Salary Cap: 24 25 Salary Thread Crosbicles Volume Mmxxvii Retool over Time to Go for A Cup in 2026

[spcastlemagic]

Marner (the dream)

I’ve told my buddy from Toronto to be down here July 1st so he can hand over his Marner jersey to me. I am manifesting this shit.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Buffet also said you should never get emotionally attached to stocks.
The Penguins have a major problem with this and their feelings to guys like Rust.

Well, we should remember that people aren't stocks either.

 

[Sideline]

Damn…I guess Geno is still out…I want him back so badly…who knows how many games he has left

Geno, as is tradition, remains the unsung hero of the Penguins. When they were a good team he'd show up with a Conn Smythe or Hart trophy season. Now that they are in need of a tank commander he's ready with acute f***-this-itis.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Well, we should remember that people aren't stocks either.

Agree- there should be a middle ground
But this franchise doesn't understand that concept either.

 

[Le Magnifique 66]

Damn…I guess Geno is still out…I want him back so badly…who knows how many games he has left

I was hoping for Broz or Poulin but whatever!! I guess Geno will be out longer than anticipated!!

His contract is up after next season, I know he is a Pittsburgh Legend but we should have the same approach as the Bruins did with Marchand come deadline depending on where we sit in the standings!

 

[Khelandros]

I was hoping for Broz or Poulin but whatever!! I guess Geno will be out longer than anticipated!!

His contract is up after next season, I know he is a Pittsburgh Legend but we should have the same approach as the Bruins did with Marchand come deadline depending on where we sit in the standings!

Marchand and Malkin are two very, very different scenarios.

 

[SEALBound]

Be objective.

You ask for reality. I gave you it.

Dubas wanted to keep Schenn. Schenn said no.

Call out people for bad decisions. Respect them for good decisions.

The end result of the Bunting trade was solid.

Acquiring Bunting for nothing worthwhile in a Guentzel trade was not. Acting like Bunting was a good NHLer like most of y’all did because of a hot 10-15 games was not. Acquiring Luke Schenn and thinking he was a locker room guy we should keep was not.

I say that as a big fan of Luke Schenn that has wanted him as a player here.

I would say you're grasping at straws here but it's like watching a child try to grasp the moon. That was just a bunch of non-sense words. Glad you feel the way you do though. I guess?

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

f*** Dubi for saying he liked a guy he traded for then flipped immediately. He should say that Schenn is garbage and that he never liked him.

 

[cookthebooks]

i love psychoanalyzing someone to the point of knowing with certainty what happened in their decision making processes. its a real gift for all the dr freuds of the world

 

[Ryder71]

i love psychoanalyzing someone to the point of knowing with certainty what happened in their decision making processes. its a real gift for all the dr freuds of the world

Or being cynical of a matter that turned out well in the end regardless.

''WE like what you did, but you stumbled badly into it''.

 

[Gurglesons]

f*** Dubi for saying he liked a guy he traded for then flipped immediately. He should say that Schenn is garbage and that he never liked him.

I have no problem with Dubas saying he liked him.

That’s not what I’m criticizing. CJ specifically said the plan was to keep Luke Schenn and when the team when to Schenn and said that, he said I want to win.

There is no reason this team should be keeping Schenn’s or Rakell’s.

Ultimately, we did the right thing. But, much like the decision making with Rakell. It seems this organization has some bizarre approaches.

Look at Boston. They committed to sucking this year and are going to be rewarded with Hagens. That’s the approach we should’ve taken at the deadline.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

I don’t mind keeping a guy like Schenn for Pickering to play with. I don’t mind dealing him. Both are positive either way.

Rakell is nice to have to throw McGroarty or Koivune or their pick this season with but prob worth too much to not trade in next 2 years though.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Having no talent on the NHL team only works if you also don't have any prospects on the NHL team, because putting young players with shit support around them is how you ruin prospects. Look at Buffalo's past struggles and Chicago's current struggles, they've both had issues of not supporting young players with veterans.

Boston can afford to trade Carlo because they still have McAvoy, Lindholm and Zadorov on that defense to be able to support the young defensemen that will be coming up in their system. The Penguins aren't nearly that deep at forward, their forward group is basically only Crosby, a Rust and a pretty declined Malkin if you trade Rakell.

This doesn't mean they shouldn't trade Rakell, but if you trade Rakell you need to bring in proven NHL talent to replace him and support the guys like McGroarty and Koivunen as they come up. The dream scenario is you sell Rakell and bring in Peterka, even with it very likely costing assets to do that.

The same thing applies to the defense. You don't want Pickering to be in a situation where his D partner is someone like Graves, Shea or a washed up Letang (at least in a significant role) that Pickering needs to cover for.

 

[Gurglesons]

Having no talent on the NHL team only works if you also don't have any prospects on the NHL team, because putting young players with shit support around them is how you ruin prospects. Look at Buffalo's past struggles and Chicago's current struggles, they've both had issues of not supporting young players with veterans.

