Salary Cap: Pens Salary Cap Thread: If we score 6 we win, its science!

Status
Not open for further replies.

chethejet

Registered User
Feb 4, 2012
8,742
1,936
Sullivan will not play a player that brings that level of edge to the ice. He deems his system of grinders and puck possession as the primary way to win. since he is unlikely to go anywhere and Hextall simply is not seen as a important piece in the Pens new ownership. I think the Pens will hang around the almost a playoff team and maybe a couple moves are made. But Hextall just won't make the needed decisions to really change the dynamic of the play. The three year plan of being a team that can fight for a playoff spot is still the goal here. No cap space and limited roster moves contractually was the issue this year. I do think after three years no matter success or not, that the rebuild and a new front office and head coach will be here to do that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gurglesons

HandshakeLine

A real jerk thing
Nov 9, 2005
49,238
33,843
Praha, CZ
If we're resigned to never changing the coaches, at least try to get a player Sullivan will play, but who doesn't suck shit through a straw and is interesting to watch.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,808
49,318
If we're resigned to never changing the coaches, at least try to get a player Sullivan will play, but who doesn't suck shit through a straw and is interesting to watch.
I'm not entirely sure what type of player that would be other than some vanilla player who plays safe hockey and won't try to be creative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99

Andy99

Registered User
Jun 26, 2017
52,954
34,743
If we're resigned to never changing the coaches, at least try to get a player Sullivan will play, but who doesn't suck shit through a straw and is interesting to watch.
i was going to say, by definition, no one interesting to watch is a player Sullivan ideally would like to play…he probably doesn’t want to play to Geno but he’s forced to lol
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,808
49,318
i was going to say, by definition, no one interesting to watch is a player Sullivan ideally would like to play…he probably doesn’t want to play to Geno but he’s forced to lol
Ironically enough, I've always wondered what type of rope Geno would have gotten from Sullivan if Geno was just starting out versus already having achieved so much by the time Sullivan took over.

I just realized Sullivan was the coach of the Bruins when they traded Joe Thornton to San Jose because they weren't happy with the way Thornton was playing.
 

Big Friggin Dummy

Registered User
Feb 22, 2019
26,101
25,320
I think Therrien kinda molded Geno into a pretty lethal two-way guy tbh. Young Geno was an absolute puck predator in all three zones, and iirc he used to be right up around Datsyuk for takeaways for a bit. Dude was unbelievably good.

Prime Sid was unreal, and probably a better player, but I preferred watching prime Geno. Just galloping around the ice, overpowering opponents and just dummying guys.
 

Dennis Reynolds

I have to have my tools!
Jun 10, 2011
3,595
3,772
Paddy's Pub
I think Therrien kinda molded Geno into a pretty lethal two-way guy tbh. Young Geno was an absolute puck predator in all three zones, and iirc he used to be right up around Datsyuk for takeaways for a bit. Dude was unbelievably good.

Prime Sid was unreal, and probably a better player, but I preferred watching prime Geno. Just galloping around the ice, overpowering opponents and just dummying guys.
It's so long ago now, I don't remember the specific year or injury. But I believe it was 2008-ish when Sid had a high ankle sprain. Instead of that injury dragging the team in the standings, Geno decided to put the whole team on his back and just win. He had a stretch of 20 games or so that he played some of the most complete hockey of any player I've ever seen. In my opinion, it eclipsed even peak Sid. Really magical stuff.
 

Big Friggin Dummy

Registered User
Feb 22, 2019
26,101
25,320
It's so long ago now, I don't remember the specific year or injury. But I believe it was 2008-ish when Sid had a high ankle sprain. Instead of that injury dragging the team in the standings, Geno decided to put the whole team on his back and just win. He had a stretch of 20 games or so that he played some of the most complete hockey of any player I've ever seen. In my opinion, it eclipsed even peak Sid. Really magical stuff.
Sid's gone through so many changes to his game, it's wild. He was this speed-driven, off the rush guy when he was a kid. Then he started to really develop his edgework and lower body strength. He realized he was becoming too predictable with a pass-first mindset so he became a 50+ goal guy. Then he just became like a 2PPG all-around monster at his peak. Was wild.

But yeah, give me prime Geno if I'm paying to go see a game live. Don't get me wrong, prime Sid just embarrassing guys below the goal line with his stamina, lower body strength and edgework before beating the goalie with a backhand or finding a wide open guy for a tap-in was great--but watching Geno just flying around the ice, disrupting plays, stealing pucks and going the other way before the opponent had any idea what was going on. That was unreal entertainment.
 
Last edited:

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,808
49,318
Sid's gone through so many changes to his game, it's wild. He was this speed-driven, off the rush guy when he was a kid. Then he started to really develop his edgework and lower body strength. He realized he was becoming too predictable with a pass-first mindset so he became a 50+ goal guy. Then he just became like a 2PPG all-around monster at his peak. Was wild.

But yeah, give me prime Geno if I'm paying to go see a game live. Don't get me wrong, prime Sid just embarrassing guys below the goal line with his stamina, lower body strength and edgework before beating the goalie with a backhand or finding a wide open guy for a tap-in was great--but watching Geno just flying around the ice, disrupting plays, stealing pucks and going the other way before the opponent had any idea what was going on. That was unreal entertainment.
I think both of his major injuries almost forced him to change his game. The high-ankle sprain seems to have sapped him of some of his explosiveness, so he had to rely more on the cycle game. Then the concussion/neck issue made him less of a beast around the crease, so he became a bit more perimeter where he picks his spots about when he'd go into the slot/crease area.

The improved goal scoring was the only change that came about naturally and not out of necessity, IMO.
 

Pancakes

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 4, 2011
27,536
20,183
I think Therrien kinda molded Geno into a pretty lethal two-way guy tbh. Young Geno was an absolute puck predator in all three zones, and iirc he used to be right up around Datsyuk for takeaways for a bit. Dude was unbelievably good.

Prime Sid was unreal, and probably a better player, but I preferred watching prime Geno. Just galloping around the ice, overpowering opponents and just dummying guys.
Geno in 08-09 would just routinely go end to end even in the playoffs. It felt like the puck was just on his stick all the time and nobody could take it from him.

I miss those days. It's great how well Sid and Geno are still playing, but they're obviously not what they once were.
 

DesertedPenguin

Registered User
Mar 11, 2007
7,479
8,427
Ironically enough, I've always wondered what type of rope Geno would have gotten from Sullivan if Geno was just starting out versus already having achieved so much by the time Sullivan took over.

I just realized Sullivan was the coach of the Bruins when they traded Joe Thornton to San Jose because they weren't happy with the way Thornton was playing.
Never let bias get in the way of a good story. Mike O'Connell was the GM and he and the team president pushed for the trade. O'Connell was defending it years later.

"Years later, the architect of that trade, Bruins GM Mike O’Connell, defended the team’s decision. “I asked myself if Joe Thornton could lead us to the Stanley Cup and my answer was no,” O’Connell told the New England Hockey Journal."


And Thornton was positive about Sullivan shortly after the Penguins promoted him. Thornton also played with Sullivan for a year.

“So long ago,” Thornton said Friday of his days playing under Sullivan. “Good coach. Obviously great coach this year.”

“He was actually a really, really good teammate,” Thornton said. “I remember when I was 18, 19 years old, just a tremendous teammates and yeah, he’s got the boys working over there.”


Sullivan has to have guys who hate him. I bet he's not on Kapanen's Christmas card list and I'm pretty sure Ian Cole wouldn't piss on Sullivan if he was on fire.

But there's nothing there when it comes to Thornton.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,808
49,318
Never let bias get in the way of a good story. Mike O'Connell was the GM and he and the team president pushed for the trade. O'Connell was defending it years later.

"Years later, the architect of that trade, Bruins GM Mike O’Connell, defended the team’s decision. “I asked myself if Joe Thornton could lead us to the Stanley Cup and my answer was no,” O’Connell told the New England Hockey Journal."


And Thornton was positive about Sullivan shortly after the Penguins promoted him. Thornton also played with Sullivan for a year.

“So long ago,” Thornton said Friday of his days playing under Sullivan. “Good coach. Obviously great coach this year.”

“He was actually a really, really good teammate,” Thornton said. “I remember when I was 18, 19 years old, just a tremendous teammates and yeah, he’s got the boys working over there.”


Sullivan has to have guys who hate him. I bet he's not on Kapanen's Christmas card list and I'm pretty sure Ian Cole wouldn't piss on Sullivan if he was on fire.

But there's nothing there when it comes to Thornton.

I said he was the coach when it happened. I didn't say he was the reason for the trade. I said "they", as in the Bruins, not "they" as in Sullivan. It was more so "just realized he was the coach there when Thornton was traded".

But speaking of bias, it's not surprising you'd read into my statement what you want since you've been a steadfast defender of everything Sullivan and want to turn everything into a woe is Mike.
 

chethejet

Registered User
Feb 4, 2012
8,742
1,936
I have thought that sully just blew away one of the principals of the ownership group and they extended him for 3 more years. But I also think the extension was a contract that was keeping Sullivan in the ownership group even maybe in a different role. I can see him being head of hockey operations if he tires of coaching as some point. Could be wrong my sense is he is valued as an asset that the group values.
 

Pens x

Registered User
Oct 8, 2016
16,394
8,178
I have thought that sully just blew away one of the principals of the ownership group and they extended him for 3 more years. But I also think the extension was a contract that was keeping Sullivan in the ownership group even maybe in a different role. I can see him being head of hockey operations if he tires of coaching as some point. Could be wrong my sense is he is valued as an asset that the group values.
The new ownership group has been beyond disappointing. You are probably giving them too much credit. It was likely just a dumb, unnecessary extension.
 
