Salary Cap: Salary Cap & Roster Building | Countdown to Free Agency (Cap Details + Links in First Post)

[DegenX]

From CapFriendly.
Baby Pens and signed prospects thread is here.
RHD Calen Addison thread is here.
C Filip Hallander thread is here.
C/LW Justin Almeida thread is here.
C Liam Gorman thread is here.
Thread for Simon re-signing is here.
Thread for Rust re-signing is here.
Mackey PG article on who did and did not receive a QO is here.
Sheary and Hunwick trade thread is here.
Sheahan re-signing thread is here.

Click to read more...

 

[DegenX]

 

[Empoleon8771]

@ the people who think there's no chance at Kessel getting traded because of what Sullivan said yesterday, Treliving said this 2 days ago about Hamilton.

Edit: Holy cow this one actually got through this time. My hot take on trading Sheary vs Rust didn't make it through.

 

[Peat]

What hot take?

And, I won't rule it out, but I think it's a slightly different platter of bovine testicles with Sully and Kessel. Course, something could still surface once the early losers on the winger sweepstakes come up with new plans.

 

[Empoleon8771]

What hot take?.

I think I'm shifting stances to wanting to trade Rust over Sheary because Sheary's upside is higher, he plays more of a position of need and Rust likely brings back more in a trade than Sheary does. I've also started to question how much I actually value "defensive wingers", due to wingers not having that high of a defensive responsibility. What value is there in being great defensively in a position that doesn't require much defensively? It's like playing a great offensive center on your 3rd line, you're wasting some of their talent that way.

Idk, it has been something I've been thinking about recently. It hasn't been related to Rust, it's more in general. My thinking is that you can't win games by not giving up goals, if that makes sense. Scoring as much as you can, however, does make you win games. So what's the value in having good defensive players, as opposed to players who can just outscore their defensive issues? This is more of a thought for forwards than defensemen, because playing Mike Green against Alex Ovechkin is going to cause you to lose that matchup.

The ideal team makeup IMO is a goalie that is the backbone of your team defensively, a defense that can get the puck out of your zone quickly and a forward group who can score with any line. Where do defensive forwards fit in that case? It's the goalie's job to stop shots and it's the defenseman's job to get the puck out of the zone, I just don't see where defensive forwards fit on that team.

Edit: I'm changing this because I realized Rust wasn't the player I wanted to question in this. It's Hagelin vs Sheary, not Rust.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I think I'm shifting stances to wanting to trade Rust over Sheary because Sheary's upside is higher, he plays more of a position of need and Rust likely brings back more in a trade than Sheary does. I've also started to question how much I actually value "defensive wingers", due to wingers not having that high of a defensive responsibility. What value is there in being great defensively in a position that doesn't require much defensively? It's like playing a great offensive center on your 3rd line, you're wasting some of their talent that way.

Idk, it has been something I've been thinking about recently. It hasn't been related to Rust, it's more in general. My thinking is that you can't win games by not giving up goals, if that makes sense. Scoring as much as you can, however, does make you win games. So what's the value in having good defensive players, as opposed to players who can just outscore their defensive issues? This is more of a thought for forwards than defensemen, because playing Mike Green against Alex Ovechkin is going to cause you to lose that matchup.

The ideal team makeup IMO is a goalie that is the backbone of your team defensively, a defense that can get the puck out of your zone quickly and a forward group who can score with any line. Where do defensive forwards fit in that case? It's the goalie's job to stop shots and it's the defenseman's job to get the puck out of the zone, I just don't see where defensive forwards fit on that team.

Rust's defensive ability is a plus, but he has a lot more than that over Sheary.

Consistency, versatility, possession, playoff performance, and the uncanny ability to not fall down whenever he's near the puck spring immediately to mind. Rust has consistently been a very effective player for us, and Sheary did nothing but logjam better options last year.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Ok what the hell, now my posts are gone?

Holy f***.

 

[Turin]

Sheary was bad in 2016 after New York minus those couple goals vs San Jose. He was useless entirely in 2017 until the last 6 games where he was serviceable. Last year he didn’t do anything.

 

[Peat]

Idk, it has been something I've been thinking about recently. It hasn't been related to Rust, it's more in general. My thinking is that you can't win games by not giving up goals, if that makes sense. Scoring as much as you can, however, does make you win games. So what's the value in having good defensive players, as opposed to players who can just outscore their defensive issues? This is more of a thought for forwards than defensemen, because playing Mike Green against Alex Ovechkin is going to cause you to lose that matchup.

