Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XXXVI

[True Blue]

You're slightly setting up a strawman here. You're comparing it to an absolute perfect scenario.... It would be amazing to sign an elite UFA, that's 25 in 2-3 years. That's not likely to happen though.

A strawman argument is seeming to debate a point, while actually arguing a point that no one is debating. Your views are to sign Panarin. I am directly arguing against signing Panarin and am listing out my reasons.

There's a discrepancy between players like Parise and Suter, compared to Panarin. They were good players, not great. I'd say Panarin is closer to a Hossa.. Offensively, I'd say Panarin is better. These players just don't come around often.

You state that only because you have the benefit of hindsight. At the time, Parise and Suter were the Panarins of their free agent class.

Next year ( or two for that matter ) is about playing in meaningful games in March. The kids would benefit greatly IMO

I understand and do not disagree. The issue that I have with that is that adding Panarin to this team, while making them better, will not significantly improve their chances of playing those meaningful March games.

I don't understand the issue. All I see are hypothetically unlikely scenarios. 'Well, a better thing might come along' ... Ok, if we're speculating, the odds are against that scenario coming to fruition.

The issue is not next year. The issue is that you are signing Panarin to a contract that will be max years and max dollars and have the customary NTC/NMC attached. You will waste at least the first two years of his prime, waiting for the Rangers to become competitive. You will then waste the next two while you are waiting for them to become truly competitive. Then, just when the Rangers are ready to truly compete, they will then be saddled with a player who is no longer the player he was during his prime. And it becomes an albatross of a contract.

Panarin really wants to play for the Rangers and be in New York? That is his true desire? Fine. Then sign the contract without the NTC/NMC clause. Tell me, what do you think the chances are of that?

 

[TheBloodyNine]

His market value based on what SJ was willing to offer him, and also the Islanders offered him more as well if I remember correctly was higher than the contract he took from Toronto, therefore it was a discount, it doesn't matter whether his contract is still relatively high compared to the rest of the league. When it comes to the Leafs cap situation, maybe take a peek at the 6.25M cap hit for a 40-year old 40 point scorer like Marleau or the 4.5M cap hit to a scrub like Zaitsev. Those are the contracts that are causing issues, not signing a 28-year old star player for 11M.

You’re arguing semantics at this point. He didn’t take 8, or 9 or even 10. He took 11 a year average on a team that is counting every cap space dollar they have in order to survive. When that’s considered a discount the cap would have to be like 100 million plus. This is like saying “oh he took 19 million instead of 20, what a discount!” He didn’t do Toronto any favors.

At the end of the day, Tavares got the cap hit that everybody thought he would.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

So if you are Panarin do you want to spend the next several years of your career playing in front of a half empty building in beautiful Miami or would you prefer playing in an atmosphere like last night in the world’s greatest city? Asking for a friend...

This is subjective. Not everyone thinks NY is the best city on the world. It depends on whether or not Panarin thinks this way.

 

[Mikos87]

Re: Tavares

There's also contract structure and office sponsorship to consider.

Time value of money, bonus structure all play a factor.

 

[kovazub94]

At the season start when we talked about where the Rangers would wind up, only the most “optimistic” of posters had that number on the lower end of their range (typically 5-8). Most were somewhere in 7-12 range. I see absolutely no reason to cry about a few points here and there now.

As a rebuild this was a very good season. Generally I’m satisfied with just about everyone who could be in the future core and happy with returns we got for those who couldn’t be. I like what Gorton’s has done including hiring Quinn and, in turn, the work that the head coach has done too. Measuring against my expectations for the organization including performance of prospects not yet in the NHL - this has been the best season since SC final and ECF trips.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Lol what?

Parise was 1000000% on the level of Panarin when he signed, ditto Suter who is a legitimate top pair D.

I for one never saw all the hype behind Parise. There was never a point where I would compare him to Panarin.

 

[DanielBrassard]

You’re arguing semantics at this point. He didn’t take 8, or 9 or even 10. He took 11 a year average on a team that is counting every cap space dollar they have in order to survive. When that’s considered a discount the cap would have to be like 100 million plus. This is like saying “oh he took 19 million instead of 20, what a discount!” He didn’t do Toronto any favors.

At the end of the day, Tavares got the cap hit that everybody thought he would.

It's not semantics at all, he took 11M on a team that is "counting every dollar" when he could have held out for 13M which is a big difference in a salary cap sport. The fact that it's not the number you believe makes it a discount doesn't mean that's the case. When it comes to the bolded, Please show me where you came up with these calculations. He did Toronto plenty of favors when he decided to take 2M less per season than he was offered from San Jose. And your hypothetical argument isn't even accurate; if you take the 15% discount that Tavares took to sign in Toronto compared to what he could have signed for, and extrapolated it out to 20M, he would have ended up signing for around 17M. Taking 3M a year less according to your hypothetical in a salary cap world is not a discount to you? Kind of strange to me if that's what you believe but OK.

I also think the premise that Toronto would have been better off without signing Tavares and having that cap space available is ridiculous. They are in a much better position having Tavares than if they failed to sign him just so they could potentially pay guys like Johnsson/Kapanen/ various other players of that caliber. It's so much easier to find those players than players of Tavares' stature.

 

[kovazub94]

So if you are Panarin do you want to spend the next several years of your career playing in front of a half empty building in beautiful Miami or would you prefer playing in an atmosphere like last night in the world’s greatest city? Asking for a friend...

One of bring Panarin’s proponets made a pretty good argument against. He gave him 4 years of elite level, which I assume he considers his current level and then 3 good years, which would be a level below. What’s level below? Kreider? If so then at $11m against cap is no, thank you very much. This is not the same as Hossa where Chicago took advantage of a loophole in the previous cap structure (including timely retirement). Hossa also brought a first class two-way game that somewhat compensated when he started to decline. Panarin does not have that. Gorton will consider bringing Panarin only if he thinks his current level will last longer than 4 years.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

It's not semantics at all, he took 11M on a team that is "counting every dollar" when he could have held out for 13M which is a big difference in a salary cap sport. The fact that it's not the number you believe makes it a discount doesn't mean that's the case. When it comes to the bolded, Please show me where you came up with these calculations. He did Toronto plenty of favors when he decided to take 2M less per season than he was offered from San Jose. And your hypothetical argument isn't even accurate; if you take the 15% discount that Tavares took to sign in Toronto compared to what he could have signed for, and extrapolated it out to 20M, he would have ended up signing for around 17M. Taking 3M a year less according to your hypothetical in a salary cap world is not a discount to you? Kind of strange to me if that's what you believe but OK.

I also think the premise that Toronto would have been better off without signing Tavares and having that cap space available is ridiculous. They are in a much better position having Tavares than if they failed to sign him just so they could potentially pay guys like Johnsson/Kapanen/ various other players of that caliber. It's so much easier to find those players than players of Tavares' stature.

You’re talking about 2 million dollars now. What appreciable difference would that have made to the Leaf’s cap?

 

[kovazub94]

Minnesota comparison scares me even more. It’s not really about how comparable Panarin is to Parise in terms of talent. It’s about overestimating the organizational talent pool to build around (with) these players. I think we are going to be fine at forwards. I like Zibanejad and Buch, I like Chytil and Kravtsov but we will need to be patient with these two for the next 2-3 years at least. I’m sure they could get a another one or two within the next few years. Projecting D is much more difficult. Except for Miller there’s no true 1D prospect in the system and his timeline is even longer 4-6 years even if he gets there eventually.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

One of bring Panarin’s proponets made a pretty good argument against. He gave him 4 years of elite level, which I assume he considers his current level and then 3 good years, which would be a level below. What’s level below? Kreider? If so then at $11m against cap is no, thank you very much. This is not the same as Hossa where Chicago took advantage of a loophole in the previous cap structure (including timely retirement). Hossa also brought a first class two-way game that somewhat compensated when he started to decline. Panarin does not have that. Gorton will consider bringing Panarin only if he thinks his current level will last longer than 4 years.

I think he has 5 high level years in him followed by some 60+ point years but that's just guessing. At 10 or 11 mill now its roughly 13 percent of the cap, it sounds high now but by the time 5th year comes along it will be somewhere around 9 or 10% of the cap with the cap expected to continue to grow and grow so production will match the contract at that point as well. It's a free asset at a time when cap space isnt important to us. But that's just my opinion

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I for one never saw all the hype behind Parise. There was never a point where I would compare him to Panarin.

Parise has a 94 point season under his belt and was an excellent 2 way guy.

He was a really good Drury.

 

[True Blue]

I for one never saw all the hype behind Parise. There was never a point where I would compare him to Panarin.

The fact is that leading into his free agency year he had one year that he dealt with injury. In the the previous 5 years (aside from his rookie year), he scored over 30 goals 4 times and over 40 once. 3 years of over 60 points, 1 of over 80 and 1 of over 90. All this in a time that skating through center ice was not quite as easy as it is today. Other than that? Nothing jumps out as a comparison of why people would liken him to Panarin. Oh, wait. While not a Selke winner, he was thought of as a pretty good two way player for Lou's Devils. Ok. Now there really is nothing that would make one think that he was on a level with Panarin.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Minnesota comparison scares me even more. It’s not really about how comparable Panarin is to Parise in terms of talent. It’s about overestimating the organizational talent pool to build around (with) these players. I think we are going to be fine at forwards. I like Zibanejad and Buch, I like Chytil and Kravtsov but we will need to be patient with these two for the next 2-3 years at least. I’m sure they could get a another one or two within the next few years. Projecting D is much more difficult. Except for Miller there’s no true 1D prospect in the system and his timeline is even longer 4-6 years even if he gets there eventually.

This x10000000.

When people talk about timelines, this is what we mean. We have drafted zero top shelf level talents outside of MAYBE Miller and Kravstov, and if those guys get to that level, it's going to be a while before they get there and in the case of Miller, it would almost for sure be after Panarin would start to decline.

Like in order to successfully build a contender under the sign Panarin route, we'd have to back into another high end talent or 2 somehow. That requires more luck than winning the draft lottery.

He is not a fit at the moment.

 

[bobbop]

Minnesota comparison scares me even more. It’s not really about how comparable Panarin is to Parise in terms of talent. It’s about overestimating the organizational talent pool to build around (with) these players. I think we are going to be fine at forwards. I like Zibanejad and Buch, I like Chytil and Kravtsov but we will need to be patient with these two for the next 2-3 years at least. I’m sure they could get a another one or two within the next few years. Projecting D is much more difficult. Except for Miller there’s no true 1D prospect in the system and his timeline is even longer 4-6 years even if he gets there eventually.

Praise and Suters would have been fine if they were seven year contracts. Suter, in particular, well worth the $. Money was OK considering where cap was at that time. What went wrong here was the length of the contracts. Fortunately the league fixed that.

 

[BroadwayBlues]

They could have used Panarin four years ago.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Praise and Suters would have been fine if they were seven year contracts. Suter, in particular, well worth the $. Money was OK considering where cap was at that time. What went wrong here was the length of the contracts. Fortunately the league fixed that.

Ok, but the timing of signing both was off.

They’ve basically been a WC gatekeeper. We should aspire to be more than that.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

They could have used Panarin four years ago.

They’ll probably be able to use this version of Panarin four years from now.

 

[egelband]

The fact of the matter is he is still being paid an average of 12 million dollars a year. In a high tax city. He took a "discount" but that contract isn't doing Toronto any favors with making sure the rest of their roster is signed and complete.

Yeah I think teams just can't afford to have more than one guy at 10-plus. There's just not enough to go around. Maybe for a year or two while the roster shakes out, but long term the cap just doesn't allow it.

 

[kovazub94]

Praise and Suters would have been fine if they were seven year contracts. Suter, in particular, well worth the $. Money was OK considering where cap was at that time. What went wrong here was the length of the contracts. Fortunately the league fixed that.

Sure, but even in Suter/Parise era SO FAR what did they achieve? At least Hossa’s career is full of Stanley Cups and finals appearances while Minnesota has always been a pretender.

Otherwise regarding Suter, this is why I want the Rangers to address their D in the first place before giving consideration to bringing Panarin.

My only caveat in all of this is that if they chose to move Kreider for another haul then I’d be fine with Panarin as his replacement on the roster (but would Panarin do it then).

 

[leetch99]

Not sure on how I see the Panarin situation playing out....likely be a few clubs in on him and he will get the money and the term and the clauses that usually go hand in hand with these big signings . I think we can suffice without him and possibly Kreider ....but we might need some good insulation in place in the time being while Krav and Chytil/Andersson/Howden/Lemieux/Buch grow as pros . It is a really hard call . I see both sides of the argument . He is pretty to watch LOL....

 

[Jaromir Jagr]

Every time a major FA hits the market the same argument appears - 'when will a guy like this be available again?' Yet, almost every time, within a few years, the teams signing them (often us) ends up regretting it.

Two things are obvious:

1. Big FA's will continue to hit the market in the future, meaning we should hold open our cap space for when it actually makes sense to use it.

2. Signing players in their late 20's to long term, big $ contracts will almost certainly not work out.

In my opinion, when you give a contract out for max term/big money to older guys you're basically going all-in for the next 3-5 years, knowing that the last few they will be an albatross.

Seeing as Panarin will likely not even make the Rangers a playoff team, I have a hard time finding any logic behind why they should sign him and I think Gorton probably feels the same. He's not an idiot and this would just be an idiotic move.

 

[egelband]

Not sure on how I see the Panarin situation playing out....likely be a few clubs in on him and he will get the money and the term and the clauses that usually go hand in hand with these big signings . I think we can suffice without him and possibly Kreider ....but we might need some good insulation in place in the time being while Krav and Chytil/Andersson/Howden/Lemieux/Buch grow as pros . It is a really hard call . I see both sides of the argument . He is pretty to watch LOL....

This is definitely one scenario that coukd happen. Panarin wants Top Dog money and he has big offers. In which case, if I'm the rangers, I walk away. And if Kreider is demanding more than 7x5 I think the rangers should move him like they did with Hayes. But if those guys are willing to allow into the appropriate cap slots, I'd be glad to have them. I wish it weren't, but these days cap management is so critical.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Panarin will be a Ranger, book it.

 

[Leetch3]

Signing a big ufa will be different this time....