[brooks] Rangers Rebuild Centered Around Tricky Artemi Panarin, Kevin Hayes Pursuit

[Fatfrancesa]

How does someone quantify hockey age from actual age? So panarin is a young 27 while someone else is getting old in hockey terms at 27? Can somebody let me know the formula other than hopeful speculation? Is it just a “feeling” or is something you can actually predict based on facts? Is there a new advanced stat that I just don’t understand? Seriously I would love to know.

[RangersIn7]

How does someone quantify hockey age from actual age? So panarin is a young 27 while someone else is getting old in hockey terms at 27? Can somebody let me know the formula other than hopeful speculation? Is it just a “feeling” or is something you can actually predict based on facts? Is there a new advanced stat that I just don’t understand? Seriously I would love to know.

 

No true formula really.

 

Think of it like this.

Typically by age 27-28, an NHL player who entered the league at 20-21 will have played a minimum of 550-600 games. More if you’re drafted high and enter the league at 18-19. Tavares as an example is 28, turning 29 in September, entered the league at 19 and is in his 10th season. He has played 750 NHL games. Panarin is a year younger, has played only about half of that, at around 320. Just less NHL miles.

 

Even with his games in Russia, he’s still way below what he’d be had he come over here at 18-20. Plus the Russian league is not as physical, seasons are much shorter, and the competition isn’t quite as good.

 

That’s the basis for the “low mileage “ argument with him, and it applies.

[Long live the King]

How does someone quantify hockey age from actual age? So panarin is a young 27 while someone else is getting old in hockey terms at 27? Can somebody let me know the formula other than hopeful speculation? Is it just a ?feeling? or is something you can actually predict based on facts? Is there a new advanced stat that I just don?t understand? Seriously I would love to know.

Most 27 year olds have played twice as many NHL games. Is that not quantifiable?

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Puck Head]

Most 27 year olds have played twice as many NHL games. Is that not quantifiable?

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

He came into the league at 24 rather than 21 or 22 like most. That being said, he was playing 55-74 games a year in the KHL, (excluding international play).

His style of play has more to do with his longevity than amount of NHL games. His decline will be similar to what studies and statistics show more than likely

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[BrooksBurner]

How does someone quantify hockey age from actual age? So panarin is a young 27 while someone else is getting old in hockey terms at 27? Can somebody let me know the formula other than hopeful speculation? Is it just a “feeling” or is something you can actually predict based on facts? Is there a new advanced stat that I just don’t understand? Seriously I would love to know.

 

Edit: Sorry for the long post, but honestly this is a topic that requires thought.

 

I'll piggyback on some of what others have said re: games played but also add a huge factor is style of play. In particular with games played, I pay attention to the league that those games were played. I'd like to think most would agree that games played in the NHL generally have more wear and tear on your body since it's the best, fastest and most physical league. Chris Kreider and Artemi Panarin are essentially the same age, with Kreider about 6 months older. This is a perfect use case to analyze if you ask me.

 

Start with Kreider.

 

Pros:

 

- Physical and willing to go to the tough parts of the ice in front of the net. He's willing to take a beating for a screen, dirty goal, or deflection.

- Very fast north/south speed and can generate offense via stretch passes off the boards.

- Has a good shot, but should probably score more goals than he does. This has always baffled me.

 

Weaknesses

 

- Bad puck handler.

- Not a good playmaker aside from the occasional great pass here and there.

- Doesn't generate much offense by himself with the puck on his stuck.

 

I'd point out that Kreider's weaknesses are generally skills that can extend a player's career when they age and slow down. Once Kreider's north/south speed begins to deteriorate, one of his key strengths disappears and he won't be able to fall back on an ability to create offense via vision, passing, puck handling, etc. Additionally, considering the hard nosed style of game he plays I tend to believe that each game played takes a larger toll on his body than more finesse players. Kreider is at 460 NHL games and 628 total games including college and AHL.

 

Now Panarin, who is basically the exact opposite of Kreider.

 

Strengths

 

- Upper echelon playmaker (I'll refrain from elite out of respect for the Crosbys of the world) and passer.

- Elite puck handler.

- Incredible vision.

- Can generate offense on his own with the puck on his stick.

- Excellent shot. He should probably score more goals than 30. If he ever does he'll be a 90-100 point player.

- Good speed (not as fast north/south as Kreider), but deceptively quick and agile in the zone.

 

Weaknesses

 

- Smallish, not physical.

- Generally won't find him getting dirty goals in front of the net.

- ?? not much else...

 

Most of Panarin's strengths have a longer shelf life than Kreider's. When he starts to lose his speed and quickness, he will be able to fall back on his puck handling, vision, and ability to create offense for teammates. He also has far less NHL wear and tear with 322 NHL games. If you include his KHL experience, he has played in 585 games. While only 43 games less than Kreider's total, the KHL is not as physical or competitive of a league as the NHL. His style of play also reduces the physical toll on his body compared to Kreider.

 

Just my two cents.

[RangersIn7]

Edit: Sorry for the long post, but honestly this is a topic that requires thought.

 

I'll piggyback on some of what others have said re: games played but also add a huge factor is style of play. In particular with games played, I pay attention to the league that those games were played. I'd like to think most would agree that games played in the NHL generally have more wear and tear on your body since it's the best, fastest and most physical league. Chris Kreider and Artemi Panarin are essentially the same age, with Kreider about 6 months older. This is a perfect use case to analyze if you ask me.

 

Start with Kreider.

 

Pros:

 

- Physical and willing to go to the tough parts of the ice in front of the net. He's willing to take a beating for a screen, dirty goal, or deflection.

- Very fast north/south speed and can generate offense via stretch passes off the boards.

- Has a good shot, but should probably score more goals than he does. This has always baffled me.

 

Weaknesses

 

- Bad puck handler.

- Not a good playmaker aside from the occasional great pass here and there.

- Doesn't generate much offense by himself with the puck on his stuck.

 

I'd point out that Kreider's weaknesses are generally skills that can extend a player's career when they age and slow down. Once Kreider's north/south speed begins to deteriorate, one of his key strengths disappears and he won't be able to fall back on an ability to create offense via vision, passing, puck handling, etc. Additionally, considering the hard nosed style of game he plays I tend to believe that each game played takes a larger toll on his body than more finesse players. Kreider is at 460 NHL games and 628 total games including college and AHL.

 

Now Panarin, who is basically the exact opposite of Kreider.

 

Strengths

 

- Upper echelon playmaker (I'll refrain from elite out of respect for the Crosbys of the world) and passer.

- Elite puck handler.

- Incredible vision.

- Can generate offense on his own with the puck on his stick.

- Excellent shot. He should probably score more goals than 30. If he ever does he'll be a 90-100 point player.

- Good speed (not as fast north/south as Kreider), but deceptively quick and agile in the zone.

 

Weaknesses

 

- Smallish, not physical.

- Generally won't find him getting dirty goals in front of the net.

- ?? not much else...

 

Most of Panarin's strengths have a longer shelf life than Kreider's. When he starts to lose his speed and quickness, he will be able to fall back on his puck handling, vision, and ability to create offense for teammates. He also has far less NHL wear and tear with 322 NHL games. If you include his KHL experience, he has played in 585 games. While only 43 games less than Kreider's total, the KHL is not as physical or competitive of a league as the NHL. His style of play also reduces the physical toll on his body compared to Kreider.

 

Just my two cents.

 

Panarin?s 283 KHL games are actually spread out over 7 seasons, never more than 54 games in a season and I?m not counting his international play. Another thing to think about.

[Sod16]

A good point has been made about the impact of NOT signing Kreider. Add him to McDonaugh and Hayes and you see a real trend of not extending players who are due a good contract. I think Uncle Larry's talk of Hayes is possibly wishful thinking on his part, or at least an attempt to push the Rangers in that direction, as was his report that the Rangers were having preliminary talks with Hayes a few weeks before the deadline. Without Panarin or Kreider, this would just be a flat out bad team next year, and they really can't afford that three years in a row. When you've been bad three years in a row, UFAs don't want to sign with you and existing players don't want to extend.

[Fatfrancesa]

Ok but age is age. I’m sure when panarin wasn’t in the nhl, he wasn’t a part time hockey player. I’m sure he was still training or practicing year round. The biggest point here though is that not all players/humans are the same. Time catches up to all people diffently. There is no equal basis to start from here. There are guys who seemingly can play forever and then there are guys that grow old(playing terms) for no simple reason. I just don’t think you can make blanket statements about anybody in terms of how people age out. There is risk in signing a player who will be in his mid thirties at the end of his contract. Being willing to take that risk is an argument that stands by itself. Reasoning that risk with he’s really only 23 in games played terms is guessing. Not to mention there is always a risk in signing any player to a large contract and moving to nyc, that they lose some motivation and enjoy the big city too much. Does anybody know this guys habits off the ice? I doubt it. But those habits are also very important to not aging. For instance dietary and alcohol intake. I’m not saying I know anything but for anyone here to claim they aren’t worried about his age is speaking with less than adequate knowledge of the person.

[Sod16]

OK, if Panarin's age is a worry, as is/was Kreider's and McDonaugh's, we can just play with a roster full of unproven players on entry level contracts. Unfortunately, today's NHL requires you to sign 27-28 year old players to longer terms than you would like if you ever want to contend.

[fletch]

That?s what?s happening. Guys are establishing themselves big time on their ELC, and teams are giving them 6-8 years and locking them up until they?re 28-29, so there isn?t tons of prime seasons left when they hit the market. That is the risk on Panarin. Turns 28 in October. Gets a 7 year deal. How many prime seasons at huge money will they actually get?

 

I'm not as leery on Panarin. He has a lot less mileage than a typical 28 year old hockey player. He also plays the kind of game that ages extremely well - finesse, vision, high skill. I'd have no trouble believing he has 5 years of a 7 year deal before seeing some dip, and at that point he should still be a good player.

 

Kreider on the other hand...when his speed starts to deteriorate he is going to have to rely almost exclusively on front of the net presence to be productive. That could be in just a few short years.

 

He came into the league at 24 rather than 21 or 22 like most. That being said, he was playing 55-74 games a year in the KHL, (excluding international play).

His style of play has more to do with his longevity than amount of NHL games. His decline will be similar to what studies and statistics show more than likely

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Can't argue with the talent and the regular season production. Panarin has to be a key cog and performer in the playoffs to justify a long-term deal 'speeding up the rebuild'. Otherwise, he would eat up valuable cap space and delay the Rangers returning to playoff relevancy (capable of deep runs). I like players with grit for the playoffs, but skill and speed are important in team composition as well.

[CBrowningPI]

Getting Panarin also has the added bonus of helping develop his comrades that will infiltrate the Rangers. Rykov, Kravtsov, Shesterkin and Buch. That's alot of shots of vodka and may be a good selling point to the bread man.

 

Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Long live the King]

He came into the league at 24 rather than 21 or 22 like most. That being said, he was playing 55-74 games a year in the KHL, (excluding international play).

His style of play has more to do with his longevity than amount of NHL games. His decline will be similar to what studies and statistics show more than likely

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Both the KHL and international play are far less physical than the NHL. That's the whole point. 74 games a year in the KHL is far less wearing on your body than 100 in the NHL.

[NYR2711]

Gotta unload salary and dead weight.

 

Why do they need to unload salary? They have plenty of cap space with both Hayes and Zucc gone. They were under the cap all last season as well, and the cap is going to go up next season.

[RangersIn7]

Ok but age is age. I’m sure when panarin wasn’t in the nhl, he wasn’t a part time hockey player. I’m sure he was still training or practicing year round. The biggest point here though is that not all players/humans are the same. Time catches up to all people diffently. There is no equal basis to start from here. There are guys who seemingly can play forever and then there are guys that grow old(playing terms) for no simple reason. I just don’t think you can make blanket statements about anybody in terms of how people age out. There is risk in signing a player who will be in his mid thirties at the end of his contract. Being willing to take that risk is an argument that stands by itself. Reasoning that risk with he’s really only 23 in games played terms is guessing. Not to mention there is always a risk in signing any player to a large contract and moving to nyc, that they lose some motivation and enjoy the big city too much. Does anybody know this guys habits off the ice? I doubt it. But those habits are also very important to not aging. For instance dietary and alcohol intake. I’m not saying I know anything but for anyone here to claim they aren’t worried about his age is speaking with less than adequate knowledge of the person.

 

There’s definitely guess work involved. And no one knows for sure how a particular player will age until he ages. But it is a bit more favorable when there are fewer games played. Makes you a little less anxious about handing a player a contract that runs into his mid-30’s.

[Fatfrancesa]

There’s definitely guess work involved. And no one knows for sure how a particular player will age until he ages. But it is a bit more favorable when there are fewer games played. Makes you a little less anxious about handing a player a contract that runs into his mid-30’s.

 

That’s fair but it doesn’t totally eliminate the possibility. It’s just a talking point for those in favor of signing him.

[Fatfrancesa]

OK, if Panarin's age is a worry, as is/was Kreider's and McDonaugh's, we can just play with a roster full of unproven players on entry level contracts. Unfortunately, today's NHL requires you to sign 27-28 year old players to longer terms than you would like if you ever want to contend.

