Salary Cap: Pens 2024 Summer Thread: "Thus, knocking us out of these superior numbers when we emerge! Mr. President, we must not allow a non-playoff bound gap!"

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I'm not really in a rush to judge Dubas. It's one year, and he's here on a long term project.
I also don't like blaming GMs for some acquisitions performing below their career averages, like Graves did. There's no way to know that when you acquire them.

But I will say that I really don't like his cowardice in prioritizing his relationship with Sullivan, by keeping Reirden all year. It's clear he wasn't satisfied with the job he did, since he fired him post-season. So it should have happened when a playoff berth was still salvageable.

The FA signings, trades etc. are tertiary to me. Even if some of them are already looking bad to my eyes.

Your second point was what really turned me off of him this year. Just flushed the season down the shitter for no good reason. For what? Todd Reirden? What a joke.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

The FA signings, trades etc. are tertiary to me. Even if some of them are already looking bad to my eyes.

Your second point was what really turned me off of him this year. Just flushed the season down the shitter for no good reason. For what? Todd Reirden? What a joke.

For not stepping on Sullivan's toes and having easier day to day interactions with him. But I want my team's GM to prioritize the team, not himself. So that meek attitude was very disappointing.
He grew a pair and fired him this summer, but too little too late.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

For not stepping on Sullivan's toes and having easier day to day interactions with him. But I want my team's GM to prioritize the team, not himself. So that meek attitude was very disappointing.
He grew a pair and fired him this summer, but too little too late.

Total speculation by myself (well not really... tons of people have contemplated the same thing) but even there I think it took so long because he got pushback on it. Too bad so sad. Dude was mediocre at best BEFORE he turned in a historically miserable powerplay. That's a layup.

Like it got done, great. But Kyle is really kinda working around the margins when the only hope of doing anything with Sid's time left requires bold strokes. Who cares what some shlub NHL head coach thinks? They are a replaceable commodity.

 

[HandshakeLine]

Then give up and find another team.

Lol. Or what? You gonna make me? You gonna smack me weakly with your clammy grandma arm flab until I watch something else?

 

[bambamcam4ever]

I don't think positional 2/3 defensemen are people worth celebrating, especially when they are on the team for a huge spell of playoff failures.

I don't think Martin was a bad player, but I don't think he's worth getting nostalgic over. I'm also not the kind of person to go "You know who REALLY was the star of the 1990-1991 Penguins? Jiří Hrdina." unless I'm trolling.

I don't f*** with positional defending, I guess. Some people do. I think it's overrated, boring, and mostly ineffective.

Maatta was a positional defender and their best Dman in the 2017 playoff run...

 

[Ryder71]

Lol. Or what? You gonna make me? You gonna smack me weakly with your clammy grandma arm flab until I watch something else?

Big talker from overseas.

But if you were here you'd call me sir and nervously apologize for fear I MIGHT put in your place.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I think Dubas can earn his contract if he handles the post-Sid years correctly. None of this current shit matters anymore, particularly because the organization is wholly unwilling to change the easiest cog in the machine to swap out. I dunno whether that's a Dubas thing, an FSG thing, or both.

 

[HandshakeLine]

Maatta was a positional defender and their best Dman in the 2017 playoff run...

Yeah but once Maatta’s thyroid condition slowed his speed, he was absolutely horrible. So positional smarts are fine, but you need something else there, and mostly when we talk about positional guys here on the Pens that means Rob Scuderi, not Niklas Lidstrom.

 

[HandshakeLine]

Also the thing about building a defense with positional guys as the cornerstones is you have to get the whole team to buy into the scheme because if you’re slow getting back, or blow your assignment, the whole thing comes tumbling down like a house of cards.

Guys like prime Letang are frustrating as hell to watch but he could skate our muscle his way out of dumb decisions or pressure more often than not (back in the day). Maatta could not.

 

[Ulf5]

Maatta was a positional defender and their best Dman in the 2017 playoff run...

So severely underrated. When he was healthy.

 

[Sidgeni Malkby]

I don't agree with this. It's a mid 2nd round pick. It's better than nothing, but I'd prefer the 1st as I said because I think the value of a "1st round pick" regardless of where it's at in trades is much, much more substantial.

Any team trading for a rental isn't going to give you a HIGH ANY round pick. You know the typical profile of a contender, and they are usually top 5 teams, which means LATE picks. That's why WE gave them away so freely.

The round is irrelevant, it's the position of the pick that's important.

If indeed we got Carolina's 2nd round, then I'd be more aligned with you, as that would have been a LATE 2nd round. We got MID 2nd round, which is in the middle of a typical 1st/2nd round from a contender. That's why I called it a 1.5 rounder, in the context of a contender.

