Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXV

[GoAwayPanarin]

And I understand all this, but players like Panarin don't hit free agency. In the last 10 years, only Tavares comes to mind and I wouldn't even count him since he had already made up his mind before hitting UFA status

Gaborik, Hossa (twice), Parise, Suter, Kovalchuk.

I'm probably missing a few.

This argument applies to Karlsson if he gets there, Not Panarin.

 

[Trxjw]

Gaborik, Hossa (twice), Parise, Suter, Kovalchuk.

I'm probably missing a few.

This argument applies to Karlsson if he gets there, Not Panarin.

Exactly. Every one of those guys when they hit the market got the "these guys are never available so we have to sign them" treatment by fans. Someone better than Panarin will hit the market someday and then he'll be the best UFA ever that we just have to get. It's the same stuff repackaged over and over.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Gaborik, Hossa (twice), Parise, Suter, Kovalchuk.

I'm probably missing a few.

This argument applies to Karlsson if he gets there, Not Panarin.

Parise was never on the level of Panarin. Kovalchuk re-signed with his current team (although he took his time to do so). Nonetheless the most recent examples are from the summer of 2012, it's no longer the recurring phenomenon it once was.

 

[GAGLine]

And I understand all this, but players like Panarin don't hit free agency. In the last 10 years, only Tavares comes to mind and I wouldn't even count him since he had already made up his mind before hitting UFA status

Stamkos counts as well, I think. He decided to re-sign in Tampa, but he did talk to other teams, so there was an opportunity there.

There may be opportunities via trade too for which we will need that cap space.

 

[Ola]

We are trashing many teams for just having no bottom and sucking year in and year out.

But a team I have to admit that I am really impressed with is Arizona. They are probably missing the POs by a point or two again this season, but they have had no goaltending it seems like, AND they are what 6m under the cap and has like what 15m in LTIR contracts they have taken on.

I just love like their line-up last night:
Panik-Stepan-Keller
Grabner-Richardson-Hinostroza
Crouse-Dvorak-Archbald
Galchenyuk-Cousins-Garland

And then a fairly big and strong blueline that isn't without talent.

Talent and speed all through the line-up. Only one forward bigger than 6'1.

Their GM has been ridiculed and trashed pretty much, but overall I think he certainly has been able to put together a roster with very effective players.

I think they potentially could become pretty scary if they had the resources to use their cap space for a few addition and if they got goaltending all season.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Stamkos counts as well, I think. He decided to re-sign in Tampa, but he did talk to other teams, so there was an opportunity there.

There may be opportunities via trade too for which we will need that cap space.

Stamkos never hit UFA. He re-signed with Tampa before July 1st, so he never spoke to other teams

 

[GAGLine]

Stamkos never hit UFA. He re-signed with Tampa before July 1st, so he never spoke to other teams

He spoke to teams during the period prior to July 1st when pending free agents are allowed to speak to teams.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

He spoke to teams during the period prior to July 1st when pending free agents are allowed to speak to teams.

Hmm, I forgot that was allowed

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Parise was never on the level of Panarin. Kovalchuk re-signed with his current team (although he took his time to do so). Nonetheless the most recent examples are from the summer of 2012, it's no longer the recurring phenomenon it once was.

Parise was absolutely on the level of Panarin.

Kovalchuk fielded offers from other teams but eventually circled back to NJ when he didn’t get what he wanted. Don’t see why he should be looked at any differently.

Point is, these guys don’t become available every year, but they do shake loose.

The most recent example was JT from last year and we very well may get Panarin and EK this summer.

Not buying this as an argument to sign either of them. Maybe the UFA market sucks the next few years but it won’t every year.

 

[Edge]

Parise was never on the level of Panarin. Kovalchuk re-signed with his current team (although he took his time to do so). Nonetheless the most recent examples are from the summer of 2012, it's no longer the recurring phenomenon it once was.

You know it's funny what time does to context though.

In his previous 4 seasons prior to becoming a free agent, Parise scoring 251 points in 258 games and was a UFA at 28.

In Panarin's previous 4 seasons prior to becoming a free agent, Panarin has scored 316 points in 319 games and will be an UFA at 27 (he'll be about 4 months younger)

Essentially we're comparing guys who headed into free agency with .99 ppg compared to .97 ppg.

I feel like the "this time it's different" argument comes up more often than we realize. The key difference is that we view previous examples through the prism of hindsight, while we view the latest example through the optics of hope.

 

[SA16]

Gaborik, Hossa (twice), Parise, Suter, Kovalchuk.

I'm probably missing a few.

This argument applies to Karlsson if he gets there, Not Panarin.

Outside of Gaborik all four of those signed cheating contracts that are no longer allowed. That's also nobody more recent than 7 years ago. The CBA has changed since then making it less likely those players become FA since the current team has the advantage of offering the extra year. It's no surprise the quality of FA players has dropped pretty much instantly with this new CBA (Suter/Parise were in 2012...new CBA in 2013).

 

[TheTakedown]

They're not going to run the table or be picking 10th-11th.

Geo straight up ****ed up their chances at picking top 5, but I doubt they'll end up any higher than 7th.

Bet NJ beats them tomorrow.

No doubt that we lose tonight. Devils are on an actual tear

 

[Blue Blooded]

You know it's funny what time does to context though.

In his previous 4 seasons prior to becoming a free agent, Parise scoring 251 points in 258 games and was a UFA at 28.

In Panarin's previous 4 seasons prior to becoming a free agent, Panarin has scored 316 points in 319 games and will be an UFA at 27 (he'll be about 4 months younger)

Essentially we're comparing guys who headed into free agency with .99 ppg compared to .97 ppg.

I feel like the "this time it's different" argument comes up more often than we realize. The key difference is that we view previous examples through the prism of hindsight, while we view the latest example through the optics of hope.

You're right insofar as Parise at his peak was as good as Panarin is but it was only for two seasons; 08-09 and 09-10. After his injury he wasn't near that level though and his season going into UFA was a significant step below what he was before the injury. Panarin has been consistent and consistently improving.

 

[Tawnos]

I feel like the "this time it's different" argument comes up more often than we realize. The key difference is that we view previous examples through the prism of hindsight, while we view the latest example through the optics of hope.

Also, the fact that the success or failure of previous free agent signings fundamentally has nothing to do with future ones. Artemi Panarin is not Zach Parise or Ilya Kovalchuk. He's Artemi Panarin.

As humans, we evolved to recognize patterns, but often those patterns are false.

 

[Edge]

You're right insofar as Parise at his peak was as good as Panarin is but it was only for two seasons; 08-09 and 09-10. After his injury he wasn't near that level though and his season going into UFA was a significant step below what he was before the injury. Panarin has been consistent and consistently improving.

I think that's where the hindsight comes into play a little bit.

At that time, there was the belief that Parise was young enough to bounce back and get back to that 80-90 point plateau. Obviously we know that didn't quite happen.

That's part of the risk of going with the UFA approach though, it tends to look much better in theory and in principal than it does in execution. In its most successful instances, it tends to work when you have multiple high-end younger pieces in place, such as Toronto or Chicago or Tampa.

In other instances, where those high-end younger pieces are not in place, I tend to find that it often doesn't work nearly as well.

At the end of the day, it's really hard to find a team that's successfully done what some people want the Rangers to do with Panarin. And I don't think that's a coincidence or because a guy like Panarin is so far off the scale that there's no real comparable.

 

[Edge]

Also, the fact that the success or failure of previous free agent signings fundamentally has nothing to do with future ones. Artemi Panarin is not Zach Parise or Ilya Kovalchuk. He's Artemi Panarin.

As humans, we evolved to recognize patterns, but often those patterns are false.

I feel like that's our Hail Mary whenever we're about to do something that doesn't really have a history of working.

Yes, every time is unique and every individual is unique to their time.

And I still don't see the infrastructure in place to make it work.

 

[Tawnos]

I feel like that's our Hail Mary whenever we're about to do something that doesn't really have a history of working.

Yes, every time is unique and every individual is unique to their time.

And I still don't see the infrastructure in place to make it work.

It's not a Hail Mary. It's a reality. There's no such thing as a history of signing free agents as an overarching concept, so it can't have a history of not working or working.

Your view of "the infrastructure in place to make it work" is based on something that doesn't exist.

Because there's no real pattern to draw from, doing something like this is a risk... each of us can have our own opinions on whether or not the risk is worth it, but those opinions CANNOT be justified by using past experience.

 

[Edge]

It's not a Hail Mary. It's a reality. There's no such thing as a history of signing free agents as an overarching concept, so it can't have a history of not working or working.

Your view of "the infrastructure in place to make it work" is based on something that doesn't exist.

Personally, I love how "never been done before" we're making this out to be.

But hey, peoples gonna believe what they're gonna believe and the heart's gonna want what the heart wants.

 

[Edge]

Because there's no real pattern to draw from, doing something like this is a risk... each of us can have our own opinions on whether or not the risk is worth it, but those opinions CANNOT be justified by using past experience.

Nope, no pattern at all.

 

[Tawnos]

Personally, I love how "never been done before" we're making this out to be.

But hey, peoples gonna believe what they're gonna believe and the heart's gonna want what the heart wants.

Nope, no pattern at all.

I'm glad your sarcastic side is showing itself this morning. I'm not even advocating signing Panarin or Karlsson. I go back and forth on whether or not the gamble is worth it at this moment. Mostly it's a hedge against the time frame of when we will be competitive and the possibility of a decline. The only thing I am 100% against is signing UFAs who aren't top-end. Panarin and Karlsson are the only two who qualify.

Show me the pattern of how signing Panarin has worked out as a free agent. You admit he's a unique individual. Show me the pattern.

Like I said, you can be against the signing, but I don't think "previous UFAs haven't worked for us" is a valid justification.

 

[Edge]

I'm glad your sarcastic side is showing itself this morning. I'm not even advocating signing Panarin or Karlsson. I go back and forth on whether or not the gamble is worth it at this moment. Mostly it's a hedge against the time frame of when we will be competitive and the possibility of a decline. The only thing I am 100% against is signing UFAs who aren't top-end. Panarin and Karlsson are the only two who qualify.

Show me the pattern of how signing Panarin has worked out as a free agent. You admit he's a unique individual. Show me the pattern.

Like I said, you can be against the signing, but I don't think "previous UFAs haven't worked for us" is a valid justification.

Been there and done that, ad naseum. Including the time frame.

Literally, there is nothing that hasn't been said in this thread that hasn't been said in the more than 1,000 pages that have been written.

You're right, the sarcasm is in full bloom. Because there's literally nothing I can add, that hasn't been said 50 different ways. At some point you just kind of shrug and realize that the points of view are what they are and there's really nothing that's going to change them.

As for "previous UFAs haven't worked for us", I don't think I ever actually said that.

What I did say was, "That's part of the risk of going with the UFA approach though, it tends to look much better in theory and in principal than it does in execution. In its most successful instances, it tends to work when you have multiple high-end younger pieces in place, such as Toronto or Chicago or Tampa.

"In other instances, where those high-end younger pieces are not in place, I tend to find that it often doesn't work nearly as well.

"At the end of the day, it's really hard to find a team that's successfully done what some people want the Rangers to do with Panarin. And I don't think that's a coincidence or because a guy like Panarin is so far off the scale that there's no real comparable."

I then followed that up with, "I feel like that's our Hail Mary whenever we're about to do something that doesn't really have a history of working."

 

[Tawnos]

Been there and done that, ad naseum. Including the time frame.

Literally, there is nothing that hasn't been said in this thread that hasn't been said in the more than 1,000 pages that have been written.

You're right, the sarcasm is in full bloom. Because there's literally nothing I can add, that hasn't been said 50 different ways. At some point you just kind of shrug and realize that the points of view are what they are and there's really nothing that's going to change them.

As for "previous UFAs haven't worked for us", I don't think I ever actually said that.

What I did say was, "That's part of the risk of going with the UFA approach though, it tends to look much better in theory and in principal than it does in execution. In its most successful instances, it tends to work when you have multiple high-end younger pieces in place, such as Toronto or Chicago or Tampa.

"In other instances, where those high-end younger pieces are not in place, I tend to find that it often doesn't work nearly as well.

"At the end of the day, it's really hard to find a team that's successfully done what some people want the Rangers to do with Panarin. And I don't think that's a coincidence or because a guy like Panarin is so far off the scale that there's no real comparable."

I then followed that up with, "I feel like that's our Hail Mary whenever we're about to do something that doesn't really have a history of working."

Fair enough, but all of that boils down to the same thing: using what happened with other players to back up your opinion about this one. It's fundamentally bad logic.

If you're at the point of shrugging and agreeing to disagree, stop talking.

 

[Off Sides]

Forsberg and Seth Jones are slated to be a UFAs in 2022.

 

[Edge]

Fair enough, but all of that boils down to the same thing: using what happened with other players to back up your opinion about this one. It's fundamentally bad logic.

If you're at the point of shrugging and agreeing to disagree, stop talking.

LOL, now, just because of the way you worded that, no. I don't think I will.

 

[Tawnos]

Forsberg and Seth Jones are slated to be a UFAs in 2022.

If they get there. They might. Can you plan on it?