article: If Not Artemi Panarin, Then Who?

[Phil]

But have any of us stopped to seriously ask ourselves what happens if come July 1 (or later), Panarin goes elsewhere? Or, perhaps more importantly, if not Panarin, then who?

 

Assuming an $83 million salary cap (and no major roster changes), the Rangers are projected to enter the free agent period with just over $19 million in cap space. That?s not just a healthy chunk of change, but money we can assume they?re itching to spend given their early ties to Panarin and Erik Karlsson, not to mention reported scuttlebutt about accelerating their rebuild.

 

Panarin is an undeniable star in the NHL. Since joining the league in 2015-16, he?s eighth in points (320) and has 116 goals in 322 games. It?s more than reasonable that the Rangers would show interest in him. But should he opt not to reciprocate ? and as Mike Murphy explored earlier this offseason, that?s a possibility with the Florida Panthers in the mix for him ? New York won?t be left holding the proverbial bag (of money).

 

Duchene would no doubt shore up the Rangers? thin-for-now center depth, though likely at nothing resembling a discount given the reported range on an extension with Ottawa that was worth upward of $75 million over eight years.

 

What about Buffalo?s Jeff Skinner? The 27-year-old is coming off of a 40-goal season with the Sabres and has yet to ink an extension. The closer he gets to free agency, the stronger his urge to test it will grow. The Rangers, who finished 24th in goals-per-game last season, would surely benefit from his offensive prowess.

 

Lots more in this one. Too much to quote properly.

 

https://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2019/5/21/18633595/if-not-artemi-panarin-then-who-new-york-rangers-free-agency

 

 

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

[Vodka Drunkenski]

Didn't realize Skinner only missed 3 games in the last 4 seasons.

[Blue Heaven]

If the Rangers want to "speed" up this rebuild then they pretty much have to get one of these 3 big free agents, however do it diligently and not overspend.

If they can't sign any of these free agents then IMO they have to wait to see what happens with Taylor Hall and go all in with him after next season, high end Free Agents are thin after next season.

Might make sense to keep Kreider if they cant get Panarin/Duchene

[Blue Heaven]

Didn't realize Skinner only missed 3 games in the last 4 seasons.

 

yeah the knock on him that he's injury prone is false, his 2nd/3rd seasons he was hurt, every other season he has played 70+ games

[Pete]

There's no such thing as "not overpaying" in free agency.

[BrooksBurner]

If not Panarin, and presumably no Karlsson, then it should be nobody. Elite players only. Don't overpay for secondary players. Continue down the path of youth development and expect a lottery team the next 2 years.

[josh]

If they dont get Panarin, and we arent talking about Karlsson/defense, I prefer they stay away from the big names - Duchene, Skinner, and the 2nd liners like Eberle and Lee. I think you look to make trades with team stuck at the cap. As Phil mentions, Ehlers is an option. As I mentioned yesterday, a trade with TB for Tyler Johnson and absorbing the Callahan contract (although I'm not fond of taking on cap dumps - NYR have enough already), or Marleau with Kapanen (FIN), VGK Haula (FIN) + Gusev.

[Pete]

31 Thoughts speculated Point on an offer sheet.

[Blue Heaven]

31 Thoughts speculated Point on an offer sheet.

 

Cant offer an offer sheet unless its in the $2.1-$4.2 range

[josh]

Cant offer an offer sheet unless its in the $2.1-$4.2 range

 

or 4 1sts.

$10,568,590+

 

To date, I haven't seen enough from the Rangers prospects in the NHL to be comfortable trading away 4 1sts for Point.

[Blue Heaven]

or 4 1sts.

$10,568,590+

 

To date, I haven't seen enough from the Rangers prospects in the NHL to be comfortable trading away 4 1sts for Point.

 

$10.5 million+ to give up 4 1sts, no thanks.

[Future]

Cant offer an offer sheet unless its in the $2.1-$4.2 range

As it stands now, but the Rangers could acquire another pick at the draft.

 

They'd probably have to go into 4 first-round pick territory ($10.5+) to get Point anyway.

[Pete]

I'd do 4 firsts.

 

It's not like you can't trade for a 1st down the line. You can probably get one for Kreider, or Zibenajad down the line if situation warrants.

[BrooksBurner]

or 4 1sts.

$10,568,590+

 

To date, I haven't seen enough from the Rangers prospects in the NHL to be comfortable trading away 4 1sts for Point.

 

$10.5 million+ to give up 4 1sts, no thanks.

 

A counter point is if the Stars re-sign Zucc and we get their 1st, then we trade Kreider for a 1st+, that recoups roughly half the cost for an offersheet to Point. Not exactly half since I would rather own the Rangers' own 1sts than those hypothetical ones.

 

I would probably be inclined to do Kreider and 2 1sts for Point. Hell, make Tampa a similar offer for Point before offersheeting if you go that route.

