For fans of the 14 NHL teams that missed the playoffs, there are endless scenarios for improvement headed into the 2015-16 season. Teams that were eliminated in the first or second round have also stirred debate amongst fans as to what can be done to advance further next spring.
But what can be said about a depth-based team of mostly under contract players still in the prime of their careers, that has finished in the top four in three of the last four seasons? What more can be added or subtracted to the New York Rangers, who won the President’s Trophy and made it as far as Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals? Teams that come within five wins of the Stanley Cup always have more to lose than gain in the off-season, because the drop is further than the ascent.
Unlike the prior off-season, when the Rangers had key players head into unrestricted free agency including Benoit Pouliot, Anton Stralman, and Brian Boyle (and the complications arising from Ryan Callahan’s pending UFA status and the necessary buyout of Brad Richards), this summer’s UFAs do not present any hard choices, and the cap room will be there to re-sign RFAs unless circumstances become abnormal. For more on that, see my previous post on the Rangers’ 2015 cap situation.
Operating under the not-so-crazy assumption that Derek Stepan and Carl Hagelin can be re-signed within the $9-9.5m range, Jesper Fast and J.T. Miller will be retained on reasonable two-year bridge deals, and that re-signing Martin St. Louis would likely mean the departure of Carl Hagelin or the trade of Keith Yandle, we’re going to look at the Rangers’ decisions for next season.
But first, what went wrong for the 2014-15 Rangers?
It goes without saying that the regular season was a rousing success. While being a weak possession team, the Rangers were able to secure the league’s best record and home ice advantage throughout the playoffs by having the highest combined 5-on-5 shooting and save percentage in the NHL at 1019 (commonly referred to as SPSv% or PDO).
While many proponents of possession (even-strength shot attempts and unblocked shot attempts percentage for/against, where the Rangers hovered between 49-50%) will point out that high PDO teams typically fall short in the playoffs because these high shot/save percentages tend to be unsustainable in the long run while facing teams in a series, it should be noted that 5v5 SP% is always a stable stat for teams with stable goaltending, such as the Rangers. Henrik Lundqvist is what he is, and it’s been that way for 10 seasons now.
As for shot percentage, outside of a few individuals (such as Kevin Klein), there weren’t many Rangers who shot WAY above their career percentages. In fact, some (notably Rick Nash) returned to their typically high S%. Looking at simple Corsi% (5v5 shot attempts for versus against) and Fenwick% (5v5 unblocked shot attempts for versus against) does not always tell the full story: these stats do not take shot range into account, or a team’s ability to make opposing goaltender’s more active by shooting one-timers, generating rebounds and broken plays by screening and crashing the net, all of which make for better scoring chances. Teams get their shots in different ways, and there is something to be said for teams who dominate center ice using size, strength, and skill (Ducks, Penguins, Kings) versus teams that dominate along the boards and cycle the puck well using speedy wingers and relentless forecheckers (Rangers, Red Wings).
The other thing that the “possession uber alles!” crowd doesn’t tell you is when looking solely at possession stats for the playoffs versus shooting and save percentages (PDO), it is usually the high PDO playoff teams that succeed (Ducks, Blackhawks, Rangers, Lightning finish one, two, three and four in playoff PDO while only the Ducks finished top five in playoff possession). Interestingly enough, these high-PDO playoff teams tend to be strong regular season possession teams. Shooting percentages tend to go down in the playoffs, while save percentages go up, and not surprisingly, as in the regular season, it’s always the teams who find a way to get strong goaltending and timely, accurate shots who win in the playoffs. Shock of the century, right?
So what happened in the playoffs?
Well, the Rangers’ team 5v5 save percentage went up from .931 to .939, good for third highest in the playoffs and highest among the final four teams. Hank did his job, and as we saw, he was even better in elimination games.
Even-strength shot attempt and unblocked shot attempt percentages remained in the 49-50% range as they did in the regular season, while shooting percentage plummeted from 8.8% to 6.7% in the playoffs. For the second straight postseason, Rick Nash was the embodiment of this trend. To this point, Nash has led the playoffs in shots on goal with an outstanding 69, but his regular season S% went from 13.8% to 7.2%.
More on Nash and other individuals later, but let’s stick with the team analysis. Larry Brooks put out a column today calling for the Rangers to increase their toughness, subtly placing the blame on Coach Alain Vigneault by comparing his “turn the other cheek” comment directed at Chris Kreider to AV’s similar message to the 2010-11 Canucks who narrowly lost the Finals to the big, bad Bruins.
This simplistic analysis might be popular with fans who constantly scream “HIT SOMEBODY!” throughout the game, but in both cases, Brooks is dead wrong. First off, anybody who watched the Canucks take a 3-2 series lead in that Finals knew that they blew it for one reason, and only one: Roberto Luongo fell apart. Even in spite of Tim Thomas’ otherworldly play in net for the Bruins, the Canucks win that series with ease if Luongo even played adequate in net after Game 4. It had nothing to do with hits, toughness, or intimidation.
Now let’s fast-forward to the present. In Brooks’ example where during Game 6, Chris Kreider took a penalty by retaliating against Steven Stamkos for a dirty hit on Ryan McDonagh, the Rangers were ahead 1-0 in a game where the team was being badly outshot. Was there a single fan who didn’t hold their breath once that penalty was called? Sure enough, at the tail end of the ensuing power play, Ryan Callahan scored on a breakaway to tie the game.
I get the need to stand up for teammates and show toughness, but considering that the Lightning’s power play conversion percentage was nearly 40% for the series, can you really blame AV for wanting to keep guys out of the box at all costs?
Lack of toughness is not what eliminated the Rangers in seven games in the ECF, nor was it ever a problem during the course of the playoffs. Below is a breakdown of hits per game in each game of all three series, with a W or L noted for the game’s result:
Game 1 – NYR 32, PIT 32 W
Game 2 – NYR 25, PIT 21 L
Game 3 – NYR 37, PIT 43 W
Game 4 – NYR 42, PIT 28 W
Game 5 – NYR 36, PIT 28 W
NYR 172, PIT 152 W
Game 1 – NYR 34, WSH 32 L
Game 2 – NYR 30, WSH 30 W
Game 3 – NYR 31, WSH 39 L
Game 4 – NYR 31, WSH 37 L
Game 5 – NYR 32, WSH 24 W
Game 6 – NYR 30, WSH 36 W
Game 7 – NYR 32, WSH 26 W
NYR 220, WSH 224 W
Game 1 – NYR 30, TBL 18 W
Game 2 – NYR 28, TBL 26 L
Game 3 – NYR 33, TBL 41 L
Game 4 – NYR 30, TBL 32 W
Game 5 – NYR 29, TBL 29 L
Game 6 – NYR 27, TBL 22 W
Game 7 – NYR 29, TBL 25 L
NYR 206, TBL 193 L
The Rangers were 8-5 when they outhit or were even in hits with the opposing team, and 3-4 when they got outhit or were even in hits. The trend seems to be on the winning side, and barely. Of course, when you break it down by series, we beat the only team that outhit us for the series.
Speaking of the Capitals, aka the biggest team in the NHL in terms of average height and weight, and by far the biggest hitting, dirtiest team through the first two rounds, the hits were basically even for that series with the Caps having a negligible four hit advantage. All series long, we heard from announcers and fans, “This is a different Caps team! They play just like the LA Kings! This team is built for the playoffs!” And yet the “turn the other cheek” Rangers went hit-for-hit with them en route to a series win. We also outhit the Penguins, not a particularly tough team but one that made a point of coming after us and making every game a tight-checking, shot-blocking affair. And of course, the Tampa Bay Lightning were a cakewalk in terms of brute physicality, as they are one of the smallest teams in hockey.
I say “brute physicality” because Tampa did manage to wear the Rangers down in another aspect of the game: endurance. It was clear for most of the series, even in our big Games 4 and 6 wins, that Tampa was the fresher, faster, and harder playing team. This was the first time in years that the Rangers met a team in the playoffs that was as fast or faster on skates than we are. In a foot-race competition, it’s anybody’s guess who possesses the faster team. Carl Hagelin, Chris Kreider, Keith Yandle and Ryan McDonagh can absolutely fly, and even resident old guys Martin St. Louis and Dan Boyle were among the league’s fastest in their primes. But it’s how a team uses its speed that counts, and Tampa’s speedy forwards were able to wear the Rangers down by outworking us along the boards, keeping up in the neutral zone, and converging at center-ice in unpredictable breakout formations.
This is why we struggled against Tampa in the regular season, and it’s why we had trouble with the Islanders in the first three games of the season series. But unlike Tampa, the Islanders (and every other NHL team) do not possess a top six that can match the Triplets and Stamkos lines, and the Hedman-Stralman pairing is a nightmare and probably the third best in the NHL behind Doughty-Muzzin and Keith-Seabrook.
Too many times, the Rangers pin themselves against the boards during the breakout, immediately setting up the cycle and looking for shots from the point or at center when lanes are fully clogged up. Given that the clogging/shotblocking intensity increases during the playoffs, it’s no wonder that the Rangers have trouble scoring in the postseason. This problem is often alleviated when our defensemen pinch and join the play, but this can be high risk/reward when facing speedy teams. McDonagh pinches, leaving our slowest D-man Girardi to face a possible odd-man rush, and that that risk is intensified with the Yandle-Boyle pairing. When fans wonder why we don’t shoot enough from the points, well…do you really want Johnson and Palat barreling full-steam ahead at Dan Girardi after a blocked shot creates a fortuitous breakout for Tampa?
It’s not all negative for the Blueshirts. After all, this was a seven game series that saw us fall short by a mere two goals in the deciding game. As tough a matchup as the Lightning present, the Rangers are deadly in their own right. No team in the NHL has the defensive depth that we have, or three defensemen who can join the rush like McDonagh, Yandle, Boyle, and at times, Klein can. Our breakout is a thing of beauty when Stepan, Brassard, and Hayes feed Kreider, Nash, and Hagelin speeding up the boards. Those three forwards routinely embarrass opposing D, but the breakout has to work in a way that specifically utilizes our forwards’ strength.
Nash and Kreider are almost always ahead of defenders coming up the boards, but it’s absolutely crucial that both men cut towards the net instead of pinning to the boards, using their size and strength to protect the puck en route to a direct challenge on the goaltender. Hagelin doesn’t quite have the power to always crash, but he does have a center iceman in Hayes who, unlike Stepan and Brassard, does possess the size and hands to dominate the middle of the ice. Stepan is the type of center you want working off the cycle because he has the IQ to bring together all elements of the play, while Brassard has the shot and creativity to be dangerous off the rush with Zuccarello, a player with the same skill-set.
On the scoresheet, there wasn’t much separating the Rangers and Lightning, and to borrow the football cliche, playoff hockey is a game of inches. Zuccarello was scratched, and McDonagh was hurt down the stretch. A goal here and a save there can make all the difference in the world, and in that context it’s difficult to extrapolate any useful lessons from a tight seven game series.
