Brooks Rangers Will be in on Patrick Kane

[Keirik]

1 hour ago, Br4d said:

 

A big part of the depth chart problems the Rangers have right now is Drury trying to make Gorton's talent choices all fit.  We're still not far away enough from Gorton's departure for Drury to have anything like a free hand in assembling the roster.

 

The trade deadline was great last year but *all* of those guys are gone because they didn't fit under the cap structure that Gorton laid out and that is still driving the Rangers choices today.

 

Drury has to be pulling his hair out at some of the choices he is going to have to make this off-season and over the next couple until he's actually in the driver's seat with a roster of his own making.

 

Thinking outside the box is definitely going to help him but any move he makes could blow up in his face sooner rather than later.

 

 

 

50 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

Yea, Gorton shouldve used our #2 or #1 for a center. No question about it. Look at how the draft played this year. Everyone took what they needed instead of the expected #1.

Such revisionist history going on. What C should the Rangers have gotten over a projected RW in Kakko that was universally agreed upon as a 1a/1b 1st overall or an ALF that also was a universal 1?

 

  If you are talking about years before then I’m not sure there is an issue either. Chytil at 21st pick wasn’t exactly passing over top flight players. Even Kravtsov. What C drafted afterwards is even in the NHL outside of a handful of games let alone impact level? 

[Pete]

4 hours ago, Winter said:

 

Don't think they traded 21 year old RFA Dach just to throw the Kane asset away for 21 year old RFA Kakko. I'd assume they'd want the rest of our draft 22 draft + 23 1st and Othmann   

It's more about getting Dach out. Fan base was on him and he's part of the old front office. 

[Pete]

3 hours ago, jsm7302 said:

Yea, Gorton shouldve used our #2 or #1 for a center. No question about it. Look at how the draft played this year. Everyone took what they needed instead of the expected #1.

Yea, they should have taken Dach instead of Kakko!

 

[The Dude]

5 hours ago, jsm7302 said:

Yea, Gorton shouldve used our #2 or #1 for a center. No question about it. Look at how the draft played this year. Everyone took what they needed instead of the expected #1.

Nah man. Even the BPA were fits at the time. Kreider wasn't signed yet and they STILL have problems at RW. 

 

Gorton probably didn't envision having 8 million in cap hit, tied into Goodrow, Nemeth and Reaves.

 

He probably should have dealt Kreider too, but nobody on this planet thought the Rangers would actually win the lottery and have a "generational talent" sitting there daring them not to take him. 

 

Let's also not forget that Drury was assistant GM prior to taking over. It's not like he had no input into the roster he is now in charge of.  

 

 

[Br4d]

It's not just the drafts that Drury is dealing with.  Panarin and Trouba are both cap issues that keep on causing problems.

 

BTW, I like both players but not at the effect they have on the cap.  Between them they account for nearly 25% of the cap and when has that ever worked out?

 

This roster right now is Gorton's roster with Drury doing continuous damage control and he'll have to keep doing that for at least another season.

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

58 minutes ago, Br4d said:

It's not just the drafts that Drury is dealing with.  Panarin and Trouba are both cap issues that keep on causing problems.

Completely disagree.

 

Sure Trouba's contract should probably be 1-1.5 million cheaper, but what are you doing with those savings if it were?

 

And saying that Panarin's contract is an issue is ridiculous. Who are you replacing his 1.28 ppg production with?

 

As the Dude pointed out, if you want to criticize Gorton's cap management on those two, I think that you have to be much more critical to the unnecessary extension given to Reaves, and the 3 year term given to Nemeth. Those two salary's plus your available cap space is you 5-6 million dollar 2nd line center.

 

I actually think being cap constrained is beneficial in that it makes Drury have to be more creative than signing Strome or Copp to an open market contract that will age badly once they get into their thirties.

Edited July 8, 2022 by MuddyInTheMiddle

[Br4d]

Panarin and Trouba are conservatively $4.5M over the cap collectively.  This assuming that you think Panarin should be paid as the best paid LW in the NHL - which I think is doubtful.  Really they are more like $5.5-6M over the cap between them and *that* is our 2C in a nutshell.

[Cash or Czech]

We've gotta wait til the deadline to afford Kane's cap hit even at 50% retained, right?

[jsm7302]

8 hours ago, Keirik said:

 

Such revisionist history going on. What C should the Rangers have gotten over a projected RW in Kakko that was universally agreed upon as a 1a/1b 1st overall or an ALF that also was a universal 1?

 

  If you are talking about years before then I’m not sure there is an issue either. Chytil at 21st pick wasn’t exactly passing over top flight players. Even Kravtsov. What C drafted afterwards is even in the NHL outside of a handful of games let alone impact level? 

You're right as far as who they drafted in those positions; other options were supposed to be a tier below these two. I guess the issue im having is how we ended up with a backlog of LW and D players/prospects.

 

At some point, you have to address weaknesses with strengths and whether it was by draft or trade, the lack of center depth could have/should have been addressed. We all know the draft is a crapshoot. 

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

10 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Panarin and Trouba are conservatively $4.5M over the cap collectively.  This assuming that you think Panarin should be paid as the best paid LW in the NHL - which I think is doubtful.  Really they are more like $5.5-6M over the cap between them and *that* is our 2C in a nutshell.

That part in bold is absurd.

I acknowledged that Trouba is overpaid by 1-1.5 million so are you saying that Panarin is over paid by 3-3.5 million?

[jsm7302]

57 minutes ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

Completely disagree.

 

Sure Trouba's contract should probably be 1-1.5 million cheaper, but what are you doing with those savings if it were?

 

And saying that Panarin's contract is an issue is ridiculous. Who are you replacing his 1.28 ppg production with?

 

As the Dude pointed out, if you want to criticize Gorton's cap management on those two, I think that you have to be much more critical to the unnecessary extension given to Reaves, and the 3 year term given to Nemeth. Those two salary's plus your available cap space is you 5-6 million dollar 2nd line center.

 

I actually think being cap constrained is beneficial in that it makes Drury have to be more creative than signing Strome or Copp to an open market contract that will age badly once they get into their thirties.

Teams were offering more for Panarins services. We made out well for his production. He needs a center. That is the problem. You hit the nail on the head; Nemeth and the Reaves extension killed the cap unnecessarily. Reaves purpose was well received and really helped put this team on the right track but after last year; I find his presence unnecessary.

[Br4d]

6 minutes ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

That part in bold is absurd.

I acknowledged that Trouba is overpaid by 1-1.5 million so are you saying that Panarin is over paid by 3-3.5 million?

Trouba is overpaid by $2M and Panarin is overpaid by at least $2M.  His cap number is $2.1M over the next highest in the NHL at LW.

[jsm7302]

10 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Trouba is overpaid by $2M and Panarin is overpaid by at least $2M.  His cap number is $2.1M over the next highest in the NHL at LW.

Contracts were years apart when signed. Are you comparing Jamie Benns 9.5 mil for 50 points to Panarins. 11.6 mil for 90+ points?

[Pete]

So, Lou Lam offered more than the Rangers for Panarin. The guy who just won GM of the year offered more than the Rangers for Panarin, but the contract was a mistake?

 

Yea, no. Considering Panarin outscored all LWs except Hurberdeau and JT Miller (who had outlier season), and Kaprizov who now makes $10M/yr...I'd say he's paid appropriately for a UFA signing.

Edited July 8, 2022 by Pete

[Br4d]

22 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

Contracts were years apart when signed. Are you comparing Jamie Benns 9.5 mil for 50 points to Panarins. 11.6 mil for 90+ points?

I'm comparing Panarin's deal signed in 2019 with the biggest cap numbers today.   He's still $2.1M over the next highest cap number at LW.

 

I'd have less of a problem with Panarin's deal if he was a consistent 35-40 goal a year player.   The way his play is structured it would be absolutely top level if he was a C.  It is less so as a LW.

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by Br4d

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

idk what it is lately with Rangers fans being upset at having Panarin on this team. people want him traded, people saying he's overpaid....

 

The fact that his spot on this team is even being discussed is ludicrous. Best forward we've had on our team in many years. He had an inconsistent playoff performance, fine. It's one time, and we still managed to get to the ECF and take the defending back to back champs 6 games. 

 

He's an insanely dynamic player. Yeah, Igor is why we went as far as we did, fine. But if you think we even sniff the playoffs without Panarin you just didn't pay attention this year. 