[Future]

A counter point is if the Stars re-sign Zucc and we get their 1st, then we trade Kreider for a 1st+, that recoups roughly half the cost for an offersheet to Point. Not exactly half since I would rather own the Rangers' own 1sts than those hypothetical ones.

 

I would probably be inclined to do Kreider and 2 1sts for Point. Hell, make Tampa a similar offer for Point before offersheeting if you go that route.

Not a bad idea to just try to trade for him, but you'd have to know that Point is going to sign with NYR.

[Pete]

Not a bad idea to just try to trade for him, but you'd have to know that Point is going to sign with NYR.

Exactly. The offer sheet at least locks the salary because he signed it.

[josh]

I'd do 4 firsts.

 

It's not like you can't trade for a 1st down the line. You can probably get one for Kreider, or Zibenajad down the line if situation warrants.

 

A counter point is if the Stars re-sign Zucc and we get their 1st, then we trade Kreider for a 1st+, that recoups roughly half the cost for an offersheet to Point. Not exactly half since I would rather own the Rangers' own 1sts than those hypothetical ones.

 

I would probably be inclined to do Kreider and 2 1sts for Point. Hell, make Tampa a similar offer for Point before offersheeting if you go that route.

True true... still not sure Point would be my target for an offer sheet, or the cap hit.

[Phil]

Assuming they make their picks and don't acquire any others, they'll have taken seven players in the first round over the last three Drafts. If any team can afford four first-rounders in an offer sheet, it's the Rangers.

[Slobberknocker]

agree here that you will overpay in FA. no doubt about it. i'd look for the Toronto or Tampa option to try to take Marner or point if you also absorb cap as well. might be the more economical thing to do.

 

you still have to get out of the blueline nightmare which imho, will take another year anyway.

 

not to say i wouldn't go after Panarin or Skinner.

[Gravesy]

Haven't read the article yet, but personally I'm not convinced at all about going after Duchene in free agency.

Is he good? Yes. Is he elite? No, he's not. I'm not comfortable with the idea of a 33/34/35 year old Duchene on big money. He also strikes me as more of a wagon than a truck, to borrow a term from a podcast I listened to the other day. I.e., he's a very good player in the right situation but I'm doubtful he's the kind of guy that puts a team on his back. Panarin is, imo.

[Fatfrancesa]

While the rangers maybe best positioned to lose 4 first round picks to sign a player like point, it doesn’t make it good asset management. 4 firsts if traded separately would net you much more than point and without a $10+m contract.

[LindG1000]

I think I'd probably approach this market as such:

 

Panarin.

 

If not Panarin, Karlsson.

 

If not Karlsson, Point.

 

Else? Cap space is an asset, and we're swimming in it. Money is an asset, and we have it. I'd rather bring in a deprecating asset that's going to eat 1-2 years of cap space and whatever someone's willing to pay to off that space. I'd rather spend 10m/y for 2 years of a combination of mid-range players and get paid to do it, than do the same for 6 years of our own volition.

[Phil]

While the rangers maybe best positioned to lose 4 first round picks to sign a player like point, it doesn’t make it good asset management. 4 firsts if traded separately would net you much more than point and without a $10+m contract.

 

Quality > quantity. Four firsts, traded separately, are unlikely to land you a 23-year-old point-per-game player.

[Phil]

I think I'd probably approach this market as such:

 

Panarin.

 

If not Panarin, Karlsson.

 

If not Karlsson, Point.

 

Else? Cap space is an asset, and we're swimming in it. Money is an asset, and we have it. I'd rather bring in a deprecating asset that's going to eat 1-2 years of cap space and whatever someone's willing to pay to off that space. I'd rather spend 10m/y for 2 years of a combination of mid-range players and get paid to do it, than do the same for 6 years of our own volition.

 

Essentially the Bickel-for-Teravainen approach? I like that idea.

[LindG1000]

A counter point is if the Stars re-sign Zucc and we get their 1st, then we trade Kreider for a 1st+, that recoups roughly half the cost for an offersheet to Point. Not exactly half since I would rather own the Rangers' own 1sts than those hypothetical ones.

 

I would probably be inclined to do Kreider and 2 1sts for Point. Hell, make Tampa a similar offer for Point before offersheeting if you go that route.

 

I'd argue this one, actually. For 2020, you're almost assuredly right - I can't argue that.

 

However, for two or three years down the line?

 

You'd be talking about a top of the lineup that looks something like this:

 

Kreider-Point-Kakko

Kravtsov-Zibanejad-Chytil

 

Miller-Fox

Hajek-Rykov

 

Georgiev/Shesterkin

 

Hard to imagine that top of the lineup not being competitive - not including Buchnevich in here, or Andersson, or any of the other pieces we'll pick up on the way.

 

I consider phrasing the question as "Would you give #15 in 2020, #24 in 2021, #32 in 2022 (hey, let's get some optimism), and #24-32 in 2023 for Point?" and I've gotta say...that's not a tough sell in my book.