I think, though, beyond the numbers and game-planning, there was one disappointing trend that reared its head early in the Washington series, and was our ultimate undoing against the Lightning. Simply put, the Rangers lacked battle level and often looked tired late in games, relying on Lundqvist and lucky bounces to bail them out of games they had no business winning. Games 3 and 4 against Washington saw us come out fast and strong, only to fizzle in the final two periods. Stellar play in goal and inspired third period and overtime performances helped us defeat the Capitals. After struggling against the Lightning in Games 2 and 3, Hank was phenomenal in Games 4-7, stealing two games in Tampa where the Rangers were badly outplayed until getting quick offensive explosions in the third period.
In both of their road wins, the Rangers were outshot by wide margins, and out-attempted in the shutout losses at home that saw Ben Bishop, to his ultimate credit, earn two shutouts behind a Tampa defense that didn’t allow a single high quality chance against him. Hank made some of the best stops of his career in Game 7, keeping the score 0-0 for two periods while the players in front of him were repeatedly beat to pucks by the opposition. Aside from Carl Hagelin and the injured Ryan McDonagh, there wasn’t a single forward or defenseman on the Rangers who seemed to have his legs that night. Short of Lundqvist perfection and a lucky overtime bounce, the Rangers were not going to win that game with such an effort.
Seeing Hank bent over in exhaustion and frustration before the start of the handshake line was the image of a franchise player who had given everything and more. Ryan McDonagh had a broken foot stiffened and numbed by freezing agents, according to AV, so he could play the last couple of games. The team’s two prime leaders left everything on the ice. Where was that commitment down the stretch from the rest of the team? This wasn’t a question in the losses against the Kings last year, but it is now. Why? I think the answer lies in the fact that the Rangers ran into a younger, faster team that refused to buckle under pressure like the Capitals and Penguins did. Like so many fallen teams have experienced against us, the Rangers got tired of chasing these guys around.
Who Stepped Up/Who Didn’t
I don’t think that more than a few sentences needs to be written about the regular season. Pretty much everybody stepped up, notably Cam Talbot, Rick Nash, Chris Kreider, Marc Staal, Kevin Hayes, Jesper Fast, Kevin Klein, Derick Brassard and Derek Stepan. Martin St. Louis considerably slowed down after a hot start, Zuccarello played well but struggled to convert on offense, and Ryan McDonagh returned to form down the stretch after injuries impeded his first half. Dan Boyle was a disappointment, while Keith Yandle basically continued his points-per-game pace from Arizona with slightly improved defensive play. Everybody else played to expectations.
But it’s all about the playoffs, and I’m going to single out a few guys here for good and bad.
Nothing more needs to be said about Henrik Lundqvist, who arguably had his best postseason performance this year. The highlight reel saves from 2015 alone are enough to make for an epic YouTube video, and his elimination game dominance continued, even in the ECF Game 7 loss.
Derick Brassard also continued his string of clutch playoff performances, ending with 16 pts in 19 games, along with 9 goals and a +9 rating.
90% of Ranger fans will disagree with my next choice, but Rick Nash had a very good playoffs. Did it match his MVP caliber regular season output? No. Was it a great performance, worthy of the superstar moniker? No. But he was absolutely dominant in two of our three wins in the ECF, and was almost as good the whole first round. The semi-finals is where he struggled the most, and if he managed to score just a few more points there, Nash would have been among the leading playoff scorers this year.
To put this into greater perspective, compare Nash’s 2015 playoff numbers to 2014:
Rick Nash – 2014 Playoffs
GP G A P +/- PIM PPP SHP GW Shots S% Time-On-Ice
25 3 7 10 -1 8 2 0 1 83 3.6% 17:25
Rick Nash – 2015 Playoffs
GP G A P +/- PIM PPP SHP GW Shots S% Time-On-Ice
19 5 9 14 +8 4 3 0 0 69 7.2% 18:30
The performance improvement is clear. Nash was second in team points behind Brassard, led the league in shots through three rounds, doubled his shooting percentage, and took less penalties while playing a minute more per game than last year. Was it a performance worthy of $7.5 million salary? Perhaps not. But Nash’s numbers put in range of other star players like Alex Ovechkin and Ryan Kesler. It wasn’t an “ultimate vindication” type postseason for Nash, but his play didn’t warrant him being the team whipping boy. More often than not, he was part of the solution.
You know who was even better? Keith Yandle. I know, I know, he’s a turnover machine who doesn’t come up with the points when we need them. Except none of that was true during the postseason. Yandle was our most effective offensive defenseman, scoring and assisting on some of the biggest goals of the playoffs. In terms of defense, outside of some bad turnovers against the Capitals, Yandle was mostly solid.
Below is a snapshot of the leading defensemen in 2015 playoff scoring: (click to enlarge)
The number speak loudly in Yandle’s favor. He was third in scoring among defensemen while playing 1:36 less minutes per game than the next lowest minutes-getter on the list, Dan Boyle, who himself is nearly a minute and a half below Sami Vatanen, who is over two minutes below the next player. That’s elite level offensive efficiency from both Yandle and Boyle. But unlike Boyle, who far and away was the Rangers’ worst defensive liability, there was hardly any risk in Yandle’s play away from the puck. At +7, Yandle remained in the top three among all defensemen, while finishing seventh in shots.
That stat doesn’t tell the whole story, since Yandle had a low number of defensive zone starts and was normally paired against the opposition’s weakest lines, but the point is that he was not a liability. When playing without the puck, Yandle was better than adequate, and even found himself paired against better opposition in the first round when Klein was injured. For the start of Game 7, while McDonagh was being treated in the locker room, Yandle was on the first pairing with Dan Girardi. That’s a measure of earned trust. It makes you wonder why Yandle didn’t receive more ice time than Dan Boyle. It’s fair to say that any criticism of Yandle is a result of confirmation bias: fans chose to notice him only when he made turnovers.
On the other hand, Dan Boyle was the embodiment of high risk/high reward during the playoffs. Offensively, he was very good after some crucial shanked shots in the first round. Having him and Yandle contributing the way they did was a luxury, and you could say that the combination of those two, plus McDonagh, gave the Rangers a distinct advantage in offense from the blue-line over just about everyone else in the East. But being -3 against the weakest assignments and hardly any defensive zone starts is atrocious.
His penchant for coughing up turnovers at the blue-line was brutal, and his inability to move the puck up the boards against the forecheck kept the Rangers pinned in their own zone for egregious amounts of time. Boyle’s offensive contributions during a Rangers playoff goal famine was the only thing keeping Matt Hunwick out of the lineup. Coming up on his 39th birthday and a year left on a move-protected contract, one wonders whether the Rangers are better off buying out Boyle’s contract and paying him to play for someone else.
Rounding out the key playoff performers are Dan Girardi, who was miles better than last year, Derek Stepan, Chris Kreider, Carl Hagelin, and the young guys Jesper Fast and J.T. Miller, the latter of whom showed major promise as a potential top six forward next season.
That should mean the end of Marty St. Louis, who was the undisputed worst performer of the playoffs. Not of the Rangers, of the playoffs.
One goal and seven points with a -1 rating in 19 games, with a porous defensive effort to boot represented the low point of Marty’s hall of fame career. Last year, Marty was our second leading playoff scorer behind Ryan McDonagh, and scored in overtime to put us ahead of the Canadiens 3-1 in the ECF. To anyone who questioned the Ryan Callahan trade last year, I would defend Marty to the hilt. This year, not so much (though it’s interesting to note that Cally has also been terrible for his team this year, continuing a career trend of disappointing playoff performances).
On paper, Marc Staal was another disappointment, but it should be noted that for his bad play in the ECF, Staal was great in the first two rounds. Kevin Klein wasn’t the same since returning from injury, Tanner Glass was a non-factor, and Kevin Hayes struggled despite a couple of clutch moments of his own. Hayes can be forgiven on the basis of age and position – for a player who is not a natural centerman, it will take time for him to become a good playoff performer. This year provided him with experience that will give him an edge over his peers next season.
Needs For 2015-16
It all starts with cap management and in-house business. Glen Sather’s first priority should be signing RFAs Derek Stepan and Carl Hagelin to value deals that will allow for moderate cap flexibility. That means farewell, Marty. Second, J.T. Miller and Jesper Fast must be re-signed on inexpensive two-year bridge deals.
Third, Sather must sit down with Dan Boyle and convince him to waive his no-trade clause. Buying out the remainder of his contract (one more year at $4.5m) is also an option, but that would reduce his cap hit to $2.5m for an extra year. While helpful for 2015-16, that extra $2.5m will come back to bite us when Kreider and Hayes become RFA eligible the following season. If Boyle does accept a trade (and a team actually trades for him), part of the cleared space should be spent on bringing back Matt Hunwick in case one of our D prospects aren’t ready to step up.
James Shepherd can walk in favor of Oscar Lindberg, who has been described by Wolfpack watchers as a faceoff winning, defensive menace who can contribute on offense and is NHL ready yesterday. Lindberg was the Wolfpack’s second leading playoff scorer during their own run to the conference finals in the AHL.
Another young player who is ready to step up is Carl Klingberg, ho can provide big size and nasty physical play in a bottom six role. He could be the first call-up in case of trade or injury.
In the aforementioned Larry Brooks article, he mentions the need to bring Dylan McIlrath into the fold on defense to provide toughness. There isn’t a Rangers fan on earth who doesn’t want to see McIlrath, the 10th overall pick in 2010, make the team and succeed long-term. The issue, as always, is whether or not he’s ready. There hasn’t been a lot of feedback on McIlrath, positive or negative, except that he’s coming along slowly and needs to work on his skating and defensive positioning. On the other hand, Brady Skjei, our top defensive prospect, is a speed demon with a hard shot who is earning rave reviews for his defensive play in the AHL. This article from Hockey’s Future provides insight into the current development status of both McIlrath and Skjei.
Next season, barring a buyout or trade of Dan Boyle, or a significant injury, the only opening on defense will be at the number seven spot. In this role, a player will see anywhere from 20 to 30 games at most. If it’s true that McIlrath is incapable of playing left defense, that means he’ll have to wait until Dan Boyle is gone to compete for a regular spot. As for Skjei, his speed and defensive attributes are much better suited to an evolved NHL that values speed, awareness, possession and playmaking over hitting and crease-clearing. McIlrath can absolutely be valued as a hitter, but he can’t play at the pro-level without some of the finer skills in his repertoire. After all, based on the above descriptions of McIlrath and Skjei, who do you think would have benefitted the Rangers more against the Lightning?
Mat Bodie, Conor Allen, and the hulking Ryan Graves will also be competing for defensive spots this year and next. Graves possesses all the gritty aspects of McIlrath, along with the size, which could ultimately lead to McIlrath’s trade.
The best scenario is that Skjei and McIlrath, or the two best defensive showings in camp, spend time alternating as the 7th D, playing in the range of 15 games each, with the better of the two replacing Dan Boyle when he departs in summer 2016 (and possibly both making the team if Keith Yandle also leaves).
As for the rest of the team, it will be up to the young core to turn the dial up while Henrik Lundqvist, Rick Nash, Dan Girardi, and Marc Staal are still in their primes. There could be anywhere from a three to five year window until these players begin to rapidly decline, but until that happens, expect the Rangers to remain at the top of the league in terms of Cup competitiveness.
Unlike years past, there is no trade or free agency option that will make this team better. All needs are currently filled, it’s just a matter of the young players getting better. Fortunately, team leaders Ryan McDonagh, Derek Stepan, Derick Brassard and Mats Zuccarello still have room to grow and improve, while Chris Kreider, Kevin Hayes, J.T. Miller and Jesper Fast are in the infancy of their careers and could potentially be twice what they are now. McDonagh must take the next step and bring his offense up to the level of players like Duncan Keith and Drew Doughty. Hayes and Stepan will have to become reliable faceoff winners. Kreider can be a premiere power forward with unmatchable athleticism if he can bring a consistent effort over 82 games.
The key for the Rangers, the difference between winning or not winning a Cup in these next three years, will be the continued upward trajectory of these players. Best of all, the Rangers’ cap situation should not prevent us from retaining every single one of them, as only Stepan, Kreider, and Hayes remain to be signed long term with key veteran contract expirations on the horizon.
As prospects continue to graduate to the big club, and with Brady Skjei and Pavel Buchnevich as the only consensus Top 50 prospects in our system, the Rangers must explore trades to replenish lost draft choices. Cam Talbot can be used to gain a high second or low first round draft choice this June, and if a reasonable deal can’t get done with Keith Yandle, he would net a very good return at next year’s trade deadline. If Yandle continues to play well and if Kevin Klein regresses, Klein’s salary is very cap friendly and could probably get us a first round pick in return. This all depends on the rapid development of Brady Skjei or Dylan McIlrath, but trading Klein opens up enough salary to keep Yandle along with our 2017 RFAs.
Projected 2015-16 Rangers Depth Chart:
LW C RW
Nash Brassard Zuccarello
Kreider Stepan Miller
Hagelin Hayes Fast
Glass Moore Lindberg
13th Forward: Klingberg
7th Defenseman: Skjei
While Rangers fans await the conclusion of the 2015 Stanley Cup Playoffs, win or lose, one thing is clear: the team has established itself among the elite in the NHL after four seasons that have produced three ECF appearances including eight playoff series wins total, a Stanley Cup Finals appearance, a best-in-East record, a Presidents Trophy, and, fingers crossed, pretty please, the chance to win a Cup this season.
But whether it’ll be ticker tape or tears streaming in June, Rangers Town/Country/Nation/Multi-Family Dwelling/Whatever will have to turn its attention to that rotten son of a bitch we call the salary cap.
Despite what envious fans of “other teams” and alarmist sports writers have to say, the Rangers are not in a bad cap predicament. Like the NYC subway during rush hour, it’s going to be tight but manageable, and probably won’t even involve some lady yelling “PEOPLE! MOVE TO THE CENTER OF THE CAR!” The guys who need to make more should be able to get their due raises, and most of the dead weight can be dropped if needed.
Let’s take a look at what the teams owes for next season, who needs to be signed, and who can fill depth roles. All figures are based on cap info from Spotrac.
On The Books For 2015-2016
Of the Rangers’ 23-man, 16 are under contract for next season, with 6 of those players entering the final year of their deal. The expiring contracts are important to note, because they are a combination of players who are important pieces for the future, and highly tradeable assets that can be unloaded at the draft or the 2016 trade deadline.
Players signed for next season, in order of their cap hit:
EXP = Expiring Contract, NTC = Full No Trade Clause, LNTC = Limited No Trade Clause
Henrik Lundqvist, G – $8.5m (NTC)
Rick Nash, W – $7.5m (NTC)
Marc Staal, D – $5.7m (LNTC)
Dan Girardi, D – $5.5m (LNTC)
Derick Brassard, C – $5.0m (LNTC)
Ryan McDonagh, D – $4.7m
Dan Boyle, D – $4.5m (EXP, NTC)
Mats Zuccarello, W – $4.5m (LNTC)
Kevin Klein, D – $2.9m
Keith Yandle, D – $2.625m (EXP)
Chris Kreider, W – $2.475m (EXP)
Dominic Moore, C/W – $1.5m (EXP, LNTC)
Tanner Glass, W – $1.45m
Cam Talbot, G – $1.45m (EXP)
Kevin Hayes, C/W – $900k (EXP)
Chris Summers, D – $600k (EXP)
TOTAL 2015 CAP HIT = $59.8m
To recap, that means that our franchise goaltender, top four D-men, franchise Winger, and number two Center are all locked up for the foreseeable future. That’s good news. Girardi and Staal’s contracts are a point of debate in terms of their value, but keep in mind that both men could easily have fetched more money on the open market, Girardi is an iron man who has missed three games for his career, and Staal is 28 and arguably coming off his best defensive season. And if that’s not enough to make you like those contracts, take comfort in the fact that McDonagh and Klein are on unbelievably good long-term deals. Seriously, McDonagh is our captain, one of the ten best D in the league, and making $4.7m annual. Considering his age and skill level, he is easily worth over $7.0m. Klein would also have no trouble getting a contract between $4-5m.
Keith Yandle and Cam Talbot are our most tradeable assets headed into next season. With a full season left on both of their contracts, and given the demand at their respective positions, Glen Sather can recoup high draft picks while shedding salary in both cases should the need arise. It’s almost a given that Talbot will go (rumors have the Oilers interested, and going rates for young goalies of Talbot’s caliber are anywhere from high second round picks to low first rounders, both of which the Oilers possess in the 2015 draft).
Chris Kreider and Kevin Hayes are must-signs for 2016, and the potential for either or both of them to have a monster, break-out year in 2015 is pretty high. If Kreider gives us another 20-25 goal season, he will easily warrant a $4.0m+ deal, more if he can blow past the 30 goal mark. Hayes plays a premiere position, and his low salary/high production means that he’ll be set for a BIG TIME raise. His 45 points at an average of 13:02 in ice time puts his rookie campaign on the level with past elite rookie performances like that of Ryan Getzlaf, a very comparable player considering his size and playmaking ability. Say Hayes scores between 50-60 pts next season and improves his faceoff win percentage. Now we’re talking about a possible $5-6m deal. Let’s just go crazy and say that Kreider hits 30 goals and Hayes reaches 60 points, aka the ultimate “This is awesome but our cap is in a world of HOLY FUCK” situation. The silver lining is that Dominic Moore, Dan Boyle, and Keith Yandle’s combined $8.625m salaries come off the books in 2016, enough to pay Kreider and Hayes a combined $8.6 in raises if the awesome nightmare scenario were to occur.
Yes, that creates a void on our bottom-two D pairing and at 4th line depth center, but remember that our farm system is stacked with potential D-men like Brady Skjei, Ryan Graves, Conor Allen, Mat Bodie, and Dylan McIlrath, all highly rated and seasoned enough that they can be expected to compete for bottom pairing D positions over the next two seasons. Considering the team’s history of graduating prospects to the pro level (Fast, Miller, and Hayes as the recent examples), it shouldn’t be a problem to get two of those aforementioned D-men into the lineup by 2016. As for Dom Moore’s expiring contract, it is almost a certainty that Oscar Lindberg, a defensive maven and faceoff specialist with offense to boot, will be on the big club’s roster next season after leading the Hartford Wolfpack in playoff scoring.
2015 Free Agents
Before we move on to this year’s free agents, it’s important to establish what type of cap room the Rangers will be dealing with. This week, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman went on record to say that he expects the cap to rise to $71 million, depending on the value of the Canadian dollar. That’s kind of always been the case, but that decision has to be made soon, and Bettman’s expectation of a $71m cap at this late stage is significant. I’m more than comfortable assuming that figure for the purpose of this article, which would leave the Rangers a total of $11.2 million to spend on free agents.
RFA = Restricted Free Agent, UFA = Unrestricted Free Agent, with 2014 salaries noted by parentheses
Martin St. Lous, F (UFA) – $5.625m (2014)
Derek Stepan, C (RFA) – $3.075m (2014)
Carl Hagelin, W (RFA) – $2.250m (2014)
Jesper Fast, W (RFA) – $783,870k (2014)
J.T. Miller, C/W (RFA) – $682,643k (2014)
Matt Hunwick, D (UFA) – $600,000k (2014)
James Sheppard, C/W (UFA) – $193,548k (2014)
EXPECTED 2015 CAP SPACE = $11.2m
This list presents a clear agenda for Sather: Stepan, Hagelin, Fast, and Miller must be signed. That goes double when you consider how each of those players has performed in the playoffs to this point. The good news is that unlike last season, this year’s prime Ranger free agents are restricted, meaning that unless some asshole GM swoops in with a ridiculous offer sheet (no chance it happens with Hags, Fast, or Miller, small chance it happens with Stepan), the Rangers will have the ultimate say in whether these guys come back. That’s good, because I’d love to avoid another Anton Stralman/Brian Boyle/Benoit Pouliot debacle.
Look, I’ve perused internet comments sections galore, and have seen all kinds of stupid numbers thrown around in terms of what Derek Stepan is worth. Forget it. Realize that he’s a six million dollar man, period, end of story. Stepan is not only one of the smartest, best defensive Centers in the game, he is also ranked 20th among Centers in points-per-game averaged since 2012-13 at 0.79 clip (averages out to 64 points over an 82 game season); 2013 was lockout shortened and Stepan missed a portion of this season due to injury. With a threshold of at least 120 games played over that time, that puts him ahead of players like David Krejci, Patrice Bergeron, Ryan Johansen, Ryan Kesler, and Paul Stastny, while placing him within a .003 range of Jason Spezza, Logan Couture, and Eric Staal. Not all of those players are $6 million men (Kesler), some are beyond $7.0m (Staal, Bergeron), and others are still on smaller bridge deals (Johansen). However, Stepan’s agent will likely use the most recent contract signings as a measuring stick, since many of the cheaper contracts were signed in years ago. The three most coveted UFA and RFA centers in 2014 were Spezza ($7.5m/4yrs), Couture ($6.0m/5yrs) and Stastny ($6.5m/4yrs).
Looking further into the stat comparisons over the last three seasons, it’s true that Stepan’s faceoff percentage is below average, but his value is even further magnified when you consider that the top five Centers in Defensive Point Shares (DPS) over that time were Jonathan Toews, Anze Kopitar, Derek Stepan, Sidney Crosby, and Joe Pavelski, in that order. If you still like your old time stats, Stepan is ranked third in plus/minus behind Toews and Bergeron, 18th in Goals Created, 15th in Assists Per Game, and 22nd in Shots on Goal. And that’s just the regular season. In the playoffs, combined since 2013, Stepan is 6th among centers in total points (Derick Brassard is 4th), not to mention his now-famous overtime goal in Game 7 of the semi-finals this post-season.
After holding out during training camp last season, we know that Stepan and his agent are prepared to go into deep water with Sather at the negotiating table. My guess is that Sather will want Stepan somewhere in the $5.5-5.8m range, citing his statistical similarities to Brassard, but the truth is that Stepan is 24 years old (his closest comparisons Couture and Stastny are 26 and 29), improving each season, and twice the defensive player that Brass is. He’s $6.0m easy, and will possibly ask for more.
A similar look at Carl Hagelin places him in the range of $3.0 million. Andrew Cogliano of the Anaheim Ducks is a near perfect comparable to Hagelin – both are forecheck wizards with unreal speed, they play the same position at the same size, and have almost identical point production in both the regular season and playoffs. Last season, Cogliano (27 years old) signed a four-year, $12 million contract coming off a 22 goal season. Hagelin (26 years old) is coming off 17 goal production and a playoff performance, to this point, that has included more than a few key goals including the OT winner in Game 5 that eliminated the Penguins.
Signing Stepan and Hagelin at their deserved salaries will cost the Rangers $9.0m, which means one thing: Marty St. Louis has seen his last season on Broadway. That’s probably not a hard sell to the fanbase right now, considering his lower production in the regular season and (to this point) dismal, almost non-existent scoring in the playoffs. Marty has made it clear that he wants to retire as a Ranger, but it makes no financial sense for the organization. Even if Sather was intent on doing it, re-signing Marty on a one or two-year deal won’t be cheap. Jaromir Jagr, an older and similarly productive player as Marty at this time last year, signed for over $3.0m on a one-year deal with the Devils. It’s a safer bet that Marty will be seeking two years or more, and it wouldn’t surprise me to see a team get him for two years at $2.0-2.5m per. That means we could potentially sign Stepan, Hagelin, and Marty by using our remaining cap space of $11.2m, leaving nothing for Miller, Fast, and two depth players (a 13th forward and 7th defenseman). That’s unacceptable. Marty played a key role in our 2014 run to the Finals, and my gut tells me that he’s going to surprise many people by contributing in big ways in the remaining ECF games and beyond, but re-signing him is a terrible decision in the salary cap age.
J.T. Miller and Jesper Fast will receive two-year bridge deals from Sather, similar to what other significant young Ranger players have signed in years past (Staal, Dubinsky, Stepan, Anisimov, Kreider, Hagelin, Del Zotto, Callahan, etc.). These bridge deals seem to get harder and harder to negotiate each time they come up (see: Stepan and Columbus’ Ryan Johansen who both held out in recent years). The good news for the Rangers is that as impressive as Miller and Fast have been, their numbers pale in comparison to those other Rangers I mentioned, who had two and three years of full production en route to signing their bridge deals. Miller was considered a disappointment until about midway through this season, and Fast has 14 points in 69 career games for the Rangers. The closest comparison to either player is Artem Anisimov, who in 2011 signed a two-year $3.75 bridge deal after scoring 28 and 44 points in two full 82 game seasons. Neither Miller or Fast are even close to that, which means arbitration probably wouldn’t go their way. It’s tough to say what their range will be, but I would guess twin deals of $2.2m over two years for the both of them, putting their cap hits at $1.1m each.
As for Hunwick and Sheppard, both are likely gone. Hunwick was the 7th defenseman most of the season, but played on the third pairing for extended bouts while players like Ryan McDonagh, Dan Boyle, and Kevin Klein spent time nursing injuries. For all the praise that young players like Hayes, Fast, and Miller received for stepping up this year, Hunwick has not gotten enough recognition for his stellar defensive play. I don’t think anyone would have complained if AV decided to sit Boyle for Hunwick during these playoffs, and that speaks volumes to the type of player Hunwick is.
Initially a Bruins 7th round draft pick in 2004, Hunwick came out of his final season at the University of Michigan in 2007 as one of the Bruins’ top young prospects in a class that included David Krejci, Tuukka Rask, Brad Marchand, Milan Lucic, and Carl Soderberg. After scoring 27 points in 53 games for the Bruins in 2008-09 and finishing 14th in Calder Trophy voting that year, Hunwick’s play steadily regressed before being traded in 2011 to Colorado, mere months before the Bruins went on their Stanley Cup run. His play didn’t improve much in Colorado, and the Rangers signed him last summer along with Mike Kostka and Ryan Malone, two other “project players” with high potential upside and low expectations. But the 29 year old Hunwick exhibited fantastic skating skills en route to scoring 11 points in 55 games, with a plus-17 rating and a career high in shots-per-game. Hunwick also had the second highest CORSI rating on the team, though that stat means less considering his low number of defensive zone starts. All told, Hunwick proved that he is still a player of value, and could easily slide in as a defensively-responsible third pairing D-man on most NHL teams, maybe even second-pairing here and there. Anton Stralman was a similar project player before the Rangers organization helped turn his game around, and I expect that Hunwick will be able to score a nice deal on the open market.
Shepherd has played admirably, but not well enough to earn much of a raise. The Rangers might be able to retain him for cheap, but the smart money is on Oscar Lindberg making the team instead. Lindberg is 23 and expected to contribute immediately, and there is also the 6’3 Swedish bruiser Carl Klingberg (acquired from the Jets for Lee Stempniak), another player who the Rangers expect to be NHL-ready next season. Each of them is still on their $750k entry deal, and only one will be able to make the team barring injury.
Finally, in the absence of Hunwick, the Rangers top defensive prospect Brady Skjei is already impressing in Hartford during their playoff run, after being a top player for the Minnesota Golden Gophers. It is unknown what he signed for out of college, but my guess is that it’s in the range of Kevin Hayes’ $900k salary. Let’s be safe and say it’s $900k.
That means in order to complete the roster by re-signing Stepan, Hagelin, Fast, Miller, Skjei, and a $750k prospect from Hartford presumed to be Lindberg or Klingberg (other possibilities to make the team include Adam Tambellini, who came out of nowhere to dominate the WHL in Juniors this season, Ryan Haggerty, Marek Hrivik, and Ryan Borque), the total cost will be somewhere in the range of $12.85m-$13.0m.
To get to at least $12.85m from $11.2m in cap space, Cam Talbot and his $1.45m salary will have to be traded at the draft, which we assume will be happening anyway given his considerable value and the Rangers’ need to recoup draft picks. Mackenzie Skapski is the most ready Rangers goaltending prospect to replace Talbot as backup, but two quality starts against the Buffalo freaking Sabres won’t be enough to convince Sather to add his $800k salary to the books when there will certainly be cheaper veteran replacements on the market. Assuming Skapski does make the team, we’re looking at a net goalie cap savings of $650k. As per league guidelines, the Rangers are not required to carry 23 players on the roster, so assuming the AHL demotion of Chris Summers and his $600k salary, that leaves the Rangers with $12.45m in cap space to accommodate 22 players at a minimum of $12.85m. The extra $400k could come from anywhere – a cheaper backup goalie, Stepan and Hagelin agreeing to cap-friendly deals like Zuccarello did, etc.
So in a neat little fantasy exercise, this blog solved the Rangers’ cap issues for next season and beyond. Of course, the real world is never that convenient. The projections we made are reasonable, but the realm of possibility is wide.
What if Derek Stepan demands $7.0m? What if Miller and Fast re-sign and completely regress next season, necessitating more call-ups and/or veteran acquisitions? What if all that happens, and to top it off, Oscar Lindberg, Carl Klingberg, Brady Skjei, Dylan McIlrath, Conor Allen, and Mackenzie Skapski all show up to camp out of shape and unready for primetime, forcing Sather to gamble on more value vets?
It is unlikely that none of those young players will be ready to step up and add value to the big club next season, but on the other hand, the Rangers were extremely fortunate to have three different prospects fill depth roles this season, and actually exceed the production of the veterans they replaced. Can that happen again? Does it even need to? Well, yes and no. The Rangers depth needs will not be as great next season, but assuming Marty walks, Miller, Fast, or Hayes (at wing) will have to prove that they can regularly fill a top six role for an entire season. Hayes is likely there already, but the Rangers need him at Center. Many believe that top Russian prospect Pavel Buchnevich is ready right now to be a top six forward in the NHL, but he just signed for another season in the KHL. Other than that issue, the team just needs a prospect to fill a fourth line checking role, a 7th Defenseman role, and possibly a backup goalie spot. The stakes are not high, and given the Rangers’ past success in graduating prospects year to year, it’s a good probability that one or two rookies will be ready next season in limited ice time.
But if more cap space is needed, and by all accounts it shouldn’t be much more, even in a worst-case scenario (i.e. the cap not rising to $71m), the last resort is to trade Keith Yandle at the draft and re-sign Hunwick at cap-friendly dollars, easily fitting the rest of the team under the cap. That does require Sather to locate more cap space the following season if the Kreider/Hayes awesome nightmare scenario happens, but it would be a matter of $1m-$2m. Finding a way to trade Tanner Glass would solve that, and in today’s cap world, there are worse predicaments to be in than having to locate pocket change.
Of course, this projection largely reflects the team priorities of me and other Ranger fans. The major caveat here is that Glen Sather rarely does what you expect him to, for better or worse. He’s like the Bilbo Baggins of hockey GMs, and I’m not just talking about the uncanny resemblance. He’s a risk taker, a gold chaser, a ring taker and dragon slayer. Which means that like other smart people with dreams or delusions of grandeur, he can alternate between strokes of genius and making you want to slap the glasses off his sugary old face.
What if he wants to bring Marty St. Louis back? What if he lets Carl Hagelin walk?
Fortunately, the UFA market this year is quite awful, and the only bad-risk player that I could imagine Sather going after, Chris Stewart, put together an impressive enough postseason that it’s likely Minnesota will re-sign him.
Despite the many variables, the truth is that there are far more scenarios than not where the Rangers can comfortably afford a team primarily made up of promising young players in their early to mid-20s who already have a wealth of postseason experience under their belt, and the chance to come away this Spring with a Stanley Cup.
Sather has a chance to set this team up to compete for a championship for the next 5-6 years and beyond, and in many ways he has already done that. All that’s left is to get Stepan, Hagelin, Kreider, and Hayes under long-term contract, and ensure that there is enough roster space to accommodate prospect graduation at a decent clip. It won’t be easy, but it is more than probable if the right steps are taken.
The Rangers are not in the cap predicament that other top teams such as the Bruins, Blackhawks, and Kings currently find themselves in. To keep the ship sailing forward, it will take great care but not intensive surgery, and that’s good news for Rangers fans.