GDT: 2024-2025 Training Camp

[SEALBound]

Yeah Bunting brought an element this team desperately needed. It remains to be seen if he can continue doing that or if he was just out to prove himself after being dealt. If he can bring that same game this year and if even one of those prospects pans out to be something then I'm pretty happy with the Jake trade.

I can understand being annoyed with Bunting being part of that deal if you were hoping that Dubas just got a pure futures package, though. But I wonder how likely that ever was going to be. The teams that wanted Jake were playoff teams so it was probably always going to be a case of a team needing to send salary back to make a Jake trade work. Perhaps the true ideal would have been a team sending a crappy (but expensive) player back so that said player didn't affect the package Dubas got of futures, but again how many playoff teams have dead weight like that to give up?

Also if Dubas doesn't get Bunting back then he's got to use the cap space to get some other top six player for Sid this year and who knows how that plays out. I doubt we get someone as good as Bunting or as cheap.

The package he got was incredibly appropriate for the stated goals of this team. They got help now and in the future. I mean, they got Brunicke with that pick and he's looking damn promising!

And I mean, worrying about player performance is something that applies to ALL players. Even Guentzel. Every year after his shoulder injury, we all kinda wondered if this was going to be the year he drops off a bit. Our expectation was 40 goals. There's a constant worry of "Well what do we do if he doesn't hit that?" Same will apply to Rust, Malkin, Rakell, even Crosby. And yes, it will apply to Bunting.

And I agree that I would rather have got Bunting at $4.5mil x 3yrs vs having to pay for a 2LW on the open market this past free agency. Who would we have even got? DeBrusk?

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

You know it's hard to blame people, really. This team has a long-standing tradition (even now that they are quite aged) of lining up middle six and worse players next to Crosby and Malkin. So I can forgive people for having a warped view of what a top six wing actually is.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Would that be in the same way Guentzel has benefited from playing with Crosby?

Look, I'm not sitting here saying Bunting is as good or better than Guentzel. He's not and never will be. Fact is though, from the stats and eye test (from his time here) suggests that it wasn't a bad consolation prize to get in the trade, especially when he's coming in at half the cost and has a pinch of nasty in his game (which the entire forum complained about not having since Horny left).

Why are people so down on the guy? Truthfully, I think it's because some people hate Dubas and want to go out of their way to hate any trade he makes or player he brings in. Any objective person should be happy with Bunting since his arrival here.

Guentzel has also benefited from averaging 3.5 more minutes per game, per season. Far more PP time as well.
Yeah, Jake's a notably better goal scorer. But if you give Bunting 19 minutes a night, Crosby and PP1 all year, the point comparison would be closer than people think.
As for defense, they're about the same.

It's as good of a replacement as was possible. And he's a total bargain if you max out his usage.

 

[eXile3]

Guentzel has also benefited from averaging 3.5 more minutes per game, per season. Far more PP time as well.
Yeah, Jake's a notably better goal scorer. But if you give Bunting 19 minutes a night, Crosby and PP1 all year, the point comparison would be closer than people think.
As for defense, they're about the same.

It's as good of a replacement as was possible. And he's a total bargain if you max out his usage.

There would still be a material difference in their production. Bunting just isn’t as talented of a player.

Not to say I don’t like Bunting. I saw impressive improvement from the PP when he was a net front presence and his hustle makes a difference.

Not comparing him to Jake he’s absolutely a player I want on this team.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Totally agree! He doesn't have as high of an offensive acumen as Jake, but he's more physical and very consistent in his work ethic and attention to detail away from the puck.

So that's why he's a -19 last season, he paid attention to details.

Jake was over a point per. game at 6.0 for the Pens. Bunting will be the difference of .600 to Guentzels 1.13. A second line winger to a 1st line winger.

Bunting has been way better than I thought he would be. He was basically a fourth-line winger in Carolina. Here, he is perfect for Malkin. People seem to complain about Bunting because he relies on teammates for production. That is literally the definition of a complementary player.

He complements Malkin to a tee. And for once, our coach actually sees this and seems to be on board with helping Malkin out here.

I don't know "ANY" 4th line wingers who scored at .600 pace that equals 49.2 points per. 82 games.

I believe some people are trying to sell some swamp land to the dumb people.

 

[Ryder71]

So that's why he's a -19 last season, he paid attention to details.

Jake was over a point per. game at 6.0 for the Pens. Bunting will be the difference of .600 to Guentzels 1.13. A second line winger to a 1st line winger.

I don't know "ANY" 4th line wingers who scored at .600 pace that equals 49.2 points per. 82 games.

I believe some people are trying to sell some swamp land to the dumb people.

Prior to CAR he was a +48 the previous two seasons in TOR. He can't help it if his line mates were defensively inept. He's a solid top six winger. No one is suggesting he's on the level of Jake. But then again he wasn't the only component to that trade return. He had 19 points in 21 games here, that's very respectable. He's also younger with a much smaller cap hit. Context is important.

 

[Andy99]

lol…

https://x.com/i/web/status/1840824117068546438

 

[Randy Butternubs]

I'm still catching up on this thread. But I wanted to say that WBS has a game tomorrow that I'm hoping to watch.

 

[The Old Master]

I believe some people are trying to sell some swamp land to the dumb people.

how much are you asking?

 

[GilbertSeinfeld]

how much are you asking?

I bet he knows a guy who can get you a good deal.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

There would still be a material difference in their production. Bunting just isn’t as talented of a player.

Not to say I don’t like Bunting. I saw impressive improvement from the PP when he was a net front presence and his hustle makes a difference.

Not comparing him to Jake he’s absolutely a player I want on this team.

Well let's see what the math says if Bunting and Guentzel (hypothetically) had identical usage and maintained their career rates.

Guentzel:
Power Play - 1500 mins dead-even on the career. 121 PPP's >>> 12.4 minutes per point
Non-PP - 8153 mins. 370 points >>> 22 minutes per point.

Bunting:
Power Play - 522 minutes. 39 PPP's >>> 13.3 minutes per point
Non-PP - 3670 minutes. 142 points >>> 25.8 minutes per point

So he's 7% worse of a Power Play point producer than Jake. As for other situations, 15% worse.
So let's say he'd do 12% worse? Seems fair, given how much less you play on the PP.
Jake is good for 77 points per 82 games. So Bunting would then get 68 points per 82 games here, averaging 19 minutes.

Factor in a few things to this. Bunting creates more goals through screens and net commotion than Jake does, which he sometimes doesn't get points on.
He was not given a ton of empty net minutes to pad his stats like Jake had for a very long time. Lastly, a potential Crosby boost.

Guentzel is more talented but there's more that factors into point generation than that. The bigger difference between them is the goal scoring rate.

 

[Ryder71]

lol…

https://x.com/i/web/status/1840824117068546438

Is he suggesting we're finishing ahead of the Rangers and likely to make the playoffs?

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Is he suggesting we're finishing ahead of the Rangers and likely to make the playoffs?

Yeah that's f***ed up. Did news come out with several Rangers key long-term injuries today?

 

[Ryder71]

Yeah that's f***ed up. Did news come out with several Rangers key injuries today?

Not that I'm aware of. Betting line the RAGS over/under for points this season is 102.5, where as PIT is 90.5.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Well let's see what the math says if Bunting and Guentzel (hypothetically) had identical usage and maintained their career rates.

Guentzel:
Power Play - 1500 mins dead-even on the career. 121 PPP's >>> 12.4 minutes per point
Non-PP - 8153 mins. 370 points >>> 22 minutes per point.

Bunting:
Power Play - 522 minutes. 39 PPP's >>> 13.3 minutes per point
Non-PP - 3670 minutes. 142 points >>> 25.8 minutes per point

So he's 7% worse of a Power Play point producer than Jake. As for other situations, 15% worse.
So let's say he'd do 12% worse? Seems fair, given how much less you play on the PP.
Jake is good for 77 points per 82 games. So Bunting would then get 68 points per 82 games here, averaging 19 minutes.

Factor in a few things to this. Bunting creates more goals through screens and net commotion than Jake does, which he sometimes doesn't get points on.
He was not given a ton of empty net minutes to pad his stats like Jake had for a very long time. Lastly, a potential Crosby boost.

Guentzel is more talented but there's more that factors into point generation than that. The bigger difference between them is the goal scoring rate.

It's pretty simple. Jake was over a PPG at each level. Bunting wasn't.

Are you going to argue Bunting should have gotten the same opportunities throughout his entire journey (each level) as Jake did?

There's a reason Jake is getting over 9.0 and Bunting is getting less.

 

[Ryder71]

I also seriously doubt both Sid and Geno play every game for the third consecutive year.

 

[Ugene Magic]

how much are you asking?

I bet he knows a guy who can get you a good deal.

I'm neither the seller or the buyer.

 

[eXile3]

Well let's see what the math says if Bunting and Guentzel (hypothetically) had identical usage and maintained their career rates.

Guentzel:
Power Play - 1500 mins dead-even on the career. 121 PPP's >>> 12.4 minutes per point
Non-PP - 8153 mins. 370 points >>> 22 minutes per point.

Bunting:
Power Play - 522 minutes. 39 PPP's >>> 13.3 minutes per point
Non-PP - 3670 minutes. 142 points >>> 25.8 minutes per point

So he's 7% worse of a Power Play point producer than Jake. As for other situations, 15% worse.
So let's say he'd do 12% worse? Seems fair, given how much less you play on the PP.
Jake is good for 77 points per 82 games. So Bunting would then get 68 points per 82 games here, averaging 19 minutes.

Factor in a few things to this. Bunting creates more goals through screens and net commotion than Jake does, which he sometimes doesn't get points on.
He was not given a ton of empty net minutes to pad his stats like Jake had for a very long time. Lastly, a potential Crosby boost.

Guentzel is more talented but there's more that factors into point generation than that. The bigger difference between them is the goal scoring rate.

Lot of assumptions in there.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

It's pretty simple. Jake was over a PPG at each level. Bunting wasn't.

Are you going to argue Bunting should have gotten the same opportunities throughout his entire journey (each level) as Jake did?

There's a reason Jake is getting over 9.0 and Bunting is getting less.

It's not that simple. Both weren't given the same level of opportunity. Guentzel's played 250 more games, and he averaged more TOI in them. Bunting's pay day contract hasn't come yet.
Besides, you're missing the point. This whole discussion wasn't about how he stacks up to Jake. I was simply using Jake as a comparable to illustrate how good Bunting is.
He's not someone that belongs on a 3rd line.

I'd never pay 9M for Jake anyway. His defending is awful. And I certainly wouldn't pay him that until he's 38.

Lot of assumptions in there.

I use what players have done until they prove otherwise. That's the fairest approach.
I'll call Bunting a 3rd liner caliber player when he plays like it. And we'll probably need about 2 full seasons of that level of play before that label is appropriate.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

There would still be a material difference in their production. Bunting just isn’t as talented of a player.

Not to say I don’t like Bunting. I saw impressive improvement from the PP when he was a net front presence and his hustle makes a difference.

Not comparing him to Jake he’s absolutely a player I want on this team.

This team could actually use another Bunting clone. Guy generally brings it most nights...something the rest of the team has a hard time doing.

 

[pistolpete11]

I feel like this is an argument between "Bunting is a top 6 winger" vs. "Bunting is a middle six winger" when "Bunting is a second line winger" satisfies both statements and is actually what he is on this team.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

I feel like this is an argument between "Bunting is a top 6 winger" vs. "Bunting is a middle six winger" when "Bunting is a second line winger" satisfies both statements and is actually what he is on this team.

He'd be the best left winger on half the teams in this league, at minimum imo. If that's true, that makes him a 1st line caliber player who's being used on the 2nd line for fit reasons.
He certainly is our best left winger.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I feel like this is an argument between "Bunting is a top 6 winger" vs. "Bunting is a middle six winger" when "Bunting is a second line winger" satisfies both statements and is actually what he is on this team.

Correct. On THIS team.

It's situational, right? But like... if we are to zoom out to the rest of the league I just don't know that I could comfortably call Bunting a "top six wing." He plays it here but IS he?

It's frankly mostly just semantics.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Correct. On THIS team.

It's situational, right? But like... if we are to zoom out to the rest of the league I just don't know that I could comfortably call Bunting a "top six forward." He plays it here but IS he?

It's frankly mostly just semantics.

He's like the 15th-20th best left winger in the NHL until he shows he's not. I only went that low because his defense is bad too.

1st line - probably deserving on a per team basis
2nd line - 100% deserving, at minimum
3rd line - What are you doing?
4th line - Quit coaching permanently

 

[SEALBound]

You know it's hard to blame people, really. This team has a long-standing tradition (even now that they are quite aged) of lining up middle six and worse players next to Crosby and Malkin. So I can forgive people for having a warped view of what a top six wing actually is.

Except they don't, really. We like to keep an oral tradition of the meme "Malkin gets Crosby's leftovers" and "they've never had good wings" and really, neither of them are true in reality.

I would say up until 2015, they were largely handcuffed by cap space. After that, they've always had adequate top 6 wings. Problem is, people might look to a team like Tampa and be like "well they have Kucherov! We don't have one of those!" and they proceed to say our guys suck. In reality, if you look at ALL 30-32 teams and their predominant top 6 wings, we're no better or worse than anyone. Especially considering we live in a cap world and our two top 6 centers are generational talents making $8.7 or $9.5mil for the most part. Something not many teams had so of course there has to be some give and take.

lol…

https://x.com/i/web/status/1840824117068546438

I will reply to that - I believe they CAN make the playoffs. They are CAPABLE of it. Now the probability of "WILL THEY?" is completely different.