Salary Cap: Penguins Salary Cap Thread: We suck again summer edition

[AuroraBorealis]

The Predators were a bad team and Granlund was one of the culprits. When you have a guy who gets incredible offensive usage and puts up such mediocre production, he is hurting you.

You can't "maximize" every player. You can just do the best with what you've got. What Granlund has is like, some vision and decent hands aside from when he's shooting the puck (the time when having good hands is most useful). That is an incredibly limited skill set especially when you consider being unable to shoot makes it harder to pass.

I respect that you like goal diff and +/- but like all stats SSS can skew results. I can't point to anything Granlund did to improve his lines defensively. At best he's ZAR with more passing ability but less size? The stats you like to quote had Granlund as miserable, miserable defensive player. Which jived with the eye test. Guess who finished last in Nashville this year in +/-?

2024-25 Nashville Predators Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the latest Nashville Predators Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts and more on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

Maybe there's a version of the team next year in which he's the 3C and our 3rd line is just uneventful nothingness but we upgrade LD/Goalie/LW and are successful. I'd rather get rid of bad players making big money if the team is actually serious about improving though.

I don't care one iota what he did in Nashville defensively if he does that better here, which he did. That's factual. He had 8 takeaways and 3 giveaways for example.
His lines were far less porous than others post-deadline, with heavy defensive allocation, and he did just fine on the PK.

What eye test? The biased one? All people ever talked about here was Granlund's offense. They weren't even paying attention to him away from the puck. They just called him a ghost or whatever.
No one here ever mentioned his backchecking, pressuring, marking and effective zone exits because they were so down on his scoring.
He used to be a good defensive player earlier in his career. I don't know why that disappeared, but if he can rekindle it then that adds value. Goals against prevention could have gotten us into the playoffs too, if more contributed that way.

I never said I wanted to keep Granlund. I've suggested trading him multiple times. I was saying I don't want to take Markstrom in exchange, and was weighing the +/-'s and risk of doing that.
Would rather burn a 1st or a 2nd+3rd to unload him and get a proper goalie in free agency/trade than roll the dice at the most critical position. It's hard to trust Markstrom right now and not everyone's an upgrade on Jarry just because they're not him. Odds are Jarry improves next season anyway. He played hurt since like October.

My preferred 3C is Compher or O'Reilly. Even ERod might work. He's excellent defensively and is used to shit usage here. He followed up last season with solid production again this season. He loves the city and enjoyed his time here and probably will be fairly cheap. That's probably the most realistic option, since other free agents might not choose us.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I guess there has been some talk about the Hawks wanting to upgrade their second first rounder (#19) to the top 15. Evidently might even be willing to take on a bad contract. Wonder if there is a deal to be made, there?

 

[ChaosAgent]

I don't care one iota what he did in Nashville defensively if he does that better here, which he did. That's factual. He had 8 takeaways and 3 giveaways for example.
His lines were far less porous than others post-deadline, with heavy defensive allocation, and he did just fine on the PK.

He played 3/4th of his season in Nashville and 1/4th of his season here. Does the last 20 games make him a "good" defensive player?

I thought he was incredibly weak and soft defensively as well.

I just proposed Granlund + our 1st for Chicago's 2nd (35th) on the Trade board which was accepted, so we agree there.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

C'mon Chicago... you're already getting Bedard. No need to be selfish.

14th overall and Granlund for 19th overall (Tampa Bay) and the 51st overall also from Tampa Bay. The second round pick is one of four they are holding and the third best positioned one, at that. So shouldn't be a huge loss and they get to move up the draft like they want. They seem to want to load up on bad contracts in the near term, anyway. And this trade fits that need to a tee.

Seems fairly reasonable to me. Moving up even a few positions in the NHL draft is expensive and this deal isn't all that steep considering the picks they are holding.

Hell Granlund might even be able to help them with... BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... whew... ha... sorry sorry I just couldn't finish that sentence with a straight face.

 

[Pancakes]

Trading our first just to get rid of Granlund is silly.

Buy him out instead.

 

[ChaosAgent]

C'mon Chicago... you're already getting Bedard. No need to be selfish.

14th overall and Granlund for 19th overall (Tampa Bay) and the 51st overall also from Tampa Bay. The second round pick is one of four they are holding and the third best positioned one, at that. So shouldn't be a huge loss and they get to move up the draft like they want. They seem to want to load up on bad contracts in the near term, anyway. And this trade fits that need to a tee.

Seems fairly reasonable to me. Moving up even a few positions in the NHL draft is expensive and this deal isn't all that steep considering the picks they are holding.

Hell Granlund might even be able to help them with... BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... whew... ha... sorry sorry I just couldn't finish that sentence with a straight face.

I just think from a trade value standpoint 19/51 has more value than 14. Throw in Granlund and not even close.

Having said that, teams that have a lot of 2nds are willing to throw them around like nothing. I think that was JR's genius in unloading Matt Murray. He identified that Ottawa had 2nds to burn. So maybe we could get 2 2nds for 1st + Granlund.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

He played 3/4th of his season in Nashville and 1/4th of his season here. Does the last 20 games make him a "good" defensive player?

I thought he was incredibly weak and soft defensively as well.

I just proposed Granlund + our 1st for Chicago's 2nd (35th) on the Trade board which was accepted, so we agree there.

Let's just drop this topic. He's not gonna be here in October. What he could hypothetically do here moving forward is irrelevant.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I just think from a trade value standpoint 19/51 has more value than 14. Throw in Granlund and not even close.

Having said that, teams that have a lot of 2nds are willing to throw them around like nothing. I think that was JR's genius in unloading Matt Murray. He identified that Ottawa had 2nds to burn. So maybe we could get 2 2nds for 1st + Granlund.

Very true. I'm being fairly hopeful with that framework, I admit.

But like you said when teams are sitting on a giant pile of draft gold like Chicago is right now sometimes they (in some ways correctly) don't sweat an extra second or third rounder here and there. And the difference to the Penguins between 14 and 19 is rather small IMO while perhaps Chicago has a specific reason for wanting to move into that area of the draft. Though my feeling is they want a few picks higher than the Penguins have and that's where this deal likely breaks down.

I am very adverse to buyouts but that's where Granlund (optimistically) looks like he's heading. My gut feeling is that they shoehorn him into the lineup and try to make it work, though. Because new GM or not I'm assuming until I see tangibly otherwise that this team hasn't learned dick.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Trading our first just to get rid of Granlund is silly.

Buy him out instead.

No thanks. That's 1.8M on the books next year and 2 more after that. If they manage to stay as a bubble team longer than we expect, I don't want that cap hit lingering.
I don't think it'd take a 1st anyway. 2nd + 3rd maybe.

 

[Pancakes]

No thanks. That's 1.8M on the books next year and 2 more after that. If they manage to stay as a bubble team longer than we expect, I don't want that cap hit lingering.
I don't think it'd take a 1st anyway. 2nd + 3rd maybe.

A first to move him is too much. That pick should be used to acquire an impact player if moved

 

[ChaosAgent]

Very true. I'm being fairly hopeful with that framework, I admit.

But like you said when teams are sitting on a giant pile of draft gold like Chicago is right now sometimes they (in some ways correctly) don't sweat an extra second or third rounder here and there. And the difference to the Penguins between 14 and 19 is rather small IMO while perhaps Chicago has a specific reason for wanting to move into that area of the draft. Though my feeling is they want a few picks higher than the Penguins have and that's where this deal likely breaks down.

I am very adverse to buyouts but that's where Granlund (optimistically) looks like he's heading. My gut feeling is that they shoehorn him into the lineup and try to make it work, though. Because new GM or not I'm assuming until I see tangibly otherwise that this team hasn't learned dick.

Granlund nailed Hextall's coffin though. And that assistant GM (Pryor) specifically.
No doubt the team wants to get rid of him.

They could try to talk themselves into holding onto him through the deadline, but if they are going for it they can't afford another (bad) passenger. No guarantee we're even in it this year. Buyout, Bribeout, or part of a package for better player/more hideous contract.

 

[Pancakes]

Granlund nailed Hextall's coffin though. And that assistant GM (Pryor) specifically.
No doubt the team wants to get rid of him.

They could try to talk themselves into holding onto him through the deadline, but if they are going for it they can't afford another (bad) passenger. No guarantee we're even in it this year. Buyout, Bribeout, or part of a package for better player/more hideous contract.

I could live with Granlund if we weren't also going to play Carter, but we know that Carter is playing 82 games even if he should be our 13th or 14th forward. Sullivan can't help himself.

Can't have two passengers in our bottom six. Too much pressure on the other four guys.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

I could live with Granlund if we weren't also going to play Carter, but we know that Carter is playing 82 games even if he should be our 13th or 14th forward. Sullivan can't help himself.

Can't have two passengers in our bottom six. Too much pressure on the other four guys.

I'm not sure our next GM will view Carter the same way Hextall did. There's gonna be very different discussions between Sully and the next guy, which could lead to changes in deployment.
GMs discuss the team with coaches after every practice. If we get Tulsky for example, I can't see him just rolling with this nonsense, unless Carter improves.

 

[Pancakes]

I'm not sure our next GM will view Carter the same way Hextall did. There's gonna be very different discussions between Sully and the next guy, which could lead to changes in deployment.
GMs discuss the team with coaches after every practice. If we get Tulsky for example, I can't see him just rolling with this nonsense, unless Carter improves.

Sullivan already lowered Carter's minutes as the season went along. I expect he'll keep to that next year.

I just don't think they or the new GM will have the heart to scratch him.

He'll play, it'll just be for isolated minutes and similar usage as he got down the stretch. That's my guess.

 

[66-30-33]

Sullivan already lowered Carter's minutes as the season went along. I expect he'll keep to that next year.

I just don't think they or the new GM will have the heart to scratch him.

He'll play, it'll just be for isolated minutes and similar usage as he got down the stretch. That's my guess.

Carter and Perry had similar stats, I really wish we pulled the Perry contract for him not what he was given.

 

[cygnus47]

Sullivan already lowered Carter's minutes as the season went along. I expect he'll keep to that next year.

I just don't think they or the new GM will have the heart to scratch him.

He'll play, it'll just be for isolated minutes and similar usage as he got down the stretch. That's my guess.

Yeah he only got to play the last minutes of vital games.

 

[Phil68]

What are your realistic expectations with the new GM to do between the time he is hired and the NHL draft 2023?

 

[eXile3]

What are your realistic expectations with the new GM to do between the time he is hired and the NHL draft 2023?

Trade everyone.

I assume they will do press conferences and assess the current situation. Draft is a month away and one hasn’t been hired yet. Not a lot of time to do anything.

 

[Andy99]

What are your realistic expectations with the new GM to do between the time he is hired and the NHL draft 2023?

Efforts to trade Granlund, find out Carter’s plans and if it’s to play for Pittsburgh, send Tonya Harding to his house lol, and try to gauge interest and trade Jake at the draft if there’s a good return…also see what we can get for our first round pick, I.e. Hellebuyck?

 

[Harvey Birdman]

What are your realistic expectations with the new GM to do between the time he is hired and the NHL draft 2023?

Not a whole lot before the draft. And I wouldn’t say expect, just hope, I hope before or at the draft he can figure out how to move on of the restrictive contracts we have an give some cap flexibility. I don’t expect it to happen but man I hope it can be done.

As a side note I also hope that we leave a roster spot open coming up to the preseason or at least the end of the preseason. We have almost nothing in the prospect pool. So weaponize the waiver wire. Leave a spot open coming up to the point teams start waiving guys every year till this team has a competitive pool again.

 

[Phil68]

Also would we want Tarasenko at 5.5 mil to 6 mil for 3 years? He was really good for the Rangers in the playoffs. And pretty alright two way play.

 

[Malkinstheman]

Also would we want Tarasenko at 5.5 mil to 6 mil for 3 years? He was really good for the Rangers in the playoffs. And pretty alright two way play.

There isnt really a need for another RW. We already have Rak and Rust making a bunch of money. Id try to spend that money on a LW like Bunting/Barbashev

 

[Andy99]

Also would we want Tarasenko at 5.5 mil to 6 mil for 3 years? He was really good for the Rangers in the playoffs. And pretty alright two way play.

No…I really think we should be looking to bring in younger skaters…

 

[Extra Texture]

Bertuzzi, Severson, Orlov projected for richest contracts among Top 50 Free Agents

A new projection model vaults Bertuzzi near the top of the board after his short but stellar playoff showing.

www.dailyfaceoff.com

Ufa projections. Have at it.

Soucy at 2.5M and Barbashev at 4.2M sound good to me. If we're still hurting for depth, and had enough money, I'd probably be fine with Hathaway at 2M per, but not for 4 years.

Also, side note, but I hope ERod gets a 3.7M payday. That would be well deserved for him after years of over-performance and getting underpaid.

Edit: is it just me, or do the goalies on that list seem well underpaid?

 

[Wattsburgh]

Just inflate Granlund assists by putting him on the first line for the first quarter of the season and get a second round pick back. Or a player swap. It’s much better than seeing him bought out for the next 4 years.