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

1 hour ago, Br4d said:

I'm comparing Panarin's deal signed in 2019 with the biggest cap numbers today.   He's still $2.1M over the next highest cap number at LW.

 

I'd have less of a problem with Panarin's deal if he was a consistent 35-40 goal a year player.   The way his play is structured it would be absolutely top level if he was a C.  It is less so as a LW.

 

You are looking at this myopically by comparing him only to left wings. 

 

Also, you never answered my last question; who are you replacing his production with that is not "overpaid"?

[Pete]

 

1 hour ago, Br4d said:

I'm comparing Panarin's deal signed in 2019 with the biggest cap numbers today.   He's still $2.1M over the next highest cap number at LW.

 

I'd have less of a problem with Panarin's deal if he was a consistent 35-40 goal a year player.   The way his play is structured it would be absolutely top level if he was a C.  It is less so as a LW.

 

 

2 minutes ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

You are looking at this myopically by comparing him only to left wings. 

 

Also, you never answered my last question; who are you replacing his production with that is not "overpaid"?

It's all fuzzy math. Since Panarin signed, the only LWs who outperformed him are not UFAs and the one who signed a contract is Kaprizov at $10M. What do you think he'd get as a UFA of his 100+ pt season? My guess would be in the 12-14M range.

 

Panarin was also signed before the flat cap, so if you think he's overpaid based on %Cap, who could have predicted the cap not rising for 3 straight years? It doesn't make the deal a bad one or the contract a mistake.

[BrooksBurner]

We really just need to wait and see what Gaudreau signs for. He’s probably the closest UFA wing comparable to Panarin since Panarin signed his contract. If he has ties to Calgary he may take a discount, but if he leaves it’s probably for max dollar or close to it.

[RichieNextel305]

3 minutes ago, rmc51 said:

We really just need to wait and see what Gaudreau signs for. He’s probably the closest UFA wing comparable to Panarin since Panarin signed his contract. If he has ties to Calgary he may take a discount, but if he leaves it’s probably for max dollar or close to it.

Or it’s to come close to home with either Philadelphia or New Jersey.

[Capt]

4 hours ago, MuddyInTheMiddle said:

That part in bold is absurd.

I acknowledged that Trouba is overpaid by 1-1.5 million so are you saying that Panarin is over paid by 3-3.5 million?

He's 100% right.  Panarin is a left wing, not a center.  He's not even close to a complete player.  He's paid in the McDavid and soon to be McKinnon class.  He is not those players, not even close.  He's a great scorer on the wing.  

[Capt]

To revise my statement.  Maybe Panarin is only overpaid half that amount.  The bigger issue is do you want so much money tied up on the wings regardless of the player.  My viewpoint is no.  Center and defense  is where I want the lion share of my cap going.  Even goaltending.  It's great having the best goalie but only when that goalie is making the money Igor is making now.  Hank was outstanding but his last contract was one of the biggest obstacles to improving the team enough for him to get his cup.  

Edited July 8, 2022 by Capt

[Capt]

Panarin and Kreider's contracts make even less sense on this team when you have Laf and Kakko (assuming they reach their potential).  Like it or not the Rangers future is very much tied to those two guys.  Either as trade bait or as foundational pieces.  Probably two of Panarin, Laf, Kreider, and Kakko need to be moved to better balance the cap positionally 

[MuddyInTheMiddle]

2 minutes ago, Capt said:

He's 100% right.  Panarin is a left wing, not a center.  He's not even close to a complete player.  He's paid in the McDavid and soon to be McKinnon class.  He is not those players, not even close.  He's a great scorer on the wing.  

As has been stated repeatedly above, it's an open market contract.

 

He makes the approximately the same as Marner, and what M. Tchachuk & Gaudreau will make this off season.

 

Same question for you: Who are you replacing his production with that is not "overpaid"?

[Scott]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

 

 

It's all fuzzy math. Since Panarin signed, the only LWs who outperformed him are not UFAs and the one who signed a contract is Kaprizov at $10M. What do you think he'd get as a UFA of his 100+ pt season? My guess would be in the 12-14M range.

 

Panarin was also signed before the flat cap, so if you think he's overpaid based on %Cap, who could have predicted the cap not rising for 3 straight years? It doesn't make the deal a bad one or the contract a mistake.

Seems to be overlooked in the argument as though it doesn't even exist.