In the interview that Dubas did last week, he straight up said that offer sheets will be something they will look at. I think it will be a priority this summer to steal a young player from a cap strapped team
Salary Cap: 24 25 Salary Thread Crosbicles Volume Mmxxvii Retool over Time to Go for A Cup in 2026
- Thread starter Zirakzigil
- Start date
He would have been happy with a '26 1st IF he liked the prospect offered. He just didn't like Clarke. Moore is a solid roster player and a couple years younger than Rakell. I think he wanted a different prospect. One the Kings wouldn't offer.
We're talking Rakell here! Not some world beater!
Just for context, we got Rakell for a 2hd rounder, he's soon to be 32 yrs old. We shoulda made that deal.
Hell if it were two 1sts that'd be great relative to what we gave up to get him. Again, THAT was a mistake! I think it's insane KD had that level of a ridiculous ask. So much so that no GM in their right mind would meet it.
Problem is the cap is going up, which is why not trading Rakell was so stupid. Other teams will have more money to retain their players as a result.
I have a strong feeling that Mavrik Bourque will be a target of a couple of teams this off-season. I hope the Penguins are one of those teams in on him.
Offer up one of their late 2nds for him at the draft and then throw an offersheet at him if Dallas won't trade him here. Have him at 3C for next year and plan on him sliding up to the 2C spot eventually.
Offer up one of their late 2nds for him at the draft and then throw an offersheet at him if Dallas won't trade him here. Have him at 3C for next year and plan on him sliding up to the 2C spot eventually.
Rakell was gotten with a 2nd rounder because he was UFA (Edit) in a capped cap league, but like the Pens now, the Ducks were not letting him go cheap when he had term. The Pens tried for years to get him. Rakell is a very good player when he's with top players. Which is what he'll be with. Age is not a factor here, but his term and super low cap hit in a cap going up league is very attractive when you're talking a 25/30 goal scorer.
Two very late firsts do not help this team more than already seasoned prospects.
The ask isn't so ridiculous. You want to pry Rakell away considering all his positives it's.....
Moore, and 2 of Clarke/Turcotte/Spence/Helenius
Last edited:
What’s going on with Tommy Novak, is he done for the season? Looks like he is not skating, bummer, I was looking forward to seeing what he could do
Agree to disagree that's a ridiculous ask for a player who's had a history of an up and down career. Two late 1sts for a soon to be 32 yr old would have been fantastic on a team going nowhere! And we were getting Moore who's a solid player in his own right. It was a bad decision. And they weren't necessarily gonna be that late in the draft. Not if it's LA. Besides, we could have had Clarke, Moore AND a '26 1st. You take that and run!
Also, if he weren't here it would have made it harder to go on this win streak, which hurts us in the lottery. Him helping us win now is destroying our ability to get a difference maker in the draft.
Talk to Blake when they get romped by the Oilers again, and all he did is Kuzmenko for a 3rd. The major point is the Pens don't have to trade him. They will be fine either way. They are essentially a 1-line team. They are making Crosby happy while they accrue assets and try to retool.
The plan is the plan.... No matter how much we all like/hate it.
No, we don't have to trade Rakell, you're right. We can suck in perpetuity. We can finish just out of the playoffs year after year and not garner a single blue chipper as a result, fantastic!
We agree they wanna make Crosby happy. I just think it's foolish to put a cheap knock off of Mario ahead of the long term viability of the team, wonderful!
edit: The only way it makes sense to keep Rakell is if they land guys like Marner and Chychrun in free agency. I don't see that happening but at least that makes some sense.
Last edited:
Seravalli said it in his podcast. Another guys that reports on the Devils said "basically a 1st, a conditional 1st, and a prospect." Someone that reports on the Habs said the same as Seravalli.
Maybe they are making it up. Or maybe where there's smoke, there's fire.
The problem is, there aren't many cap-strapped teams come this off-season. As I said before, I think the better route is to offer the Stars what the offer sheet price tag is.
Some maybes:
Samoskevich from Florida as they work on Bennett, Ekblad, etc
Bourque as discussed
Bouchard even though I don't think it's a good idea.
Luke Hughes - would be wild but the Devils have a ton of guys to sign and only $14mil in space.
Marco Rossi - which I would be okay with if we pick outside of the top 5.
Kakko - seems unlikely and would be more based on Seattle not wanting him.
Rangers are prime for the picking if they burn out
Knies - obvious target
Hague and Holtz from VGK even though i don't think we need either.
Another victim of playing the right way
NHL owner rankings: Grading every team, from Tampa Bay to Buffalo
Introducing The Athletic's first NHL owner rankings, based 50 percent on a fan survey and 50 percent on expert accounting.
www.nytimes.com
FSG ranked 24th out of 32 ownership groups in the NHL. Too high imo. Interestingly, 62% of fans surveyed said they had less confidence in ownership in 2025 as opposed to 2024, ranking 31st in the league.
If you think Sullivan wants to turn us into 'zero-event defensive-first hockey', then why are we such a high-event team this season?I hate everything that the 90s Devils stand for, so I don't agree there. And Bobby Holik is a family friend, so don't think I haven't told him so!