The ideal team makeup IMO is a goalie that is the backbone of your team defensively, a defense that can get the puck out of your zone quickly and a forward group who can score with any line. Where do defensive forwards fit in that case? It's the goalie's job to stop shots and it's the defenseman's job to get the puck out of the zone, I just don't see where defensive forwards fit on that team.

First off, what manner of blasphemous beast are you that you can actually edit a post on this rickety old toaster of a forum? Nothing less than a deep and abiding pact with Satan explains being able to do this.

Defensive forwards aid in transition and providing cover for when the defence pinch. I also think, particularly with guys like Rust, their ability to pressure dmen and create turnovers is also invaluable. I look at a guy like Rust and I see a guy who helps you control the puck and transition the puck more than most. As we discovered when Letang was out, you can have the most stacked attack in existence and it'll still really struggle to impact games if you can't get the puck to them in good conditions.

Also penalty kill. Some of your forwards have to do it, and it won't be all four centres, so some wingers with speed/courage/anticipation are needed.

But, going back to the transition thing... I feel Sully's system hinges on quick accurate transition and swarming the puck more than just about anything else. At times it feels like proto-total hockey. For that you need wingers who aren't a total loss defensively.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Ok what the hell, now my posts are gone?

Holy ****.

Yeah mine got deleted too when I was trying to explain what I said. This is extremely infuriating, it's borderline impossible to have a discussion on here right now.

Rust's defensive ability is a plus, but he has a lot more than that over Sheary.

Consistency, versatility, possession, playoff performance, and the uncanny ability to not fall down whenever he's near the puck spring immediately to mind. Rust has consistently been a very effective player for us, and Sheary did nothing but logjam better options last year.

"It hasn't been related to Rust, it's more in general."

This doesn't completely apply to Rust and Hagelin, because they have assets of their game that help offensively. Rust is an effective offensive player and Hagelin is a monster on the forecheck. I just don't see any added value in them being good defensively, I think it's mostly irrelevant because of their positions. Same thing with versatility, versatility doesn't help you win games. Scoring does. When you start getting rid of the things that don't matter for wingers, it suddenly becomes a lot more debatable for who to keep between Sheary and Rust (or Hagelin).

Defensive forwards aid in transition and providing cover for when the defence pinch. I also think, particularly with guys like Rust, their ability to pressure dmen and create turnovers is also invaluable. I look at a guy like Rust and I see a guy who helps you control the puck and transition the puck more than most. As we discovered when Letang was out, you can have the most stacked attack in existence and it'll still really struggle to impact games if you can't get the puck to them in good conditions.

That's a part of the offensive game though, and it what makes Hagelin very useful here. Puck retrieval and forechecking is absolutely imperative for scoring, so there's actual value in that. I don't think defensive wingers help transition, and that's why you need strong puck moving defensemen. I also don't think you need to be a good defensive winger to cover for a pinching defenseman.

This argument, though, is a really good case for playing Rust on LW, because who cares if he's worse defensively on LW? Rust can play LW and the traits he brings that are actually important for wingers are his speed/forechecking ability and his offensive talent, so who cares if he's worse defensively on his off wing?

 

[Peat]

Yeah mine got deleted too when I was trying to explain what I said. This is extremely infuriating, it's borderline impossible to have a discussion on here right now.

There's so many cheap jokes to be made there...

That's a part of the offensive game though, and it what makes Hagelin very useful here. Puck retrieval and forechecking is absolutely imperative for scoring, so there's actual value in that. I don't think defensive wingers help transition, and that's why you need strong puck moving defensemen. I also don't think you need to be a good defensive winger to cover for a pinching defenseman.

This argument, though, is a really good case for playing Rust on LW, because who cares if he's worse defensively on LW? Rust can play LW and the traits he brings that are actually important for wingers are his speed/forechecking ability and his offensive talent, so who cares if he's worse defensively on his off wing?

This is where being a relatively new hockey fan sucks, because I can't debate in confidence on this. I'd love to hear @ColePens or @mrjiggyfly or @Mike Farkas talk about this, but I can't.

What I can say though is the forechecking and puck retrieval is something that I believe Rust does to a consistently high level and Sheary doesn't. And, well, the word 'consistency' would appear in a lot of the arguments I'd have about why to keep Rust instead of Sheary. This team needs a base line of competence every game in the play offs. I don't think we've got this from Sheary.

I've made it clear enough that I'm very pro-keeping Rust. But if Rutherford sees a chance to make the team better using it, go for it. Some of the stuff you mention may well figure in his thinking BUT -

That doesn't mean keeping Sheary is necessarily a good idea. Because, even if he reverts entirely back to 16-17 form next season, I'd still not feel comfortable with him going into the play-offs. I'd feel uncomfortable going into next season if he was arguably our 2nd best LW too - and if he isn't, because you've traded Rust for a fix, then is he in a position of need here as long as Hagelin/ZAR/Simon (and in a pinch, Brassard/Sheahan) are all here?

 

[PensandCaps]

tradin Rust over Sheary is insanely dumb. hell Rust plays LW better than Sheary does. also, Rust is like a much much much much much better player. Especially come playoffs. Sheary sucks, Rust is awesome. You keep Rust. not even a question.

 

[Empoleon8771]

tradin Rust over Sheary is insanely dumb. hell Rust plays LW better than Sheary does. also, Rust is like a much much much much much better player. Especially come playoffs. Sheary sucks, Rust is awesome. You keep Rust. not even a question.

I mean, that's just ridiculous. I know it's the popular thing to hate on Sheary here, but he's a legit top-9 winger that produces well. Just because he didn't hit a 70 point pace this season like he did in 2016-2017 doesn't mean he sucks.

What I can say though is the forechecking and puck retrieval is something that I believe Rust does to a consistently high level and Sheary doesn't. And, well, the word 'consistency' would appear in a lot of the arguments I'd have about why to keep Rust instead of Sheary. This team needs a base line of competence every game in the play offs. I don't think we've got this from Sheary.

I've made it clear enough that I'm very pro-keeping Rust. But if Rutherford sees a chance to make the team better using it, go for it. Some of the stuff you mention may well figure in his thinking BUT -

That doesn't mean keeping Sheary is necessarily a good idea. Because, even if he reverts entirely back to 16-17 form next season, I'd still not feel comfortable with him going into the play-offs. I'd feel uncomfortable going into next season if he was arguably our 2nd best LW too - and if he isn't, because you've traded Rust for a fix, then is he in a position of need here as long as Hagelin/ZAR/Simon (and in a pinch, Brassard/Sheahan) are all here?

I think the debate for Sheary vs Rust come down to Sheary's offense vs Rust's offense and forechecking. It's the same thing with Hagelin, what point differential do you need to go with Sheary over those guys? I think the debate is more so Sheary vs Hagelin than Sheary vs Rust, because Sheary needs to be over 50 points to have significantly more points than Rust. But Hagelin? He's not getting much more than 30 points a season at this point. How many points does Sheary need to be worth it to keep over Hagelin if Hagelin is at 30 points with a strong forechecking presence? I think I'm in the comfortable yes range by 40 points. And if we're talking about Hagelin and Sheary in the same role, is Hagelin even going to hit 30 points?

If you run with the thought of "defense for wingers doesn't matter", I think I trade Hagelin and give ZAR a top-6 role. People will question why I think ZAR should be in the top-6, I think it's pretty simple. He's useless as a 4th liner because he can't create his own offense and isn't fast. If you put him with Sheahan, he'll be nothing more than a Kuhnhackl clone for you. He should be put in a role where he can produce and use his talents appropriately. I don't think it's a mistake that he produced really well with Crosby last year, that's the kind of role he should be used in. He's not a bottom-6 grinder, he's a Hornqvist type of complementary offensive winger. I think their lineup would be:

Guentzel-Crosby-Hornqvist
ZAR-Malkin-Kessel
Rust-Brassard-Sprong
Sheary-Sheahan-Physical and fast RWer

If it would work with the cap, I'd try to make the 4th line Hagelin-Sheahan-Sheary, but I don't think that works with the cap unless you don't address your defense at all.

 

[SouthGeorge]

Sheary was bad in 2016 after New York minus those couple goals vs San Jose. He was useless entirely in 2017 until the last 6 games where he was serviceable. Last year he didn’t do anything.

So he's only good when playing with the best player in the world?

