Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread: Clever Thread Title Needed

[Tom Hanks]

Pretty much nailed it when talking about how Vegas made out in their expansion draft.

The general consensus among GM’s is no side deals and just lose who they’ll lose.

Whether they stick to that is another story.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

The general consensus among GM’s is no side deals and just lose who they’ll lose.

Whether they stick to that is another story.

Yeah, I think that's how it'll play out this time around. Some GMs really embarrassed themselves with the Vegas ED. Doubt anyone wants to chance being the punchline again.

 

[Peat]

I don't believe in no side deals for one second when there's a gigantic cap crunch and Seattle have more cap than anyone. We're one of many who definitely knows who they want Seattle to take simply due to cap, the question is whether it's worth it for us to make sure they do - and you know some GM is going to say yes.

 

[Gurglesons]

“Just let it happen”. I usually respect Gretz’s opinion but that is such a BS take. Nobody thought that Vegas roster looked good.

 

[Flying Dego]

If Scott Wilson has a cup ring for top 6 minutes, then ZAR can fit into a cup winner's top 9

But, more to the point, I just don't Francis' job is to build a cup winner's top 9 right off the bat, and I don't think he thinks it is either. Vegas were a freak and they were a freak powered by side deals. Side deals require cap, as does quickly turning an okay team into a great team by picking up the likes of Stone and Patches.

And cap disappears pretty quick if he takes a bunch of Zuckers. Less so for grabbing premium bottom six guys. Maybe he doesn't have a lot of top 6 LW options and takes Zucker - hell, maybe he takes Pettersson - but those depend a lot on the side deals, who else is there, etc.etc.

While ZAR would be a useful plug and play non-break the bank option that makes his team better with no need to think about it.

We will not agree but it's all good! I don't think ZAR is anything special at all. But I'm a harsh critic.

Zucker carries the most value to an expansion team. Petts a second option if they believe that gangly goof is a top 4 Dman (lol).

If Francis values a sub 20 point 4th liner that's a 'defensive specialist' I'll be shocked. It isn't that easy to bloat their salary immediately so Zucker's contract would be reasonable. Now if there were 2 or 3 higher profile LWs available (doubtful) than Petts may be a guy.

Your view of ZAR is mine of Tanev. He is a superior bottom 6 guy that every team craves. He is assuredly taken before ZAR as well.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I'm sure we'll see a move here or there but I don't think it'll be the same like dozen trades we saw the first time around.

 

[Peat]

We will not agree but it's all good! I don't think ZAR is anything special at all. But I'm a harsh critic.

Zucker carries the most value to an expansion team. Petts a second option if they believe that gangly goof is a top 4 Dman (lol).

If Francis values a sub 20 point 4th liner that's a 'defensive specialist' I'll be shocked. It isn't that easy to bloat their salary immediately so Zucker's contract would be reasonable. Now if there were 2 or 3 higher profile LWs available (doubtful) than Petts may be a guy.

Your view of ZAR is mine of Tanev. He is a superior bottom 6 guy that every team craves. He is assuredly taken before ZAR as well.

I think you're far underestimating how valuable cap is right now. The deals made over the past twelve months to clear it would have been thought ridiculous a couple of years ago. Being cheaper's going to be a real plus point. Seattle aren't going to cheap out on every player but the idea that the most expensive guys will automatically have the most value right now seems very unsupported to me.

Also, ZAR had a 27 point pace and putting quotation marks around him being a defensive specialist is like putting quotation marks around water being wet.

 

[Flying Dego]

I think you're far underestimating how valuable cap is right now. The deals made over the past twelve months to clear it would have been thought ridiculous a couple of years ago. Being cheaper's going to be a real plus point. Seattle aren't going to cheap out on every player but the idea that the most expensive guys will automatically have the most value right now seems very unsupported to me.

Also, ZAR had a 27 point pace and putting quotation marks around him being a defensive specialist is like putting quotation marks around water being wet.

Like I said I'd bet money ZAR is not the guy. He's an RFA due a bump no? Let's say ZAR has the confidence you have in him he'll look for closer to 2M a year. If I'm a GM and want a defensive bottom 6 guy that impacts I'm taking Tanev at 3.5M without thinking twice.

But again I don't think they pass Zucker if available. We shall see who is right with ole Ron Francis.

 

[Turin]

“Just let it happen”. I usually respect Gretz’s opinion but that is such a BS take. Nobody thought that Vegas roster looked good.

Yup. Absolute revisionist garbage to say anybody thought that team was good.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

ZAR has 3 points in 20 playoff games.

He's looked better this playoffs than in his previous games, but yeah, he's a 4th liner and allocating too much to a guy who is a 4th liner is not good cap management.

If he wants a raise, move him.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I find it fascinating that people are using ZAR's playoff production here to say he stinks and shouldn't be signed at a raise, but when I point out Rust's awful playoff numbers in the same years as ZAR's awful playoff numbers, it's apparently a "hot take". Hell, you can also say the same thing about McCann.

The point is that if you're saying "this guy isn't as good as what money he wants because of his bad playoff numbers", you can extend that to literally tons of players on this team since 2018.

 

[bigdaddyk88]

It’s why I trade Zar before the expansion for a 5th round pick. You have carter openly say if I am taken by Seattle I will retire.
You force Seattle to take tanev Zucker or petts

 

[KIRK]

Like I said I'd bet money ZAR is not the guy. He's an RFA due a bump no? Let's say ZAR has the confidence you have in him he'll look for closer to 2M a year. If I'm a GM and want a defensive bottom 6 guy that impacts I'm taking Tanev at 3.5M without thinking twice.

