Salary Cap: Pens Summer Salary Thread: Dull days of August... Oooo! A trade!

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
84,320
84,522
Redmond, WA
This is why I keep bemoaning the fact we keep on picking guys like Poulin, Pickering, etc. You're dead in the water if those guys don't turn into the names you list above.

Whether it be scouting or development or a combination of both, the Pens can't afford to keep using 1st round picks on guys who end up being bottom line/bottom pairing filler (at best).

I agree but I'd also point out that the 2019-2021 drafts are shaping up to be awful in terms of top end talent later in the draft. COVID really f***ed up the draft classes in those years. Look at how much guys like Krebs, Newhook and Knight have fallen off from the 2019 draft.

The classes still produced NHLers but no really stand-out guys, outside of like Wyatt Johnson.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,374
48,298
Here's the thing, Boston didn't win 3 cups or get to 4 finals. They managed 3 finals and a single cup.

Would people here trade with Bostons results for the Pens?

I would think not, or they should not.
I'd rather Boston's success over the past 15 years than the Leafs or Oilers' success.

Penguins are the "best case scenario" for teams amassing high picks. But we've seen what other organizations with a bunch of top 5 picks have done during that same time span.
 

OtherThingsILike

Registered User
May 6, 2020
1,687
1,427
Pittsburgh
I think youre misunderstanding by saying no one gets your post. People absolutely get it, its just extremely poor logic.

Say we pick 1OA in 2028, you really think a 24 year old McGroarty doesn’t fit that kids timeline?

Someone should have told the Pens they shouldn’t have kept all their graduating prospects like Malone (9 years older than Sid, UFA rights traded for nothing), Whitney (4 years older because college draft was different then, and traded for older player), Armstrong (4 years older, traded for older player), Orpik (5+ years older), Talbot (3 years older), Scuderi (7 years older) and traded them for more magic beans. Or used cap on Gonchar (30+ years old, over decade older than the core), Sykora, Fedetenko. Because they were poor fits age wise for the Crosby/Malkin window, and it shortened the duration of their window. Oh wait it was longest postseason streak in pro sports when it ended.. and they won 3x..
Yep. The idea that a contender wants all of their best players to be essentially the same age is weird to me. You need vets - specifically, the right vets - to teach your young players to win, and you need them to win alongside your young players as well.
Where did you see that? He is pretty young still. At least could be a good WBS addition.
It was earlier in the same day that the McGroarty/Yager trade happened.

 

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,997
19,489
Pittsburgh
I'd rather Boston's success over the past 15 years than the Leafs or Oilers' success.

Penguins are the "best case scenario" for teams amassing high picks. But we've seen what other organizations with a bunch of top 5 picks have done during that same time span.
Yeah, the shitholes in no-mans land Edmonton where they have to overpay players to stick around. Nobody wants to go there. Even with the McJesus there.

But even the Pens had to trade to fill their roster after the core.
 
Last edited:

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,374
48,298
I agree but I'd also point out that the 2019-2021 drafts are shaping up to be awful in terms of top end talent later in the draft. COVID really f***ed up the draft classes in those years. Look at how much guys like Krebs, Newhook and Knight have fallen off from the 2019 draft.

The classes still produced NHLers but no really stand-out guys, outside of like Wyatt Johnson.
Not stars, but the fact the 4 next guys drafted after Poulin are all at least NHL regulars at this point and have played over 120 in the NHL each, and then early 2nd rounders drafted after him like Pinto, Kaliyev and Hoglander, shows there was decent picks available. But for whatever reason, our organization identified what Poulin brings to the table over those guys.

Again, whether that's poor drafting or poor development of a kid who had potential, it's impossible to say. But it's an example of what can NOT happen if we want to build a winning team around draft picks without having to draft top 5.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
84,320
84,522
Redmond, WA
Not stars, but the fact the 4 next guys drafted after Poulin are all at least NHL regulars at this point and have played over 120 in the NHL each, and then early 2nd rounders drafted after him like Pinto, Kaliyev and Hoglander, shows there was decent picks available. But for whatever reason, our organization identified what Poulin brings to the table over those guys.

Again, whether that's poor drafting or poor development of a kid who had potential, it's impossible to say. But it's an example of what can NOT happen if we want to build a winning team around draft picks without having to draft top 5.

Yeah I was just making the point about high upside guys in those years. There is only 1 player taken after #15 in that draft that has put up more than 40 points in a season (Maccelli at #98), that's how bad that draft was. The Poulin pick was a bad pick in itself, but pretty much anyone they could have picked there wouldn't be a particularly notable NHL player today.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
95,071
76,879
Joshua Tree, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Not stars, but the fact the 4 next guys drafted after Poulin are all at least NHL regulars at this point and have played over 120 in the NHL each, and then early 2nd rounders drafted after him like Pinto, Kaliyev and Hoglander, shows there was decent picks available. But for whatever reason, our organization identified what Poulin brings to the table over those guys.

Again, whether that's poor drafting or poor development of a kid who had potential, it's impossible to say. But it's an example of what can NOT happen if we want to build a winning team around draft picks without having to draft top 5.

I think Pickering and Poulin were both high upside picks.

Poulin’s career has been derailed by personal issues which hockey teams notoriously handle poorly.

Pickering still trending to be a potential # 4. Hard to hate that given the spot he was taken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Freeptop

chethejet

Registered User
Feb 4, 2012
8,682
1,923
Picks are just lottery tickets unless it is a Crosby, McDavid ect. To me it is the player development that is critic.al. Dubas seems to want scouting and player development stronger in the system. Pens went all in on RD in the draft as it was barren in the system. My hope is the same approach in the next draft will be RW.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
84,320
84,522
Redmond, WA
I think Pickering and Poulin were both high upside picks.

Poulin’s career has been derailed by personal issues which hockey teams notoriously handle poorly.

Pickering still trending to be a potential # 4. Hard to hate that given the spot he was taken.

I don't quite agree with that regarding Poulin, I think his upside was mostly described as a middle-6 guy when he was drafted. I remember Saad was mentioned as a best case scenario with him.

I generally agree with Pickering though, especially when you consider that similar guys (like Pettersson and Dumoulin) can far outweigh their prospect rankings once in the NHL. Pickering himself may not project to be a driver on defense, but if he ends up another Pettersson playing 23 minutes a night, I don't think anyone will be mad about that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OtherThingsILike

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
42,072
20,723
Seguin and Hamilton were both high picks that came from good management (or bad management by Toronto if you'd rather call it that), and neither of those guys had a notable impact on the Bruins maintaining a consistent contender level for most of the last 20 years. The Bruins have maintained their contender level though good management and drafting well, it has nothing to do with tanking to get high picks.
Outside of Seguin (which they got through Kessel), Bruins didn't pick near the top for quite awhile but as I said and as you just said, they've drafted very well almost to the point of shear luck:

1998 - Raycroft - 5th - 135 - Turns into Rask
2003 - Bergeron - 2nd - 45ov
2004 - Krejci - 2nd - 63ov
2006 - Kessel - 1st - 5ov - Turns into Hamilton, Seguin, and Knight
2006 - Lucic - 2nd - 50ov
2006 - Marchand - 3rd - 71ov
2014 - Pastrnak - 1st - 25ov
2015 was bonkers in that they had 7 picks in the first 3 rounds and really only got Carlo at 37 out of it.
2016 - McAvoy - 1st - 14ov
2016 - Swayman - 3rd - 111ov

I mean, that's some outstanding drafting and the ability to build a longer-term contender without having a top 3ov pick. Granted, getting a franchise center and perennial Selke winner in Bergy helped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Empoleon8771

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
95,071
76,879
Joshua Tree, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
I don't quite agree with that regarding Poulin, I think his upside was mostly described as a middle-6 guy when he was drafted. I remember Saad was mentioned as a best case scenario with him.

I generally agree with Pickering though, especially when you consider that similar guys (like Pettersson and Dumoulin) can far outweigh their prospect rankings once in the NHL. Pickering himself may not project to be a driver on defense, but if he ends up another Pettersson playing 23 minutes a night, I don't think anyone will be mad about that.

Getting a Saad player at 21st is about as good as it gets. And at Poulin’s size with his skill the Pens were potentially getting a very good power forward.

Pickering when drafted had a lot of offensive upside.

Neither were “safe picks”.

Outside of Seguin (which they got through Kessel), Bruins didn't pick near the top for quite awhile but as I said and as you just said, they've drafted very well almost to the point of shear luck:

1998 - Raycroft - 5th - 135 - Turns into Rask
2003 - Bergeron - 2nd - 45ov
2004 - Krejci - 2nd - 63ov
2006 - Kessel - 1st - 5ov - Turns into Hamilton, Seguin, and Knight
2006 - Lucic - 2nd - 50ov
2006 - Marchand - 3rd - 71ov
2014 - Pastrnak - 1st - 25ov
2015 was bonkers in that they had 7 picks in the first 3 rounds and really only got Carlo at 37 out of it.
2016 - McAvoy - 1st - 14ov
2016 - Swayman - 3rd - 111ov

I mean, that's some outstanding drafting and the ability to build a longer-term contender without having a top 3ov pick. Granted, getting a franchise center and perennial Selke winner in Bergy helped.

If you wanted to make this argument you could, I’m not sure I would but perhaps the Bruins drafting and development has something to do with that franchise identifying a winning culture and sticking to it regardless if it meant moving out very solid players.

Would be an argument for what Dubas is trying to do here.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
56,374
48,298
I think Pickering and Poulin were both high upside picks.

Poulin’s career has been derailed by personal issues which hockey teams notoriously handle poorly.

Pickering still trending to be a potential # 4. Hard to hate that given the spot he was taken.
Poulin was never seen as a high upside pick. He was very much a "safe" pick in that he wasn't expected to be a top line scorer, but instead was a "safe bet" to be a middle six 20 goal guy. Obviously injuries/personal stuff has affected even that, but he was never seen as a "this guy could be a 40 goal, 80 point guy if he hits his ceiling" type.

As for Pickering, again, his best case scenario was that of a second pairing guy. He didn't have "future #1D" upside. Nothing inherently wrong in that, but the discussion was about needing to hit it out of the park with these picks in order to rebuild without top 5 picks. Picking a bunch of guys who may end up as a 2nd line forward or a 2nd pairing defenseman isn't going to result in a strong core of later picks like the Bruins have with guys like McAvoy and Pastrnak (again, which was the discussion).
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
95,071
76,879
Joshua Tree, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Poulin was never seen as a high upside pick. He was very much a "safe" pick in that he wasn't expected to be a top line scorer, but instead was a "safe bet" to be a middle six 20 goal guy. Obviously injuries/personal stuff has affected even that, but he was never seen as a "this guy could be a 40 goal, 80 point guy if he hits his ceiling" type.

Nah this is complete revision. Everything about Poulin at the time was his consistency and skating are shaky, but with his frame and offensive chops he'd be a huge hit if he hit.

Super revisionist history here.

40. Samuel Poulin, RW, Sherbrooke (QMJHL)​

Age: 18 | Ht: 6-1 | Wt: 212 | Shot: L
67 GP | 29 G | 47 A

Poulin has been one of the toughest players for me to rank. There are times when you see a player showing what he can do with his size and skill. There are other times when he disappears. The effort needs to be better. Aside from that, the skill he has in that sturdy frame of his is tantalizing. If he finds a level of consistency to force his will more during games, he has a chance to outperform his draft ranking in a major way.


  1. Samuel Poulin, RW, Sherbrooke-QMJHL
Feb. 25, 2001 | 6-foot-2 | 207 pounds

Skating: 50
Puck Skills: 60
Physical Game: 50
Hockey Sense: 60

Poulin, the 2017 second-overall pick in the QMJHL draft, was a good junior player the past two years and got better as the season went along and in the postseason. He’s a smart and competitive winger. He’s very intelligent, flashing high-end vision and tending to make good decisions with the puck. As the season went along he showed more consistent playmaking and overall dynamic elements. He’s got some soft skill, but he’s more of a distributor than an individual creator. He’s got very good hands in tight and scored several nifty goals. His shot is also good, and he can score with his wrist shot in tight. Poulin works hard, is strong on pucks, and wins his fair share of battles along the boards and in front of the net. He’s already quite strong, measuring in at over 200 pounds. His skating is OK. Some days he flashes a good top gear and other times I don’t think his pace is anything noteworthy.


Hannah Stuart - theScore
May 1st: "He's a power-forward type, with the size that more traditional scouts like to see combined with a killer shot, passionate work ethic, and good puck-protection skills. He needs to work on his first step to improve his quickness and be more explosive in his skating."


When watching Poulin, the first thing you notice is his play within the offensive zone. His shot is NHL ready, and is a tool that will be deployed to improve an NHL power play. He is noticeable in possession, and is effective in both creating space below the circles for his linemates, and distributing when defenders play him too closely.

Size-wise, Poulin has a projectable frame which he has already started to fill. His combination of size and strength lends many to peg him as a power winger down the road, but it would be near-sided to think of him only as a hard-nosed net front presence. He certainly has the tools to be a playmaker as well.

A player of Poulin’s ability wouldn’t fall to the end of the first round if there wasn’t some room for improvement. His skating is above average, but not elite, and his transitions within the play could (and should) improve with time. However, at this point in the first round, you bet on talent, especially if a player has the work ethic to improve.

I don't see anything in here or during the time that says "safe bet to be a 200 ft player" with limited upside.
 
Last edited:

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
95,071
76,879
Joshua Tree, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
As for Pickering, again, his best case scenario was that of a second pairing guy. He didn't have "future #1D" upside. Nothing inherently wrong in that, but the discussion was about needing to hit it out of the park with these picks in order to rebuild without top 5 picks. Picking a bunch of guys who may end up as a 2nd line forward or a 2nd pairing defenseman isn't going to result in a strong core of later picks like the Bruins have with guys like McAvoy and Pastrnak (again, which was the discussion).

Not sure what you are saying here either. Pickering was 100% a high upside pick at the time. He had huge size and most people said at the time if he was a RH shot he'd be a top ten pick.

“Still, it’s unfair to talk about the bad aspects of Pickering’s game without also acknowledging that most, if not all of these areas are teachable. Pickering can be molded into a top-four defenseman capable of seeing time on a power-play unit and, with enough development, maybe even the penalty kill. I mentioned at the beginning of this report that Pickering was one of the biggest ‘what if’ players in this draft class, and it’s true. What if he becomes a better passer? What if he becomes a dominant force in transition? What if Pickering becomes an elite two-way defender? All of these are possible when you look at his current skill set. It’s going to take the right team and the right development path for Pickering to get to that point, though.” – Matthew Somma, Smaht Scouting

“Projection as a top-3 defenceman is based on his upside as a late-blooming player with raw tools.” – Sam Cosentino, Sportsnet

“Pickering’s tools are evident to anyone who watches a game or two. He’s a 6-foot-4 defenseman who skates quite well for his size and has offense. He can carry through the neutral zone to create controlled exits/entries and is good on retrievals. He can also pull up to make a good outlet or seam pass in the o-zone. He can use his size and feet to close on checks efficiently. Pickering’s ascent has been quick, and thus there are some raw aspects with his play with the puck and overall consistency. He projects as a second-pair defenseman.” – Corey Pronman (from, ‘The 2022 NHL Draft ranking: Juraj Slafkovsky rises in Pronman’s updated list,’ The Athletic, March 29, 2022)

Mike - Morreale - June 29th: "Pickering might have the highest upside at this point in the draft. He's a good skater who defends well with his feet and reach, taking time away from opponents."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Darren McCord

chethejet

Registered User
Feb 4, 2012
8,682
1,923
Pickering is a good athlete and has physical ability to be a solid to good defender. Poulin got a little off track and that cost him development time at a crucial stage of his development. I hope he is back on track and does bring size and net presence to the mix. But he is at best a third line guy which is a little less than I hoped.
 

Ryder71

Registered User
Nov 24, 2017
24,158
11,501
Picks are just lottery tickets unless it is a Crosby, McDavid ect. To me it is the player development that is critic.al. Dubas seems to want scouting and player development stronger in the system. Pens went all in on RD in the draft as it was barren in the system. My hope is the same approach in the next draft will be RW.
I think that's a bit of a stretch. So, if you're not 1st OA It'sa crapshoot? That's ridiculous. You can find players that project to be future quality NHLers beyond the first few picks. And next draft they need to focus on getting Centers (all things being equal or pert near). You win in this league being strong down the middle. We need quality centers.
 

chethejet

Registered User
Feb 4, 2012
8,682
1,923
It is a crapshoot unless you have talents that are so good that it is a no brainer. What I am saying is even top picks can become less than what scouts projected. Remind me how many top 5 picks really were generational players. Not many. Yes one can get fortunate with later picks but the stats don't support that is a reliable way to go. I think Pens fans are with Mario, Sid, Malkin just thinking they can be had with a top pick. Not so. Franchises can win with good centers but that is hard to sustain. Pens may not see a Sid for decades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gurglesons

Ryder71

Registered User
Nov 24, 2017
24,158
11,501
It is a crapshoot unless you have talents that are so good that it is a no brainer. What I am saying is even top picks can become less than what scouts projected. Remind me how many top 5 picks really were generational players. Not many. Yes one can get fortunate with later picks but the stats don't support that is a reliable way to go. I think Pens fans are with Mario, Sid, Malkin just thinking they can be had with a top pick. Not so. Franchises can win with good centers but that is hard to sustain. Pens may not see a Sid for decades.
I'm not suggesting these players I speak of will be generational talents. What I am suggesting is you can build a cup contender through the draft even if you don't get a generational talent. FLA from last season comes to mind.

As far as seeing another guy Like Mario or even a lesser player like Sid or Geno, no one should expect that. That in and of itself doesn't mean you can't win a cup or compete consistently through evaluating talent and drafting well.

There's been 1st OA picks that have flopped. Or they can get injured, nothing is guaranteed, so what.
 

AuroraBorealis

Back-to-back hater
Oct 16, 2018
19,795
17,137
Vancouver, British Columbia
It is a crapshoot unless you have talents that are so good that it is a no brainer. What I am saying is even top picks can become less than what scouts projected. Remind me how many top 5 picks really were generational players. Not many. Yes one can get fortunate with later picks but the stats don't support that is a reliable way to go. I think Pens fans are with Mario, Sid, Malkin just thinking they can be had with a top pick. Not so. Franchises can win with good centers but that is hard to sustain. Pens may not see a Sid for decades.
They have to try. It's the only way that can work.
They are not gonna trade and free agent their way to a 6th Cup. They need a proper, young foundation.
The more picks you acquire, the more your odds go up of hitting. They just haven't fully committed to acquiring all the best quality picks they can yet.
They also need guys outplaying their AAVs, and that tends to happen a lot with youth on ELCs, bridge contracts, or just years they suddenly take off in.

Free agency is too expensive to rely on to that extent. And in trades you have to give to get. It's hard to make significant progress that way.

So what do you have left? The draft. You milk that for all its worth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryder71 and Jacob

Ryder71

Registered User
Nov 24, 2017
24,158
11,501
They have to try. It's the only way that can work.
They are not gonna trade and free agent their way to a 6th Cup. They need a proper, young foundation.
The more picks you acquire, the more your odds go up of hitting. They just haven't fully committed to acquiring all the best quality picks they can yet.
They also need guys outplaying their AAVs, and that tends to happen a lot with youth on ELCs, bridge contracts, or just years they suddenly take off in.

Free agency is too expensive to rely on to that extent. And in trades you have to give to get. It's hard to make significant progress that way.

So what do you have left? The draft. You milk that for all its worth.
100%!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AuroraBorealis

The Old Master

come and take it.
Sep 27, 2004
17,912
5,054
burgh
I think that's a bit of a stretch. So, if you're not 1st OA It'sa crapshoot? That's ridiculous. You can find players that project to be future quality NHLers beyond the first few picks. And next draft they need to focus on getting Centers (all things being equal or pert near). You win in this league being strong down the middle. We need quality centers.
:heart:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryder71

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad