RichieNextel305 Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 Guys, I get the bitterness toward some of the playoff issues with Panarin. I have been guilty of it with him and other guys on this team. But you wish we could waive him? We are talking about a Top-10 forward in the entire league. Come on guys. 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 21 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said: Guys, I get the bitterness toward some of the playoff issues with Panarin. I have been guilty of it with him and other guys on this team. But you wish we could waive him? We are talking about a Top-10 forward in the entire league. Come on guys. It’s not bitterness. It’s just the reality of the situation. He’s a top 10 forward in the regular season and a bottom 10 forward relative to cap hit in the playoffs. They can’t effectively change the look of the forward group with Panarin. It is what it is. Take the red pill my dude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 6 hours ago, BrooksBurner said: Well I mean you are saying something is an unchallengeable fact to people who are challenging it. What do you expect? You're wrong to say that. That's not me saying that your opinion that his production is irreplaceable is invalid or irrational, even if I disagree with it. It's not a bad take. I just like mine better With Schneider at 2.25, Lindgren at 4.25, and Panarin's cap out, they would have a hair under 18 million to sign 2 top 6 players and either a 3rd line player (alternative: Berard or Othmann slug it out for the spot) or a defensive upgrade (alternative: Zac Jones gets the 3LD spot). Here's a hypothetical example using AFP's contract projections (scratches are placeholders, I don't care who): Now you can say you don't think this is better than a lineup than one you can create with Panarin in it, and that's fine, but I don't see why it's unreasonable to think that this lineup could offer more hardnosed play in the playoffs. Maybe they win fewer regular season games because Panarin is just a god there, you'll likely lose a few extra games from not having him on PP/4v4/3v3/shootout, but when it comes down to needing to create a forecheck in the playoffs, I'm taking my chances with the above. That's all. I think you're illustrating the point, though. You trade Panarin - a guy who has had two Hart-caliber seasons and three additional point-per-game years with us - and you're not getting better players than Tyler Bertuzzi and Dakota Joshua in the lineup? Like...this is what we're doing? Bringing in a guy who might be a total flash-in-the-pan in Joshua, bringing in a guy with a long history of injury and, let's face it, mediocrity in Bertuzzi, bringing in Guentzel (which, whatever - I'm not a believer, but it does effectively take us out of the McDavid sweepstakes you've been going on about) and getting nothing for Artemi Panarin? What did we get for the NHL's fourth-leading scorer since he signed that contract? Parking passes to a Hamilton cast reunion performance? I get that this is an exercise in what we can do with that cap space. How about acquiring a half-decent player in the trade? Not to mention that this lineup fails to address the actual reason why our forwards are getting neutralized in the playoffs - garbage breakout play from defenders not named Adam Fox. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 (edited) 3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: It’s not bitterness. It’s just the reality of the situation. He’s a top 10 forward in the regular season and a bottom 10 forward relative to cap hit in the playoffs. They can’t effectively change the look of the forward group with Panarin. It is what it is. Take the red pill my dude You act like this team is far off. They’re not, as much as you want to pretend that they are. Take this pill. It’s a Xanax. It’s going to calm you down. And you may still do math better than me then too. Edited June 24 by RichieNextel305 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 1 minute ago, RichieNextel305 said: You act like this team is far off. They’re not, as much as you want to pretend that they are. They are. They need 1 of Panarin or Zibanejad out to make necessary changes in the play style of the top 6. It’s going to get gradually worse if the roster stays relatively the same. There was no improvement in the analytics because they struggle to establish good forechecks, especially in the playoffs. The more the top end of the roster stays the same, the more they will fade into a bad team. It’s coming faster than you think. Drury needs to get out ahead of it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 1 minute ago, BrooksBurner said: They are. They need 1 of Panarin or Zibanejad out to make necessary changes in the play style of the top 6. It’s going to get gradually worse if the roster stays relatively the same. There was no improvement in the analytics because they struggle to establish good forechecks, especially in the playoffs. The more the top end of the roster stays the same, the more they will fade into a bad team. It’s coming faster than you think. Drury needs to get out ahead of it. I mean, they’re not. There’s work to be done. But this team isn’t millions of miles away. You can keep saying it. It doesn’t mean it’s true. Regardless of whatever the analytics say or what fans think or what fans think of what may happen. They are not as far off as you say they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 16 minutes ago, LindG1000 said: I think you're illustrating the point, though. You trade Panarin - a guy who has had two Hart-caliber seasons and three additional point-per-game years with us - and you're not getting better players than Tyler Bertuzzi and Dakota Joshua in the lineup? Like...this is what we're doing? Bringing in a guy who might be a total flash-in-the-pan in Joshua, bringing in a guy with a long history of injury and, let's face it, mediocrity in Bertuzzi, bringing in Guentzel (which, whatever - I'm not a believer, but it does effectively take us out of the McDavid sweepstakes you've been going on about) and getting nothing for Artemi Panarin? What did we get for the NHL's fourth-leading scorer since he signed that contract? Parking passes to a Hamilton cast reunion performance? I get that this is an exercise in what we can do with that cap space. How about acquiring a half-decent player in the trade? Not to mention that this lineup fails to address the actual reason why our forwards are getting neutralized in the playoffs - garbage breakout play from defenders not named Adam Fox. That’s all fine but we just disagree. I will take Guentzel + Bertuzzi for this team over Panarin and whatever $2.5 million scrub they will sign in free agency to consume a similar total cap number. I’m not some massive believer in Guentzel either, but he plays a certain way and he has a history of producing when it matters. Those two players fit the mold needed to improve the forecheck and be tougher to play against when it matters. Panarin is redundant. The return for Panarin is whatever. I’d like to think he can net some combination of a decent prospect and pick or two, or potentially a low cost, young bottom 6 player or bottom 4 defenseman. I don’t need a 100 point finesse player back. That’s what we’re changing. On the other side of rhe fence, I get told he’s too valuable to trade for anything, and out of the same mouth I get told nobody is taking his full cap hit even when it’s clear there are a few competitive teams who absolutely can. Make that make sense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 57 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said: Guys, I get the bitterness toward some of the playoff issues with Panarin. I have been guilty of it with him and other guys on this team. But you wish we could waive him? We are talking about a Top-10 forward in the entire league. Come on guys. If he can't take over a game in ECF he's not a top-10 forward and I don't care how many points he had last season or will next if that is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 6 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said: I mean, they’re not. There’s work to be done. But this team isn’t millions of miles away. You can keep saying it. It doesn’t mean it’s true. Regardless of whatever the analytics say or what fans think or what fans think of what may happen. They are not as far off as you say they are. Right. It’s my opinion that they are. I may not be right. You might not be either. I view this team’s current window like a bell curve. I find it very likely they just hit the highest point of it. Now comes the descent. If they run it back, I would probably wager they are in that 102-106 point range next year. 2nd or 3rd in Metro and out in the first or second round. Then worse the following year if they keep on keeping on, but maybe the season I just described gets them to finally push to cut bait with who they need to cut bait with. Who knows. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 6 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: On the other side of rhe fence, I get told he’s too valuable to trade for anything, Any serious hockey fan shouldn't need to be told this. That's why you can't be taken seriously. It's pretty clear at this point that you're trolling. Quote and out of the same mouth I get told nobody is taking his full cap hit even when it’s clear there are a few competitive teams who absolutely can. Make that make sense. It's already been made to make sense for you, you just ignore facts that doesn't play directly into your narrative. You presented exactly one trade proposal from Boston where it doesn't even benefit Boston in the slightest. "Pasta couldn't score in the playoffs so let's use half of our available cap on the same exact player and in the process give away a center when we're looking for centers". Nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 7 minutes ago, Br4d said: If he can't take over a game in ECF he's not a top-10 forward and I don't care how many points he had last season or will next if that is the case. How many games did Barkov take over in the Eastern conference final? How many games did Tkachuk? Damn, it's almost like the playoffs are hard and the further you go the harder they get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 5 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: Right. It’s my opinion that they are. I may not be right. You might not be either. I view this team’s current window like a bell curve. I find it very likely they just hit the highest point of it. Now comes the descent. If they run it back, I would probably wager they are in that 102-106 point range next year. 2nd or 3rd in Metro and out in the first or second round. Then worse the following year if they keep on keeping on, but maybe the season I just described gets them to finally push to cut bait with who they need to cut bait with. Who knows. This is exactly the same trope we heard last summer. "They peaked last year! That's why they lost to the Devils! Nothing but downhill from here!" Except none of that was close to being true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 6 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: That’s all fine but we just disagree. I will take Guentzel + Bertuzzi for this team over Panarin and whatever $2.5 million scrub they will sign in free agency to consume a similar total cap number. I’m not some massive believer in Guentzel either, but he plays a certain way and he has a history of producing when it matters. Those two players fit the mold needed to improve the forecheck and be tougher to play against when it matters. Panarin is redundant. The return for Panarin is whatever. I’d like to think he can net some combination of a decent prospect and pick or two, or potentially a low cost, young bottom 6 player or bottom 4 defenseman. I don’t need a 100 point finesse player back. That’s what we’re changing. On the other side of rhe fence, I get told he’s too valuable to trade for anything, and out of the same mouth I get told nobody is taking his full cap hit even when it’s clear there are a few competitive teams who absolutely can. Make that make sense. I'm not the one making the argument to trade the guy. It's not on me to make it make sense. Who's taking him? What's the return? Why does it make sense for us to make the deal? To turn a phrase...make this make sense! So far, we're stuck on a big bunch of butthurt, largely around calling a perennial Hart candidate worthless because in the playoffs he's scoring at a mediocre .94 p/g rather than his usual 1.2 p/g Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 1 minute ago, LindG1000 said: I'm not the one making the argument to trade the guy. It's not on me to make it make sense. Who's taking him? What's the return? Why does it make sense for us to make the deal? To turn a phrase...make this make sense! So far, we're stuck on a big bunch of butthurt, largely around calling a perennial Hart candidate worthless because in the playoffs he's scoring at a mediocre .94 p/g rather than his usual 1.2 p/g I answered all of those questions. I think it makes them better. You don’t. Oh well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieNextel305 Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 17 minutes ago, Br4d said: If he can't take over a game in ECF he's not a top-10 forward and I don't care how many points he had last season or will next if that is the case. Did Matthew Tkachuk? Did Barkov? Alexander Ovechkin went the first decade plus of his career not even getting into the ECF. Does he stink too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 Just now, BrooksBurner said: I answered all of those questions. I think it makes them better. You don’t. Oh well! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Pete said: Any serious hockey fan shouldn't need to be told this. That's why you can't be taken seriously. It's pretty clear at this point that you're trolling. It's already been made to make sense for you, you just ignore facts that doesn't play directly into your narrative. You presented exactly one trade proposal from Boston where it doesn't even benefit Boston in the slightest. "Pasta couldn't score in the playoffs so let's use half of our available cap on the same exact player and in the process give away a center when we're looking for centers". Nonsense. I mentioned 3 or 4 players, and you focus on the one who happens to play center. They have Coyle and Zacha at center too. I didn’t realize Geekie was untradeable for a 120 point player! Who cares about Geekie? Lol Both Brad and I also mentioned Detroit, but you got so focused on defaulting to “Panarin would never waive” and “Boston doesn’t want a 120 point player”, that it doesn’t make sense to talk about it with you. Yet you follow me around everywhere about it. Down boy! Edited June 24 by BrooksBurner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 (edited) 37 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said: I mean, they’re not. There’s work to be done. But this team isn’t millions of miles away. You can keep saying it. It doesn’t mean it’s true. Regardless of whatever the analytics say or what fans think or what fans think of what may happen. They are not as far off as you say they are. Here's the reality of it...(I can't believe it needs to be repeated every single day for two people who just seem to ignore reality, or more likely are just trolling at this point) They have 1 year left of Shesterkin and 2 left of Panarin, who has NMC as does Mika. There's single digit chances of those two players going anywhere. This is also a team that's been to the Eastern conference finals 2 out of the last 3 years with obvious holes at topline right wing, third line center and can do better at third line wings. So what do we think is more likely, that the team jump through hoops trying to remove players with trade protection while trying not to take any money back at all, or adding to what's already here to improve the outcome? I know these folks want a gas light everyone into thinking that The team didn't have a very good season and that it should be blown up immediately, But that's really just bullshit. At this point it's not even about preference, it's just about what's fantasyland and what's reality. If they had a real plan to break this team up (and I don't consider anything that's been posted here so far to be a "real" plan) that makes them better next season with Shesterkin, I'm all