Salary Cap: 24-25 Salary Thread Crosbicles Volume MXVI: End of season wrap up
- Thread starter Zirakzigil
- Start date
- Status
Jarry was a suspect move due to his physical concerns. smith simply was going for all skates after Vegas. He was marginal in NY as well. Lets see how Graves is utilized with a new coach. He to me can be a OK 3rd line LD. Not what I expected but not a killer. Acciari is a 4th line rh energy guy who has been injured to much for me. But he can play a nice role when healthy.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
CheckingLineCenter
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2018
- 9,422
- 12,944
JackFr
Registered User
- Jun 18, 2010
- 4,976
- 4,040
Not a fan of Mercer. Definition of mid player, has a little upside but just doesn't do anything well enough to make a real impact at 5v5. He's really stagnated and frankly gotten worse each year. I would hope we could get something more interesting
Empoleon8771
Registered User
I think the counterargument I'd throw up here is put him with Crosby and have him put up a 30-30 season like he did in 2022-2023, which would make him a massively valuable piece with his age and contract.
JackFr
Registered User
- Jun 18, 2010
- 4,976
- 4,040
CheckingLineCenter
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2018
- 9,422
- 12,944
Empoleon8771
Registered User
I don't think Howard's college career has been anything incredible from where he was drafted, a lot of the guys drafted around him in 2022 (Kulich, Lamoureux, Lambert, Howard, Schaefer and Beck were the picks from 28-33) have also done well and have progressed similarly to Howard. That said, he has still progressed really well for a late 1st rounder and a ton of guys drafted in similar positions don't progress as well as he has. The 2022 draft is unique in that they do have a bunch of guys who have progressed well, I personally really like Kulich, Lamoureux and Lambert from that group as well. But a lot of drafts have guys that don't progress nearly as well from those spots.
He's not a guy you empty the vaults for, but he's a guy you trade 2 2nds or Pickering and a 2nd for super easily.
He's not a guy you empty the vaults for, but he's a guy you trade 2 2nds or Pickering and a 2nd for super easily.
JackFr
Registered User
- Jun 18, 2010
- 4,976
- 4,040
I don't know that we have the prospect pool to be moving a guy like Pickering so easily.
That said, Howard does interest me. I can only speak for EliteProspects but there's been a lot of friendly disagreement and uncertainty of how to project him. We had him pretty deep in the "honourable mentions" section of the U23 player rankings (alongside guys like Brunicke, Greig, and Foerster) and I've seen comparisons ranging from bust to Frank Vatrano to J.T. Miller. Some people see him as a legit top six player, others think he's more likely a third line off-puck catch-and-shoot guy.
That said, Howard does interest me. I can only speak for EliteProspects but there's been a lot of friendly disagreement and uncertainty of how to project him. We had him pretty deep in the "honourable mentions" section of the U23 player rankings (alongside guys like Brunicke, Greig, and Foerster) and I've seen comparisons ranging from bust to Frank Vatrano to J.T. Miller. Some people see him as a legit top six player, others think he's more likely a third line off-puck catch-and-shoot guy.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 24,937
- 28,430
I know blueliners take longer to develop and hit their stride and all that shit but I'm not really impressed by what little we've seen from Pickering just yet. If Pickering and a small add gets you Howard, I'd take the gamble. Don't think either guy is really a must-have or anything, but I like the idea of a bunch of younger forwards all playing and developing together and Howard beings a style/strengths we're thin on, if we have any of at all, as far as the prospects go.
Gurglesons
Registered User
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in the Flood
If you can move 2nd round picks instead of Pickering, you do it 100% of the time.
DesertPenguin
Registered User
- Apr 22, 2015
- 3,344
- 2,280
Deal Karlsson, get a first back as part of the package, use that for Howard. Dont send out Pickering.
I mean.... literally any college free agent would be crazy not to consider Pittsburgh. Lots of opportunity in NHL / Farm team (while improving, it's wide open if you have talent)
Sullivan's teams need to understand how to leave the crease and goalie completely undefended all at the same time. Super hard to consistently do over and over....
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
I mean I’m trolling but really, I’m also curious. People keep saying what an intellectually challenging system it is to play but nobody seems to know what actually is unique or difficult about it.
OtherThingsILike
Registered User
Speaking purely about offense, Sullivan put very few restrictions on what the players could do. Because of this, generating offense was largely in the players' control. This means that the players on the ice need to be able to predict what their teammates are going to do in a given situation. To do this successfully requires a high hockey-IQ.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
But that’s not really much of a system, no? That’s being like “follow Sid’s lead”.
OtherThingsILike
Registered User
There is a basic framework, but yes, it's not much of a system.
On defense, it's a different issue. There are more restrictions when you don't have the puck. But when you do have the puck, you can mostly do what you want with it.
Jag68Sid87
He's gone, gone gone!
Regarding the Sullivan system, my hockey brain works far more in a roster-building, GM capacity than an X's and O's capacity. So a lot of coach-speak goes right over my head.
That said, I will always remember something Jeff Petry said early days in his first training camp with the club. He was asked about the system here versus what he was used to in Montreal. If I remember correctly, he basically talked about how much more "freedom" there was in the Sullivan system. How it was way more "player friendly". However, he also said something to the effect of there being way more responsibilities placed on the players' shoulders. And that it was a lot easier to look foolish in the Sullivan system when things break down. He sounded both happy to be playing it but also foreshadowing potential doom.
I always remember that because nothing we saw in the Sullivan years with our own eyes suggests Petry was wrong. If I were to summarize the Sullivan system, it would be something to the effect of it being a system that is easy to PLAY but hard to excel at. And again, I am not much of an X's and O's guy. Lots of people who do this for a living have a much better understanding of this. But it seems to me, the system is predicated on predictability. So to that end, it seems obvious that if you play the game north-south instead of east-west, your teammates will be better able to predict your next move/next position, etc. Of course, so will the opponent.
If I were to hazard a guess, it would seem to me that teams should be more predictable in the defensive zone or when players do not have the puck, but less predictable when they are in the offensive zone or when they do have the puck. But under the Sullivan system, it seems there is no discrepancy there. It's north-south, predictable play by all five members at all times. So, ironically, the freedom that Petry described is actually more rigid. I firmly believe that it is the main reason why a LOT of players struggled after coming to the Penguins. Defensemen, forwards...young players, older established veterans. LOTS of players have struggled to play this way.
You could make the case that it only really worked in 2016. But how much of 2016 was this group of talent being so happy with the new coach bump that ANY coach would have sufficed at that time? Remember, we saw similar early returns under Dan Bylsma, a head coach nowhere nearly as revered as the other ex-coach. Byslma proved to be incredibly unremarkable almost immediately after winning the Cup. With Sullivan, it took an extra year but the results were similar beyond that. In 2017, you could make the argument that we were simply too talented to lose, regardless of system. Most of the 2017 finals games looked a bit like the Washington-Carolina series this year. Nashville did everything right except they could not score (which Carolina has struggled to do against Washington, but it mattered less last night) enough. They also got terrible goaltending and we were simply surgical when it came down to scoring goals. So, the theory that the Pens won because we outscored the problems with Sullivan's system is not that far from the truth.
If we look at the type of players who succeed under Sullivan, it is hard to envision THIS CURRENT NYR squad doing anything of note next season. Drury, one would assume, knows this and will do some major surgery on that roster this summer. Artemi Panarin is one of the most unpredictable players in this league. Generally speaking, that is high praise. Not under a Mike Sullivan system, though. So it would shock me if a) Panarin is not traded this summer or b) he is successful playing that style. If we look back at 4 Nations, who were the players who shone the brightest for team USA? The Tkachuk brothers, no surprise there. Dylan Larkin, because his straightline speed is exactly what Sullivan likes. Jaccob Slavin was awesome, but then again Jaccob Slavin is awesome no matter what so that came as no surprise. Who struggled, relatively speaking? Adam Fox, a very cerebral defenseman (dare I say an EK65 comp?). Kyle Connor, who has the speed for Sullivan's system, but is a lot less predictable in his play. I did not think Auston Matthews was great in that series, either. Although he is having a down year in general.
Back to us, because that is what's important here. Our new coach needs to simplify things. I think we need more separation between what this team does in the defensive zone vis-a-vis the offensive end. Dumb it down in the D zone, so that the players have the freedom they want to be unpredictable in the scoring areas. I honestly don't think it means we HAVE to become a defensive team. We don't need to become the Wild, the Bruins, the Golden Knights or the Jets overnight in terms of style. After all, it is ALWAYS about team identity and how you are constructed. We are and have always been an offensive team, basically since 1984. So that should not change. But if we keep things a bit more simple on defense, actually coach them up a little bit more and give them less to think about, I believe we can get right back on track.
Which brings me back to Owen Pickering. I do not understand one iota why anyone would want to trade this guy. People tend to want to constantly maximize value with former first-rounders, and tend to also be very disappointed when a first-round defenseman is not putting up Zayne Parekh-esque numbers. In the real hockey world, you need several different types of good hockey players in order to succeed. And if you draft a guy in the first round who turns out to be a 20-25 minute muncher who can play in any situation and stabilize things from the back, that is a GOOD thing. OK, so Owen Pickering is unlikely to make the hockey Hall of Fame. He is also the type of defenseman every single Cup winner has iced and every aspiring Cup winner needs in order to hoist the trophy. That reliability is so underrated. And I honestly do not know what you guys were watching when he played for us early in the season this past year, but I saw a player loaded with promise and ready for the NHL already. Imagine how much better he is going to look with another summer of training, a full training camp, a new coach and new system?
We are a team in desperate need of some stability on defense. Owen Pickering is part of the solution, people. So enough with the trade proposals. We should be focused on trading away the players we no longer need (whether that is because they were more Sullivan guys, or whether that is because we need to make room for the younger players in the system.)
Acciari might get back to what he once was before Sullivan, but I would rather move him because he still has value to other teams. Ryan Shea is clearly a Mike Sullivan creation. Send him to the Rangers. Thomas Novak just got here, so it is a little unfair to put him in this category but if were are trying to improve the team, he should be made available. P.O Joseph is a player I like, he seems like a very likeable player. I would not qualify him. Fresh start for all parties there. Tristan Jarry has to go. Yeah he might thrive with more reliability in front of him but his time with the organization is done. If you need to throw players into deals, try to include the likes of Hayes, Heinen or Graves. If you can't, hope for the best that they can look better under a new bench boss. I like Timmins, Tomasino and Dewar and would qualify those three. But if you have to move them to improve the team, go for it. If someone wants Nedeljkovic as a backup, you have to listen for sure. And while Lizotte is an effective player, I do not think Malkin, Novak, Lizotte is anywhere near good enough down the middle. So if you can slide someone better somewhere down the middle, we should try to do so.
I actually like Dawson Mercer as a player. I would not mind acquiring him. I just don't want to break up this core group right away. I want to see what the new coach bump can do and then reevaluate at the 2026 trade deadline. I don't think that is an unreasonable strategy.
That said, I will always remember something Jeff Petry said early days in his first training camp with the club. He was asked about the system here versus what he was used to in Montreal. If I remember correctly, he basically talked about how much more "freedom" there was in the Sullivan system. How it was way more "player friendly". However, he also said something to the effect of there being way more responsibilities placed on the players' shoulders. And that it was a lot easier to look foolish in the Sullivan system when things break down. He sounded both happy to be playing it but also foreshadowing potential doom.
I always remember that because nothing we saw in the Sullivan years with our own eyes suggests Petry was wrong. If I were to summarize the Sullivan system, it would be something to the effect of it being a system that is easy to PLAY but hard to excel at. And again, I am not much of an X's and O's guy. Lots of people who do this for a living have a much better understanding of this. But it seems to me, the system is predicated on predictability. So to that end, it seems obvious that if you play the game north-south instead of east-west, your teammates will be better able to predict your next move/next position, etc. Of course, so will the opponent.
If I were to hazard a guess, it would seem to me that teams should be more predictable in the defensive zone or when players do not have the puck, but less predictable when they are in the offensive zone or when they do have the puck. But under the Sullivan system, it seems there is no discrepancy there. It's north-south, predictable play by all five members at all times. So, ironically, the freedom that Petry described is actually more rigid. I firmly believe that it is the main reason why a LOT of players struggled after coming to the Penguins. Defensemen, forwards...young players, older established veterans. LOTS of players have struggled to play this way.
You could make the case that it only really worked in 2016. But how much of 2016 was this group of talent being so happy with the new coach bump that ANY coach would have sufficed at that time? Remember, we saw similar early returns under Dan Bylsma, a head coach nowhere nearly as revered as the other ex-coach. Byslma proved to be incredibly unremarkable almost immediately after winning the Cup. With Sullivan, it took an extra year but the results were similar beyond that. In 2017, you could make the argument that we were simply too talented to lose, regardless of system. Most of the 2017 finals games looked a bit like the Washington-Carolina series this year. Nashville did everything right except they could not score (which Carolina has struggled to do against Washington, but it mattered less last night) enough. They also got terrible goaltending and we were simply surgical when it came down to scoring goals. So, the theory that the Pens won because we outscored the problems with Sullivan's system is not that far from the truth.