 

[Peat]

The hole in your logic is that Sheary needs to bring that extra production in the play-offs because this team is - or should be - play-offs or GTFO. And he hasn't done so and after three play-offs, you've kinda got to think he won't. Which is why, regardless of who else you trade, Sheary should leave the building.

I don't like saying it, because I like watching him and think we'll look like pillocks when he bounces back somewhere after his very cheap trading, but that's what we should do. Trades would have to go very odd indeed for me to change my mind on that.

And because of this, I'll re-iterate - I don't believe in Sheary vs Rust. I believe in Sheary OR Sheary + Rust. Maybe Rutherford won't go with this... but he's wrong

 

[Riptide]

I just don't see any added value in them being good defensively, I think it's mostly irrelevant because of their positions. Same thing with versatility, versatility doesn't help you win games. Scoring does. When you start getting rid of the things that don't matter for wingers, it suddenly becomes a lot more debatable for who to keep between Sheary and Rust (or Hagelin).

I don't think defensive wingers help transition, and that's why you need strong puck moving defensemen. I also don't think you need to be a good defensive winger to cover for a pinching defenseman.

I get what you're saying... but given some of the centers and skilled players we have... I think at this point I'd rather have a bunch of 2 way wingers to fill in the gaps then more pure skill guys like Sheary. Especially seeing how the gap between the 'average' Rust vs 'average' Sheary likely are not all that great when it comes to their actual production. So while I agree with you that Sheary likely has a higher upside when he's on his game... I don't think he's consistent enough for me to bank on that, and as such if given the choice between them, I'd take Rust every time (based on who we currently have on our roster - although that probably changes if/when Kessel is traded).

 

[Empoleon8771]

The hole in your logic is that Sheary needs to bring that extra production in the play-offs because this team is - or should be - play-offs or GTFO. And he hasn't done so and after three play-offs, you've kinda got to think he won't. Which is why, regardless of who else you trade, Sheary should leave the building.

I don't like saying it, because I like watching him and think we'll look like pillocks when he bounces back somewhere after his very cheap trading, but that's what we should do. Trades would have to go very odd indeed for me to change my mind on that.

And because of this, I'll re-iterate - I don't believe in Sheary vs Rust. I believe in Sheary OR Sheary + Rust. Maybe Rutherford won't go with this... but he's wrong

Sheary had 17 points in 45 games in the 2 cup runs combined. That's fine production overall, especially when he's playing 3rd line minutes overall and not getting any powerplay production. Yeah, he struggled to produce in the playoffs this year, but so did everyone else.

The big thing I don't get is why people criticize Sheary for his playoff production while simultaneously saying Rust is a clutch playoff performer. You are aware that they're separated by 2 points in their entire playoff careers, right? Rust has 16 goals and 21 points in 58 games, Sheary has 6 goals and 19 points in 57 games. Outside of the HBK run, Hagelin has been really bad in the playoffs for the Penguins, he has 5 points in his last 24 playoff games. I really don't understand why people criticize Sheary's playoff production, it's no worse than anyone else's production and it's all at ES.

I get what you're saying... but given some of the centers and skilled players we have... I think at this point I'd rather have a bunch of 2 way wingers to fill in the gaps then more pure skill guys like Sheary. Especially seeing how the gap between the 'average' Rust vs 'average' Sheary likely are not all that great when it comes to their actual production. So while I agree with you that Sheary likely has a higher upside when he's on his game... I don't think he's consistent enough for me to bank on that, and as such if given the choice between them, I'd take Rust every time (based on who we currently have on our roster - although that probably changes if/when Kessel is traded).

I think Rust is a bad example in this case because he's good offensively too, I just don't think his defense is relevant. For guys with equal production and equal talents, go with the better defensive player because you'll be getting more out of that obviously. But when production isn't equal or the talents are very different? That changes things, I don't think defense matters at that point. I realized after my first post that I picked the wrong guy to bring up in question, it's not Rust. It's Hagelin vs Sheary.

Let's compare Hagelin vs Sheary, you have Hagelin's forechecking ability vs Sheary's pure production. At that point, defense doesn't matter because Sheary should be producing a lot more. It's a question of how many points does Hagelin's forechecking count for, because like I said, you don't get points for preventing goals.

