Proposal: 1st OA pick (Patrick) for Panarin

[L13]

Panarin has maybe 3-5 years left in his prime while a 1OA has 10-12 and costs far less...

You're assuming Patrick will enter his prime at 18?

As a Flames fan I'd totally do it if Panarin agrees to re-sign with the Flames and can play RW. I know he shoots right, but don't know much about his history in that position. Patrick is a fine prospect, but we've already drafted a bunch of comparable prospects (Monahan, Bennett, Tkachuk) and none of them can play RW.

 

[Sojourn]

Yeah, but add to them busts and just average players, like RNH.

And the end result is still probably more top 10 scorers than you think. That doesn't change.

The success rate of 1st overall picks is pretty high. Just because some of them don't live up to their hype doesn't mean they aren't very good players. That's an argument you probably shouldn't be trying to make. You'd be better off arguing that this particular draft's 1st overall pick won't be at that level. If I had the choice of a 1st overall pick in an unnamed draft or Panarin, I'd take the pick. Pretty much every time.

Even if the player ends up being slightly worse than Panarin, and that's possible, the 7 year difference and the benefit of a cost controlled asset is huge. It's even bigger when you consider what a team competing for a 1st overall pick looks like. Panarin alone isn't going to turn things around for them.

 

[Brock Radunske]

1. Not all 1sts overall are the same.
2. How many 1sts overall have ever become top10 scorers in the league?

Well, since 2010 there has been at least three 1st overall players in the top 10 in scoring save for 2010/2011 where there were two...

2010/11 - #5 Stamkos, #7 Ovechkin
2011/12 - #2 Stamkos, #5 Kovalchuk, #7 Tavares
2012/13 - #2 Stamkos, #3 Ovechkin/Crosby, #5 Kane, #6 Staal, #9 Hall
2013/14 - #1 Crosby, #6 Hall, #8 Ovechkin
2014/15 - #2 Tavares, #3 Crosby, #4 Ovechkin
2015/16 - #1 Kane, #3 Crosby, #4 Thornton
2016/17 - #1 McDavid, #3 Crosby, #7 Kane

Every forward taken at #1 since Ovechkin's draft is on that list, save for RNH and Yakupov (Matthews is 30 games in so I left him off)
There is a VERY strong likelihood that if a forward is taken at #1, he will be as good or better than Panarin.
Or they could be Yakupov/RNH but based on the last 15 years, that's VERY unlikely.

 

[Rebels57]

Patrick won't be as good at Panarin in all likelihood, but the age and salary gap make this an impossible deal..unless Benning lands the 1OA

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Patrick won't be as good at Panarin in all likelihood, but the age and salary gap make this an impossible deal..unless Benning lands the 1OA

If Benning lands the 1st OA he's drafting Patrick, nice baseless jab though....

Also Panarin plays with one of the best players in the world, in all likelihood if Patrick had the same opportunity he would be just as good if not better.

 

[CanadienShark]

I love Panarin, but hell no. I'd rather take the risk on Patrick being the better player long term and he'd actually be affordable for the Sharks, unlike Panarin. To a team with the cap space like Nashville, maybe Panarin would make more sense (minus the whole divisional thing).

 

[Makar Goes Fast]

the main issue is the team that gets the 1st overall pick is not going to be a Panarin away from being in contention. they will likely need a few years of development.

 

[yourbestfriend]

I think this has to do more with the fact that Panarin is a winger.
If we replace him with a top pairing 25yr old defenseman, I think more teams would make the trade.

 

[Rebels57]

If Benning lands the 1st OA he's drafting Patrick, nice baseless jab though....

Also Panarin plays with one of the best players in the world, in all likelihood if Patrick had the same opportunity he would be just as good if not better.

Panarin is one of the best players in the world on his own.

Nothing Patrick has shown at the Junior level suggests he will be a PPG player at the NHL level like Panarin.

As I said though, the trade would make little sense for the team holding the 1OA.

 

[slimbob8]

1. Not all 1sts overall are the same.
2. How many 1sts overall have ever become top10 scorers in the league?

Ummm...most of them? Can't tell if you're joking or not. If you're looking for a top 10 scorer, there's no better place to start than the 1st pick in the draft obviously. Or is it a safer bet to go the khl route now after Panarin?

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Panarin is one of the best players in the world on his own.

Nothing Patrick has shown at the Junior level suggests he will be a PPG player at the NHL level like Panarin.

As I said though, the trade would make little sense for the team holding the 1OA.

Care to explain this?

 

[McSuper]

This idea came up on our team board.

If your team landed the first overall pick, would you trade if for Artemi Panarin next offseason?

Fans of other teams will say no . Truth is Panarin has much more value in a weak draft then a 1st OA that could end up as Yakupov did . If a team has the cap space this is a no brainer .

The only teams that would refuse would be ones going into a rebuild . Benning in Vancouver would probably do it and send more back . TML would be a good fit . Move JVR and resign Panarin and they got the makings of a deadly 1st line . Just don't see C town doing it . They won 3 cups by managing their assets

 

[Brock Radunske]

Fans of other teams will say no . Truth is Panarin has much more value in a weak draft then a 1st OA that could end up as Yakupov did . If a team has the cap space this is a no brainer .

The only teams that would refuse would be ones going into a rebuild . Benning in Vancouver would probably do it and send more back . TML would be a good fit . Move JVR and resign Panarin and they got the makings of a deadly 1st line . Just don't see C town doing it . They won 3 cups by managing their assets

Just because Yakupov was the #1 pick doesn't mean he was the best of the weak draft. He was just a bad pick.

Taking EVERYTHING into account (Age, contract, position, etc.), I doubt Montreal/Toronto/Anaheim/Winnipeg/Nashville* would trade Galchyenuk/Rielly/Lindholm/Trouba/Forsberg for Panarin.

If the team trusts their scouts, then they 100% keep the pick.
If they don't, then Panarin would be a great pick up.



*via trade

 

[Kshahdoo]

Well, since 2010 there has been at least three 1st overall players in the top 10 in scoring save for 2010/2011 where there were two...

2010/11 - #5 Stamkos, #7 Ovechkin
2011/12 - #2 Stamkos, #5 Kovalchuk, #7 Tavares
2012/13 - #2 Stamkos, #3 Ovechkin/Crosby, #5 Kane, #6 Staal, #9 Hall
2013/14 - #1 Crosby, #6 Hall, #8 Ovechkin
2014/15 - #2 Tavares, #3 Crosby, #4 Ovechkin
2015/16 - #1 Kane, #3 Crosby, #4 Thornton
2016/17 - #1 McDavid, #3 Crosby, #7 Kane

Every forward taken at #1 since Ovechkin's draft is on that list, save for RNH and Yakupov (Matthews is 30 games in so I left him off)
There is a VERY strong likelihood that if a forward is taken at #1, he will be as good or better than Panarin.
Or they could be Yakupov/RNH but based on the last 15 years, that's VERY unlikely.

What about Mackinnon?.. But it doesn't matter. Out of this bunch Crosby, Ovechkin, Tavares, Kovy and Kane are probably not a level above Patrick, but two, if not three. Not sure about Thornton, where he was projected to be.

So it's probably Stamkos, Staal and Hall, you can compare Patrick to, who were on comparable (Stamkos and Staal even higher, but very shortly) to Panarin level. And there are Yakupov, RNH and Mackinnon, who never were as good as Panarin and will never be.

And I'm sure, that Stamkos and Hall were considered as significantly better prospects, than Patrick or anybody from 2017 draft.

 

[Jared Dunn]

For the leafs, yes, as you lock in a deadly winger for matthews for the next 6 years.

Oooor, you keep both Marner and Nylander on the wing and have a deadly winger for both Matthews and Patrick, and have some of the grossest center depth in the NHL.

 

[Brock Radunske]

What about Mackinnon?.. But it doesn't matter. Out of this bunch Crosby, Ovechkin, Tavares, Kovy and Kane are probably not a level above Patrick, but two, if not three. Not sure about Thornton, where he was projected to be.

So it's probably Stamkos, Staal and Hall, you can compare Patrick to, who were on comparable (Stamkos and Staal even higher, but very shortly) to Panarin level. And there are Yakupov, RNH and Mackinnon, who never were as good as Panarin and will never be.

And I'm sure, that Stamkos and Hall were considered as significantly better prospects, than Patrick or anybody from 2017 draft.

Ah, forgot about Mac.
He's less than 5 years in the league, but I'll give you that.
I guess my point it that a star almost always comes with the #1 pick, especially if you have competent scouting.

 

[Hawksfan2828]

Don't see any team that gets the 2017 #1 pick, Helping out Chicago here Chicago would need to offer way more then just Panarin to give up the 2017 1st overall pick Nolan Patrick especially considering that Panarin is seeking at least 6 years $36 million from Chicago that could be far more from another team that might not be able to afford him.

Yea, and I heard the same thing about Yakupov.

Wait, how many ppg players are there in the league 24 or younger?

Nevermind.. How many ppg players are there in the league?

The notion that the 1st overall pick is worth more than Panarin is insane given Panarin's age.

 

[Brock Radunske]

Yea, and I heard the same thing about Yakupov.

Wait, how many ppg players are there in the league 24 or younger?

Nevermind.. How many ppg players are there in the league?

The notion that the 1st overall pick is worth more than Panarin is insane given Panarin's age.

Since when is 77pts in 80 games PPG?

kidding! Everyone relax! lol

 

[Hawksfan2828]

Well, since 2010 there has been at least three 1st overall players in the top 10 in scoring save for 2010/2011 where there were two...

