Temper Your Expectations of Nils Lundkvist...For Now
He's not John Klingberg's replacement...yet...
Two weeks ago, Jim Nill did the unthinkable: he traded away assets for a blue chip prospect — not somebody in the twilight of their career, or in the middle of developing rheumatoid arthritis, but somebody primed for a breakout. It was the kind of high risk, high reward move Nill hasn’t done during his tenure. Hence my reaction. According to Jeff Marek, Lundkvist was a prospect Nill almost traded for in Dallas during the 2018 draft.
I was excited for another reason, though: I’ve been following the Lundkvist drama in New York for awhile. Anytime a prospect “falls out of favor” with a team, I pay attention. Valeri Nichushkin, Anthony DuClair, Kirby Dach, Sam Reinhart, Sam Bennett, Jack Roslovic, Pavel Buchnevich, Carter Verhaeghe, Gustav Forsling — there’s nothing a team overrates more than their own depth, which is why every year, there’s a young player who needs a “change of scenery” and elevates their game elsewhere.
In my experience, this is code for NHL teams not having mind enough to trim the roster fat, using loyalty as an excuse for inaction, and inexperience as code for ‘not good enough.’ Just look at San Jose, and Quinn’s assessment of hotshot prospects William Eklund and Thomas Bordeleau. The point here isn’t whether he’s right. The point is that this standard is never applied to veterans. Which is why young, talented players become expendable.
“You think you know what NHL coaches don’t?”
The same principles that inform a person’s hockey knowledge are not always the same principles that inform decision-making. Decision-making is a lot messier. Remember when Shea Theodore, Alex Tuch, Jonathan Marchessault, and Reilly Smith were given away for nothing more than a handshake because their teams “didn’t have any room” for them during the Vegas expansion draft? That was horseshit, of course. Chuck Fletcher is just a wretched GM, and Anaheim still had players like Kevin Bieksa and Clayton Stoner on their payroll to push out premiere young talents like Theodore. I say all that to say this: when people tell you the Rangers “didn’t have room” for Lundkvist, your bullshit detector should be on high alert.
Ranger fans had a very different tone about Lundkvist before a trade seemed inevitable. It was very clear in February that Gerard Gallant simply liked Braden Schneider’s game more despite the fact that there’s very little preliminary evidence to believe as much. In March, once Lundkvist started finding his groove, fans felt he earned another shot. It’s important to remember that New York wasn’t a good offensive team — 19th in EV goals per hour, and 28th in expected goals per hour (they were a bottom five playoff scoring team as well; it’s amazing how much elite goaltending can change the perception of a team) — hence why Lundkvist was seen as a prospect they could use. If they could use him, why didn’t they? Because they’re paying $8 million a year for this.
Does anything think NYR wouldn’t happily play with a cost-controlled right side of Adam Fox, Braden Schneider, and Nils Lundkvist if it meant taking that $8M a year and using it for a legit second line center to help a team that struggles offensively? I don’t think so. If you read the 800+ comments about news of the trade for SB Nation’s Ranger site, it doesn’t sound like Ranger fans believe so either. Chris Drury is closer to Chuck Fletcher than Joe Sakic; so far he’s spent a third rounder, and two seconds for Ryan Reaves and Arizona to take Patrik Nemeth off their hands. A contending team doesn’t need draft picks, but when you’re that loose with your draft capital on replacement level players, you have to build it back up. The idea that Nill was “fleeced” may or may not come to fruition, but Drury doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. Ultimately, the point here is that Lundkvist wasn’t the odd man out. He’s not a prospect who didn’t “pan out.” He simply became artificially expendable (despite possessing a talent the team needs) like so many other talents before him.
So now what? There’s a lot to say about Nils, but I don’t want to cover what you already know. In fact, now’s a good time to send you elsewhere. Robert did a great job at D Magazine illuminating what makes Lundkvist’s presence an interesting litmus test for how Pete DeBoer wants Dallas to play. Mitch Brown at EPRinkside has the most comprehensive, and detailed analysis of Lundkvist as you’ll find; all eight minutes of his scouting work is worth your time. The preseason has been a great display of his off-puck movement on the power play.
And his on-puck movement.
I’ve said before: Lundkvist has a very unique ability to get open for a shot that would threaten even if he were sitting in the nosebleeds. This is great. Nill’s a genius! But will he start opening night? I don’t think so.
Who is he supposed to supplant? Ryan Suter and Miro Heiskanen are the first pair. Esa Lindell and Colin Miller/Jani Hakanpaa are the second pair. And then Thomas Harley and Colin Miller/Jani Hakanpaa will form the third.
The only spot Lundkvist could threaten to take is Harley’s. Honestly, he probably has. Granted, I think Harley is NHL ready. I haven’t liked the chemistry between Harley and Hakanpaa but it’s a work in progress, and Harley has flashed some real brilliance (albeit in small doses). Maybe Harley gets the inside track for being a left hand shot, but with Miro on his right anyway, it a wash. I just have a hard time seeing Lundkvist paired with one of Miller or Hakanpaa on their offside. And I have a harder time seeing Lundkvist in the top four. That’s certainly a possibility with Miller and Hakanpaa being career depth defenders. But is it likely? I understand the hype. I’m a huge fan of Lundkvist. But we’re still talking about a 22-year old prospect with 25 games worth of experience. The idea that a spot is his to lose seems premature. Would I like to see it? Yes. Do I want it? Yes. Would it be crazy if it didn’t happen? No.
This is a very different situation from the Honka Wars. Everyone ahead of Lundkvist has more experience, even Harley. I don’t want to get caught in the weeds of who plays where. My point isn’t to fixate on roster Jenga. The point here is that I don’t believe Dallas genuinely figured Lundkvist into their top four plans.
“Nill paid a first for him! Hellooo! Of course he’s gonna play!”
Nill paid a first for someone with potential to replace elements of the blueline offense that they lost with Klingberg’s departure. That’s not the same as paying a first for someone to replace Klingberg the player. If Nill wanted to replace Klingberg the player, he would have needed to pay a lot of money, or a lot of assets. Yes, that’s what makes the trade such a savvy move, but it doesn’t come without risk.
Lundkvist is essentially insurance. The best insurance there is, in fact - a cost controlled player at a position of need with a high ceiling and a shockingly high floor (Lundkvist is hardly a liability defensively). But that doesn’t make him a fixture of the current core…yet. What I’m trying to say is that we shouldn’t feel disappointed if Lundkvist isn’t on the opening night roster. I would like him to be, but I don’t think that should be the expectation. Anything more is just house money. Which is why I love the move by Nill. Nill’s got a mixed past, but as I’ve argued — he’s also set up a bright future. However, it’s a bright future that’s been slow going. Don’t be alarmed if Lundkvist’s future is slow going too. It doesn’t mean it won’t be bright.