But again I don't think they pass Zucker if available. We shall see who is right with ole Ron Francis.

I'd be stunned if Ronnie took Zucker before Tanev. Delighted, but stunned.

 

[mpp9]

I'd be stunned if Ronnie took Zucker before Tanev. Delighted, but stunned.

Zucker would thrive given more opportunity on the PP like in the past. I’d at least think about it if I’m Seattle.

 

[Flying Dego]

I'd be stunned if Ronnie took Zucker before Tanev. Delighted, but stunned.

Well I think as a GM he'd simplify it.

One guy has proven to be a 50+ point guy and those won't be found in abundance. Like I said he hasn't fit with us but Ron may see his team as a better fit to get that player back.

Tanev is an awesome role player but his ceiling is around 30ish points (how they'd assess him) and I'm sure they'll have no shortage of good role players to pick from.

So I think Zucker stands out for potential and is at a good age still. I hope I'm right cause losing Tanev for us would be catastrophic.

 

[Andy99]

I'd be stunned if Ronnie took Zucker before Tanev. Delighted, but stunned.

well, while he’s paid more, he’s also only got two years left of term whereas Tanev has four....they’re both 29, so there’s good reason to want the lower term...got nothing else lol

 

[Gurglesons]

Well I think as a GM he'd simplify it.

One guy has proven to be a 50+ point guy and those won't be found in abundance. Like I said he hasn't fit with us but Ron may see his team as a better fit to get that player back.

Tanev is an awesome role player but his ceiling is around 30ish points (how they'd assess him) and I'm sure they'll have no shortage of good role players to pick from.

So I think Zucker stands out for potential and is at a good age still. I hope I'm right cause losing Tanev for us would be catastrophic.

Well I think as a GM he'd simplify it.

One guy has proven to be a 50+ point guy and those won't be found in abundance. Like I said he hasn't fit with us but Ron may see his team as a better fit to get that player back.

Tanev is an awesome role player but his ceiling is around 30ish points (how they'd assess him) and I'm sure they'll have no shortage of good role players to pick from.

So I think Zucker stands out for potential and is at a good age still. I hope I'm right cause losing Tanev for us would be catastrophic.

I think it depends on what Seattle is trying to do. If they are trying to mimic Vegas and be win now. I could see them taking Tanev. But Vegas’s big thing was taking low term contracts. I think Zucker makes a lot of sense to put in a top line role and then pump and dump if things do not work out for them.

 

[Flying Dego]

I think it depends on what Seattle is trying to do. If they are trying to mimic Vegas and be win now. I could see them taking Tanev. But Vegas’s big thing was taking low term contracts. I think Zucker makes a lot of sense to put in a top line role and then pump and dump if things do not work out for them.

Right. I think if Ron looks at Zucker as let's get him premium minutes and PP time. Maybe snag Granlund to try and replicate 60+ points. Its a rare opportunity.

I just need to talk with Ron to help convince him that Tanev's contract is too long for a bottom 6 guy. After all Ron was a skill guy.

 

[KIRK]

Best spin I've got is Vegas took Neal, but Neal was in a much better place in 2017 than Zucker is now.

Guessing a Zucker pump and dump by Francis best case gets him a 3rd (a 2nd if Zucker does a full 180 perhaps). I just think there are better pickings on the Pens regardless of objective. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

[Tom Hanks]

Best spin I've got is Vegas took Neal, but Neal was in a much better place in 2017 than Zucker is now.

Guessing a Zucker pump and dump by Francis best case gets him a 3rd (a 2nd if Zucker does a full 180 perhaps). I just think there are better pickings on the Pens regardless of objective. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Vegas put a lot of time into getting to know the players personalities and a lot of weight went into that on who to pick.

Worked really well for them but not sure Seattle will put the emphasis that Vegas did in that or be as successful at it.

 

[JRS91]

Colorado is going to be really hard to beat, but man, those blue pants and helmets are so ugly. I wish they'd go back to black.

 

[JTG]

The general consensus among GM’s is no side deals and just lose who they’ll lose.

Whether they stick to that is another story.

I think that's the best way to go. Our deal was a bit unique because they were trying to make Fleury comfortable, but there was a rumor that Calgary offered two 2nds, and we gave up a 2nd in addition to Fleury, so we gave up three 2nd round picks. They were better off just taking a player from us and being done with it.

I think if Zucker and Tanev are available, Seattle picks Zucker every time.

 

[Tom Hanks]

I think that's the best way to go. Our deal was a bit unique because they were trying to make Fleury comfortable, but there was a rumor that Calgary offered two 2nds, and we gave up a 2nd in addition to Fleury, so we gave up three 2nd round picks. They were better off just taking a player from us and being done with it.

I think if Zucker and Tanev are available, Seattle picks Zucker every time.

There will still be some deals but not to the extent of Vegas.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I find it fascinating that people are using ZAR's playoff production here to say he stinks and shouldn't be signed at a raise, but when I point out Rust's awful playoff numbers in the same years as ZAR's awful playoff numbers, it's apparently a "hot take". Hell, you can also say the same thing about McCann.

The point is that if you're saying "this guy isn't as good as what money he wants because of his bad playoff numbers", you can extend that to literally tons of players on this team since 2018.

Except ZAR hasn't ever produced at any time of year.

He's a guy who paces for around 30 points in a good year, and he's regularly injured. That's why he's 26 years old and has never scored more than 17 points total in a season.

That said, I'd be disappointed if he were taken instead of Zucker.

 

[Tom Hanks]