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

[Dipsy Doodle]

Why is it wrong? Just because you say so? You can win games when getting scored on a bunch. You can't win games when not scoring at all. You can outscore your defensive issues, you can't out-defend your offensive issues. No team in recent memory has won a cup with a bad offense, while plenty have won with a bad defense.

Wingers in general can't have that much of an impact defensively because of their position. So why does it matter if a wing is good defensively? Wingers don't have much responsibility defensively.

You're setting up a false dichotomy here. Nobody is arguing that a pure defensive winger who can't score is better than Sheary.

People are arguing that all other things being equal, a good defensive winger is better than a shit defensive winger, which is precisely the difference between Rust/Hagelin and Sheary this year...except Rust was significantly better offensively this year too, on top of everything else.

 

[3074326]

I'm more of a fan of Sheary than most and I keep Rust over him 10 out of 10 times.

 

[Ryder71]

I don't think parting with Sprong or Rust is a good idea when you factor in the cap. I don't mind if Sheary is involved but the other two, a hard pass!

 

[Empoleon8771]

Based on your Sheary take, I’ll assume you just like arguing the contrarian position.

Anyone watching these games can see how much more valuable to the team Rust is, just a really bad take by you. I’m happy when Sheary takes a full shift without falling over. Sheary is so easily taken out of the game with even a modicum of physicality.

My Sheary take of "he's not garbage" is a contrarian take now? It seems like the "Sheary is garbage" take is just the standard HF whipping boy take at this point.

Sheary is very hot and cold in the playoffs, and he averages out to just be okay in the playoffs. I feel like people zero in on when he's cold to scream about how terrible he is.

You're setting up a false dichotomy here. Nobody is arguing that a pure defensive winger who can't score is better than Sheary.

People are arguing that all other things being equal, a good defensive winger is better than a **** defensive winger, which is precisely the difference between Rust/Hagelin and Sheary this year...except Rust was significantly better offensively this year too, on top of everything else.

The comparison isn't Rust vs Sheary, as I've said a bunch of times already. I've been saying "I picked the wrong person to compare to Sheary, it should be Hagelin" since page 1. I'm saying under normal circumstances, Sheary should be producing noticeably more than Hagelin. At that point, Hagelin's defense doesn't matter, because defense from wingers doesn't count for any points. It's Hagelin's forechecking ability vs Sheary's extra production, at some point, it shifts towards Sheary.

An on the "false dichotomy" idea, that's exactly what Hagelin has been in the playoffs for the Penguins. Outside of the HBK run, he's been a pure defensive winger who doesn't produce.

Possibly because he was a healthy scratch in the playoffs. 2017 ECF games 5 and 6 in particular come to mind vs. Ottawa. This was following a stretch of 15 playoff games where he only recorded 3 assists and basically looked lost on the ice.

So was Hagelin, though, and you don't see anyone extending the hate towards Hagelin for his play in the playoffs.

It's nice to know that this site is still super messed up. You'd think they'd just reset the site and take it down for an hour or something, but nope. Just leave it.

 

[Turin]

A. Goals don't count for more than assists. Both result in 1 goal for your team.
B. Being better defensively doesn't result in 1 player sucking and one being a playoff warrior.
C. Based on their production, it's really baseless to say that Sheary goes any more AWOL in tight games than Rust does.

I feel like people overrate the hell out of Rust in the playoffs because he has gotten some goals in elimination games in the past, while underrated the hell out of Sheary because he's a whipping boy.

Rust scores big goals, is trusted by the coach, kills penalties and helps the forecheck even when he’s cold. Sheary apart from game 2 OT in the SCF does none of these things. He’s been a healthy scratch worthy forward for the Pens in most of 2016 and almost all of the last 6 series.. and this is coming from a guy who doesn’t want to just trade him for fun.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Hagelin was key to winning in 2016 because he was producing. He wasn't key to winning in 2017 because he was garbage in the playoffs.

I'd say this is wrong, preventing goals when you're not scoring like they normally do when the teams is healthy, guys like Hagelin doing their due diligence preventing them came up large. This was the case for just about everyone right down to Murray in goal.

People seem to forget how beat up this team was coming into the ECF/SCF that brought them down to the level of competition.

They had to win on attrition.

Getting the winning goal off the broken hand of one Patric Hornqvist.

Sheary is the most expendable player when you consider bringing in Skinner.

