Although the uncertainty surrounding the upcoming CBA talks (current one expires in September) certainly is and should be alarming, because it's clear that there are several issues that once again will need to be dealt with and altered, we don't know how the free agency period is going to go down this July.
This said, I don't think PAP gets less than a 4 year deal somewhere (maybe here) for $4-4.5 million per. Don't see a dime less coming.
The cap's going down, though. That means less big money guys, meaning PAP has to measure against Suter, Parise. I'll bet it keeps the sum lower and Snow has an edge to meet the bids.
I don't see him getting any more than $3M elsewhere. Sorry. He has a history, and he also has the "he only did it with Tavares" card played against him. Picking him up is a GOOD gamble, but still a gamble. If I have $4-5M to give a UFA, do I give it to Parenteau or someone who has done it for his entire career and not just when sent to a team with John Tavares centering him (because the Isles didn't spend on a top winger)?
I know he has talent, but not $5M talent. I'd imagine other GM's know this, too.
But GMs don't have that choice...they can spend $4-5M on Parenteau, who is on pace for 70+ points with Tavares at center, or give it to somebody who has never come close to 70 points.
How many UFAs have hit 70 points within the past three or four years? Maybe a handful. Heck, there are probably only about 15 that have reached 60 points. And some of those will be re-signed.
Realistically, you are looking at maybe 8-10 top-6 forwards available during free agency. And about 25 teams looking to add one (and some more than on).
If you want a consistent 70 point scorer, you are looking at Parise or Selanne. That's it. If you want to look at players with 70 point potential, would you rather give your money to PAP, assuming he scores 70 points this year, or players like Huselius or Boyes who have been on the decline?
It will most likely go down in the new CBA (owners will push to lower player salaries from 57% of league revenue to 50% similar to the most recent NBA and NFL agreements).
Problem is, that won't happen until after the summer.
it would be crazy to give Parenteau the kind of money/term that Grabovski got....just crazy money. I truly don't think he's worth it. There's MUCH MORE to hockey than goals/assists and there are dozens of players I'd rather spend money on than Parenteau.
I expect Parenteau to test UFA and to get his lottery money from another desperate team.
I'm NOT worried about his production because whomever steps into that top line will produce just the same. A team with so little overall talent and so many holes in other areas cannot afford to use that much money on a player like Parenteau.
They need size, speed, defense (both defensemen and defensive forwards).
Parenteau is like Jason Blake. Greta season, at the perfect time, on a horrible team - time to cash in and hopefully not with the NYI.
I'd keep it to 3 years and 12MM tops.
If TWO or THREE of Nino, Strome, Petrov, Nelson, Lee, Kabanov, Yakupov (or whomever else we draft this year) cannot take a top six role over the next three years then this team's in trouble, serious Columbus-like trouble)
Parenteau is like Jason Blake. Greta season, at the perfect time, on a horrible team - time to cash in and hopefully not with the NYI.
Gotta admit, I don't see him as a Jason Blake type. His style of play and hockey sense are just so, so different, that there's much more reason to believe that at least his assist numbers will hover between 30-60 for the next ten years.
In addition, Blake entered the league late, but took his precious time to start contributing offensively. Parenteau broke in as a 53 point guy. He should easily have 70+ points by the time the season is over. We're in an age where the Leino's get 6 million and the Fleischman's get 4.5. He's DEFINITELY landing in that range.
Quote:
I'd keep it to 3 years and 12MM tops.
Which will make it hard to keep him.
Quote:
If TWO or THREE of Nino, Strome, Petrov, Nelson, Lee, Kabanov, Yakupov (or whomever else we draft this year) cannot take a top six role over the next three years then this team's in trouble, serious Columbus-like trouble)
A risk Snow can't take. He cannot detract a 70 point guy this summer and hope that players within the system make up for that. There is no-one on the forefront who projects to be capable to do that as soon as next season. No-one!
They've got to pitch out the dough - and the years. Then pray. It'd be a catastrophe to lose that offense. There's no one on the market who can feel could realistically come in and make up for that. Not on the Islanders' clock. Even if we could somehow rake in Parise, there's no guarantee that he gets more than 65-80 points here.
