Empoleon8771
Registered User
I can't see any way that signing Tavares makes any sense for either side.
Salary Cap: 24-25 Salary Thread Crosbicles Volume MXVI: End of season wrap up
- Thread starter Zirakzigil
- Start date
- Status
molon labe
Registered User
Sorry. Nobody's gonna convince me that signing a 28 year old supporting cast guy to like a $95M contract is a good or prudent idea when a team has no prospects of significance and a 38 year old core. It's just nonsense.
If he was a center or blueliner, sure. Kick the tires, see what the deal is. But he's very clearly not The Guy to carry the baton of the post-Sid years or really act as a mentor for the next crop, and he'll be well past his prime by the time this team's scrabbled together a core through the draft to build around and try and go for it again.
Add this look to your mentality though:
- Teams almost never get the full cast of characters at the same time. You have to start somewhere.
Would a rebuilding team have any purpose in getting an elite goalie? He might steal games and throw draft position! But that elite goalie isn't gonna be available once they have all their chess pieces in play. You have to simply acquire and get crafty and that's what makes the game brilliant (and talking on message boards interesting)....
If every rebuild were the same, we'd be saddled up to the bar ready for Chicago to be good for 10 years versus watching their tire fire of a rebuild. Detroit would have already gotten good (and bad) again. Buffalo, etc. etc.
You add Marner? Swap your goalie (should do that anyway), shore up LD with 1-2 pieces, and try for another offensive piece [please!]. You're not going to be "favorites" [who is? FLA/TB are the only playoff deep teams]...
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in the Flood
Doesn't every team besides Vegas that's won the Cup since like Detroit in 08 have a top 5 draft pick on their team?
I'd say that getting high draft picks is still pretty important.
Is there a downside to talking to Marner? It isn't as if this UFA class is super deep, and the Pens have a bunch of holes to fill and you lose out on the time on chasing Marner that you might lose out on an attractive 1B option. Maybe Ehlers so that makes a grand total of 2 guys that you might want to talk multiyear contracts with and maybe a couple of 1 year fliers that you hope to flip for assets at the deadline?
The Old Master
come and take it.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
There isn't a downsize in talking to Marner, but I think there's a downside of giving Marner a 7 year, $15 million AAV deal where you're not going to be competitive for like the first 4 years of it.
Like I said, I'd definitely sign Marner if it's a team friendly deal that he'll still be worth at like age 32. But if he gets something completely stupid like it seems he'll get this year, I'd rather not sign him.
BlindWillyMcHurt
ti kallisti
- May 31, 2004
- 34,654
- 32,983
I'm fine with debating the overall merits of Mitch Marner and how much is on him and how much is on a dysfunctional organization.
But as a player he's a like 90-100 point player with outstanding defensive metrics. If he wants to come here for some reason then why not? My only concern is there isn't really anyone on this team that can consistently finish off all this sauce that'll be flying all over the ice. Not many natural goal scorers on this team (any?) and Marner is another guy who is primarily a playmaker.
People worried about "the tank" aren't paying much attention. With or without Marner next season this will be a bad team... but not bad enough to QUITE get that top five pick IMO.
Gurglesons
Registered User
Difference between high draft picks versus tanking in my opinion.
I’ll go one further. Every SC winning team since the lockout has had a top 5 pick in their top 5 play off scoring with the exception of the Blues.
Thats just scoring though. The Blues had Pietrangelo who lead them in ice time.
That counts Vegas because of they had Eichel a top 5 pick. And yes you can acquire those players via trade but I believe of those teams it was like 70% that had drafted them? I would need to go back to my research.
Le Magnifique 66
Let's Go Pens
There is no chance we are signing Marner to a team friendly contract, I mean no chance. Probably only Tampa and Florida have a shot at that type of deal with him
Empoleon8771
Registered User
Then I'd rather wait 2-3 years and try to sign the closest player to Marner that will be a UFA then. I don't think it's worth giving Marner a mega deal right now when you're not going to be good for half of it.
CheckingLineCenter
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2018
- 9,422
- 12,944
If I were GM I would “tank” for 2 maybe 3 years and do so with the worst goaltending you’ve ever seen and maybe only one decent pair on D, and leave the F group in somewhat decent shape.
I would not go longer than that. I don’t think the full strip it down rebuild really works too well. But I do think there’s no way to get your Barkov, Hedman, Pietrangelo, MacKinnon, Makar without a top 5 pick.
development is 50% or more of the battle and the model of stripping it to the studs for 5-6 years really makes it hard for guys to develop imo.
I would not go longer than that. I don’t think the full strip it down rebuild really works too well. But I do think there’s no way to get your Barkov, Hedman, Pietrangelo, MacKinnon, Makar without a top 5 pick.
development is 50% or more of the battle and the model of stripping it to the studs for 5-6 years really makes it hard for guys to develop imo.
Le Magnifique 66
Let's Go Pens
I mean I know the chances are slim of this happening regardless, but I'd rather spend money on 2-3 solid UFA players than to just chase Marner at 12-13 million per. I mean Bennett, Ehlers, Boese and a few other players and D are going to be available. I would prefer 20 million spent on 3 players to be honest if the goal is obviously to do this " fast "..
Empoleon8771
Registered User
I don't see a purpose in dipping into UFA to sign some "good" players, they're going to get completely insane deals that won't be worth it and will have terrible deals by the time the team is good again. Even if we're being more optimistic and thinking the team will turn it around in 2028, it's entirely possible that someone like Boeser or Bennett already is a negative value player.
BlindWillyMcHurt
ti kallisti
- May 31, 2004
- 34,654
- 32,983
I feel like this team has been signing 2-3 "good/decent" players for years and it's hardly done a thing to move the needle.
They aren't turning it around regardless so I'd personally prefer to err on the side of excitement.
They aren't turning it around regardless so I'd personally prefer to err on the side of excitement.
A real swift turnaround rests on one of two things
a) Creating the deepest, best-drilled team in the league
b) Somehow bullshitting their way to a series of acquisitions that replaces the old core
Either way, I don't think shopping in FA for good players achieves it, because if Alex Wennberg just got 5m for 35 points in in 77 games without actually even hitting FA, people are gon' get ripped off.
Hit FA for players they can't get in another manner but other than that, leave it alone and rely on youth and trades.
edit: And I somewhat misread Le Magnifique's point, because if we're talking the Boeser/Bennett/Ehlers tier... well, I think you can argue all of them bring traits it'll be very difficult to get elsewhere. But the price there is still gonna be real steep. You're not fitting three guys like that into 20m.
a) Creating the deepest, best-drilled team in the league
b) Somehow bullshitting their way to a series of acquisitions that replaces the old core
Either way, I don't think shopping in FA for good players achieves it, because if Alex Wennberg just got 5m for 35 points in in 77 games without actually even hitting FA, people are gon' get ripped off.
Hit FA for players they can't get in another manner but other than that, leave it alone and rely on youth and trades.
edit: And I somewhat misread Le Magnifique's point, because if we're talking the Boeser/Bennett/Ehlers tier... well, I think you can argue all of them bring traits it'll be very difficult to get elsewhere. But the price there is still gonna be real steep. You're not fitting three guys like that into 20m.
Last edited:
OnMyOwn
Worlds Apart
- Sep 7, 2005
- 18,798
- 4,908
I think signing Marner also helps with getting people interested in coming to games as well. Attendance is a big part of running a club. If they’re purposely fielding a shit team, I’m not sure that’ll fly for ownership.
Also, it doesn’t really matter to me if he’s making 15 mil a year. We don’t have any other high dollar guys coming up right now. So it’s pretty moot, IMO.
Also, it doesn’t really matter to me if he’s making 15 mil a year. We don’t have any other high dollar guys coming up right now. So it’s pretty moot, IMO.
CheckingLineCenter
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2018
- 9,422
- 12,944
On average for sure. But every year it does seems like there are some savvy signings that don’t take a ton of AAV or term. Foegele comes to mind. Mikkola. Marchment. Vatrano.
I think it takes things to align for that. Opportunity, market, relationship with a coach GM, agent knows GM, etc.
but would be nice to hit on one of those lol.
- Jun 13, 2010
- 40,881
- 24,977
There's tons of awkward cognitive dissonance when discussing Marner.
"I don't want Marner? Why? Because I believe his addition would make us a better RS team and it would decrease our chances of getting a high draft pick next year, specifically McKenna. Why do I want McKenna? Because he could easily be a 100pt winger. What's Marner? A 100pt winger. So, yeah, I want a 100pt winger just not THAT 100pt winger."
Yeah, crawling out of the pile of ashes at the bottom of the blast crater like San Jose and Chicago have to do is tough. Penguins were able to do it...but on the backs of Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin, Jordan Staal, and Marc-Andre Fleury. Neither have that and I highly doubt we ever get that again. But in the ways that Dubas has talked about how he wants to rebuild, I don't get the sense that they will strip it to the studs. He's mentioned NYR and LA as models and I would even throw Dallas on there as well as ways to rebuild without eviscerating the current team.
Have your core, add some high end players who help the current core, then when the current core retires, you have the new set of young players to build off of. In this thought process, I think getting picks is key. Dallas knocked it out of the park several years in a row and while Heiskanen was one of them, it was primarily late 1sts and 2nds that laid the ground work for them being competitive now. If you want to follow that, you need 3-4 picks in the 1st/2nd round for the next 3 years. By the time you get those last 3-4 picks in 2027, you could be able to have the future blueprint. Then you can start making trades for depth or signing FAs to fill holes. All the while, the crop of young kids are hanging around Crosby, Rust, and maybe Letang.
Tasty Biscuits
with fancy sauce
Nor would anybody we'd draft during the time he'd be here, even if we luck into some studs.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
If they win the McKenna lottery next year, he'll be up for his first RFA contract in 2029 while Marner still has probably about half of his deal left.
I think my argument is more so that you'd be paying a huge amount to Marner while you're not competing, then he won't be worth that money when you are ready to be competing.
Unless he literally doesn't decline during the length of his deal, he's not going to be worth the AAV he signs for by the end of it. Considering the Penguins are only going to be competitive in the second half of his deal, I don't think it's smart to give him a huge AAV that he won't be worth when the team is ready to turn a corner.
Gurglesons
Registered User
I think the argument is more so that the teams that are having success right now in Dallas, Florida, and Colorado never intentionally tanked.
You could even argue Edmonton was trying to be competitive when they got McDavid.
The argument is just try to acquire good players and be a good team and if you suck lean into it, but don't just blow up everything for 2-3 years.
That was my biggest issue this season. Dubas could've pulled the trigger on Rakell and we would've finished even worse. You get a top 5-7 draft pick in this draft is how you start building up that pool that you're talking about.
BlindWillyMcHurt
ti kallisti
- May 31, 2004
- 34,654
- 32,983
Oh gods yes and I'd meant to add a note on those. Yeah, dumpster diving at the low end to grab talent that others let slip is also on the menu.
That said... to a certain extent, Dubas has already filled most of those roster spots with dumpster dive trades/claims - Timmins, Tomasino, Lizotte, Kolyachonok, and so on - and I'm not sure there's a ton more space for those guys. Guys will have to go out and hey, looking at the roster, so many guys I'm happy to say bye to, but whether he actually does that, who knows.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
Trading Rakell absolutely would not have had this level of impact. The team won so much down the stretch because of Jarry.
- Status