 

[Ryder71]

Don't the CANES need goaltending? I would think a Sheary + Jarry makes more sense for them. Not sure I'd like that but I could see it be somewhat appealing to the Canes.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I know I've seen some people mention him as an option, but he's unavailable now. He's a really intriguing guy for Ottawa, he had a great start offensively to this season while playing a super limited role. I wonder if he'll see an extended role going forward.

 

[xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Sheary is atrocious come playoff time. If he's not scoring, and he seemingly never is, he's wholly ineffective as an NHL player when the checking gets tighter. Dude is on his ass as soon as someone is within 4 feet of him.

 

[T1K]

Yeah, so it’s game 7 of the SCF and you can only pick one, give me Hags over Sheary every damn time

 

[Riptide]

You don't win cups based on top end talent, you win based on depth. It seems like we both agree on that. Guentzel and Kessel don't really matter here much, because neither are depth players. You flat out won't win in the playoffs if your depth is devoid of skilled players, that's just the way it is. Sure, the Penguins top-6 is much more skilled than it was during those years, but you need bottom-6 skill to win in the playoffs. In the bottom-6 last year, you had guys like ZAR and Kuhnhackl playing regular minutes in the playoffs. That's fine if you have other big time producers in your bottom-6, or an insane top-6 group with a hot goalie, but it's normally not okay.

Sure. But our depth even without Sheary isn't devoid of skilled players. Per your own stats, Rust is right there and we have Brassard and Sprong. And that's if we're stacking the top 6. Even without Sheary, we have skilled or at least semi-skilled depth to the point that as long as we're healthy, Sheary isn't all that much of a loss.

A. Why does it matter if he's awful defensively?

Because you find yourself in situations where he'll cost you a goal, that could cost you a game
(like game 5 vs PHI).

Considering who we have on the roster, an average offensive player who's strong defensively will do a lot more here then one who's decent offensively, and poor defensively. I'll take the former every single day of the week - again, this isn't a team that's full of shit depth guys like we had for most of 2010-15. Even without Sheary, we have fast skilled/semi-skilled depth guys.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I'd say this is wrong, preventing goals when you're not scoring like they normally do when the teams is healthy, guys like Hagelin doing their due diligence preventing them came up large. This was the case for just about everyone right down to Murray in goal.

People seem to forget how beat up this team was coming into the ECF/SCF that brought them down to the level of competition.

They had to win on attrition.

Getting the winning goal off the broken hand of one Patric Hornqvist.

Sheary is the most expendable player when you consider bringing in Skinner.

I'd expect Sheary would be a part of the package for Skinner if the Penguins would actually be pulling him off anyway. This discussion becomes moot if the Penguins do pull off Skinner, because there's no chance in hell the Penguins would have both Skinner and Sheary on the same roster.

I am curious to see what it would cost to get Skinner on the Penguins, to be honest. Does Sheary, Sprong and a 1st for Skinner with salary retained get it done? It seems like a lot, but Sprong and a 1st for Skinner seems like the expected value for scoring wingers like Skinner (B+ prospect and a 1st) and Sheary is included to get salary retention. Or would they prefer Jarry instead of Sprong?

Yeah, so it’s game 7 of the SCF and you can only pick one, give me Hags over Sheary every damn time

Based on how Hagelin has been in the playoffs for the last 2 runs, I wouldn't want him in game 7. So it's either Sheary or neither of them for me.



I wonder what happened to him, he had a decent season as a 23 year old only a year ago. If you're getting bought out by a team like Detroit, I think it's really clear that you're bad

 

[WayneSid9987]

I guess the best case scenario here is the Canes, under new ownership, being told to move Skinner this summer and with LA out and SJ potentially out(if Patches is headed there) and maybe STL not liking the player, JR may be the only one at the dance.

If the future plan is to eventually move on from Sheary and then Phil and have an upper tier LW'er, i can see why JR would pursue him right now.
He'd deffo want to keep him past this season.

 

[T1K]

Sheary+Rust+ seems more and more realistic to actually land Skinner

 

[71GenoMalkin]

Gonna throw this out there again:

Rust: 16 goals and 21 points in 58 games
Sheary: 6 goals and 19 points in 57 games

I really don't get this idea that Sheary has "sucked" in the playoffs. Why do people act like he has sucked in the playoffs while Rust has been this clutch playoff performer? Their production is nearly equal.

This isn't me saying Sheary has been better than Rust, btw. I keep seeing people say that Sheary has sucked in the playoffs without any support for why. His production is virtually identical to Rust's production, who people simultaneously call a "big game player".

Possibly because he was a healthy scratch in the playoffs. 2017 ECF games 5 and 6 in particular come to mind vs. Ottawa. This was following a stretch of 15 playoff games where he only recorded 3 assists and basically looked lost on the ice.

 

[Turin]

To play Skinner with Sid, you're taking Jake off of Sid's line.

Skinner is decent defensively, so at least that's a huge plus. But if you're adding Skinner, it's depth on the LW.

Guentzel, Crosby, Hornqvist
Hagelin, Malkin, Kessel
Skinner, Brassard, Sprong
Aston-Reese, Sheahan, Rust

Good balance there. If we can pry TVR too...

Dumoulin, Letang
Maatta, Schultz - Maatta just needs to go, just too slow.
Oleksiak, Van Riemsdyk
*Ruhwedel

I’m fine with trying Guentzel with Malkin if they get Skinner. There’s 82 games in a season after all and it’d surely be better than Wilson-Malkin-Kessel.

 

[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.

 

[Turin]

Calling Hagelin bad the last playoff run is totally disingenuous Emp, you know he was good before his face got broken and tongue lacerated.

 

[T1K]

Honestly, I don’t know how anyone could prefer Sheary over Hagelin in the playoffs. Hagelin is just more impactful, even considering his lack of offense.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Calling Hagelin bad the last playoff run is totally disingenuous Emp, you know he was good before his face got broken and tongue lacerated.

That was also against the Flyers though, who even Kessel looked good against. The Flyers just weren't a good team at all, I don't think you can take anything out of that series. I honestly think the Flyers last season were the worst team the Penguins have played in the playoffs in the last 5 years, I honestly can't think of a worse team.

The Flyers last year were an extremely shallow team with terrible defense and goaltending, they rode their top-6 to a playoff spot. In the playoffs, half of their top-6 just disappeared. A Penguins team that wasn't playing well put up 28 goals in a 6 game series.

 

[Ugene Magic]

I guess the best case scenario here is the Canes, under new ownership, being told to move Skinner this summer and with LA out and SJ potentially out(if Patches is headed there) and maybe STL not liking the player, JR may be the only one at the dance.

If the future plan is to eventually move on from Sheary and then Phil and have an upper tier LW'er, i can see why JR would pursue him right now.
He'd deffo want to keep him past this season.

That puts a bigger emphasis that the Canes may not operate under the old regimes spend and go tight pocket season in and season out.

They may want to spend and Sheary really isn't that attractive of an asset meaning it will assuredly cost more to attain Skinner.

Skinners worth would certainly be around a even swap of Brassard, but I doubt JR wants to lose his center depth.

I think it would have to be in the lines of Sheary, Sprong "and" the 2019 1st.

For team more about the "now" it is a fair price JR doesn't seem to mind to pay considering his past dealings. Sheary Sprong would allow Both to make a difference for their immediate and future movement replacing Skinner. However, I don't know what that will mean for the Pens. Kessel brings so much more dynamics/depth to this team that I'd want to keep both for at least two more seasons, and this can be done with what contracts are more than likely not going to be renewed. *Hagelin and Brassard*

That's probably why they targeted so many C's this draft and relying on Sheahan after Brassard is gone as the 3c and waiting on others including the prospects to fill the void, possibly signing another FA later to spell the time as well.

This is about them loading up to go deep for another couple seasons and we all know what it was like to keep a group together. Not for long spans of years but the most effective ones.

Speaking to all of this, though, I'd much rather get a good middle 4 D-man, If not, a top D-man with our assets worth value.

 

[71GenoMalkin]

I'd expect Sheary would be a part of the package for Skinner if the Penguins would actually be pulling him off anyway. This discussion becomes moot if the Penguins do pull off Skinner, because there's no chance in hell the Penguins would have both Skinner and Sheary on the same roster.

I am curious to see what it would cost to get Skinner on the Penguins, to be honest. Does Sheary, Sprong and a 1st for Skinner with salary retained get it done? It seems like a lot, but Sprong and a 1st for Skinner seems like the expected value for scoring wingers like Skinner (B+ prospect and a 1st) and Sheary is included to get salary retention. Or would they prefer Jarry instead of Sprong?



