Panarin, 28 on Oct. 30, for, say seven years at $11 million per? Or a hard pass on both — and on any high-priced free agent — while doubling down on the rebuild?
Now, understand, though there has been chatter surrounding a Malkin move since the Penguins were ignominiously swept by the Islanders, and though Pittsburgh is in need of clearing cap space and an organizational reboot, it is hard to believe GM Jim Rutherford would send away No. 71 without getting a prime young asset or two in the mix.
It is equally difficult to believe that the Rangers would part with any of their most prized possessions — or the 20th-overall pick gained in the Kevin Hayes deal — in order to acquire Malkin.
see also
What Rangers can learn from the Islanders small-scale youth movement
The lesson that applies to the Rangers was reinforced by…
But let’s say the price would be right; a Ryan Strome, a Jimmy Vesey, a Ryan Lindgren; a Yegor Rykov; a Pavel Buchnevich? Wait, Buchnevich? Well, he’s another decision looming, the winger coming up on Group II free agency with arbitration rights. Again, if that’s too much, that’s too much, but he likely would become part of the conversation if Kakko, Filip Chytil, Lias Andersson, Vitali Kravtsov, Libor Hajek, Nils Lundkvist and Fox are quarantined.
We are after all, talking about Malkin, who, though coming off an across the board down year (21-51=72), remains a dynamic presence in the middle and whose addition would elevate the top line/top six. A trade to New York, which he would have to approve given a full no-move clause, would all but certainly reinvigorate one of the very best of his generation.
But are there any circumstances under which the Rangers should be acquiring players of that generation? Aside from his greatness and mean edge—those slew foots probably won’t provoke as much outrage on Broadway if delivered wearing the Blueshirt—there is this: Malkin has played as many as 70 games only once over the last six seasons, three times playing between 57-and-62 matches. Last year, 68.
Then, of course, there is the specter of Panarin, coming off a typically outstanding year (28-59=87 in 79 games), but for whom the Blueshirts will have to outbid competitors expected to include the no-tax state Panthers. Should they just invest all that money—figure a minimum $77 million commitment—when contracts like that now go to players five and six years younger?
Malkin or Panarin?
Or neither of the above.
What say you?
What would say JD?