Guilt Trip
Well-known member
LA just got a whole lot better. It looks as tho it was LA or bust.
Panarin to L.A.
- Thread starter Guilt Trip
- Start date
L K
Well-known member
50% retention, he signs an extension and that's the return. I get taking something over losing him for nothing but this just makes me angrier about our crap usage of prospect capital for shit rentals and mediocre players. Why the hell can't we find players who want to come here
Guilt Trip
Well-known member
He was only going to LA...totally killed his value. Rags did well considering.
I don't see where I suggested that.
Gaudreau was arguably worse in terms of talent return - they got nothing.
But UFAs have been leaving teams since players got to be UFAs.
It is not unique to Toronto.
At least Tkachuk tried to help Calgary to get some return.
Seattle was reportedly offering Panarin 4 x $14mil... that's insane.
I think this article also shows how New York's decision to let Panarin's agent have total control over this is what destroyed his trade value. To make it completely reliant on an extension being signed dropped the pool of teams from like probably a dozen to one. They should have never let the agent discuss extensions. It would have probably at least doubled his trade value.
If the argument is, well Panarin wouldn't have waived his NMC, no way. Dude's only got a handful of chances to win a Stanley Cup left in his career. He wouldn't have wasted one toiling away with the Rangers post-deadline.
Agreed. He was going to a contender and then he could sign where he wanted too after that. Letting the agent dictate terms was crazy.
Joe S.
Moderator
No no, this wasn't meant at a shot at you or what you said. I should worded it better. I meant it to say that I think what Tkachuk did was worse. He had no choice but to help them get a return, he was not a UFA, he had no other avenue other than not reporting. He also held them hostage to 1 team. Marner honoured his contract. Tkachuk demanded out.
L K
Well-known member
Can you think of a single time where the Leafs were able to strong arm a team into giving up a superior player for underwhelming cost because they insisted on playing in Toronto. We got team friendly contracts a few times with guys like Bunting, Spezza and more recently Tavares but I can't think of a single trade where a player forced their way to Toronto like this.
He did have a choice. He was a RFA. They would have to qualify him at $7.x mil and potentially deal with him in arbitration - which had been filed. He could play a year in Calgary and leave as a UFA that following summer.
OR they could move him and get some return - which is what they elected to do. He was upfront with them that he would not re-sign as a UFA or re-sign long term which to me was what got the ball rolling to allow them to get some return.
Unfortunately, that just isn't going to happen. It's just the nature of the beast. There is more media scrutiny in Toronto than places like Florida and LA. You pay more in taxes. You can't hide as people figure out where you live. That isn't a Toronto thing, that's a Canadian thing. No body is clamoring to go to Vancouver, Edmonton or Montreal either. And that's with the political situation in the states the way it is right now.
I think Lindros tried. Tavares came as a UFA because he wanted to be here.
"Can you think of a single time where the Leafs were able to strong arm a team into giving up a superior player for underwhelming cost because they insisted on playing in Toronto."
That's a bit of a loaded question because there is potentially a fair flirtation with tampering there (strong arm..). I don't want to tangle you up with choice of words.
I'm trying to think of when that has happened. Probably has but it doesn't strike me as very common. Maybe refresh my memory ...??