Panarin: Yes or No?

[Chaels Arms]

Do I think this team should go hard after Panarin? No.

Do I think this team will go hard after Panarin? Yes.

 

[Maximus]

There has been a ton of posts on this thread but the one theme that is going on here and one which I'm a little vexed to be honest with is quite a few posts in here from some that don't want Gorton to go for Panarin because it's going to take another 3 years before we will be ready to "compete" so let's suck next year, keep accumulating draft capital and not "waste" $11 mill per year when by the time we are ready to "compete", Panarin will be past his prime. Does that sound about right?

Withought naming names...you know who you are, please help me out here because apparently I'm confused with this word compete you are using:

Do you mean in three years "we'll compete for a Cup"? Or do you mean in three years "we'll compete for the playoffs"?

I can't be the only one that looks at our division and the Eastern Conference as a whole and sees that even with the current rebuild and even if we don't sign Panarin, it wouldn't be out of the question for us to to be a bubble playoff team THIS upcoming season.

I mean other than the Caps, Leafs and Bruins, what other teams are in your opinions "locks" to make the playoffs next year? Exactly, I can't come up with one either for a variety of reasons as each team including the Pens, Jackets, Canes,Islanders, Habs of the world all have major question marks heading into this season.

I guess my point being, I'm not so sure we are going to suck as badly as some of y'all are suggesting for this upcoming season or that we are going to be a lottery team no matter how much some in here want, not so much because we are going to be all that good but because our competition for those bubble spots aren't that good either.

I dunno, I'm not going to be crestfallen if Panarin signs with Florida for example but I also don't see us sucking as badly as some of you insinuate we will and that from the comments in here by some of y'all would piss some of y'all just as much as if we signed Panarin....lol

 

[aufheben]

If Panarin wants to sign for like $6m, sure, sign him

Yeah you can't offer billion-year contracts anymore, but Chicago splurged in free agency too; Hossa, Campbell... Huet

But the Blackhawks and Penguins weren't model franchises anyway, they were literally the worst franchises.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Yo we ain't tanking!

I hope "GM" Jim Dorkton flips that weak ass tank pick, and f*** this #LosingCulture.

Leisure suit Gary can give the 2OA to the Penguins for all I care.

Sign EK and Panarin and have team President JD grow out that John Holmes stach and play the tuba screaming OH Baby!

 

[eco's bones]

There has been a ton of posts on this thread but the one theme that is going on here and one which I'm a little vexed to be honest with is quite a few posts in here from some that don't want Gorton to go for Panarin because it's going to take another 3 years before we will be ready to "compete" so let's suck next year, keep accumulating draft capital and not "waste" $11 mill per year when by the time we are ready to "compete", Panarin will be past his prime. Does that sound about right?

Withought naming names...you know who you are, please help me out here because apparently I'm confused with this word compete you are using:

Do you mean in three years "we'll compete for a Cup"? Or do you mean in three years "we'll compete for the playoffs"?

I can't be the only one that looks at our division and the Eastern Conference as a whole and sees that even with the current rebuild and even if we don't sign Panarin, it wouldn't be out of the question for us to to be a bubble playoff team THIS upcoming season.

I mean other than the Caps, Leafs and Bruins, what other teams are in your opinions "locks" to make the playoffs next year? Exactly, I can't come up with one either for a variety of reasons as each team including the Pens, Jackets, Canes,Islanders, Habs of the world all have major question marks heading into this season.

I guess my point being, I'm not so sure we are going to suck as badly as some of y'all are suggesting for this upcoming season or that we are going to be a lottery team no matter how much some in here want, not so much because we are going to be all that good but because our competition for those bubble spots aren't that good either.

I dunno, I'm not going to be crestfallen if Panarin signs with Florida for example but I also don't see us sucking as badly as some of you insinuate we will and that from the comments in here by some of y'all would piss some of y'all just as much as if we signed Panarin....lol

I think mostly the idea is two years and then we can go out and bring in some real help. We've seen however in the past how teams overpay for free agents once that season opens though sometimes (not every year) there is actually a worthwhile to go all out for. I'm just wondering that if in two years the Rangers have the problem of having to spend $25-30 mil to get to the cap floor they'll do shit like give Dougie Hamilton and Nugent-Hopkins $9 mil per year contracts or package some of our stud prospects in a trade for veteran help with a high $ contract. Free agency looks like it's going to be shit that year but speaking of that year we will have Henrik and Shattenkirk, Staal and Smith coming off the books--$26 mil worth right there and maybe another $4 for the annual cap rise bringing it to $30. And that's not factoring in what's happened to Kreider, Strome, Namestnikov, Vesey and Fast in the mean--who if anyone is even left and what the cap numbers of their replacements are. There are penalties for not hitting the cap floor that make that idea not a good option....and don't expect the NHLPA to side with us on that. They want teams spending money on their clients.

There are some who want us to lose and lose and lose our way to another lottery pick. If I were that way I'd be thinking of taking the year off from watching them at all. What's the fun of being happy watching your team lose night after night?--to jump all over some guys you don't like and tell everyone how shit they are? But as you say the Rangers really could be a much better team this coming year and then what? A Panarin signing IMO might put us in a place where we can actually make the playoffs or if not make a real attempt at competing for a playoff spot.

 

[egelband]

Do we go "hard"?

I would say no. I think we kick the tires, but the deal would have to be something that's on our terms like Shattenkirk was.

Yep. We all know the Rangers are in a good spot cap-wise. The key is to avoid bad decisions and risk. Look at Buffalo, how big a risk is that Skinner deal? Crazy. It's the proverbial shot in the dark. The rangers used to be that team.
So, brass tacks, if Panarin wants to bet on himself, I offer him 12x4. Or even 10x5. But I definitely avoid 6, 7 years unless he wants 8 and security. Crazy? Maybe. But the rangers are in a position where they can dictate terms. Panarin wants 11x7, fine. Go to Miami or wherever.

 

[Leetch3]

the exact same 'we won't be as bad as you think' argument was made last summer. why bother cause there is no way this team is finishing bottom 5 anyway...and then we picked up 3 points in the last 2 games to finish 6th worst. and that was before we traded away a bunch of key guys. this team is even worse than it was last year, especially if they dump kreider. you are seriously under-estimating how bad we are right now...and how bad our defense is

and people will say how can we be worse when we are adding kravstov and kakko...but most players aren't superstars from day 1, those are the exceptions. even the top players take time...

 

[mas0764]

See now I don't think most people are opposed to signing free agents or making major trades. But a lot of that is also dependent on timing and context.

When we're talking about where this team is at on July 1, 2019, and we're talking about potentially signing a guy like Panarin for 7 years and $77 million, those are some substantial factors to consider.

Of course - and no one knows the answer. There are pros and cons. It’s open for what should be friendly debate.

Except one poster thinks he knows everything and thinks he’s the winner if people don’t answer his irrelevant questions. No one needs to propose an alternate explanation of what JG and JD meant, because that’s the point. We don’t know. And neither does anyone, probably not even JD and JG themselves, entirely.

 

[mas0764]

The sum up what some here think, teams can NEVER be bad for multiple years and then be good, because of the myth of the "culture of losing". That is utterly false. So many in for a very rude awakening, which is incredibly surprising given how bad this team was this past season.

Thats not what literally anyone is saying.

 

[egelband]

I know it was a typo likely caused by autocorrect, but I really want to make the phrase "open the coffee" a thing, haha. #Coffeeaddict

@Inferno you meant "covfefe" right?

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Yeah you can't offer billion-year contracts anymore, but Chicago splurged in free agency too; Hossa, Campbell... Huet

But the Blackhawks and Penguins weren't model franchises anyway, they were literally the worst franchises.

That’s the other thing about those two teams, they picked in the top 5 a whole bunch. I hope Kakko/Kravtsov will pan out and be enough to build around, but man, grabbing a Lundell or a Raymond or someone at the top of the draft next year would make me start saying ‘when’ instead of ‘if’

 

[Inferno]

That’s the other thing about those two teams, they picked in the top 5 a whole bunch. I hope Kakko/Kravtsov will pan out and be enough to build around, but man, grabbing a Lundell or a Raymond or someone at the top of the draft next year would make me start saying ‘when’ instead of ‘if’

That's why I'm all aboard trading kreider for a draft pick and trading up to get someone like zegras and then standing pat with a few small moves here and there... 1 more horrible year. Draft byfield or lafreniere or someone of that ilk.

