Mr.wiskers Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 All depends on the cap. With Lundqvist, Karlsson, & Panarin?plus Staal, Shattenkirk & Skjei?s cap hit how much cap will be left. Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 I?m fine with bringing free agents to supplement what they do have. I?m just not for 7 year commitments that more than likely carry no trade clauses. The fact is this team is building towards the future, not next year. That doesn?t mean I?m throwing away next season. If pavelski is looking to move I?d see him on a three or four year deal as ok if you want to add something. I?d be fine with zucc coming back again at 3 years or so. I?m not on board for tanking. I want to try and win every game and I agree that it would be beneficial to bring some solid guys in here. That is a far cry though from committing $11-12m a year for 7 years to guys. I want some clarity to what?s here. As of now they have really two guys that you can rely on being core guys going forward. I just think tying up that kind of money at this point is not smart. It won?t hurt the next three years or so but after that it might. Also it could possibly leave them out of the running to take advantage of a future situation that is unforeseen. Teams fall out favor for all kinds of reasons with really good players. Having the cap space is key to take advantage. When you commit 1/4 of you cap to two guys it really hinders your ability to capitalize on what?s to come. I know we can?t predict that. It?s hard for me to imagine the rangers committing to those too basically for the next decade. The rangers have entered into bad contract after bad contract. Right now the risk of that compared to the reward for the next three of fours years is overwhelming. By the time this team catches up to those two in terms of being ready, what will they be? Nobody can honestly answer that Karlsson or panarin four years from now will still be elite players. Yet they will be paid as such. It?s like installing new windows but glueing them shutHow is signing Pavelski from age 35-38 better than Panarin age 28-34? Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 How is signing Pavelski from age 35-38 better than Panarin age 28-34? Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk It isn't. Not by a long shot. But in fairness it isn't 1 to 1. Pavelski might cost 6 per, Panarin 11 per. But I'd still rather Panarin at 11 than pavelski at 6 and say someone else like Zucc at 5 to make up the rest. We need quality over quantity here big time. For one we don't have a lot of quality. For two we don't want to clog the roster so our youth has a chance to step in and compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 15, 2019 Author Share Posted March 15, 2019 Pavelski is going to get 40 goals and 70+ points. He's going to cost a lot more than $6 million. More like $8 million. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 Pavelski is going to get 40 goals and 70+ points. He's going to cost a lot more than $6 million. More like $8 million. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk I didn't even look at his stats. Wow having quite a year for an oldie. Agreed. Will get closer to 8. So even worse to choose him over Panarin. That kind of signing would truly be a typical Rangers thing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 Is he really leaving SJ? Should go to Winnipeg, probably ends up in dallas or Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 15, 2019 Author Share Posted March 15, 2019 Not sure. I'm just saying, if he does, it's not for $6 million. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 The reason it’s different is the term. Three or four years from now these kids have grown or not. Hopefully they are in contend mode and in a position to better evaluate their roster. Some of you guys ask how you can improve next year without signing two guys at $11-12m for 7 years and I give an example. Now you’re comparing the players as if that’s the point. The point is is that there are a lot of ways to improve short term without committing for 7 years. For the 1000th time Karlsson already can’t stay healthy and has had major injuries to his leg. The risk in signing him and hoping he’s still worth $12m in years 4-7 is ridiculous. We all agree this team isn’t winning when you all expect to get his best years. So we get a great ek and a bad team to then maybe a good team with an anchor contract in ek. No thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 How is signing Pavelski from age 35-38 better than Panarin age 28-34? Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk You are trying to projecting what pavelski is in 5 months, while panarin 5 years. No difference you’re right. One gets three years the other 7. One gets a no trade for 7 years. No difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 The reason it?s different is the term. Three or four years from now these kids have grown or not. Hopefully they are in contend mode and in a position to better evaluate their roster. Some of you guys ask how you can improve next year without signing two guys at $11-12m for 7 years and I give an example. Now you?re comparing the players as if that?s the point. The point is is that there are a lot of ways to improve short term without committing for 7 years. For the 1000th time Karlsson already can?t stay healthy and has had major injuries to his leg. The risk in signing him and hoping he?s still worth $12m in years 4-7 is ridiculous. We all agree this team isn?t winning when you all expect to get his best years. So we get a great ek and a bad team to then maybe a good team with an anchor contract in ek. No thanks The issue with the entire debate is that we can't have one off debates about single players in a silo. If you sign Panarin and Karlsson you instantly improve both your offense and defense and accelerate a rebuild. We're looking at being competitive the year after next instead of in 3-4 years. Panarin will be turning 30 and Karlsson 31. That's not terribly old, and you need vets. Is it unrealistic to expect Kravtsov to step right in and make in impact, probably. Is it equally unrealistic to think he won't make an impact the year after next...probably. Plus Chytil, Miller and Lindqvist, plus whomever we draft this year....Plus Zib, Krieder, ADA, Hajek...I mean we're not going to suck, there is quality there. And really gotta stop harping on NTCs. All that means is a player controls where he goes. It doesn't mean you can't trade him and get him off your books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 You are trying to projecting what pavelski is in 5 months, while panarin 5 years. No difference you?re right. One gets three years the other 7. One gets a no trade for 7 years. No difference.Pavelski would be a 35+ contract with a NMC. In the second year of a similar contract Marleau won't hit 20 goals. Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 The issue with the entire debate is that we can't have one off debates about single players in a silo. If you sign Panarin and Karlsson you instantly improve both your offense and defense and accelerate a rebuild. We're looking at being competitive the year after next instead of in 3-4 years. Panarin will be turning 30 and Karlsson 31. That's not terribly old, and you need vets. Is it unrealistic to expect Kravtsov to step right in and make in impact, probably. Is it equally unrealistic to think he won't make an impact the year after next...probably. Plus Chytil, Miller and Lindqvist, plus whomever we draft this year....Plus Zib, Krieder, ADA, Hajek...I mean we're not going to suck, there is quality there. And really gotta stop harping on NTCs. All that means is a player controls where he goes. It doesn't mean you can't trade him and get him off your books. AND LIAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 The issue with the entire debate is that we can't have one off debates about single players in a silo. If you sign Panarin and Karlsson you instantly improve both your offense and defense and accelerate a rebuild. We're looking at being competitive the year after next instead of in 3-4 years. Panarin will be turning 30 and Karlsson 31. That's not terribly old, and you need vets. Is it unrealistic to expect Kravtsov to step right in and make in impact, probably. Is it equally unrealistic to think he won't make an impact the year after next...probably. Plus Chytil, Miller and Lindqvist, plus whomever we draft this year....Plus Zib, Krieder, ADA, Hajek...I mean we're not going to suck, there is quality there. And really gotta stop harping on NTCs. All that means is a player controls where he goes. It doesn't mean you can't trade him and get him off your books. I’m fine with the opinion of wanting those guys. I get the allure of it to and the benefit. However the idea there is no other path forward is kind of ridiculous. I don’t think it’s a good idea. It’s my opinion and it’s based on watching this team for 30 plus years. Others differ, fine. We’ll see. I just don’t get the risk. Because they need to be thoughtful of where this team will be in years 4-7. They are the ones that sent the letter talking rebuild. So are the rebuilding or are they going heavy on high priced ufas this off season? If it’s business as usual then proceed. I would imagine the patience for these kids will wear thin because they will new star player windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 16, 2019 Author Share Posted March 16, 2019 AND LIAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 AND LIAS. Hoping he's moved before that, but more likely in AHL or SEL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 16, 2019 Author Share Posted March 16, 2019 Pavelski would be a 35+ contract with a NMC. In the second year of a similar contract Marleau won't hit 20 goals. Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Yeah, but he's Leafs dad. You can't put a price on the way he raises his children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 AND LIAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 I?m fine with the opinion of wanting those guys. I get the allure of it to and the benefit. However the idea there is no other path forward is kind of ridiculous. I don?t think it?s a good idea. It?s my opinion and it?s based on watching this team for 30 plus years. Others differ, fine. We?ll see. I just don?t get the risk. Because they need to be thoughtful of where this team will be in years 4-7. They are the ones that sent the letter talking rebuild. So are the rebuilding or are they going heavy on high priced ufas this off season? If it?s business as usual then proceed. I would imagine the patience for these kids will wear thin because they will new star player windows. Well, it's not the only path. It's just the one that's in front of them vs maybe they can land a similar caliber player in 3 years...And we've pretty much illustrated it's highly unlikely. Rebuilding doesn't mean you don't dive into the UFA pool. It means you don't mortgage the future for the present. Signing Eriksson and Panarin doesn't do that. All they sacrifice is cap, which we have plenty of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 Yeah, but he's Leafs dad. You can't put a price on the way he raises his children. This is why Nylander held out... Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 Well, it's not the only path. It's just the one that's in front of them vs maybe they can land a similar caliber player in 3 years...And we've pretty much illustrated it's highly unlikely. Rebuilding doesn't mean you don't dive into the UFA pool. It means you don't mortgage the future for the present. Signing Eriksson and Panarin doesn't do that. All they sacrifice is cap, which we have plenty of. You really think that if the rangers had the cap space they wouldnt land a player of that caliber down the line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 And isn’t it about building a team that can win rather than adding a guy who can excite a fan base? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 You really think that if the rangers had the cap space they wouldnt land a player of that caliber down the line?The chances are slim. What happens when they are ready to add the piece and there are no 26 year old studs? You'll complain we signed a 31 year old until he's 38...? And isn?t it about building a team that can win rather than adding a guy who can excite a fan base?You have yourself convinced every move is a marketing ploy. If that's how you feel you may need another hobby until Dolan sells haha. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 The chances are slim. What happens when they are ready to add the piece and there are no 26 year old studs? You'll complain we signed a 31 year old until he's 38...? You have yourself convinced every move is a marketing ploy. If that's how you feel you may need another hobby until Dolan sells haha. ;) You can get that player in a trade or god for bid in the draft too. I mean this rare talent was traded when he was 25 with two years left under contract for Brendan Saad. So players do become available. I’m not saying every move is about marketing. I’m saying signing a high ticket guy this summer would be. X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 You can get that player in a trade or god for bid in the draft too. I mean this rare talent was traded when he was 25 with two years left under contract for Brendan Saad. So players do become available. I?m not saying every move is about marketing. I?m saying signing a high ticket guy this summer would be. XTrades cost assets. You'd have to surrender the future for the present. The exact thing you're complaining about. Again ... The draft is an uncertainty. Trying to sign a UFA in 3yrs is uncertainty. A bird in the hand.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 Trades cost assets. You'd have to surrender the future for the present. The exact thing you're complaining about. Again ... The draft is an uncertainty. Trying to sign a UFA in 3yrs is uncertainty. A bird in the hand.... Three years from now. Three years of building and developing assets. Three years of developing roster and organizational depth from which to trade from. Why is this so hard to understand? It’s not complaining because I choose not to agree. Nothing has even happened yet. I’ve been consistent here. I wanted the rebuild while we argued over selling why in a playoff spot. I’m all in with it. I’m actually happy with the direction. I want to stay the course. It’s not complaining making my case anymore than it is to want to tank and be pissed when they win. To point out pionk sucks or that the Quinn is dressing 7 defenseman. None of it is whining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.