If we look at the type of players who succeed under Sullivan, it is hard to envision THIS CURRENT NYR squad doing anything of note next season. Drury, one would assume, knows this and will do some major surgery on that roster this summer. Artemi Panarin is one of the most unpredictable players in this league. Generally speaking, that is high praise. Not under a Mike Sullivan system, though. So it would shock me if a) Panarin is not traded this summer or b) he is successful playing that style. If we look back at 4 Nations, who were the players who shone the brightest for team USA? The Tkachuk brothers, no surprise there. Dylan Larkin, because his straightline speed is exactly what Sullivan likes. Jaccob Slavin was awesome, but then again Jaccob Slavin is awesome no matter what so that came as no surprise. Who struggled, relatively speaking? Adam Fox, a very cerebral defenseman (dare I say an EK65 comp?). Kyle Connor, who has the speed for Sullivan's system, but is a lot less predictable in his play. I did not think Auston Matthews was great in that series, either. Although he is having a down year in general.
Back to us, because that is what's important here. Our new coach needs to simplify things. I think we need more separation between what this team does in the defensive zone vis-a-vis the offensive end. Dumb it down in the D zone, so that the players have the freedom they want to be unpredictable in the scoring areas. I honestly don't think it means we HAVE to become a defensive team. We don't need to become the Wild, the Bruins, the Golden Knights or the Jets overnight in terms of style. After all, it is ALWAYS about team identity and how you are constructed. We are and have always been an offensive team, basically since 1984. So that should not change. But if we keep things a bit more simple on defense, actually coach them up a little bit more and give them less to think about, I believe we can get right back on track.
Which brings me back to Owen Pickering. I do not understand one iota why anyone would want to trade this guy. People tend to want to constantly maximize value with former first-rounders, and tend to also be very disappointed when a first-round defenseman is not putting up Zayne Parekh-esque numbers. In the real hockey world, you need several different types of good hockey players in order to succeed. And if you draft a guy in the first round who turns out to be a 20-25 minute muncher who can play in any situation and stabilize things from the back, that is a GOOD thing. OK, so Owen Pickering is unlikely to make the hockey Hall of Fame. He is also the type of defenseman every single Cup winner has iced and every aspiring Cup winner needs in order to hoist the trophy. That reliability is so underrated. And I honestly do not know what you guys were watching when he played for us early in the season this past year, but I saw a player loaded with promise and ready for the NHL already. Imagine how much better he is going to look with another summer of training, a full training camp, a new coach and new system?
We are a team in desperate need of some stability on defense. Owen Pickering is part of the solution, people. So enough with the trade proposals. We should be focused on trading away the players we no longer need (whether that is because they were more Sullivan guys, or whether that is because we need to make room for the younger players in the system.)
Acciari might get back to what he once was before Sullivan, but I would rather move him because he still has value to other teams. Ryan Shea is clearly a Mike Sullivan creation. Send him to the Rangers. Thomas Novak just got here, so it is a little unfair to put him in this category but if were are trying to improve the team, he should be made available. P.O Joseph is a player I like, he seems like a very likeable player. I would not qualify him. Fresh start for all parties there. Tristan Jarry has to go. Yeah he might thrive with more reliability in front of him but his time with the organization is done. If you need to throw players into deals, try to include the likes of Hayes, Heinen or Graves. If you can't, hope for the best that they can look better under a new bench boss. I like Timmins, Tomasino and Dewar and would qualify those three. But if you have to move them to improve the team, go for it. If someone wants Nedeljkovic as a backup, you have to listen for sure. And while Lizotte is an effective player, I do not think Malkin, Novak, Lizotte is anywhere near good enough down the middle. So if you can slide someone better somewhere down the middle, we should try to do so.
I actually like Dawson Mercer as a player. I would not mind acquiring him. I just don't want to break up this core group right away. I want to see what the new coach bump can do and then reevaluate at the 2026 trade deadline. I don't think that is an unreasonable strategy.
The Old Master
come and take it.
if we could see what they are trying to do it would be simple. but because we have no clue as to what they are trying to do, and it seems the players look clueless, it must be hard.
pistolpete11
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2013
- 11,852
- 12,024
Understanding what you are supposed to do is different than understanding what you are supposed to do when you have a split second to make a decision out on the ice. So it's not that Sullivan's system was difficult to understand, it's just difficult to execute for players that don't think the game at a high level.
pistolpete11
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2013
- 11,852
- 12,024
Pickering for Howard is the same as McGroarty for Yager.
It's probably a small upgrade, so I'd still do it, but I wouldn't be excited about it. Now, if they can flip some of these 2nd and 3rd round picks they have acquired for Howard, that's worth getting excited about.
It's probably a small upgrade, so I'd still do it, but I wouldn't be excited about it. Now, if they can flip some of these 2nd and 3rd round picks they have acquired for Howard, that's worth getting excited about.
- Status
