Panarin: Yes or No?

[True Blue]

You used that age (33) and "competing". I didn't.

I used that because that is my belief. And a reason to stay away from Panarin. You did not because that is not your belief.

Furthermore, there is so much conjecture and speculation above that it's almost nonsensical. You have no idea how many playoff rounds the team will play or how successful the Rangers will be in three years from now or six or what Panarin's production will be, what UFA's we acquire, how well our draft picks develop, what trades we win or lose, etc...

We speculate based on what has already occurred. No one has a crystal ball. But one can use factual evidence to arrive at an educated conclusion about what tends to happen.

Speculating about next year is hard enough without going 6 years out.

One wins at chess by seeing the board several steps out. One losses by reacting to what his opponent does.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I listened to the same interview and I didn't take that away at all. In fact, I was hoping that Kouleas would ask some more insightful questions about the Rangers plans. JD got nothing but softballs thrown at him.

Kouleas has no idea what insight is. He's got a great platform and has no idea how to use it.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I’ve never liked what I’ve heard about Hall off the ice. I wonder if he’s matured since Edmonton. Frankly, I’d much, much , much rather sign Panarin, even if the timing isn’t as ideal.

If you're against signing Panarin, you should be even more against signing Hall.

Forget the off ice stuff for a second, the dude has enough trouble staying on it.

 

[haveandare]

People are not suggesting not adding "pieces". People are suggesting not going out and 1.25 years into a rebuild and signing a UFA to max years/max dollars contract that is rife with NTC/NMC. You know this because, and not is no snark, I feel like I have typed this line 862 times. Same people are not suggesting that we look at the future free agent classes of the next two years and sprint out to try to sign a top player. Same people are suggesting that signing the top UFA RIGHT NOW, will mean a) that said UFA playing his in prime year for a team that will not be all that competitive. and b) when the team is competitive, said UFA will no longer be the same player. Same people are saying "let's take a look at what we have and the mosaic as it exists, let the new core develop and THEN go out and spend the money to get a top player. People are also saying that if a top UFA is NOT available, you will have enough assets to go out and get a top player that will enhance your team.

But again, you know all this as this has been hashed and rehashed and regurgitated over and over and over again.

It is not true that signing him costs no assets. What is costs is a) cap space b) maneuverability when he is a shadow of his self and the team is trying to compete for the Cup. You saying that "such a player will be waiting for us" in an effort to show that he will not. What we have seen is that such players a) HAVE become available and b) HAVE been traded for.

I would rather pay the pretty penny for an asset that aligns with the timeline instead of paying a pretty penny now and having buyer's regret when he is a shadow of the player he is today.

People are saying that Panarin is the right player who is available at the wrong time.

This is all good and reasonable. One big thing though is that it’s not “a pretty penny” either way - one costs just cap space, the other costs current players and picks, at least one of high value for the type of player we’re talking about, and then probabaly the same amount of cap space or more. The costs aren’t equal or really close to equal.

 

[free0717]

If you're against signing Panarin, you should be even more against signing Hall.

Forget the off ice stuff for a second, the dude has enough trouble staying on it.

I am against the Rangers signing Panarin. I believe this team is.two years away from contending. All Panarin will do is push this team into the mushy middle. Then when it's time to pay Kakko, will be in a salary cap crunch. We need to go through two years of growing pains.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I am against the Rangers signing Panarin. I believe this team is.two years away from contending. All Panarin will do is push this team into the mushy middle. Then when it's time to pay Kakko, will be in a salary cap crunch. We need to go through two years of growing pains.

I am too at the moment, but that can change in a few weeks depending on what happens.

I'm just saying that I'd rather Panarin than Hall for the sole reason that Hall has trouble staying healthy. It's something that will plague him even more as he gets older.

 

[donpaulo]

I'll take "Players that are nothing like Artemi Panarin for $800, Alex."

What is Holik & Drury have their names on the CUP

 

[haohmaru]

I used that because that is my belief. And a reason to stay away from Panarin. You did not because that is not your belief.

No, actually, I stated that if we're not competitive until Panarin is 33 then the "rebuild" is a failure.

We speculate based on what has already occurred. No one has a crystal ball. But one can use factual evidence to arrive at an educated conclusion about what tends to happen.

There is ZERO "factual evidence" of what this team will even look like next year much less in 3, 4, 5, or 6 years.

One wins at chess by seeing the board several steps out. One losses by reacting to what his opponent does.

This isn't chess. There are 30 opponents. The plan is to make your team better and better every year until you hit your window and then hope for some luck, very few injuries, your best players playing well, and the hockey goods smiling on you.

 

[haohmaru]

FWIW, I voted "No" in the Panarin poll, but I can't deny the fact that he would make this team better for YEARS.

 

[True Blue]

No, actually, I stated that if we're not competitive until Panarin is 33 then the "rebuild" is a failure.

Once the season starts, Panarin will be 28. From there, it all depends on how you choose to tip toe around the term "competitive". If you mean competing for and in the playoffs then sure. If you mean will they be competitive for the Cup, then it looks like you will consider the rebuild to be a failure. Because to me, at best they will be competing for the Cup in 4 years when Panarin is 32. If they are not Cup contenders until a year later, then you will consider the rebuild to be a failure.

There is ZERO "factual evidence" of what this team will even look like next year much less in 3, 4, 5, or 6 years.

Of course there is no such thing. None of us can read the future. That said, there are some decent indications as to next year. And after next year, there will be more indications about the year after.

This isn't chess. There are 30 opponents. The plan is to make your team better and better every year until you hit your window and then hope for some luck, very few injuries, your best players playing well, and the hockey goods smiling on you.

I think that we are playing with words here. If the plan is simply to make your team better and better every year, then why are you not beating the drum for more than Panarin? Why not also sign Karlsson and bring back Hayes and Zucc? Are you going to deny that this will make the team better? Then why not make an enticing package offer for Trouba? I bet their is a package that is worth it for the Jets?

I think that Gorton does not have a simple year to year view. I think he is looking to build a team that will be a contender for many years instead of focusing on how to be a bubble team for one. The goal of are rebuild is to rebuild. Not reupholster.

 

[haohmaru]

Once the season starts, Panarin will be 28. From there, it all depends on how you choose to tip toe around the term "competitive". If you mean competing for and in the playoffs then sure. If you mean will they be competitive for the Cup, then it looks like you will consider the rebuild to be a failure. Because to me, at best they will be competing for the Cup in 4 years when Panarin is 32. If they are not Cup contenders until a year later, then you will consider the rebuild to be a failure.

Yes, if they aren't Cup contenders by the time Panarin is 33 then the rebuild didn't work. If they are simply competing for the playoffs... well, that's kinda what they did for 10 years before the rebuild started, no?

I think that we are playing with words here. If the plan is simply to make your team better and better every year, then why are you not beating the drum for more than Panarin? Why not also sign Karlsson and bring back Hayes and Zucc? Are you going to deny that this will make the team better? Then why not make an enticing package offer for Trouba? I bet their is a package that is worth it for the Jets?

I think that Gorton does not have a simple year to year view. I think he is looking to build a team that will be a contender for many years instead of focusing on how to be a bubble team for one. The goal of are rebuild is to rebuild. Not reupholster.

I don't think signing a bunch of UFA's necessarily make the team better moving forward. It might make them immediately better, but not long term.

I think Panarin actually does make the team better. Short term and long term. It's the contract - the NMC, the $, and the term - that makes me vote "No".

 

[free0717]

I am too at the moment, but that can change in a few weeks depending on what happens.

I'm just saying that I'd rather Panarin than Hall for the sole reason that Hall has trouble staying healthy. It's something that will plague him even more as he gets older.

Good point but Taylor Hall is a better player than Panarin.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Good point but Taylor Hall is a better player than Panarin.

Since he broke into the league he's been more productive and durable than Hall.

Even if Hall is marginally better, it doesn't matter if he can't stay on the ice.

 

[SA16]

Bringing in a 28 year old Artemi Panarin as a UFA is a once in a lifetime opportunity. I can't believe there are people who would pass that up.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Bringing in a 28 year old Artemi Panarin as a UFA is a once in a lifetime opportunity. I can't believe there are people who would pass that up.

Then I could counter with

"Bringing in a soon to be 30 year old UFA has been so disastrous for this team and so many others, I can't believe there are people who would bring that in. Especially since his prime years will be gone before we're realistically expected to be ready to compete"

 

[duhmetreE]

Bergeron is 33 and Marchand is 31... are they in their 'prime' years?

Panarins age 30/morph into a potato season will be in 2022-2023.

 

[Waivers]

Bergeron is 33 and Marchand is 31... are they in their 'prime' years?

Panarins age 30/morph into a potato season will be in 2022-2023.

I know you’re a proponent of Panarin like myself. Mass hysteria because of Sather signing blockbuster names who were past their prime. The Rangers are getting an elite winger, who isn’t injury prone, who is proven, who is also in his prime. If people are worried about the cap, for whatever reason because the Rangers in two years have another 25M off the books, trade Kreider, use that compensation towards Panarin, recoup assets in a top prospect or a 1st rounder. Now the Rangers can provide the youth with some experience, talent, and veteranship. So many people are worried about this “alignment” and when we can exactly “compete”, the Rangers should be competing every year with a winning culture like this and that’s what they’re doing. As assets accumulate, the homegrown talent will come, and the winning will come. We have a very smart management team. Let me also say I’m not for signing any big UFAs after a Panarin acquisition.

 

[bbny]

Panarin will be a very high end player for at least a minimum of 3 more seasons and, given the style of game he plays, most likely still very good through the back half of a 6-7 year contract. At which point, the cap would have raised more to lighten the percentage that his cap hit actually consumes. The Rangers also have like 13 million total committed to the cap starting in 2021. Plenty of space. I voted yes!

 

[mas0764]

I mean, if for no other reason, I want to see them sign Panarin just to embarrass the posters on here claiming how they’ve explained so many times to us how there’s gonna be no shortcuts.

That will be epic by itself.

 

[RGY]

I mean, if for no other reason, I want to see them sign Panarin just to embarrass the posters on here claiming how they’ve explained so many times to us how there’s gonna be no shortcuts.

That will be epic by itself.

It is more so how those posters talk down to others. That would be the big benefit.

 

[haohmaru]

Bergeron is 33 and Marchand is 31... are they in their 'prime' years?

Panarins age 30/morph into a potato season will be in 2022-2023.

This, sir, is simply fantastic.

You forgot Chara @ 41 and Krecji @ 32, though. One potato, two potato, three potato four.

 

[True Blue]

Yes, if they aren't Cup contenders by the time Panarin is 33 then the rebuild didn't work. If they are simply competing for the playoffs... well, that's kinda what they did for 10 years before the rebuild started, no?

By the time he is 33, I would expect them to be entering their initial foray into being legit Cup contenders. And that brings us right back to a 33 year old Panarin, who will more than likely be a shadow of his former self with a contract that is paying him $11m for another several years and has NTC/NMC. And that is why I am against it.

They will be contending for the playoffs several years before that.

I don't think signing a bunch of UFA's necessarily make the team better moving forward. It might make them immediately better, but not long term.

Then the goal is not to make them immediately better for sake of instant gratification, but for a long term. Which is what I have been arguing all along.

I think Panarin actually does make the team better. Short term and long term. It's the contract - the NMC, the $, and the term - that makes me vote "No".

If he makes the team better long term, then you should be on board with with all of it. If his salary, the term and the NTC/NMC will have a negative effect on the organisation in the long term, then you ought to be against it. If you believe that he makes the team better in the long term then the investment over the life of the deal should be worth i

For the reasons that you state, I believe that when the Rangers are competing for the Cup, those will be negatives to this franchise.

 

[True Blue]

Bergeron is 33 and Marchand is 31... are they in their 'prime' years?

Panarins age 30/morph into a potato season will be in 2022-2023.

Bergeron makes $6.875m, Marchand makes $6.125 m. If Panarin wants to get paid like that, sign me up.

 

[True Blue]

Bringing in a 28 year old Artemi Panarin as a UFA is a once in a lifetime opportunity. I can't believe there are people who would pass that up.

Apparently there are A LOT of people who feel exactly the opposite of you. For reasons well documented.

 

[Leetch3]

Bergeron makes $6.875m, Marchand makes $6.125 m. If Panarin wants to get paid like that, sign me up.

also were drafted by the bruins...not signed as UFAs