Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXI

[True Blue]

What if everything stayed the same but Panarin playing with Mika? Maybe a hockey trade or two. Letting the kids develop and keeping all prospects/picks. Your fear doesn't manifest, would you be ok then?

I do not think that you can underestimate the negative effects of tying up cap space for such a long time on a rebuilding team.

 

[effen]

There are two good reasons to stick to bridge deals this year. One, none of the four important RFAs has done enough in my eyes to earn a long term commitment. Buchnevich is a soft maybe but I want to see how the rest of this season plays out and how the draft lottery and Kreider’s future shake out before I go down that road. Second is that two years from now (or sooner) at least $25MM comes off the payroll. At that money there will be plenty of money available to do meaningful extensions or get ready to package someone off to Seattle.

My offseason formula is; buyout Smith, build four bridges, sign the Bread Man and trade for a solid defenseman.

Bridging everyone and signing Panarin caps this team out as an 8th-13th team with no 2nd line center and no flexibility.

In 2 years when SSS come off the books you're left with giving the guys you want to keep market level contracts, further reducing flexibility, all so you can have a nice set of rims on a '94 Corolla. Why.

Buying Smith out when you can't contend before his contract is over anyway is adding dead money for no reason. Why.

 

[Dijock94]

The appeal of Panarin, like any UFA, is that there are no assets going out to acquire him. Making a trade for someone like Nylander or whoever means assets going the other way and still paying big money to the player most likely.

Panarin is one of the youngest UFA's available in a long while. His production has been increasing over the last three years. I'd be interested. I wouldn't be interested @ $11m per season, but I'd be interested.

But the UFA has risk. Risk in having an immovable contract for the second half of it, because the player will most likely begin declining in play a few years into what will have to be a 7 year contract at an absurd cap hit. Furthermore 5-6 years from now we may desperately need that cap space to pay our own core through their prime years. Free agency should be used to supplement an already good team (in my personal opinion)

 

[Off Sides]

Perfectly illustrated without a **** ton of paragraphs

If you look at Gorton’s recent moves/attempted moves, the things he’s said, and you think Panarin is in the cards, well, I don’t know what the **** you’re looking at.

I never would put it past the Rangers to sign a UFA.

Yet I'm not sure I see them spending that on a UFA this off-season.

It's a little different for the Leafs, who drafted 5th, 21st, 8th, 4th, 1st, 17th in a 6 year span proceeding such a signing. Once we include the development of those picks even before said signing it becomes even more different.

 

[Edge]

This is all based on the assumption they speed things up. I'm guessing what you mean by that, is trading our assets for a 'win-now' aspect. I'm not for speeding things up in that manner. However, winning and creating a competitive environment may speed things up, in a good way.

What if everything stayed the same but Panarin playing with Mika? Maybe a hockey trade or two. Letting the kids develop and keeping all prospects/picks. Your fear doesn't manifest, would you be ok then?

It's not so much a fear, as an expectation based on the fact that there's no real precedent for it happening.

I really can't see a scenario in which it happens and hypothetical that remove key components just get a little creative for my taste.

It's kind of like the Hayes contract. You can't talk salary without talking NMC. They are indivisible. Members would float scenarios where we paid Hayes and removed the NMC and that just wasn't ever a realistic scenario for me.

As such, Panarin falls into the same category. I cannot envision a scenario in which the Rangers make the biggest free agent splash of 2019, sign a player who apparently only hits free agency once a decade, and then continue with the status quo of patiently building, developing and letting kids nurture.

There's concepts are inherently contradictory to one another.

But even if they weren't, I don't really see what difference is actually makes during Panarin's prime years, because I still don't see enough of the other components coming together for a window while Panarin is still the player people want him to be.

So that, in turn, takes me into a scenario where there are a hell of a lot of "ifs" floating around.

• If the Rangers bucked all conventional wisdom and stayed the course.
• If the Rangers decided they were okay paying a guy 8 figures to sit through a rebuild.
• If the Rangers currently have enough pieces in place that we're ready to start cranking up the dial on building an experienced team to support the young players we have.
• If the window comes quicker than it has for other teams who have been successful.
• If Panarin will still be an elite player when that window opens.
• If the prospects we have hit at 80 percent of their ceilings.
• Etc. Etc.

And that takes me back to my belief that the more "ifs" you have, the more unlikely the scenario is to work out. That's not so much a lingering fear, so much as it's something my "fairly" logical brain has a hard to running with.

 

[Fitzy]

100%, and we should probably look to move Zibanejad before his NMC locks in while he's at his highest value. Sure the team could be competitive by the time he's a UFA, but if it's not then we just missed out on a ton of value.

Are you serious?

 

[effen]

I do not think that you can underestimate the negative effects of tying up cap space for such a long time on a rebuilding team.

It's not just cap space, its roster spots too. Incrementally better players add up. Right now half the defense are bottom pairing level guys, and that's before adding any actual bottom pairing guys or kids breaking in.

 

[NYR Viper]

The GM is on record as saying he'd be willing to move quantity for quality.

Whether that means moving up in a draft or moving for a star younger player I'm unsure.

On Panarin- he's quite young. If we don't think he fits in the rebuild timeframe we shouldn't re-sign Kreider either.

this exactly!

 

[True Blue]

100%, and we should probably look to move Zibanejad before his NMC locks in while he's at his highest value. Sure the team could be competitive by the time he's a UFA, but if it's not then we just missed out on a ton of value.

There is a difference between running out to sign UFAs and having homegrown (or essentially home grown) vets like ZBad and Kreider to be the leaders on the team, take pressure off the kids and come out on the other side of a rebuild.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

If that was the priority, then why trade Hayes?

I feel like this has been debated too much. They didn't want to give him term. This is as simple as a kid giving something when it becomes deemed inferior to expectations/obsolete.

 

[True Blue]

I feel like this has been debated too much. They didn't want to give him term. This is as simple as a kid giving something when it becomes deemed inferior to expectations/obsolete.

They how can getting a such a player be a priority?

Is it a priority to you or a priority to Gorton?

 

[effen]

Are you serious?

There's merit to the idea in theory, but in practice teams are rightfully reluctant to give up big youth packages for anyone. I don't think Mika could get the package he's "worth" because teams just aren't doing that anymore.

At some point, if you can't trade Mika for 100 cents on the dollar but 75 cents on the dollar, then he's worth that 75 cent price. And at that point you just keep him.

 

[duhmetreE]

Sell
Retool
Fail to make playoffs
Send Letter
Sell
Stockpile
Have a couple 19, 20 year old rookies play in the NHL and be okay
Sell
Stockpile
Add an 11M cap hit 27 year old player for 7 years

The irony here, there's parallels to the 2004-2006 Bruins.

Gorton went on to draft Kessel, Lucic and Marchand, then sign Chara and Savard.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Who needs elite players in their prime when you could have cap space?


Players like Panarin almost never reach free agency. To get a guy like that for just money would be great. Regardless of whether we’re rebuilding or not. We need elite talent. Panarin is still young enough it’s not like it’s an over the hill guy. A 7 year deal would take him to 34. I’d rather pay Panarin 11million a year than have extra cap space to sign more but worse players.

 

[effen]

Who needs elite players in their prime when you could have cap space?


Players like Panarin almost never reach free agency. To get a guy like that for just money would be great. Regardless of whether we’re rebuilding or not. We need elite talent. Panarin is still young enough it’s not like it’s an over the hill guy. A 7 year deal would take him to 34. I’d rather pay Panarin 11million a year than have extra cap space to sign more but worse players.

It doesn't matter that Panarin types never reach free agency. Players matter less than they've ever mattered. Practically every bottom 10 team has several arguably 'elite' or soon to be 'elite' players.

Coaching, culture, and systems are vastly more important.

 

[Ola]

Cap space is also valuable because with it you can jump at any opportunity that arises. An owner goes bankrupt. A GM forgets to fail a qualifyier in time. There is a fall out between a player and his team. Whatever.

 

[wafflepadsave]

I don’t see how anyone can look at where the Rangers are right now, and the current state of the roster and system as a whole and think pursuing Panarin is the right move.

100 % agree with you. Not enough data points from Rangers management to truly believe them.

 

[Ola]

In addition, I don’t think it makes a ton of sense to get another top forward in Panarin who plays the identical role as Ziba does on the PP. We have been so sloppy with this in the past (not getting a RHS PPQB).

 

[Off Sides]

Just a nitpick, didn’t they send the letter and sell before they missed the playoffs?

Yes, probably should have gone with, knew they'd miss the playoffs.

Mostly though if one includes them buying out Girardi, signing Shattenkirk, Smith, keeping AV that was in my opinion a retool attempt. AV especially since after he was let go Dolan called him something to the effect of, not a developmental coach. Why are they keeping him if they are rebuilding?

Stepan, Girardi, Smith, Shattenkirk, emergence of Hayes, Zbad, Miller in attempt to replace Stepan, and get rid of that pending clause, to me is retool while Lundqvist was/is still in his prime.


The letter, I think they knew they were missing the playoffs and would start selling.

Post letter, Quinn, and nothing that really indicates they are trying to really speed stuff up.

Traded for some 2016 draftees and played Chytil, Lias, Howden in the NHL when it was/is kind of questionable if they are truly ready does not quite hit my threshold for they are rushing.

I think they will stay the course so to speak, yet their history with signings, not sure it can be 100% ruled out.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Who needs elite players in their prime when you could have cap space?


Players like Panarin almost never reach free agency. To get a guy like that for just money would be great. Regardless of whether we’re rebuilding or not. We need elite talent. Panarin is still young enough it’s not like it’s an over the hill guy. A 7 year deal would take him to 34. I’d rather pay Panarin 11million a year than have extra cap space to sign more but worse players.

You should bookmark this post.

Then see if you're happy if/when the Rangers, as a team, are truly ready to compete and a 30+ year old Panarin is making $11M a year.

I am much more interested in the Rangers being patient and concentrating on building the foundation over the next couple of years.

 

[Trxjw]

Could make an argument that he should. The team could very well not be ready to compete by the time he's a UFA, and his NMC kicks in this off-season. Should probably trade him at the draft so we could have 2 top-10 picks. Just need to continue accumulating assets and hope eventually the Rangers won't end up picking 9th.

I think a guy like Kreider is in the grey area of keepable, but Zibanejad is a core piece for the future or this team.

 

[duhmetreE]

I do not think that you can underestimate the negative effects of tying up cap space for such a long time on a rebuilding team.

What negative side effects?

 

[effen]

What negative side effects?

???????????????

 

[DanielBrassard]

There is a difference between running out to sign UFAs and having homegrown (or essentially home grown) vets like ZBad and Kreider to be the leaders on the team, take pressure off the kids and come out on the other side of a rebuild.

I disagree, especially in the situation with Kreider. I get Zibanejad because he has 3 years left and the team could potentially be good enough in 2 or 3 years, which is also why I want to sign Panarin who should still be effective by then. But giving Kreider a long-term deal while being unwilling to sign Panarin makes zero sense, and no amount of leadership and being homegrown would change that.

 

[duhmetreE]

It's not so much a fear, as an expectation based on the fact that there's no real precedent for it happening.

I really can't see a scenario in which it happens and hypothetical that remove key components just get a little creative for my taste.

It's kind of like the Hayes contract. You can't talk salary without talking NMC. They are indivisible. Members would float scenarios where we paid Hayes and removed the NMC and that just wasn't ever a realistic scenario for me.

As such, Panarin falls into the same category. I cannot envision a scenario in which the Rangers make the biggest free agent splash of 2019, sign a player who apparently only hits free agency once a decade, and then continue with the status quo of patiently building, developing and letting kids nurture.

There's concepts are inherently contradictory to one another.

But even if they weren't, I don't really see what difference is actually makes during Panarin's prime years, because I still don't see enough of the other components coming together for a window while Panarin is still the player people want him to be.

So that, in turn, takes me into a scenario where there are a hell of a lot of "ifs" floating around.

• If the Rangers bucked all conventional wisdom and stayed the course.
• If the Rangers decided they were okay paying a guy 8 figures to sit through a rebuild.
• If the Rangers currently have enough pieces in place that we're ready to start cranking up the dial on building an experienced team to support the young players we have.
• If the window comes quicker than it has for other teams who have been successful.
• If Panarin will still be an elite player when that window opens.
• If the prospects we have hit at 80 percent of their ceilings.
• Etc. Etc.

And that takes me back to my belief that the more "ifs" you have, the more unlikely the scenario is to work out. That's not so much a lingering fear, so much as it's something my "fairly" logical brain has a hard to running with.

In your estimation, when would you say, the competitive/contending window is? 2021? 2022?