 

 

Is that what anyone said? It’s not sign panarin or sulk. It’s also pretty extreme to label the case of discussing signing a player to one of the richest deals in the league as just another contract to a 28 year old. It’s a straw man argument to suggest that there is only two options. Sign panarin or just suck forever. What if he doesn’t want to sign here or chooses Florida instead? Should they just give up?

 

What’s more is that people act like the rangers have never gone down this road before. Or that this is a special anomaly. It may work out great as everyone predicts. But it could work out as just another in a long line of failed free agent splashes. Just look at shattenkirk if you need a reminder. He was going to pair with McDonough to be a dominant top pair. Now there is buyout talk and he’s been an absolute failure. Thank god it was only four years. If panarin goes bad it will be devastating. Of course you have to take risks but is this team really in the spot to need to take that risk. Even with panarin you still have a dumpster fire for defense and who plays center after Zibanejad? So the rangers are a playoff team with questionable center play and awful defense? Never heard of a good team ever built that way.

[RangersIn7]

That?s fair but it doesn?t totally eliminate the possibility. It?s just a talking point for those in favor of signing him.

 

Absolutely

 

I agree with you mostly. It?s a risk to sign a guy to big dollars into his mid-30?s. Always. But there are some things with Panarin that make it at least seem a little safer.

 

Hypothetically if he were to sign elsewhere, it is by no means the end of the world. Personally I?d be fine with staying out of FA waters and just letting the kids play. It?s my feeling that even with Panarin next year, it?s likely they?re a bubble team or a wild card who gets beat in round 1 as the most likely scenario. Now that is an important step, but the world doesn?t end if that doesn?t happen next season, and if they were to miss the playoffs again next year, another year with a possible high pick doesn?t hurt you in a rebuild.

[Puck Head]

Panarin?s 283 KHL games are actually spread out over 7 seasons, never more than 54 games in a season and I?m not counting his international play. Another thing to think about.

 

Playoffs also i calculated

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Puck Head]

Both the KHL and international play are far less physical than the NHL. That's the whole point. 74 games a year in the KHL is far less wearing on your body than 100 in the NHL.

 

So we deduct 10% from the equation then? Panarin isn?t it banging like Kreider, i doubt there is much difference between the leagues when you factor his style of play.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[RangersIn7]

Playoffs also i calculated

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Gotcha

[RangersIn7]

So we deduct 10% from the equation then? Panarin isn’t it banging like Kreider, i doubt there is much difference between the leagues when you factor his style of play.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

While the traditional power forward is a dying breed, Kreider’s game is reasonably close to that. Coupled with how heavily he relies on his speed, a player like him with that skill set being the best points of his game, you get a type of player that doesn’t usually age too well.

Obviously you never know and it can go either way. But the physicality and leaning on that straight line speed, when the legs start to go, the speed decreases, and the banging around exacts it’s toll, players like that are typically of minimal productivity and effectiveness after ages 31ish.

[Puck Head]

While the traditional power forward is a dying breed, Kreider?s game is reasonably close to that. Coupled with how heavily he relies on his speed, a player like him with that skill set being the best points of his game, you get a type of player that doesn?t usually age too well.

Obviously you never know and it can go either way. But the physicality and leaning on that straight line speed, when the legs start to go, the speed decreases, and the banging around exacts it?s toll, players like that are typically of minimal productivity and effectiveness after ages 31ish.

 

Oh i believe we see a much more dramatic decrease with Kreider than we do Panarin for that reason.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Fatfrancesa]

I would think kreiders speed will actually help him as he gets older. His skating will never be the reason he won’t be able to play.

[RangersIn7]

I’m

Oh i believe we see a much more dramatic decrease with Kreider than we do Panarin for that reason.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Exactly my feeling as well.

For the right term and money, they should still look at keeping him around. But I don’t think they will get to where they should with him. Any extension he signs wouldn’t kick in until the 20-21 season, so a 5 year deal still brings them to his 34th birthday at the tail end of the final season, which I don’t like. I just can’t imagine an outcome wherein he’s very productive and actually worth his salary in the last 2, or more likely last 3 seasons of that deal.

 

Even in today’s game, power forwards scare the shit out of me after age 30.

[Fatfrancesa]

While I agree that I don’t like signing kreider long term, I don’t think he’s a player that doesn’t have 5 more Kreider like years. His game has no frills. It’s straight line go to the net. Unless injury derails him there is nothing that makes meworry about him other than his usual disappearing act which has nothing to do with age. In fact maybe age will help him from disappearing for to long. It’s the guy who handles the puck all game that I worry about. As the game speed increases and he ages will he keep up? That is not kreiders game, it’s panarins.