 

[JBose7]

Next year is a very deep draft so im glad for now we still have our first rounder. That being said Im ok with our team has is but, I only say that because I think Hunwick will bounce back, Oleksiak will have a breakthrough year, and Sheary will produce next year. Rust is a player who even if hes not scoring he still helps ( like Hagelin ) and so he perfectly fits our system of transition based hockey the most out of ANY other winger other than Hagelin. Hes very, very underrated in his role.

 

[MayorofWBS]

Playoffs are everything. Sheary can't score goals, can't win a board battle, and can't battle thru the allowed interference of playoff hockey. Hell, we'll lucky if he can stay on his feet a whole shift.

It's not 2016. Playoffs teams have closed the speed gap we enjoyed during that run. Sid and Geno are getting older. They don't need to have a parasite player that we need to hang from their ball***** to wring out playoff production. He literally brings nothing in the playoffs. I'd look pass his faults if brought something else to the table in the playoffs (like even if his points were more heavily slanted in goals).

We were absolutely brutalized on the boards this playoff year. We need more guys that can win a contested puck on the boards (with the speed/scoring).

 

[Andy99]

Our “defensive” issues this last PO falls a lot on the forwards. This team is great when the forwards are backchecking, winning wall battles and using their sticks...more critical in the PO than actual offensive skill...that’s why Sheary struggles in the POs...he’s not strong enough at this....it’s not the point totals between him and Rust...I just think if we’re moving any forward, it should be him and that feeling is strengthened when I consider his salary....

 

[Empoleon8771]

They don't need to have a parasite player that we need to hang from their ball***** to wring out playoff production. He literally brings nothing in the playoffs.

And again, how can you possibly explain Rust and Sheary having equal playoff production, then? This is just stupid at this point, there's no other way to put it. Sheary's not great, but to say crap like this is just pure stupidity.

Unless you seriously think "Sheary's a parasite because he gets more assists and Rust is a playoff performer because he scores goals", there's no actual rationale for saying that Sheary is a parasite.

Our “defensive” issues this last PO falls a lot on the forwards. This team is great when the forwards are backchecking, winning wall battles and using their sticks...more critical in the PO than actual offensive skill...that’s why Sheary struggles in the POs...he’s not strong enough at this....it’s not the point totals between him and Rust...I just think if we’re moving any forward, it should be him and that feeling is strengthened when I consider his salary....

Try to tell that to any Penguins team from 2010-2015. I genuinely can't believe I'm reading this kind of stuff after the lack of talent on the wings killed 5 years of the primes of Crosby and Malkin.

Honestly, I feel like this board is a really terrible place to discuss some players. It seems to pick out 1 or 2 players to make the new whipping boys, and then it's filled with hyperbolic garbage saying how bad they are. They pick out guys who are having bad seasons and ramp it up to a 20 out of 10 in the hate scale. Right now, it's Letang and Sheary. It was Kunitz and Fleury last season.

 

[Tom Hanks]

I’d rather have Rust over Sheary no question (either side). Rust seems to improve every year. Sheary does not. Sheary isn’t very strong and one of worst players going the other way. With how we are built at the moment we need a team defense. If Sheary isn’t scoring he doesn’t add much and needs more accomodating, Hornqvist is really the only guy I’d want him with in the top 9 and there a cheaper 4th liner’s out there.

 

[Turin]

Yohe just came out with an article about JR looking to make a deal and Skinner being his main target. All throughout the article it was assumed Kessel will not be apart of any said deal.

 

[Riptide]

And again, preventing goals doesn't help you win, scoring them does. You're looking at a position with low defensive responsibility in a spot that requires offense to win. There's no value in a defensive winger who can't score. They flat out don't help you win. I'd much rather take a scoring winger who can't defend over a defensive winger who can't score, it's not even remotely a question in my eyes.

If a winger isn't scoring, they're not helping the team. Being good defensively counts for less than being good offensively, because you can't win with just being good defensively. A team who is good offensively but bad defensively will 100% do better than a team who is bad offensively but good defensively. Look at the Kings last year, they were bad offensively but good defensively and got swept in the 1st round.

Empo, I have no clue how you came onto this line of thinking... but you're flat out wrong.

A) If an offense only winger (like Sheary) isn't scoring he's not helping the team unless he can do something else to help. If a defense only winger (like Hagelin) isn't scoring, he can still help the team in many different aspects of the game. And seeing how little offense Sheary provides come PO time, I don't see how this is even a debate. Bottom line is this: If you're not a consistent offensive threat/producer, you need to do a lot more to be an effective player - Hagelin does this, and Sheary just doesn't. He doesn't score/produce consistently, and he does very little else when he's not producing.