PAP HAS to be kept. They must achieve this.
If Snow had had ANY doubt that he can sign him, and he must have, he needed to get something in return for him at the deadline and then go HARD for him once again come July 1st!
I can't believe he didn't play it like that.
I don't even wanna know how things are gonna look in Islanderville if by July 3rd, he's signed some gawwwwwd awful 5 year, 5.5 million per somehwere else.
Last edited by Chapin Landvogt: 03-07-2012 at 06:19 PM.
I don't even wanna know how things are gonna look in Islanderville if by July 3rd, he's signed some gawwwwwd awful 5 year, 5.5 million per somehwere else.
I don't even wanna know how things are gonna look in Islanderville if by July 3rd, he's signed some gawwwwwd awful 5 year, 5.5 million per somehwere else.
He'll cover with budding power forward Dustin Penner and Isles fans will think JT can turn him into 30/30 guy...
Gotta admit, I don't see him as a Jason Blake type. His style of play and hockey sense are just so, so different, that there's much more reason to believe that at least his assist numbers will hover between 30-60 for the next ten years.
In addition, Blake entered the league late, but took his precious time to start contributing offensively. Parenteau broke in as a 53 point guy. He should easily have 70+ points by the time the season is over. We're in an age where the Leino's get 6 million and the Fleischman's get 4.5. He's DEFINITELY landing in that range.
Which will make it hard to keep him.
A risk Snow can't take. He cannot detract a 70 point guy this summer and hope that players within the system make up for that. There is no-one on the forefront who projects to be capable to do that as soon as next season. No-one!
They've got to pitch out the dough - and the years. Then pray. It'd be a catastrophe to lose that offense. There's no one on the market who can feel could realistically come in and make up for that. Not on the Islanders' clock. Even if we could somehow rake in Parise, there's no guarantee that he gets more than 65-80 points here.
PAP HAS to be kept. They must achieve this.
If Snow had had ANY doubt that he can sign him, and he must have, he needed to get something in return for him at the deadline and then go HARD for him once again come July 1st!
I can't believe he didn't play it like that.
I don't even wanna know how things are gonna look in Islanderville if by July 3rd, he's signed some gawwwwwd awful 5 year, 5.5 million per somehwere else.
Yup Parenteau is the kind of player this organization needs: hockey sense and desire to play. Not something you see in Grabner and Okposo. Something like 4.75 mil for 5 years would make sense too me for PAP. But I have the feeling he's going to hit the market next July ...
Yup Parenteau is the kind of player this organization needs: hockey sense and desire to play. Not something you see in Grabner and Okposo. Something like 4.75 mil for 5 years would make sense too me for PAP. But I have the feeling he's going to hit the market next July ...
Yup Parenteau is the kind of player this organization needs: hockey sense and desire to play. Not something you see in Grabner and Okposo. Something like 4.75 mil for 5 years would make sense too me for PAP. But I have the feeling he's going to hit the market next July ...
I'm hoping that our GM doesn't overvalue PAP in the way that some here are.
We're not one of the worst 5-on-5 teams in hockey for no reason. It has to do with the makeup of our forwards as well as the shrimp-sized defense.
If you keep PAP, then you need a goal scoring center to place him with. Anyone see one of those on our roster?
The Moulson-JT-PAP line is subpar at 5-on-5 hockey. Keep reading that until it sinks in. Against big and/or strong skating 5-man units they're simply not as effective.
We have all the playmakers you could possibly want on a team. We lack goal scorers. We lack size down the middle. Judging by how little money we spend, we can't afford to be throwing anything remotely close to $5 million at PAP. That actual salary is better spent elsewhere.
$3 million is fair.
$4 million is probably what he'll get.
$5 million is far too ****ing much for a complementary forward when we lack the right player to match him with and he's not a great fit for our star player who the coaching staff seems obsessed to keep him with.
PAP just went scoreless for 3 games. Does that mean we change the lines up again? That's all it took to end the KO experiment (even after JT had his most dominant month ever and was a plus player - something he hasn't been in any other month.)