2010/11 - #5 Stamkos, #7 Ovechkin
2011/12 - #2 Stamkos, #5 Kovalchuk, #7 Tavares
2012/13 - #2 Stamkos, #3 Ovechkin/Crosby, #5 Kane, #6 Staal, #9 Hall
2013/14 - #1 Crosby, #6 Hall, #8 Ovechkin
2014/15 - #2 Tavares, #3 Crosby, #4 Ovechkin
2015/16 - #1 Kane, #3 Crosby, #4 Thornton
2016/17 - #1 McDavid, #3 Crosby, #7 Kane

Every forward taken at #1 since Ovechkin's draft is on that list, save for RNH and Yakupov (Matthews is 30 games in so I left him off)
There is a VERY strong likelihood that if a forward is taken at #1, he will be as good or better than Panarin.
Or they could be Yakupov/RNH but based on the last 15 years, that's VERY unlikely.

But Panarin IS already a ppg player, and you're using language like "could"..

The risk for the Hawks ISN'T worth it.

The only reason why the Hawks would do this trade would be to have a potental ppg player down the road that is presently cost controlled..

But say Patrick does pan out at becomes a ppg player down the road - well the Hawks would be in the same position they're in now....

The notion the Hawks would end up getting a better player than Panarin at #1 would be a stretch - I mean the player would have to be a generational player for the Hawks to actually win the trade and the chances of Patrick being "generational" are slim.

 

[Brock Radunske]

But Panarin IS already a ppg player, and you're using language like "could"..

The risk for the Hawks ISN'T worth it.

The only reason why the Hawks would do this trade would be to have a potental ppg player down the road that is presently cost controlled..

But say Patrick does pan out at becomes a ppg player down the road - well the Hawks would be in the same position they're in now....

The notion the Hawks would end up getting a better player than Panarin at #1 would be a stretch - I mean the player would have to be a generational player for the Hawks to actually win the trade and the chances of Patrick being "generational" are slim.

I guess I'm just looking at this from a different lens since I wouldn't be taking Patrick if I had the #1 pick. If Patrick was the player picked, you're probably correct.

 

[Hawksfan2828]

I guess I'm just looking at this from a different lens since I wouldn't be taking Patrick if I had the #1 pick. If Patrick was the player picked, you're probably correct.

Patrick is a big "if"...

I just don't see the reasoning behind trading Panarin for 1st overally (Patrick).

Like I said the only reason to do this would be to obtain a young star that is cost controlled for several years... But like I also said - why? when the Hawks will ultimately find themselves in this position again.

If the Hawks need to make room - they trade Kruger first and if need be Seabrook.

I know Hawks fans don't want to lose Seabrook but we may have to - Panarin given his age and production - not to mention the type of player he is (the Russian Kane) - is just too valuable to lose

 

[TheKrebsCycle]

No rebuilding agrees to this. Too many years of cost control/1 overall pics tend to end up as star/elite players. It's easily the more appealing combo.

 

[TT1]

Like many people have mentioned Panarin's next contract makes this a bad deal for the team trading Patrick.

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

Well at the moment, Panarin looks to be posting back to back 75-80 pt seasons.

The question is do you think Patrick will be producing at that rate or better in the future?

At that rate? Sure, I can agree with that, if all goes right.

Better? Meh... that would be a stretch to automatically pencil a guy in for routine 80+ in todays NHL

I would say its a fairly even swap, the main reason to decline is obviously the cost control of an ELC and bridge player, where as Panarin is obviously going to get paid long term now

Not to take anything away from Panarin, but he definitely benefits a lot from Kane. Is he still a 1st liner? Absolutely. But on a weaker team, I think he is more of a 65 point guy than a high 70s guy. I think he is worth a high pick - maybe top 3-5 in this draft, but not #1. Patrick is 7 yrs younger than Panarin and could very well be a better player within 3-5 yrs. And, even though that's far from a guarantee, you're looking at paying Patrick ~9-12 million over the next 5 yrs, whereas Panarin will get close to 3x more than that.

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

Not to take anything away from Panarin, but he definitely benefits a lot from Kane. Is he still a 1st liner? Absolutely. But on a weaker team, I think he is more of a 65 point guy than a high 70s guy. I think he is worth a high pick - maybe top 3-5 in this draft, but not #1. Patrick is 7 yrs younger than Panarin and could very well be a better player within 3-5 yrs. And, even though that's far from a guarantee, you're looking at paying Patrick ~9-12 million over the next 5 yrs, whereas Panarin will get close to 3x more than that.

But if you have watched much of him and Kane this year, they dont have the same chemistry as last year.

Panarin is an ELITE shooter and he buries a one timer like Stamkos, Ovechkin, and like Kovalchuk used too.

Most of his goals and looks now are coming off point passes from Keith and Seabrook. He is also creating more plays this year and finding guys like TVR for their first goal of the year. Last year was definitely the Kane and Panarin chemistry show. This year Panarin is standing out on his own and any Hawks fan will tell you the same. In fact, before Toews got injured, Panarin wasnt playing with Kane as Quenneville put Toews and Kane together to get Toews going, and panarin was lighting it up still with Anisimov and Hossa