The once-new "what's going on with Panarin" thread

[blahblah]

Other than blah I don't think you'd find anyone here willing to take on Seabrook.

I forget the exact details of what I was thinking at the time, but I certainly don't have the negative view that others have of him to be sure. I had the ideas of a trade in which I would have been willing to take Seabrook back. I've had a lot of unpopular ideas that tend to gain momentum and legitimacy over time. I doubt this will be one of them and I doubt we end up with Seabrook.

 

[CBJFan827]

Paying a guy who would likely be our 3rd pairing RD nearly $7M for the next 6 years is just irresponsible.

Seabrook makes more than Werenski and Jones combined. Definitely a no go for me.

 

[blahblah]

Paying a guy who would likely be our 3rd pairing RD nearly $7M for the next 6 years is just irresponsible.

Seabrook makes more than Werenski and Jones combined. Definitely a no go for me.

This part is just silly, of course a 33 year old top pairing player, with a career like Seabrook's, is going to make more than a guy on a ELC and guy that signed a deal after his ELC in which his performance wasn't worthy of a larger deal. This idiotic stat of your won't be accurate after next off season.

As far as the rest of it, you do realize you are just arguing with me right? At that, you aren't really arguing with me if you read my post closely. Basically you are just arguing with yourself. On a side note, your 3rd pairing argument is just asinine. I'm not sure if people really listen to themselves. All things considered he arguably had a better season than Keith.

Let's step up our game.

 

[blahblah]

Freaking boards acting weird.

 

[major major]

Paying a guy who would likely be our 3rd pairing RD nearly $7M for the next 6 years is just irresponsible.

Seabrook makes more than Werenski and Jones combined. Definitely a no go for me.

It's the 6 years thing that is really galling. Under some circumstances you could justify the cap hit. If it was just this year I'd look into the deal because we've got the cap space for it. But 6 years! That's a really long time to have that much deap cap.

 

[CBJFan827]

This part is just silly, of course a 33 year old top pairing player, with a career like Seabrook's, is going to make more than a guy on a ELC and guy that signed a deal after his ELC in which his performance wasn't worthy of a larger deal. This idiotic stat of your won't be accurate after next off season.

As far as the rest of it, you do realize you are just arguing with me right? At that, you aren't really arguing with me if you read my post closely. Basically you are just arguing with yourself. On a side note, your 3rd pairing argument is just asinine. I'm not sure if people really listen to themselves. All things considered he arguably had a better season than Keith.

Let's step up our game.

I wasn't arguing with you, or anyone. If I'm arguing with anyone, it was grindline for proposing that deal, which was pretty much universally disliked on the mains by Columbus and Chicago fans alike. You came in hot, so I'll respond now.

I'm not sure who lit a fuse in your butt, but I decided to contribute to a thread, like a great many other people have. Seabrook wouldn't be a top pair defenseman on this team. I happen to think Savard would be ahead of him on Torts' depth chart if we were to acquire Seabrook. It's far from asinine.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I just was looking at capfriendly.com and drew an imaginary line through Panarin's name.

It was not a pretty sight.

Then I drew one through Bob's name.

It got even uglier.

 

[JacketFanInFL]

I just was looking at capfriendly.com and drew an imaginary line through Panarin's name.

It was not a pretty sight.

Then I drew one through Bob's name.

It got even uglier.

I love how some just think we will magically recover from losing both of them.

 

[blahblah]

Seabrook wouldn't be a top pair defenseman on this team. I happen to think Savard would be ahead of him on Torts' depth chart if we were to acquire Seabrook. It's far from asinine.

The first part would probably be true, the last part is, again, downright silly. Savard is a NHL D. He's not a top 4 on a team that wants to win a Cup. He's serviceable, but some around here are, finally. starting to see where his limits are. Now you do have a point in that Torts can be a moron about his roster decisions but in this case he should be smarter than that.

The Hawks had a down year, Seabrook is still a very good D in this league. Our D is not nearly as good as those around here are saying. We don't have a veteran presence at all, Jones is pretty much it. We say what Cole added to this team, as well as Vanik. If you want to move this franchise toward winning a Cup, your veterans can't be Dubinsky and Foligno.

I know in my original post, a few weeks back, the understanding was that Seabrook was likely going to be a 2nd pairing on this team. Having said that if either Jones or Werenski was injured he could more than fill in.

Yes, there are challenges to bringing on a contract like that. I've also heard about "the worst contract in the history of the NHL" with a lot of players that still had quite a bit of value. For the record that distinction probably falls with DiPietro. His probably isn't even the worst in the NHL today. Fans, as a whole, tend to think of things statically and with a deep bias. One of the requirements with bringing in a contract like that is you either get a lot of value for the cap space (roster player, picks, prospects) or you get some value with the other team retaining some of the contract. The third option is to get rid of a contract you don't like as well, that tends to be dubious as far as actual value.

Seabrook is not done as a player and to suggest Savard is somehow better is laughable.

As I said, there is almost no chance we bring him here so the point is moot. I'm not even sure Seabrook would even waive is NMC even if something could be worked out.

 

[KJ Dangler]

Why in the world are we discussing Seabrook of all people. Were going to trade away a top 10 offensive forward in the league, to bring back another defenseman . And then were arguing our defense isnt as good as some think ? What is our forward group then ? We just not going to dress forwards, and just depend on our defenseman to score all the goals ? Pretty safe to say that when we trade Panarin, its not going to center around Seabrook.

 

[major major]

Why in the world are we discussing Seabrook of all people. Were going to trade away a top 10 offensive forward in the league, to bring back another defenseman . And then were arguing our defense isnt as good as some think ? What is our forward group then ? We just not going to dress forwards, and just depend on our defenseman to score all the goals ? Pretty safe to say that when we trade Panarin, its not going to center around Seabrook.

He wasn't arguing that it would center around Seabrook, just that taking on Seabrook as a part of the deal wouldn't be bad for us because Seabrook would actually be useful. I don't think he would be particularly useful and I think it's likely that Savard is the better player going forward.

 

[Jovavic]

I'm ready for this shit to be over

 

[squarelaces]

Just spitballing here but I don't think I've seen any mention of a possible new BFF Artemi & Bob collusion, like a position of both or neither.

 

[squarelaces]

And I guess I would be remiss if I didn't add "Collusion is not a crime"

 

[thebus88]

I love how some just think we will magically recover from losing both of them.

I love how others think the team will do nothing or add nobody in response to losing them, either in a trade return and/or with all the cap space that would be opened up.

 

[thebus88]

. Savard is a NHL D. He's not a top 4 on a team that wants to win a Cup. He's serviceable, but some around here are, finally. starting to see where his limits are.

The Hawks had a down year, Seabrook is still a very good D in this league. Our D is not nearly as good as those around here are saying. We don't have a veteran presence at all, Jones is pretty much it. We say what Cole added to this team, as well as Vanik. If you want to move this franchise toward winning a Cup, your veterans can't be Dubinsky and Foligno.

Fake news. Savard is absolutely a perfectly fine (good) #4 defenseman on any good NHL team. Our defense is, at worst, top 5 in the league. There's no point to having a veteran presence if the veterans are worse (and more expensive) than the younger guys.

The team is better off with Foligno and Dubinsky than they are with Cole and Vanek.

 

[blahblah]

Savard is absolutely a perfectly fine (good) #4 defenseman on any good NHL team. Our defense is, at worst, top 5 in the league. There's no point to having a veteran presence if the veterans are worse (and more expensive) than the younger guys.

I'm glad to see your bar is set so low. Fans are very good at having no idea how to compare players.

The team is better off with Foligno and Dubinsky than they are with Cole and Vanek.

I just threw up a little in my mouth.

Most people aren't all that good at looking at the big picture or looking at things from all sides, which you did a great job of illustrating. It's not meant as an attack or even a negative. As I've said I look at things differently and I can see nuance with greater ease. Cheers.

 

[grindline]

I wasn't arguing with you, or anyone. If I'm arguing with anyone, it was grindline for proposing that deal, which was pretty much universally disliked on the mains by Columbus and Chicago fans alike.

Hey guys... I can be wrong enough for you to both be able to disagree with me. I have plenty more wrongness to go around.

Actually, I still think my idea has some merit but I’m aware that if I held a convention for all of the people who agree with me we could rent a phone booth to hold it in.

 

[thebus88]

I'm glad to see your bar is set so low. Fans are very good at having no idea how to compare players.

Huh?

No, we have "fans" here who consistently underrate (certain) CBJ players (they're not fans of) and worst of all overrate other teams players (mainly) in relation to the CBJ players. Or they underrate the entire team as a whole. Your "bar" is unrealistically high.

I just threw up a little in my mouth.

Most people aren't all that good at looking at the big picture or looking at things from all sides, which you did a great job of illustrating. It's not meant as an attack or even a negative. As I've said I look at things differently and I can see nuance with greater ease. Cheers.

You honestly believe the team is worse of with Foligno and Dubinsky than they would be with Vanek and Cole? For just next year or for 3 years, its all the same.

But in your mind, I'll guess that you think Cole > Savard

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Most people aren't all that good at looking at the big picture or looking at things from all sides, which you did a great job of illustrating. It's not meant as an attack or even a negative. As I've said I look at things differently and I can see nuance with greater ease. Cheers.

This is terrific. ‘This isn’t meant as a negative, but I’m just smarter and more perceptive than you are.’

 

[We Want Ten]

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Hello everyone , Please don't take this wrong way just wanted to come over hear and read your thoughts on Panarin

Given all this talk about Panarin and a potential return to Chicago in future I was curious if Jackets decide to move him what are the Jackets biggest needs in a trade?

Do you believe a trade is at all viable at moment?

 

[Viqsi]

Hello everyone , Please don't take this wrong way just wanted to come over hear and read your thoughts on Panarin

Given all this talk about Panarin and a potential return to Chicago in future I was curious if Jackets decide to move him what are the Jackets biggest needs in a trade?

Do you believe a trade is at all viable at moment?

The biggest need is Panarin. Barring that, what we need is top-end scoring, such as that which is provided by Panarin. Literally everything else is already covered.

 

[EspenK]

Hello everyone , Please don't take this wrong way just wanted to come over hear and read your thoughts on Panarin

Given all this talk about Panarin and a potential return to Chicago in future I was curious if Jackets decide to move him what are the Jackets biggest needs in a trade?

Do you believe a trade is at all viable at moment?

Here's a different answer. Yes a trade with Chicago is viable imo. Depends on the return as always. If Panarin commits to re-signing with Hawks then I think something like Saad, DeBrincat and a #1 gets it done for me. Don't know if Chicago would do that though. If it is just a rental type deal with no commitment to re-sign I doubt the Jackets do it unless the return is much, much better than what Carolina got for Skinner. For that kind of a deal I think he stays at least until the TDL. Maybe Saad, #1 and Ejdsell.

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

And I guess I would be remiss if I didn't add "Collusion is not a crime"

But this is a crime against the Union Army.