Boston can afford to trade Carlo because they still have McAvoy, Lindholm and Zadorov on that defense to be able to support the young defensemen that will be coming up in their system. The Penguins aren't nearly that deep at forward, their forward group is basically only Crosby, a Rust and a pretty declined Malkin if you trade Rakell.

This doesn't mean they shouldn't trade Rakell, but if you trade Rakell you need to bring in proven NHL talent to replace him and support the guys like McGroarty and Koivunen as they come up. The dream scenario is you sell Rakell and bring in Peterka, even with it very likely costing assets to do that.

The same thing applies to the defense. You don't want Pickering to be in a situation where his D partner is someone like Graves, Shea or a washed up Letang (at least in a significant role) that Pickering needs to cover for.

Novak - Crosby - Rust
Dewar - Malkin - Tomasino

Not sure what the issue is with this top six would've been for the remainder of the year.

Next year you can go out and invest picks if you get a top 5 pick in this draft because you just expedited the rebuild with a true impact prospect.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Novak - Crosby - Rust
Dewar - Malkin - Tomasino

Not sure what the issue is with this top six would've been for the remainder of the year.

Next year you can go out and invest picks if you get a top 5 pick in this draft because you just expedited the rebuild with a true impact prospect.

I don't think you read my post

 

[Gurglesons]

I don't think you read my post

I don't really see how it's relevant to the posts above.

Aren't you advocating for trading EK65?

If we trade EK65, our RH side on D is a literal dumpster fire.

 

[SEALBound]

Having no talent on the NHL team only works if you also don't have any prospects on the NHL team, because putting young players with shit support around them is how you ruin prospects. Look at Buffalo's past struggles and Chicago's current struggles, they've both had issues of not supporting young players with veterans.

Boston can afford to trade Carlo because they still have McAvoy, Lindholm and Zadorov on that defense to be able to support the young defensemen that will be coming up in their system. The Penguins aren't nearly that deep at forward, their forward group is basically only Crosby, a Rust and a pretty declined Malkin if you trade Rakell.

This doesn't mean they shouldn't trade Rakell, but if you trade Rakell you need to bring in proven NHL talent to replace him and support the guys like McGroarty and Koivunen as they come up. The dream scenario is you sell Rakell and bring in Peterka, even with it very likely costing assets to do that.

The same thing applies to the defense. You don't want Pickering to be in a situation where his D partner is someone like Graves, Shea or a washed up Letang (at least in a significant role) that Pickering needs to cover for.

It's hard to project how quickly some of our defensive prospects will develop but I imagine they will supplement with free agency (or trade) to help those young kids. Maybe on a third pairing you can get away with a guy like Shea or Graves but if we are filling holes with prospects, I imagine they will sign a complementary dman when needed. Our current issue is that we have a...sloppy?...collection of dmen. In reality, no one really complements anyone. Like a Gryz-Letang or Gryz-Karlsson pairing is not something we should be aiming for. Pettersson-Letang/EK was a fantastic combo. In theory, a Graves-EK/Letang would have been in that mold before Graves got his abilities zap by the space aliens from Space Jam.

It would be great to start moving (or not resigning) a few guys so that you can slowly rebuild that blue line as both a serviceable for the team but also provides a development opportunity. With who we have coming up - Brunicke, Pieniniemi, Harding, and even Pickering - these are offensive minded PMD with Pickering offering a decent combo of both offensive and defensive skill sets. They should be looking to trade guys like Letang and EK and getting a Pettersson or Luke Schenn in the mix to provide that. Now to be clear, this is after the next couple of years when we are in shambles and the rebuild is fully on. Not saying this should be the blueprint this off-season.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I don't really see how it's relevant to the posts above.

"This doesn't mean they shouldn't trade Rakell, but if you trade Rakell you need to bring in proven NHL talent to replace him and support the guys like McGroarty and Koivunen as they come up."

The point of my post was to say you would need to replace Rakell if you trade him. That doesn't mean you can't trade him, but trading him and not supporting the young guys in any way is how you would ruin prospects.

Aren't you advocating for trading EK65?

If we trade EK65, our RH side on D is a literal dumpster fire.

The difference is that the guys coming up at forward will be playing with Rakell, while the guys coming up on defense won't be playing with Karlsson. Or they at least shouldn't be playing with Karlsson.

Trading Rakell directly impacts Koivunen or McGroarty because they should be in the top-6 if they're in the NHL, and they'd be losing a very talented NHL linemate if you traded him. Trading Karlsson shouldn't impact Pickering because Pickering shouldn't be playing in their top-4 D group next year. He should be on the 3rd pair with Timmins or a comparably UFA to Timmins.

If Pickering was going to be on a top-4 D pair with Karlsson, the comparison would be appropriate, but Pickering shouldn't be in that role. Trading Karlsson would bump Timmins to the top-4, but it's not all that difficult to get a Timmins caliber player to replace Timmins on the 3rd pair to play RD with Pickering.

 

[Gurglesons]

"This doesn't mean they shouldn't trade Rakell, but if you trade Rakell you need to bring in proven NHL talent to replace him and support the guys like McGroarty and Koivunen as they come up."

The point of my post was to say you would need to replace Rakell if you trade him. That doesn't mean you can't trade him, but trading him and not supporting the young guys in any way is how you would ruin prospects.



The difference is that the guys coming up at forward will be playing with Rakell, while the guys coming up on defense won't be playing with Karlsson. Or they at least shouldn't be playing with Karlsson.

Trading Rakell directly impacts Koivunen or McGroarty because they should be in the top-6 if they're in the NHL, and they'd be losing a very talented NHL linemate if you traded him. Trading Karlsson shouldn't impact Pickering because Pickering shouldn't be playing in their top-4 D group next year. He should be on the 3rd pair with Timmins or a comparably UFA to Timmins.

If Pickering was going to be on a top-4 D pair with Karlsson, the comparison would be appropriate, but Pickering shouldn't be in that role. Trading Karlsson would bump Timmins to the top-4, but it's not all that difficult to get a Timmins caliber player to replace Timmins on the 3rd pair to play RD with Pickering.

Why should Pickering not be played with EK65?

 

[Empoleon8771]

Why should Pickering not be played with EK65?

Because he's not top-4 ready and asking him to be the defensive cover for a player as flawed defensively as Karlsson is a huge ask.

If they keep Karlsson, they 100% should be bringing in an established UFA to be a partner for him. Putting a young guy there and hoping he can do that job is asking for trouble.

 

[Gurglesons]

Because he's not top-4 ready and asking him to be the defensive cover for a player as flawed defensively as Karlsson is a huge ask.

If they keep Karlsson, they 100% should be bringing in an established UFA to be a partner for him. Putting a young guy there and hoping he can do that job is asking for trouble.

I don't really see any issue with Pickering playing 15-16 minutes a night with EK65 or Kris Letang.

I honestly don't know where else he'd be expected to play on our roster over the next two years and he's probably playing with even worse talent moving forward.

 

[Ryder71]

Several here are overthinking our position. Simply put we NEED to get core pieces for the future in the next couple of drafts period! UNLESS they go after and get a guy like Marner. Otherwise it's just window dressing. Peripheral upgrades don't move the needle much and this team is far from any meaningful contention. They should tank!

Losing now at least gets us in the game for possibly getting a difference maker for the future. THAT's where you can really take big steps forward and get off the mat!

Tanking for SEVEN measly games in the scheme of things shouldn't be much to ask under the circumstances. Yet this coach and his goalie don't understand they're damaging us.

 

[DesertedPenguin]

I have no problem with Dubas saying he liked him.

That’s not what I’m criticizing. CJ specifically said the plan was to keep Luke Schenn and when the team when to Schenn and said that, he said I want to win.

There is no reason this team should be keeping Schenn’s or Rakell’s.

Ultimately, we did the right thing. But, much like the decision making with Rakell. It seems this organization has some bizarre approaches.

Look at Boston. They committed to sucking this year and are going to be rewarded with Hagens. That’s the approach we should’ve taken at the deadline.

This is what CJ reported:



This is what Vensel reported came from an email exchange with Dubas a couple hours later:



It's clear Dubas used the positive comments about Schenn to try to amplify the market for him. "We don't have to trade him. We love what he brings. We need something like that."

Then after Schenn is traded, there's more spin. "Sure, there was a lot we liked about him. That's why we initially acquired him. But we also try to do right by players, and when it was clear there was a chance for him to be on a contender while bringing back some assets, we couldn't say no."

It's all spin and fluff. It's modern management. Actions speak 10x louder than words at this point.

 

[PensFutures]

I feel like if Dubas said "yeah, we feel that we can flip Luke for more assets" the offers might be lower.

 

[Gurglesons]

This is what CJ reported:



This is what Vensel reported came from an email exchange with Dubas a couple hours later:



It's clear Dubas used the positive comments about Schenn to try to amplify the market for him. "We don't have to trade him. We love what he brings. We need something like that."

Then after Schenn is traded, there's more spin. "Sure, there was a lot we liked about him. That's why we initially acquired him. But we also try to do right by players, and when it was clear there was a chance for him to be on a contender while bringing back some assets, we couldn't say no."

It's all spin and fluff. It's modern management. Actions speak 10x louder than words at this point.

I believe it's on his podcast where he stated that they went to Schenn and asked him.

I don't really care to argue about this anymore.

Dubas can do no wrong, you guys keep having faith in him. In Shero We Trust.