Now there's a name I haven't heard or thought about in a long while.I'll go back to our origins and say that Whitney was a comparable. The real title might actually go to Bryan Berard.
*Sigh*
Now there's a name I haven't heard or thought about in a long while.I'll go back to our origins and say that Whitney was a comparable. The real title might actually go to Bryan Berard.
I'll go back to our origins and say that Whitney was a comparable. The real title might actually go to Bryan Berard.
A post of mine from another thread about Panarin vs Johny hockey:
Panarin Scored 80+pts for the team with the worst PP in the league while playing Selke caliber wing on his first year with a team that is very defensive focused. The #2 F scorer is around 30pts behind at least. It took about 25 games for bread to find his feet with the jackets. He was under .5ppg at that time. Next year there is a strong chance for 90-100pts.
My post wasn't directed at you just wanted to put my opinion out there I didn't think you were putting him down. And the PP production norm actually I'd say there is.no norm because in 3 years he has improved every season so it is too small of a sample size. But having the worst PP I'm the league and him being one of the top PP producers in the team if we were even league average at 15 that would likely have given him at least 5 more points putting him at 87 with 2 games left and he is historically a Pens killer. Not factoring his very slow start it' reasonable to assume if the PP was better 90pts is closer to his numbers then 80 this s3ason.I'm not going to bother with talking about the prediction, of course there's a chance for 90+ points. Having said that, the analysis was kind of flawed in that being on "the worst PP in the league" didn't hurt his overall PP production norms. I haven't bothered to look at his PP time comparison, but this seems like the start of pro-Panarin bias.
My comment was not intended to put down Panarin in any way or to be negative, just illustrating that what was provided was horribly simplistic.
I believe Panarin and Dubois were first paired together around game #24 and since then Panarin is on a 90 point pace and PLD on pace for 60. Next year they're going to rip it up.A post of mine from another thread about Panarin vs Johny hockey:
Panarin Scored 80+pts for the team with the worst PP in the league while playing Selke caliber wing on his first year with a team that is very defensive focused. The #2 F scorer is around 30pts behind at least. It took about 25 games for bread to find his feet with the jackets. He was under .5ppg at that time. Next year there is a strong chance for 90-100pts.
Yeah I also think if PLD started at C (which if anyone looks at my posts since before he started his last year in the Q and ESPECIALLY the WJC I fought he should not play W because it is not his game he is much more effective as a C and we saw how the wjc went and the start of this year) he would be very close to 60 right now. I'd say at least 25g as well. Next year if Wennberg can get is shit together or we get it together for him and move him out haha our top 2 lines IMO could be deadly.I believe Panarin and Dubois were first paired together around game #24 and since then Panarin is on a 90 point pace and PLD on pace for 60. Next year they're going to rip it up.
My post wasn't directed at you just wanted to put my opinion out there I didn't think you were putting him down.
And the PP production norm actually I'd say there is.no norm because in 3 years he has improved every season so it is too small of a sample size.
But having the worst PP I'm the league and him being one of the top PP producers in the team if we were even league average at 15 that would likely have given him at least 5 more points putting him at 87 with 2 games left and he is historically a Pens killer. Not factoring his very slow start it' reasonable to assume if the PP was better 90pts is closer to his numbers then 80 this s3ason.
I thought you thought it was directed towards you because your wording. And his improvement isn't based on stats it's based on watching a lot of hawks games when the Cbj aren't on. I love watching Kane play so I had a good idea of Panarins talent before coming here. Each year it seemed like a different part of his game has grown stronger. One year he was great with carrying it in and the other his was better at taking the shit when he had it opposed to handling the puck or passing to Kane and this year his D has been leaps and bounds above anything he did in CHI.Never thought it was directed at me, no idea why you would think I did.
In what way has he "improved all three seasons". What are you using to draw this opinion? Just a quick looks at statistics doesn't draw us to that conclusion. Statistically he actually dropped slightly in year two. Any statistical increase this season can be easily explained by an increase in ice time, not necessarily improvement in his play.
We are not the worst PP in the league. This season we are in the bottom quarter. The "worst" is actually Edmonton, at 14.1%. League average is 20%, we're at 17%. Minnesota is at slightly over 20%, has had 15 more opportunities and that translates to 8 extra goals. If we hit the league average would that be because the top unit has been dragging Panarin down or what that be because the 2nd unit improved their play? The assumption you are making is that an improved PP would directly translate to increased points by Panarin. Going to league average might have a modest increase his PP production or have no impact at all.
You are making suppositions. In just 5 minutes of research, I've been able to put doubt in your thesis. Let's just wait and see what happens shall we?
I'm not saying he won't reach 100 points at some point in his career, but I'm not ready to say that an increase like that is going to come from a statistical team increase in PP%.
snip
We are not the worst PP in the league. This season we are in the bottom quarter. The "worst" is actually Edmonton, at 14.1%. League average is 20%, we're at 17%. Minnesota is at slightly over 20%, has had 15 more opportunities and that translates to 8 extra goals.
snip
Not to get overly nit-picky, but there were stretches this season where the CBJ did have the worst PP in the league. It stunk for a (seemingly) really long stretch, their recent success has pulled them out of the bottom. Had they been middle of the pack rather than oscillating between crappy and spectacular, it is likely that Bread would have had more points.
I thought you thought it was directed towards you because your wording. And his improvement isn't based on stats it's based on watching a lot of hawks games when the Cbj aren't on. I love watching Kane play so I had a good idea of Panarins talent before coming here. Each year it seemed like a different part of his game has grown stronger. One year he was great with carrying it in and the other his was better at taking the **** when he had it opposed to handling the puck or passing to Kane and this year his D has been leaps and bounds above anything he did in CHI.
And the PP must have gone up over the last 3 games because we were the worst at least when PLD scored his hattrick goal. And I have 0 doubt I don't know what you think you poked holes in but your holes are speculation on what if it goes bad instead.of continual progression.
I'll go back to our origins and say that Whitney was a comparable. The real title might actually go to Bryan Berard.
But I'm pretty much drunk on the Panarin kool aid. I enjoy having a superstar on the team, especially one who seems to make his linemates better in a way I don't remember Nash doing.
Very good player, but I'm not ready to put him in the "superstar" category. He does get notice, but I doubt fans of most teams are buying tickets just for the chance to watch him when he comes in town. I doubt Panaris is going to drive TV ratings.
Very good player, but I'm not ready to put him in the "superstar" category. He does get notice, but I doubt fans of most teams are buying tickets just for the chance to watch him when he comes in town. I doubt Panaris is going to drive TV ratings.
I think you are taking more about production and performance, we still have some work to to there.
He's growing on me and I'm happy we have him. Time will tell what that will do for us long term as a franchise.
Oh and Whitney, he was good for more than just us. I think he had over 1k points in something like 1300 games and played to around 40.
MacLean thought he wasn't worth the term he was asking for (3 or 4 years?) and then the guy continued to produce for another decadeAnd I remember that about Whitney. Honestly, when he became a Jacket I was surprised he was still so productive, I thought he came to Columbus in the same career point as Fedorov. And then he left Columbus (which was a little bit salty, IIRC) and continued to produce. Yeah, he was a gamer for sure.
MacLean thought he wasn't worth the term he was asking for (3 or 4 years?) and then the guy continued to produce for another decade
I can list about 20 other decisions he made that were worse than the Whitney debacle.And he wonders why he's a guess commentator and not an NHL GM.
Not sure if you meant to say guest commentator, but guess commentator seems accurate.And he wonders why he's a guess commentator and not an NHL GM.
How are bonuses counted against the cap?I'll guess that Panarin's agent-along with most other agents-keeps a close eye on what Tavares and Matthews get and goes from there. He'll be 27 starting next season so an 8 year deal takes him through 34 which is about as good an age-time frame as a team can hope to sign a top player.
He's blown away every other CBJ in points production. He's a top 10 wing. It would be surprising to see him settle for less than $9 million per year. I think it'll be richer. His contract will probably include a NMC and a lot of bonus money as well. It's hard for me to see him signing for much less than Eichel did. Buffalo screwed up the pay levels with that deal. Edmonton's Draisatl deal will also cause problems for GMs.
I'll guess that he'll get $9.75 million/8 years/NMC/heavy bonus money. First year salary plus bonus in the $12 million range.
That Dougie thought he wouldn't should have been the confirmation he would.MacLean thought he wasn't worth the term he was asking for (3 or 4 years?) and then the guy continued to produce for another decade
That Dougie thought he wouldn't should have been the confirmation he would.