Last edited:

DesertedPenguin

Registered User
Mar 11, 2007
7,479
8,427
I said he was the coach when it happened. I didn't say he was the reason for the trade. I said "they", as in the Bruins, not "they" as in Sullivan. It was more so "just realized he was the coach there when Thornton was traded".

But speaking of bias, it's not surprising you'd read into my statement what you want since you've been a steadfast defender of everything Sullivan and want to turn everything into a woe is Mike.
You insinuated that Sullivan would have clamped down on Malkin as a rookie. In the very next sentence, you mention Sullivan was coach when Thornton was traded and that Boston was unhappy with Thornton.

Pretty hard not to think you're suggesting there is a connection.

And I've readily admitted my bias and that I think the NHL fires coaches too quickly. Most teams play similar schemes with a wrinkle here or there. It comes down to motivating the room and individual players, and as long as a coach hasn't lost the room, I think it's more reasonable to make player moves to jumpstart a team.

People immediately want to fire a coach when there is a slide, especially in this town. It's backup QB and backup goalie syndrome.
 

Pens x

Registered User
Oct 8, 2016
16,394
8,178
You insinuated that Sullivan would have clamped down on Malkin as a rookie. In the very next sentence, you mention Sullivan was coach when Thornton was traded and that Boston was unhappy with Thornton.

Pretty hard not to think you're suggesting there is a connection.

And I've readily admitted my bias and that I think the NHL fires coaches too quickly. Most teams play similar schemes with a wrinkle here or there. It comes down to motivating the room and individual players, and as long as a coach hasn't lost the room, I think it's more reasonable to make player moves to jumpstart a team.

People immediately want to fire a coach when there is a slide, especially in this town. It's backup QB and backup goalie syndrome.
Four consecutive first round exits is more than just a slide. At some point, you need to change up the head coach.

People want to fire a coach in this city??? You could have fooled me with the Sully and Tomlin defenders around here. Tomlin hasn’t done a damn thing in a decade and only recently did he start to get criticized.
 
Last edited:

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,808
49,318
You insinuated that Sullivan would have clamped down on Malkin as a rookie. In the very next sentence, you mention Sullivan was coach when Thornton was traded and that Boston was unhappy with Thornton.

Pretty hard not to think you're suggesting there is a connection.
Orrrrr ... it was two different points that were only tangentially connected in the sense that I'd wanted to respond about my comment about how Sullivan would handle Malkin, which then blended in with a "I just realized that Sullivan was the coach when Thornton got dealt" thought that was added after I'd already started the post.

And since it was about "how Sullivan might be handling a young player", I just put it in the same post rather than making another post after.

Again, nowhere did I say that Sullivan was the reason for Thornton's trade nor did I say Thornton didn't like him.
And I've readily admitted my bias and that I think the NHL fires coaches too quickly. Most teams play similar schemes with a wrinkle here or there. It comes down to motivating the room and individual players, and as long as a coach hasn't lost the room, I think it's more reasonable to make player moves to jumpstart a team.

People immediately want to fire a coach when there is a slide, especially in this town. It's backup QB and backup goalie syndrome.

"People immediately want to fire a coach when there is a slide" is such a disingenuous way of phrasing the situation we're currently in where fans want him fired. "When there is a slide" suggests it's a single bad slide during one particular season. "When there is a slide" is a pretty farcical way to describe multiple years of first round playoff failures and multiple years of the team often looking disorganized in way too many games.
 

McGroarty2

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
3,262
2,223
PA
Never let bias get in the way of a good story. Mike O'Connell was the GM and he and the team president pushed for the trade. O'Connell was defending it years later.

"Years later, the architect of that trade, Bruins GM Mike O’Connell, defended the team’s decision. “I asked myself if Joe Thornton could lead us to the Stanley Cup and my answer was no,” O’Connell told the New England Hockey Journal."


And Thornton was positive about Sullivan shortly after the Penguins promoted him. Thornton also played with Sullivan for a year.

“So long ago,” Thornton said Friday of his days playing under Sullivan. “Good coach. Obviously great coach this year.”

“He was actually a really, really good teammate,” Thornton said. “I remember when I was 18, 19 years old, just a tremendous teammates and yeah, he’s got the boys working over there.”


Sullivan has to have guys who hate him. I bet he's not on Kapanen's Christmas card list and I'm pretty sure Ian Cole wouldn't piss on Sullivan if he was on fire.

But there's nothing there when it comes to Thornton.
I don't think anyone would piss on Cole if he were on fire.
 

HandshakeLine

A real jerk thing
Nov 9, 2005
49,238
33,843
Praha, CZ
Say what you will but I watch this great game not for the players on the ice, but how the coach masterfully tells them to do something. I don’t actually care about the on-ice result, that’s for NoRmIeS.

Also holy shit there’s a real publication called the New England Hockey Journal? Please tell me they publish peer reviewed hockey studies! :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: BusinessGoose
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad