Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLI
- Thread starter Gardner McKay
- Start date
- Status
12 Years in the league. 5 Cup appearances. 3 wins. Guy was worth the money for the teams he played on.
Was he a top UFA? I'd say so.
I could see the team being somewhat better next year but as others have said, it requires several or more players taking a big step forward. Why is it hard to also see we could potentially be significantly worse next year without 5 month's of Zucc,Hayes, and potentially Kreider? We gobbled up plenty of loser points last year, this year we might probably lose way more in regulation time. I'm in the get another top 5 pick for next year crowd and lets try to start taking off next summer.
He wasn’t seen as a top guy in the league, but it was a typical Detroit move, they built a team and had a very clear picture of what they wanted from each position. Helped all transitions they faced really well. Made it so much easier for everyone to make the jump. Didn’t just throw a bunch of players on the ice.
Rafalski’s status grew after he moved to Detroit and I don’t think he ever was better or held higher than in 2010.
But I don’t think we really can compare UFA signings they did. It was one guy out, another guy handpicked for the same existing role in. Schneider left for LA I think, so they brought in Rafalski to replace him. The sum he got paid was sick, but they could be confident that he could deliver. He wasn’t expected to carve out his own position on the team like someone we bring in basically have to do, they had identical roles through the entire lineup and he could just step in.
We more or less never have a LW that is similar to any other LW on the roster, a C that is similar to any other C on the roster, a RW that is similar to any other RW on the roster — and so forth. Detroit basically had 4 Cs who in some core areas had the same strengths, a large number of LWs who the same could be said about — and so forth. I am not saying that Darren Helm and Kris Draper were carbon copies of each other, but both had wheels, could drive the puck up ice and so forth. It gets so much easier to replace one center with another when you have that clear philosophy in a franchise. And it’s so much easier to draft players and develop them when you know what you want and also can pull a kid aside and point at players on the team and tell them exactly what they must improve.
Last edited:
SA16
Sixstring
The loser point thing is a sham.
We had 20 OT games and won 6 of them. This is almost surely lower than expected and our expectation should have been to have more OT wins and less OT losses. We were 0-9 in 3 on 3 OT. If we play 20 OT games next year we will probably earn more than the 26 points we got in them this year.
Chytiljuicee
Registered User
- Jul 16, 2017
- 36
- 33
I don't get the opposition to signing Panarin. Elite wingers don't grow on trees. Worry about his contract being an albatross in 5 years not before you even sign him. So many unpredictable things happen over the course of 1 season let alone over the course of a 7 year contract. He's also a few years removed from winning the calder.. I get he's not the youngest guy but theres not a lot of NHL tread on those tires.
Miller covers the left side...I would like one on the right as well lol
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Since Panarin is a once in a lifetime UFA who can benefit teams regardless of the stage of the team's development (contending, just playoffs, or like us rebuilding), then all 31 teams should be in on him.
To get a great player who can benefit any team without giving up any assets, you must offer him a contract that all 30 other GMs think is so crazy, they wouldn't even want this elite player for free. After all, if even 1 other team thinks the offer isn't insane, they'd still be bidding to get him for free.
So would you offer Panarin a contract that 30 GMs think is crazy? Just a yes or no please, no fantasies about how he will accept $2-3 million annually less from us and will accept not having a NMC when someone else will no doubt offer it.
Again, yes or no: do you think it would be smart for the Rangers to offer Panarin a contract that the other 30 GMs think is crazy?
To get a great player who can benefit any team without giving up any assets, you must offer him a contract that all 30 other GMs think is so crazy, they wouldn't even want this elite player for free. After all, if even 1 other team thinks the offer isn't insane, they'd still be bidding to get him for free.
So would you offer Panarin a contract that 30 GMs think is crazy? Just a yes or no please, no fantasies about how he will accept $2-3 million annually less from us and will accept not having a NMC when someone else will no doubt offer it.
Again, yes or no: do you think it would be smart for the Rangers to offer Panarin a contract that the other 30 GMs think is crazy?
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Just like the Tavares scenario. Oh. Wait. He took less. Sorry that doesn't fit your narrative.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
That's why we should trade Kreider and not sign any stars, so we likely get a top-5 pick in 2020 and at least top-10 in 2021, plus whatever we get for Kreider, Names, Vesey and Fast. Having 2 more early picks plus a torrent of later picks very likely results in at least 1 of them turning into a cost-controlled, longer lasting Panarin-quality player.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
He took mildly less, he didn't take $3 million less like people here are suggesting that Panarin will accept $8 when at least $10, maybe $11 will be thrown out by some GM looking to save his own job.
And he took it from a team with a ton of young stars. What's the Rangers version of Matthew's? Mariner? Rielly? Even Nylander had two 61-point seasons immediately before Tavares signed. He was joining a team on an upswing.
Any agent will advise his star client that the Rangers will still be mired in deep swamp at least until the contracts for Staal, Shatty, Smith and Hank expire. Unless Panarin loves NYC beyond all reason (and he never indicated loving NYC), he won't accept less money. If anything, we have indication he'll accept less money to go live in Miami because it has great weather and no state income tax (and also has a large Russian community) than he would accept from the Rangers.
And if he does accept less money from us, less money will still mean $10.25 here instead of $11 elsewhere. It under no circumstances will it mean $8-9.
Last edited:
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
I agree that Panarin will command 10+M. Completely.
Mariner - I'm guessing that's Marner? He's another guy that's going to want Nylander money or more. The Leafs are in for a long summer.
I think Panarin ends up in Florida, personally. I don't, however, think that "the most money/best offer" always wins. It often doesn't. Are you making 1M more annually and playing in Edmonton over New York? Probably not. Agents, and free agents, listen to a club's pitch and their timeline for becoming successful and what the plan(s) are to reach that goal. I think Panarin is a long shot to end up here for a variety of reasons, but plenty of guys take less money to play in attractive markets and historic franchises.
Shesterkybomb
Registered User
- Dec 30, 2016
- 17,726
- 19,439
I'm doubtful that we will lose more games next year than we did this year. I know Zuc and Hayes aren't here but Chytil, Anderson, Howden, Pionk, DeAngelo are a year older and specifically in the case of DeAngelo should get more ice time, Kravtsov, Kakko, Hajek, and whoever else we might add ie Panarin maybe or a smaller signing will likely make this team closer to the playoffs than last place anyway. The draft next year is deep so we still should get a decent player.
Shesterkybomb
Registered User
- Dec 30, 2016
- 17,726
- 19,439
Nylander money??? Marner wants Matthew's money and he has earned it.
Shesterkybomb
Registered User
- Dec 30, 2016
- 17,726
- 19,439
LORDE
I am Lorde, YA YA YA
LORDE
I am Lorde, YA YA YA
I’d rather suck for another year rather than get bounced in Rd. 1
Make that two years.
I want cupSSSSSSSS
plural
Or at least many chances at it.
Stay the course
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Toronto 1967 (and not a Final since) landed Tavares as a "historic franchise".
You read that right. They haven't been to the final in 52 years, much less winning it, and still got Tavares.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Agree with that, but if we're talking "hometown discount" then that's a starting point. He's an RFA, so I wonder if he'll sit out like Nylander did. Toronto seems to have more trouble than most signing their RFA's.
How’d that signing work out for Toronto? Bounced in the 1st round. Hell, they almost missed the playoffs.
Now that team is cap purgatory, despite signing Tavares for less than what SJ offered.
Tavares to Toronto made a hell of a lot more sense than Panarin here though. Their window is at least open right now.
We don’t even have a window. We have Sheetrock.
I don’t want to end up like Toronto. Top heavy team with **** Defense who’s going to most likely have to trade one of their homegrown talents.
In 2-3 years when Tavares’s production declines into the 60~ point range, Toronto will be paying him as much as they are now. And in 3 years, he’s still going to have another 3 years left on his contract.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
The problem with this is that, other than if you're Carolina, most franchises that win Stanley Cups actually lose for a few years earning playoff experience. There's something to be said for being in the hunt for a spot, then making it and getting bounced, making it again and going deeper, and then figuring it out.
The Vegas' and Carolina's of the world are exceptions.
- Status
