[text_output]The draft lottery is now behind us, and as the 2018 NHL draft draws closer, Rangers fans are becoming more and more excited about the unique position of strength and flexibility the team has entering the draft. Due to the trades made at, and before, the trade deadline this year, the New York Rangers have a war chest of draft assets, including three first-round picks—their own sitting at 9 overall along with the Boston Bruins and Tampa Bay Lightning picks, whose exact draft position have yet to be determined—two second-round picks that sit at 39 and 48, and three third-round picks that slot in at 70 and 88. That’s seven picks within the top-90 and five within the top-50.

This collection of picks, along with Jeff Gorton’s comments after the lottery and throughout the off-season have led to many to speculate that the Rangers will be looking to potentially move up in this year’s draft. Personally, I would be surprised if the Rangers made all three of their first-round selections, and I would be absolutely stunned if they made all seven of their picks within the first three rounds. Despite what many are speculating, I’m not sold on the idea that the Rangers are definitely trading up, and I’m staunchly against the notion that they “have to” move up, especially when talking about trading up from 9. I think trading up is one of many options the team will pursue, and if the price is right and the right player falls, then they could pull the trigger and move up a few spots. I also think it is just as likely (actually, I think it is more likely) that they package some picks to move up from one of their late first-round picks, or that they move some picks in a deal for a young NHL player.

While I wanted to state my opinion for the record, it’s really neither here nor there. What I want to discuss today is how much it could realistically cost to move up in the draft. The best way to establish an idea for how much moving up could cost is to look at the precedent set in recent drafts. Below is a table of all of the draft-day trades made from 2013-2017 where teams moved up somewhere within the first 50 picks (trade data courtesy of Pro Sports Transactions). I only included trades that exclusively involved draft capital, because if we’ve learned anything from NHL GMs over the past few years, it is that beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder when it comes to trades involving players, so it is much more difficult to determine cost of moving up when actual players are involved.

For each trade, I list the picks given up by the team trading up (number in parenthesis indicates the round the pick was in), the picks given up by the team moving down, and a sentence that clearly explains the cost paid to move up in the draft. San Jose slightly muddied the water a bit, by twice making deals to move up in which they gave up future draft assets, as opposed to current draft assets. For those trades, I list the round pick they gave up, since at the time the teams didn’t know exactly what number pick it was, and then I listed what number the pick eventually ended up being in parenthesis.[/text_output][image type=”none” float=”none” src=”2495″ alt=”” href=”” title=”” info_content=”” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][text_output]In total, there were 17 trades made over the past five drafts that involved only draft capital and a team moving up within the top-50. That’s an average of nearly 3 ½ per draft, so the precedent is most certainly there for teams moving up within the top-50. However, when you look closer, you see that not a single team in the past 5 years moved up within the top-10, with the highest being New Jersey and Ottawa swapping the 11th and 12th picks in 2016 at the price of Ottawa’s 3rd round pick (80th overall). There was however, a lot of pick movement in the late first round and early second round, so let’s start there with our analysis.[/text_output][custom_headline type=”left” level=”h5″ looks_like=”h5″ accent=”true” id=”” class=”” style=””]Trading Up from the Boston or Tampa Bay Picks[/custom_headline][text_output]The fate of exactly where the Boston and Tampa Bay picks land has yet to be determined, so we don’t know exactly where the Rangers’ pick will fall. However, multiple mock drafts, including recent ones by Steve Kournianos and DraftSite.com have the Bruins and Lightning picks settling in at 26 and 30, respectively, so for simplicity’s sake let’s use these for now. Last year the Stars traded up from 29 to 26, costing them only the 70th overall pick. In 2016 the Blues moved up two spots from 28 to 26, sending the Capitals the 87th pick in return. In 2015 is cost the Flyers a late-second rounder (61) to make the jump from 29 to 24, and in 2014 the Blackhawks received the Sharks 179th pick in the draft and sent their high 3rd rounder (62) to San Jose to move up from 27 to 20.

If we dig deeper and look prior to 2013, there are a number of additional examples of teams moving up a few spots in the latter half of the first round, and even more examples of teams moving up in the second round. To spare you from listing all of the details, just trust me when I say there are numerous scenarios where the Rangers can fairly easily move up higher in the second round, or move up a few slots from their late first round selections. Using all of these fairly recent deals as precedent, you could surmise that the going rate to trade up a few spots from the mid-late 20s is a pick in the range of 60-90. In other words, a third-round pick, but usually falling towards the top portion of the third. The Rangers currently own two picks in this range, 70 and 88, so they most certainly can flip one of those if they simply wish to move up a few draft slots.

Let’s take a look at some specific examples of how the Rangers could cash in some of their excess draft capital to move up and grab a talented prospect that could be a great addition to their prospect pool.

Dominik Bokk is a 6’ 1’’ German right-winger coming off a very successful campaign in the Swedish SuperElit league, and also saw time in the bigs, the SHL. He is easily one of the most purely talented forwards in the draft, and possesses strong playmaking ability, an above-average shot and is comfortably one of the best puck handlers in this draft class. However, despite oozing talent, he is still a bit raw and many scouts believe he has much room for improvement in terms of his defensive play and physicality, leading to him being ranked all across the mid and late first round on pundits’ boards. The Rangers could definitely target a player such as Bokk if they chose to. For example, if he is still on the board at pick 24, the Rangers in theory should be able to send their own third-round pick (70) as payment to move up from 26 and take him.

[/text_output][image type=”circle” float=”none” link=”true” target=”blank” info=”tooltip” info_place=”bottom” info_trigger=”hover” src=”2497″ alt=”Photo Credit: Bildbyrån” href=”https://www.blueshirtsbreakaway.com/” title=”Photo Credit: Bildbyrån” info_content=”Photo Credit: Bildbyrån” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][text_output]If the Rangers want to be slightly more aggressive, and move up from the Tampa pick at 30 to the early 20s, you can look to the 2011 draft for value precedent, when the Maple Leafs traded the 39overall pick to the Ducks in order to move up to 22. Using Bokk as the example again, the Rangers could in theory send their own second-rounder (39), to the Wild, owners of the 22pick, to slide up and grab Bokk without giving up the 26pick.

Jesperi Kotkaniemi is another player the Rangers could target if they wish to be even more aggressive. Most draft analysts rank Kotkaniemi somewhere between 10 and 20 on their draft boards, and I personally have him currently slotted in at 11. I wrote about Kotkaniemi in our first draft prospects article, but to sum it up, I believe he is the best center in this draft, and he checks all of the boxes. He has a high level of skill, is a good skater for his size (6’ 2’’), has a high hockey IQ and had a significant impact playing in the Finish professional league, Liiga, something that very few his age have accomplished.

There is far less precedent of teams moving into the teens from the late-20s, but I dug deeper and found about what it would cost for the Rangers to move up from 26 into the teens to potentially nab Kotkaniemi if he falls a bit. In 2012, the Sabres moved up from 21 to 14 for the price of the 42nd overall pick. If we combine this with the scenario we just outlined to move up and grab Bokk, you could reasonably surmise that the approximate cost of moving up from 26 to 14 would be both of the second-round picks the Rangers currently own.

While there is no precedent for teams in the modern era packing two first round picks together to move up, you can use the 2014 pick between the Islanders and Lightning to show that a pick in the range of 26-30 is worth two second-round picks, with one of them being a high-end second. So, an alternative to giving up both second round picks to move up from 26 to grab Kotkaniemi, could be giving up the 30th pick instead. Or you can go really nuts and trade BOTH the 30 and one of the seconds to sneak even higher and creep closer to the 10th selection.

Long story short, given the fact that the Rangers have four selections in between picks 39 and 88, they could most certainly maneuver to trade up from either the Boston or Tampa Bay picks they own to grab a prospect they like. In my personal opinion, I think it makes a lot of sense to use the extra picks the Rangers own to move up from the back-end of the first to grab a talented prospect that falls a bit. Usually I’m more in the camp of it’s better to trade down than up, and the team that trades down often “wins” the trade more often. With that said, when you are in a situation like the Rangers, who have an excess of picks and a strong foundation of solid NHL prospects, I’d be more willing to roll the dice to move up and nag a guy that you project could be an impact player at the pro level.[/text_output][image type=”circle” float=”none” link=”true” target=”blank” info=”tooltip” info_place=”bottom” info_trigger=”hover” src=”2498″ alt=”Photo Credit: Kimmo Metsälä” href=”https://www.blueshirtsbreakaway.com/” title=”Photo Credit: Kimmo Metsälä” info_content=”Photo Credit: Kimmo Metsälä” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][custom_headline type=”left” level=”h5″ looks_like=”h5″ accent=”true” id=”” class=”” style=””]Trading Up from Pick Nine[/custom_headline][text_output]While three teams dealt away top-10 picks over the past five seasons for significant roster players—Derek Stepan, Bobby Ryan and Cory Schneider—no team moved up into the top-10 using draft capital. In fact, you’d have to go all the way back to the 2008 draft to see the last time a team traded up within the top-10 using draft capital, when the Maple Leafs traded the Islanders the seventh overall pick and their choice of either the 2008 second-rounder + 2009 third-rounder (which was not exercised), or the 2008 third-rounder and 2009 second-rounder (which was exercised, and ended up being the 68th pick in 2008 and 37th pick in 2009) to move up two spots to the fifth pick. In that same draft, the Islanders would then go on to move down from seven to nine in exchange for the Predators’ second-round pick, which sat at 40 overall.

So, if you are a fan that is hoping that Rangers move up from nine and hope to do so by packaging picks, you have to go all the way back to 2008 for a comparable, and the cost was the 40th overall selection to move up from nine to seven. So, putting this into terms of this current draft, the Rangers would be trading their own second-round pick, which sits at 39 overall, to Vancouver in order to move up two spots and guarantee they get the player they like the most left, as opposed to hoping he falls two more spots. I am still working on updating my own personal draft prospect rankings, which will be published in late May, so my ranks as of now are still fluid and very much subject to change. But, if you want an idea of what this looks like in terms of players, this deal would look something like this:

Rangers trade away a player like Noah Dobson, Evan Bouchard or Ty Smith (all of whom I currently have on my 4 th tier of prospects) and a player along the lines of talented Finnish winger Niklas Nordgren, USNTDP defenseman Mattias Samuelsson, or Flint (OHL) center Ty Dellandrea

tier of prospects) and a player along the lines of talented Finnish winger Niklas Nordgren, USNTDP defenseman Mattias Samuelsson, or Flint (OHL) center Ty Dellandrea Rangers obtain the ability to select one of the players in my third tier of prospects: Oliver Wahlstrom, Quinn Hughes or Adam Boqvist (assuming Dahlin, Svechnikov, Zadina and Tkachuk are all taken, which nearly every draft analyst has happening).

Personally, I am a massive fan of Oliver Wahlstrom as a prospect, I wrote about him in our initial draft prospects article, and I currently have him as fourth overall on my board. Because of this, I would be comfortable with this trade, but it is far from a fleecing of any sort, and I would not argue with anyone that would rather not execute a trade along these lines.[/text_output][image type=”circle” float=”none” src=”2499″ alt=”” href=”” title=”” info_content=”” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][text_output]If you are more aggressive and want the Rangers to trade as high as five, you can again look at the 2008 draft and combine both of the Islanders’ deals, which equates to them moving down from five to nine. The cost of moving up from nine to five, using these deals as precedent? Picks 9, 37, 40, and 68. In terms of the Rangers assets, that would mean in order to move up to five, the Rangers would likely need to include their own pick at nine, their own third-round pick (70) and the 26th overall pick at the very least; the 26th pick is slightly less valuable than the 37 and 40 combined based on past precedent. That’s a lot to give up to move up four spots, and considering the way I have my rankings tiered off, I’d much rather stay pat at nine, or move up to seven if need be, compared to paying the price to move all the way up to five.

For those of you that got all excited by the reports that Montreal or Carolina might be willing to trade the 2nd or 3rd picks: it’s not even worth getting into. Both the Canadians and Hurricanes are in desperate need of the same thing, a true first line center. This year’s draft lacks top-end center talent, and in my opinion, these two teams are likely only dangling these picks to see if any offers involving a 1C get thrown their way. And I know exactly what some of you are thinking, so I’m just going to say it now. No, Vladislav Namestnikov and Ryan Spooner are not even close to a first line centers, so save us all some time and don’t even bother with any trade proposals involving them. While it sounds nice to make a four quarters for one dollar type trade that sends the ninth pick and Namestnikov and some other piece to the Habs for the third pick, it does very little to help the team enough now to make a potentially-desperate Marc Bergevin pull the trigger based on the teams needs.

Even if these teams were willing to trade all the way back to nine, the cost would be far too prohibitive to justify the gains. I would much rather hang on to all of the Rangers’ draft assets and make any of the lesser trades I outlined above, than sell the farm to make the jump from nine to three. I’ll happily gamble that one of Wahlstrom, Boqvist or Hughes fall to nine (which many draft analysts project is a real possibility) and then also be able to use later picks on excellent prospects like Nils Lundkvist, Ryan Merkley, Martin Kaut, Jonatan Berggren, Jake Wise, Alexander Kovanov etc. than trade that all away for Filip Zadina or Andrei Svechnikov. Don’t get me wrong, Svechnikov and Zadina are great prospects, but making the jump from Wahlstrom/Boqvist/Hughes/Dobson/Boucjard to them is not worth the massive haul it would take to make that move. I understand I stated earlier that given the Rangers situation, I’m more willing to trade up to get a more guaranteed high impact player, but the risks associated with the cost far outweigh the benefits here in my personal opinion.[/text_output][image type=”thumbnail” float=”none” src=”2500″ alt=”” href=”” title=”” info_content=”” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][custom_headline type=”left” level=”h5″ looks_like=”h5″ accent=”true” id=”” class=”” style=””]Trading Up Using both Players and Picks[/custom_headline][text_output]Another avenue the Rangers can potentially take to move up in the draft is by trading a current roster player for a pick, or packaging with picks to move up. The Rangers have no shortage of options here, as the team currently has seven roster players due to be restricted free agents with arbitration rights: John Gilmour, Kevin Hayes, Vladislav Namestnikov, Rob O’Gara, Brady Skjei, Ryan Spooner and Jimmy Vesey. The team also has three players entering the last years of their deals—Peter Holland, Steven Kampfer and Mats Zuccarello. I could write a whole series of articles on the various trade possibilities involving these players and the returns they could likely get, but I’ve gone on for long enough already, so let’s save that for another day.

However, one quick option we can go with that helps add to the discussion of moving up in the draft, is looking at how Mats Zuccarello could be used to increase the teams’ draft standing. The reason this is the quick option, is because Tom Urtz Jr. recently wrote a fantastic article for Blueshirt Banter where he broke down the trade value of my personal favorite Ranger, Mats Zuccarello. I highly recommend you check out the piece for the full details, but Tom provided a bevy of evidence to show that Zuccarello could potentially be worth as high as the 13th pick, or a number of iterations that could equate to similar value. A few examples he provides are the 20th and 88th pick combined, the 23rd and 69th picks and the 26th and 45th.

So, using Tom’s research in addition to all of the scenarios I outlined earlier, the Rangers have a number of way they can move up in the draft by using Zuccarello. The first that comes to mind is targeting the Edmonton Oilers pick, which sits at 10th overall. Given the season the Oilers just had and some of the poor moves Peter Chiarelli has made, he likely can be on his last leg as the GM of Edmonton. Given this, it is very plausible to assume that Chiarelli cares far more about how the team succeeds this year than the long-term sustainability of the roster; after all, what does he care how the team performs in 2020 if he is fired after next season.

Let’s take a conservative approach, and say Edmonton values Zuccarello slightly less than Tom’s research suggests he’s worth, and places his value around that of the 16th overall pick. We now need to make up to value gap between 16 and 10. If we go all the way back to 2005, we see that the Rangers sent the Thrasher their own first, which was #16, along with the 41st pick in order to move up to 12. Just two years ago, the Senators moved up one spot from 12 to 11 by giving the Devils the 80th pick in the draft. So, combining these, we can estimate the cost of moving up from 16 to 11 as approximately the 41st pick and the 80th pick. We aren’t quite at the 10th pick, but we are in the right ballpark, and this is Peter Chiarelli we are talking about. Combine all of this, and a fair value package for Edmonton’s 10th pick could be Mats Zuccarello and the Rangers’ own second and third-round picks (39 and 70).

There are a number of alternative pick combinations the Rangers could use to come to similar value that I just outlined. If Zuccarello is a player that Edmonton has its sights set on, there is most definitely a fair deal that could be struck that results in the Rangers having both the 9th and 10th picks in the draft, without giving up either of their late first-rounders. In this scenario, the Rangers have even more room to play with to execute some of the more aggressive trade-ups I detailed earlier, or they can make an aggressive offer for a young NHL player that may be available this summer.[/text_output][image type=”circle” float=”none” link=”true” target=”blank” info=”tooltip” info_place=”bottom” info_trigger=”hover” src=”2501″ alt=”Photo Credit: Jim McIsaac” href=”https://www.blueshirtsbreakaway.com/” title=”Photo Credit: Jim McIsaac” info_content=”Photo Credit: Jim McIsaac” lightbox_caption=”” id=”” class=”aligncenter” style=””][custom_headline type=”left” level=”h5″ looks_like=”h5″ accent=”true” id=”” class=”” style=””]Bottom Line[/custom_headline][text_output]To summarize everything I’ve detailed in this article, here is a list of the examples I outlined throughout this piece, which really only scratch the surface of the of the possibilities available to the Rangers this June. Again, these deals are all built using past draft day trades as precedent in order to establish the cost of moving up in the draft:

Package the Boston first (26) and the Rangers’ third (70) to move up to 24

Deal the Tampa Bay first (30) and the Rangers’ second (39) to move up to 22

Trade the Boston first (26) and both seconds (39 and 48) to move up to 14

Trade both firsts (26 and 30) to move up to the 14 range

Trade the Rangers’ first and second (9 and 39) to move up to 7

Trade the Rangers’ first and third (9 and 70) plus the Tampa Bay first (26) to move up to 5 (no thank you)

Trade Mats Zuccarello and the Rangers’ second and third-rounders (39 and 70) for Edmonton’s first (10)

The conclusion of all of this, is that the draft resources that the Rangers have acquired put them in a unique position to be able to make any number of moves in this year’s draft. I’d be very surprised if the Rangers make all of the picks they currently have, and I’d bet that Jeff Gorton will be working the phones hard leading up to the draft to assess the value of the picks and players he currently has as well as gauge the cost of potential impact players that could be on the market and of moving up in the draft. The Rangers have not had this sort of asset flexibility in a long time, and I for one can’t wait to see what route the team decides to go.[/text_output]