Based on how Hagelin has been in the playoffs for the last 2 runs, I wouldn't want him in game 7. So it's either Sheary or neither of them for me.



I wonder what happened to him, he had a decent season as a 23 year old only a year ago. If you're getting bought out by a team like Detroit, I think it's really clear that you're bad

Game 6 2017 SCF, up a goal with less than a minute to play. The game, series and Stanley cup are on the line. The forwards Sullivan puts out there are 17, 87, and 62. Hags’ empty netter seals the deal. I think that counts for something.

 

[Dick Sledge]

Why would anyone want to keep Sheary over Rust or Hags is beyond me.

Even the eye test destroys Sheary even when Hagelin/Rust aren't scoring.

 

[JRS91]

Skinner makes little sense unless the Penguins move Kessel.

We don't need anymore forwards, we need a defenseman. Even if we did acquire a forward, he should be a good two-way player, which Skinner is not. I think if you're the Penguins, you trade Sheary and Jarry for a defenseman. I'd much rather trade Sheary and Jarry for someone like Christopher Tanev than Jeff Skinner. You can always sign someone like Benoit Pouliot if need be to replace Sheary who in my opinion would be a much better fit than Sheary is currently.

 

[KIRK]

Skinner makes little sense unless the Penguins move Kessel.

We don't need anymore forwards, we need a defenseman. Even if we did acquire a forward, he should be a good two-way player, which Skinner is not. I think if you're the Penguins, you trade Sheary and Jarry for a defenseman. I'd much rather trade Sheary and Jarry for someone like Christopher Tanev than Jeff Skinner. You can always sign someone like Benoit Pouliot if need be to replace Sheary who in my opinion would be a much better fit than Sheary is currently.

This is a soft team . . . without Skinner.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Why would anyone want to keep Sheary over Rust or Hags is beyond me.

Even the eye test destroys Sheary even when Hagelin/Rust isn't scoring.

Because Hagelin can't score, and if you can't score, no amount of defense matters. Sheary's crappy production is about on par with Rust over his playoff career. Hagelin has 1 goal and 4 points that wasn't an empty net goal in his last 25 playoff games.

 

[bathroomSTAAL]

That was also against the Flyers though, who even Kessel looked good against. The Flyers just weren't a good team at all, I don't think you can take anything out of that series. I honestly think the Flyers last season were the worst team the Penguins have played in the playoffs in the last 5 years, I honestly can't think of a worse team.

The Flyers last year were an extremely shallow team with terrible defense and goaltending, they rode their top-6 to a playoff spot. In the playoffs, half of their top-6 just disappeared. A Penguins team that wasn't playing well put up 28 goals in a 6 game series.

Rangers in 2016 were a disaster too

 

[Dick Sledge]

Because Hagelin can't score, and if you can't score, no amount of defense matters. Sheary's crappy production is about on par with Rust over his playoff career. Hagelin has 1 goal that wasn't an empty net goal in his last 25 playoff games.

Hagelin creates scoring because of his defensive ability. When he's on a line with Geno and Phil they know they have someone on their line that's going to hustle to back check. And not just hustle to back check but has the speed and defensive awareness and skill to prevent something because Geno and Phil went for the high skill risky offensive play.

It's useless arguing the Rust portion because Rust>Sheary easily. And I would presume most would take Hagelin over Sheary if the price tag was the same.

Also, through years of reading these boards when there's one person arguing one point, and pretty much everyone else arguing the opposite.

That 1 person........is wrong.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

The comparison isn't Rust vs Sheary, as I've said a bunch of times already. I've been saying "I picked the wrong person to compare to Sheary, it should be Hagelin" since page 1. I'm saying under normal circumstances, Sheary should be producing noticeably more than Hagelin. At that point, Hagelin's defense doesn't matter, because defense from wingers doesn't count for any points. It's Hagelin's forechecking ability vs Sheary's extra production, at some point, it shifts towards Sheary.

It doesn't matter whether you're comparing Sheary to Rust or Hagelin. Sheary didn't outproduce either last year in the regular season or playoffs and both were significantly better than Sheary away from the puck.

The whole point is that Sheary is an offense-only winger whose offense was no better than the aforementioned wingers who blew him out of the water in other areas of the game.

An on the "false dichotomy" idea, that's exactly what Hagelin has been in the playoffs for the Penguins. Outside of the HBK run, he's been a pure defensive winger who doesn't produce.