I'd love to see....

Lafreniere zibanejad buchnevich
Kakko zegras chytil
Lemieux howden\lias kravtsov
4th liners, lias, howdrn, etc

Miller deangelo
Skjei fox
Lundkvist, rykov, Keane, etc etc

That's a group I can get behind... And we'd have a ton of firepower to go get whoever we need if someone busts.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

Thats not what literally anyone is saying.

The fear and panic of being bad for multiple years here is in astronomical levels of hysteria.

 

[RangerBoy]

the exact same 'we won't be as bad as you think' argument was made last summer. why bother cause there is no way this team is finishing bottom 5 anyway...and then we picked up 3 points in the last 2 games to finish 6th worst. and that was before we traded away a bunch of key guys. this team is even worse than it was last year, especially if they dump kreider. you are seriously under-estimating how bad we are right now...and how bad our defense is

and people will say how can we be worse when we are adding kravstov and kakko...but most players aren't superstars from day 1, those are the exceptions. even the top players take time...

The Rangers won’t be a bottom five with Lundqvist. That was the popular argument. Lundqvist won’t allow the Rangers to be a bottom five team. The Rangers had the fewest ROW in the NHL. Georgiev’s play in the 2nd half was the only reason why the Rangers finished 6th overall. It got to the point where Rangers tank nation was rooting for Lundqvist to play more than Georgiev because the Rangers had a better opportunity to lose with Lundqvist in net.

The Rangers will never rebuild with Lundqvist still on the team. If you listen to Gorton’s comments from earlier this week, Lundqvist is still here become he has two more seasons left on the contract.

 

[RGY]

the exact same 'we won't be as bad as you think' argument was made last summer. why bother cause there is no way this team is finishing bottom 5 anyway...and then we picked up 3 points in the last 2 games to finish 6th worst. and that was before we traded away a bunch of key guys. this team is even worse than it was last year, especially if they dump kreider. you are seriously under-estimating how bad we are right now...and how bad our defense is

and people will say how can we be worse when we are adding kravstov and kakko...but most players aren't superstars from day 1, those are the exceptions. even the top players take time...

And no one is debating this. But that is based off of the team trading Kreider AND adding no one. Sure yeah then they will be pretty bad.

But IF they re-sign Kreider and sign Panarin? They might not be AS bad considering how weak the East is imo.

The offseason has not started yet.

 

[Off Sides]

Here is data I compiled earlier today regarding aging for elite players. The players included in this data set are those that scored at 1 point per game or better, in a minimum of 60 games, for multiple seasons between age 24-28 during the years 2006-2007 to 2010-2011. Why did I choose these limits for age and season? Largely because I had to go through everything manually and a data set of 50 players would be unwieldy.

The 2012-2013 season was also entirely excluded because hockey reference does something very weird with the adjusted data in the short season.

Takeaways are this "rapid drop off after age 30" is not a real thing. It's just a slow decline for years. Additionally these players remained playing at a 1st line level pretty much their entire careers - at least through age 34 they were scoring over 60 adjusted points/82 and then age 37 is still at 54 points. The sample sizes are 550+ player games for all years up to age 35 and then around 400 games for age 36 and 37.

So the logic of not wanting Panarin because of a potential huge drop off and albatross contract is just being extremely overly risk adverse as it is not really founded by any data but much more by anecdotal evidence from previous past signings that were not really even comparable situations. We should fully expect him to be a 1st line caliber player for the entirety of his next contract even if towards the end he is more of a lower tier 1st liner (which would still be better than basically every wing we've had the last 10 years outside of Gaborik and Nash). Not wanting him because you'd rather wait for a better spot in a couple of years, while I don't agree with, is a perfectly reasonable stance.

Nice work, I appreciate the time it must have taken. I think generally that looks about right to me.

Some questions and quibbles, because while I think I understand your methods and conclusions, just to clarify?

It seems to show what I've been talking about, the dip at age 33 is there from 32 year old.

Much bigger drop off, even if gradual from age 28 to 33, From near 90 points at age 28 to near 60 in points per game per 82 at age 33.

~30% drop off in 5 years is pretty significant. Wouldn't the cap need to go up by any % drop in production for that contract to be considered as good as it was when it was signed? If the cap increases less than the production % drops, wouldn't that mean the contract is becoming less valuable? If so then I think there is some truth to the idea that the back end of the contract is likely to be at least not very good.

As you said there is also a drop off in amount of players as the age increases, those who stopped playing for whichever reason would not have their future production represented. They could have retired, gone on LTIR or been bought out and not signed again, yet had they kept playing their production could have dropped significantly. Since they eliminated the 1M dummy years at the ends of contracts it at least seems more likely those players who have long term are going to try to play them out as there is more money in doing so.

Which brings up another point, if the player is injured and missing a lot of games, using points per 82 may not be the right measurement to use? Wouldn't the value be in having the player play in the games?

Again overall I think your post represents what I think it should, more so just trying to point out some of the things it is showing, and a couple it is not.

 

[Edge]

The fear and panic of being bad for multiple years here is in astronomical levels of hysteria.

One of the things all of us need to be mindful of is thinking too many years into the future, or venturing too far down the line - and I include myself in that statement.

With various issues, and with various opinions on said issues, it can be very easy to start projecting time periods that are unknown to us as the current time period would’ve been to us a handful of years ago.

Whether it’s a fear of losing cultures, how a player will be performing in several years, point projections, or playoff performances, the reality is that we are barely into this process and almost certainly have a lot more road ahead of us than we really want to acknowledge.

While the debates are good, and we do have to keep on eye on the future so that we don’t shoot ourselves in the foot, we haven’t even seen a good chunk of the kids we’re projecting into roles and lineups. Hell, in some cases we haven’t even drafted the kids yet.

But as a group we’re spending an awful lot of time thinking about 2021, 2023 and 2024 than we are thinking about October 2019, or February 2020. And those time periods are going to shape our future, and give us a glimpse of our progress, way more than projections, theories about losing cultures, or how we define short cuts.

God knows there’s a lot of unknowns at this point.

 

[Leetch3]

And no one is debating this. But that is based off of the team trading Kreider AND adding no one. Sure yeah then they will be pretty bad.

But IF they re-sign Kreider and sign Panarin? They might not be AS bad considering how weak the East is imo.

The offseason has not started yet.

the goal should be to build a team that can contend for the cup year in and year out, not a team that can maybe take advantage of how weak the east is in a given year. you can't rely on the top teams getting upset in the first round again

 

[RangerBoy]

The fear and panic of being bad for multiple years here is in astronomical levels of hysteria.

The idea is to build a championship team able to compete for a championship every year. The Rangers said that last week when JD was introduced as Rangers president.

The Rangers want to be better ASAP but they want to stick to the plan, do it the right way and make good decisions.

Patient Aggressiveness.

 

[Leetch3]

i know this is a terrible reason, but part of me hopes that we don't even talk to panarin and karlsson just so fans & media stop with all the 'rangers aren't really rebuilding' and ready to sign every player available...but thats silly cause we did that last summer and no one believed it lol

 

[RGY]

the goal should be to build a team that can contend for the cup year in and year out, not a team that can maybe take advantage of how weak the east is in a given year. you can't rely on the top teams getting upset in the first round again

But how does that goal change by icing a competitive team this year? Because they make the wild card and eliminate their lottery chances? What they have accumulated isn’t enough? No one is saying they should trade their 1st round picks or any of their draft picks. No one is suggesting that. So I guess it is bothersome that they wouldnt have a chance at a Top 5 pick. Or Top 10 pick. That seems to be the problem here. But when is it enough? I know some are salivating here at the chance that we end up with the top pick but that again is all based on chance and luck.

What happens if this team stands pat for the most part. Re-signs Kreider. Signs a vet forward like Hagelin and then because of improvements by the kids they make the wild card in a weak east. What happens then? Are we supposed to be angry with the kids for being successful?

Signing Panarin is more than taking advantage of a weak East. That point is very minimal to my stance.

 

[Leetch3]

But how does that goal change by icing a competitive team this year? Because they make the wild card and eliminate their lottery chances? What they have accumulated isn’t enough? No one is saying they should trade their 1st round picks or any of their draft picks. No one is suggesting that. So I guess it is bothersome that they wouldnt have a chance at a Top 5 pick. Or Top 10 pick. That seems the problem here. But when is it enough? I know some are salivating here at the chance that we end up with the top pick but that again is all based on chance and luck.

What happens if this team stands pat for the most part. Re-signs Kreider. Signs a vet forward like Hagelin and then because of improvements by the kids they make the wild card in a weak east. What happens then? Are we supposed to be angry with the kids for being successful?

Signing Panarin is more than taking advantage of a weak East. That point is very minimal to my stance.

I don't disagree with this...but my point was simply thinking that we might be better than expected next year or that the east is weak isn't a reason to make a move be better next year IMO. if you think signing panarin is part of the long term solution then great, but interest in him and how he fits into the long term plans shouldn't changed based on next year

 

[RGY]

I don't disagree with this...but my point was simply thinking that we might be better than expected next year or that the east is weak isn't a reason to make a move be better next year IMO. if you think signing panarin is part of the long term solution then great, but interest in him and how he fits into the long term plans shouldn't changed based on next year

Oh I absolutely agree. Given our current state, signing Panarin with the main reason being for next season is insane. I have always said signing him would be for the 20-21 season and 21-22 season. Thats when I see the window starting to crack open. You will have some of your kids entering their 3rd and 4th seasons still at a very young age and some still on their ELC. You will have some contracts expiring with the older vets. And I just dont like and/or expect some of the names in the upcoming free agent class to be available choices. Or as good as Panarin is now or even as good as he will be in 2 years. That is just my belief. Sure its certainly optimistic. I am also considering the teams around us in 2 years. Malkin, Crosby, Ovechkin. Those guys are all going to be another 2 years older. Malkin has been banged up. Even other teams, Stamkos. Bergeron. So our window starting to open can be sprung just by whats going on around us.

I am not saying to deviate from the plan. To me the plan is to be smarter than we were in the past. We never had top picks. We had what one top 10 pick? Two? McIlrath and Montoya. We did a bad job there. Then we traded our other 1sts. We never had a stocked cupboard to replenish with. We had to use our future draft picks to add a quality player.

Howden included, we have added (6) 1st round players from the last 3 drafts. It is likely going to be at least (8) in 4 drafts after this one. (8) 1st rounders in 4 years is just unheard of. If Dallas re-signs Zucc, then it could be (10) 1st rounders over a 5 draft span. I know people want top 10 picks. I get it. And if it happens it happens. If management decides to stand pat this offseason that is fine too. But if we cannot find success with that many 1st round picks in a 5 year span then we had the wrong guys running this organizaiton top to bottom. We are screwed anyway. That isnt even counting the scouting capability of finding NHL players from rounds 2-7.

So I guess all in all, to me signing Panarin isn’t what will screw this organization out of having a contender year after year. He wont be the reason. It will be the management group, more specifically the scouting department, that buries us into a lifetime of misery. But Panarin. Panarin is an elite talent who I would absolutely love to see Kakko with. Or Kravtsov with. Or Chytil with. He makes players around him better.

 

[True Blue]

"So, you said eight seasons.

Rebuild started at the end of last year

Through the end of this year the rebuild is 1.25 years in
Through the end of next year is 2.25 years - Rangers bottom out and are still a lottery pick - Panarin begins the year at 28
Through the end of the year after is 3.25 years - The Rangers begin to rise - Panarin begins the year at 29
Through the end of the year after is 4.25 years - Rangers are competitive - Panarin begins the year at 30
Through the end of the year after is 5.25 years - Rangers are competitive - Panarin begins the year at 30
Rebuild over - Rangers are competing for the Cup - Panarin begins the year at 31

Panarin still has two years left on a contract that is worth at least $22 million. It has complete NTC/NMC on it. During his prime years with the Rangers (the first three) there may only be one trip to playoffs. As the Rangers are competing for the Cup, he is no longer the player that he was. During the last tail end of his contract, the board spends time discussing how when the next compliance buy out is and how much needs to be retained in order to possibly trade him.

 

[True Blue]

I feel like this applies with or without Panarin with the way the roster stands right now.

May I ass-u-me that you also meann with or without Kreider? Or if he is traded the likelihood of falling on face increases?