Dubas literally said this that (paraphrasing here) "the 44 wasn't that far off from the 27". He chose to take the 44, and likely get Ponomarev.

Yeah, I would PREFER a 1st rounder, but what we got is not as simple as "ugh..we got a 2nd rounder". I don't know why you're so stuck on the 1st round pick as the defining mark of a trade .

Maybe the deal wasn't the best possible, but it's far from getting fleeced!

 

[eXile3]

Any team trading for a rental isn't going to give you a HIGH ANY round pick. You know the typical profile of a contender, and they are usually top 5 teams, which means LATE picks. That's why WE gave them away so freely.

The round is irrelevant, it's the position of the pick that's important.

If indeed we got Carolina's 2nd round, then I'd be more aligned with you, as that would have been a LATE 2nd round. We got MID 2nd round, which is in the middle of a typical 1st/2nd round from a contender. That's why I called it a 1.5 rounder, in the context of a contender.

Dubas literally said this that (paraphrasing here) "the 44 wasn't that far off from the 27". He chose to take the 44, and likely get Ponomarev.

Yeah, I would PREFER a 1st rounder, but what we got is not as simple as "ugh..we got a 2nd rounder". I don't know why you're so stuck on the 1st round pick as the defining mark of a trade .

Maybe the deal wasn't the best possible, but it's far from getting fleeced!

The round isn’t irrelevant though. GMs see “1st round pick” and approach the prospect differently.

Is a late first round pick that different from a mid second rounder? No. But the perception among a lot front offices there is which could mean additional trade value.

I’m of the opinion once you’re drafted it doesn’t matter where you’re picked which was my entire argument about Puustinen being our best prospect a few years ago but GMs absolutely put value in it.

 

[Gurglesons]

The round isn’t irrelevant though. GMs see “1st round pick” and approach the prospect differently.

Is a late first round pick that different from a mid second rounder? No. But the perception among a lot front offices there is which could mean additional trade value.

I’m of the opinion once you’re drafted it doesn’t matter where you’re picked which was my entire argument about Puustinen being our best prospect a few years ago but GMs absolutely put value in it.

Yeah, this is exactly the point I’ve been making.

 

[Deport Ogie]

The round isn’t irrelevant though. GMs see “1st round pick” and approach the prospect differently.

Is a late first round pick that different from a mid second rounder? No. But the perception among a lot front offices there is which could mean additional trade value.

I’m of the opinion once you’re drafted it doesn’t matter where you’re picked which was my entire argument about Puustinen being our best prospect a few years ago but GMs absolutely put value in it.

I don't think you're wrong at all but it really is a sorry ass state of the league FO's isn't it? You'd think we had progressed to the point where result and data matter more than the little number in parenthesis next to a name but it has not. The same way results and data have not yet managed to matter more than 6'5 245lb.

 

[eXile3]

I don't think you're wrong at all but it really is a sorry ass state of the league FO's isn't it? You'd think we had progressed to the point where result and data matter more than the little number in parenthesis next to a name but it has not. The same way results and data have not yet managed to matter more than 6'5 245lb.

NHL GMs are idiots and no one has been able to convince me otherwise.

July 1st they will hand out awful contracts despite historical evidence that it rarely turns out well.

They will trade up in the draft despite the fact trading down and aggregating picks has shown to be more successful.

They reach on players in the draft despite evidence that the CSS list is the best to go off of.

You as a GM could literally separate yourself from the others by going golfing the first week of July and pick from a list of publicly available names.

But they won’t because they think they’re smarter than everyone else and they’re idiots. NHL GMs are idiots.

 

[JTG]

Drafting NHL prospects is so hit or miss that you almost need to constantly flood your system and hope something sticks. After watching the Crosby era, I am not sure any big move we did truly paid off - it was always the smaller moves that had a massive impact and pushed us over. Couple that with the fact that two of our biggest contributors since the Cups were 3rd round picks.

It's why I have always thought that bumping the age to 20 to be draft eligible is better for everyone. It allows players to develop and makes it easier to project for NHL front offices. We would also see kids who are 2-3 years away instead of 6-7. Maybe make an exception for truly exceptional players like Jr hockey does.

 

[Ulf5]

Fwiw, according to dk he wrote he recently learned that Eller was one of the players that Dubas offered around at the deadline. But there was no interest.

 

[Gurglesons]

Fwiw, according to dk he wrote he recently learned that Eller was one of the players that Dubas offered around at the deadline. But there was no interest.

Shocker.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

Does anyone wanna fight about the difference in 12-13 draft spots in the late 1st and early 2nd rounds for a few days?

 

[SomeDude]

Drafting NHL prospects is so hit or miss that you almost need to constantly flood your system and hope something sticks. After watching the Crosby era, I am not sure any big move we did truly paid off - it was always the smaller moves that had a massive impact and pushed us over. Couple that with the fact that two of our biggest contributors since the Cups were 3rd round picks.

It's why I have always thought that bumping the age to 20 to be draft eligible is better for everyone. It allows players to develop and makes it easier to project for NHL front offices. We would also see kids who are 2-3 years away instead of 6-7. Maybe make an exception for truly exceptional players like Jr hockey does.

So much of prospect development comes down to opportunity, IMO. In order to fully develop, most guys need to steadily have their roles increased. Stagnation (like staying in WBS until you’re 24) is death for most prospects.

Most NHL coaches are going to be less inclined to play rookies no matter what age they’re drafted because they’re shortsighted. They care about not getting fired in 2 months, not if the franchise’s promising pick turns out.

 

[SEALBound]

Fwiw, according to dk he wrote he recently learned that Eller was one of the players that Dubas offered around at the deadline. But there was no interest.

I think they reported that the day of the TDL

But honestly, Eller was good enough for us that I'm kinda glad we kept him. He's making 3/4C money next year and then is a UFA. Perfect stop gap for us. What would be best is if we can promote a 3C or bring in a 3C and push Eller to 4C. I would 100% try to dump Acciari and waive Nieto but if you can't, there are worse things than having a Nieto/Poulin/etc - Eller - Acciari defensive-minded 4th line going into next year.

If we're out at the TDL, send Eller out. Plenty of teams would bite on a $1.2mil vet center if for nothing else, depth.

 

[Sidgeni Malkby]

The round isn’t irrelevant though. GMs see “1st round pick” and approach the prospect differently.

Is a late first round pick that different from a mid second rounder? No. But the perception among a lot front offices there is which could mean additional trade value.

I’m of the opinion once you’re drafted it doesn’t matter where you’re picked which was my entire argument about Puustinen being our best prospect a few years ago but GMs absolutely put value in it.

If that perception is really true, then it should be something to take advantage of, which is really what you are saying.

As a GM I'd be trading my late 1st round, for an early 2nd round + assets every single year!! I'm would easily bet I would win out over the long run.

Anyhow in our specific situation...
As we likely aren't flipping the pick and want to draft,
AND assuming the perception of a 1st rounder is true, then getting a mid second rounder is an even better decision IMO.

 

[Gurglesons]

If that perception is really true, then it should be something to take advantage of, which is really what you are saying.

As a GM I'd be trading my late 1st round, for an early 2nd round + assets every single year!! I'm would easily bet I would win out over the long run.

Anyhow in our specific situation...
As we likely aren't flipping the pick and want to draft,
AND assuming the perception of a 1st rounder is true, then getting a mid second rounder is an even better decision IMO.

Good thing Kyle Dubas is our GM then. He's done that 3 times in his career.

 

[Ryder71]

The round isn’t irrelevant though. GMs see “1st round pick” and approach the prospect differently.

Is a late first round pick that different from a mid second rounder? No. But the perception among a lot front offices there is which could mean additional trade value.

I’m of the opinion once you’re drafted it doesn’t matter where you’re picked which was my entire argument about Puustinen being our best prospect a few years ago but GMs absolutely put value in it.

So, essentially you don't think GM's or people in positions like scouting and player development aren't nuanced enough to understand that in a fairly unremarkable draft there isn't much fall off from say 27OA to 44th?

If we're talking top 10 you'd have a solid point, but that's why Kyle garnered the Lottery protection.

And as I said previously in placing value on our haul in the Guentzel deal. I'd much rather have Koivunen, PONO, Bunting, Cruz and a high 2hd rounder than TWO late 1sts. Anybody who understands valuations accurately would as well. Including GM's.

Bunting has already shown himself to be a solid addition who's 28 and signed for two more years.

 

[eXile3]

So, essentially you don't think GM's or people in positions like scouting and player development aren't nuanced enough to understand that in a fairly unremarkable draft there isn't much fall off from say 27OA to 44th?

If we're talking top 10 you'd have a solid point, but that's why Kyle garnered the Lottery protection.

And as I said previously in placing value on our haul in the Guentzel deal. I'd much rather have Koivunen, PONO, Bunting, Cruz and a high 2hd rounder than TWO late 1sts. Anybody who understands valuations accurately would as well. Including GM's.

Bunting has already shown himself to be a solid addition who's 28 and signed for two more years.

I’m sure there are plenty who understand the marginal difference between a late first and mid second.

That doesn’t mean people don’t have cognitive bias when seeing a 1st round prospect vs a 2nd round prospect.