Basically, I hate zero-event defensive-first hockey, which is what I see Sullivan turning us into. I mean, even with his recent comments about making sure young players learn to grind, I just hate that kind of hockey. It's boring. It's not even particularly effective!
NHL owner rankings: Grading every team, from Tampa Bay to Buffalo
Introducing The Athletic's first NHL owner rankings, based 50 percent on a fan survey and 50 percent on expert accounting.
FSG ranked 24th out of 32 ownership groups in the NHL. Too high imo. Interestingly, 62% of fans surveyed said they had less confidence in ownership in 2025 as opposed to 2024, ranking 31st in the league.
“An attempt to retool rather than rebuild has gone poorly“
Pretty much this. Even if Groats and Koivunen come up next year it will take time if they do become good players. I doubt very much either of those guys jump right in and make an impact.
This years first will be a year or two at least before he’s ready. Free agents like Marner are a pipe dream.
Not sure how Dubas is going to pull off this off. All I see is more losing in the foreseeable future.
You know damn well they will instead sign a bunch of mid Sully grinders. But hey, maybe Mr. Pivot can flip these guys for fourth rounders! Success!
Last edited:
Dubas came in with a mandate to use the 2023 off-season to give the Penguins one last chance at a run, and if that didn't work, he would shift to a rebuild. The moves he made didn't pan out, so he shifted to a rebuild at the 2024 deadline and has mostly been operating with that focus since then. So why exactly is it a problem that they're at the bottom of the standings? Yes, rebuilding teams are bad.
The line of "they tried to retool rather than rebuild, and it didn't work and they're at the bottom of the standings" as a criticism doesn't make sense to me. If they would have started a rebuild as soon as Dubas took over, they'd still be bad right now.
The line of "they tried to retool rather than rebuild, and it didn't work and they're at the bottom of the standings" as a criticism doesn't make sense to me. If they would have started a rebuild as soon as Dubas took over, they'd still be bad right now.
Problem is, there's no potential cornerstone pieces in the pipeline with the possible exception of Murashov.
Sure there are some nice pieces, but no one who'll lead us to legit contention.
Best analogy I could use is a nice dinner. You have your drink, a very good side dish, a great dessert, but no steak.
That's why going up in the standings this time of year is so frustrating. And I've heard pundits or wanna be experts talk about ''winning cultures''? We've turned into a mediocre culture.
We were a horrible team in the early 2000's. And in the process drafted a core 2hd to none! NO, that scenario is not in front of us. You're not getting four cornerstone pieces like that including two all time greats, I get that. But you gotta start somewhere. And if we're being honest we haven't even done that yet. Not to any large degree anyhow. Incremental improvement, sure. But we could have made a huge jump if we handled this deadline better and shipped off Rakell for a tidy sum. Keeping him helped contribute to this ungodly winning streak. Not great for a team that needs cornerstone pieces for the future.
IF say we drafted say 6th OA that could have been a very nice piece. And arguably one that would have provided us our best prospect over the last decade or so. Now, that seems like a pipedream. So essentially we're going nowhere and getting very little for it! That's how you never improve. Just stay in the mushy middle by winning meaningless games that help no one! Not the team as a whole, not the core (if they ever wanna see the post season anyhow), and the not the fanbase.
Last edited:
I'm not even sure this team has attempted a retool, let alone rebuild yet. They gave one last home run swing with EK, it failed, and now they're just beginning the process of selling pieces with value--starting with Jake, who made this team's decision for them.
Enjoy. Sullivan uses an example of how he actually does give young guys a fair shot — the example was from nearly a decade ago.
I think Sullivan is solely focused on putting together what he views as the "guys who give them the best chance to win", as he has used that exact phrase multiple times. The more telling quote that aligns with my theory regarding Sullivan is right here:
"I’m absolutely willing to put them in prominent roles. But they have to be effective and they’ve got to be ready."
I think it's more that Sullivan is extremely impatient and is unwilling to give young players the rope they need to figure out their game in the NHL, so if they're not instantly effective, he'll pull the plug on them. His focus is on putting out the "best" team in his eyes, so if a young guy is struggling and isn't instantly succeeding in a role, he'll scrap the idea and try something else. He's not willing to sit through the growing pains that every single young player will have in the NHL, which is why he's ill suited to be the coach of a rebuilding team.
"I’m absolutely willing to put them in prominent roles. But they have to be effective and they’ve got to be ready."
I think it's more that Sullivan is extremely impatient and is unwilling to give young players the rope they need to figure out their game in the NHL, so if they're not instantly effective, he'll pull the plug on them. His focus is on putting out the "best" team in his eyes, so if a young guy is struggling and isn't instantly succeeding in a role, he'll scrap the idea and try something else. He's not willing to sit through the growing pains that every single young player will have in the NHL, which is why he's ill suited to be the coach of a rebuilding team.
"Of course I hear it, I'm not stupid," said Sullivan, "I'm just incredibly stubborn. The more you say I'm dumb for doing something, the more I'm going to prove I'm right for doing it," he continued.
This interview really reads like something from The Onion.
These other teams have been teasing us for years now, the bastards.
