Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXIV

[Edge]

Is it speculation that the Rangers would be a better team with Panarin? I don't think it's really up for debate at all and that's the point I'm trying to make.

And the question each and every time has been how much better?

With regards to what you’re pointing to, it was the acknowledgement that they would be better, but still not “good.”

Better and good are not mutually exclusive, especially when you’re starting point is already exceptionally low.

So yes, they will be better. Will they be good? I doubt it.

 

[haohmaru]

And the question each and every time has been how much better?

With regards to what you’re pointing to, it was the acknowledgement that they would be better, but still not “good.”

Better and good are not mutually exclusive, especially when you’re starting point is already exceptionally low.

So yes, they will be better. Will they be good? I doubt it.

I get that and I'm not even all that Pro-Panarin because the term/contract/$ will probably be positively frightening.

The question, however, is in regards to team-building. Do the Rangers have to be "good" to be in on Panarin? I don't think they do. He's young enough to matter in 2-3 years from this summer. The question here, I guess, is if you view him as "a piece" instead of the "centerpiece" of what you're trying to build.

Team-building, to me, is smart drafting, smart contracts, smart acquisitions, and elite talent. I think Panarin can fit some of those and the Rangers don't have to be good next year in order for it to be a smart move.

The goal should be to make the team better from here on out. We've got a thousand draft picks and the 2nd or 3rd youngest lineup in the league. I don't mind adding young-ish UFA's to improve the team and improve the chances of winning games. Teams need to build that culture to be successful.

 

[Edge]

I get that and I'm not even all that Pro-Panarin because the term/contract/$ will probably be positively frightening.

The question, however, is in regards to team-building. Do the Rangers have to be "good" to be in on Panarin? I don't think they do. He's young enough to matter in 2-3 years from this summer. The question here, I guess, is if you view him as "a piece" instead of the "centerpiece" of what you're trying to build.

Team-building, to me, is smart drafting, smart contracts, smart acquisitions, and elite talent. I think Panarin can fit some of those and the Rangers don't have to be good next year in order for it to be a smart move.

The goal should be to make the team better from here on out. We've got a thousand draft picks and the 2nd or 3rd youngest lineup in the league. I don't mind adding young-ish UFA's to improve the team and improve the chances of winning games. Teams need to build that culture to be successful.

I getcha. You’ve articulated your point well and even played Devil’s advocate.

I’ve outlined my stances on many of the topics you’ve touched on. If nothing else, I’m a consistent stick in the mud in this thread.

 

[Ori]

I understand your culture reasoning @haohmaru , but we don`t have the player yet to rebuild around. And we can`t build around Panarin based on age reasoning which dont go well in our current rebuild direction. What I`m trying to point out is that we need to find the "new" Panarin type of player in the draft, or maybe even better to be successful in this league and win us a cup. And then you can start to talk about the whole winning culture arguement and add pieces to strengthen the overall team with good support players as well when we finally hit in the draft - a future star player.

 

[Winston2018]

All excellent points !!

The decision to add an EK or Breadman will not be solely based on the nuts and bolts of hockey but alas Dolan will look over to Slats at the adjoing urinal on the third floor of the garden and mumble something like "we need some stars sign them up Glen". I think star power is lacking at MSG time to restock. I would try short term. 5 yrs 10 Million. EK is not a dog. Panarin is young and wirery lasts forever.Compliance buyouts,cba and expanding cap along with another close to 20 mil in Seattle cash..Lets rock

 

[Barnaby]

He looked like a budding star during our last playoff run and has regressed badly since.

Maybe there's a team out there who believes his lackluster play is a result of our team in flux. Maybe they think putting him on a 2nd pair with a solid partner will let him flourish. I'm obviously not saying Skjei is McDonagh, but look how McDonagh has played in a diminished roll on a better club.

I wouldn't give him away, but I'd certainly listen to offers.

 

[Winston2018]

Maybe there's a team out there who believes his lackluster play is a result of our team in flux. Maybe they think putting him on a 2nd pair with a solid partner will let him flourish. I'm obviously not saying Skjei is McDonagh, but look how McDonagh has played in a diminished roll on a better club.

I wouldn't give him away, but I'd certainly listen to offers.

Brady is fixable needs confidence...great trade bait for RD

 

[CTRanger]

Stay the course! We’ve been waiting for a proper rebuild forever (really 20+ yrs) let’s not pull up the roots halfway through like we’ve always done. For crying out loud I don’t get it, we should be enjoying this. The chance to actually build a team from the ground up... and in NY of all places who would’ve dreamed it. Stay the ******* course!

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

I get that and I'm not even all that Pro-Panarin because the term/contract/$ will probably be positively frightening.

The question, however, is in regards to team-building. Do the Rangers have to be "good" to be in on Panarin? I don't think they do. He's young enough to matter in 2-3 years from this summer. The question here, I guess, is if you view him as "a piece" instead of the "centerpiece" of what you're trying to build.

Team-building, to me, is smart drafting, smart contracts, smart acquisitions, and elite talent. I think Panarin can fit some of those and the Rangers don't have to be good next year in order for it to be a smart move.

The goal should be to make the team better from here on out. We've got a thousand draft picks and the 2nd or 3rd youngest lineup in the league. I don't mind adding young-ish UFA's to improve the team and improve the chances of winning games. Teams need to build that culture to be successful.

My main issue with your argument is the premise that 'he's young enough to matter in 2-3 years from this summer.' He is 28 at the beginning of next season. Meaning we are looking at a 30/31 year old Panarin once ready to compete. NHL players' peak age has been trending downward for some time. We have seen it countless times with our guys. Brassard is 31 and he's basically finished. Stepan the same at 28. Nash started the downward spiral shortly after 30. Gaborik as well.

I know there are some in here who will give a list of reasons as to why Panarin is the exception to the rule and they very well may be correct. However, I have absolutely no interest in taking that gamble given our current situation, which will undoubtedly not be fixed by bringing in one or two players. Tying up cap space that we can employ once we are ready to compete would be classic Rongos and is about the dumbest thing i can imagine them doing this summer.

 

[pld459666]

I understand your culture reasoning @haohmaru , but we don`t have the player yet to rebuild around. And we can`t build around Panarin based on age reasoning which dont go well in our current rebuild direction. What I`m trying to point out is that we need to find the "new" Panarin type of player in the draft, or maybe even better to be successful in this league and win us a cup. And then you can start to talk about the whole winning culture arguement and add pieces to strengthen the overall team with good support players as well when we finally hit in the draft - a future star player.

I think its dangerous to rely on finding "our" version of a Panarin in the draft alone.

If there can be a two pronged approach here, I'm not sure why we should not explore both?

 

[BleedinBLUEsince92]

I'm pretty indifferent on how we approach the offseason (leaning more toward not doing much and hoping for another top 5 pick) but I think a lot of people here may end up being disappointed. We will have 7 first round picks in the past 3 years + all the other prospects we collected. Finishing bottom 5 is far from a guarantee in getting a franchise player either. I want our own Auston Matthews as bad as anyone, but it takes a ton of luck. Tavares may have started a trend where elite players go to UFA more often.
I think we will be fine with a deep pool of depth + Cap space and will be able to poach a star that way. Obviously, I prefer homegrown but going by the odds it's more likely it will be the later. You never know what will happen in the future. Say Buffalo and Edmonton continue to be a hot mess... Do either of McDavid and or Eichel demand a trade? Right now, probably no, but if they're in the same spot two years from now, I don't think it's that far fetched.

 

[Leetch3]

I think its dangerous to rely on finding "our" version of a Panarin in the draft alone.

If there can be a two pronged approach here, I'm not sure why we should not explore both?

the problem is the timing unless we win the lottery and get our franchise player in this draft. you sign panarin next year and you still aren't good enough to contend but probably become good enough that you won't be bad enough to 'tank' and get a top pick. i hope that no one actually thinks that we should never go after a top player outside of the draft again, cause that would be silly. but that doesn't mean it can't also be the wrong move right now

 

[Barnaby]

Without seeing who else they sign and how their younger players develop, speculating on where they finish has little or no merit.

The question is what is the goal of the Rangers? Is it to make the team better and better or is it to keep securing higher draft picks? Panarin makes the team better, each and every year he's on the team.

My hesitation with him is the contract/term he'd get, not that he doesn't instantly improve the squad for YEARS.

I believe the goal is to win a cup and be a significant contender for a long time.

I also believe that you have to speculate or you're an awful GM. You don't invest significant assets - future cap space - to make the team mildly better in the short term at the risk of the future then sit back and say "Hey, you never know." That's how you just tread water for years on end. That's awful management.

We want a team with a long term plan and goal. That was the criticism of those dark age teams. Let's add this guy or that guy and "Hey, you never know."

 

[Barnaby]

Are you subtracting what Names and Vessey are getting paid?

Names cap hit is 4m and Vessey is 2.28m. So that’s over 6m deducted from your 18m number.

Are you also speculating that teams will add those salaries in the offseason without sending any salary back? Are you also speculating that their replacements will be making the league minimum?

 

[Barnaby]

Brady is fixable needs confidence...great trade bait for RD

Maybe. It depends whose out there. The question is are you selling at his low, or before his value completely drops off a cliff.

 

[BleedinBLUEsince92]

I believe the goal is to win a cup and be a significant contender for a long time.

I also believe that you have to speculate or you're an awful GM. You don't invest significant assets - future cap space - to make the team mildly better in the short term at the risk of the future then sit back and say "Hey, you never know." That's how you just tread water for years on end. That's awful management.

We want a team with a long term plan and goal. That was the criticism of those dark age teams. Let's add this guy or that guy and "Hey, you never know."

There's a significant difference. We have gone into this with a plan, sold off most of our value before it was too late, and have recouped a giant pool of prospects + assets. Signing a UFA doesn't mean they don't have a plan. It seems the plan for some posters here is ”no matter how many firsts and prospects we collect, unless we draft 1oa, this rebuild is a failure.” Spoiler: Even finishing last only gives you an 18.5% chance of picking first.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Panarin will put less pressure on the young players. Help them through the process. Even a $10 million cap hit isn't so bad. Remember after next season Girardi's cap hit from the buyout goes down. And in two years the three S's and Lundqvist are off the books.

How many 1 goal games and blown leads did the Rangers take part in this year? A slight change in personnel could shift the process the other direction.

I think next year is going to be the last year for a grace period. Not meaning they're going to go all vets UFA but if they don't show improvement by 2020-21, they will me much more aggressive.

 

[Barnaby]

There's a significant difference. We have gone into this with a plan, sold off most of our value before it was too late, and have recouped a giant pool of prospects + assets. Signing a UFA doesn't mean they don't have a plan. It seems the plan for some posters here is ”no matter how many firsts and prospects we collect, unless we draft 1oa, this rebuild is a failure.” Spoiler: Even finishing last only gives you an 18.5% chance of picking first.

Signing a guy to a max or near max deal that doesn't coincide time wise with other talent on the roster does absolutely show a lack of a plan.

That's not to say that you can't add any players in free agency. There has to be a middle ground between signing a guy to a max deal and "tanking for 1oa or it's a failure."

I feel as if a majority of people in the Panarin boat are saying that you either buy the Ferrari or you'll be stuck driving a 1986 Carolla forever. I have to believe that we have a middle ground here.

 

[LORDE]

I'm pretty indifferent on how we approach the offseason (leaning more toward not doing much and hoping for another top 5 pick) but I think a lot of people here may end up being disappointed. We will have 7 first round picks in the past 3 years + all the other prospects we collected. Finishing bottom 5 is far from a guarantee in getting a franchise player either. I want our own Auston Matthews as bad as anyone, but it takes a ton of luck. Tavares may have started a trend where elite players go to UFA more often.
I think we will be fine with a deep pool of depth + Cap space and will be able to poach a star that way. Obviously, I prefer homegrown but going by the odds it's more likely it will be the later. You never know what will happen in the future. Say Buffalo and Edmonton continue to be a hot mess... Do either of McDavid and or Eichel demand a trade? Right now, probably no, but if they're in the same spot two years from now, I don't think it's that far fetched.

This is a great concept (fingers crossed) and wouldn’t we be stupid to have signed Panarin and or Karlsson to insane albatross contracts NOW, only to be unable to sign someone else who can’t wait to get outta dodge in 3 years time.

Yeah, players of this caliber never hit FA... bull f***ing shit

 

[Mikos87]

Would like to see the Rangers and Stars link up on another trade.

Fast for L'Eperance

 

[Heckler81]

Are you also speculating that teams will add those salaries in the offseason without sending any salary back? Are you also speculating that their replacements will be making the league minimum?

Well if you read my post. I said to trade each for a draft pick. That should mean that we did not take any salary back.

I also gave you the lineup for the top 3 lines. So that shows you who there replacements are.

 

[duhmetreE]

And the question each and every time has been how much better?

With regards to what you’re pointing to, it was the acknowledgement that they would be better, but still not “good.”

Better and good are not mutually exclusive, especially when you’re starting point is already exceptionally low.

So yes, they will be better. Will they be good? I doubt it.

The signing is not to be contending next year. It's for the years to come.

They'd be good in 2-3 years w/ Panarin as a piece to the puzzle.

 

[Barnaby]

Well if you read my post. I said to trade each for a draft pick. That should mean that we did not take any salary back.

I also gave you the lineup for the top 3 lines. So that shows you who there replacements are.

You said you'd trade them for draft picks... you're speculating that you can do that in the offseason without taking salary back... It's no guarantee.

 

[bobbop]

They don't need to do much on defense

You lost me right here

 

[bobbop]

I strongly believe that one of Kreider or Panarin will be on the Rangers next year. A developing young team needs leaders. Kreider certainly appears to be a team leader. Panarin has been described by his GM as a great team player and leader and he brings the added bonus of being Russian when a large contingent of his countrymen are due stateside next year. You are not going to trade for a leader and you tell me where else do you go for a UFA leader? Anders Lee? Joe Pavelski? Alex Edler?

It’s one thing to strip down the team on the ice but if you strip down the team in the locker room (no smartass comments necessary) you’ve created a problem of your own doing.