Hagelin outproduced Sheary last year in the regular season and playoffs so yes, it is a false dichotomy.

If Hagelin was a pure defensive winger last year on account of his production, Sheary was a pure nothing winger because his production was no better and his all-around play was much, much worse.

 

[KIRK]

Because Hagelin can't score, and if you can't score, no amount of defense matters. Sheary's crappy production is about on par with Rust over his playoff career. Hagelin has 1 goal and 4 points that wasn't an empty net goal in his last 25 playoff games.

Carl Hagelin

In the last 2 seasons, Carl Hagelin has played 24 playoff games. He has 4 goals and 1 assist and is a -1. He has 3 goals that are NOT empty net goals.

In the last 2 seasons, Connor Sheary has played 34 playoff games. He has 2 goals and 7 assists and is a -7.

Now, I'm not great at math, but counting ONLY goals where the goalie was in the net, Hagelin scores .125 GPG in the last two playoffs, and Sheary scores .059 GPG.

We could add in 2016, but Hagelin outscored Sheary in that year too.

So, by your standard, you move Sheary before Hagelin, because Sheary can't score in the playoffs.

It doesn't matter whether you're comparing Sheary to Rust or Hagelin. Sheary didn't outproduce either last year in the regular season or playoffs and both were significantly better than Sheary away from the puck.

The whole point is that Sheary is an offense-only winger whose offense was no better than the aforementioned wingers who blew him out of the water in other areas of the game.



Hagelin outproduced Sheary last year in the regular season and playoffs so yes, it is a false dichotomy.

If Hagelin was a pure defensive winger last year on account of his production, Sheary was a pure nothing winger because his production was no better and his all-around play was much, much worse.

Actually, the critique of Hagelin is that he can't score. Thing is, his playoff GPG in the last two seasons is over 200% greater than Sheary . . . and that is WITHOUT counting empty net goals. Count the ENG in game 6 in 2017, and it's about 300% greater.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

If you prefer Sheary, Empo, one stance you could take is that you think it's worth gambling that he'll get his '16-'17 regular season groove back.

I don't think that's a good gamble considering how useless he was last year and how the roster's constructed moving forward, but at least that position makes some sense. Saying last year's version of Sheary is basically a pick 'em with far more well-rounded wingers who produced the same or better doesn't.

 

[Burn]

Why are we not talking about option X and bringing in new blood over all 3?

 

[JRS91]

I'd take Rust in 24 playoff games over Sheary in 24 playoff games.

Comparing the two in the regular season isn't worth it because they're two different players. The only similarity they share is that they're both fast. Rust is an industrious winger that produces 12-15 goals a season and 30-40 points, kills penalties, is responsible in his own end. Sheary is an offensive winger who is capable of producing 20-25 goals and 40-50 points a season (mostly with Crosby), he doesn't kill penalties and is responsible in his own end. I think Sheary's defensive game is underrated.

That being said, Rust can play anywhere in the lineup. Literally anywhere and be effective. He's effective on the first line, second line, third line and fourth line. He's fit well with Crosby, Malkin and Sheahan. There's no doubt in my mind that he'd be able to play with Brassard. The most important thing though is in 58 playoff games Rust has 16 goals and they all seem to come at important times. Rust absolutely needs to be re-signed.

Compare that to Sheary, who can only play with Crosby when it comes to producing to where people might expect him to produce. Even then, Sheary is more of playmaking winger than he is a scoring winger. If you want to play with Crosby you have to be able to pass, but also be able to finish. That's what makes Guentzel so effective on Crosby's line. Sheary hasn't been finishing lately. If he isn't playing with Crosby, then his production drops to the level of Rust's with less intangibles. Also in 57 playoff games Sheary has 6 goals, let that sink in.

Sheary is expendable. He's small, not very versatile and could be used as a means to obtain something we need like a defenseman. I'd even be fine with swapping Sheary for another winger or center. Sheary is more expendable than any other player on this team. As much as people complain about Hagelin, Letang, Kessel it would make much less sense to trade any one of those three over Sheary.

 

[Pens x]

I don't think parting with Sprong or Rust is a good idea when you factor in the cap. I don't mind if Sheary is involved but the other two, a hard pass!

Sprong is a complete unknown at the NHL level. We would have a much better idea of his potential if Sullivan hadn’t been such a schmuck. But you have to consider moving him in order to win now.