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

Status
Not open for further replies.

pistolpete11

Registered User
Apr 27, 2013
12,000
11,027
Seems like a lot for a guy with a career high 41 points and who's currently on pace for 18, even if he is on his ELC.

I like Jeannot as a target, though. Would bring a different element to the bottom 6 and depending on how he does here, could step up to replace Zucker next year.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
96,455
78,386
Joshua Tree, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Seems like a lot for a guy with a career high 41 points and who's currently on pace for 18, even if he is on his ELC.

I like Jeannot as a target, though. Would bring a different element to the bottom 6 and depending on how he does here, could step up to replace Zucker next year.

The issue with Jeannot is he’s a cap hit and player literally everyone that is a contender can fit in and wants.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,801
49,277
I think Jeannotts offensive game has struggled this year because he's a complementary piece on a team who can't score. They've gone from 15th to 30th in GF from last year to this year. That doesn't completely excuse his performance, but it does explain some of it.

I don't think Jeannot is a true top-6 guy, he's more like a Cooke caliber 3rd liner who can be an acceptable third wheel on a 2nd line. He'd be an incredible addition to the Penguins 3rd line, I just think he'd cost top-6 prices and they shouldn't be paying that.

A 6'2 version of Cooke (physical game, not the dirty stuff) would be a perfect addition to this forward group. I'd pay top six prices for that type of player, even if the offense was more in line with a high end 3rd liner, because I think as a third wheel he'd be fine next to Geno and whoever on the other wing.
 

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
42,809
21,672
What about Greenway? Greenway-Malkin-Rust, also capfriendly says he's a LW/RW so I guess can play both wings fine.
I say yes. I just don't know how we get him here though.
Is Tanner Jeannot untouchable? He's off to a poor start offensively, so I wonder if that makes him easier to acquire.

Honestly, if at all possible, him or that type of winger is who we should be targeting. Even if his offense falls in the middling range of being a 15-ish goal scorer most years, the "other stuff" combined with 15 or so goals is something this forward group could use.
I think Jeannot is closer to a 2016-2017 Wilson. That solid 25-35pt guy who provides physicality. I'm not convinced at all that he's a 40pt+ winger but hey, I could be wrong.

If you bring him in, you are essentially brining Reaves back. Or rather, we are bringing in another Reaves who we hope can do what we had hoped Reaves could do - be that physical 3rd line player who will punch people.

Less we forget, that has to be Sullivan's vision as well. Otherwise we WILL get a 2nd rendition of Reaves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 66-30-33

K Fleur

Sacrifice
Mar 28, 2014
15,866
26,808
Seems like a lot for a guy with a career high 41 points and who's currently on pace for 18, even if he is on his ELC.

I like Jeannot as a target, though. Would bring a different element to the bottom 6 and depending on how he does here, could step up to replace Zucker next year.

Can’t put a price on punching people. That’s what wins hockey games.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,801
49,277
I say yes. I just don't know how we get him here though.

I think Jeannot is closer to a 2016-2017 Wilson. That solid 25-35pt guy who provides physicality. I'm not convinced at all that he's a 40pt+ winger but hey, I could be wrong.

If you bring him in, you are essentially brining Reaves back. Or rather, we are bringing in another Reaves who we hope can do what we had hoped Reaves could do - be that physical 3rd line player who will punch people.

Less we forget, that has to be Sullivan's vision as well. Otherwise we WILL get a 2nd rendition of Reaves.

I don't think Jeannot and Reaves are the least bit comparable. Reaves was never brought in to be a 3rd liner. He was brought in to be a 4th liner who protected the stars.

Jeannot's a much better player than Reaves. He may be closer to that 25-30-ish point winger, but that's already triple what you can ever expect from Reaves.

At worst, Sullivan would utilize him as he did Brandon Tanev. Physical guy who plays 12-14 minutes per night either on the 3rd or 4th line, with PK shifts. As much as I'm not a Sullivan fan, I can say with almost certainty he wouldn't "Reaves" him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gurglesons

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
96,455
78,386
Joshua Tree, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
I say yes. I just don't know how we get him here though.

I think Jeannot is closer to a 2016-2017 Wilson. That solid 25-35pt guy who provides physicality. I'm not convinced at all that he's a 40pt+ winger but hey, I could be wrong.

If you bring him in, you are essentially brining Reaves back. Or rather, we are bringing in another Reaves who we hope can do what we had hoped Reaves could do - be that physical 3rd line player who will punch people.

Less we forget, that has to be Sullivan's vision as well. Otherwise we WILL get a 2nd rendition of Reaves.

Jeannot is nothing like Reaves.

If Sullivan can’t get Jeannot or Trenin to work in his system further proof he should be fired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HandshakeLine

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
42,809
21,672
I don't think Jeannot and Reaves are the least bit comparable. Reaves was never brought in to be a 3rd liner. He was brought in to be a 4th liner who protected the stars.

Jeannot's a much better player than Reaves. He may be closer to that 25-30-ish point winger, but that's already triple what you can ever expect from Reaves.

At worst, Sullivan would utilize him as he did Brandon Tanev. Physical guy who plays 12-14 minutes per night either on the 3rd or 4th line, with PK shifts. As much as I'm not a Sullivan fan, I can say with almost certainty he wouldn't "Reaves" him.
Reaves was brought in to play on the 3rd line - that came from a direct quote from JR right after he traded for him. Now, that's obviously not how it turned out and Sullivan used him as you described. But that wasn't the original intent. That said, I compared him more to Wilson than Reaves. I think there's a decent comparison between those two.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,801
49,277
Reaves was brought in to play on the 3rd line - that came from a direct quote from JR right after he traded for him. Now, that's obviously not how it turned out and Sullivan used him as you described. But that wasn't the original intent. That said, I compared him more to Wilson than Reaves. I think there's a decent comparison between those two.
As much as I loathe the guy, adding a player like Wilson would actually be a good add for this team's forward group.
 

chethejet

Registered User
Feb 4, 2012
8,742
1,936
I see Jarry as a 6 million AAV for say 5 years. But that depends on how he does this year as to potential playoffs especially if the can play a couple rounds. Pens like Jarry and he will sign here as he is comfortable playing with the Pens. But the question is who will offer a much bigger package than that?
 

Andy99

Registered User
Jun 26, 2017
52,919
34,696
I see Jarry as a 6 million AAV for say 5 years. But that depends on how he does this year as to potential playoffs especially if the can play a couple rounds. Pens like Jarry and he will sign here as he is comfortable playing with the Pens. But the question is who will offer a much bigger package than that?
Yeah but I mean there are only a few goalies making $6+ mil…you only need to look at the goalies doing well so far this season to see that paying a goalie that much for that long isn’t worth it…I mean, I’d pay Jarry $7M but only for 3 seasons…I wouldn’t want the team to be locked up paying him for so long
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad