You do understand the waste that is spending over 6.0 on your 4th line? Some teams use one of their stars as PKers, some spend near half that 6.0 and their PK is good enough. The difference 3.0 could make spending it on upgrading on a Zucker, Rakell or even Rust and having an elite player in your top 6/9 who actually makes a difference when it matters most.
They aren't only paid to be 4th liners. They are paid to be above average defensive players who can move up when there's injuries, chip in with scoring and PK for ~70 games a year. In Blue's case he's a C too, which adds value.
"The 4th line" is just a term, one that Sullivan doesn't even use when talking to the team. How many nights will Blue actually be the 3C, with Carter, Sid or Geno hurt? Could be close to half the season with our luck. How many nights does McGinn follow him when that happens?
How many nights does the 3rd line underperform and have the 4th line get more minutes than them? Do they not become the "3rd line" for all intents and purposes when that happens?
I don't see a problem at all with spending 4.95 mil on Blue+McGinn if they play like last year. Their contributions justify it. I think you're underestimating the drop off in goals against if you just use just any PK'ers and L4 guys in their stead.
What has the 4th line made a difference since they started over spending on it? Regular season success. What has the team had trouble doing? Scoring and staying one ahead of the other team(s) they have faced. This team isn't just top heavy anymore, they are bottom heavy that really doesn't mean anything but pretty graphs and playoff failures.
Regular season success matters. That's how you make the playoffs. We've gotten comfortable with this giant playoff streak and assume we'll make it every year, but there have been a few close calls along the way.
We're not bottom heavy. We're balanced. Our top 6 is quite strong. Rust and Jake are among the best in the league at their respective positions the last 3 years. Sid is still Sid and Geno still popped in goals at a 40 goal pace. Rakell is a solid 2-way winger with nice playmaking and chemistry with 87+59. Even Zucker looks fast and motivated right now. Might have his best season as a Penguin with a bit of luck. This is easily among our best top 6's in the Crosby era.
Scoring is not why we lost to the Rangers at all. We scored 29 goals in 7 games. 11 of those were from the bottom six. 3 were from the D. This is exactly what you want from your offense. It's a blueprint for success. In fact that should be more than enough.
The problem is we're f***ing unlucky with injuries at critical positions. The goalies of course, Rakell for 6 games, Dumoulin for 6 games and then Sid at a critical juncture.
Yeah, L2 didn't score much but the bottom 6 made up for it and Geno's line was quite awesome defensively. They ended up being a + for the series.
Our 4th line, while supposedly a top defensive/PK line, is a detriment to progressing where they need the difference maker more.
Any signings like Heinen or the like at a cheaper cap number for the top 9 while it has no difference makers beyond the usual Crosby, Malkin, Guentzel and even if some want to add Rust to them (he's really not) doesn't put them over the top. Put your cap dollars where you'll get the most bang for your cap. Upgrade on just one player making 5.0 with that 3.0 overspending on the 4th line and they will be much better off. You won't need the perfect PK or 4th line. They'll be giving the top 9 a break instead of worrying about them contributing absolutely nothing when it matters at double the cost.
That only works if you have ELC's who are stars to elite talent, which they don't have.
We have a difference in philosophy about where wins come from. I like the way Hextall approaches it. Since we're among the most injured teams in the league, I like that there's a bunch of depth guys who can play multiple positions and move up seamlessly. I like that Blue's here when the 3 C's above him are 35+ and long term injuries wouldn't be surprising at all. This "through the collective" approach works for us. There's a plan B, C, D when things go wrong.
Well this sport's about goals right? So tell me how many goals do you think we'll gain by re-allocating the money the way you'd do it.
How many more goals against does the bottom 6 and PK surrender vs goals gained on L2. Not to mention the goals Blue and McGinn help produce.
You have to come out net positive with this or it's pointless.