B) I'd point to Vancouver in the early 2000s (good offensively, crap defensively) as a team that repeatedly failed. Even Toronto in recent years is a solid example of another good offensive team that was poor defensively. And then Calgary and Edmonton (good defensively, crap offensively) in their two runs as contrasting examples to your LA one. And I'm sure if I thought about it, I could probably come up with more examples.

 

[Riptide]

I think Rust is a bad example in this case because he's good offensively too, I just don't think his defense is relevant. For guys with equal production and equal talents, go with the better defensive player because you'll be getting more out of that obviously. But when production isn't equal or the talents are very different? That changes things, I don't think defense matters at that point. I realized after my first post that I picked the wrong guy to bring up in question, it's not Rust. It's Hagelin vs Sheary.

Let's compare Hagelin vs Sheary, you have Hagelin's forechecking ability vs Sheary's pure production. At that point, defense doesn't matter because Sheary should be producing a lot more. It's a question of how many points does Hagelin's forechecking count for, because like I said, you don't get points for preventing goals.

If Hagelin cost the same as Sheary... I'd be extremely tempted to go with Hagelin. And while you "don't get points for preventing goals", I think that's a little short sighted... because while that's true, the more goals you prevent (as a team), the less you need to score - and scoring is typically tighter in the POs.

If Sheary was "on his game" more often, then it would be an easy decision - but as that isn't consistently the case, I think I'd probably go with Hagelin if the AAV was the same or similar.

 

[Riptide]

The forums as so f***ed. Every time I hit refresh on the page, half the posts disappear. And then when I finally got a post to post... it shows up halfway up the page.

Edit 1: Yeah and more and more posts disappearing. F this, I'm going to bed.
Edit 2: Can't even edit a post without "saving" it 5+ times.

 

[Peat]

Sheary had 17 points in 45 games in the 2 cup runs combined. That's fine production overall, especially when he's playing 3rd line minutes overall and not getting any powerplay production. Yeah, he struggled to produce in the playoffs this year, but so did everyone else.

The big thing I don't get is why people criticize Sheary for his playoff production while simultaneously saying Rust is a clutch playoff performer. You are aware that they're separated by 2 points in their entire playoff careers, right? Rust has 16 goals and 21 points in 58 games, Sheary has 6 goals and 19 points in 57 games. Outside of the HBK run, Hagelin has been really bad in the playoffs for the Penguins, he has 5 points in his last 24 playoff games. I really don't understand why people criticize Sheary's playoff production, it's no worse than anyone else's production and it's all at ES.

Sure, Sheary's play off production is better than often given credit for. I make that point myself a lot. However! As you say:

I think the debate for Sheary vs Rust come down to Sheary's offense vs Rust's offense and forechecking. It's the same thing with Hagelin, what point differential do you need to go with Sheary over those guys?

Being equal isn't good enough. He's pretty much strictly just below Rust, not good enough. Hagelin is a different barrel of fish. One stupendous play off run, one stupendously bad play off run and the most recent one of 3 in 9 which is acceptable when you remember he was injured for a lot of it. Given his history of production with NYR, I'd give him a slight benefit of the doubt.

As such, I don't think Sheary produces enough more than Hagelin either.

 

[SEALBound]

2019 1st + Sprong? or Sheary/Rust.

I only see us getting Skinner if JR has a solid deal in place with Kessel.

 

[Riptide]

But that's just the thing, I don't think Hagelin's defensive game/forechecking is helping the Penguins win any more and he's producing less. That's where I'm at with this, Hagelin produces even less than Sheary and I don't think the rest of his game matches that production difference under most circumstances.

Yes, but while he's producing "less" (and I don't think it's all that much less), he's still doing things to help when he's not producing - something Sheary frequently doesn't do. Which means unlike Hagelin, Sheary is next to useless when not scoring. And that's okay - as long as you're scoring a lot of points to overcome that aspect/issue with your game. Sheary doesn't provide enough offense to overcome that. Now if you want to talk about Kessel, then sure you'd have a point, as regardless of whatever flaws he has defensively, he more than makes up for it offensively. But Sheary isn't even close to that level, which makes this a really weird issue to be debating.