Confirmed with Link: Artemi Panarin, Tyler Motte, 6th (17) to Columbus for Saad, Forsberg, 5th (18)

Status
Not open for further replies.

mikeyp24

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
5,959
1,231
A post of mine from another thread about Panarin vs Johny hockey:

Panarin Scored 80+pts for the team with the worst PP in the league while playing Selke caliber wing on his first year with a team that is very defensive focused. The #2 F scorer is around 30pts behind at least. It took about 25 games for bread to find his feet with the jackets. He was under .5ppg at that time. Next year there is a strong chance for 90-100pts.



 
  • Like
Reactions: Sore Loser

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
A post of mine from another thread about Panarin vs Johny hockey:

Panarin Scored 80+pts for the team with the worst PP in the league while playing Selke caliber wing on his first year with a team that is very defensive focused. The #2 F scorer is around 30pts behind at least. It took about 25 games for bread to find his feet with the jackets. He was under .5ppg at that time. Next year there is a strong chance for 90-100pts.

I'm not going to bother with talking about the prediction, of course there's a chance for 90+ points. Having said that, the analysis was kind of flawed in that being on "the worst PP in the league" didn't hurt his overall PP production norms. I haven't bothered to look at his PP time comparison, but this seems like the start of pro-Panarin bias.

My comment was not intended to put down Panarin in any way or to be negative, just illustrating that what was provided was horribly simplistic.
 

mikeyp24

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
5,959
1,231
I'm not going to bother with talking about the prediction, of course there's a chance for 90+ points. Having said that, the analysis was kind of flawed in that being on "the worst PP in the league" didn't hurt his overall PP production norms. I haven't bothered to look at his PP time comparison, but this seems like the start of pro-Panarin bias.

My comment was not intended to put down Panarin in any way or to be negative, just illustrating that what was provided was horribly simplistic.
My post wasn't directed at you just wanted to put my opinion out there I didn't think you were putting him down. And the PP production norm actually I'd say there is.no norm because in 3 years he has improved every season so it is too small of a sample size. But having the worst PP I'm the league and him being one of the top PP producers in the team if we were even league average at 15 that would likely have given him at least 5 more points putting him at 87 with 2 games left and he is historically a Pens killer. Not factoring his very slow start it' reasonable to assume if the PP was better 90pts is closer to his numbers then 80 this s3ason.
 

Hello Johnny

Registered User
Apr 13, 2007
13,208
1,142
A post of mine from another thread about Panarin vs Johny hockey:

Panarin Scored 80+pts for the team with the worst PP in the league while playing Selke caliber wing on his first year with a team that is very defensive focused. The #2 F scorer is around 30pts behind at least. It took about 25 games for bread to find his feet with the jackets. He was under .5ppg at that time. Next year there is a strong chance for 90-100pts.



I believe Panarin and Dubois were first paired together around game #24 and since then Panarin is on a 90 point pace and PLD on pace for 60. Next year they're going to rip it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikeyp24

mikeyp24

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
5,959
1,231
I believe Panarin and Dubois were first paired together around game #24 and since then Panarin is on a 90 point pace and PLD on pace for 60. Next year they're going to rip it up.
Yeah I also think if PLD started at C (which if anyone looks at my posts since before he started his last year in the Q and ESPECIALLY the WJC I fought he should not play W because it is not his game he is much more effective as a C and we saw how the wjc went and the start of this year) he would be very close to 60 right now. I'd say at least 25g as well. Next year if Wennberg can get is shit together or we get it together for him and move him out haha our top 2 lines IMO could be deadly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mac DeMarco

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
My post wasn't directed at you just wanted to put my opinion out there I didn't think you were putting him down.

Never thought it was directed at me, no idea why you would think I did.

And the PP production norm actually I'd say there is.no norm because in 3 years he has improved every season so it is too small of a sample size.

In what way has he "improved all three seasons". What are you using to draw this opinion? Just a quick looks at statistics doesn't draw us to that conclusion. Statistically he actually dropped slightly in year two. Any statistical increase this season can be easily explained by an increase in ice time, not necessarily improvement in his play.

But having the worst PP I'm the league and him being one of the top PP producers in the team if we were even league average at 15 that would likely have given him at least 5 more points putting him at 87 with 2 games left and he is historically a Pens killer. Not factoring his very slow start it' reasonable to assume if the PP was better 90pts is closer to his numbers then 80 this s3ason.

We are not the worst PP in the league. This season we are in the bottom quarter. The "worst" is actually Edmonton, at 14.1%. League average is 20%, we're at 17%. Minnesota is at slightly over 20%, has had 15 more opportunities and that translates to 8 extra goals. If we hit the league average would that be because the top unit has been dragging Panarin down or what that be because the 2nd unit improved their play? The assumption you are making is that an improved PP would directly translate to increased points by Panarin. Going to league average might have a modest increase his PP production or have no impact at all.

You are making suppositions. In just 5 minutes of research, I've been able to put doubt in your thesis. Let's just wait and see what happens shall we?

