Fatfrancesa Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 I get it. I’m not spending that kind of money on a wing. He’s not a 27 year old Patrick Kane and he’s not a 27 year old Ovie. It’s not how I would allocate the cap. I understand your points. I just don’t agree with paying him. I do think spending on elite defense would be wise just not someone with such a horrid injury history. That doesn’t age well. The rangers are a pretty bare slate. We have different opinions on how to rebuild. Your view is panarin as a way to speed up the process, I view a player like that as one of the final pieces. Nobody can say who is right. I’m sure panarin will have success here but will the team? That’s all I care about. Finally don’t underestimate how much of an asset cap space is. Having it allows your gm to take advantage of other gms who are in cap trouble. This rebuild needs all kinds of prudent moves. Eliminate the cap space and you severely limit yourself from those advantages. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Now you're talking Sure. I go back and forth between Cozens and Turcotte. Like Zegras, too. Plus Dach, Krebs, McMichael... should have a good C to choose from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 I get it. I’m not spending that kind of money on a wing. He’s not a 27 year old Patrick Kane and he’s not a 27 year old Ovie. It’s not how I would allocate the cap. I understand your points. I just don’t agree with paying him. I do think spending on elite defense would be wise just not someone with such a horrid injury history. That doesn’t age well. The rangers are a pretty bare slate. We have different opinions on how to rebuild. Your view is panarin as a way to speed up the process, I view a player like that as one of the final pieces. Nobody can say who is right. I’m sure panarin will have success here but will the team? That’s all I care about. Finally don’t underestimate how much of an asset cap space is. Having it allows your gm to take advantage of other gms who are in cap trouble. This rebuild needs all kinds of prudent moves. Eliminate the cap space and you severely limit yourself from those advantages. He's 9th in the league in points (12th in ppg) since he came to the NHL. 7 of the top 9 are wings. If you wait for a player better, and the same age or younger, to get to free agency you'll be waiting forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 I get it. I’m not spending that kind of money on a wing. He’s not a 27 year old Patrick Kane and he’s not a 27 year old Ovie. It’s not how I would allocate the cap. I understand your points. I just don’t agree with paying him. I do think spending on elite defense would be wise just not someone with such a horrid injury history. That doesn’t age well. The rangers are a pretty bare slate. We have different opinions on how to rebuild. Your view is panarin as a way to speed up the process, I view a player like that as one of the final pieces. Nobody can say who is right. I’m sure panarin will have success here but will the team? That’s all I care about. Finally don’t underestimate how much of an asset cap space is. Having it allows your gm to take advantage of other gms who are in cap trouble. This rebuild needs all kinds of prudent moves. Eliminate the cap space and you severely limit yourself from those advantages. Kane is actually quite a good comparison for Panarin. Kane has had a couple of special years, but all of his other years have been basically Panarin's point production pace. Panarin is capable of a season that Kane is currently having (at 30 years old mind you). I think this might show how much differently you view Panarin than those of us who would like to sign him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 He's 9th in the league in points (12th in ppg) since he came to the NHL. 7 of the top 9 are wings. If you wait for a player better, and the same age or younger, to get to free agency you'll be waiting forever. You’re going to be waiting years for this team to be a contender regardless if they sign him or not. You don’t know who’s going to be available in the years to come. To say you do is ridiculous. Panarin doesn’t make this team a contender. Signing him does put you to the cap though and adds a $12m player for 7 years probably with a ntc to boot. You all say he’s going to be the same player at 32 that he is now. Also based on nothing but hope. Yes panarin is a great player today but the team as a whole sucks. There is no way to meet in the middle here. I understand your point and you are entitled to it. Im not arguing that he won’t put up points next year, he will. However what does his addition mean to the team? How much better are they? What does adding his cap hit sacrifice in terms of moves they won’t be able to make? We would never know. What we will know and I’m sure argue in the future is his success and the teams success or lack there of. Right now this team has no foundation. I just don’t believe building that foundation should start with $12 m cap hits. Macdavid or Matthews sure but he’s not that. There are moves to be made in the future. Multiple good teams are up against the cap. They are ripe for the picking. Being able to take advantage of that takes cap space first and foremost. Everyone is so impatient to spend the cap space. We differ on opinions here. I understand and respect yours yet I disagree. You may not respect mine and that’s fine but you will not change my mind here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Kane is actually quite a good comparison for Panarin. Kane has had a couple of special years, but all of his other years have been basically Panarin's point production pace. Panarin is capable of a season that Kane is currently having (at 30 years old mind you). I think this might show how much differently you view Panarin than those of us who would like to sign him. No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 No. Actually, yes. Stats matter, and they don't care about anyone's opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 You’re going to be waiting years for this team to be a contender regardless if they sign him or not. You don’t know who’s going to be available in the years to come. To say you do is ridiculous. Panarin doesn’t make this team a contender. Signing him does put you to the cap though and adds a $12m player for 7 years probably with a ntc to boot. You all say he’s going to be the same player at 32 that he is now. Also based on nothing but hope. Yes panarin is a great player today but the team as a whole sucks. There is no way to meet in the middle here. I understand your point and you are entitled to it. Im not arguing that he won’t put up points next year, he will. However what does his addition mean to the team? How much better are they? What does adding his cap hit sacrifice in terms of moves they won’t be able to make? We would never know. What we will know and I’m sure argue in the future is his success and the teams success or lack there of. Right now this team has no foundation. I just don’t believe building that foundation should start with $12 m cap hits. Macdavid or Matthews sure but he’s not that. There are moves to be made in the future. Multiple good teams are up against the cap. They are ripe for the picking. Being able to take advantage of that takes cap space first and foremost. Everyone is so impatient to spend the cap space. We differ on opinions here. I understand and respect yours yet I disagree. You may not respect mine and that’s fine but you will not change my mind here. Like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Like... Patrick Marleau or Matthieu Perrault! Get'em Slats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Can we trade for Brayden Point instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Can we trade for Brayden Point instead? He's open for an offer sheet. His cost for that would likely be the next 4 1st round picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 He's open for an offer sheet. His cost for that would likely be the next 4 1st round picks. Sold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Point is a good player, but 20 of his goals and 35 of his points have come on the power play. The number one power play unit in the league where he is surrounded by Kucherov, Stamkos, and Hedman. That production won't translate to the Rangers. Would I trade for Point, sure. Would I trade 4 first rounders, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Perfect, we need PP help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 So we also gonna trade for Kucherov to pass him the puck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Nah, Point doesn?t need him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 So we also gonna trade for Kucherov to pass him the puck? Well I think the assumption is, some teams are at the cap ceiling and will give away guys incredibly cheap. So you'd get Marner or Nylander for a 3rd, Point for Pionk, and Trouba for future considerations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Well I think the assumption is, some teams are at the cap ceiling and will give away guys incredibly cheap. So you'd get Marner or Nylander for a 3rd, Point for Pionk, and Trouba for future considerations right, right. Tampa will trade Point before Callahan, Miller, Johnson, Palat, and Killorn. Now I get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Well I think the assumption is, some teams are at the cap ceiling and will give away guys incredibly cheap. So you'd get Marner or Nylander for a 3rd, Point for Pionk, and Trouba for future considerations Nah, that?s not the correct assumption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 right, right. Tampa will trade Point before Callahan, Miller, Johnson, Palat, and Killorn. Now I get it. Finally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Actually, yes. Stats matter, and they don't care about anyone's opinion. Since the hawks paid Kane and towes they?ve fallen into mediocrity if not flat out sucked. Not because Kane still doesn?t produce but because his contract along with toews doesn?t allow a supporting cast around them. Panarin is not the player Kane is and any gm or any other serious person would Never claim as much. If anything Chicago is an example that proves my point. Edmonton too and their guys are centers. You can?t and don?t build teams around one or two guys without a foundation of competence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Well I think the assumption is, some teams are at the cap ceiling and will give away guys incredibly cheap. So you'd get Marner or Nylander for a 3rd, Point for Pionk, and Trouba for future considerations Who said that? Wasn’t panarin traded from chicago for Saad because of the cap? Instead of making stuff up why not just stick to what’s actually said. And why even have a gm if the idea of rebuilding is to sign the best ufa every offseason? Why send a letter? What’s changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Since the hawks paid Kane and towes they’ve fallen into mediocrity if not flat out sucked. Not because Kane still doesn’t produce but because his contract along with toews doesn’t allow a supporting cast around them. Panarin is not the player Kane is and any gm or any other serious person would Never claim as much. If anything Chicago is an example that proves my point. Edmonton too and their guys are centers. You can’t and don’t build teams around one or two guys without a foundation of competence. Honestly, those are not the contracts that hurt them. The Seabrook (6.875 x 8), Crawford [injured] (6 x 6), 40-point Anisimov (4.5 x 5), Saad (6 x 5*), are the ones that hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Who said that? Wasn’t panarin traded from chicago for Saad because of the cap? Instead of making stuff up why not just stick to what’s actually said. And why even have a gm if the idea of rebuilding is to sign the best ufa every offseason? Why send a letter? What’s changed? Same cap hit, and Panarin's contract was signed when he was with the Hawks. Instead of making stuff up why not just stick to what’s actually said. Saad is good friends with Toews. why not target FAs instead of destroying your rebuild by giving up 4 1sts for a guy with 1 good season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Since the hawks paid Kane and towes they’ve fallen into mediocrity if not flat out sucked. Not because Kane still doesn’t produce but because his contract along with toews doesn’t allow a supporting cast around them. Panarin is not the player Kane is and any gm or any other serious person would Never claim as much. If anything Chicago is an example that proves my point. Edmonton too and their guys are centers. You can’t and don’t build teams around one or two guys without a foundation of competence. Who said that? Wasn’t panarin traded from chicago for Saad because of the cap? Instead of making stuff up why not just stick to what’s actually said. And why even have a gm if the idea of rebuilding is to sign the best ufa every offseason? Why send a letter? What’s changed? Panarin and Saad both make $6M per year, so no that trade had nothing to do with cap. Toews wanted Saad back. Not sure how Chicago proves your point. They sucked for a decade. Picked in the top 10 seven times. Got lucky to have the #1 OA pick in Kane's year (he has 300 more points than anyone else in that draft). They won 3 cups and were buyers at the deadline. They paid their guys and it left them with no farm system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now