for it. But breaking up the team for the sake of breaking up the team is loser thinking. The bottom line is they are closer to a cup than they are to missing the playoffs or being a bad team and anybody who wants to say different is just gaslighting you. So why would a team that's close blow it up when so many contracts are expiring on their own over the next few years? Here's the answer, they probably won't. Edited June 24 by Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 2 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: I mentioned 3 or 4 players, and you focus on the one who happens to play center. They have Coyle and Zacha at center too. I didn’t realize Geekie was untradeable for a 120 point player! Who cares about Geekie? Lol Both Brad and I also mentioned Detroit, but you got so focused on defaulting to “Panarin would never waive” and “Boston doesn’t want a 120 point player”, that it doesn’t make sense to talk about it with you. Yet you follow me around everywhere about it. Down boy! What I actually did was ask you why Boston would spend half their available cap space on one player who was also shut down by the team who eliminated them... You can't even stand one Bread, but you think Boston wants Bread and Pasta? Too many carbs. You could never explain it cuz it doesn't make sense. Let's step away from Be A GM mode and live in the real world. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 18 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: I answered all of those questions. I think it makes them better. You don’t. Oh well! They were shitty answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 1 minute ago, Pete said: What I actually did was ask you why Boston would spend half their available cap space on one player who was also shut down by the team who eliminated them... You can't even stand one Bread, but you think Boston wants Bread and Pasta? Too many carbs. You could never explain it cuz it doesn't make sense. Let's step away from Be A GM mode and live in the real world. Lmao. I did explain it. Like if you read what I had written at the time and didn’t agree, ok I really don’t care, but it was clear you just hadn’t been reading through what I was writing so why would I bother continuing? And no. I like Be a GM mode. And shootout wins against the Sharks in November are what does it for you. We all have our enjoyments! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Pete said: They have 1 year left of Shesterkin and 2 left of Panarin, who has NMC as does Mika. There's single digit chances of those two players going anywhere. So what do we think is more likely, that the team jump through hoops trying to remove players with trade protection while trying not to take any money back at all, or adding to what's already here to improve the outcome? You don’t have to clarify any of this. I can’t speak for Brad, but I am well aware that the chances of the meaningful change I’d like to see are low. Maybe not single digit low, but considerably less than 50%. I expect as close to a run it back roster as you’re going to get. I also expect the same less-than-desired outcome. Why does that bother you so much? Edited June 24 by BrooksBurner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 12 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: You don’t have to clarify any of this. I can’t speak for Brad, but I am well aware that the chances of the meaningful change I’d like to see are low. Maybe not single digit low, but considerably less than 50%. I expect as close to a run it back roster as you’re going to get. I also expect the same less-than-desired outcome. Why does that bother you so much? The team was very very good and they're likely gonna run it back because they're close enough and the contracts dictate it's a perfectly valid decision. Why does that bother you so much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 4 minutes ago, Pete said: The team was very very good and they're likely gonna run it back because they're close enough and the contracts dictate it's a perfectly valid decision. Why does that bother you so much? That's your opinion and you're welcome to it. I don't get actively upset by it like you do about mine. So answer the question without some lazy retort like "stupid opinions like yours just make me mad". Very funny. Ok, for real though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 23 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: Lmao. I did explain it. Like if you read what I had written at the time and didn’t agree, ok I really don’t care, but it was clear you just hadn’t been reading through what I was writing so why would I bother continuing? I read it. I "didn't buy it". Like if the Rangers had 20 million in cap would you want to take Pasta thinking he's gonna help Panarin? I already know the answer. It never made sense, whether I read it front back sideways last week or next week. Quote And no. I like Be a GM mode. And shootout wins against the Sharks in November are what does it for you. It's so odd that you find you're clearly attempting an insult here...because I enjoy watching the team play and wins make me happier than you and losses don't bother me as much. OK, I'm happy when the team wins, in November or in a shootout...you're too cool for that. Weird flex but whatever feeds your ego. Quote We all have our enjoyments! It's quite clear that you don't enjoy anything about this team other than [bad] ways to blow it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now