I'm fine with us not trading PAP at the deadline. I feel it would have sent the wrong message to the core of our team. Same with Nabby. However, I'm placing a strong limit on how much I'd be willing to spend on PAP.
If we're going to start getting near $5 million, then we're far better off investing that in a center (even if we have to get one via trade.)
Stopgap player at $4 million/year for 2 years MAX for me. Even then, I'd see PAP as an option, not a must sign player.
We do not need more smaller forwards who can't skate on this team. I love PAP's work ethic. I love that he hits. I hate his physical attributes.
We lack snipers. We lack larger bodies. We lack strong skaters. PAP is none of those. You don't overpay to keep him; you keep him at the right price for the right reasons. You should also work on the makeup of the entire team if you plan on keeping him.
We need to spend our resources at forward more wisely. Keeping PAP would need to come along with bringing in a goal scoring center. Since we don't lack for playmakers and still need a 1A or #2 goal scoring center, it makes more sense to focus on that area first when it comes to free agency. The second this season ends, you have to look at PAP as a free agent. You have to consider the opportunity cost of signing PAP.
Yes, if we just bring up another player, then it's a mistake not to keep him. I don't want to rush more prospects. That said, I don't want to block their way by signing this kind of player for a long period of time when he isn't a good fit for the team.
Feel free to read this over and over until it sinks in.
I don't think the Isles pay him more than Taveras is making. He'll be offered slightly more than Moulson is earning because of the market, but there's no way they offer him more than JT's salary. Some other GM might, but I think Taveras's contract is the highpoint for forwards currently on the roster.
I'm hoping that our GM doesn't overvalue PAP in the way that some here are.
We're not one of the worst 5-on-5 teams in hockey for no reason. It has to do with the makeup of our forwards as well as the shrimp-sized defense.
If you keep PAP, then you need a goal scoring center to place him with. Anyone see one of those on our roster?
The Moulson-JT-PAP line is subpar at 5-on-5 hockey. Keep reading that until it sinks in. Against big and/or strong skating 5-man units they're simply not as effective.
We have all the playmakers you could possibly want on a team. We lack goal scorers. We lack size down the middle. Judging by how little money we spend, we can't afford to be throwing anything remotely close to $5 million at PAP. That actual salary is better spent elsewhere.
$3 million is fair.
$4 million is probably what he'll get.
$5 million is far too ****ing much for a complementary forward when we lack the right player to match him with and he's not a great fit for our star player who the coaching staff seems obsessed to keep him with.
PAP just went scoreless for 3 games. Does that mean we change the lines up again? That's all it took to end the KO experiment (even after JT had his most dominant month ever and was a plus player - something he hasn't been in any other month.)
I'm fine with us not trading PAP at the deadline. I feel it would have sent the wrong message to the core of our team. Same with Nabby. However, I'm placing a strong limit on how much I'd be willing to spend on PAP.
If we're going to start getting near $5 million, then we're far better off investing that in a center (even if we have to get one via trade.)
Stopgap player at $4 million/year for 2 years MAX for me. Even then, I'd see PAP as an option, not a must sign player.
We do not need more smaller forwards who can't skate on this team. I love PAP's work ethic. I love that he hits. I hate his physical attributes.
We lack snipers. We lack larger bodies. We lack strong skaters. PAP is none of those. You don't overpay to keep him; you keep him at the right price for the right reasons. You should also work on the makeup of the entire team if you plan on keeping him.
We need to spend our resources at forward more wisely. Keeping PAP would need to come along with bringing in a goal scoring center. Since we don't lack for playmakers and still need a 1A or #2 goal scoring center, it makes more sense to focus on that area first when it comes to free agency. The second this season ends, you have to look at PAP as a free agent. You have to consider the opportunity cost of signing PAP.
Yes, if we just bring up another player, then it's a mistake not to keep him. I don't want to rush more prospects. That said, I don't want to block their way by signing this kind of player for a long period of time when he isn't a good fit for the team.
Feel free to read this over and over until it sinks in.
It will most likely go down in the new CBA (owners will push to lower player salaries from 57% of league revenue to 50% similar to the most recent NBA and NFL agreements).
Problem is, that won't happen until after the summer.
,
