You’ve probably already seen variations of this talking point resurface in recent weeks, that the Rangers rebuild failed, as they always do when the Rangers become the focus of the hockey world following a public failure. Drury’s public trade decree coupled with arguably the most paltry run of form I’ve seen from a Rangers team relative to talent level has ensured they are back on the front pages.
The narrative that the Rangers rebuild failed has bothered me for some time now. The team is at its lowest point since 2017-18, it feels like an appropriate time to attack the questions or points that lead people to this conclusion head-on. In my opinion, those questions are:
- Did they ever truly rebuild?
- If so, did they rush the rebuild?
- Is the contending cycle for this core over, and was the cycle cut short because of the rebuild approach?
Did the Rangers truly rebuild?
To me, the answer to this is an unequivocal yes, the Rangers did truly rebuild. The Rangers executed a borderline masterclass in stripping the team of aging core assets in exchange for top-two-round picks and B-level prospects. There are two misses from the teardown: The Ryan McDonagh/JT Miller trade and the Mats Zuccarello trade. Zucc should have fetched a guaranteed first, and his play since leaving New York indicates that maybe he shouldn’t have been moved at all. We all know the McDonagh/Miller trade was a massive failure.
Otherwise, from 2017-2020, the Rangers held multiple first-round draft picks in each draft due to the sell-off, which began with Derek Stepan in June 2017. If stockpiling high draft picks and prospects is not rebuilding, can someone tell me what is?
It boils down to this: 13 players from the Rangers’ 2024 Conference Final team played their first NHL game with the Rangers. That excludes players like Zibanejad and Panarin who played the prime of their careers in New York following a trade or signing. This team was built from scratch. The Rangers rebuild failed (probably), but it was most certainly a rebuild.
If the Rangers rebuild failed, did they rush it?
To me, the driver in this whole “Rangers rebuild failed” controversy comes down to goaltending, particularly when looking at the 2019-2020 season and the narrative around the Rangers lottery win. If you are a bad team AND have bad goaltending, people know you’re tanking. But when you are arguably the worst chance-preventing team in the league with strong goaltending, people aren’t so sure anymore.
Look at the Sharks, the Blackhawks, and everyone’s rebuild darlings, the four-time lottery-winning Devils (since 2011). They all had appalling goaltending, and nobody batted an eye at them being bottom-feeders.
But Will, the Rangers added players to compete in 19/20.
Yes, I will give you that the Rangers were crowned offseason winners in 2019. Igor Shesterkin signed from SKA, the Jacob Trouba trade happened, and Adam Fox signed to revamp the defense. Kaapo Kakko was drafted at #2 overall, and they signed arguably the greatest free agent in Rangers history in Artemi Panarin.
But how many times have the rebuild-model Devils “won the offseason” and then missed the playoffs the following season? Oh, it happened last season, and in 2021-2022 before that.
And that 2019-2020 Rangers team was actually pretty poor. It was a shallow team that played terrible defensive hockey, carried to relevance by outstanding shooting and goaltending, and Artemi Panarin, who should have won the Hart Trophy. They were 29th in the league in 5v5 xGF% share.
Also, that team wasn’t a playoff team! Shout it from the rooftops so the salty Red Wings fans can hear. An arbitrary cut-off due to a once-in-a-generation pandemic did not make them a playoff team. Maybe that’s why they got steamrolled by an actual playoff team in the play-in round and missed the playoffs the following season. The Rangers rebuild failed, but early success wasn’t the reason why.
Finally–and this is a bit of a context-less argument to make–I find many arguments around the Rangers’ rebuild lacking context. Any team that wins two lotteries and drafts in the top-10 in four consecutive years is expected to take a step forward in year five. Teams don’t want to pick in the lottery for a decade, they end up doing it because they made mistakes. The rebuild started in earnest in 2017, so making the playoffs in 2022 is exactly what any GM would set as a goal when starting a rebuild.
Again, shouting from the rooftops, the Rangers rebuild failed to reach the ultimate goal, but it was most certainly a rebuild.
Is this cycle over?
When I started writing this piece, the Rangers were not far into this 14-game skid, so I thought it was difficult to see an answer other than yes. Now the answer is clear: this cycle is over. Key players in top roles have dropped off significantly, and several of them are over 30 or have lengthy injury histories.
Several players can be moved in the immediate future, with the true lone exception being Mika Zibanejad and his (likely) unmovable, buyout-proof contract. When you combine the poor performances with the undeniable opportunity to eliminate salary and move forward with a younger core, plus Igor, the answer is clear. It’s time to build the next Rangers team.
The Rangers rebuild failed, and a new cycle is needed.
Did our rebuild approach shorten the contention window length?
I am not trying to argue the rebuild was perfect. Mistakes were made along the way in the form of bad draft picks, awful coaches, bad trades, or missed opportunities. There were decisions made that could have prolonged this team’s competitive window. Some examples include: trading Pavel Buchnevich, selecting Lias Andersson (although, who doesn’t love Will Cuylle?) over players like Suzuki/Mittelstadt/Vilardi, and failing to trade for Eichel which, in turn, led to extending a declining Zibanejad.
But this is not a piece about critiquing each decision. This is whether or not the Rangers rebuild failed due to the approach taken. The strategy led the Rangers to two Conference Finals in three years, compared to rebuild peers like Buffalo, New Jersey, Detroit, and Ottawa, who have all done a worse job selling assets for picks and accelerating their rebuilds with the right players.
To me, the what-ifs largely boil down to luck. What if we won the 1st overall pick in 2019? Yours truly was not among those who thought Kakko was in the same tier as Jack Hughes, although that is not meant as a sleight to Kakko. Te Rangers would have secured the true elite 1C prospect that eludes many rebuilds, and then perhaps the Zibanejad contract doesn’t happen.
What if the pandemic didn’t happen and there was no flat cap era? The flat cap screwed many teams, but it really screwed the Rangers due to the competitive timeline. Maybe Drury hates Russians–not sure I buy that–but my guess is that Buchnevich is still a Ranger without the flat cap.
What if Sebastian Aho didn’t knee Adam Fox in November 2023, an injury that was reaggravated in the Caps sweep and led to him playing against Florida on one leg? What if Chytil stayed healthy in 2023-2024, giving the Rangers outstanding center depth and play-driving at 5v5?
So many factors have to come together to win a Stanley Cup. This iteration of the Rangers rebuild failed, but with players like Fox, Igor, Laf, Chytil, Cuylle, and Perreault, there is a timeline where 5 years from now they may be back where we, as fans, want them to be. Maybe replicating the template from 2017 – 2022 isn’t the worst idea.
Recent Comments