Fatfrancesa

The only other players on elcs that have as much bonus potential is kakko, Kravtsov, and Anderson. Just so happens they are all top 10 picks. Adam Fox was not a first round pick at all.

 

What is also interesting. The rangers have only three top prospects that don’t have bonus clauses. Howden, Hajek, and Rykov. Hmmm how come? Even third and fourth round picks have bonus clauses as long as it was the rangers who signed their elc. Howden a first and Hajek a second round pick got nothing from Tampa? You wonder why they are good? The rangers hand out bonus clauses to every draft pick

Straight from the CBA:

 

Defensemen

(i) Ice time (aggregate and/or per Game). Player must be among top four (4) defensemen on the Club (minimum 42 Regular Season Games played by Player and comparison group). (Note: an Entry Level SPC may contain bonuses for both aggregate and per Game ice time; however, the maximum aggregate amount the Player may receive on account of the ice time category is $212,500.)

(ii) Goals: 10 Goal Minimum

(iii) Assists: 25 Assist Minimum

(iv) Points: 40 Point Minimum

(v) Points Per Game: .49 Points Per Game Minimum (minimum 42 Regular Season Games played)

(vi) Plus-Minus Rating: Among top three (3) defensemen on the Club (minimum 42 Regular Season Games played by Player and comparison group).

(vii) Blocked Shots: Among top two (2) defensemen on the Club (minimum 42 Regular Season Games played by Player and comparison group).

(viii) End-of-Season NHL All-Rookie Team

(ix) NHL All-Star Game (selected to play or plays)

(x) NHL All-Star Game MVP

 

Fox's bonuses are based on achieving some of those accomplishments though we don't know the exact nature of his bonus structure. Those are just all of the standard ELC bonuses for a defenseman, the bonuses for a forward are similar. Why is Fox entitled to the ability to receive bonuses? Because it's standard practice. Look at every other top prospect ELC. Most receive $925k, the maximum in ELC salary, plus bonuses that can't total more than $850k. You also can't be paid more than $212,500 per accomplishment so it's not often you see players getting the full $850k if at all.

 

DeAngelo also had performance bonuses in his contract. Based on his statistics he never met any of them. That's too bad.

 

The team also isn't broke. They're currently listed as carrying 14 forwards. It's doubtful they go into the season like that. They probably end up with another $700-750k which would give them around $1.9M in cap space. They could offer DeAngelo more. They could do it now if they wanted to because of the summer cap bonus. They haven't because they don't want to because they feel $925k properly represents DeAngelo's value.

 

Not broke? What am I reading here in post after post? Not saying you said it but post after post says that the rangers don’t have the cap space to give him a proper bridge deal so he should just suck it up because he has no leverage. Forget getting into the weeds of this with cba talk. I mean did DeAngelo have as many bonus clauses in his elc? I don’t think so and he was a first round pick, Fox was not.

 

Speaking of leverage. How does Adam fox have so much? He forced a trade to his demanded destination. Then was able to pry as good an elc you can get from the team he just stated he had to play for. He’s not a first round pick. Why would another player with “no leverage” think they are worth more. Because they are not blind to what goes on around them. End of story. They are not us, the fans. Fans take the angle at what’s the best for the team. The player has himself first and foremost to think about. The rangers have long made it a practice to be loose with their purse strings. Leverage or not DeAngelo feels like he is worth more than a rookie contract without bonuses. Any reasonable person would agree with that.

The odds of Fox achieving those bonuses for them to even count are pretty low. ADA can't get bonuses. Doesn't make sense to compare an ELC to a second contract.

 

What are the terms of the bonuses? Usually a second contract is worth more than an elc which would be ada’s point. Not sure why it’s on ada to take the league minimum basically because the rangers spent all their money. He’s well within his right to hold out for more. It could become unwise if it drags on but if he settles in the next week or two this will all mean nothing.

 

Fox had zero leverage too yet he was given a bonus rich elc.

 

I’m sure everyone here would gladly accept from their boss that the new kid gets as much as $1.775m having yet to play a game but you need to prove yourself to get a penny more than a elc. Besides the company is broke because they overpaid basically every other guy on the team. So now we as a company have decided that it is on you to make up for our generosity to your teammates.

 

Clearly nobody would take issue with this at their work. Being underpaid and feeling like youre getting the shaft is very much human. Talking about these guys like they are robots is unrealistic. The league is littered with guys who should have no leverage according to the CBa yet they are holding out for millions and they are getting it. Hard to blame a guy who watches the gms undermine their leverage daily and not expect to get a little something. I’m sorry but saying we’ve spent all the money is not going to fly. And next year he’s not looking at a big pay day from the rangers regardless. The money situation is worse next summer. So the pay off for him next summer if he’s earns it now, is probably another hold out until he’s traded. Which makes it even less damaging holding out now. He’s probably gone next summer regardless, onlyway he stays isif he has a bad year and in that case he’s not getting paid again.

Adam fox currently holds a contract that pays him $925k a year. It also has $850k in bonuses for each season making his cap hit $1.775m a year if he hits those bonuses. It would seem reasonable to me that DeAngelo has at least earned the same type of contract

Just look at chytil and howden. They both had their problems with the grind. They aren’t college kids. Most of these kids have some dips in their adjustment seasons. Having extra capable guys around to give a night off is a good thing and won’t or shouldn’t be a problem. If used properly it could be a great benefit to the team and the young players development.

 

Wasn’t trying to open up yet another argument. Just disagreeing with the thought of having too many guys for not enough spots. On this team with so many kids trying to adjust to the rigors of the nhl, having this problem is actually the opposite.

Sure. Also have to figure out where Strome and Namestnikov fit in. Doesn’t seem like there’s enough room for everyone but we’ll see I guess.

 

There are a lot of forwards seemingly leaving some without a spot. I do think though that if will be beneficial to give some nights off for these young guys. The two biggest jumps a player has to make is the speed and the grind of the schedule. Most of these kids have not played 82 games in a year. Having capable guys who can step in to give a night off to s teen will be helpful.

How do you know the Rangers would be willing to pay more?

 

They knew what they were doing when they signed Panarin and Trouba. They knew who the odd man out would be.

 

I'm pretty sure the Rangers are comfortable moving forward without neither one of these guys. Either that, or they always knew the plan would be to sign them once they were able to send guys down and clear summer cap room.

 

Well they just did.

 

Their miscalculation wasn’t panarin and trouba. It was not being able to move others.

The rangers would pay them more if they had the space to get the deals done. Again we are talking about $250 to $500k more they’d be willing to pay. Not a lot in terms of pro sports but somebody tell me that’s not a lot of money, especially when it’s 50% of what you’re currently making. Circumstances left these guys without a chair when the music stopped. If panarin didn’t sign, if kreider, names or strome were able to be moved the rangers would cough up the extra 500k to get it done. Sucks for them. I’m not to worried about it getting done. When the cap space becomes available they will get their modest raise

Perspective is of course they are not as missed as laine and such. They are hurting themselves the most. There isn’t money to sign them for more than the qo. The rangers did fuck io their cap assuming other players had trade value. As it stands they are replaceable. The point in having all these young kids is to find the players who aren’t easily replaceable and build. While all these things are true imo, them holding out hurts this organization. These are kids still trying to find their way in the league, they need camp and the process. The rangers need to see them play with no excuses to determine where they fit long term. Hard to believe the N.Y. rangers have players holding out over peanuts. This is the hard cap at its core. Ny fans get raped with ticket prices and the team can’t afford to pay modest raises to prospects.

Who cares? The rangers are in rebuilding mode. Trying to establish an identity throughout their organization. While not every young player will develop into a star, those who develop into nhl players are very valuable. Acting like two kids who are nhl caliber can rot on the vine isn’t helpful for the rangers either. The rangers hold all the cards and I’m not saying they should pay them. But it does matter. Depth matters. Development matters. Competitive roster battles matter. Weeding out and identifying team chemistry matters. The rangers are hurt by them holding out no question.

That same description describes zherdev too

I can tell you right now, Kravstov is going to piss off the fans that judge "effort" and "hustle" from their living room because Krav is a very smooth skater and often times it looks like he's not busting his ass. He takes indirect routes to the puck and he backs away from traffic to find space rather than get in the middle of it. He's also turned the puck over trying to be creative rather than just chipping it in -- I can foresee some complaints coming already -- but the guy has a boatload of skill. It'll be interesting to see him in camp with more skilled players around him.

 

Haven’t seen enough of him but if true it will the coach he pisses off.

but I was not trying to compare 1990s to now, I was trying to compare pre-Roy era and current era.

Compared to the game now, the game in the 1990s was unwatchable.

 

I don’t know about that. Those ranger teams were pretty entertaining. The game was certainly different but not always in a worse way. Watch the 1994 conference finals and finals again. Plenty of skill on display, great goaltending, and physical. Honestly before the devils really changed the game somewhere around 95 the game was never better. You name it, skill, fights, physicality, goaltending was all at its peak in the early 90’s

Because Panarin, over the last for years on two different teams, has gone for 77, 74, 82, and 87 points. He's never scored less than 27 goals. There are no question marks surrounding Panarin. Kakko, Kravtsov, and Fox are rookies with no track record, that's why people debate it. Trouba is going to be in the spotlight with an expanded role, that's why people debate it. There'd be more question marks surrounding Kucherov or Point leaving Tampa than there is about Panarin.

 

So how many points do you expect from him?

Because Panarin, over the last for years on two different teams, has gone for 77, 74, 82, and 87 points. He's never scored less than 27 goals. There are no question marks surrounding Panarin. Kakko, Kravtsov, and Fox are rookies with no track record, that's why people debate it. Trouba is going to be in the spotlight with an expanded role, that's why people debate it. There'd be more question marks surrounding Kucherov or Point leaving Tampa than there is about Panarin.

 

And that’s why my expectations are as such. I’m not debAting him not performing to somewhere close to what he has in the past. The others I do expect a learning curve from.

 

The thread is about expectations is it not?

Link to someone even remotely credible describing Kakko as a generational talent?

I don’t mean to be a prick, but it feels like you’re just making shit up to fabricate a point at this stage.

 

Not at all. The underlying point is that it’s a given that kakko is penciled in as a top line forward at minimum. I don’t doubt that but just reading posts on here the general discussion pre draft has tempered as it should. He’s a kid that needs time and the least amount of pressure possible. Not to go down this hole but Kenny Albert for one is reliable, no?

 

My general point is to get people’s expectation of what panarin will produce. Pre July 1st when his destination was uncertain arguments were made at what he’d mean signing here and what he’d bring. Obviously intangibles, effect on others play, etc will have to sorted out and is not easily determined. Point totals are just that and that’s all I’m asking.

 

You don’t need to read into it anymore than that. Kakko, Kravtsov, Fox, and trouba production have all been discussed without incident. Why can’t the same be discussed with panarin

 

My expectations

Kakko 55 points

Kravtsov 40 points

Fox. 25 points

Trouba. 45 points

Panarin. 92 points

DeAngelo has a considerable amount of physicality in his game. He’s also very willing to stand up for his teammates. Does fox fit that mold too?

No, but if I'm honest, if the Rangers win a Cup I won't give a flying fuck if Panarin is a 75 point player or a 95 point player.

 

Agreed

Just curious if the goal posts will be moved. Like pre draft kakko is a generational talent ready right now to be a star. Post draft the expectations along with reality settles down a bit.

Personally, I'm not holding high expectations for Panarin to set personal point records on this team in year 1. There's a lot of kids being injected into the lineup. I don't think you'll see the kind of production you are expecting, at least until the second year. So I don't think it's a black and white question of an exact point number he has to hit for year 1 to be considered a success for him. If he gets 25 goals and 70 points this year, and the rest of the team does pretty shitty, how do we interpret that? I'd call it pretty successful, knowing that the following year the kids will have more experience and would presumably elevate their play (hopefully).

 

Of course it’s hypothetical and we can discuss his impact when the season is over. But it’s august and it’s just for conversation sake. A lot more goes into a players worth than points obviously. I was just curious what people’s expectations were being that some will throw his point totals in past years as the reason they signed him.

All I wanted to know is what people expected panarin s production to be. I say 92 points. So if he’s in the neighborhood than production wise he would have lived up to expectations. Not trying to dive back into the logic of signing him or not. His salary is important because with being paid like a star he should produce like a star and be expected to as well.

 

Just like when a player is drafted puts expectations on a player so does a contract.

McDavid is a special case. There are a number of players whose salaries approach his, yet none can be said to closely approach him as a player. With UFAs, you expect to overpay. Part of that overpayment is in lieu of giving up players to get him. If Panarin were on a long term contract at say $9 million, you would have had to pay dearly in terms of players and picks to get him, and you wouldn't expect less of him than if you are paying him $11.6 million and gave up nothing for him.

 

I get that. In a cap system his contract will cost players anyway. Put that aside and I’m not asking him to win a scoring title, win a hart trophy, or anything like that. The rangers got him to be a game breaking offensive force. To say I’d expect him to be in the top 10-20 players in scoring is not asking a lot for a guy carrying the second largest contract in the league. He’s not a two way center or a defenseman. His game is scoring. I’m not saying anything that he, the team, or any other nhl commentator wouldn’t expect. Except because I’m saying it obviously has to be argued because I obviously am putting unrealistic expectations on him and of course by me just discussing panarin it’s to complain about him.

 

I said 100 points another poster said 75-85. Maybe the average is the number How about 92? Is that an ok expectation without coming off like I rooting against him? I’m not. But we have a thread, this one, dedicated to expectations. We have discussed kakko, Kravtsov, trouba. All without issue. Yet we get to panarin and now it’s about motives? 92 points. Is that a fair number?

And the point of that stat is?

 

 

That $11.6m should get you more than 75 points.

37 players had 75 pts last year. Macdavid had 116.

McDavid signed for 16.7% of the cap when he signed. Panarin signed for 14.2%. So no, he doesn't have to perform on a McDavid pace. All he needs to do is continue his 25-30 goal/75-85 point seasons and he'll be worth the cost. Anything more is gravy.

 

He’s the second highest paid player is he not? Maybe not macdavid pace but close to it. 95-100 pts. I don’t think that’s very controversial saying that. Macdavid is obviously better and signed for a higher % but panarin is being paid like a top 5 point producer. 75 pts is not that and quite frankly that would be moving the bar at this point.