I'm not saying he won't reach 100 points at some point in his career, but I'm not ready to say that an increase like that is going to come from a statistical team increase in PP%.
 
Last edited:

mikeyp24

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
5,959
1,231
Never thought it was directed at me, no idea why you would think I did.



In what way has he "improved all three seasons". What are you using to draw this opinion? Just a quick looks at statistics doesn't draw us to that conclusion. Statistically he actually dropped slightly in year two. Any statistical increase this season can be easily explained by an increase in ice time, not necessarily improvement in his play.



We are not the worst PP in the league. This season we are in the bottom quarter. The "worst" is actually Edmonton, at 14.1%. League average is 20%, we're at 17%. Minnesota is at slightly over 20%, has had 15 more opportunities and that translates to 8 extra goals. If we hit the league average would that be because the top unit has been dragging Panarin down or what that be because the 2nd unit improved their play? The assumption you are making is that an improved PP would directly translate to increased points by Panarin. Going to league average might have a modest increase his PP production or have no impact at all.

You are making suppositions. In just 5 minutes of research, I've been able to put doubt in your thesis. Let's just wait and see what happens shall we?

I'm not saying he won't reach 100 points at some point in his career, but I'm not ready to say that an increase like that is going to come from a statistical team increase in PP%.
I thought you thought it was directed towards you because your wording. And his improvement isn't based on stats it's based on watching a lot of hawks games when the Cbj aren't on. I love watching Kane play so I had a good idea of Panarins talent before coming here. Each year it seemed like a different part of his game has grown stronger. One year he was great with carrying it in and the other his was better at taking the shit when he had it opposed to handling the puck or passing to Kane and this year his D has been leaps and bounds above anything he did in CHI.

And the PP must have gone up over the last 3 games because we were the worst at least when PLD scored his hattrick goal. And I have 0 doubt I don't know what you think you poked holes in but your holes are speculation on what if it goes bad instead.of continual progression.
 

cbjgirl

Just thinking
Jan 19, 2006
3,681
272
about last summer.
snip

We are not the worst PP in the league. This season we are in the bottom quarter. The "worst" is actually Edmonton, at 14.1%. League average is 20%, we're at 17%. Minnesota is at slightly over 20%, has had 15 more opportunities and that translates to 8 extra goals.

snip

Not to get overly nit-picky, but there were stretches this season where the CBJ did have the worst PP in the league. It stunk for a (seemingly) really long stretch, their recent success has pulled them out of the bottom. Had they been middle of the pack rather than oscillating between crappy and spectacular, it is likely that Bread would have had more points.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
Not to get overly nit-picky, but there were stretches this season where the CBJ did have the worst PP in the league. It stunk for a (seemingly) really long stretch, their recent success has pulled them out of the bottom. Had they been middle of the pack rather than oscillating between crappy and spectacular, it is likely that Bread would have had more points.

And we no longer are. The individual was using outdated information. A team will have ups and downs, Panarin in within his norms for the last two seasons for PP production. At one point, last season, we were the best PP in the league. We didn't finish that way.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
I thought you thought it was directed towards you because your wording. And his improvement isn't based on stats it's based on watching a lot of hawks games when the Cbj aren't on. I love watching Kane play so I had a good idea of Panarins talent before coming here. Each year it seemed like a different part of his game has grown stronger. One year he was great with carrying it in and the other his was better at taking the **** when he had it opposed to handling the puck or passing to Kane and this year his D has been leaps and bounds above anything he did in CHI.

So you used no objective information to draw these conclusions. Ok. That isn't to say I doubt your analysis, but what you are posting is subjective analysis - your opinion.

And the PP must have gone up over the last 3 games because we were the worst at least when PLD scored his hattrick goal. And I have 0 doubt I don't know what you think you poked holes in but your holes are speculation on what if it goes bad instead.of continual progression.

If you don't understand the doubt, it's because you are choosing to spin the facts to support your thesis. The statistical data doesn't support your conclusions, even just a quick analysis. You seem to believe the that team was holding Panarin back from producing more PP points. I seen nothing to support that hypothesis. As I said moving us to middle of the pack in PP% might not make any statistical different in Panarin's PP production. That could simply be made up by other players, even on different units.

I don't want to sound like a jerk, this appears to be based on looking at the teams PP ranking(s) and your scouting of the player. We similar things with like "Imagine if so-and-so played with so-and-so!!!!". When this happens (a player moves to a different team and plays with better players) it rarely translates into any meaningful increase in production.

As I said, I think Panarin is capable of putting up 90+ points in a season. However, he sure doesn't seem to be McDavid either so let's not get crazy with our expectations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikeyp24

db2011

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
3,565
474
Brooklyn
I'll go back to our origins and say that Whitney was a comparable. The real title might actually go to Bryan Berard.

Yeah, Whitney was a comparison I made yesterday on the mains, too. He was great in Columbus.

Berard's a good call.

But I'm pretty much drunk on the Panarin kool aid. I enjoy having a superstar on the team, especially one who seems to make his linemates better in a way I don't remember Nash doing.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
But I'm pretty much drunk on the Panarin kool aid. I enjoy having a superstar on the team, especially one who seems to make his linemates better in a way I don't remember Nash doing.

Very good player, but I'm not ready to put him in the "superstar" category. He does get notice, but I doubt fans of most teams are buying tickets just for the chance to watch him when he comes in town. I doubt Panaris is going to drive TV ratings.

I think you are taking more about production and performance, we still have some work to to there.

He's growing on me and I'm happy we have him. Time will tell what that will do for us long term as a franchise.

Oh and Whitney, he was good for more than just us. I think he had over 1k points in something like 1300 games and played to around 40.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,621
4,188
Very good player, but I'm not ready to put him in the "superstar" category. He does get notice, but I doubt fans of most teams are buying tickets just for the chance to watch him when he comes in town. I doubt Panaris is going to drive TV ratings.

What exactly is your definition of a superstar? One who drives TV ratings? 233 pts in 243 NHL games and a ppg this year ain't bad. I think it translates to a 12.4 share in viewership terms.:sarcasm:
 

db2011

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
3,565
474
Brooklyn
Very good player, but I'm not ready to put him in the "superstar" category. He does get notice, but I doubt fans of most teams are buying tickets just for the chance to watch him when he comes in town. I doubt Panaris is going to drive TV ratings.

I think you are taking more about production and performance, we still have some work to to there.

He's growing on me and I'm happy we have him. Time will tell what that will do for us long term as a franchise.

Oh and Whitney, he was good for more than just us. I think he had over 1k points in something like 1300 games and played to around 40.

You make good points re: superstar. I agree, he probably doesn't compel opposing teams' fans to come watch him.

Yet? If he keeps this up, he might get there.

And I remember that about Whitney. Honestly, when he became a Jacket I was surprised he was still so productive, I thought he came to Columbus in the same career point as Fedorov. And then he left Columbus (which was a little bit salty, IIRC) and continued to produce. Yeah, he was a gamer for sure.
 

Hello Johnny

Registered User
Apr 13, 2007
13,208
1,142
And I remember that about Whitney. Honestly, when he became a Jacket I was surprised he was still so productive, I thought he came to Columbus in the same career point as Fedorov. And then he left Columbus (which was a little bit salty, IIRC) and continued to produce. Yeah, he was a gamer for sure.
MacLean thought he wasn't worth the term he was asking for (3 or 4 years?) and then the guy continued to produce for another decade :laugh:
 

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,643
4,166
Jarmo said when acquiring Panarin they needed a game breaker who can hang with the top talents in the league (the Crosbys and Malkins).

Watch Werenski's goal. Panarin gains the zone 3 on 1 and draws everyone to him. He then makes a beautiful long pass to PLD who sets up Werenski.

If Panarin isn't the most talented forward we have had, he is second. He is what Zherdev was supposed to be, just 10 years later.
 

Cyclones Rock

Registered User
Jun 12, 2008
10,595
6,519
I'll guess that Panarin's agent-along with most other agents-keeps a close eye on what Tavares and Matthews get and goes from there. He'll be 27 starting next season so an 8 year deal takes him through 34 which is about as good an age-time frame as a team can hope to sign a top player.

He's blown away every other CBJ in points production. He's a top 10 wing. It would be surprising to see him settle for less than $9 million per year. I think it'll be richer. His contract will probably include a NMC and a lot of bonus money as well. It's hard for me to see him signing for much less than Eichel did. Buffalo screwed up the pay levels with that deal. Edmonton's Draisatl deal will also cause problems for GMs.

I'll guess that he'll get $9.75 million/8 years/NMC/heavy bonus money. First year salary plus bonus in the $12 million range.
 
Last edited:

CharlotteJacket

Registered User
Apr 11, 2013
2,046
910
Charlotte, NC
I'll guess that Panarin's agent-along with most other agents-keeps a close eye on what Tavares and Matthews get and goes from there. He'll be 27 starting next season so an 8 year deal takes him through 34 which is about as good an age-time frame as a team can hope to sign a top player.

He's blown away every other CBJ in points production. He's a top 10 wing. It would be surprising to see him settle for less than $9 million per year. I think it'll be richer. His contract will probably include a NMC and a lot of bonus money as well. It's hard for me to see him signing for much less than Eichel did. Buffalo screwed up the pay levels with that deal. Edmonton's Draisatl deal will also cause problems for GMs.

I'll guess that he'll get $9.75 million/8 years/NMC/heavy bonus money. First year salary plus bonus in the $12 million range.
How are bonuses counted against the cap?
 

Double-Shift Lasse

Just post better
Dec 22, 2004
33,505
14,245
Exurban Cbus
That Dougie thought he wouldn't should have been the confirmation he would. :laugh:

opposite-George.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad